Mavericks Trading Luke Doncic To Lakers For Anthony Davis

[LAKESHOW]

Hatred. Anger. Animosity. These things can Enrage a person and impact him so deeply, so as to Compel a person to think.....AD is a Useless Scrub

[nicholas88]

I don't buy the collusion argument.

Spoiler:

Players have to pass physicals before a trade is finalized (in nearly every case). And, technically an injury wouldn't be collusion. Collusion is the 2 GMs agreeing to hide the same thing, for both their benefit, not one GM trying to take advantage of another. Collusion means 2 or more.

If Luka is injured and might never play again, maybe he and Dallas ownership collude in a "trade me and get something back" scenario, but that feels like a stretch, given that he'd need to pass a physical in that situation anyway.

Collusion in the sense that Adam Silver and the NBA won this trade. NBA ratings are way down, and there's no better way to change that fact than to have the Lakers receive a young superstar for pennies on the dollar. Just speculation. To go further—maybe there was an under-the-table deal that the new owner—Patrick Dumont—agreed to when he was permitted to purchase the Mavericks.

Lets assume you're right. Why does Dallas do this trade? What's in it for Miriam? Collusion implies that there's something in this for Dallas.

As a hypothesis, Miriam was allowed to purchase the Mavericks in the first place. I am not saying this is what happened, but just as speculation. Anything at this point makes more sense than what we currently know about the trade as it stands.

[nicholas88]

double post

[Luv those Knicks]

Collusion in the sense that Adam Silver and the NBA won this trade. NBA ratings are way down, and there's no better way to change that fact than to have the Lakers receive a young superstar for pennies on the dollar. Just speculation. To go further—maybe there was an under-the-table deal that the new owner—Patrick Dumont—agreed to when he was permitted to purchase the Mavericks.

Lets assume you're right. Why does Dallas do this trade? What's in it for Miriam? Collusion implies that there's something in this for Dallas.

As a hypothesis, Miriam was allowed to purchase the Mavericks in the first place. I am not saying this is what happened, but just as speculation. Anything at this point makes more sense than what we currently know about the trade as it stands.

OK. That's big, and I don't think I agree, but props for completing the circle.

But then what's in it for Marc Cuban? Presumably, Miriam pays less for the Mavs because she agrees to trade Luka to the lakers before buying the team, because the NBA knew that viewership would be done, so Miriam agreed to trade her best player to a bigger market in exchange for the OWNERS (not the commish - the commish can give a purchase his blessing, but can't order the owners to approve), so . . .

So, props on making the argument, but I don't buy it.

What I've read is that Luka had a year left in his deal but could have requested a super-duper max extension this summer, as they can negotiate with a year left. That would have been 5 years 345 and what I've also read is that Miriam didn't want to pay that, so she decided to move him.

OK, she did it quietly and didn't shop him, so there was shock and outrage, but avoiding 5 years 345 makes more sense than having a handshake deal with Adam SIlver to trade their best player to Los Angeles

[nicholas88]

Lets assume you're right. Why does Dallas do this trade? What's in it for Miriam? Collusion implies that there's something in this for Dallas.

As a hypothesis, Miriam was allowed to purchase the Mavericks in the first place. I am not saying this is what happened, but just as speculation. Anything at this point makes more sense than what we currently know about the trade as it stands.

OK. That's big, and I don't think I agree, but props for completing the circle.

But then what's in it for Marc Cuban? Presumably, Miriam pays less for the Mavs because she agrees to trade Luka to the lakers before buying the team, because the NBA knew that viewership would be done, so Miriam agreed to trade her best player to a bigger market in exchange for the OWNERS (not the commish - the commish can give a purchase his blessing, but can't order the owners to approve), so . . .

So, props on making the argument, but I don't buy it.

What I've read is that Luka had a year left in his deal but could have requested a super-duper max extension this summer, as they can negotiate with a year left. That would have been 5 years 345 and what I've also read is that Miriam didn't want to pay that, so she decided to move him.

