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

[Smitty]

Does Atlanta have to include Risacher with KP and Kennard to make the money work? Is that the only realistic way to make salaries work? Because Atlanta (per reports) does not want to include him in a KP trade.

No, the Hawks don't have to include Risacher with those two for a legal trade. They could add any one player like Wallace, Dante, Vit, Asa, Gueye, and it would be legal. However, this would put Atlanta in the tax (~3.3M over), and they'd also have to add another player to their roster to get to the minimum 14. Mavericks would have to waive two players.

Knowing that, I think it's safe to say that just because it's a legal trade, doesn't make it realistic.

The Hawks can't include CJ or Kispert with those two in an AD trade, and they aren't going to include Johnson, Naw, or Daniels. The only two remaining that make more than $3M are Risacher and Okongwu. Adding either of those two requires the Mavs send out at least one more player, as they can't take back more money in a trade. 

The Mavs could send up to $7,583,222 more in salary and keep the Hawks below the Tax Line, if Risacher is the 3rd player. 
The Mavs could send up to $9,385,502 more in salary and keep the Hawks below the Tax Line, if Okongwu is the 3rd player.

[DanSchwartzgan]

The Hawks can't include CJ or Kispert with those two in an AD trade, and they aren't going to include Johnson, Naw, or Daniels. The only two remaining that make more than $3M are Risacher and Okongwu. Adding either of those two requires the Mavs send out at least one more player, as they can't take back more money in a trade. 

The Mavs could send up to $7,583,222 more in salary and keep the Hawks below the Tax Line, if Risacher is the 3rd player. 
The Mavs could send up to $9,385,502 more in salary and keep the Hawks below the Tax Line, if Okongwu is the 3rd player.

And, The Mavs could sent up to $11,583,222 more and keep the Hawks below the Tax Line if Kennard isn't included and KP, Okongwu and Risacher are?  The problem for ATL is any deal that sends OO out with KP leaves them too thin at Center.  Those deals are theoretically possible, but unlikely IMHO.  My first post after the Trae Trade was that Atlanta really limited their options on  an AD deal.  They can tell people they won't deal Risacher, but if they are doing an AD deal with the intention of winning this year, it kind of has to be Risacher in the outgoing.

The other player who makes more than the minimum is Newell.  So, sending him out and replacing him with a minimum deal adds spread above the tax to the tune of $941,206 (using Exum as the outgoing in a 4/3).  

So, in a deal that is KP, Kennard, Risacher and Newell for AD and Exum, The Mavs could send up to $8,524,428 more in salary and keep the Hawks  below the Tax Line.  That means Russell or Hardy and there is still room for Atlanta to back fill with another Vet Minimum guy.  

Dallas can rightly say your tax is not my problem (and potentially kill the deal since ATL never pays tax).  Dallas could also add almost $8mm cash to the deal.  Remember, it isn't' the actual tax that is the issue.  It is forgoing the estimated $14mm of payments from the league for being a non-taxpaying team.

[Smitty]

And, The Mavs could sent up to $11,583,222 more and keep the Hawks below the Tax Line if Kennard isn't included and KP, Okongwu and Risacher are?  The problem for ATL is any deal that sends OO out with KP leaves them too thin at Center.  Those deals are theoretically possible, but unlikely IMHO.  My first post after the Trae Trade was that Atlanta really limited their options on  an AD deal.  They can tell people they won't deal Risacher, but if they are doing an AD deal with the intention of winning this year, it kind of has to be Risacher in the outgoing.

The other player who makes more than the minimum is Newell.  So, sending him out and replacing him with a minimum deal adds spread above the tax to the tune of $941,206 (using Exum as the outgoing in a 4/3).  

So, in a deal that is KP, Kennard, Risacher and Newell for AD and Exum, The Mavs could send up to $8,524,428 more in salary and keep the Hawks  below the Tax Line.  That means Russell or Hardy and there is still room for Atlanta to back fill with another Vet Minimum guy.  

Dallas can rightly say your tax is not my problem (and potentially kill the deal since ATL never pays tax).  Dallas could also add almost $8mm cash to the deal.  Remember, it isn't' the actual tax that is the issue.  It is forgoing the estimated $14mm of payments from the league for being a non-taxpaying team.

Spot on. The only thing we haven't discussed is a multi-team deal. Rightfully so, because the possibilities are endless. But between our two posts, we've covered all of the ATL-DAL avenues for an AD trade.

