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

[Smitty]

I would break it down and say the only decision they NEED to make is if they want to sell high on the vets listed and if they want to offer extensions to the ones eligible.

We will know their path soon enough.

[Chicagojk]

https://x.com/mavsfilmroom/status/201560...85312?s=61

[Winter]

https://x.com/mavsfilmroom/status/201560...85312?s=61

Spot on. Thanks for posting.

[Smitty]

https://x.com/mavsfilmroom/status/201560...85312?s=61

Looks like they’re willing to sell high on Naji. Meaning the extension talks this summer are a likely factor. But don’t have to do anything, if they don’t get a deal they like. That’s the position you want to be in as we near the TDL.

[cow]

Considering offers on Christie is a pleasant surprise. Don't ask, it's completely irrational.

[mvossman]

Naji Marshall, and to a slightly lesser extent, Gafford, are basically gold to contenders right about now. Both good players (Marshall's play currently reaching all time high levels), both on good contracts (especially Marshall, but Gafford's is good, too, provided his new team has a starting role in mind). Both of them are worth a first or two for sure, considering the type of firsts good teams have to offer.

Again, the problem is "why?" There is a very low chance that you'd find a player as good as either with a late first round pick, and even if you hit on the pick(s) it will be 2-4 years (starting when the pick is made - the drafts in question might be a few years down the road already) before you have a player who's the equivalent of what you're giving up with either of those two. If you think you'll be bad for the next few years, that's a decent risk to take because before long those guys (Marshall and Gafford) will be old and worth less, anyway. But, if there's a chance of being good in the next year or so, letting go of those guys (for draft capital, at least) could be a mistake (unless you get back better fitting pieces of equivalent quality, not just picks).

I just don't know what I think they should do, frankly. Honestly, if there was just a starting level PG here, I might be in favor of trying to compete next season, in which case I'd be looking at reshaping the roster in a completely different light. It's really that close of a call for me.

I mean we got both PJ and Gafford with crappy first round picks.  Getting picks back does not mean we can't turn those around later into getting better fitting players.  I don't think it makes any sense to hold onto Gafford if we are not trading AD.  Naji is tougher.  I really like the player, but the fit is questionable and the value is probably at its peak.

[RoyTarpleysGhost]

Again, the problem is "why?" There is a very low chance that you'd find a player as good as either with a late first round pick, and even if you hit on the pick(s) it will be 2-4 years (starting when the pick is made - the drafts in question might be a few years down the road already) before you have a player who's the equivalent of what you're giving up with either of those two. If you think you'll be bad for the next few years, that's a decent risk to take because before long those guys (Marshall and Gafford) will be old and worth less, anyway. But, if there's a chance of being good in the next year or so, letting go of those guys (for draft capital, at least) could be a mistake (unless you get back better fitting pieces of equivalent quality, not just picks).

I just don't know what I think they should do, frankly. Honestly, if there was just a starting level PG here, I might be in favor of trying to compete next season, in which case I'd be looking at reshaping the roster in a completely different light. It's really that close of a call for me.

The why is future assets.  If for example a player you like such as Darius Garland becomes available, future 1st rd picks are needed.  The more you have, the better.  It's not really about the player picked using that pick being as good as Naji or Gafford.

The chances of being good next year are about what they were this year.  Being good would require Anthony Davis to be healthy.  We've seen how that goes.  We're gonna be stuck in this never ending loop of "if AD was healthy..."

It feels to me like people are looking at all the recognizable names the Mavs have on paper.  That does not make a good team.  Most of their top players have health or fit concerns.  Cooper Flagg and Max Christie are the only certainties.

[KillerLeft]

I mean we got both PJ and Gafford with crappy first round picks.  Getting picks back does not mean we can't turn those around later into getting better fitting players.  I don't think it makes any sense to hold onto Gafford if we are not trading AD.  Naji is tougher.  I really like the player, but the fit is questionable and the value is probably at its peak.

I don't disagree on any particular point. I just can't escape the feeling that anything they do at this point could end up being the wrong thing. I know that's always and constantly true, but I don't normally feel that way. I'm usually pretty confident in my opinions about how the team should move forward. I have no damn clue how this will play out, or what steps should be taken for it to play out favorably.

[mvossman]

I don't disagree on any particular point. I just can't escape the feeling that anything they do at this point could end up being the wrong thing. I know that's always and constantly true, but I don't normally feel that way. I'm usually pretty confident in my opinions about how the team should move forward. I have no damn clue how this will play out, or what steps should be taken for it to play out favorably.

I don't think there is that big of a difference between running it back and a full reset anymore, not after the latest AD injury.  I don't think they will get an offer that they think will be worth getting off him.  He was the biggest swing decision.

I think the bigger driver is if they are willing to pay tax.  They may want to run it back but not pay tax.  The best way to do that is probably to shed some cap now.  The most obvious candidates are Gafford and Klay.  Maybe they can get somebody to take on Dlo.

So with AD likely not moving, there is not much difference between running it back while avoiding tax and a full reset.  The only real difference might be your stance on Naji, but I could see both sides saying only if the offer is really good.

My fear is that they won't clear that cap due to indecision and decide/realize at some later point that they need to stop the bleeding when it becomes much more painful to do so.  

My bigger fear is that they push hard to make the play-in and lower (possibly significantly) the value of one of their biggest assets.

[meistermatze]

We have to factor one thing in: We don't have a FRP for several years after next season and we have a chance for picking high. What is our great plan to build a contender after that?

I understand most rationals being thrown around here, but if we miss out on a potentially great pick now, what is our clear path forwards? I don't see it.