It has been over two months since the Kyrie Irving trade, yet the Dallas Mavericks seem to constantly find new ways to worsen their situation. Recently, when Dallas hosted Luka Dončić and the Los Angeles Lakers, fans witnessed Dončić become emotional during a tribute video celebrating his time as a Maverick. Shortly after, Nico Harrison held a highly unusual press conference, limiting media access and prohibiting recordings, as he attempted to justify what many consider an indefensible trade.
The Mavericks` season concluded with a play-in tournament loss to the Memphis Grizzlies, officially ending their playoff hopes. Despite this disastrous season, it appears the architect of their troubles, Nico Harrison, will not only remain in charge but is doubling down on his current strategy. “I think once we start winning, opinions will change,” Harrison stated during that controversial press conference.
Harrison may be alone in his optimism about the Mavericks` immediate chances of success. Many have discussed why their current approach is unlikely to lead to wins. In reality, the most sensible course of action for the Mavericks might be to dismiss everyone involved in what is increasingly viewed as one of the worst trades in NBA history, apologize to their frustrated fan base, and begin a rebuilding process. This is likely the recommendation from most objective observers.
However, the Dallas Mavericks are not guided by outside opinions. Harrison is at the helm, determined to continue his current path. The Mavericks now face a critical offseason, intending to operate as a team aiming for immediate contention in a competitive Western Conference, despite their second-best player, Kyrie Irving, recovering from a torn ACL. The key questions are: How will they achieve this? What players will they target? And is there any realistic hope that the Mavericks can actually win their way out of this predicament?
What Assets Do the Mavericks Possess, and What Are Their Needs?
Nearly the entire Dallas roster is under contract for the upcoming season. Currently, they have approximately $146 million committed to 11 players: Anthony Davis, Klay Thompson, P.J. Washington, Daniel Gafford, Caleb Martin, Naji Marshall, Max Christie, Dereck Lively, Dwight Powell, Olivier Maxence-Prosper, and Jaden Hardy. Brandon Williams, recently promoted to a standard contract, is also expected to return. They hold Early Bird Rights for Danté Exum and Non-Bird Rights for Spencer Dinwiddie, giving them options to retain both. Essentially, they are in a position to maintain their current player base.
One significant name is notably absent: Kyrie Irving. His situation is complex. He has a player option of around $44 million. If he exercises it, the team salary jumps to approximately $190 million, exceeding the projected luxury tax threshold and potentially reaching the first apron, especially if Exum and/or Dinwiddie are re-signed and a lottery pick is added.
From this perspective, a long-term agreement similar to Rudy Gobert`s with the Minnesota Timberwolves could be beneficial. Gobert declined his 2025-26 player option to sign a three-year, $110 million deal, reducing his annual cap hit for long-term security. Irving, coming off an ACL injury, should consider a similar approach, especially in a free agency period with limited cap space. Expect Irving to opt out and sign a multi-year contract that provides the Mavericks some breathing room under the tax line and, more importantly, the apron limits.
This scenario would place Dallas near the luxury tax line with a nearly full roster. Regarding draft picks, their situation is relatively straightforward. Dallas does not control its picks from 2027 to 2030. Due to owing their 2027 pick to Charlotte, the Stepien Rule restricts trading their 2026 pick outright, allowing only swaps. However, their 2025 pick is tradable, as are their 2031 or 2032 picks (with swap rights for the other) and the 2029 pick acquired from the Lakers. To enhance trade appeal, the 2027 pick owed to Charlotte is top-2 protected, technically allowing it to be traded again with a condition of conveying only if it lands at No. 1 or No. 2.
In summary, the Mavericks possess three tradable unprotected first-round picks, two sets of swap rights, and a fraction of their 2027 pick if necessary. This is a decent amount of tradeable draft capital, especially combined with veteran players ranging from salary filler to valuable trade assets. They have pieces to trade. The question is, what do they need?
