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

[KillerLeft]

If I am BKN that tip would be a (late) first round pick or at least a swap.  I'm not taking on bad contracts for seconds, especially when I know Mavs are trying to get out of the tax.

...and that's not what a pick-stripped franchise who mortgaged their future to build around a guy they eventually traded at age 25 can offer. It's a complete non-starter, unless you think BRK would do it for like, idk, Max Christie, but I don't think the Mavs can afford that, either.

[Chicagojk]

speaking of Brooklyn, do they have an attractive offer for Giannis?  It would probably have to be this offseason.  If the got a non top 3 pick, that might be more attractive for Brooklyn to be aggressive.   Could they offer future picks a guy like MPJ and maybe a youngster?  If they could keep most of their young players, maybe that is more appealing to Giannis?   The Nets youngsters are not really ready, but they do have upside as they get older.

[mvossman]

...and that's not what a pick-stripped franchise who mortgaged their future to build around a guy they eventually traded at age 25 can offer. It's a complete non-starter, unless you think BRK would do it for like, idk, Max Christie, but I don't think the Mavs can afford that, either.

No interest on that.  Given this orgs limited assets, I have always thought we are going to have to sit on Nico bad contracts and use the good contracts to generate space and assets.  AD and Klay are the best candidates for that if we are rebuilding due to age, but Gafford, Naji and (eventually) PJ make sense as well.

[F Gump]

If I am BKN that tip would be a (late) first round pick or at least a swap.  I'm not taking on bad contracts for seconds, especially when I know Mavs are trying to get out of the tax.

(If that scenario had been workable, as it first looked) -- I would certainly give a late 1st to get BKN to take the contracts to duck under the tax line this season. (To keep from being bare of picks, I would want a 2nd rounder back in return.)

[mvossman]

(If that scenario had been workable, as it first looked) -- I would certainly give a late 1st to get BKN to take the contracts to duck under the tax line this season. (To keep from being bare of picks, I would want a 2nd rounder back in return.)

That is surprising.  I think the fundamental difference between our outlooks (and correct me if I am wrong) is that my focus is almost entirely on how to make this team really good in 2-3+ years and you have more interest than I do in being good in the next 1-2 years.

[F Gump]

That is surprising.  I think the fundamental difference between our outlooks (and correct me if I am wrong) is that my focus is almost entirely on how to make this team really good in 2-3+ years and you have more interest than I do in being good in the next 1-2 years.

That's part of it. Keep in mind that I am not prioritizing for years 1-2 instead of 2-3+, but rather in addition to. I have seen the evolution of teams when they strip it down - with the belief they will add talent back as easily as they shed it - and it is way harder than anyone expects. If you aren't trying to be good next year, then you are very likely to still suck in years 3,4, and more. Talent is HARD to acquire. Then, the fact the Mavs won't have any avenue to top picks, even if they suck in those 1-2-3-4 years, is likely to push the "back to the top" timeline even farther down the road than years 4-5. FOREVER. Ugh.

Mavs of the early 90s were just going to go backwards a little bit and then be great again. And it took a decade. It was awful. The same was true of the Mavs of the post-title years - after Cuban decided to strip down the talent from the title team, it took a decade to be relevant again (wasting the balance of the Dirk years, right after they had assembled all the pieces needed to be dominant, with Dirk at his peak of dominance). 

There's another part to it, however. It's the cheap price as I see it. If it's a LATE first as the (theorized) price (as mentioned), I'm not all that clingy to keep it. Those are very very dicey as to actual value (OMax and Green are the latest glaring examples), and an early 2nd can be just as promising even though they don't carry the glittery label of FIRST Round Pick. That cheap price would be layered on top of the benefit of removing Dumont's possible desire to sell off GOOD talent that you already have, to back off from taxed payroll. Getting a non-tax year injected right now would be a huge financial change and maybe keep him from later being miserly. Or to put it another way, I would pay a late first (turning it into a 2nd, as mentioned), for the benefit of swapping out the carcasses of Martin/DAR (or similar) and getting back the talents of Klay/Naji, for example.

I would NOT want to give away good key talent right and left to achieve that savings to be clear. But if it's a late 1st (in my mind, I read that as a pick in the 20's, and in a future year down the road)? Yeah, I'd do that. 

