Trade & Free Agency 2026/2027

[omahen]

So what does Denver do.  It appears the league is not very interested in helping them get out of this mess.    Still a really good team when healthy.   Their ownership has not paid the tax and there is doubts if they have any interest to do so.   Jokic will watching.  

Gordon is coming off an injured season, but a healthy Gordon could be the difference between a good vs great team.  He just has not been healthy.    Same with Murray.    Do the Nuggets do something like Boston did with Brown?

I can't see teams interested in Braun or Zeke.   Teams would probably have interest in Cam Johnson but it would only probably lead to reducing their tax bill in any trade.    

I didn't like their draft movement this year either.    I thought trading out of the first was not the best direction.

Denver really is a mistery. After a bad season, they have already lost their back-up center (Val) and 6th-man (THJ). Seems like they are also losing a starter in Watson. They have only replaced the back-up center by signing Bagley, who is probably a bit of a step down from Valanciunas. 

Latest rumors are they are looking for a player and a FRP for Watson. Lets assume they get a deal with Clippers and they receive DJJ. That would put them some 14 mil over the second apron and they will have a real hard time replacing another starter like Cam on roughly 14 mil lower contract. And they still need to replace THJ shooting and scoring. 

All of their core outside of Jokic is overpaid. Their best move might be splitting either Gordon or Murray in a couple of useful role players that make less money combined. But overall, I think they are in a downward spiral they will have a huge trouble getting out of.

[Chicagojk]

Denver really is a mistery. After a bad season, they have already lost their back-up center (Val) and 6th-man (THJ). Seems like they are also losing a starter in Watson. They have only replaced the back-up center by signing Bagley, who is probably a bit of a step down from Valanciunas. 

Latest rumors are they are looking for a player and a FRP for Watson. Lets assume they get a deal with Clippers and they receive DJJ. That would put them some 14 mil over the second apron and they will have a real hard time replacing another starter like Cam on roughly 14 mil lower contract. And they still need to replace THJ shooting and scoring. 

All of their core outside of Jokic is overpaid. Their best move might be splitting either Gordon or Murray in a couple of useful role players that make less money combined. But overall, I think they are in a downward spiral they will have a huge trouble getting out of.

I wonder if they would have been better served doing what Dallas did with AD?  The return was blah but it opened up options by being flexible.    AD made more than Gordon though.    Could they have done what Dallas did?    That flexibility led to a first round pick, picking up Aldama and Sasser (and Tarek) and also opened up an opp to take on Rishacher.    Maybe none of these moves pan out for Dallas, but I wonder if Denver should have tried the same thing.

[omahen]

Borrowing this from a user on another board, but I think it perfectly describes options for Denver:

Denver is where Milwaukee was in like 2024. If they were smart they would talk to Jokic now. Which does he want:
1) To go down with the ship
2) To attempt a retool which will mean taking a step back this year and next but potentially being able to contend again at age 33 or so
3) A trade

[F Gump]

The Stein Line on Tuesday learned that Chicago is Mathurin's other current suitor. You'll recall that The Stein Line also revealed recently (July 23 to be exact) that New Orleans has been trying to shed Jordan Hawkins' contract via trade to move further away from the first apron. Among the options available to the Pelicans, if they succeed in those efforts, would be opening up the use of a healthy portion of its midlevel exception to assemble an offer sheet to Mathurin.

marcstein.substack.com

The wording that they are looking at using "a healthy portion" of the mid-level to try to obtain Mathurin jumps off the page to me. Our assumptions about what contract Mathurin is worth, and perhaps for the price range for RFAs in general, have apparently been way too high. We are seeing this with Watson as well.

I think this also has relevance to what it is likely to cost the Mavs to re-sign players (especially RFAs) next summer. Big raises that have been assumed to be necessary may turn out to be small ones (or even no raise at all). 

This also may be instructional to not get overburdened cap wise in advance of next summer, because prices next summer for all but the top players may be inviting.

In this context, I would certainly avoid taking on any bloated contract just to solve the roster issues they have at the moment. It looks possible that the same level of player may be gettable next summer at a fraction of the cost, and with the hard cap and softening revenues, payroll efficiency is super vital.

[mvossman]

The wording that they are looking at using "a healthy portion" of the mid-level to try to obtain Mathurin jumps off the page to me. Our assumptions about what contract Mathurin is worth, and perhaps for the price range for RFAs in general, have apparently been way too high. We are seeing this with Watson as well.

I think this also has relevance to what it is likely to cost the Mavs to re-sign players (especially RFAs) next summer. Big raises that have been assumed to be necessary may turn out to be small ones (or even no raise at all). 

This also may be instructional to not get overburdened cap wise in advance of next summer, because prices next summer for all but the top players may be inviting.

