Preseason Game 4: Dallas Mavericks (2-1) vs. Los Angeles Lakers (1-3) | 9:30pm EST

[KillerLeft]

i can get on board with this, but what are we doing with Gafford?  AD playing huge minutes at the 5 is the best on court fit. But then we have a 15 million dollar 3rd string center. One that could start for 25 other teams.

I don't know if he'd start for 25 teams, but it's a pretty high number. The rest of this point is what I've been preaching around here all...damn...summer. 

I mean, for now, it's nice to have three starting caliber centers, I suppose. I just hope they don't get caught holding the bag.

[Nowitzki Way]

I don't know if he'd start for 25 teams, but it's a pretty high number. The rest of this point is what I've been preaching around here all...damn...summer. 

I mean, for now, it's nice to have three starting caliber centers, I suppose. I just hope they don't get caught holding the bag.

I love Gafford.  I almost said he'd start for 28 teams! But yes. Having 3 of the better centers in the league is nice. And its amazing from where we were 3 years ago with no centers. 

Honestly Gafford is injury insurance at this point. Neither AD nor Lively can stay on the court. We can assume both will miss 15 to 20 games  at some point in the season(if not more). That alone solves the minutes issue.

But this team needing shooting and ball handling makes the Gafford thing puzzling when it comes to roster construction when everyone is healthy.

[myconsumerclub]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bES27D6aPDs Los Angeles Lakers Vs Dallas Mavericks FULL GAME | Oct 15,2025 replay I found on YT

Nembhard needs to get developed and used and he and B Will could end up being who we depend on more than DLO till Ky is back.

As for AD he is clearly out of shape but that is understandable given his type of injury but getting into shape now that he can play shouldn't take too long. I can see him staying healthy and giving his all to win because he knows he is not going to get many more chances to win a title.

When Kyrie comes back He and AD plus our 2 centers and maybe Flagg operating at an even higher level as he gets used to the NBA and the rotation of Klay PJ Max Naji B Will Nembhard Kelly .

This team is sitting on an opportunity to go to the finals this year and they can do it they have that level of talent. AD does need to hold off on trying so many 3's I agree but they can make him understand that without being disrespectful about it you address those issues in a private talk and tell him we need him scoring more goals from inside at the rim not out at the three point line we have others who hit 3 pointers at a higher rate so pass it to one of them instead if you see them open. They know how to get it across.

[Mavs2021]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bES27D6aPDs Los Angeles Lakers Vs Dallas Mavericks FULL GAME | Oct 15,2025 replay I found on YT

Nembhard needs to get developed and used and he and B Will could end up being who we depend on more than DLO till Ky is back.

As for AD he is clearly out of shape but that is understandable given his type of injury but getting into shape now that he can play shouldn't take too long.

He had eye surgery on July 8th. That´s almost four months ago.

[meistermatze]

I have a different take than most: I looked it up a while ago, and before LA traded Davis he was playing north of 80% of his minutes at the 5. Anyone with eyes can see that should be his primary position, and I think this idea that he's going to play the 4 is based more on the balance of the roster and the need to get all the good players on the court than on his wishes. I'm sure even he realizes he's more 5 than 4, frankly, and I expect that to be the way things shake out, particularly if the big lineup has all the problems we expect (many of us). If it shakes out how those who like it expect, then none of us will have issues with it, but if it's not working, you have to think the smart basketball minds in the organization will adjust.
With that logic in mind, I think it would be nutbar-factor-9 to trade probably the best defensive center in the league in order to create roster balance. I don't understand how people will claim it's not a big deal for Lively to go halvsies on the center minutes with Gafford, but then balk at the idea of him instead splitting the position with Anthony Davis, who is actually a far superior player at this point in time. FAR superior.
I get that the contract is excessive, but that's a done deal, and you're not getting $60 million of GOOD salary in return, even in a great deal. The reality is that any deal involving AD at this point results in a less talented roster, at least for a year or two (depending on what type of draft capital you get in return and how you're able to flip anything you get in the deal).
The one solid argument in favor of trading AD, imho, is that he's an injury waiting to happen, but clearly that hasn't scared the Mavs to this point. So, my hope will continue to be that they actually play him a lot at CENTER, where he is a difference maker on a level that's being trivialized here aggressively.