They still have the talent base, which can be really good imo if they are smart enough to tweak it properly (and can work the training/medical staff stuff properly). It's not all gone yet, but once it's gone, there's no going back.

[mvossman]

That's part of it. Keep in mind that I am not prioritizing for years 1-2 instead of 2-3+, but rather in addition to. I have seen the evolution of teams when they strip it down - with the belief they will add talent back as easily as they shed it - and it is way harder than anyone expects. If you aren't trying to be good next year, then you are very likely to still suck in years 3,4, and more. Talent is HARD to acquire. Then, the fact the Mavs won't have any avenue to top picks, even if they suck in those 1-2-3-4 years, is likely to push the "back to the top" timeline even farther down the road than years 4-5. FOREVER. Ugh.

Mavs of the early 90s were just going to go backwards a little bit and then be great again. And it took a decade. It was awful. The same was true of the Mavs of the post-title years - after Cuban decided to strip down the talent from the title team, it took a decade to be relevant again (wasting the balance of the Dirk years, right after they had assembled all the pieces needed to be dominant, with Dirk at his peak of dominance). 

There's another part to it, however. It's the cheap price as I see it. If it's a LATE first as the (theorized) price (as mentioned), I'm not all that clingy to keep it. Those are very very dicey as to actual value (OMax and Green are the latest glaring examples), and an early 2nd can be just as promising even though they don't carry the glittery label of FIRST Round Pick. That cheap price would be layered on top of the benefit of removing Dumont's possible desire to sell off GOOD talent that you already have, to back off from taxed payroll. Getting a non-tax year injected right now would be a huge financial change and maybe keep him from later being miserly. Or to put it another way, I would pay a late first (turning it into a 2nd, as mentioned), for the benefit of swapping out the carcasses of Martin/DAR (or similar) and getting back the talents of Klay/Naji, for example.

I would NOT want to give away good key talent right and left to achieve that savings to be clear. But if it's a late 1st (in my mind, I read that as a pick in the 20's, and in a future year down the road)? Yeah, I'd do that. 

They still have the talent base, which can be really good imo if they are smart enough to tweak it properly (and can work the training/medical staff stuff properly). It's not all gone yet, but once it's gone, there's no going back.

So that makes sense.  You care about the next two years for themselves (which is more than I do) but you are also concerned about stripping it down to the point where we can't get back reasonably quickly.

From my perspective of primarily focused on 3+ years from now, you can probably understand why I would prefer to maximize return on guys in or approaching their mid 30s as I think their contributions in that timeframe will be limited (that talent is going away relatively soon regardless if we trade it or watch it decline).

While I agree talent is not easy to add, its interesting to look at how we acquired the talent on this roster that's under 30:

Flagg: finished in the very late lottery and got crazy lucky
Lively: finished late lottery
Max: throw-in on Luka trade
PJ: crappy first round pick (that might not be crappy, thanks Nico!)
Gafford: crappy first round pick (OKC)
Marshall: 10 mil in free agency

Lets not forget the two guys Nico threw away:

DJJ: min signing
Grimes: THJ dump and a bunch of 2nds

All of that talent was acquired in two years with two late lottery finishes, two crappy firsts and sub MLE signings.  Seems like crappy firsts and some exemption room are not totally useless.  

I will also point out that nobody has suggested "giving away" talent to clear cap.  There are always assets coming back in deals proposed.  A team like Atlanta that currently has more expiring salary than they know what to do with will likely welcome trading some of it for a quality player.  That means we are getting full value in assets with the side benefit of clearing some cap.

[Smitty]

Which adds a significant layer of interest to this AD argument we've been having for weeks. The prospect of such immediate and "easy" salary relief is almost enough to move someone from one side of that war to the other

I think this is exactly what happened to me after digging into it today. Does Dumont even know what’s coming? Surely he has to?! Either way, I’m back on the AD to ATL train and I don’t know that I even need a FRP, if it’s Risacher in the deal. Sure, I’m all-in if ANY Pick is in the deal.

Adding a 20 year old 6’8 SF that looks like a fit next to Flagg, can shoot league average from three, while cleaning up your finances, to make additional moves this summer is enough for me to get there.

You’d have the full mid level at your disposal or you could bring back Porzingis on a 1 year deal, or a SnT, depending on other moves. You could look to package PJ+Gafford/Naji for a Max level player, and take back much more salary, now that you have so much space to work with.