I will say that I still believe the Hawks ownership group would be willing to go into the tax if they believe this move makes them a contender. I don't know how you convince yourself to make an all-in type move for Davis and still count the dollars and cents. They've avoided it for nearly 15 years. A lot of Hawks fans seem to think it's only because they haven't been "contenders" in that time.

[Smitty]

TOR: Poeltl + Barrett or Quickley + 2 FRP --> Starting center + $30M youngish player (25 or 26)  + 2 picks

The TOR deal is interesting if you think about it like a 3-team deal involving Gafford for expirings + FRP.

Dallas would essentially swap their starting center (Gafford) for Poeltl + FRP. Gafford and Poeltl make close to the same money next year; and in '27-'28 Poeltl will make about $10M more than Gaff; and Poeltl's last year is only guaranteed $5M when Gaff is guaranteed $19M. So Dallas would end up saving money if they waive Poeltl in '28-'29. Or they could keep him if he's playing well. Also keep in mind Barrett is exporing next year if you don't like him. The total deal would look like

TOR: Poeltl + Barrett + 2 FRP for AD

Mystery team: expiring + FRP for Gafford

DAL: AD + Gafford for Poeltl + Barrett + 3 FRP --> $14.4M expiring + $30M expiring next year + 3 FRP

This is a great way to view the potential Toronto deal in a way that isn't entirely negative. I will add that I think the Mavs would have no problem finding suitors in the summer for Barrett on an expiring deal, or to someone that wants to pay him, if the Mavs don't see him as a long-term fit. Could he be worth a FRP on draft night? Would the Mavs have to wait until the new league year starts in June for him to be trade eligible again? Either way, Barrett and Poeltl are not BAD players. It's the contract stuff that leaves a bad taste in our mouth. Along with Poeltl's injury history of course.

The Mavs need to pick a direction. It doesn't have to be this TDL though. It can wait until the summer when the permanent GM is in place. We're impatient and its trade season so we all want to fix as much as possible right this second. I think a lot of us have worried too much about the financials also. If Dumont is willing to pay $100+ million tax bill, who cares. Fans should really only care about the second apron and even then, it's not as dire a situation as some make it. Ideal, no?

[DanSchwartzgan]

Spot on. The only thing we haven't discussed is a multi-team deal. Rightfully so, because the possibilities are endless. But between our two posts, we've covered all of the ATL-DAL avenues for an AD trade.

I will say that I still believe the Hawks ownership group would be willing to go into the tax if they believe this move makes them a contender. I don't know how you convince yourself to make an all-in type move for Davis and still count the dollars and cents. They've avoided it for nearly 15 years. A lot of Hawks fans seem to think it's only because they haven't been "contenders" in that time.

I don't think adding extra teams to the deal helps ATL that much if you hold to the not-paying-tax criteria.  All of their salaries except the ones we've discussed are minimums.  So, sending one out to a third team to avoid tax doesn't help as they have to replace it.  I guess you could argue that they could do a remainder of the season deal with one of their two-ways and save money under the tax by sending out a minimum (to Dallas or to a third team)

One place a third team might help is sending all four of KP, Kennard, OO and Risacher with one of them going to the third team.  That leaves ATL $22.5mm under the tax and with some room to add back a center (could be Gafford, but it could be a center from the third team).  

Another could be sending out Kispert in a non-aggregated deal (again, could be Dallas or could be a third team).  They could also do Kispert for Gafford as a side deal where the ATL outgoing is KP/Kennard/OO and solve ATL's center depth issue.  That side deal takes away space under the tax for ATL to the tune of $411,320.  

So, if Deal #1 is Gafford for Kispert and Deal #2 is KP, Kennard, OO and Newell for AD and Exum, there is still $9,915,388 of space under the tax for Dallas to send back more players.  Martin fits, but ATL only has 13 functional players since Exum is one of their 14.  Or, you can go back to Hardy or D'Lo and back filling with a minimum and a two-way.

[Smitty]

I don't think adding extra teams to the deal helps ATL that much if you hold to the not-paying-tax criteria.  All of their salaries except the ones we've discussed are minimums.  So, sending one out to a third team to avoid tax doesn't help as they have to replace it.  I guess you could argue that they could do a remainder of the season deal with one of their two-ways and save money under the tax by sending out a minimum (to Dallas or to a third team)

One place a third team might help is sending all four of KP, Kennard, OO and Risacher with one of them going to the third team.  That leaves ATL $22.5mm under the tax and with some room to add back a center (could be Gafford, but it could be a center from the third team).  

