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

[KillerLeft]

I would truly prefer 2 BW's rather than add Sexton. That's not taking into account the salaries. Yes Sexton creates numbers (for himself) but he does none of the things that make a TEAM better. (I'm higher than most on BW but that's been the case since very soon after Luka was given away, and I think I was right to be so bullish. Still do.)

You are correct in saying that the Mavs have a big need for a PG -- but I think you are way off base in the idea that we need to have Sexton to fill that need. In fact, I'm not convinced he actually would really be a solution at all - sure, he can handle the ball and get himself some shots, but so can Hardy. 

A trade for Sexton would be the PG version of a  Christian Wood trade.

Sexton has no interest in defense or team and his best skill is getting a shot for himself. I've no interest in giving up good talent PLUS paying 19M to have that on my team. 

BOTTOM LINE --- imo The Mavs can do soooooo much better for a far far far lower price in talent and pay.

BW = Brandon Williams? 

If so, I think I agree with what I believe is your point, even if I do think you're somewhat overvaluing the small sample size of Williams vs. the long track record of Sexton. My point isn't in support of Sexton, specifically, though I do feel that what he has mastered is not as commonplace as your stance seems to suggest. It's really hard to consistently create scoring opportunities (for yourself or others) in the NBA. It's not a problem we've endured much recently as Mavs fans, but I have a feeling we're about to get really sick of watching this team try to play offense. The post trade deadline stretch was more than enough for me. 

As I said, if there's a better guy out there than Sexton, sign me up. I have no burning need for him, specifically, but I think it would be silly to sit on 1/10 of the league's starting centers while you have NO proven rotation guards because you're worried about not getting enough in exchange for Daniel Gafford. I'm not saying that's your take, necessarily, just that it's the take I'm arguing with.