(06-14-2026, 09:03 PM)F Gump Wrote: I think this forum generally sells Kyrie way short, in their perceptions. That's not a comment about a trade offer that's too low in return, but rather a failure to appreciate the difference on the court that an all-NBA caliber player brings. The gravity of their game has huge impact. The desire for Flagg to have a top-level running mate to alter the offense's potential would be IMMENSELY changed as soon as day one, just by having a healthy Kyrie.
I'm not saying either side would do it, but just working through the hypothetical of a Kyrie for Fox swap and what I'd ask for in return:
+1 FRP for the shorter contract length
+1 FRP for the smaller contract numbers
+1 FRP for the upgrade in talent
Toss in Martin for salary matching purposes.
Remove or reverse the swap rights in 2030.
Too greedy? Not greedy enough?
Why would the Spurs do it? Seemingly do the impossible and upgrade Fox while reducing long term salary. Kyrie fits their win now timeline nicely.
Why the Spurs don't do it? Not sure if Kyrie has rehabbed his image league wide. Harper is going to be ready sooner than later.
Why the Mavs do it? Refills the cupboard of tradeable future assets and recaptures control of one of their own future picks. Does right by Kyrie. Dumps Martin. I've never been the biggest fan of Fox, but he's fine for the Mavs timeline and you probably aren't going to get a better option back at the position if you let Kyrie go.
Why the Mavs don't do it? That's a huge contract for Fox and you'll probably not be able to get rid of it until the final year, if then. Those firsts are likely late round picks or mid round picks if you are lucky. I guess you could ask for additional swap rights.
Even if the swap makes a lot of sense in my head, I'm not sure I'd pull the trigger. Still a fun excercise.