It just gives you the freedom to do things this summer that you WANT to do instead of HAVING to make moves because you’re in the second apron and staring at a $100M+ tax bill.

Also, I think a starting 5 of Kyrie-Max-ZR-Flagg-Lively would be fun. 4 promising players 22 and under, plus one of the most entertaining basketball players to watch.

[mvossman]

I think this is exactly what happened to me after digging into it today. Does Dumont even know what’s coming? Surely he has to?! Either way, I’m back on the AD to ATL train and I don’t know that I even need a FRP, if it’s Risacher in the deal. Sure, I’m all-in if ANY Pick is in the deal.

Adding a 20 year old 6’8 SF that looks like a fit next to Flagg, can shoot league average from three, while cleaning up your finances, to make additional moves this summer is enough for me to get there.

You’d have the full mid level at your disposal or you could bring back Porzingis on a 1 year deal, or a SnT, depending on other moves. You could look to package PJ+Gafford/Naji for a Max level player, and take back much more salary, now that you have so much space to work with.

It just gives you the freedom to do things this summer that you WANT to do instead of HAVING to make moves because you’re in the second apron and staring at a $100M+ tax bill.

Also, I think a starting 5 of Kyrie-Max-ZR-Flagg-Lively would be fun. 4 promising players 22 and under, plus one of the most entertaining basketball players to watch.

This is exactly where I am at.  I wanted that CLE pick as well, but after this latest injury I will not be crushed to get massive cap relief and Risacher.

[Smitty]

Quite a telling quote from Dunleavy on the Kuminga trade demand: "As far as the demand, I'm aware of that. In terms of demands, when there's a demand, there needs to be a demand on the market. So we'll see how that unfolds."

[DanSchwartzgan]

I think this is exactly what happened to me after digging into it today. Does Dumont even know what’s coming? Surely he has to?! Either way, I’m back on the AD to ATL train and I don’t know that I even need a FRP, if it’s Risacher in the deal. Sure, I’m all-in if ANY Pick is in the deal.

Also, I think a starting 5 of Kyrie-Max-ZR-Flagg-Lively would be fun. 4 promising players 22 and under, plus one of the most entertaining basketball players to watch.

Remember the tweet that Rich Paul liked?  It was KP/Kennard and Newell for AD.  I listened a deal yesterday where the guy had the pick as the 27 pick from either NOP or MIL.  The guy made a pretty compelling case that that was the best pick asset in Atlanta’s arsenal besides the 26 NOP pick.

He also wanted to get Dallas under the tax, so he put D’Lo in the outgoing.  I get that Atlanta would then be in the tax if that happened, but they are the ones getting the star player.  That leaves Dallas a little over $2 million away from getting under the tax.  The plan from there would be to buy out KP at a discount so he could get picked up by a contender.  That might solve both the tax issue and the Nembhard issue.    

I know many have talked themselves into Risacher and he looks good in your starting five above (so will our own 2026 pick).  But, I see some hints of positive things in Newell’s advanced stats that I don’t see in ZR.

[mvossman]

Remember the tweet that Rich Paul liked?  It was KP/Kennard and Newell for AD.  I listened a deal yesterday where the guy had the pick as the 27 pick from either NOP or MIL.  The guy made a pretty compelling case that that was the best pick asset in Atlanta’s arsenal besides the 26 NOP pick.

He also wanted to get Dallas under the tax, so he put D’Lo in the outgoing.  I get that Atlanta would then be in the tax if that happened, but they are the ones getting the star player.  That leaves Dallas a little over $2 million away from getting under the tax.  The plan from there would be to buy out KP at a discount so he could get picked up by a contender.  That might solve both the tax issue and the Nembhard issue.    

I know many have talked themselves into Risacher and he looks good in your starting five above (so will our own 2026 pick).  But, I see some hints of positive things in Newell’s advanced stats that I don’t see in ZR.

Newell is playing barely 10 minutes a game, so I am worried some of those advanced stats are looking at garbage time.  He is also a power forward, which doesn't seem like a good fit with Flagg.  He has a good 3 point percentage so far but the sample is so small (it could be another Brandon Williams situation).  I think he would be a big drop off in desirability from Mavs standpoint.

