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

[mvossman]

The Mavs will just keep AD if he has no value like some are claiming. You don't give away elite talent just because. Bring him back next year, hope he can stay healthy and rebuild his value, but don't give him away now. They can give him away anytime. What's the rush. Get value or keep him.

It all comes to down to the definition of value.  Even a salary dump has some value (way more than what they got for KP).  The real question is can they get more value in the future.  He is an aging big man who already looks to be declining, has major injury concerns and a massive contract.  That is not the formula for increasing value.

[RoyTarpleysGhost]

The Mavs will just keep AD if he has no value like some are claiming. You don't give away elite talent just because. Bring him back next year, hope he can stay healthy and rebuild his value, but don't give him away now. They can give him away anytime. What's the rush. Get value or keep him.

There are different levels of "giving him away."

It started a month ago with hopefully we can get a good young player and a 1st for AD.

Then it was hopefully we can get a 1st OR a good young player.  (where we are now)

Next injury it'll be please just give us some expiring salaries.

Eventually it'll be like the Porzingis deal where you have to take on a bad salary like Bertans just to get him off your roster.  

The chances that AD has a healthy summer, shows up to camp in shape, plays 30-40 games healthy for the Mavs next year to re-establish his trade value are about 10%.

[BigDirk41]

There are different levels of "giving him away."

It started a month ago with hopefully we can get a good young player and a 1st for AD.

Then it was hopefully we can get a 1st OR a good young player.  (where we are now)

Next injury it'll be please just give us some expiring salaries.

Eventually it'll be like the Porzingis deal where you have to take on a bad salary like Bertans just to get him off your roster.  

The chances that AD has a healthy summer, shows up to camp in shape, plays 30-40 games healthy for the Mavs next year to re-establish his trade value are about 10%.

These are all just your opinions and views. That doesn't mean they are more accurate than mine. They are just vastly different. Mavs fan seem to value AD less than anyone in the league. We won't truly know his "value" unless he is traded and we can grade the package. Everything else is just speculation, but I think it's a little wild that so many on here want to tell how wrong everyone else is if they don't agree with them. You may be right, I may be right. Who knows. The devaluing of AD on here by yourself and others is getting similar to the Luka hate. It's a little exhausting. I'm just ready for the trade deadline to pass so we can get back to basketball.

[Tyler]

I was thinking about potential AD to Milwaukee trades this morning, and had a random thought. Assuming Turner would have to be part of the deal, wouldn't Atlanta love to have him? As part of the larger trade, what if Dallas forwards Turner to Atlanta for KP's expiring. In addition, Milwaukee sends the rights to the lesser of the Bucks/Pelicans picks this year to Atlanta and the Hawks send the rights to the better of those picks to Dallas. It's an interesting potential method to pry the Pelicans pick away from Atlanta while still leaving the Hawks with a good pick this year.

[Mavs2021]

I was thinking about potential AD to Milwaukee trades this morning, and had a random thought. Assuming Turner would have to be part of the deal, wouldn't Atlanta love to have him? As part of the larger trade, what if Dallas forwards Turner to Atlanta for KP's expiring. In addition, Milwaukee sends the rights to the lesser of the Bucks/Pelicans picks this year to Atlanta and the Hawks send the rights to the better of those picks to Dallas. It's an interesting potential method to pry the Pelicans pick away from Atlanta while still leaving the Hawks with a good pick this year.

That´s indeed brilliant as a side angle that could satisfy the Mavs in a Bucks trade. You might be onto something here. The trade could also be expanded to strengthen Atlanta further and extract additional value for the Mavs.

Bucks

AD

Hawks

Turner
Portis
KPJ

Mavs

Porzingis
Risacher
lesser of Hawks/Bucks/Pelicans 2027 1st
Bucks 2031 1st
Bucks 2032 1st (swap rights)

[Chicagojk]

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/s/fixy9a6NcC

This is probably true. I would be surprised if Giannis signs and extension this summer. If he doesn’t, things may move quick. Even if he doest demand a trade. If I had a 15% shot at Giannis, I would probably resist using my assets at the trade deadline.

