Trade & FA 2024-25:

[Scott41theMavs]

No doubt Mavs would want to keep Gafford at the right price, but Gafford will be in the middle of his prime when his contract expires so I'm looking at it from Gaff's point of view. I said the same thing about Brunson not wanting to re-sign to be Luka's backup at the time and people on other boards thought that was nutty.

Considering Lively's age, upside, and most likely increasing minutes going into his 3rd season next year, the fact Kyrie and Klay are on the back sides of their careers, the Mavs having limited trade assets, and Gaff most likely wanting to play starting minutes (and get paid a starter salary), I don't think it is a nutty idea to think he could be trade bait next off season or at TDL in 2026. That will be close to the time the Mavs will have to offer Lively most likely a huge contract. Gafford should be one hell of a trade asset for us to help acquire Klay's replacement.

The idea on developing Sharp is more about holding on to him as a potential candidate to replace Gafford if he decides to move on from the Mavs. Sharp could very easily be the next Moses Brown or Tacko Fall but my point is to give him one of the two-way contracts to see if he can become at least take Powell's role as an insurance/situational backup. Also, we have to remember the budding 7'6 superstar in our division that we'll have to deal with for many years so it wouldn't hurt having someone with similar size as an insurance/situational option.

Trading Gafford this year or next year are two completely different conversations. This year? Hell no. Next year? Possibly.

[DL2RimRocker]

The idea of Sharp being a possible player who might solve a need in 2 years is reasonable. But there is no need for them to do anything different that what they are doing with a player who is raw and needs lots of work to get to the 3rd stringer level. He's ALREADY  locked up this year on a GL deal, with the Mavs having control and all kinds of choices at the end of the year. It remains to be seen if he develops at all, or very fast, but Mavs have all kinds of opportunities to keep him and bring him along further if they need them.

That's the main thing...as long as they have control.
Fairly mobile at 7'5 with 7'8 WS and 9'10 standing reach is not something that can be taught.
I see him more as Powell's possible replacement next season.

[DL2RimRocker]

Trading Gafford this year or next year are two completely different conversations. This year? Hell no. Next year? Possibly.

I don't recall any suggestions to trade him this season. The conversation was always about next off season or the 2026 TDL.

It really comes down to what role he wants to play at age 28 when his salary expires and what his market value will be at that time.
I'm anticipating he won't want to settle for a backup role and there will be some interest by other teams in FA.

Right now we have about 22.5 mil tied up in the center position which is pretty damn good considering the talent level and our current overall situation.
But the strong possibility of having over 35 mil tied up in the center position wouldn't make much sense if there are other areas of serious need.

[F Gump]

This conversation is partly about Gafford and partly about Sharp. In some ways they are related, but it's not as simple as replacing (or being able to replace) one with the other.

The point being, there's a lot of time between now and a decision point on either one. Values and needs go up and down. You have to deal with each of them independently and see where it goes.

ABOUT SHARP. Sharp has showed a few good things, but he's very raw. His size is his best trait, but it's not like that has been a secret. And he went undrafted. That's how the entire NBA world sees him. That says a lot about how far he has to progress, to be of value here.

ABOUT GAFFORD. To some degree, the same point is true with Gafford. While we like what we see, there are some weaknesses, and as a result he was not highly regarded in WAS (or CHI either) which is what made him so easily available. The point being, while he's a good fit here, he may not have a price tag that is too expensive for the Mavs when this contract ends. Maybe he sees what we all see, and feels like this is a good fit for home, and signs an extension for a similar deal. We also forget easily that while Gafford is a bit in favor right now in Dallas, he's only the flavor of the day at a position that is not necessarily highly regarded in the NBA anymore. As a comp, think Portis, or B Lopez, as they settled into their teams. I don't expect Gafford contract and ability to keep to become much different.

[SleepingHero]

I’m looking around the league for potential backup guards that can distribute but also score a little that could be available.

Guys in the TJ McConnell mold.

Turns out there aren’t a ton of guys like that right now. But one name that stood out to me and is on my list is Tre Jones for the Spurs. They just drafted Castle. Perhaps Jones could be had.

[DL2RimRocker]

This conversation is partly about Gafford and partly about Sharp. In some ways they are related, but it's not as simple as replacing  (or being able to replace) one with the other.

