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

[RGP1981]

Have y'all seen what KD said about Jabari Smith Jr.?

Now would be a really good time for a savvy Front Office to try trading for Jabari, he could pair really well with Coop at the Forward position.

[HoosierDaddyKid]

https://x.com/KeithSmithNBA/status/20237...22014?s=20


Deadlines for NBA teams to have 14 players signed to standard contracts.

[DanSchwartzgan]

I noticed that Ivey got a DNP-CD last night...his fifth game with Chicago.  He started 3 of the previous four and gave way to Sexton in the fourth game.  Giddy was out all four, but was back last night and Sexton got the bench role over Ivey.

Isaac at Locked-On has said several times in the last week that he thinks Gafford gets traded this summer.  Chicago was one of the rumored destinations.  If we don't draft a guard, I wonder if a Gafford for S&T Ivey might be in order.  If Dallas stays under the first apron next season, the $7.5mm spread applies.  That infers maximum starting salaries of about $24mm in the first year which works for both sides under the BYC rules (as would trading Ivey into the TPE we have and starting him at about $21mm).

What Chicago did at the trade deadline was just strange bringing in so many guards.  They don't control Simons (other than Bird rights), but they can extract value for Ivey if they choose to go down that road.  Much depends on who the teams draft, but Dallas needs to add a guard if they draft a forward.  You have to look beyond the Kyrie years to see the benefit as Ivey is small-ish and you wouldn't want to play them together (the same applies to Acuff, Flemings and Brown).  But, Ivey would be a high upside swing and would help with our need for creation from the wing.  If the cost was Gafford and I ended up with someone like Ament or even Wagler in the draft, I'd take that swing and try to develop him to become the Kyrie replacement in a couple of years.  BTW, Ivey's agent is also Flagg's agent FWIW.

[Chicagojk]

I noticed that Ivey got a DNP-CD last night...his fifth game with Chicago.  He started 3 of the previous four and gave way to Sexton in the fourth game.  Giddy was out all four, but was back last night and Sexton got the bench role over Ivey.

Isaac at Locked-On has said several times in the last week that he thinks Gafford gets traded this summer.  Chicago was one of the rumored destinations.  If we don't draft a guard, I wonder if a Gafford for S&T Ivey might be in order.  If Dallas stays under the tax next season, the $7.5mm spread applies.  If they operate over the tax, but below the first apron, the 125% rule applies.  Those infer maximum starting salaries of about $24mm in the first case and about $21.5mm in the second.  Either of those numbers solve the BYC issue (as would trading Ivey into the TPE we have and starting him at about $21mm).

What Chicago did at the trade deadline was just strange bringing in so many guards.  They don't control Simons (other than Bird rights), but they can extract value for Ivey if they choose to go down that road.  Much depends on who the teams draft, but Dallas needs to add a guard if they draft a forward.  You have to look beyond the Kyrie years to see the benefit as Ivey is small-ish and you wouldn't want to play them together (the same applies to Acuff, Flemings and Brown).  But, Ivey would be a high upside swing and would help with our need for creation from the wing.  If the cost was Gafford and I ended up with someone like Ament or even Wagler in the draft, I'd take that swing and try to develop him to become the Kyrie replacement in a couple of years.  BTW, Ivey's agent is also Flagg's agent FWIW.

Quote from Ivey last night.  Looks like he is not right.

https://x.com/Sam_Vecenie/status/2024820981853012435

[DanSchwartzgan]

Quote from Ivey last night.  Looks like he is not right.

https://x.com/Sam_Vecenie/status/2024820981853012435

I wonder if a broken bone is like an ACL in that you aren't 100% when you first come back from the injury.

[Chicagojk]

I wonder if a broken bone is like an ACL in that you aren't 100% when you first come back from the injury.

It probably didn't help when he came back from his broken bone that he had a knee scope (or some kind of surgery).  Probably has little trust in his body right now and must be a little depressing not being able to move like he use to.   It will probably take some time to get his confidence up and stay healthy before we see the real Ivey again.

[DanSchwartzgan]

It appears I made two mistakes in what I said about trade matching above.  1.  The $7.5mm trade band for players in the middle tier of salary ($7.5mm to $29mm) now rises as the cap rises.  In other words, $7.5mm is now indexed for cap inflation and will be a larger number next summer.  2.  Also, being under the tax doesn't matter.  The first apron will be the limiting factor as Dallas would be hard capped for taking back more salary.  Gemini and ChatGPT weren't in agreement on this, so I had to keep digging (as I was too lazy to look it up myself).

We focus on the TPE and the MLE, but if we are sending out salary, whether it be Gafford or PJ or whomever, there is actually more space to be used (whether for a free agent or not) under the trade matching rules.  If we are really trying to team build and add talent around Flagg and our 2026 pick, a trade or S&T provides more room to work with than the TPE.

[loki]

I noticed that Ivey got a DNP-CD last night...his fifth game with Chicago.  He started 3 of the previous four and gave way to Sexton in the fourth game.  Giddy was out all four, but was back last night and Sexton got the bench role over Ivey.

