Trade & FA 2025-26: Free Agency Starts 5pm CST/6pm EST

[omahen]

More twitter "insiders" are believing Lebron is a Mav and the deal is agreed upon.

Memphis, Cleveland, Dallas, and the Lakers.

Interesting discussion. Funnily, nothing about this "insider" news on Lakers forum

I don't believe LeBron will be traded, but for the purpose of entertainment. Out of the four teams, Memphis is the only one considerably below the first apron and can send out less salary than taking in. I don't think they have any trade exceptions and I think they spent large part of their MLE on Ty Jerome. Cleveland can't aggregate players in such a deal and can't take back more salaries. Mavs can't take back more salaries. Lakers can't take back (much) more salaries as they are very close to the first apron. Based on all this. Mavs and Lakers could do a LeBron trade on their own, Cleveland and Memphis would only be in because they have some better fitting players for either Mavs or Lakers. 

I think it is safe to assume LeBron would be the only major salary going to Mavs in such a case. Mavs have plenty of flexibility for the outgoing salary. Cleanest way would be Klay, PJ, Gafford and another smaller salary out of Hardy, Martin or Naji. Other combinations with even more players from Dallas are possible. LeBron would take the starting SF spot, so PJ becomes even more squeezed for minutes and I think he is the obvious guy out. Flagg would be "forced" to take the SG spot and Mavs would look something like:

PG: Irving, DLo
SG: Flagg, Christie
SF: LeBron, Naji and/or Martin
PF: AD (LeBron, Flagg)
C: Lively, (AD), Powell

Mavs biggest need after this kind of trade (if Klay is going out) would be at SG, which they could patch-up with some vet min FA. 

Not sure why Cleveland would be in this mix. I think their team is set on all positions unless they would be looking for salary dumps or unless they would be looking to trade Garland. But, neither Memphis or Lakers have no need for Garland as he is not a good fit in their rosters. Mavs would be already receiving LeBron, so I think it is unrealistic they would include another 40 mil of salary in this deal. So, I only see Cleveland in some very minor capacity in this deal. Strus might be most redundant guy on their roster, especially if they can take less salary back.

Memphis has sort of a crunch on SG spot with KCP, Jerome, Konchar, Coward, Wells and Spencer. I could see their interest in moving Konchar and taking more money back. They could use a good back-up center as Gafford. Here I have the biggest problem how to make salaries work, unless they include Clark instead of Konchar. However, I can't make the deal make sense with Clark. So I will stick with Konchar and Memphis adds additional minor salaries to make it work  

Lakers main principle would imho be to not harm short term flexibility unless the player is a clear cut building block for the future. No matter what we think about Ayton, I think it is obvious his move to Lakers was generated by Duffy with a sign of signature from Luka. Ayton came because of the starting job. So I doubt Lakers would be interested to screw Duffy. Based on this Gafford could be a nice bench piece for Lakers, but doesn't really hold a lot of value in a role of a back-up center. From this point of view, his long term deal could be seen as problematic for Lakers. PJ is expiring and fits Lakers plan, he would also replace LeBron in the starting line-up. Klay, Hardy or Naji only have one more year on their deals so I could see them as ok for Lakers, I doubt they would have interest in Martin. 

Based on all this thoughts, I think the deal could be something like as below. Mavs and Memphis are a little bit light on outgoing salaries so add minor pieces for salary matching and cap rules details where needed (Lakers have space to take more salaries):
Dal: LeBron (out PJ, Klay, Gafford, Hardy)
Cle: Konchar, Hardy (out Strus)
Mem: Gafford (out Konchar)
LAL: PJ, Strus, Klay (out LeBron)

[omahen]

The other thought I had was Jarrett Allen to LA with Gafford back-filling to Cleveland. 

Let me repeat here if it might get lost in the longer text about LeBron to Mavs response. I think Lakers gave their starting C position to Ayton for this season. Duffy didn't go through all the trouble of his buyout to see him relegated to a deep back-up center behind a guy like Allen (which would be great for Lakers). I have no doubt the buyout from Portland was Duffy/Lakers idea, because Ayton stimulated Portland by leaving a lot of money to Portland (which he got from Lakers), which he would not have done without his landing spot and role secured. I think Lakers will not risk to damage their relationship with Duffy. Lakers are looking for 3-D wings on SG and SF spots. 

In addition: I think Cleveland wouldn't entertain any thought about trading Mitchell.

[HoosierDaddyKid]

https://www.masslive.com/celtics/2025/07...eport.html


Lakers, Bucks, and Hawks showing interest in Horford.