Another could be sending out Kispert in a non-aggregated deal (again, could be Dallas or could be a third team).  They could also do Kispert for Gafford as a side deal where the ATL outgoing is KP/Kennard/OO and solve ATL's center depth issue.  That side deal takes away space under the tax for ATL to the tune of $411,320.  

So, if Deal #1 is Gafford for Kispert and Deal #2 is KP, Kennard, OO and Newell for AD and Exum, there is still $9,915,388 of space under the tax for Dallas to send back more players.  Martin fits, but ATL only has 13 functional players since Exum is one of their 14.  Or, you can go back to Hardy or D'Lo and back filling with a minimum and a two-way.

Yeah, this is what I meant about multi-team deals or non-aggregated ones involving Kispert or CJ. You and I outlined the simplest ways to do the deal, or the most logical ones, but there is more than one way to get there, like you've outlined above!

[DanSchwartzgan]

This is a great way to view the potential Toronto deal in a way that isn't entirely negative.  Barrett and Poeltl are not BAD players. It's the contract stuff that leaves a bad taste in our mouth. Along with Poeltl's injury history of course.

The Mavs need to pick a direction.

In terms of direction, I think Dallas will want to compete in 26/27.  There isn’t a path to that magic “contender” status or the even more elusive “true contender” level.  They just need to take what they have and do the best they can with it.

It would be nice for that to include more 20-22 year olds who are promising.  But as you say Barrett and Poetl aren’t bad players.  Barrett fits in nicely with Flagg, your 2026 pick, Christie and Kyrie in terms of adding some much needed scoring punch.  Poeltl plus Lively in 26/27 allows you to get value for Gafford now.  None of that is the ideal, but absent the most optimistic versions we see (almost all of which come exclusively from FG), there isn’t an ideal to be had.  I think your effort to think about what you do with Barrett later (any my effort last night to send Poeltl to a third team) are good exercises to try to make a Toronto deal more palatable.

[Smitty]

@ShamsCharania
Golden State's Jonathan Kuminga has demanded a trade away from the Warriors as he becomes eligible to be moved Thursday, sources tell ESPN.

Full story with @anthonyVslater

[Chicagojk]

@ShamsCharania
Golden State's Jonathan Kuminga has demanded a trade away from the Warriors as he becomes eligible to be moved Thursday, sources tell ESPN.

Full story with @anthonyVslater

Golden State's Jonathan Kuminga has demanded a trade away from the Warriors as he becomes eligible to be moved Thursday, sources tell ESPN.

League sources said the Warriors have been prioritizing expiring contracts in return for Kuminga. They've declined the idea of taking back long-term contracts unless they view it as no-brainer positive value. That's been the hold up in conversations with Sacramento. The Warriors refuse to absorb the three years and $60.4 million remaining on Malik Monk's deal, though league sources said Keon Ellis (on a cheap expiring deal) is a potential sweetener of interest to them.

[Chicagojk]

Max Kellerman says the Lakers should consider trading Luka Doncic: “If you wanna win a championship, I believe that your best player needs to… at least play team defense… like Steph Curry... I can get x for Austin. I can get 3x for Luka.”


**********************
This is a Ringer Podcast.  Bill Simmons is the owner of the Ringer.  Bill is a massive Celtics fan and hates the Lakers.  This may be the greatest troll of all time giving Rich Paul a podcast and then watching the damage it causes.

[Smitty]

General manager Mike Dunleavy and his front office have spent the past several weeks canvassing the market for Kuminga. The Sacramento Kings and Dallas Mavericks are among the teams that have shown interest in Kuminga as an intriguing part of their rebuild, league sources said, but several other teams are also in the mix because of his flexible contract structure. If the right star player is made available, the Warriors would be willing to move multiple first-round draft picks, team sources said, though they are more protective of their first rounders in 2028 and beyond than their 2026 pick.

[Chicagojk]

General manager Mike Dunleavy and his front office have spent the past several weeks canvassing the market for Kuminga. The Sacramento Kings and Dallas Mavericks are among the teams that have shown interest in Kuminga as an intriguing part of their rebuild, league sources said, but several other teams are also in the mix because of his flexible contract structure. If the right star player is made available, the Warriors would be willing to move multiple first-round draft picks, team sources said, though they are more protective of their first rounders in 2028 and beyond than their 2026 pick.

All this hassle just for keeping as asset and hoping to get value. At the end, they will be lucky to get any worthwile asset.  