I am your biggest fan, Killer, but I don't really understand your take.

Are you saying that the Mavs staff and AD right now know that playing him at the 4 is not going to work? If yes, why not adjust immediately? If the answer is: "Because we have too many good bigs and have to fit everybody in," then that would be making the same point I did: someone is expendable (who that someone is is another question). If the answer is "No, they and AD don't know it by now", then you seem to be contradicting yourself.

Also, the comparison doesn’t hold when it comes to being okay with splitting center minutes between Lively and Gafford but complaining about the Lively/Davis job sharing: the one (Gafford) is insurance for a superior but injury-prone player (Lively). You could say the same thing about Lively and Davis now, but now you have two injury-prone players — and one of them is making huge money. What I’m saying is: it’s a false equivalence, and the logic doesn’t hold.

If we want to employ three great centers because we assume playing time will work itself out due to injuries, well, that’s an argument — but then your roster construction is questionable from the beginning (relying on injury-prone players, that is). But I cannot see why we would start two centers and bench a perfectly fitting piece (PJ) just to feed Lively’s ego — which, as far as I know, isn’t even a thing.

What am I missing here?

EDIT: About trivializing AD's talent around here: Davis is awesome and special (if healthy — but we’ll leave that aside for now; like you say, it’s a done deal!). The issue is that he doesn’t play within himself, which seriously lowers his impact and value. Jacking up threes and long twos instead of dominating inside — and publicly saying that his best position is at the four (am I making this up?) — doesn’t support your case that he knows where he belongs on the court.

[Dahlsim]

With Lively developing his inside game better (I'm liking his jump hook) AD may indeed be expendable. Not wild about him jacking up 3's with zero passes. He's an excellent 5 that wants to play like a 3 or 4, but that keeps PJ off the floor and I'm really liking what PJ/Flagg bring when playing together. Maybe it's just me, but I'm not getting a leadership vibe off AD like you do off Kyrie.

Nembhard continues to impress, despite his size. Getting JJB vibes here.

AD is expendable certainly on paper.  Reality check though is in addition to salary, there's the Kyrie dynamic where he will return ideally and those 2 hope to play together and get a chance to make at least one or two runs as stars on the team.  It's likely not a serious consideration until at least this season is in the books unless some team really sees AD as their solutions at the TDL. 

Nembhard gives me Chris Paul lite vibes as elite floor general.  Like the JJB vibe but JJ was a small guard that at times was just unstoppable as a scoring threat even though he was also a solid passer. 

Nemb looks like a steal that you hope not to mishandle with a Brunson style roster/contract fiasco. 

If we forget for a moment that Nico will never trade AD, can you think of a hypothetical trade involving AD that makes any sense?

Hard to be specific but AD's age is significantly less than Durant and he brought back a pretty good reset return at age 37.  I could see a few teams in the East like say Detroit, Orlando, ATL, Indiana, Charlotte etc. that might pair up their elite young guard/wing talent with a veteran star center and make run to get out of the East. 
 
Key is if AD looks like he can put in healthy season(s) still at age 32, he could have final piece type value to the right team.  

... The reality is that any deal involving AD at this point results in a less talented roster, at least for a year or two (depending on what type of draft capital you get in return and how you're able to flip anything you get in the deal).

The one solid argument in favor of trading AD, imho, is that he's an injury waiting to happen, but clearly that hasn't scared the Mavs to this point. So, my hope will continue to be that they actually play him a lot at CENTER, where he is a difference maker on a level that's being trivialized here aggressively.

Ideally if you trade AD it's because you think you can get a better roster blend for that year or two because the mix of talent can remain just as competitive for a run as you are now more or less while shifting the weight to the younger Coop timeline.  As it stands now Mavs don't top anyone's this year contender list but it's not because of raw talent as much as the mix of talent.  

Kyrie returning healthy while still being Kyrie has to overlap with healthy AD time, otherwise Nico's goal of contending can't succeed.  As much as Nico doesn't want to trade his favorites I also don't imagine he wants to watch Luka hoist trophies while his roster under achieves in Dallas.

[Kidnova]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bES27D6aPDs Los Angeles Lakers Vs Dallas Mavericks FULL GAME | Oct 15,2025 replay I found on YT

Nembhard needs to get developed and used and he and B Will could end up being who we depend on more than DLO till Ky is back.

