Photo: AFP

The NBA world was left stunned when the Dallas Mavericks traded Luka Dončić to the Los Angeles Lakers in a blockbuster deal. The 25-year-old superstar, who had just led the Mavericks to their first NBA Finals appearance in over a decade, was sent to Los Angeles alongside Maxi Kleber and Markieff Morris in exchange for Anthony Davis, Max Christie, and a 2019 first-round pick.

With no clear explanation from Mavs GM Nico Harrison or head coach Jason Kidd, speculation has run rampant. Did Dončić demand a trade? Was it an injury risk? Was there a deeper financial or business motive? Here’s a breakdown of the most talked-about theories surrounding one of the most baffling trades in NBA history.

Theory 1: Luka Dončić’s Injury Concerns (Believability: 1/5)

Some have speculated that Dončić’s injury history played a role in the trade, but the numbers don’t support this claim. Dončić has played in 82% of his career games, while Anthony Davis—his replacement—has played in just 73% over the same period. Furthermore, Dončić has never required surgery, unlike Davis, who has dealt with multiple serious injuries, including knee and Achilles issues.

If Dallas was genuinely worried about injuries, trading for a player with a worse injury record doesn’t make sense. This theory doesn’t hold up.

Theory 2: Dončić Was a Flight Risk (Believability: 2/5)

Another theory is that the Mavericks feared Dončić would leave in free agency in 2026 rather than sign a supermax extension. GM Nico Harrison hinted at this concern, stating that teams had already been preparing future cap space to lure Dončić.

However, there’s no evidence that Dončić had planned to leave. His agent, Bill Duffy, has stated that Dončić never considered turning down the supermax deal. Historically, no player has ever declined a supermax extension, which suggests Dallas might have overreacted to a non-issue.

Theory 3: Dončić’s Defense Was a Liability (Believability: 2/5)

Harrison justified the trade by saying that “defense wins championships” and that acquiring Anthony Davis, an All-NBA defender, improved the team’s chances. While it’s true that Davis is an elite defender, the notion that Dončić was a defensive liability is misleading.

This season, Dončić was having his best defensive year yet, ranking 13th in steals and helping the Mavs’ defense improve when he was on the floor. If Dallas truly prioritized defense, they wouldn’t have made past moves like trading Dorian Finney-Smith or signing an aging Klay Thompson. This explanation seems like an excuse rather than a valid reason.

Theory 4: Mavericks’ Financial Strategy (Believability: 1/5)

Some argue that Dončić’s upcoming supermax contract would have been too expensive, but this theory doesn’t hold weight. Superstars like LeBron James and Stephen Curry generate far more revenue than they cost. Economic studies suggest Dončić’s market value could exceed $100 million annually, making his projected $68 million salary a bargain.

Trading him over financial concerns would be illogical, especially when acquiring Anthony Davis, who is also on a max contract and has a worse health track record.

Theory 5: Mavericks’ Owners Are Planning a Move to Las Vegas (Believability: 3/5)

The most intriguing—and perhaps far-fetched—theory suggests that the Mavericks’ new owners, the Adelson family, are positioning the team for a potential move to Las Vegas. Texas currently does not allow casino gambling, and the Adelsons—who own major casino resorts—are lobbying to legalize gambling in the state.

If the effort fails, they might threaten to relocate the team to Vegas to pressure Texas lawmakers. By trading Dončić, they could be making the team weaker on purpose, making a relocation threat more credible.

While there is no direct proof of this plan, the business and political motivations make more sense than the basketball reasons given for the trade.

Conclusion: A Confusing, Possibly Regrettable Trade

In the absence of a clear explanation, the Luka Dončić trade remains one of the most puzzling moves in NBA history. If the Mavs truly wanted to build a contender, trading away a generational talent in his prime doesn’t align with that goal. Whether the move was influenced by business interests, financial strategies, or sheer miscalculation, only time will tell if Dallas made one of the biggest mistakes in franchise history.