In this context, I would certainly avoid taking on any bloated contract just to solve the roster issues they have at the moment. It looks possible that the same level of player may be gettable next summer at a fraction of the cost, and with the hard cap and softening revenues, payroll efficiency is super vital.

Wouldn't this be more of an argument to send out big contracts like PJ and Gafford for somebody like Butler to clear the books?

[HoosierDaddyKid]

LaMelo Ball is allegedly leaving Charlotte with some unpaid debts. Court records viewed by The California Post on Tuesday show Ball was sued Monday — just weeks after he was traded from the Hornets to the Timberwolves — over accusations he owes a North Carolina landlord more than $100,000 in missed rent checks. According to a copy of the lawsuit, Ball and Agape Property Management Group entered into an agreement in December 2020 for the NBA player to rent two swanky units in a fancy uptown Charlotte condominium complex.

New York Post


As much money as these guys make, what are we doing here?

[HoosierDaddyKid]

Christian Koloko and Kobe Bufkin will be E9 deals. This means no G League obligations if they get waived, but a standard non guaranteed min if they are on the roster after camp ends. Koloko does not have 2-way eligibility left, so this is a true compete-for-your-spot opportunity

x.com

[F Gump]

Wouldn't this be more of an argument to send out big contracts like PJ and Gafford for somebody like Butler to clear the books?

I think it would be a plus to have some spending ability next summer.

But no, I don't think it would be a plus to strip away the existing talent, SOLELY to create more spending room. 

One problem is that in re-using salary space you clear, you will be looking to fill specific needs (not just scoop up random bodies), and you never have any GUARANTEE of availability (of the specific type of player you need) nor of the price you might prefer to pay. Talent at the right price and that fits - not air - is where value lies. 

There's also the issue of the totally unsubstantiated assumption that GS [or team X] would do such a deal. As interesting as such a deal would seem, the reality is that GS has maintained their desire to keep Butler. That's true not just of Butler, but with the vast majority of such targets being named. And some of the proposed targets aren't even expiring.

[Jym]

I get looking for better fits and first round picks but I dont agree with clearing space just to hopefully sign similar guys in a couple years
Space and 2nd round picks dont do it for me

[mvossman]

I think it would be a plus to have some spending ability next summer.

But no, I don't think it would be a plus to strip away the existing talent, SOLELY to create more spending room. 

One problem is that in re-using salary space you clear, you will be looking to fill specific needs (not just scoop up random bodies), and you never have any GUARANTEE of availability (of the specific type of player you need) nor of the price you might prefer to pay. Talent at the right price and that fits - not air - is where value lies. 

There's also the issue of the totally unsubstantiated assumption that GS [or team X] would do such a deal. As interesting as such a deal would seem, the reality is that GS has maintained their desire to keep Butler. That's true not just of Butler, but with the vast majority of such targets being named. And some of the proposed targets aren't even expiring.

It's not just about having spending money.  If contracts continue the trend of being lower than expected, then PJ and Gafford are in legit danger of becoming negative assets.  They are on the books for a long time and there is a possibility that they will negatively impact Mavs options in the future.

There is no assumption that GS would do such a deal.  I'm well aware it is highly unlikely.  That was merely an example of the kind of deal that might make sense for Mavs.  The Jrue Holiday trade is another.  He has another year on that contract, but you would still be shedding long term salary and would be getting draft capital back.

[Smitty]

A lot of talk about Miami and Klay. I looked at the MIA cap situation, and this is where they stand:

10 Guaranteed Contracts
2 Non-guaranteed Contracts

Total Salary: $198,139,835
Space below the Tax Line: $2,027,992
Space below First Apron: $10,614,992

Exceptions:
NTMLE: $8,979,000
BAE: $5,477,000
TPE: $5,616,000

1 tradeable FRP: 2029
1 tradeable SRP: 2027

Depth Chart:

Mitchell | Dru Smith | Conwell
Larsson | Hardaway Jr.
Wiggins | Fontecchio | Gardner
Giannis | Jovic
Bam | Portis


In a Klay for Jovic trade, it adds $1,260,317 to MIA payroll. They would still need to add a minimum of 2 players to get to 14. This trade would leave them $9,354,675 below A1. They could split the rest of the NTMLE between (2-3) players, leaving them $375,675 below A1. One is DeRozan? The other a Center?

Projected Depth Chart:

Mitchell | Dru Smith | Conwell
Klay | Hardaway Jr.
Wiggins | Larsson | Gardner
Giannis | DeRozan | Fontecchio
Bam | Portis | (FA Big)



Anyway, I know we look at it from a Mavs angle all the time. At least the financial implications. Found this exercise interesting... In that a trade match that's been talked about plenty, kind of lines up well on MIA side. Not to mention the cap space it opens up for them as early as next year...

My guess is that the Mavs would want to find a 3rd team to send Jovic to. One that might be desperate enough, after missing out on Kuminga (to CLE?), and going all in with their current roster, would be the Lakers.