Isaac at Locked-On has said several times in the last week that he thinks Gafford gets traded this summer.  Chicago was one of the rumored destinations.  If we don't draft a guard, I wonder if a Gafford for S&T Ivey might be in order.  If Dallas stays under the first apron next season, the $7.5mm spread applies.  That infers maximum starting salaries of about $24mm in the first year which works for both sides under the BYC rules (as would trading Ivey into the TPE we have and starting him at about $21mm).

What Chicago did at the trade deadline was just strange bringing in so many guards.  They don't control Simons (other than Bird rights), but they can extract value for Ivey if they choose to go down that road.  Much depends on who the teams draft, but Dallas needs to add a guard if they draft a forward.  You have to look beyond the Kyrie years to see the benefit as Ivey is small-ish and you wouldn't want to play them together (the same applies to Acuff, Flemings and Brown).  But, Ivey would be a high upside swing and would help with our need for creation from the wing.  If the cost was Gafford and I ended up with someone like Ament or even Wagler in the draft, I'd take that swing and try to develop him to become the Kyrie replacement in a couple of years.  BTW, Ivey's agent is also Flagg's agent FWIW.

Ivey could be interesting as a reclamation project, but I think you would only want him on a short term bargain contract. 

I'll throw an idea out there if they go the opposite route and draft a guard. Gafford to Atlanta for Corey Kispert. That gives you a much better shooting SF next to Flagg on a sub-MLE contract for the next 3 years. It would allow Naji to function as Flagg's backup so you can keep the ball in his hands a bit more when he's out there.

[mvossman]

Ivey could be interesting as a reclamation project, but I think you would only want him on a short term bargain contract. 

I'll throw an idea out there if they go the opposite route and draft a guard. Gafford to Atlanta for Corey Kispert. That gives you a much better shooting SF next to Flagg on a sub-MLE contract for the next 3 years. It would allow Naji to function as Flagg's backup so you can keep the ball in his hands a bit more when he's out there.

I would want to target a 3&D player with that trade.  Kispert is not a plus defender.  I would prefer to overpay a little bit (from a cap perspective) to get a high level 3&D player.  That is one of the advantages of the AD trade is that is an option we can take if it makes sense.

[loki]

I would want to target a 3&D player with that trade.  Kispert is not a plus defender.  I would prefer to overpay a little bit (from a cap perspective) to get a high level 3&D player.  That is one of the advantages of the AD trade is that is an option we can take if it makes sense.

I'd rather have that as well, but I don't think you're getting a high level 3&D guy for Gafford. The objective with this trade is to get a better fitting piece on a good contract. I'd rather pay Kispert $40M than pay Gafford $54M over the next 3 seasons. It also prepares future trades (like dealing PJ/Naji/Klay) by giving them some depth at SF.

My primary target in free agency would be Peyton Watson (S&T). It's unlikely they can pull the deal off, but I think he could fill that 3&D role long term. Trading for Kispert wouldn't prevent you from pursuing a guy like Watson (or whoever you prefer). He's cheap enough that I wouldn't mind bringing him off the bench.

[mvossman]

I'd rather have that as well, but I don't think you're getting a high level 3&D guy for Gafford. The objective with this trade is to get a better fitting piece on a good contract. I'd rather pay Kispert $40M than pay Gafford $54M over the next 3 seasons. It also prepares future trades (like dealing PJ/Naji/Klay) by giving them some depth at SF.

My primary target in free agency would be Peyton Watson (S&T). It's unlikely they can pull the deal off, but I think he could fill that 3&D role long term. Trading for Kispert wouldn't prevent you from pursuing a guy like Watson (or whoever you prefer). He's cheap enough that I wouldn't mind bringing him off the bench.

I like Watson as a young player, but he doesn't take a lot of 3s.  My ideal would be somebody like Moody or maybe Eason.

[loki]

I like Watson as a young player, but he doesn't take a lot of 3s.  My ideal would be somebody like Moody or maybe Eason.

I'd kind of view Moody as a worse Max Christie. Not sure he has the size to play SF. I guess that's fine if you're not too worried specifically about the position.

Is Eason quick enough to guard on the perimeter? He's definitely an interesting name.

[mvossman]

I'd kind of view Moody as a worse Max Christie. Not sure he has the size to play SF. I guess that's fine if you're not too worried specifically about the position.

Is Eason quick enough to guard on the perimeter? He's definitely an interesting name.

Moody is a significantly better defender than Max, and with a 7' 1" wingspan he can easily guard up.  I would call them a wash offensively, Moody shoots with more volume and they both have good percentages.

