AROUND the NBA:

[mvossman]

I like the idea of Lively, the theory.

But the Mavs don't really have Lively. They just have some theoretical player. Sad to say, the Oden comp is a good one. In the last 2 seasons combined, out of about 8000 minutes for the center position, the Mavs have had "Lively" for 948 minutes. 

Gafford hasn't been great either (about 2425 minutes over 2 seasons), but I have to wonder if some of Gafford's lack of minutes is connected to tanking.

In any case, a HIGH priority should be to get a reliable center or 2 who can give them 25 mpg night after night.  Obviously AD was expected to eat up a lot of those C minutes, and he didn't. But they need someone (and probably 2 someone's) who can. If I am the Mavs, I would have to explore what the market is for Lively, and if they can get a mid-round 1st in 2026, I might pull the trigger, depending on what his health situation is promising me for this coming season. (Would I necessarily use that 1st to draft a center? Nope, not unless there is a definite top-tier prospect C available. I don't think there is a Lively clone waiting.)

Lively is more than an idea.  We saw him be very impactful as a rookie in a finals playoff run.  I'm not ready to assume he will never get back to that because he had two injury riddled seasons assisted by the most incompetent medical staff in the NBA.

Gafford is a good center in the right situations.  But we saw him repeatedly exposed in the playoffs against teams that play with space.  From that perspective he is a situational rotational piece and makes too much money for that role.  I would be thrilled if they can get an asset for him and then replace him with somebody cheaper.