[DallasMaverick]

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/s/fixy9a6NcC

This is probably true.  I would be surprised if Giannis signs and extension this summer.  If he doesn’t, things may move quick.  Even if he doest demand a trade.  If I had a 15% shot at Giannis, I would probably resist using my assets at the trade deadline.

Dwight Howard!!

Plan Powder!!

[RasheedsBigWhiteSpot]

Mavs get Kuminga, Nolan Traore, GSW 2026 unprotected 1st and GSW 2028 top 8 protected 1st

GSW get Gafford and Naji

Nets get Caleb Martin, Gui Santos, Mavs/OKC 2028 1st swap

[DanSchwartzgan]

 
Part of the disconnect is because so many come at it from what I think is the wrong perspective. They are trying to define what they think other teams can, or will, offer the Mavs for AD these days. But his "value" can only be defined by an actual trade (what a buyer will pay, and the seller will sell for) and theorizing what teams might prefer to offer is really short of answering the question of what a trade would look like if it happens, because it completely ignores the question of what it would take for the Mavs to say yes.

It is in THAT context - what I think it would take for the Mavs to be interested and perhaps say yes - that I have been addressing the question of what is needed for an AD trade. The Mavs imo are expecting a certain amount of TALENT in return, to let go of AD, which can come via pick(s) or very good players, and I think most of the offers here fall well short of that. You (and others) don't like my pov, but let's see if he gets sold for a lot less. I don't think it will happen.

It isn't that people don't like your POV.  People here would love your stance to be predictive.  We (I) just don't think that's realistic.  

Let's set aside the "they can always wait" part of this.  That is always the most likely outcome as we hear 50 rumors for every trade that actually happens.  I will stipulate that the lack of a trade can certainly be characterized as "the offers fell short".  But, it can just as easily be characterized as "no one wants him".  I've seen two national writers espouse that theory warning that no one should pursue AD given his health history and likely future contract expectations.  The first version...the offers fell short...paints waiting as some righteous stance.  But, waiting doesn't necessarily create value nor does it define what posture was more realistic.  

I also think defining those who have a different perspective as "trying to define what other teams can/will offer for AD" is way too narrow.  Yes, there are people who are trying to take the other side of the deal and project what a team might be willing to pay.  There are also people who are trying to be predictive hoping to nail the exact balance that is likely to happen.  There are people who are trying to take published rumors and make sense of them.  There are people who are trying to be creative and concoct their own inventions (in hopes that they might somehow nail the outcome).  None of these inherently misjudge value.  Neither are they inherently less realistic than your "demand" for the NOP 2026 and Risacher and expiring contracts.  That might be the opening offer, but from everything I read, it stands almost zero chance of being predictive.

I do see value in trying to define an opening offer.  It creates one bookend of what might be possible.  But, the insistence that it is reality and Dallas should walk for anything less creates two dynamics that I'd like to point out.  1.  The assertion of better things to come later can't currently be proven (or successfully challenged).  But, I bet we will all try.  2.  These extreme positions (I now lump in the call for the OKC GM to be hired) set you up to call anything that actually does happen a failure.  You defined value as the result of an "actual trade".  I'm happy to live with that, but I fear that definition of value will be forgotten and the actual result will become another thing to beat the franchise up over since it didn't meet the expectations of those who held the position.  It can't be value and yet another failure.  The failure occurred 12 months ago.

[Smitty]

@MikeAScotto
The Atlanta Hawks say center Kristaps Porzingis (left Achilles tendinitis) and forward Zaccharie Risacher (left knee bone contusion) will both be re-evaluated in approximately one week.

[Smitty]

“After the Luka trade I quit saying never about things. I feel pretty confident Ja Morant won’t be a Miami Heat, and won’t be a Buck. That’s what I would say. I don’t believe he is going to Miami and I don’t believe he is going to Milwaukee”

(Via @TimBontemps)

[F Gump]

DS, not sure you quite get the gist of my post. I will try again. 