OK, she did it quietly and didn't shop him, so there was shock and outrage, but avoiding 5 years 345 makes more sense than having a handshake deal with Adam SIlver to trade their best player to Los Angeles

Good points.

I agree with your assessment; it seems to be the general perception. As the details come out, the more realistic the trade starts to feel. As of the last day and a half, the information I have come across basically points to his weight and longevity as the main motivator for the trade.

But, maybe you'll agree: the fact that some 70-year-old Vegas casino mogul & grandmother could be calling the shots on who to resign and who to trade . . . seems wild. If not, Nico Harrison may have just completed the worst trade in the modern NBA by a GM.

That being said, one way or the other, no matter their reason—I don't understand the logical justification. Maybe more information will trickle out. Or, maybe it's just me.

[puja21]

DAL can turn around and flip him for 4-5 picks next summer if they want out.

Maybe. No guarantees in the apron CBA though.

If they were set on AD, then they could've at least demanded both Laker picks now and either Knecht or Reaves -- no chance Jeannie/Pelinka lose Luka over those assets.

The problem with trying to flip AD for 4-5 FRPs in Summer 2025 is he will be age 32 and only 2 years left on his deal.

One reason Dallas rushed the Doncic trade -- they weren't willing to wait until he signed the supermax for ~400M. If they had waited until they had 4-5 years of team control on Luka to offer, then they could've opened the market to literally anyone.

This has been the norm even pre-apron:
-Rudy had 4+1 (PO) when Utah traded him.
-Dame had 3+1 seasons left when Portland traded him.
-Durant had 3.5 seasons left in Feb 23 when the nets moved him.
-Bridges had 2 but was only age 27 and this was a known overpay bc CAA had the Villanova leverage from the other 3.

I haven't heard anyone criticize Dallas for wanting to move off Luka -- the beef has been that they prioritized rushing it to salvage the current season and didn't even maximize the Laker haul, let alone setup a bidding war this summer (AFTER the supermax was signed).

[puja21]

As a hypothesis, Miriam was allowed to purchase the Mavericks in the first place. I am not saying this is what happened, but just as speculation. Anything at this point makes more sense than what we currently know about the trade as it stands.

OK. That's big, and I don't think I agree, but props for completing the circle.

But then what's in it for Marc Cuban? Presumably, Miriam pays less for the Mavs because she agrees to trade Luka to the lakers before buying the team, because the NBA knew that viewership would be done, so Miriam agreed to trade her best player to a bigger market in exchange for the OWNERS (not the commish - the commish can give a purchase his blessing, but can't order the owners to approve), so . . .

So, props on making the argument, but I don't buy it.

What I've read is that Luka had a year left in his deal but could have requested a super-duper max extension this summer, as they can negotiate with a year left. That would have been 5 years 345 and what I've also read is that Miriam didn't want to pay that, so she decided to move him.

OK, she did it quietly and didn't shop him, so there was shock and outrage, but avoiding 5 years 345 makes more sense than having a handshake deal with Adam SIlver to trade their best player to Los Angeles

Good points.

I agree with your assessment; it seems to be the general perception. As the details come out, the more realistic the trade starts to feel. As of the last day and a half, the information I have come across basically points to his weight and longevity as the main motivator for the trade.

But, maybe you'll agree: the fact that some 70-year-old Vegas casino mogul & grandmother could be calling the shots on who to resign and who to trade . . . seems wild. If not, Nico Harrison may have just completed the worst trade in the modern NBA by a GM.

That being said, one way or the other, no matter their reason—I don't understand the logical justification. Maybe more information will trickle out. Or, maybe it's just me.

The other gigantic motive flaw in this equation is that Cuban was forced out and has been miserable:

Tim Bontemps on The Hoop Collective, 12/1/23:

I don't know exactly what the language is in the purchase agreement, but one thing I have been told, and the exact word I heard is Cuban will have basketball operations for quote forevermore. I assume that is agreed to in writing.