[F Gump]

1 On 2026 summer roster-building, just like last summer, I am very hesitant to trade Gaff and end up without a starter-caliber C.
2 Ivey? If he's more than MLE, for me it's an instant hard pass. And the closer I look, I am not sure he's the guy you want anyhow, even at MLE or less. He's not a PG, he's undersized as a 2-guard, his shooting is not special, and his defense is meh. To me that adds up to a 3rd-stringer behind Max and Klay, and I don't really want to be spending on 3rd stringers.
3 Note to DS - while the rules allow the Mavs to spend up to the apron, we can rest assured they won't be taxpayers no matter what. They will undoubtedly prioritize a hard repeater-tax reset which happens with 2 consecutive tax-free years. We should look at moves that fit that paradigm.
4 In general I think the Mavs will be looking for two players - one in the draft, and one either via FA or trade - who can be SIGNIFICANT foundational pieces.
5 I think their key solution would be to find an offense-creator, to build the whole offense around, and I'm thinking back to when the Suns grabbed Nash as a FA and it was the key to their team's ascent for many years to follow. That's the move I want, getting THAT guy, by some means or another -- but that's much easier said than done.
6 As I game plan, I tend to pencil in Nemby and Cisse to 2 of the slots, based on the belief they need low cost playable guys on the roster, but I think they might prefer to have them as 2-ways instead, expanding the usable roster.
7 I would expect the bottom of the roster to be very much up in the air. Money, alternatives, draft picks, roster slots, it feels like a big stew. Questions about DP, Bagley, Cisse, Middleton, Martin, Williams, Nembhard, Jones, Johnson, Kelly, pick 30, SRP -- I can see a way for any of those to be on next year's roster (including 2-ways), but not a lot of them.

On the question of who to keep out of the top end of the roster, I don't think you can answer that until you figure out that PG-type player and who else you can get this summer as foundational pieces. Do you have to spend some of your top end talent to accomplish the main goal? If so, which? If not, which of your ccurrent top guys can complement and even accelerate the value of the ones you are building around (hopefully consisting of CF, Kyrie, top-10 pick, trade/FA acquisition), and which don't?

[loki]

1 On 2026 summer roster-building, just like last summer, I am very hesitant to trade Gaff and end up without a starter-caliber C.

Hopefully that's going to be Lively. I think he gets one more shot before they invest significant resources in another 5. But even if that doesn't pan out, I don't know that Gafford himself qualifies as starter-caliber. Definitely not in a playoff series.

[Scott41theMavs]

Hopefully that's going to be Lively. I think he gets one more shot before they invest significant resources in another 5. But even if that doesn't pan out, I don't know that Gafford himself qualifies as starter-caliber. Definitely not in a playoff series.

He does if they're running the pick and roll (which I'm surprised we haven't seen Coop running this year - hopefully just a matter of having him develop a limited offensive toolbox, and tanking - a guy as good at both driving to the rim and passing as he is should be a fantastic pick and roll ballhandler).

[mvossman]

He does if they're running the pick and roll (which I'm surprised we haven't seen Coop running this year - hopefully just a matter of having him develop a limited offensive toolbox, and tanking - a guy as good at both driving to the rim and passing as he is should be a fantastic pick and roll ballhandler).

That is a necessity for him to be close to starter level, but even with that he has defensive limitations in space.  I don't think he is the long term solution and I would rather go cheaper for a Lively insurance plan.

[F Gump]

Hopefully that's going to be Lively. I think he gets one more shot before they invest significant resources in another 5. But even if that doesn't pan out, I don't know that Gafford himself qualifies as starter-caliber. Definitely not in a playoff series.

If you are trading Gafford in suitable trade window, the decision has to be made IN THE SUMMER. And there will be NO CLUE on what Lively will offer next season, when we are in the summer. He's an injured player, who has had a significant issue and surgery, and will not even try to play until October. 

On top of that, Lively has NEVER been reliable for a whole season. Has he ever even played half? I like the "idea" of Lively, but I don't see that as something to depend on.

In light of that, to me it would be a major mistake to assume Lively is the answer as the C you need, and move Gafford. This franchise has lots of experience in lacking a decent center, years on end at times, and now that they have a decent solution, imo the idea of frittering it away would be stupid.

[mvossman]

If you are trading Gafford in suitable trade window, the decision has to be made IN THE SUMMER. And there will be NO CLUE on what Lively will offer next season, when we are in the summer. He's an injured player, who has had a significant issue and surgery, and will not even try to play until October. 

On top of that, Lively has NEVER been reliable for a whole season. Has he ever even played half? I like the "idea" of Lively, but I don't see that as something to depend on.

In light of that, to me it would be a major mistake to assume Lively is the answer as the C you need, and move Gafford. This franchise has lots of experience in lacking a decent center, years on end at times, and now that they have a decent solution, imo the idea of frittering it away would be stupid.

In lively Rookie year he played in 76 out of 104 games including the playoffs which was 73%, and he was crucial in the playoff run.  His health is a huge concern, but he has been a very positive impact when on the court (he has one of the highest net ratings this season).

I would argue Gafford has maybe even more questions.  He was abused regularly in that playoff run and he has been terrible this season without an elite P&R partner.  He has also had some of his own health concerns recently.  If we don't end up with an elite P&R ball handler I am concerned that Gafford is going to tank his value even more.

[F Gump]

In lively Rookie year he played in ....

We had this discussion last summer when you said how wonderfully reliable he was, despite his continuing ability to get injured and miss games, and how Gaff needs to go, and sorry but "7 games played" is what we got and is NOT an outcome that makes me confident in Lively's availability.