[Smitty]

Lot of discussion. Good reading material. I haven't seen any of these Twitter rumors yet, only from the posts here. The one thing that sticks out to me is Klutch repeatedly saying Gafford's deal is 3/60m. Does that mean there's a 10% trade kicker and Klutch knows he's getting traded, therefore it'll be the 3/60?!

I can see a trade working from Mavs POV:
Gafford to a 3rd team
Klay and Martin to CLE.
Garland to DAL
3rd team send FRP+ small salary player to CLE

Won't argue for why the other teams would do it. But Dallas basically turns Klay into DLO (6'3 Guard, playmaker, high volume shooter) and replaces Kyrie with Garland in the short term.

DLO can be a 6th man when Kyrie is back. The Mavs can run a lot more 2 Guard - 2 Wing - 1 Big lineups.

Garland | Exum    | B-Will      | Nembhard* | Kyrie**
DLO | Christie      | Hardy      | Kelly*
Flagg | Naji                        | Edwards*
PJW | (AD)          | Omax
AD | Lively          | K. Jones | Powell

* Two-Way
** Injured

[KillerLeft]

Late to the party, and haven't read the Twitter rumors.  But, my first thought when I first started reading posts was Donovan Mitchell.  To me, he makes more sense in Dallas than Garland.  The other thought I had was Jarrett Allen to LA with Gafford back-filling to Cleveland.  You can overcome the aggregation issues for Cleveland by dividing things into two stand alone deals.    
I came up with two versions that salary match.  Klay, Gafford, Martin and Hardy adds $250k to Dallas salary.  Klay, Gafford and PJ adds $1.1mm.  Note that it isn't enough to just get the deal to barely work financially for Dallas.  You have to also account for filling in the needed roster spots with minimums.  The second deal (3 for 1), creates roster room to add Exum and K. Jones.  But, it doesn't create room under the second apron.  

That's the issue with barely legal constructs (I think SH had something similarly tight for Garland a few pages back).  You have to create some extra space to fill out the roster and create a sufficient margin under the second apron.  You typically have to add more salary (and probably send at least one of the outgoing players to an additional team).  FWIW, I had Jarrett Allen going to LA for Rui in the second stand alone deal involving these three teams.

Thanks for this! 

I ruled Mitchell out, mostly because I assumed A) Cleveland would prioritize him over Garland (an assumption based on nothing, really) and B) his contract size seemed to be prohibitive for the Mavs, both as a trade practicality and sitting here for the next couple of years with Kyrie and AD. I also kind of thought a Garland target would add a piece that starts to make sense on the Cooper Flagg timeline (but no idea if they're thinking that way at all, to be fair). I don't know that I think one or the other is a better fit in Dallas, play-style wise. Both would be the primary PG here, with or without Kyrie, I think, but both are too small to play with Kyrie anyway,, really. 

I think Mitchell would be a bigger news event due to name recognition (Garland has made what, two all star teams so far?) and I'd of course love to see either of them here, but Garland would be my preference due to age and role.

Final tinfoil hait tidbit: Mitchell is CAA, Darius Garland is Rich Paul. I'm not sure if this has anything to do with LeBron (some of the rumors seem to suggest it did), but I found that part interesting. Even if is has nothing to do with LeBron (in the unlikely event this is anything at all), Dallas seems to be in the process of becoming a Klutch-friendly team.

[Smitty]

DLO can be a 6th man when Kyrie is back. The Mavs can run a lot more 2 Guard - 2 Wing - 1 Big lineups.

Garland | Exum    | B-Will      | Nembhard* | Kyrie**
DLO | Christie      | Hardy      | Kelly*
Flagg | Naji                        | Edwards*
PJW | (AD)          | Omax
AD | Lively          | K. Jones | Powell

* Two-Way
** Injured

Garland 30 | Exum 18
DLO 30 | Christie 18
Flagg 30 | Naji 18
PJW 30 | AD 18
AD 16 | Lively 20 | Jones 12


With Kyrie:

Kyrie 32 | Garland 16
Garland 14 | DLO 24 | Christie 10
Flagg 30 | Naji 14 | Christie 4
PJW 30 | AD 18
AD 16 | Lively 20 | Jones 12

[KillerLeft]

Garland 30 | Exum 18
DLO 30 | Christie 18
Flagg 30 | Naji 18
PJW 30 | AD 18
AD 16 | Lively 20 | Jones 12


With Kyrie:

Kyrie 32 | Garland 16
Garland 14 | DLO 24 | Christie 10
Flagg 30 | Naji 14 | Christie 4
PJW 30 | AD 18
AD 16 | Lively 20 | Jones 12

It's definitely a better team. Like, there's no doubt in my mind. The combined size of the two highly paid guards (whether it's Kyrie/Mitchell or Kyrie/Garland, frankly) isn't ideal, but with that front line I personally believe the added ball-handling and creation would be worth it. I'm not sure Kidd and Harrison would agree, though. I have a hard time seeing them get either Cleveland player without PJW being involved, but would of course be over-the-moon if they could. 