^And Cuban later said himself "in perpetuity" and that he'd be in charge of operations as long as he wanted to be

And of course this didn't happen, because <12 mos later...

Marc Stein's the Stein Line from Nov 2024:

As he nears the one-year anniversary of the sale that ended his nearly quarter-century as the majority owner of the Dallas Mavericks, Mark Cuban did not attend Dallas' stirring victory Friday night in Denver. Nor will he be at Sunday night's game in Miami. Or Monday's in Atlanta. There is a simple explanation, Cuban said, for his dwindling presence at road games. The reason that he is no longer allowed to sit behind the Dallas Mavericks' bench, which has reduced the number of games he chooses to attend.

Cuban to Stein:

You're right - I'm not there making day-to-day decisions. That's all Nico. That's just the way it's evolved. Honestly .. is it exactly the way l expected it to be? No. It's been up and down l've had moments of both - times where I was like, 'OK, this is what we need to do, but I'm not the boss.

^does this sound like a man who gave up control willingly?

[Pickled Prunes]

Do some research. Watch the Exchange between AD and LeBron during Kobes memorial during a game. That tells you all you need to know. We Been tryin to get rid of this Dude

Trying to get rid of him? They could have traded him any day of the week!

Luka wasn't available till Now

So... "you" have been trying to get rid of him... but only if Luka is available?

If those are your terms: With very few exceptions, every team has been trying to get rid of every player... if Luka is available.

[LAKESHOW]

It was a major success, no?

[Pickled Prunes]

DAL can turn around and flip him for 4-5 picks next summer if they want out.

Maybe. No guarantees in the apron CBA though.

If they were set on AD, then they could've at least demanded both Laker picks now and either Knecht or Reaves -- no chance Jeannie/Pelinka lose Luka over those assets.

The problem with trying to flip AD for 4-5 FRPs in Summer 2025 is he will be age 32 and only 2 years left on his deal.

One reason Dallas rushed the Doncic trade -- they weren't willing to wait until he signed the supermax for ~400M. If they had waited until they had 4-5 years of team control on Luka to offer, then they could've opened the market to literally anyone.

This has been the norm even pre-apron:
-Rudy had 4+1 (PO) when Utah traded him.
-Dame had 3+1 seasons left when Portland traded him.
-Durant had 3.5 seasons left in Feb 23 when the nets moved him.
-Bridges had 2 but was only age 27 and this was a known overpay bc CAA had the Villanova leverage from the other 3.

I haven't heard anyone criticize Dallas for wanting to move off Luka -- the beef has been that they prioritized rushing it to salvage the current season and didn't even maximize the Laker haul, let alone setup a bidding war this summer (AFTER the supermax was signed).

My point was about the folly of trying determine the value of a trade by the number of picks involved. All-NBA players went both ways. People are talking about it like DAL got one 1st and salary filler.

There is a bunch to unpack in your point. Most importantly, DAL would have to wait to trade Luka for a full year after he signs the supermax. That's a long time to keep pretending Luka is your future. Does DAL believe Luka would have been healthy and in shape a year after signing the supermax? How do you keep building around a player you have already decided you want to move?

Max Christie is only 21 and has the most upside of the players you mentioned. Reaves (26) is about as good as he's going to get, his main value being the terms of his contract. Knecht (23) did 5 years in college. I'm happy for the dude, but I doubt we'll be talking about him much 5 years from now. My guess is that DAL got the young asset they wanted.

The idea that DAL couldn't shop Luka until he signed the supermax was just something Bontemps made up. Of course they could have shopped him. This didn't come out for two reasons: 1) LAL didn't want anyone to know Luka was available. 2) DAL didn't want anyone to know AD was available.

If DAL calls OKC and says "LAL will give us AD, Christie and a 1st for Luka, what's your offer?"... OKC hangs up and calls LAL,"we'll give you I-hart, Dort and five 1sts for AD." OKC has SGA, but AD and Chet would be nasty!

