Trade & Free Agency 2026/2027

[mvossman]

You think a rookie Burries would have done more for Gafford/Washington on the court than the two veteran guards they´ll surely get through free agency and trades?

I think Morez getting significant minutes at the 4 and 5 will be a hit to Gafford/PJ minutes, especially if Lively is remotely healthy.  Its hard to rebound your value when you are not on the court (more of an issue for Gafford than PJ).

[KillerLeft]

I think Morez getting significant minutes at the 4 and 5 will be a hit to Gafford/PJ minutes, especially if Lively is remotely healthy.  Its hard to rebound your value when you are not on the court (more of an issue for Gafford than PJ).

Agreed, and I'll raise you: 

I can wrap my head around a significant portion of minutes being allocated to Flagg at the 3 and either Johnson or Washington at the 4 - WITH LIVELY AT THE 5. 

I think that approach has ZERO chance of any kind of success with Gafford at the 5. ZERO. 

I think the vision is pretty clear here. Versatility and size...those are the goals. Think about how Michigan played last year, and in your mind substitute Lively for Mara and Flagg for Lendenborg. Plenty of time with all three on the court, but also plenty of time with Mara sitting and Johnson/Lenedenborg at the 5/4.

[Smitty]

I think Morez getting significant minutes at the 4 and 5 will be a hit to Gafford/PJ minutes, especially if Lively is remotely healthy.  Its hard to rebound your value when you are not on the court (more of an issue for Gafford than PJ).

And if Lively is not healthy (most likely scenario) then you have MoJo as the starting 5 for the next decade+

I think it's difficult to separate what's best for next year and what's best for the future. At least for me. I'm impatient and want them to make all of the necessary moves right away. We don't know what we don't know about Lively's long term health/outlook. We also don't really know the true trade value of the current Vets. Without that information it's difficult for us to have well-informed opinions.

[KillerLeft]

And if Lively is not healthy (most likely scenario) then you have MoJo as the starting 5 for the next decade+

I think it's difficult to separate what's best for next year and what's best for the future. At least for me. I'm impatient and want them to make all of the necessary moves right away. We don't know what we don't know about Lively's long term health/outlook. We also don't really know the true trade value of the current Vets. Without that information it's difficult for us to have well-informed opinions.

Agreed that this 1st round investment goes a long way towards unchaining the entire franchise from dependence on Lively, which isn't a bad play, given the fast approaching contractual decision with him. This ensures they won't get stuck between a rock and hard place with him. If he's healthy this year, GREAT, but if he's not, you probably view the ending of his rookie deal as a good opportunity to get off the ride. 

But...either way, this is not the move of someone interested in keeping Gafford, imho. I think he's quite literally Gafford's replacement, and one who brings a ton more to the table, without losing the things Gafford fans love about him.

[mvossman]

Agreed, and I'll raise you: 

I can wrap my head around a significant portion of minutes being allocated to Flagg at the 3 and either Johnson or Washington at the 4 - WITH LIVELY AT THE 5. 

I think that approach has ZERO chance of any kind of success with Gafford at the 5. ZERO. 

I think the vision is pretty clear here. Versatility and size...those are the goals. Think about how Michigan played last year, and in your mind substitute Lively for Mara and Flagg for Lendenborg. Plenty of time with all three on the court, but also plenty of time with Mara sitting and Johnson/Lenedenborg at the 5/4.

That is how I am seeing it as well.  Doesn't seem like a lot of minutes for PJ in that scenario.  You don't want to play him at the 2.  You would be better off with a wing who can guard 1-3 and shoot (and create).

[Smitty]

Agreed that this 1st round investment goes a long way towards unchaining the entire franchise from dependence on Lively, which isn't a bad play, given the fast approaching contractual decision with him. This ensures they won't get stuck between a rock and hard place with him. If he's healthy this year, GREAT, but if he's not, you probably view the ending of his rookie deal as a good opportunity to get off the ride. 

But...either way, this is not the move of someone interested in keeping Gafford, imho. I think he's quite literally Gafford's replacement, and one who brings a ton more to the table, without losing the things Gafford fans love about him.

I've joined your side that Gafford isn't a great fit here. Without a PnR Guard his strength on that end is negated. He has some value as a rebounder and shot blocker, but his inability to guard on the perimeter, with a switch heavy NBA, nullifies those strengths as well. 

I think he's a serviceable NBA Big, just not for this team at this time. What my overall point was, is that we don't know what we don't know. If Gafford isn't actually a positive value guy at all - I'm not interested in taking back a bad player/contract just so he's off my team next year. He's not useless. Just not an ideal Big for this version of the Mavericks.

[KillerLeft]

I think he's a serviceable NBA Big, just not for this team at this time. What my overall point was, is that we don't know what we don't know. If Gafford isn't actually a positive value guy at all - I'm not interested in taking back a bad player/contract just so he's off my team next year. He's not useless. Just not an ideal Big for this version of the Mavericks.

Well, if the choices are to either take back a bad contract or wait for him to expire as he gathers dust on the bench, I agree. Waiting is better. Unless the bad contract is shorter, of course. The team is cheap right now, so if you've got to eat a mistake to clear the way forward, now is a better time than most.

