The Mavs actually had Brunson and Dinwiddie, but let’s just leave it at Brunson for the sake of argument. The Mavs had what now appears to be a really good core around Luka a few years ago, but I guess they didn’t want to pay Brunson. After a series of trades, they ended up with Kyrie Irving.
The team looks good right now and Kyrie looks like he has accepted being Robin. Come playoff time, having a guy like Kyrie is going to be very valuable. He has experience and can take over games, especially when doncic is cold.
On the other hand, Brunson has been playing really well and looks good leading the Knicks offense alongside a cold-shooting Julius randle. I’m not sure that Brunson would be content ball watching on the Mavs and waiting for his turn like he would be on the Mavs.
My main argument for Brunson is that he is on his way up while Kyrie is on his way down. Kyrie, on the other hand, has been one of the best iso scorers in the league for a decade and seems to have accepted a backseat role.
Who would the Mavs rather have?
I’d rather have Brunson because he’s younger (meaning he lines up with Luka a bit more if you re-sign him), seems to be less injury prone, and is on a smaller contract. Also, he hasn’t shown himself to be a possible problem in the locker room like Kyrie has the potential to be.
As for current level of play, Kyrie is probably a bit better, but I’m a little suspicious that he might fall of earlier than people think. He’s already not the quickest guy in the league, and small, score first, guards who are poor on defense and tend to get injured often fall off fast.