As for AD he is clearly out of shape but that is understandable given his type of injury but getting into shape now that he can play shouldn't take too long. I can see him staying healthy and giving his all to win because he knows he is not going to get many more chances to win a title.

When Kyrie comes back He and AD plus our 2 centers and maybe Flagg operating at an even higher level as he gets used to the NBA and the rotation of Klay PJ Max Naji B Will Nembhard Kelly .

This team is sitting on an opportunity to go to the finals this year and they can do it they have that level of talent. AD does need to hold off on trying so many 3's I agree but they can make him understand that without being disrespectful about it you address those issues in a private talk and tell him we need him scoring more goals from inside at the rim not out at the three point line we have others who hit 3 pointers at a higher rate so pass it to one of them instead if you see them open. They know how to get it across.

You guys are in for some big disappointment if you actually think that Nembhard and/or Williams are going to get significant minutes over DLO while Kyrie is out based on a few preseason games.

[Chicagojk]

You guys are in for some big disappointment if you actually think that Nembhard and/or Williams are going to get significant minutes over DLO while Kyrie is out based on a few preseason games.

I agree.  i am super excited for what I saw in Nemhbard and think he has a real chance to get some opportunities this year.   Although, there will be challenges.  There is a 1 hour video of his assists as a senior.   It is a fun watch.  Not a lot of eye opening passes, but just good passes.   Gets the ball to the right place at the right time.  All with a low turnover rate.  He is also not a guy who dominates the ball.   

I may be in the minority, but i want to see Davis at the 4.   Maybe in a few weeks I will eat my words.  I didn't think it look very good in the preseason though.  What I saw from Flagg is just so promising though.   I think we need one more good player at the 2.  I was hopeful Max would make a jump, but I think he may be more of a rotation player.    Seeing how Flagg looks already, I think super big could work if you make the right move.   Although, like I said I could be eating my words in a month.

[michaeltex]

I agree.  i am super excited for what I saw in Nemhbard and think he has a real chance to get some opportunities this year.   Although, there will be challenges.  There is a 1 hour video of his assists as a senior.   It is a fun watch.  Not a lot of eye opening passes, but just good passes.   Gets the ball to the right place at the right time.  All with a low turnover rate.  He is also not a guy who dominates the ball.   

I may be in the minority, but i want to see Davis at the 4.   Maybe in a few weeks I will eat my words.  I didn't think it look very good in the preseason though.  What I saw from Flagg is just so promising though.   I think we need one more good player at the 2.  I was hopeful Max would make a jump, but I think he may be more of a rotation player.    Seeing how Flagg looks already, I think super big could work if you make the right move.   Although, like I said I could be eating my words in a month.

I agree and think Nembhard performed so well in pre-season, we all want to see how it translates when the games matter. If Williams is effective on his return, then the pressure to play Nembhard is reduced with DLo on board. 

Davis at PF is not problematic, but Davis shooting 3s is. He's good enough to give defenses nightmares anywhere below the FT line, but I wince every time he's shooting from deep. I don't know if it's the conditioning thing or just because the games didn't count, but I was observing that AD was continually the last man down on offense. That's not going to work if DAL wants to take advantage of their length and the mis-matches it creates during transition. AD is not the guy to be taking trailer 3s from the top of the arc.

[mvossman]

I love Gafford.  I almost said he'd start for 28 teams! But yes. Having 3 of the better centers in the league is nice. And its amazing from where we were 3 years ago with no centers. 

Honestly Gafford is injury insurance at this point. Neither AD nor Lively can stay on the court. We can assume both will miss 15 to 20 games  at some point in the season(if not more). That alone solves the minutes issue.

But this team needing shooting and ball handling makes the Gafford thing puzzling when it comes to roster construction when everyone is healthy.

Gafford is basically a very expensive injury insurance policy.  That is a luxury this team can't afford given all of the other holes it has.  If this team makes it to the playoffs healthy, I don't think Gafford will be in the top 7/8 playoff rotation and the value of that contract is going to take a significant hit.

[Jym]

Id be shocked if Gafford is still on the team in January 
No idea what a trade should/would look like but it has to happen

[DallasMaverick]

Gafford provides options:

Contribute 18-20 minutes per night, depending on matchups.