I think where Mvossman is coming from is the idea that there's hopefully still time to move him BEFORE we get to that point with his value, as they probably should have done last summer, when his value was close to its all time high. Personally, I'd have signed and traded him or moved him in the Luka deal. His utility here has really only ever been on the offensive end, and to my thinking was attached to Luka at the hip.

[mvossman]

I've joined your side that Gafford isn't a great fit here. Without a PnR Guard his strength on that end is negated. He has some value as a rebounder and shot blocker, but his inability to guard on the perimeter, with a switch heavy NBA, nullifies those strengths as well. 

I think he's a serviceable NBA Big, just not for this team at this time. What my overall point was, is that we don't know what we don't know. If Gafford isn't actually a positive value guy at all - I'm not interested in taking back a bad player/contract just so he's off my team next year. He's not useless. Just not an ideal Big for this version of the Mavericks.

I don't think you dump Gafford just to get rid of him.  The goal at this point would be to trade him for a player on similar contract that fits this roster better.  It would be nice to snag one the early picks in the second round as part of it, but I don't expect that to happen.

[Winter]

That is how I am seeing it as well.  Doesn't seem like a lot of minutes for PJ in that scenario.  You don't want to play him at the 2.  You would be better off with a wing who can guard 1-3 and shoot (and create).

Agree with this as well. I said as much last night. I would think at least two of the three (Naji, PJ, Gaff) are traded before next season. Powell may be gone (he's like something stuck on my shoe) and then the mission for us is shooting wings and guards. Then do you keep BWill? Nembhard? AJ Johnson is gone for sure. I liked Poulikidas from what I saw, and I naturally think you stick with Cisse.... but Bagley? Lots of decisions.

[cow]

I'd still combo Gafford with taking back a bad contracts t get a future FRP.  Lakers and Vanderbilt come to mind.

[KillerLeft]

There's some smoke out there about BOS liking Gafford. What do they have that might make some sense?

[cow]

There's some smoke out there about BOS liking Gafford. What do they have that might make some sense?

It would probably need to be centered (free pun) around Sam Hauser if it is a 1:1 (meaning, no other teams) deal.  If they deal Brown, it could be a lot more interesting with multiples teams/pieces being involved.

[HoosierDaddyKid]

Kendrick Perkins: Teams were asking Memphis to attach picks in order to take Ja Morant, not the other way around. They were asking Memphis, "Hey man, attach picks with Ja and we'll take him."

YouTube

[dirkfansince1998]

There's some smoke out there about BOS liking Gafford. What do they have that might make some sense?

Not a lot that would be a reasonable return in a Gafford trade. Not to mention that it wouldn't be easy to match salaries. Maybe if the Mavs operate as a third team in a Brown trade.
As the resident analytics nerd the target on the Celtics roster is Hugo Gonzalez but I cannot imagine that they are willing to give him up in a trade for Gafford.

[cow]

Not a lot that would be a reasonable return in a Gafford trade. Not to mention that it wouldn't be easy to match salaries. Maybe if the Mavs operate as a third team in a Brown trade.
As the resident analytics nerd the target on the Celtics roster is Hugo Gonzalez but I cannot imagine that they are willing to give him up in a trade for Gafford.

I think Hugo was a no-go in the purposed Giannis trade.  Also, if you desire picks and they are coming from Boston, those have a good chance of being towards the end of the round.  I don't think I'd have interest in doing a trade with them unless other parties are involved.  Thankfully the Brown situation opens up a lot of possibilities.

[Mavs2021]

Not a lot that would be a reasonable return in a Gafford trade. Not to mention that it wouldn't be easy to match salaries. Maybe if the Mavs operate as a third team in a Brown trade.
As the resident analytics nerd the target on the Celtics roster is Hugo Gonzalez but I cannot imagine that they are willing to give him up in a trade for Gafford.

We still think it´s Portland for Brown?

This works on the machine

Boston

Gafford
Thompson
Holiday
two 1st round picks

Portland

Brown

Mavs

Henderson
Hansen

[DallasMaverick]

One of the things I feel was semi-confirmed last night with both picks was that this front office (and 99% of the league, frankly) is just as focused on versatility and size as ever. 

We don't know, obviously, but I'd say my confidence that Nembhard will be on this team next year has decreased over the past 24 hours.

On this team, I think I'd value Williams more highly than Nembhard.

[FireNicoHarrison]

I hope Sergio will be better than Williams and Nembhard honestly...

[JBB]

I hope Sergio will be better than Williams and Nembhard honestly...

If he doesn't, it'll have been a terrible trade and worse pick (unless Williams and/or Nembhard turn into legitimate contributors on winning NBA teams, which IMO is very unlikely). 

However, I trust the process. The current braintrust deserves our trust at the moment (which is incredible to say for the first time in a long time).

[DallasMaverick]

If he doesn't, it'll have been a terrible trade and worse pick (unless Williams and/or Nembhard turn into legitimate contributors on winning NBA teams, which IMO is very unlikely). 

However, I trust the process. The current braintrust deserves our trust at the moment (which is incredible to say for the first time in a long time).

Dang.  That's a lot of pressure on a late first-round pick.