I’m not sure how long this will last, but as of right now, it is still hard for me to make much sense of anything the Mavericks do with their roster. Nico Harrison traded away the team’s future for a shorter, and in his mind, stronger run at a championship. Of course, he was subsequently gifted a new future by lottery luck that will result in the Mavericks selecting phenom Cooper Flagg with the first pick in tonight’s draft.
There is still the rest of the roster to address, though, and every decision made has the shadow of those dual timelines looming over it. This week, center Daniel Gafford signed a three-year, $54 million extension. (The deal starts after next season.) Gafford will be 27 when the season starts, and he has earned this raise with his performance in Dallas. He’s a good player who could start and close games for half of the teams in the league. The problem, of course, is that he has no clear path to doing so in Dallas.
I am truly trying to avoid making every column a referendum on The Trade. But it’s hard not to note again that this frontcourt logjam was entirely unnecessary. The Mavericks really had a dream scenario: Gafford and fellow center Dereck Lively II do different things well, they have both accepted coming off of the bench, and their ages are such that paying Gafford more than a typical “backup” center would have worked alongside Lively’s cheap rookie contract. Enter Anthony Davis.
Davis wants to play power forward, which basically means he wants to play with another rim-protecting big as much as possible. In nine games with the Mavericks last season, Davis played 40 percent of his minutes at power forward; 60 percent at center. The Mavericks were extremely beat up or on the mend for the entire season, including the portion in which Davis was able to play, so it’s hard to read too much into those numbers. I heard DLLS’ Tim Cato mention the Lakers game (Luka’s return to Dallas) in April, where Davis played as the lone big for basically the entire second half. Gafford and Lively were both only a few games back from injury, but they each played 15 minutes. That was simply a game that called for Davis at the 5 for long stretches. Those matchups are going to present themselves, and Davis is the type of player who should be punishing them.
The problem, then, comes when you have your budding Defensive Player of the Year candidate (Lively) and an $18 million a year vet (Gafford) sitting on the bench for long stretches or not on the floor to close games because the moment calls for Davis alone. On one hand, I would want to give credit to Jason Kidd and his staff for playing the best lineup. Lord knows, everyone in Dallas lived through the Force Feeding of Zeke as a result of his contract to respect merit- and matchup-based decisions. However, I will resist that urge to give credit, because if the Mavericks were going to close a game with a lone big, I’m not sure I wouldn’t want it to be Lively.
There are a million variables to consider in this hypothetical scenario, most notably, who else is on the floor. But this question really gets to the core of the “two timelines” issue the Mavericks now face. It isn’t just that they have two developmental timelines; they are also trying to play basketball two ways, and the center position drives this home. Lively and Gafford are modern NBA centers—they set screens, they roll, they finish at the rim, they protect the paint. Lively is a better rebounder and certainly has more upside, while Gafford has a physicality and a sneaky big-man bag that makes him a nightmare for every backup center in the league. Neither shoots threes, which is fine.
Davis doesn’t shoot threes, either. However, in his last full season as a Laker, he remained an especially effective pick-and-roll big. Still, this is a tricky situation. The “problem” is that Davis can score in a lot of other ways, and he’s moderately effective in those other ways. None of it is as efficient or productive as simple pick-and-roll actions, especially at the end of games, especially with the newly re-signed Kyrie Irving orchestrating whenever he returns from his torn ACL. This is where the “who else is on the floor” element is important. What if Kidd wants to close a game with a lone big, but the moment calls for Lively? Again, he’s so different from Davis, that moment will surely come up. Will Dallas have Davis (making $50 million annually) and Gafford ($18 million) both sitting on the bench? Unlikely.
Gafford’s extension is structured in such a way that he can still be traded. (In fact, the timing and structure seem to indicate that might happen.) A quick glance at the roster would indicate that moving Gafford would be wise, as playmaking will be a need even when Irving is healthy. But if this is how Harrison and Davis want to do this, they almost have to retain Gafford. We have to factor in missed time due to injury for Davis, and frankly, Lively at this point. But beyond that, it really is just this: when Harrison decided he would build the boat around an injury-prone, jump-shooting center who doesn’t want to play center, the minutes and subsequent contact valuations were always going to be tricky.
Perhaps if Gafford is moved it will be for two players, a lesser frontcourt option and a guard to bolster the backcourt. Because if he goes, make no mistake, he will need to be replaced in some capacity. There is this notion that one of Gafford or P.J. Washington will be moved. (Washington’s potential logjam has been created by the addition of Flagg.) Both were on expiring contracts, and again, the backcourt cupboard is bare. But if there is any executive in the league who is going to hold on to guys because they play defense (or at least were at one time thought to play defense), it’s Harrison. Also, these are good players—he should want to keep them! Gafford certainly benefited from playing with Doncic, but his numbers at the rim remained elite after Luka’s departure. Washington’s efficiency from beyond the arc without Doncic is a little more concerning, but he has a well-rounded offensive game that can fly in any weather unlike, say, Reggie Bullock.
I’m sure Flagg will learn a ton from Davis. Maybe how to joke, impractically. But you see the problem his presence creates. I want to see Flagg with Lively and Washington, players whose games complement him. Throw Irving and Naji Marshall in there, and those five are running into buckets that lead to timeouts and State Farm commercials. Hell, I want to see Flagg with Gafford punishing second units with lobs. As the roster is constructed, Flagg is going to have to play guard, at least some of the time. Gafford is the prototypical backup big who can help with that process, like Dwight Powell was for Doncic.
This team is so deep in sunk cost coupled with historic fortune that nothing it does can be fully viewed as the movements of a rational actor. Paying Gafford makes sense, because the Mavericks have backed themselves into a corner where it has to make sense. We remember the phrase “the clock is ticking” with respect to building a contender around Doncic. The same applies to Flagg; that clock starts ticking tonight. The problem for Flagg, and Mavericks fans, is that I’m not sure Harrison is looking at the right watch.
Author
Jake Kemp
Jake Kemp
View Profile
Jake Kemp covers the Cowboys and Mavericks for StrongSide. He is a lifelong Dallas sports fan who previously worked for…