Playing out how something like that looks, I came up with:

DAL: Scoot Henderson (-$3.9M)
MIA: Klay Thompson (+$1.3M)
LAL: Nikola Jovic (+$3.8M)
POR: Jarred Vanderbilt (-$1.2M) + Draft Capital of some sort

[F Gump]

It's not just about having spending money.  If contracts continue the trend of being lower than expected, then PJ and Gafford are in legit danger of becoming negative assets.  They are on the books for a long time and there is a possibility that they will negatively impact Mavs options in the future.

There is no assumption that GS would do such a deal.  I'm well aware it is highly unlikely.  That was merely an example of the kind of deal that might make sense for Mavs.  The Jrue Holiday trade is another.  He has another year on that contract, but you would still be shedding long term salary and would be getting draft capital back.

" then PJ and Gafford are in legit danger of becoming negative assets"

To me, "they might become negative assets" is not a real concern. There is always a good side/potential and a bad side/potential with every multi-year obligation, and values can fluctuate. 

Besides, a shift in general NBA contract costs doesn't make them actual negative assets. All that really matters is whether you have players who can start and play well, and fit your roster. 

While you have them, they cost whatever the contract is. The "market value" doesn't have to matter at all, as you don't need to sell until/if they no longer fit. And you can't change any of that by a panic sell when it looks like the market has shifted - whatever you have them for, it's sunk cost anyhow.   

I see this stuff like owning a home. As long as it's livable and suitable to my needs, I don't worry about whether there are houses on sale somewhere, or whether my home value might not be as high if I sell. That's just noise.

[Scott41theMavs]

" then PJ and Gafford are in legit danger of becoming negative assets"

To me, "they might become negative assets" is not a real concern. There is always a good side/potential and a bad side/potential with every multi-year obligation, and values can fluctuate. 

Besides, a shift in general NBA contract costs doesn't make them actual negative assets. All that really matters is whether you have players who can start and play well, and fit your roster. 

While you have them, they cost whatever the contract is. The "market value" doesn't have to matter at all, as you don't need to sell until/if they no longer fit. And you can't change any of that by a panic sell when it looks like the market has shifted - whatever you have them for, it's sunk cost anyhow.   

I see this stuff like owning a home. As long as it's livable and suitable to my needs, I don't worry about whether there are houses on sale somewhere, or whether my home value might not be as high if I sell. That's just noise.

All that just feeds the argument you're arguing against - what if they don't fit, in some sense, right now?

[DanSchwartzgan]

The wording that they are looking at using "a healthy portion" of the mid-level to try to obtain Mathurin jumps off the page to me. Our assumptions about what contract Mathurin is worth, and perhaps for the price range for RFAs in general, have apparently been way too high. We are seeing this with Watson as well.

While your broader point is still true, I think the specific comment in this case was more about NO being able to use a healthy portion of the MLE and still be under the tax line.  They are currently $8.2mm under the tax with 14 players.  Trading Hawkins for air is another $7.0mm which takes them to enough to offer the full MLE.  But as you've taught in the past, they have to leave a cushion.  They may also have to leave enough space for the 15th player.

If one wanted to tie several things together - because their brains just naturally do that - there is a way to get there involving LAC/NOP and DAL/MIA:

Dallas sends Klay to Miami and gets Hawkins from NOP
Miami sends Jovic to the LAC trade exception and does a S&T of Mathurin to NOP at a starting number of ~$13.5mm
NOP sends Hawkins to DAL and expiring Bey to LAC and gets S&T Mathurin
LAC sends Mathurin to NOP and gets Jovic

I'm NOT going to try to define picks here as it is probably fairly minor stuff.  The various players make sense at their destinations besides possibly Hawkins in Dallas - which would still have 16 players.  The main benefit to Dallas is getting off of $10mm of current year salary (even if they cut Hawkins) which would then allow them to use the rest of their $12mm MLE if something good were to come their way either now or before the Trade Deadline.  That $10mm savings is far better than any concession they might get from Klay in a buyout.

[Scott41theMavs]

While your broader point is still true, I think the specific comment in this case was more about NO being able to use a healthy portion of the MLE and still be under the tax line.  They are currently $8.2mm under the tax with 14 players.  Trading Hawkins for air is another $7.0mm which takes them to enough to offer the full MLE.  But as you've taught in the past, they have to leave a cushion.  They may also have to leave enough space for the 15th player.