If you want to say I'm unrealistic, are you saying you think I am not properly perceiving the MAVS' approach or mindset? My thinking is that if the Mavs won't deal, there is no deal, so to me what matters is "what will the Mavs do a deal for." I am opining from that angle, as I perceive it to be.

I get the pushback that "other teams won't want to pay that much." Sure, they all would want a steal, right? (Then again, do we REALLY know what a team will truly pay? They aren't wanting outsiders to know their top limit, that's for sure.) But in any event, other teams' won't dictate what an actual trade will look like -- the Mavs HAVE TO be thrilled enough to pull the trigger at that level.

If they do a trade, I do reserve the right to say whether I think it's a stupid trade or not. But at this point, I am thinking about what I think a trade COULD look like, if it were to happen (in light of what I think the Mavs are doing), and not what it should look like.

My sincere belief is that the Mavs (or, to be specific, Dumont) are expecting X-Y-Z for AD or else they just won't deal. From what I am seeing and from what I think I know, I don't think they are all that interested in trading AD if they don't get offers satisfying that criteria -- ie, I don't think they are scared of a no-trade outcome. 

To satisfy the Mavs, I think the bar is fairly high, and essentially is that they will expect to get a path to some sort of BIG TALENT, a top starter at least, either now or via a reasonable chance of eventually being there (if it's a younger player or a pick or three), because that's how THEY see what they would be letting go of (AD). (Note: I'm not convinced they see Risacher as meeting that criteria - his inclusion may have been important to them primarily because he has a larger salary, and they were needing more salary to make the trade work.) While helpful, I don't think they see payroll savings as being a primary goal. They can get that a number of other ways, but they can't get a star big man like AD other ways. (Of course, if they otherwise have decided to move AD, they would certainly want to wrap those savings in that deal rather than have to chase them another way.)

I try to talk about an AD trade with those things in mind. 

For those who think AD is worthless and needs to be moved no matter what, obviously to them what I am saying is not "realistic," but I don't think the Mavs feel that way about AD at all - and thus won't bargain that way. And AD - even with his flaws - is not easy to replace and uniquely fills a huge number of vital needs for a team. I think the NBA (and particularly the Mavs) value that way more than most seem to. 

Also, your point about the danger of waiting is way off point for me. [In general, it's a valid thing to weigh, but I have not been speaking to that issue at all.] 

Sure, any choice has risk. But I am not evaluating risk/reward on trade/no trade at all, but only opining on what I think trade offers will need to look like (more or less) to get AD from the Mavs.

PS - The Mavs need that expert GM, not any ole exec, to figure these things out and avoid the land mines. Presti, please! I know Dumont can afford to pay for the best, right?

[Smitty]

My sincere belief is that the Mavs (or, to be specific, Dumont) are expecting X-Y-Z for AD or else they just won't deal.

This is where I continue to agree with you. The recent MacMahon article/report was very telling. The Stein stuff has let us know they haven't received anywhere close to a deal that would meet this criteria. It's why a Davis deal this TDL is unlikely to happen in the end. Most of us post fantasy trades showing what WE would be willing to do, and we take the other teams needs/wants into account for the most part. BUT what WE think doesn't matter. It seems reasonable to assume Dumont is perfectly fine 'paying up' to see Davis-Flagg-Kyrie next year, unless he gets something he finds agreeable.

[Chicagojk]

I think Dallas and ATL will be in a staring contest until the last minute of the trade deadline.  In the end, I don't think either side likes the deal proposed and it doesn't happen.  Just my opinion.

I think ATL will also be monitoring Giannis.  It is easier for them to make a trade for Giannis now rather than this offseason.   In the end, I don't see Giannis being very excited about ATL.   I am not sure Giannis in ATL with Johnson is much greater than what he has in MIL.  It is better, but still think that roster would need a lot of work.  Especially with what they would need to give up for him.   I expect 4-5 teams will be in contention for Giannis this summer.   With one year left on his contract, MIL loses some leverage.   I am not sure where the great offer comes if Houston and SA don't bid.   Houston is more likely, but they may not be offering the package MIL would readily accept.