[DanSchwartzgan]

Newell is playing barely 10 minutes a game, so I am worried some of those advanced stats are looking at garbage time.  He is also a power forward, which doesn't seem like a good fit with Flagg.  He has a good 3 point percentage so far but the sample is so small (it could be another Brandon Williams situation).  I think he would be a big drop off in desirability from Mavs standpoint.

Clearly the former #1 overall should present a more enticing level of desirability.  But, if you've watched Newell, he's got a little bit of everything in his bag.  His three point shooting is much worse in his low minute appearances.  In the 12 games where he's played over 12 minutes, he's 51% from 3 and has gotten up five attempts in all four of the games he's played 20 minutes or more (50% in those games also).

This was more a response to Smitty's efforts toward a fiscal responsibility than an argument that Newell is superior to Risacher.  I'm not sure I buy that Flagg is only a four and therefore can't play next to a four.  Flagg is a big wing and once he fully develops a three point shot he's fine playing next to any size wing as long as the other wing can spread the floor.  Newell seems like someone who can do that while also being a pretty decent roll guy and someone who can attack a closeout.  It's a pretty impressive set of skills.  But you are absolutely right about sample size concerns...thus the word "hint".

I'll go ahead and address the Atlanta tax thing that's coming next.  I know, I've posted their history of tax payments a couple of times now and have been on the no tax bandwagon myself (though a skilled negotiator should be able to accomplish what might be our biggest priority...might be...despite the other sides desire to do just the opposite).

[cow]

Reading Gump's signature, it sounds like Dumont is less concerned about the tax than those coming up with these fantasy trades. That's encouraging to me from a patience and willing to spend standpoint. A lot of these floated trade ideas remind me of when we sold off KP as a depressed asset. I'd rather just hold onto him if salary relief is the primary return. I guess that all depends how you view the would-be players involved in these would-be trades and where you feel the Mavs timeline is, but nothing purposed has piqued my interest, the opposite really, to the point where I'd rather just let AD playout his contract and get 60% of availability from him. And something better could come along in the offseason or before next years TDL, things change fast in the NBA. Just look at GSW hopes with Butler's ACL injury.

[KillerLeft]

I'm not sure I buy that Flagg is only a four and therefore can't play next to a four.  Flagg is a big wing and once he fully develops a three point shot he's fine playing next to any size wing as long as the other wing can spread the floor. 

For me, it's not a question of can/can't. I agree with your assessment that he can play as a 3, for example. It's just that I have little to no interest in going that route. I feel the clearly superior plan is to play Flagg as the bigger forward, where he's much more likely to have an athletic advantage deep into his career, and where he's much more likely to end defensive possessions protecting the rim as a help defender. Obviously, he's going to have to do a little of everything to be a superstar, but I just think he's special if they don't try to get too cute with his role. Just my opinion. 

If we were talking about Jabari Smith or someone even better, maybe, but I don't think Newell falls into that category. Heck, I'm not even sure he's going to be a Max Christie level excitement as a young player. I'd probably take Newell as the young player with the New Orleans pick, but that's not happening.

[myconsumerclub]

Really we do not know what we need till after the draft and we see who we are building around.

Atlanta's offer was the best when it contained Zach.

KP is supposed to be healthy now and if we have a 20 point per game guy like him who all of a sudden stays healthy from here on out then why would you get rid of him on a buy out?

No matter what you keep him and let him rebuild his value and then trade him for assets or he does well and you keep him if he can play well and fit in. You never just get a guy and buy him out if he is all of a sudden back to normal from a disease that is not the same thing as an injury.

Risacher is a conundrum because he plays the 3 and we are sort of using Cooper there but if you move Cooper to the 4 now you have both PJ with Cooper at the 4 so what do you do there trade off PJ? I would see what we get offered for him but I would not trade him unless he gets us a huge return. Somebody has to start shooting well from the 3 at these positions I assume we will see better from Cooper and if Risacher has started to evolve his game more we should see better from him with a new team to give him a new start.

If we draft 6 through 8 we may be able to get Kingston, Mikel and definitely Labaron to play PG and I may like them all about the same. Heck I like the top 4 PG's. Whoever scores higher and shows skills off more in the combine is who I want. taking any of the top 4.

Key to maximizing what we can be as a team going forward is our getting a TDL done where we add a few if not 3 or more 2nd round picks. This draft is filled with a lot more talent than most drafts. This is a draft you take advantage of that and stock up.