The most pressing need is shot creation. With Irving injured and Dinwiddie`s contract uncertain, Jaden Hardy is likely their best ball-handler, yet he has never averaged nine points per game. The team needs someone who can generate offense in half-court situations, potentially a point guard. Considering their plan to play Anthony Davis at power forward alongside a non-shooting center, strong shooting across the rest of the roster is crucial. While their role players are generally good shooters, they lack the dribble-penetration to create those shots.
The Potential Pursuit of Kevin Durant
Offense is paramount for the Mavericks, and Kevin Durant, an elite offensive player, might be available. He has played with Kyrie Irving in Brooklyn, raising the question of a potential reunion. However, despite Durant`s offensive prowess, a trade to Dallas seems unlikely. Reports suggest Dallas is not a frontrunner for Durant, even before considering potential issues from his previous partnership with Irving.
Salary is a significant obstacle. Durant`s salary is nearly $55 million next season. Matching this without including Irving or Davis requires complex salary aggregation. Beyond these stars, no Maverick earns more than $17 million. A trade would necessitate including at least three, possibly four, key rotation players. Dallas would likely need to send out more salary than they receive, potentially triggering a first-apron hard cap, which is undesirable. This might require a third team to facilitate the deal, either gaining assets for taking on salary or being compensated to absorb salary.
Hypothetically, a Durant trade could involve sending Daniel Gafford to Phoenix to address their center need, and P.J. Washington to replace Durant at wing. However, their combined salaries are only around $28.5 million, far short of Durant`s. Klay Thompson, with a $16.7 million salary, could also be sent to Phoenix. This still leaves a $10 million gap to avoid the second apron, potentially requiring Caleb Martin to be included, along with multiple first-round picks to incentivize Phoenix.
This scenario would leave Dallas with Davis and Lively in the frontcourt, Durant at forward, an injured Irving, and role players like Marshall, Christie, and younger players. If everything aligned, this team could contend, but injury histories are concerning. Critically, Irving`s absence at point guard for at least the start of the season is unaddressed. Christie and Marshall are their best perimeter defenders, and essential to a team with aging, high-minute veterans. Acquiring a point guard using Hardy, Powell, and Maxence-Prosper might be possible but would likely cost additional draft capital.
Pursuing Durant would deplete depth and draft capital, creating a top-heavy salary structure similar to Phoenix, Milwaukee, and Philadelphia. Even if manageable, building around a 32-year-old, a 33-year-old, and a 37-year-old with injury risks creates a short championship window. Irving`s injury could jeopardize next season, shifting focus to 2026 when Durant is 38, reducing their odds significantly.
Furthermore, the fit itself is questionable. Durant and Irving`s Brooklyn success partly relied on James Harden`s elite passing and surrounding shooters like Seth Curry and Joe Harris. Dallas` role players are less consistent shooters and often play with two big men. Durant`s drives to the basket have decreased, and Irving is recovering from an ACL injury. Offensive diversity is uncertain. This setup could resemble Phoenix but with better big men, making them a good team, but not necessarily a guaranteed champion with roster holes, age, and injury risks.
Therefore, hesitations about Durant are understandable. If pursuing a star, a younger, healthier player focused on creation rather than just shot-making, complementing Irving, would be more suitable.
Alternative Trade Targets for Dallas
Players in Durant`s salary range are likely unaffordable. Younger stars would demand too many assets. For example, acquiring Devin Booker would be impossible in a bidding war with Houston. Dallas should likely target sub-max-salary guards to bridge the gap until Irving returns. Their asset base allows them to pursue most players on the trade market. Potential targets include:
- C.J. McCollum (Pelicans): Given his age and salary (nearly $31 million next season), he wouldn`t cost excessive assets. He provides consistent offense and could coexist with Irving if minutes are staggered.
- Jordan Poole (Wizards): While not known for defense, Poole had a solid bounce-back offensive season and has playoff experience.
- Anfernee Simons (Trail Blazers): Miscast as a primary ball-handler in Portland, Simons could thrive as a secondary guard alongside Dallas` big men. Defense is a concern next to an injured Irving, but he could boost offense until Irving`s return and complement him afterward.
- Collin Sexton (Jazz): Available in recent trade deadlines, Sexton has improved offensively in Utah and become less ball-dominant, though not a traditional point guard. Defense is a work in progress, but he has potential.