This is all very interesting. I love the NBA...even the deep fake NBA is fun.

[Smitty]

It's definitely a better team. Like, there's no doubt in my mind. The combined size of the two highly paid guards (whether it's Kyrie/Mitchell or Kyrie/Garland, frankly) isn't ideal, but with that front line I personally believe the added ball-handling and creation would be worth it. I'm not sure Kidd and Harrison would agree, though. I have a hard time seeing them get either Cleveland player without PJW being involved, but would of course be over-the-moon if they could. 

This is all very interesting. I love the NBA...even the deep fake NBA is fun.

It would be closer to how you and I see it for sure. Still, not ideal because all 3 guards (Kyrie, Garland, DLO) are below average defenders. You’re asking a lot from Flagg or PJ on the perimeter. In a perfect world the Guard they trade for would be a great on-ball defender and a threat on offense. Maybe the front court size and versatility can overcome the lack of both in the backcourt. Vogel would need to earn his pay.

[DanSchwartzgan]

Thanks for this! 

I ruled Mitchell out, mostly because I assumed A) Cleveland would prioritize him over Garland (an assumption based on nothing, really)  

Final tinfoil hait tidbit: Mitchell is CAA, Darius Garland is Rich Paul. I'm not sure if this has anything to do with LeBron (some of the rumors seem to suggest it did), but I found that part interesting. Even if is has nothing to do with LeBron (in the unlikely event this is anything at all), Dallas seems to be in the process of becoming a Klutch-friendly team.

I think Cleveland lives in constant fear of Mitchell leaving the next chance he gets.  That is two seasons away, but if you wait another year, you lose leverage.  So, that was part of why my mind went in that direction.

God, I hope this doesn't involve Lebron coming here.

I do find the Klutch thing to be persuasive.  I also like the timeline idea as it retains a Garland, Christie, Flagg and Lively young-ish core.  You don't need the next iteration all be 22 when the OG's go away.  Garland and even PJ would still be in their primes 3 years from now.  I'm in favor of almost anything that moves us on from Klay as long as we have adequate 3 point shooting from his replacement.  I find his fit on the new roster to be awkward.  A deal to Cleveland at least puts him on a contending team.

[mvossman]

Lot of discussion. Good reading material. I haven't seen any of these Twitter rumors yet, only from the posts here. The one thing that sticks out to me is Klutch repeatedly saying Gafford's deal is 3/60m. Does that mean there's a 10% trade kicker and Klutch knows he's getting traded, therefore it'll be the 3/60?!

I can see a trade working from Mavs POV:
Gafford to a 3rd team
Klay and Martin to CLE.
Garland to DAL
3rd team send FRP+ small salary player to CLE

Won't argue for why the other teams would do it. But Dallas basically turns Klay into DLO (6'3 Guard, playmaker, high volume shooter) and replaces Kyrie with Garland in the short term.

DLO can be a 6th man when Kyrie is back. The Mavs can run a lot more 2 Guard - 2 Wing - 1 Big lineups.

Garland | Exum    | B-Will      | Nembhard* | Kyrie**
DLO | Christie      | Hardy      | Kelly*
Flagg | Naji                        | Edwards*
PJW | (AD)          | Omax
AD | Lively          | K. Jones | Powell

* Two-Way
** Injured

That deal would probably require two unprotected first from Mavs.  Garland is a 25 year old all star.  Those guys don't come cheap.

[Smitty]

That deal would probably require two unprotected first from Mavs.  Garland is a 25 year old all star.  Those guys don't come cheap.

I think I agree. It does seem light on the Cavs front. They'd have to really like all of Klay, Martin, & 3rd team's player. Plus, the ~20M+ in tax savings.

[mvossman]

I think I agree. It does seem light on the Cavs front. They'd have to really like all of Klay, Martin, & 3rd team's player. Plus, the ~20M+ in tax savings.

