Why the Spurs Should Think Twice About an Anthony Davis Trade
The San Antonio Spurs have always done things their way. No flashy headlines.
No blockbuster deals just for the sake of it. Their stars-Tim Duncan, Manu Ginóbili, Tony Parker, Kawhi Leonard-were all homegrown.
And now, with Victor Wembanyama in the fold, the Spurs once again have a generational talent to build around. That’s why a recently proposed three-team trade involving Anthony Davis raised more than a few eyebrows.
Let’s break down the deal, and why it doesn’t quite add up for San Antonio.
The Mock Trade
San Antonio Spurs receive: Anthony Davis
Dallas Mavericks receive: Harrison Barnes, Keldon Johnson, Luke Kornet, 2026 second-round pick (via Jazz), 2028 and 2029 second-round picks (via Bulls), extinguish 2030 first-round swap rights
Chicago Bulls receive: Naji Marshall
The Case Against the Deal
At first glance, the idea of pairing Davis with Wembanyama might sound intriguing. Two elite bigs with defensive chops and offensive versatility?
That’s a frontcourt that could give opposing teams nightmares-at least on paper. But when you dig deeper, the fit gets murky fast.
Let’s start with the obvious: **Anthony Davis isn’t the player he once was. ** Injuries have taken a toll, and availability has become a major concern.
Davis still flashes brilliance-rim protection, switchability, mid-range touch-but he’s no longer the ironman you build a franchise around. And for a young Spurs team that’s starting to find its rhythm, shaking up the core for a high-risk, aging star feels like a step backward.
San Antonio would be giving up Keldon Johnson, a key piece of their young nucleus, Luke Kornet, a solid backup center who’s quietly done his job, and multiple picks that could be instrumental in shaping the team’s future. All that for a player who might not even be on the floor consistently? That’s a tough sell.
And let’s talk fit. Davis is most effective when playing center, but that’s also where Wembanyama thrives defensively.
The idea of Davis sliding into Kornet’s role as Wemby’s backup or occasional frontcourt partner sounds good in theory, but in practice? It’s a spacing and role overlap waiting to happen.
We already saw the challenges Wembanyama faced sharing the floor with Rudy Gobert internationally. Davis brings similar complications-just with more offensive upside and a longer injury history.
The Spurs’ Identity Matters
This isn’t just about basketball X’s and O’s. It’s about philosophy.
The Spurs have built their identity around patience, development, and continuity. They don’t chase names-they chase fit.
And right now, they’re not in desperation mode. Wembanyama is blossoming.
The young core is gaining confidence. There’s no need to force a shortcut.
Even ESPN’s Kevin Pelton, who floated the idea, acknowledged the trade benefits Dallas more than anyone else. The Mavericks get off salary and add depth, while the Bulls get a rotation piece in Naji Marshall.
But the Spurs? They’re the ones absorbing the risk.
Pelton argues that Davis could be an easier fit alongside De’Aaron Fox and Wembanyama because he doesn’t need the ball in his hands. He also paints an intriguing picture of Davis and Wembanyama running staggered screens with Fox or Dylan Harper.
Sure, that would be tough for defenses to navigate. But it also assumes Davis is healthy, engaged, and willing to take a secondary role-three things that haven’t always aligned in recent years.
Don’t Fix What Isn’t Broken
The bottom line? The Spurs don’t need to make a panic move.
They’re not in a title-or-bust window. They’re in a development phase, and it’s working.
Wembanyama is the real deal, and surrounding him with players who complement his game-not complicate it-should be the priority.
Anthony Davis is a big name, no doubt. But at this stage in his career, he’s more gamble than guarantee. And for a franchise that’s built on calculated, long-term thinking, this trade just doesn’t fit the blueprint.
San Antonio has options. They’ve got picks, cap space, and a budding superstar.
If they’re going to make a move, it should be one that accelerates the timeline without jeopardizing the foundation. This deal?
It’s not that.