DAL didn't open it up because they knew what they wanted. They targeted AD specifically, and probably Christie as well. They also got off of Klieber, who's owed $11m next season! You are correct that DAL probably could have gotten that last pick. But either way, they clearly got what they wanted.

Rudy was overpaid and MIN gave up way too much for him. That cant be our barometer. But still, the talent went overwhelmingly in one direction.
POR got one 1st and two swaps for Lillard. Good players went both directions.
BRK got four 1sts, a swap, a solid role player and trash for one of the greatest scorers the world has seen. We all knew it was a mistake at the time. PHX was left with nothing to build around KD and Booker. (Where DAL was heading.) Still talent went heavily in one direction.
Bridges is back to being a role player, making that trade possibly the greatest overpay in NBA history. This should not be our barometer either. But to my original point, the talent was moving in one direction.

[Luv those Knicks]

Good points.

I agree with your assessment; it seems to be the general perception. As the details come out, the more realistic the trade starts to feel. As of the last day and a half, the information I have come across basically points to his weight and longevity as the main motivator for the trade.

But, maybe you'll agree: the fact that some 70-year-old Vegas casino mogul & grandmother could be calling the shots on who to resign and who to trade . . . seems wild. If not, Nico Harrison may have just completed the worst trade in the modern NBA by a GM.

That being said, one way or the other, no matter their reason—I don't understand the logical justification. Maybe more information will trickle out. Or, maybe it's just me.

Jets fan here. Our owner, Woody (Johnson and Johnson), who loves Trump, listened to his kids who play Madden NFL, and used their insight to void a trade earlier this year. He denies this, of course, but a fired GM said it - so we can choose who we believe.

And I watched the Dolans run the Knicks into the ground for 25 years, before they stepped back and let Leon Rose run the show. Leon seems to know what he's doing.


Long story short, yes, I 100% agree with you that owners can be dumb. Hek, even smart people can think they know more than others and make dumb decisions, and I'm not saying Miriam is smart, because I know nothing about her beyond knowing who she married. But this can happen. A person can be smart in one area and not smart in another, and the whole operating in secret thing to avoid criticism, well, I understand that. This would have been Jimmy Butler times 12, so lets not tell anyone, not even the player.

What she missed was that there might have been a team out there ready to offer 7 or 8 first round picks, some younger players and expiring contracts for Luka and the fans might have accepted that with less fury. Or, wait for the off season when the salary cap rises by 10% and more teams have cap space, and Luka's agent asks for a 5-345 super-max extension, and when that happens, let the fans know "We love this guy, but we have to trade him".

In a vacuum, only talking to one or two teams, I don't hate adding AD and avoiding an undesirable contract, but that doesn't mean I agree with the trade. She didn't even try to get a nifty return and that's not a good decision, and why does she do it? She does it to avoid fan backlash but she gets some of the worst backlash in sports history anyway. Ouch.

If AD brings the Mavs a championship, then all bets are off. She'll be redeemed. But what are the odds?


sorry. You might have noticed, I tend to type too much. Bad habit.

[puja21]

My point was about the folly of trying determine the value of a trade by the number of picks involved. All-NBA players went both ways. People are talking about it like DAL got one 1st and salary filler.

Agree

DAL didn't want anyone to know AD was available.
DAL didn't open it up because they knew what they wanted.
They targeted AD specifically, and probably Christie as well.

Agree

[Pickled Prunes]

My point was about the folly of trying determine the value of a trade by the number of picks involved. All-NBA players went both ways. People are talking about it like DAL got one 1st and salary filler.

Agree

DAL didn't want anyone to know AD was available.
DAL didn't open it up because they knew what they wanted.
They targeted AD specifically, and probably Christie as well.

Agree

I knew this day would come!

[t-rexCity]

Can never understand how every GM falls in love with J Kidd. This was his decision. He always gets his way for some reason

Watch the pass conference, J Kidd didn’t know about it and he looks pissed the whole press conference with the GM, Kidd didn’t say one word…this isn’t on him. How did you make a trade and not talk to the coach then brag about it in a press conference?