So would you want to make this deal given that cost?  It makes some sense long term, but short term you are using Cleaveland as your model, a team that has not been able to make a deep run in the East.  I struggle with this deal making sense for either team, especially in the short term.

[Winter]

The other thing is that any trade Dallas does now is going to be highly scrutinized from the Front Office straight down to the fans. The owners are going to want to make the right call here and not give up too much.

Parts of this idea makes some sense, but I could also see this as something quickly finding its way back to the rumor trash heap.

[Smitty]

So would you want to make this deal given that cost?  It makes some sense long term, but short term you are using Cleaveland as your model, a team that has not been able to make a deep run in the East.  I struggle with this deal making sense for either team, especially in the short term.

I think it depends on how you value Klay, Martin, and Gafford. The only one that really hurts to lose from my perspective is Gafford, because Garland is kind of a Klay replacement in this hypothetical, but even then, it moves AD to more full-time Big, so I can live with it. 

I think Garland is a heck of a player. I worry about the back court size in the short-term and long-term. I'd be hesitant to send both tradeable FRP's, but it'd be hard to hate if they only send 1 in a deal for Garland.

Ultimately, I think this is a nothing-burger. Fake insiders stirring up some news. Fun to talk through though. Mavs Summer League is kind of dead with no Flagg.

[StrandedOnBeauboisHill]

If these rumors are true then I hope it's a smaller move to get Lonzo or something. Committing 80 mil a year to a defensive backcourt of Kyrie/Garland would be a fool's errand I think (despite how clean that would be on offense).

[F Gump]

The one thing that sticks out to me is Klutch repeatedly saying Gafford's deal is 3/60m. Does that mean there's a 10% trade kicker and Klutch knows he's getting traded, therefore it'll be the 3/60?!

I would guess that Klutch leaked the numbers on the deal to include all possible amounts Gafford could earn, not just salary totals. That seems to be their MO on contract numbers. It is worth noting that if Gaff were to get traded this summer, his TK might not even get paid anyhow because of Mavs' salary limits regarding the apron.

[omahen]

I would guess that Klutch leaked the numbers on the deal to include all possible amounts Gafford could earn, not just salary totals. That seems to be their MO on contract numbers. It is worth noting that if Gaff were to get traded this summer, his TK might not even get paid anyhow because of Mavs' salary limits regarding the apron.

Does his TK apply also to his deal this year or is it in force only next season, when his extension starts?

[F Gump]

Does his TK apply also to his deal this year or is it in force only next season, when his extension starts?

Good catch - it would only be applicable once the extension years begin. Which further supports the point that inclusion of a TK in his extension doesn't tell us anything about Gaff being shopped, either way.

[KillerLeft]

So would you want to make this deal given that cost?  It makes some sense long term, but short term you are using Cleaveland as your model, a team that has not been able to make a deep run in the East.  I struggle with this deal making sense for either team, especially in the short term.

We're officially way out on a branch that probably isn't even connected to a real tree at this point, but I disagree with the idea of imagining possible ways Kyrie/Cleveland Star guard A or B as a tandem could go wrong and using it as an excuse to pull away from this opportunity. 

1) Kyrie is hurt for a while. 

2) I'm not convinced beyond all doubt that they couldn't play together when Kyrie is healthy. It's definitely likely that there would be issues to overcome in that scenario, but for the payoff of an offense that actually works, putting Kyrie right back off-ball where he has been since coming here, I think it deserves a try, if possible. 

3) If it doesn't work, you simply trade Kyrie. Cooper Flagg is 18. Garland is 25. Mitchell is 28. Kyrie is like 33, I think. Pretty easy to see the level of opportunity this hypothetical represents, imo. 

And...if this is even true, when is the next opportunity you'd have to add an all star guard, in their early prime (Mitchell) or not quite in their prime yet (Garland) to this team? All the Gafford/PJW consolidation for impact guard ideas some of us tried to dream up this summer, and this is one I wouldn't have dared imagine, even. The players  in question are too good to be true (which probably means it isn't). But, if this is real I think it would be silly not to pounce. This is the kind of opportunity you jump on now and figure out how to make work later.

[Scott41theMavs]

If these rumors are true then I hope it's a smaller move to get Lonzo or something.  Committing 80 mil a year to a defensive backcourt of Kyrie/Garland would be a fool's errand I think (despite how clean that would be on offense).

Even with a frontcourt of Lively, AD, and Flagg?

Don't get me wrong - I'll believe all this when I see it, and I'm with you, I'd rather it be something much smaller. The priority is to get off of Hardy, OMax, and Powell.