Bigs usually rise up the boards as the end of the season approaches and they show that they are consistent and developing.
51 https://www.tankathon.com/players/tomislav-ivisic
54 https://www.tankathon.com/players/milan-momcilovic
58 https://www.tankathon.com/players/zvonimir-ivisic

[mvossman]

Reading Gump's signature, it sounds like Dumont is less  concerned about the tax than those coming up with these fantasy trades.  That's encouraging to me from a patience and willing to spend standpoint.  A lot of these floated trade ideas remind me of when we sold off KP as a depressed asset.  I'd rather just hold onto him if salary relief is the primary return.  I guess that all depends how you view the would-be players involved in these would-be trades and where you feel the Mavs timeline is, but nothing purposed has piqued my interest, the opposite really, to the point where I'd rather just let AD playout his contract and get 60% of availability from him.  And something better could come along in the offseason or before next years TDL, things change fast in the NBA.  Just look at GSW hopes with Butler's ACL injury.

I'm not sure that quote necessarily means he is willing to pay a huge tax bill, and I'm not sure that quote isn't just org speak to keep AD price up.  The fact is nobody knows what he is going to do.  He is a total wildcard that recently signed off on the dumbest NBA trade in recent history.

[myconsumerclub]

Lively is also a bit of an issue, do we continue to bet on him developing when we can find center talent like Cisse without even using a pick?

There are centers slotted into the 2nd round that are decent looking with nice size. I would not extend him and I would want him to prove he can play a full season before I agree to resign him.

That leads us to Gafford's situation as well and I would probably lean to trading him since his value is still well regarded and we can probably get a good return on him and find a replacement that is younger and on Coopers timeline. In fact I think we just have him stashed away out of fear he could get injured before we can trade him.

Main trade chips I want to consider moving: AD Gafford Klay Martin DLO Hardy and of course we see Powell, Williams and Exum dropping off. Naji also has value but I like his game so who knows about moving him. I can go either way because of a need to add more talent on Coopers timeline but it sure would help things if he could stay on and contribute. Actually if there is anyone else on this list worth keeping it is Klay.

If we see AD still on the roster next season we are going to be tripped up on making moves.

Hopefully ATL is still interested at the TDL to make a move. If he stays we need to have a conversation that the PF position is not right for his game. Cooper is the PF and you need to play at the 5.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkpI6w0DCZU Anthony Davis STAYING With Mavs Past 2026 NBA Trade Deadline? Mavericks Trade Rumors Today

[Smitty]

Remember the tweet that Rich Paul liked?  It was KP/Kennard and Newell for AD.  I listened a deal yesterday where the guy had the pick as the 27 pick from either NOP or MIL.  The guy made a pretty compelling case that that was the best pick asset in Atlanta’s arsenal besides the 26 NOP pick.

He also wanted to get Dallas under the tax, so he put D’Lo in the outgoing.  I get that Atlanta would then be in the tax if that happened, but they are the ones getting the star player. 

Bold of you to go from thinking there's no deal where Atlanta ends up in the tax to thinking they add Newell, which makes them a tax team at that point, and then also taking on DLO and his $5.7M.

I've been the one saying Atlanta should be the one willing to be a tax paying team, if they're getting AD to contend, and the Mavs should be the one trying to avoid the tax, as a non-contending team.

If you think the Hawks will pay the tax, then there are several different options that can be on the table. My favorite is still the one that sends AD/Gaff/Naji for KP/Kennard/ZR/OO/Pick(s).

Also, your proposed AD/DLO for KP/Kennard/Asa deal doesn't look legal. Adding DLO put the Hawks over A1 by $12,018, where they'd be Hard Capped.

[Smitty]

I'm not sure I buy that Flagg is only a four and therefore can't play next to a four.  Flagg is a big wing and once he fully develops a three point shot he's fine playing next to any size wing as long as the other wing can spread the floor. 

Could not agree more! Flagg's ball-handling gets better each week. His 3PT shot will come around. A lot of the great ones struggled from distance their rookie year. 

Lebron 29%, Luka 32%, Durant 28%. 

Those 3 are the ones Flagg closely resemble with his offensive numbers' rookie year vs. rookie year. All of which are 'big Wing' types. I'm not comparing playstyles, only production.

Saying Flagg is "only X" is the wrong way to go IMO.