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

[Smitty]

@TheDunkCentral
An NBA executive says Ja Morant is a “pain in the ass, injury-prone, and not good anymore,” and people around the league compare him to John Wall and Derrick Rose, per @espn


"‘The combination of pain in the ass, injury prone, not that good anymore and big contract is a bad one,’ said an East executive, who added that he wouldn't want Morant on his roster regardless of salary.
Morant is only 26, but some talent evaluators around the league believe that his best years have already passed. Those skeptics compare Morant to Derrick Rose and John Wall -- smaller guards who relied heavily on spectacular athleticism that was sapped by injuries, shortening their stints as superstars."

[Smitty]

I don't understand this thought process. Why must Dallas be the one appeasing every team in every trade? Chicago wants to win now and wants one of the best centers in the league. They have to pay for it. Either through a large amount of picks or through productive players.

It's just an exercise in thinking through it from both sides is all. No harm in doing so.

Opinions have been all over the place in what Davis could net in a trade. You have a strong opinion that he should net a massive return, others differ.

As for what I think he could/should fetch in a trade is: 1 young player, 1 really good player, 2+ unprotected FRP's, and some form of salary relief in the way of expirings.

[mvossman]

Maybe, but I'm not sure Coby White has enough value now to be the primary target of AD in a trade. Nembhard has changed that math enough to make me want to look elsewhere for an AD trade. Maybe you play White as a second guard once Kyrie returns, but the return on the trade still isn't good enough (not to mention Max Christie is playing well at that position now).

I get questioning whether Coby White is the right target, but I don't see Nembhard changing the match.  His size makes it very unlikely he is a long term solution in the starting lineup.  It will definitely be a problem next to Kyrie.  It would be a huge win if he can be a quality spark plug off the bench (think JJ Barera) but we don't have near enough sample to expect even that yet.  This team needs creation with some size in the starting lineup.  I am skeptical Coby White is the right target for that but I think its much less likely Nembhard is.

[omahen]

I don't understand this thought process. Why must Dallas be the one appeasing every team in every trade? Chicago wants to win now and wants one of the best centers in the league. They have to pay for it. Either through a large amount of picks or through productive players.

Davis might be one of the best centers in the league is a pretty problematic statement, imho. I think teams can have a ton of arguments to reduce his value. While he can be good, he is missing a lot of time due to injuries. He is also 33, which means a decline is more likely than improvement of his play and availability. He also wants to play PF, while he is obviously a center. Besides all of that, he is owed huge money for next two seasons and reportedly wants to sign an extension. He is paid like a number one, but I don't think he can be a number one - many issues constructing a contending roster under current CBA with such an expensive number two option. And finally, Mavs are probably better to trade him as soon as possible and build a contender around Flagg. Unless there is still hope that Mavs can be contenders with Irving and Davis in next season or two. 

Overall, Davis is a huge risk for any team. A very short term gamble for realistically just a couple of seasons. I wouldn't give up a fortune for such a player. If I am Chicago, I would not dream about becoming a contender with Davis (no matter what goes out in a trade in terms of players). I would rather patiently build around Buzelis and Giddey. In my opinion, a team that goes for Davis, would have to be pretty sure that he lifts them to contention level immediately. I only see teams like Detroit or SA in that category.

[mvossman]

Davis might be one of the best centers in the league is a pretty problematic statement, imho. I think teams can have a ton of arguments to reduce his value. While he can be good, he is missing a lot of time due to injuries. He is also 33, which means a decline is more likely than improvement of his play and availability. He also wants to play PF, while he is obviously a center. Besides all of that, he is owed huge money for next two seasons and reportedly wants to sign an extension. He is paid like a number one, but I don't think he can be a number one - many issues constructing a contending roster under current CBA with such an expensive number two option. And finally, Mavs are probably better to trade him as soon as possible and build a contender around Flagg. Unless there is still hope that Mavs can be contenders with Irving and Davis in next season or two. 

Overall, Davis is a huge risk for any team. A very short term gamble for realistically just a couple of seasons. I wouldn't give up a fortune for such a player. If I am Chicago, I would not dream about becoming a contender with Davis (no matter what goes out in a trade in terms of players). I would rather patiently build around Buzelis and Giddey. In my opinion, a team that goes for Davis, would have to be pretty sure that he lifts them to contention level immediately. I only see teams like Detroit or SA in that category.

Davis is actually 32 but I agree with most of this sentiment.  I can see Chicago talking themselves into it because he is a hometown guy, makes them better, and is probably better than what they could get in free agency.  I don't think its the right move, but I could see the mindset.  There are also some teams that have no chance at big free agents and just want to compete for their fans.  He makes some sense in those scenarios as well.