I will be interested to see what happens with Kuminga.   It is a bad sign that he has not been able to find a role in that Warriors team.  It should be easy.   I understand he wants a bigger role, but there should have been an opp to fill a support role while also looking for a bigger role down the road.   He is a guy if you watch the highlights, he looks like someone you would invest in.   He also had a few good games against the mavs.   The lack of interest is telling.    His next stop is going to be interesting to see if anything worthwhile is there.

[Smitty]

@TheDunkCentral
The Pacers are showing interest in Onyeka Okongwu, Yves Missi, Ivica Zubac, and Daniel Gafford, per @JakeLFischer

“I was told this week, for example, that Indiana has called Atlanta on Onyeka Okongwu in addition to its previously reported interest in players such as Dallas' Daniel Gafford and the (perceived as much harder-to-get) Ivica Zubac of the LA Clippers. Another name on Indiana's list, sources say, is Pelicans center Yves Missi.”

[mvossman]

General manager Mike Dunleavy and his front office have spent the past several weeks canvassing the market for Kuminga. The Sacramento Kings and Dallas Mavericks are among the teams that have shown interest in Kuminga as an intriguing part of their rebuild, league sources said, but several other teams are also in the mix because of his flexible contract structure. If the right star player is made available, the Warriors would be willing to move multiple first-round draft picks, team sources said, though they are more protective of their first rounders in 2028 and beyond than their 2026 pick.

He is a power forward that can't shoot.  I can't think of a worse profile to match with Flagg.  His only real value is his expiring contract.  Cheaper ways to get that.

[Smitty]

@esidery
The Pacers are shopping Bennedict Mathurin in hopes of landing an impact starting center.

Due for a lucrative extension this offseason, Indiana has already prioritized Andrew Nembhard and Aaron Nesmith over Mathurin in terms of new long-term contracts.

[KillerLeft]

@esidery
The Pacers are shopping Bennedict Mathurin in hopes of landing an impact starting center.

Due for a lucrative extension this offseason, Indiana has already prioritized Andrew Nembhard and Aaron Nesmith over Mathurin in terms of new long-term contracts.

This is the first confirmation that Dan's idea might actually be possible. Kudos to him, and for the record I'm into it. I suppose it hinges on just what "lucrative extension" means, however. What do we think that's likely to be? More than Gafford is making, I'll bet.

[RoyTarpleysGhost]

I'm not into Mathurin. He is very similar to Kuminga. (slightly smaller version) A guy that could be good if he played a role but he wants the ball and to score 20ppg.

Super inefficient scorer. He was shooting 42% from three a month ago. I knew that was a mirage. Down to 37% already.
Does not offer any playmaking. (2 assists per game)
Does not use his physical skills to be an imposing defender.



Now, he would fit positionally better than Kuminga. He is a bit of a slasher that could start alongside Christie and Flagg in a smaller lineup. His FT% is good so maybe some long term potential to be a better shooter.
Plus if we don't have any better offers, I wouldn't hate it. Just not a player I'd target.


CLIFFS: I'd like players that can either play make or shoot, ideally both. Kuminga and Mathurin do neither.

[Smitty]

CLIFFS:  I'd like players that can either play make or shoot, ideally both.  Kuminga and Mathurin do neither.

Coby White has entered the chat.

[mvossman]

This is the first confirmation that Dan's idea might actually be possible. Kudos to him, and for the record I'm into it. I suppose it hinges on just what "lucrative extension" means, however. What do we think that's likely to be? More than Gafford is making, I'll bet.

Its a concern.  He is a scorer but not particularly good on the other end.  I'm not sure he would be worth his asking price.  For Gafford I would probably prefer salary relief and 26 first if we can get it.

[KillerLeft]

I'm not into Mathurin.  He is very similar to Kuminga.  (slightly smaller version)  A guy that could be good if he played a role but he wants the ball and to score 20ppg.

Super inefficient scorer.  He was shooting 42% from three a month ago.  I knew that was a mirage.  Down to 37% already.
Does not offer any playmaking.  (2 assists per game)
Does not use his physical skills to be an imposing defender.



Now, he would fit positionally better than Kuminga.  He is a bit of a slasher that could start alongside Christie and Flagg in a smaller lineup.  His FT% is good so maybe some long term potential to be a better shooter. 
Plus if we don't have any better offers, I wouldn't hate it.  Just not a player I'd target.


CLIFFS:  I'd like players that can either play make or shoot, ideally both.  Kuminga and Mathurin do neither.

I can see this POV. I'm not as down on him as a shooter as you are. If you're right about that, then you're probably right to steer clear. Unfortunately, it looks like they're dangling Mathurin and holding Nesmith back. I like Mathruin's positional fit and age quite a bit.