The point being, there's a lot of time between now and a decision point on either one. Values and needs go up and down. You have to deal with each of them independently and see where it goes.

ABOUT SHARP. Sharp has showed a few good things, but he's very raw. His size is his best trait, but it's not like that has been a secret. And he went undrafted. That's how the entire NBA world sees him. That says a lot about how far he has to progress, to be of value here.

ABOUT GAFFORD. To some degree, the same point is true with Gafford. While we like what we see, there are some weaknesses, and as a result he was not highly regarded in WAS (or CHI either) which is what made him so easily available. The point being, while he's a good fit here, he may not have a price tag that is too expensive for the Mavs when this contract ends. Maybe he sees what we all see, and feels like this is a good fit for home, and signs an extension for a similar deal. We also forget easily that while Gafford is a bit in favor right now in Dallas, he's only the flavor of the day at a position that is not necessarily highly regarded in the NBA anymore. As a comp, think Portis, or B Lopez, as they settled into their teams. I don't expect Gafford contract and ability to keep to become much different.

Fair enough and all good points.

Not too much different than the point I'm making but there seems to be a lot of notions in Mavs land (this board and others) that Gafford should not be traded under any circumstances. My original point is that I could see him being dealt next off-season due to all of the reasons I've mentioned earlier.
He is a wonderful luxury to have in our current situation, but those circumstances will change next off season, and I could see him being an option as a trade piece to address other areas of possible need.

Sharp entered the conversation because he could be a possible cheap replacement for Powell and if we get lucky, a suitable backup to Lively.
Keep in mind, we may not necessarily need a backup the caliber of Gaff if Lively's minutes go up significantly. Gaff is a great piece to have while Lively develops into a bigger role but as he enters into a new contract, Gaff may not be as satisfied as a 12-15 minute backup.

Maybe my expectations of Lively and Gaff are too high, but I'd be shocked if Lively doesn't turn out to be a top 5 center in the league in a few years.
As you mention, Gaff's value might not be that high and he might settle for backup role on a championship caliber team.

[F Gump]

"He is a wonderful luxury to have in our current situation" and "we may not necessarily need a backup the caliber of Gaff if Lively's minutes go up significantly."-- I jump way off this train with this. I understand the thinking, but I just don't see Gafford as a "luxury" in any way. I think the Mavs need TWO who can do the things Gafford and Lively can do, for all kinds of reasons that are easy to ignore, and while it's sometimes hard to even find one, I don't think that changes the fact they actually need two.

I think the model is 1a, 1b, and 3, and DG + DL cover 42-44 mpg with neither getting overloaded. Their current mix at C feels about right to me. That doesn't mean DG and DL have to be the names, but I expect reasonably similar quality if they aren't.

I get the idea of Sharp working his way into the mix and up the ladder, but to offer an analogy, imo he's in the remedial 2nd grade class right now and we're talking about having people to do college level work. Maybe some day he enters as the 3rd guy, in place of Powell? But as much as we diss DP, DP is probably 10x the contributor at this stage if need arises.

[DL2RimRocker]

"He is a wonderful luxury to have in our current situation" and "we may not necessarily need a backup the caliber of Gaff if Lively's minutes go up significantly."-- I jump way off this train with this. I understand the thinking, but I just don't see Gafford as a "luxury" in any way. I think the Mavs need TWO who can do the things Gafford and Lively can do, for all kinds of reasons that are easy to ignore, and while it's sometimes hard to even find one, I don't think that changes the fact they actually need two.

I think the model is 1a, 1b, and 3, and DG + DL cover 42-44 mpg with neither getting overloaded. Their current mix at C feels about right to me. That doesn't mean DG and DL have to be the names, but I expect reasonably similar quality if they aren't.

I get the idea of Sharp working his way into the mix and up the ladder, but to offer an analogy, imo he's in the remedial 2nd grade class right now and we're talking about having people to do college level work. Maybe some day he enters as the 3rd guy, in place of Powell? But as much as we diss DP, DP is probably 10x the contributor at this stage if need arises.