[SleepingHero]

Davis might be one of the best centers in the league is a pretty problematic statement, imho. I think teams can have a ton of arguments to reduce his value. While he can be good, he is missing a lot of time due to injuries. He is also 33, which means a decline is more likely than improvement of his play and availability. He also wants to play PF, while he is obviously a center. Besides all of that, he is owed huge money for next two seasons and reportedly wants to sign an extension. He is paid like a number one, but I don't think he can be a number one - many issues constructing a contending roster under current CBA with such an expensive number two option. And finally, Mavs are probably better to trade him as soon as possible and build a contender around Flagg. Unless there is still hope that Mavs can be contenders with Irving and Davis in next season or two. 

Overall, Davis is a huge risk for any team. A very short term gamble for realistically just a couple of seasons. I wouldn't give up a fortune for such a player. If I am Chicago, I would not dream about becoming a contender with Davis (no matter what goes out in a trade in terms of players). I would rather patiently build around Buzelis and Giddey. In my opinion, a team that goes for Davis, would have to be pretty sure that he lifts them to contention level immediately. I only see teams like Detroit or SA in that category.

Calling Davis one of the best centers in the league is a problematic statement? Here is the list of the top 30 starting centers currently in the NBA:

• Porzingis
  
• Queta
  
• Claxton
  
• Kalkbrenner
  
• Vucevic 
  
• Jarret Allen
  
• Anthony Davis
  
• Jalen Duren
  
• Trace Jackson Davis (or Al Horford for the Warriors)
  
• Sengun
  
• Jay Huff
  
• Zubac
  
• Ayton
  
• Edey 
  
• Adebayo
  
• Myles Turner
  
• Gobert
  
• Derik Queen
  
• KAT
  
• Isaiah Hartenstein 
  
• WCJr
  
• Embiid
  
• Mark Williams
  
• Donovan Clingan
  
• Wemby
  
• Poetl 
  
• Nurkic
  
• Sarr
  

I can count 2 (maybe 3) guys that are better than AD on that list and two of them are also injury prone. He's a top 3 center. He has warts sure, and of course any team can talk themselves out of AD. Your critiques are valid. But that doesn't mean his value suddenly is worth nothing and that the Mavs are the ones that need to be desperate to move off of him. 

Chicago is a team that is happy to tread water and their GM is desperate for a win (https://chicago.suntimes.com/bulls/2025/...ytime-soon) and have an internal directive from ownership to "fix" the roster. I can understand why a hometown hero like AD could be an attractive play for them given how bad they are inside and they just committed big money to Giddey. 

I agree with you. I think the Spurs and/or Detroit make more sense as a partner and that their stuff is more attractive. I've been drunk off the idea that the Spurs would somehow be open to trade AD for Dylan Harper straight up. 

But regardless, AD is a valuable asset even with his horrific injury history. And he should command 3+ FRP plus a young guy or two. Anything less is the Mavs selling themselves short.

[SleepingHero]

https://x.com/thedunkcentral/status/1996...53939?s=46&t=Fmdr94oXagcEyy75KJqaFg

NBACentral (@TheDunkCentral)
“He asked to be traded already.”

- @WindhorstESPN on Giannis

[KillerLeft]

This conversation is why I'm still on the fence about whether or not AD should even be traded soon.

I'm closer to SH's evaluation of the player (though I admit the injuries have to be factored in, and that's problematic), so...if you're not getting something great back for him, and you're losing anyway because you have no offensive engine, why trade him? Maybe you get the offense solved by next year in a different way, or in a variety of different ways, and then you get the benefit of having the guy around? I do value what he brings to the table when healthy a great deal, after all.

Then again, I'm not against trading him, either. He's injury prone and expensive. If someone makes an offer that moves the team forward in a meaningful way, I'm all ears.

[KillerLeft]

https://x.com/thedunkcentral/status/1996...53939?s=46&t=Fmdr94oXagcEyy75KJqaFg

NBACentral (@TheDunkCentral)
“He asked to be traded already.”

- @WindhorstESPN on Giannis

This might be good or bad news for the trade Davis group, I guess. Maybe the perfect Davis team blows their wad on Giannis, but then again, if it happens quickly enough, maybe Davis is the only item left on the shelf at the deadline and you can ask for more?

[numnuts23]

Anyone see the trade idea from bleacherreport?