[mvossman]

DS, not sure you quite get the gist of my post. I will try again. 

If you want to say I'm unrealistic, are you saying you think I am not properly perceiving the MAVS' approach or mindset? My thinking is that if the Mavs won't deal, there is no deal, so to me what matters is "what will the Mavs do a deal for." I am opining from that angle, as I perceive it to be.

I get the pushback that "other teams won't want to pay that much." Sure, they all would want a steal, right? (Then again, do we REALLY know what a team will truly pay? They aren't wanting outsiders to know their top limit, that's for sure.) But in any event, other teams' won't dictate what an actual trade will look like -- the Mavs HAVE TO be thrilled enough to pull the trigger at that level.

If they do a trade, I do reserve the right to say whether I think it's a stupid trade or not. But at this point, I am thinking about what I think a trade COULD look like, if it were to happen (in light of what I think the Mavs are doing), and not what it should look like.

My sincere belief is that the Mavs (or, to be specific, Dumont) are expecting X-Y-Z for AD or else they just won't deal. From what I am seeing and from what I think I know, I don't think they are all that interested in trading AD if they don't get offers satisfying that criteria -- ie, I don't think they are scared of a no-trade outcome. 

To satisfy the Mavs, I think the bar is fairly high, and essentially is that they will expect to get a path to some sort of BIG TALENT, a top starter at least, either now or via a reasonable chance of eventually being there (if it's a younger player or a pick or three), because that's how THEY see what they would be letting go of (AD). (Note: I'm not convinced they see Risacher as meeting that criteria - his inclusion may have been important to them primarily because he has a larger salary, and they were needing more salary to make the trade work.) While helpful, I don't think they see payroll savings as being a primary goal. They can get that a number of other ways, but they can't get a star big man like AD other ways. (Of course, if they otherwise have decided to move AD, they would certainly want to wrap those savings in that deal rather than have to chase them another way.)

I try to talk about an AD trade with those things in mind. 

For those who think AD is worthless and needs to be moved no matter what, obviously to them what I am saying is not "realistic," but I don't think the Mavs feel that way about AD at all - and thus won't bargain that way. And AD - even with his flaws - is not easy to replace and uniquely fills a huge number of vital needs for a team. I think the NBA (and particularly the Mavs) value that way more than most seem to. 

Also, your point about the danger of waiting is way off point for me. [In general, it's a valid thing to weigh, but I have not been speaking to that issue at all.] 

Sure, any choice has risk. But I am not evaluating risk/reward on trade/no trade at all, but only opining on what I think trade offers will need to look like (more or less) to get AD from the Mavs.

PS - The Mavs need that expert GM, not any ole exec, to figure these things out and avoid the land mines. Presti, please! I know Dumont can afford to pay for the best, right?

You keep saying that you are only arguing what you think Mavs will do, but you are submitting several (questionable) value judgements:

The NOP pick is not that great
Risacher is a useless bust (I think you referred to him has trash in a previous post)
the CLE 26 pick is very low value
AD is extremely valuable (despite age, injury history and massive contract)

Your tone suggests these are your value judgements, not what you think the Mavs value judgments are.  This is where most of the disagreement comes in.  Not on whether Mavs are driving a hard bargain.

This quote "For those who think AD is worthless" is really annoying.  Very few people arguing with you have suggested AD is worthless or that we need to dump him at all costs.  There is actually a lot of room between your viewpoint and the one you are attributing to folks disagreeing with you.

[Mavs2021]

I have a question: Can you shop players from other teams?

I have a feeling that AD for Porzingis/Risacher is basically agreed. They argue over the Cavs pick. At the same time the Mavs need to shop Porzingis quickly to extract some extra value. If the Hawks drag their feet it would be advantageous for the Mavs to already shop Porzingis, while he is technically still a Hawk.