Contribute 30-35 minutes if Lively is hurt.

Bang down low with other old-school centers in a way that Lively can’t.

Good player on a reasonable contract provides positive trade value.

Good attitude that doesn’t demand minutes allows the coach to make player decisions without politics or hurt feelings.

So, what’s the urgency about trying to get rid of him, again?

[KillerLeft]

I am your biggest fan, Killer, but I don't really understand your take.

Are you saying that the Mavs staff and AD right now know that playing him at the 4 is not going to work? If yes, why not adjust immediately? If the answer is: "Because we have too many good bigs and have to fit everybody in," then that would be making the same point I did: someone is expendable (who that someone is is another question). If the answer is "No, they and AD don't know it by now", then you seem to be contradicting yourself.

I'm not sure what they know or don't. I'm not sure what they think or don't. I suspect that, just like the rest of us who follow the sport, some of them (at least) think often about how much of a difference maker Davis is at center. And yes, I think part of what got us here is that they happen to have access to a lot of quality bigs. I think the other side of that conversation is that they're hoping they'll be able to play two of them at a time in order to get all of their good players on the court. 

The rest of the paragraph is exactly what I'm saying. Yes, absolutely "someone" is expendable. I don't agree with the idea that AD makes the most sense as that "someone," that's all. He's the best of them, and one of the main reasons I'm bothering to wonder if the team can find a way to compete this year.

[KillerLeft]

If this team makes it to the playoffs healthy, I don't think Gafford will be in the top 7/8 playoff rotation and the value of that contract is going to take a significant hit.

I couldn't agree more.

[KillerLeft]

If we want to employ three great centers because we assume playing time will work itself out due to injuries, well, that’s an argument — but then your roster construction is questionable from the beginning (relying on injury-prone players, that is). But I cannot see why we would start two centers and bench a perfectly fitting piece (PJ) just to feed Lively’s ego — which, as far as I know, isn’t even a thing.

What am I missing here?

This is not my suggestion, fwiw. 

If I were making this decision, I'd start (and close) with AD at the 5 and bring Lively off the bench, with a little bit of them playing together in situations wherein it's an obviously good move. So, I'd start PJW, but to be honest, I'd be looking for a 1, 2 or 3 to add to the mix through trade who could possibly slide Flagg to the 4 and PJW back to the bench. 

In lieu of all of that, I'm fine with them starting AD and Lively together, so long as that's not the primary lineup in terms of minutes played, especially if it fails as spectacularly as I'm worried it will. If nothing else, it's something different that opposing teams have to think about/plan for. Not the end of the world. 

The end of the world (and I admit, this is only a problem when all three are healthy) is forcing yourself to play AD at the 4 in situations you know you shouldn't as an effort to get some sort of consistent minutes for Gafford.

[mvossman]

Gafford provides options:

Contribute 18-20 minutes per night, depending on matchups.

Contribute 30-35 minutes if Lively is hurt.

Bang down low with other old-school centers in a way that Lively can’t.

Good player on a reasonable contract provides positive trade value.

Good attitude that doesn’t demand minutes allows the coach to make player decisions without politics or hurt feelings.

So, what’s the urgency about trying to get rid of him, again?

I think your minutes projections are dependent on AD playing mostly the 4.  My belief is that AD is significantly more effective at the 5 and that that will become glaringly obvious early in the season (preseason implied it, but I'm not reading too much into that).

If AD does start playing more and more minutes at the 5 (which he has done for the last couple of seasons despite his wishes) then Gafford is going to be the one crowded out.  In that scenario even a Lively injury won't get him much more than 20 minutes.

Its not about getting rid of Gafford.  Its about him being our most valuable and expendable asset, the need to improve in other areas (via trade) and the concern that his value may decline if AD plays more minutes at the 5 than currently expected.

[DL2RimRocker]

I'm sorry but the thought of Powell being our backup for 70% of our games is making me nauseous.
Do people forget AD has only played in less than 30% of possible games since we acquired him?
And I'm not even counting the injury issues with Lively.

Gaff should be kept until we see what our center situation is like at the TDL. If we do trade him, we better have a decent playable 3rd option on the roster or one coming back in the trade deal.