If one wanted to tie several things together - because their brains just naturally do that - there is a way to get there involving LAC/NOP and DAL/MIA:

Dallas sends Klay to Miami and gets Hawkins from NOP
Miami sends Jovic to the LAC trade exception and does a S&T of Mathurin to NOP at a starting number of ~$13.5mm
NOP sends Hawkins to DAL and expiring Bey to LAC and gets S&T Mathurin
LAC sends Mathurin to NOP and gets Jovic

I'm NOT going to try to define picks here as it is probably fairly minor stuff.  The various players make sense at their destinations besides possibly Hawkins in Dallas - which would still have 16 players.  The main benefit to Dallas is getting off of $10mm of current year salary (even if they cut Hawkins) which would then allow them to use the rest of their $12mm MLE if something good were to come their way either now or before the Trade Deadline.  That $10mm savings is far better than any concession they might get from Klay in a buyout.

FGump said earlier that only the amount the Mavs would spend on the buyout (if they did that) would count toward the salary cap. Wouldn't they still be able to use the MLE in that event with the same results you were citing in terms of tax/aprons etc.?

[mvossman]

" then PJ and Gafford are in legit danger of becoming negative assets"

To me, "they might become negative assets" is not a real concern. There is always a good side/potential and a bad side/potential with every multi-year obligation, and values can fluctuate. 

Besides, a shift in general NBA contract costs doesn't make them actual negative assets. All that really matters is whether you have players who can start and play well, and fit your roster. 

While you have them, they cost whatever the contract is. The "market value" doesn't have to matter at all, as you don't need to sell until/if they no longer fit. And you can't change any of that by a panic sell when it looks like the market has shifted - whatever you have them for, it's sunk cost anyhow.   

I see this stuff like owning a home. As long as it's livable and suitable to my needs, I don't worry about whether there are houses on sale somewhere, or whether my home value might not be as high if I sell. That's just noise.

You are not concerned about having negative assets clogging up the cap sheet for 3 or 4 years?  That seems like a crazy take.

I would argue its better to anticipate when they will no longer fit rather than waiting for it to happen and watch their value go even lower.  I think that is a real danger with both of those guys (especially Gafford).

I love it when you use terms like "panic sale" when nobody is suggesting that.

[DanSchwartzgan]

FGump said earlier that only the amount the Mavs would spend on the buyout (if they did that) would count toward the salary cap. Wouldn't they still be able to use the MLE in that event with the same results you were citing in terms of tax/aprons etc.?

A Klay buyout (where he accepsts less salary than he is owed) would likely be for the MLE amount he would receive from Miami or $3.9mm.  So, that would mean Dallas would spend $13.6mm for Klay to play elsewhere and would move to $6.2mm under the tax.

If they did the trade I proposed, they would spend some amount to cut someone (Hawkins or Cisse) absent another trade.  But, it would be $7.0mm instead of $13.6mm and they would end up ~12.3mm under the tax (which happens to be about the portion of the MLE they have left).

[KillerLeft]

While your broader point is still true, I think the specific comment in this case was more about NO being able to use a healthy portion of the MLE and still be under the tax line.  They are currently $8.2mm under the tax with 14 players.  Trading Hawkins for air is another $7.0mm which takes them to enough to offer the full MLE.  But as you've taught in the past, they have to leave a cushion.  They may also have to leave enough space for the 15th player.

If one wanted to tie several things together - because their brains just naturally do that - there is a way to get there involving LAC/NOP and DAL/MIA:

Dallas sends Klay to Miami and gets Hawkins from NOP
Miami sends Jovic to the LAC trade exception and does a S&T of Mathurin to NOP at a starting number of ~$13.5mm
NOP sends Hawkins to DAL and expiring Bey to LAC and gets S&T Mathurin
LAC sends Mathurin to NOP and gets Jovic

I'm NOT going to try to define picks here as it is probably fairly minor stuff.  The various players make sense at their destinations besides possibly Hawkins in Dallas - which would still have 16 players.  The main benefit to Dallas is getting off of $10mm of current year salary (even if they cut Hawkins) which would then allow them to use the rest of their $12mm MLE if something good were to come their way either now or before the Trade Deadline.  That $10mm savings is far better than any concession they might get from Klay in a buyout.

I still want Mathruin in Dallas. I'm going to continue to wish for this until he has signed a contract somewhere else. I'm pretty convinced he's a fit here with a skillset that's almost completely absent from the roster. MathurIN.

[SleepingHero]

@Baxter
NEWS: The NBA investigation into whether the LA Clippers circumvented the salary cap to pay Kawhi Leonard could drag into 2027 if the parties don’t agree on the findings or any proposed settlement that involves punishing the team, sources tell ESPN.

[Moviemavguy]

@Baxter
NEWS: The NBA investigation into whether the LA Clippers circumvented the salary cap to pay Kawhi Leonard could drag into 2027 if the parties don’t agree on the findings or any proposed settlement that involves punishing the team, sources tell ESPN.

I can't believe this would be a nothing sauce if it's dragging out this long.  Like, logically, if the Clippers/Kawai weren't found guilty of anything, then this would be over already.