The Mavericks are counting on Kyrie Irving to relieve Cooper Flagg
In what direction will it go Mavericks, now that Nico Harrison to the left and that Mark Cuban put one foot back in the decision-making circle? Build around Cooper Flagg seems the most logical, and the club would therefore be ready exchange Anthony Davis between now and the “trade deadline” to get back on good footing.
Contacted by The AthleticMark Cuban assures that, however, this is not the current vision of the club, which still hopes to turn things around, despite its disastrous start: 4 wins and 12 losses.
If Anthony Davis returns and Dallas finds the pack in the Western Conference, maybe Dallas will give this team a chance. On the other hand, if the team fails to turn things around…
Irving/Flagg duo to return?
anyway, according to Mark Steinif Anthony Davis’ future in Texas is uncertain, yes Kyrie Irving is safer. While he’s still recovering from a torn cruciate knee ligament, Jason Kidd hopes to see him again until the end of the yearthe playmaker would mesh especially well with Cooper Flagg in practice.
Under contract until 2027, with a ‘player option’ for the 2027/28 season, ‘Uncle Drew’ is therefore seen as the ideal player to unlock the potential of the first pick in the latest draft.
“Kai will fit perfectly with Cooper Flagg. In addition to his dribbling and scoring skills, he will also create space on the court for Cooper. And vice versa. Cooper will create space for Kai” the coach recently explained, eager to reunite with the 2016 champion… to put a smile back on the fans’ faces?
| Kyrie Irving | Percentage | Rebounds | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saison | The team | MJ | Min | Shots | 3pts | LF | Off | Def | That | Pd | Ft | Int | Bp | Ct | Pts |
| 2011-12 | CLE | 51 | 31 | 46.9 | 39.9 | 87.2 | 0.9 | 2.9 | 3.7 | 5.4 | 2.2 | 1.1 | 3.1 | 0.4 | 18.5 |
| 2012-13 ☆ | CLE | 59 | 35 | 45.2 | 39.1 | 85.5 | 0.6 | 3.1 | 3.7 | 5.9 | 2.5 | 1.5 | 3.2 | 0.4 | 22.5 |
| 2013-14 ☆ | CLE | 71 | 35 | 43.0 | 35.8 | 86.1 | 0.7 | 2.9 | 3.6 | 6.1 | 2.3 | 1.5 | 2.7 | 0.3 | 20.8 |
| 2014-15 ☆ | CLE | 75 | 36 | 46.8 | 41.5 | 86.3 | 0.7 | 2.4 | 3.2 | 5.2 | 1.9 | 1.5 | 2.5 | 0.3 | 21.7 |
| 2015-16 | CLE | 53 | 32 | 44.8 | 32.2 | 88.5 | 0.8 | 2.1 | 3.0 | 4.7 | 2.0 | 1.1 | 2.3 | 0.3 | 19.6 |
| 2016-17 ☆ | CLE | 72 | 35 | 47.3 | 40.1 | 90.5 | 0.7 | 2.5 | 3.2 | 5.8 | 2.2 | 1.2 | 2.5 | 0.3 | 25.2 |
| 2017-18 ☆ | BOS | 60 | 32 | 49.1 | 40.8 | 88.9 | 0.6 | 3.2 | 3.8 | 5.1 | 2.0 | 1.1 | 2.3 | 0.3 | 24.4 |
| 2018-19 ☆ | BOS | 67 | 33 | 48.7 | 40.1 | 87.3 | 1.1 | 3.9 | 5.0 | 6.9 | 2.5 | 1.5 | 2.6 | 0.5 | 23.8 |
| 2019-20 | BRK | 20 | 33 | 47.8 | 39.4 | 92.2 | 1.1 | 4.0 | 5.2 | 6.4 | 2.6 | 1.4 | 2.6 | 0.5 | 27.4 |
| 2020-21 ☆ | BRK | 54 | 35 | 50.6 | 40.2 | 92.2 | 1.0 | 3.8 | 4.8 | 6.0 | 2.6 | 1.4 | 2.4 | 0.7 | 26.9 |
| 2021-22 | BRK | 29 | 38 | 46.9 | 41.8 | 91.5 | 0.6 | 3.8 | 4.4 | 5.8 | 2.8 | 1.4 | 2.5 | 0.6 | 27.4 |
| 2022-23 * ☆ | All teams | 60 | 37 | 49.4 | 37.9 | 90.5 | 1.0 | 4.1 | 5.1 | 5.5 | 2.8 | 1.1 | 2.1 | 0.8 | 27.1 |
| 2022-23 * ☆ | BRK | 40 | 37 | 48.6 | 37.4 | 88.3 | 0.9 | 4.2 | 5.1 | 5.3 | 2.7 | 1.0 | 2.3 | 0.8 | 27.1 |
| 2022-23 * ☆ | DAL | 20 | 38 | 51.0 | 39.2 | 94.7 | 1.1 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 2.8 | 1.2 | 1.9 | 0.6 | 26.9 |
| 2023-24 | DAL | 58 | 35 | 49.7 | 41.1 | 90.5 | 0.8 | 4.2 | 5.0 | 5.2 | 1.9 | 1.3 | 1.8 | 0.5 | 25.6 |
| 2024-25 ☆ | DAL | 50 | 36 | 47.3 | 40.1 | 91.6 | 1.2 | 3.6 | 4.8 | 4.6 | 2.0 | 1.3 | 2.2 | 0.5 | 24.7 |
How to read statistics? MJ = matches played; Min = Minute; Shots = Shots Successful / Shots Attempted; 3 points = 3 points / attempt 3 points; LF = free throws made / free throws attempted; Off = offensive rebound; Def=defensive jump; Tot = Total number of jumps; Pd = assists; Fte: Personal mistakes; Int = intercepts; Bp = lost balls; Ct: Against; Points = Points.
2025-11-21 13:05:00