Dallas Mavericks Receive:

PG LaMelo Ball (from Hornets)


Los Angeles Lakers Receive:

G/F Klay Thompson (from Mavs)
C Daniel Gafford (from Mavs)


Charlotte Hornets Receive:

SG Max Christie (from Mavs)
F Rui Hachimura (from Lakers)
F Dalton Knecht (from Lakers)
PG Gabe Vincent (from Lakers)
2029 first-round pick (unprotected via Lakers from Mavericks)


Ball/Nembhard/Williams
Kyrie/Hardy/Dlo
Flagg/Naji
AD/PJ/Martin
Lively/Powell

I mean...it's not terrible. Would be a fun team to watch

[KillerLeft]

https://x.com/thedunkcentral/status/1996...53939?s=46&t=Fmdr94oXagcEyy75KJqaFg

NBACentral (@TheDunkCentral)
“He asked to be traded already.”

- @WindhorstESPN on Giannis

Another point about this, albeit slightly off topic, but on a topic from yesterday involving someone's hypothetical DAL/MIL/SA three-way that got everyone's hackles up:

Giannis and AD are two huge names available. Why are they available? What do their teams have in common? For me, there is direct correlation to one thing: they don't have PG's. That's the main reason their teams are underperforming, and the main reason the guys want out. 

My conclusion, and one that I find myself more entrenched in with each passing week, is that if you don't have a PG, you don't have a team in today's sport. THAT's why I'd happily facilitate Giannis to SA for a chance at finding one in Dylan Harper and feel like I won the lottery all over again. To come out of one draft with the top 2 guys, both your franchise cornerstone in Flagg and a really good chance at his career long running mate? That would be worth a lot to me. 

But even without that pipe dream, I'm to a point where I won't take this team seriously again until they have someone handling the ball with a future. Even Kyrie doesn't do much for me, as awesome as he has been here. I need to see the guy who's going to go to war with Flagg for the next 5-10 years before I get excited again. At that point, I'll be all in to take the Mavs ride with a full heart. If I'm moving AD, THAT is what I want. Period.

[Winter]

This conversation is why I'm still on the fence about whether or not AD should even be traded soon.

I'm closer to SH's evaluation of the player (though I admit the injuries have to be factored in, and that's problematic), so...if you're not getting something great back for him, and you're losing anyway because you have no offensive engine, why trade him? Maybe you get the offense solved by next year in a different way, or in a variety of different ways, and then you get the benefit of having the guy around? I do value what he brings to the table when healthy a great deal, after all.

Then again, I'm not against trading him, either. He's injury prone and expensive. If someone makes an offer that moves the team forward in a meaningful way, I'm all ears.

I think we trade him for this reason: When he has been healthy, the Mavs have been better, but not so much better that we're even top 3 in the West with the current roster. Yet we are paying him to take us to the promised land (Nico's vision). His salary now prevents us getting to the very top of the West. His salary is a net-negative for this Dallas Mavericks team.

We should be able to use his salary to convert players who make a more meaningful contribution to this particular roster. We also stand to gain some missing draft picks in the near future - enhancing our chances.

It's eye-opening that one of the highest paid players in the league had slightly less of an impact on this team's efficiency than a two-way rookie playing PG.

[KillerLeft]

It's eye-opening that one of the highest paid players in the league had slightly less of an impact on this team's efficiency than a two-way rookie playing PG.

But see, I agree and I don't. I agree with your point, but I don't find it surprising, because I feel like what we're clearly seeing is that without a PG, nobody can really shine. 

We have a long history of being spoiled with PG's in Dallas, relatively speaking. For all of the Nelsons' faults (both senior and junior), they placed a high value on that position, and I think we're starting to see why.

I think if you dropped AD onto a team with better guard play, better ball-handling and facilitation, you'd be like "oh...that's why everyone thinks he's great." 

Now, if the point is "well Dallas doesn't have one, so there's no point in keeping AD around while they look for the next one" then I agree, but that doesn't mean I'm ready to jettison AD just because. If moving him doesn't fill that hole, then I'd be of the mind to keep him, hoping I can fill it by trading something else, because you never know - find the right guy with enough of this team still intact and you might have a good team on your hands almost overnight. I really feel that way.

[KillerLeft]

Anyone see the trade idea from bleacherreport?


Dallas Mavericks Receive:

PG LaMelo Ball (from Hornets)


Los Angeles Lakers Receive:

G/F Klay Thompson (from Mavs)
C Daniel Gafford (from Mavs)


Charlotte Hornets Receive:

SG Max Christie (from Mavs)
F Rui Hachimura (from Lakers)
F Dalton Knecht (from Lakers)
PG Gabe Vincent (from Lakers)
2029 first-round pick (unprotected via Lakers from Mavericks)


Ball/Nembhard/Williams
Kyrie/Hardy/Dlo
Flagg/Naji
AD/PJ/Martin
Lively/Powell

I mean...it's not terrible.  Would be a fun team to watch

I really hate Lamello, to be transparent. 