[DanSchwartzgan]

 
If you want to say I'm unrealistic, are you saying you think I am not properly perceiving the MAVS' approach or mindset? My thinking is that if the Mavs won't deal, there is no deal, so to me what matters is "what will the Mavs do a deal for." I am opining from that angle, as I perceive it to be.

I get the pushback that "other teams won't want to pay that much." Sure, they all would want a steal, right?  
 

This is going to end up being about semantics (as message board discussions often are).  I think it is clear there is disagreement with your perception of Market Value.  But, you are in essence saying there is no market unless Dallas agrees to a deal.  Thus, your perception of what they will accept defines market value.  That just feels circular.  

Its not like we have much else to talk about for the next 2 1/2 weeks.  I just don't want to have to have this same discussion over and over again.  So, just assume that I disagree with your certainty about where value is and adding in oversimplified words like "steal" and "worthless" to denigrate the positions others take doesn't change that for me.

[Chicagojk]

I have a question: Can you shop players from other teams?

I have a feeling that AD for Porzingis/Risacher is basically agreed. They argue over the Cavs pick. At the same time the Mavs need to shop Porzingis quickly to extract some extra value. If the Hawks drag their feet it would be advantageous for the Mavs to already shop Porzingis, while he is technically still a Hawk.

I am guessing, but I think that is probably where the Kuminga talk came from.   I don' think Gafford is a good fit for GSW.    I think KP could be.  The issue is his healthy is so spotty.

[Scott41theMavs]

This is going to end up being about semantics (as message board discussions often are).  I think it is clear there is disagreement with your perception of Market Value.  But, you are in essence saying there is no market unless Dallas agrees to a deal.  Thus, your perception of what they will accept defines market value.  That just feels circular.  

Its not like we have much else to talk about for the next 2 1/2 weeks.  I just don't want to have to have this same discussion over and over again.  So, just assume that I disagree with your certainty about where value is and adding in oversimplified words like "steal" and "worthless" to denigrate the positions others take doesn't change that for me.

Dan, not replying specifically to you, but to the discussion overall - 

1) If the Mavs current brain trust believes that the possibility realistically exists of getting what FGump is saying they regard as the minimum deal criteria for AD (or, from another POV, what they regard as AD's value in a vacuum), it doesn't speak highly to either their intelligence or team-running competence. We need a GM. Why haven't we already had one for a month or two? I know that FGump's pipe dream is Presti. Well, they had better get him, because he's the only guy on the planet right now who justifies the catastrophic malpractice of not already having a GM prior to ***this*** trade deadline. 

2) Moreover, I don't think the MCBT understands the problems that could result from not getting the best deal possible now. 

To me, a deal criteria for this deadline isn't "did the Mavs get enough assets for AD or reject an offered deal because they couldn't," but rather, "will the Mavs' future be brighter if they don't do Best AD Offer 2/5/26 or if they do pull the trigger." I have a feeling that a) if we ever found out what that best offer was, and b) have a year or two's hindsight, most of us will either be glad they took the deal or putting this group in the Zaccanelli column because they didn't. There is of course the possibility of them choosing a deal which most of us would regard as inferior to another that they turned down. They need a GM. Period.

[Smitty]

The Pistons have nearly $19M in tax space and a $14.1M TE, from the Schroder trade, that expires in July. Jaden Ivey has been underwhelming for them this year. He is a 23 year old combo guard that is a restricted free agent this summer. Would they be interested in the combination of Klay and Naji for Ivey and a FRP? Could you then make a move like Gafford for Mathurin or to ATL for Kennard + FRP, and duck the tax completely this season? I don't know that it's a requirement from Dumont, but as it stands, that repeater tax bill is massive next season.

DAL: Ivey, '27 FRP (DET)
DET: Naji, Klay

DAL: Kennard, '26 FRP (CLE)
ATL: Gafford


This would move the Mavs ~$2M below the tax line and free up a roster spot for Nembhard. The Mavs could then waive Exum at the point of needing to convert Cisse, when his two-way eligibility runs out this season.