I think where we differ is the value of Gafford and maybe Lively's ceiling. I think Gaff will be too expensive to keep and too good to accept a backup role.
I absolutely hope you are right and we can keep him as long as it doesn't compromise other positions.

I could agree Gaff is a necessity right now, but I'm betting by the time his contract is up, he will be a luxury because Lively will be a star and a 32-35 minute player.

And Sharp is a complete toss of a coin at this point. Like I said, he could easily be the next Moses Brown or Tacko Fall. If Wemby wasn't in our division, Sharp would have never been in the conversation. Powell shouldn't be on the team in 2026 because he doesn't bring anything now and obviously has no upside.

[Mavs2021]

"He is a wonderful luxury to have in our current situation" and "we may not necessarily need a backup the caliber of Gaff if Lively's minutes go up significantly."-- I jump way off this train with this. I understand the thinking, but I just don't see Gafford as a "luxury" in any way. I think the Mavs need TWO who can do the things Gafford and Lively can do, for all kinds of reasons that are easy to ignore, and while it's sometimes hard to even find one, I don't think that changes the fact they actually need two.

I think the model is 1a, 1b, and 3, and DG + DL cover 42-44 mpg with neither getting overloaded. Their current mix at C feels about right to me. That doesn't mean DG and DL have to be the names, but I expect reasonably similar quality if they aren't.

I get the idea of Sharp working his way into the mix and up the ladder, but to offer an analogy, imo he's in the remedial 2nd grade class right now and we're talking about having people to do college level work. Maybe some day he enters as the 3rd guy, in place of Powell? But as much as we diss DP, DP is probably 10x the contributor at this stage if need arises.

Exactly. Gafford is good for his role and money. A smart team might actually have the next Gafford on its radar already, if they cannot find a common ground on an extension, so they can replace him cheaply. Nothing I have seen from Sharp makes me think he can be that guy. Yes he´s very tall, but his body is not made for contact, his arms are long and weak. You can easily muscle balls away from him. I would hire an professional arm wrestling coach to make his wrists and hands into lethal weapons. Only way he has a chance to make it.

[Mavs2021]

The Patrick Williams extension in Chicago looks smooth in preseason. Through two games the five other starters have posted

White -7
Dosunmu +1
Giddey +9
Lavine +10
Vucevic +24

Overall +37 with Williams somehow managing to rack up -36 in just 31 minutes of action as their partner; on 3-15 shooting and five turnovers. Yikes.

[RGP1981]

The Patrick Williams extension in Chicago looks smooth in preseason. Through two games the five other starters have posted

White -7
Dosunmu +1
Giddey +9
Lavine +10
Vucevic +24

Overall +37 with Williams somehow managing to rack up -36 in just 31 minutes of action as their partner; on 3-15 shooting and five turnovers.  Yikes.

PWill is a conundrum, for sure. On paper he should be way better than he has shown. I don't really know what to make of the guy.

[Ghost of Podkolzin]

Is Gafford a luxury or a key competitive advantage? What team can rotate through 2 pure centers like we can? In today's NBA, this is unique.

IMO you only move Gafford for a starting SF/PF.

[The Jom]

"He is a wonderful luxury to have in our current situation" and "we may not necessarily need a backup the caliber of Gaff if Lively's minutes go up significantly."-- I jump way off this train with this. I understand the thinking, but I just don't see Gafford as a "luxury" in any way. I think the Mavs need TWO who can do the things Gafford and Lively can do, for all kinds of reasons that are easy to ignore, and while it's sometimes hard to even find one, I don't think that changes the fact they actually need two.

I think the model is 1a, 1b, and 3, and DG + DL cover 42-44 mpg with neither getting overloaded. Their current mix at C feels about right to me. That doesn't mean DG and DL have to be the names, but I expect reasonably similar quality if they aren't.

I get the idea of Sharp working his way into the mix and up the ladder, but to offer an analogy, imo he's in the remedial 2nd grade class right now and we're talking about having people to do college level work. Maybe some day he enters as the 3rd guy, in place of Powell? But as much as we diss DP, DP is probably 10x the contributor at this stage if need arises.

Whoa! You think Lively’s future is to split 42 to 44 minutes with Gafford? You are so underselling the kid. No way.

[Scott41theMavs]

Whoa! You think Lively’s future is to split 42 to 44 minutes with Gafford? You are so underselling the kid. No way.