I think he fits the description of what's needed here, if you can stomach him and still believe in any sort of upside (he is very young, still). But, although I could be talked into giving him a try, I think the upside of such a gamble is that he'd be a cheaper option than this. I couldn't get behind this type of package for someone whose odds of panning out here I'd put (generously) at 50/50. Gafford, Christie, Thompson AND an unprotected pick? Dan made a good point the other day about how that Lakers pick is looking worse and worse as time goes by, but still...I pass on that.

[Winter]

Killer, I get your point as well.... and it's not wrong. The missing part for keeping him is that he hasn't been on the court enough to make a difference. If you keep him, you're rolling the dice that he's healthy enough for, say, 60-65 games a year.

That's too much of a gamble for me now. He just scares me too much to keep him.

[F Gump]

But see, I agree and I don't. I agree with your point, but I don't find it surprising, because I feel like what we're clearly seeing is that without a PG, nobody can really shine. .

At the same time, for a PG to get an impact in the standings, there has to be a real synergy at play with another impact player or two on the floor. When AD plays, he's very much that guy. If you get a PG but give up the other part of the equation to get him, you are still going to struggle. In addition, AD is really a difference-maker on defense, which is a major plus when your PG might be a major sieve.

It's an interesting question of where the Mavs go from here, or how they navigate both ends of the floor, which to me needs to be solved by an expert GM. 

I'm not saying to keep AD -- but they need to get full value from any deal. Most of what's being proposed caters to another team but NOT to the Mavs' needs, which imo is just wrong. The team with the star should name the price it takes, not vice versa.

[KillerLeft]

Killer, I get your point as well.... and it's not wrong. The missing part for keeping him is that he hasn't been on the court enough to make a difference. If you keep him, you're rolling the dice that he's healthy enough for, say, 60-65 games a year.

That's too much of a gamble for me now. He just scares me too much to keep him.

Valid. 

I get that for some, the conversation starts and ends with "he's always going to be hurt, so what even is the point?" And, I can't really argue with that at this point (though I'll continue to push back regarding Lively for quite a while longer). 

It's a pickle, but whatever they do, they can't give him away. I feel pretty strongly about that.

[mvossman]

This conversation is why I'm still on the fence about whether or not AD should even be traded soon.

I'm closer to SH's evaluation of the player (though I admit the injuries have to be factored in, and that's problematic), so...if you're not getting something great back for him, and you're losing anyway because you have no offensive engine, why trade him? Maybe you get the offense solved by next year in a different way, or in a variety of different ways, and then you get the benefit of having the guy around? I do value what he brings to the table when healthy a great deal, after all.

Then again, I'm not against trading him, either. He's injury prone and expensive. If someone makes an offer that moves the team forward in a meaningful way, I'm all ears.

I don't think there is any question he needs to be traded at some point.  Any thought of a contention window with AD/Kyrie/Flagg died with Nico firing.  There is no reason to pay him an extension and reading the tea leaves it seems like he would rather be somewhere else.  I think the only question is how to maximize his trade value.  It will likely either be near the TDL or this coming offseason.  I lean towards pulling the trigger sooner if we can get a decent return.  I don't want to wait too long and get a lessor return like what happened with KP.

[Winter]

At the same time, for a PG to get an impact in the standings, there has to be a real synergy at play with another impact player or two on the floor. When AD plays, he's very much that guy. If you get a PG but give up the other part of the equation to get him, you are still going to struggle. In addition, AD is really a difference-maker on defense, which is a major plus when your PG might be a major sieve.

It's an interesting question of where the Mavs go from here, or how they navigate both ends of the floor, which to me needs to be solved by an expert GM. 

I'm not saying to keep AD -- but they need to get full value from any deal. Most of what's being proposed caters to another team but NOT to the Mavs' needs, which imo is just wrong. The team with the star should name the price it takes, not vice versa.

Here's the thing for me. I still don't believe this is a good enough roster with a healthy AD and an added Nembhard (or even Kyrie).

I think AD has a few warts. I don't think he defends the perimeter that well, he's slow in transition, and he's a bit too in love with a 3-point opportunity. I personally favor more movement, better 3-point shooters, and a faster pace. 

I think AD makes us better, just not enough.

[mvossman]

Here's the thing for me. I still don't believe this is a good enough roster with a healthy AD and an added Nembhard (or even Kyrie).

I think AD has a few warts. I don't think he defends the perimeter that well, he's slow in transition, and he's a bit too in love with a 3-point opportunity. I personally favor more movement, better 3-point shooters, and a faster pace. 

I think AD makes us better, just not enough.

Its not.  They would have to go all in on a Jrue Holiday like player to make this roster contention worthy.  That would be a huge gamble when you are betting on AD/Kyrie health for a one or two year window, especially when you have a potential young superstar that you are going to want to build around for years to come.  I think that idea died with Nico, which means now it should be about maximizing AD trade value.