I just watched it because you brought it up. Damn dude. What could you possibly achieve by lying? Unbelievable.

[puja21]

My point was about the folly of trying determine the value of a trade by the number of picks involved. All-NBA players went both ways. People are talking about it like DAL got one 1st and salary filler.

Agree

DAL didn't want anyone to know AD was available.
DAL didn't open it up because they knew what they wanted.
They targeted AD specifically, and probably Christie as well.

Agree

I knew this day would come!

ha

I suppose I do very rarely agree w/ your posts

[Pickled Prunes]

Agree


Agree

I knew this day would come!

ha

I suppose I do very rarely agree w/ your posts

We usually see things in a similar light; disagreeing on the margins. I enjoy intelligent, respectful back and forth that can sometimes be elusive on the interweb... but to receive two straight "agrees" on a single post... I must have nailed it!

[puja21]

OK. That's big, and I don't think I agree, but props for completing the circle.

But then what's in it for Marc Cuban? Presumably, Miriam pays less for the Mavs because she agrees to trade Luka to the lakers before buying the team, because the NBA knew that viewership would be done, so Miriam agreed to trade her best player to a bigger market in exchange for the OWNERS (not the commish - the commish can give a purchase his blessing, but can't order the owners to approve), so . . .

So, props on making the argument, but I don't buy it.

What I've read is that Luka had a year left in his deal but could have requested a super-duper max extension this summer, as they can negotiate with a year left. That would have been 5 years 345 and what I've also read is that Miriam didn't want to pay that, so she decided to move him.

OK, she did it quietly and didn't shop him, so there was shock and outrage, but avoiding 5 years 345 makes more sense than having a handshake deal with Adam SIlver to trade their best player to Los Angeles

Good points.

I agree with your assessment; it seems to be the general perception. As the details come out, the more realistic the trade starts to feel. As of the last day and a half, the information I have come across basically points to his weight and longevity as the main motivator for the trade.

But, maybe you'll agree: the fact that some 70-year-old Vegas casino mogul & grandmother could be calling the shots on who to resign and who to trade . . . seems wild. If not, Nico Harrison may have just completed the worst trade in the modern NBA by a GM.

That being said, one way or the other, no matter their reason—I don't understand the logical justification. Maybe more information will trickle out. Or, maybe it's just me.

The other gigantic motive flaw in this equation is that Cuban was forced out and has been miserable:

Tim Bontemps on The Hoop Collective, 12/1/23:

I don't know exactly what the language is in the purchase agreement, but one thing I have been told, and the exact word I heard is Cuban will have basketball operations for quote forevermore. I assume that is agreed to in writing.

^And Cuban later said himself "in perpetuity" and that he'd be in charge of operations as long as he wanted to be

And of course this didn't happen, because <12 mos later...

Marc Stein's the Stein Line from Nov 2024:

As he nears the one-year anniversary of the sale that ended his nearly quarter-century as the majority owner of the Dallas Mavericks, Mark Cuban did not attend Dallas' stirring victory Friday night in Denver. Nor will he be at Sunday night's game in Miami. Or Monday's in Atlanta. There is a simple explanation, Cuban said, for his dwindling presence at road games. The reason that he is no longer allowed to sit behind the Dallas Mavericks' bench, which has reduced the number of games he chooses to attend.

Cuban to Stein:

You're right - I'm not there making day-to-day decisions. That's all Nico. That's just the way it's evolved. Honestly .. is it exactly the way l expected it to be? No. It's been up and down l've had moments of both - times where I was like, 'OK, this is what we need to do, but I'm not the boss.

^does this sound like a man who gave up control willingly?

Cuban himself has now confirmed the obvious:

"I fully expected to run basketball. The nba wouldn’t let me put it in the contract. They took it out. I thought [the Adelsons] would stick to their word because they didn’t know the first thing about running a team. Someone obviously changed their mind."


Source: Cuban from his own facebook page
https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/1jljt21/mark_cuban_i_fully_expected_to_run_basketball_the/