This year for sure.

[The Jom]

This year for sure.

28 minimum

[Scott41theMavs]

28 minimum

Nothing would make me happier. Still have to have a rim-running center in the game every second that Luka plays.

[myconsumerclub]

Sharp is a project till we find another big center to fall in love with. He just needs a chance to learn and develop. If he pans out you could theoretically move Lively to the 4 and use PJ at the SF some ahead of Naji and possibly Klay depending on how Klay ages kind of like when Marion was playing SF and PF for us. Klay Luka and Kyrie are the core but we sure have a lot of depth at those positions. The uninjured are Hardy, Dinwiddie, Naji, Omax, Lawson, Gortman if he makes the 3 man 2 way squad. Thats 6 uninjured. Injured is Exum and Hessler. 4/5's you got crap behind Gafford and Lively unless you think Kleber and Powell are great options and if so then you have to consider those 2 centers since we need a backup center more than a backup PF. Sure you can use Kleber at PF with his 3 pointer if he is healthy but the problem is he is so unhealthy much of the season and so what else can you do but develop Sharp.

Our three best players to sign at the 2 way level are
PG 1. Gortman shoots the three plays defense and he can distribute sounds like he is just needs to play a few more decent preseason games like he is doing currently and we have no choice but to sign him in place of Williams.
BIG 2. Sharp based on an insurance need now is clearly a must sign. Hopefully later on he shows he can play and stick around to contribute when needed.
WING 3. AJ Kessler or Miller is the last decision we must make. Kessler is shooting himself in the foot being too injured to win a spot. Miller looked real good the other day and AJ is a solid wing but he is getting older and if younger players outperform you for that position then you go young. 2 games to go it looks like this last decision is the one we still need to make.

I would say Gortman and Sharp are locks at this point. We are deep enough to gamble a little bit so go for the guys with bigger upside and more youth. If I had to guess Miller might be the one that gets the nod over AJ.

[F Gump]

Whoa! You think Lively’s future is to split 42 to 44 minutes with Gafford? You are so underselling the kid. No way.

Yep. And I am not underselling Lively, ie this is not based on any doubts about his potential.

Just recognizing some realities. As in ...

1 There are challenges that exist when you are a slender guy who will often have to play against physical brutes. Play heavy minutes and you greatly increase your risk of injury (which we already saw, as he had MULTIPLE different injuries as a rookie that caused him to miss games). 

2 Tyson Chandler, a good comp, averaged 27 mpg.

3 Because of injuries, there will be games in which he logs 0 minutes of the 42-44, and games in which there will be 42-44 available (and he can't fill) because DG is dinged up.

4 Also, in that 42-44 mpg, I am only considering how to divvy the minutes as a center -- ie, if there's thought that Lively might have potential to do more than rim-run and rebound-defend, a la KG supposedly, then he would end up being used as a PF for some of the game. Maybe that happens, but it doesn't necessarily lengthen his minutes at C.

5 One issue that is completely overlooked re Lively is that he is AWFUL at FTs, and that is going to be an extra limiter on his minutes. You can't trust him to close games when Hack-A-Dereck is a possible way for a team to get an empty possession out of the Mavs. Gafford is not as bad, but also is bad, which makes it a thing that can impact C minutes.

[Dundalis]

Whoa! You think Lively’s future is to split 42 to 44 minutes with Gafford? You are so underselling the kid. No way.

The combo make our defense. 48 mins of elite rim protection. If you just have Lively, unless the perimeter defense is fantastic, our defensive rating falls off and looks like what it was pre Gaff and PJ trade IMO (sure you now have PJ, but you also have the drop off from DJJ to Klay).

Losing Gafford, unless the perimeter defense is somehow increased quite a bit, causes the teams overall defense to fall off a good amount with the team as currently constructed.

[michaeltex]

We do realize this discussion is about depth and skill at a position that almost no other team has. Combined with a back court unique in their ability to positively leverage those skills, I suggest this is an anomaly in today's NBA that most opposing teams are not prepared to deal with.

This feels especially good for DAL since we have spend years wandering the center position wasteland looking for a solution.

I just want to enjoy the advantage for as long as we can.