- Reed Sheppard (Rockets): Possibly unavailable, but his shooting would be valuable on Dallas. While defensively limited, his steal numbers in college are intriguing, and Dallas` defense could utilize his strengths.
- Benedict Mathurin (Pacers): Extension-eligible, Mathurin`s future in Indiana is uncertain with Haliburton, Siakam, and Nembhard`s contracts. He has talent and could get a higher-usage role in Dallas.
- D`Angelo Russell (Free Agency): Russell`s free agency market may be weak. Teams might not pay for regular-season players who aren`t playoff difference-makers. However, he could be ideal for Dallas to “survive until Kyrie gets back” and potentially affordable using their non-taxpayer mid-level exception.
These options are generally older players on shorter contracts, younger players needing to prove themselves, or solid players with flaws. Dallas believes they are already close to contending and need someone to maintain their position until Irving`s return.
Matching salaries for smaller trades could involve Klay Thompson. Offensively, he performed as expected this season. The issue is defense, a Dallas priority. Thompson can no longer guard guards, limiting his defensive versatility. With Davis at power forward, Thompson`s defensive fit on Dallas is unclear. Trading Thompson means losing shooting, potentially offset by acquiring a player like McCollum in a Thompson-plus-assets deal, essentially trading some shooting for improved creation. However, Thompson`s salary is significantly less than McCollum`s, requiring additional players like Dwight Powell to bridge the gap. Cheaper options might be preferable. Regardless, some trade to address ball-handling is necessary for Dallas to manage without Irving.
Is There Reason for Optimism?
Things might improve, but a further decline seems unlikely. Healthier role players and a healthier Davis are plausible next season. However, Harrison`s belief in Dallas` inevitable success seems overly optimistic due to several factors.
Harrison traded for two aging, injury-prone players in Irving and Davis. Their injuries shouldn`t be surprising, and expecting consistent health is unrealistic. Harrison`s cited three-to-four-year window is questionable, especially with Irving`s injury already impacting it. This approach sacrificed a potentially decade-long window built around Dončić, who provided greater injury insurance. Short windows can easily be derailed by unforeseen issues.
Finances are also a concern. Most of the roster is under contract through 2025-26, but Irving`s ACL injury compromises that season. Their first full-strength season could be 2026-27, but Gafford and Washington`s contracts expire then, requiring raises. Lively will also need a significant raise by 2027-28. Dallas is not currently inexpensive, but keeping a deep, especially young, roster in apron territory is challenging. By the time Irving is healthy, financial constraints may have forced them to shed talent.
The usage of Davis is also questionable. While he prefers power forward and won a championship there, data suggests center is statistically his better position. In 2019-20, the Lakers` net rating was similar at both positions, but defensively they were better with Davis at center. Playoff data from 2020 and regular season data from 2021 further indicate better performance with Davis at center.
The argument for power forward is injury prevention, but historical data doesn`t support this. His injury history is inconsistent across positions. Interestingly, he was playing power forward when injured in his Dallas debut.
The 2020 Lakers` twin towers setup was affordable because their centers were on minimum or low-cost contracts, allowing resource allocation elsewhere. Dallas invested significant assets in Lively and Gafford, impacting their roster flexibility. Crucially, the 2020 Lakers had LeBron James, whose presence mitigated spacing issues from playing two bigs. Dallas lacks a similar player to overcome these drawbacks.
Finally, Davis` 2020 postseason shooting was an anomaly. His high 3-point and mid-range percentages were career outliers. The idea of winning a championship with two non-shooting bigs relies on a false premise based on an unsustainable shooting performance. It`s unlikely Dallas will replicate that version of Davis.
Ignoring the Dončić trade, the Mavericks` current team is built on flawed assumptions. Their core premise doesn`t hold up, regardless of Harrison`s emphasis on defense.
Dallas could improve and be competitive. Roster improvements are likely. However, Harrison`s vision of a juggernaut seems overly optimistic or delusional. His recent press conference suggests he is committed to his approach, even if it risks failure.
Jasper Hawthorne