US media proposes a three-party deal: Lakers, Grizzlies and Mavericks cooperate, Morant may enter the Mavericks

The playoff performance of these three teams in the Western Conference this year is really a worry. The Mavericks didn't make it to the playoffs, and the Lakers and the Grizzlies were eliminated in the first round. Now that the offseason is just beginning, US media Sportskeeda has launched a three-party trading plan, saying that the three teams will "get each one of them."

First look at the specific chips: the Mavericks take the first round of Jamorant and the Lakers (2026 and 2028); the Grizzlies Dreevs, Klay Thompson, Najib Marshall and the Mavericks in the first round of 2029; the Lakers are Gafford and the Grizzlies in the second round of 2031. At first glance, this chip allocation seems to be "making up for each team's shortcomings".

The most realistic thing for the Lakers is to make up for the inside. After Davis left, the Lakers were too empty to run away. Although Gafford is not a top center, he has worked with Doncic (after all, he was in the Mavericks before), and has both the franchise protection and the slim-fighting. The key is that his contract expires this year, and the Mavericks will suffer heavy bleeding. It is better to exchange it for resources - this is simply "picking up ready-made" for the Lakers.

But the Lakers are going to send Reeves away, and this wave of operation is very controversial. Reeves has been the Lakers' "Hexagon Warrior" in the past two years, averaging 18.5 points and 4.2 assists per game last season, and has never been bad in key battles. But the problem is the contract: The Lakers now give up to 80 million for four years (the average salary is 20 million), but if Reeves breaks out of the contract, he can get 120 million for four years. Instead of not being able to keep people, it is better to exchange for insiders while there is still trading value - this abacus, the Lakers management may have already done it.

The most exciting thing about this deal is Morant's trip to the Mavericks. Why does the Mavericks take this risk? Just look at Irving: 33-year-old Irving has been injured 52 games this season, and his three-point shooting percentage has dropped by 8 percentage points after his comeback. The Mavericks need to find Irving's "alternative solution". Although the 24-year-old Morant has been in trouble off the field (previous gun-carrying incidents, bans), his explosive power averaged 27 points and 6 assists per game at his peak can indeed be a "sword guard" for Doncic. However, the risk is obvious: if Morant makes trouble again, the Mavericks will be ruined.

The Grizzlies, sending Morant away for Reeves + Clay + Marshall, it's more like "get the thorns and change to stability". Morant has been making the Grizzlies very difficult in the past two years. Last season, the team's locker room has been in chaos. Reeves is young (28 years old), Clay has championship experience (34 years old but three-pointers are still stable), and Marshall can defend and shoot. The trio is calm and can just "reduce fire" for the Grizzlies. The only concern is Clay's health - he played the stop last season and the Grizzlies have to pray that he won't hurt anymore.

Some people say that this transaction is "each need", while others think it is "risk transfer". The Lakers bet that GFD can support the inside, the Mavericks bet that Morant can make a comeback, and the Grizzlies bet that Reeves + Clay can rebuild discipline. But the reality is that NBA trading has never been "stable profit" - for example, the Grizzlies exchange for Clay is equivalent to using potential for experience; the Mavericks take over Morant is equivalent to using the future to bet on the present.

Who do you think among these three teams is the biggest winner? Is it the Lakers who finally make up for the inside, or the Mavericks who bet on the young point guard? Or is it a grizzly bear who replaced the "time bomb"? Anyway, if this deal is done, the lively level of the West next season will probably double.

Statement: The information in this article comes from the Internet and is not guaranteed to be completely correct and is for reference only.