Luka Doncic Is Causing Chaos in the NBA

Instead of focusing on which player fits best alongside the Slovenian, recent times have proven that it doesn’t matter – everything depends on him and his shooting, and opponents still don’t know how to handle it • Also: The economic phenomenon of college leagues and how Brooklyn sold games because they were too good

One of the biggest puzzles about Luka Dončić, from the day he arrived in the NBA until now, is the question of what players he needs around him. Who is the ultimate second or third star for such a player? At the beginning of his league career, the natural feeling was that he needed a tall player beside him. Kristaps Porzingis was brought to Dallas on a long-term contract, and several years were lost.

Later, the Mavericks even had great luck. Jalen Brunson, a second-round draft pick, suddenly emerged as a potential All-Star, and the team even reached the Western Conference Finals. The reaction? A feeling that Brunson was probably too good to play alongside Dončić in a similar role. Brunson was released, and New York built around him.

Then the Mavericks changed direction in a somewhat crazy move. Kyrie Irving, a ball-dominant player who had already failed to get along with LeBron James in Cleveland (towards the end), Jayson Tatum, and Kevin Durant – and the writing of failure was on the wall. Only it worked, and Dallas was only stopped in the finals against Boston.

Dallas lost the finals largely due to their front line. Their response? Adding Klay Thompson to the backcourt. In mid-November, with five losses in six games, it looked like a problematic experiment. Since then, the Mavericks have won 7 of 8, and the reason is right under the spotlight: sharp improvement from Dončić as the season progresses. From 38% shooting in October to 46% in November and 52% in December. For Thompson, by the way, an even steeper rise: from 35 to 50 percent between November and December.

Because somewhere in his seventh year in the league, Dončić is starting to be understood. He’s basketball’s great chaos agent, a player with illogical personal ability, without a defined role, representing a team without logic. Dallas has no player taller than 2.00 meters playing more than 23 minutes. So is it one of those teams that throws countless threes? Actually, no. A team that was second in the league in three-pointers last season dropped to 22nd place, right after bringing in Klay Thompson, one of the historical giants in this area. Confused? That’s exactly the point. A team almost without patterns, unnatural lineups, and this is definitely a problem. For the opponents.

The Economic Value of Higher Education

When college players fought for generations for their right to fair compensation for their efforts, it was often noted that they didn’t have money to eat. A practical problem. Healthy food for a professional athlete costs a lot of money, and when many come from poor backgrounds, this was a problem. The resonating symbol of hypocrisy was the punishment received by Michigan’s legendary basketball team in the nineties, with Chris Webber and Jalen Rose. Neighborhood kids who came to college and received a few pizzas from business owners. And maybe were loaned a car.

In 2021, the problem was solved. It’s now allowed to pay based salary and arrange sponsorship packages. Four years have passed, and Brigham Young University, with zero basketball history, manages to recruit A.J. Dybantsa – an amazing player from Massachusetts, 2.06m of athleticism and elegance, expected to be the first draft pick of 2026.

The sponsorship package? Something between 4 to 7 million dollars for the single year he’ll be in college. That’s more than enough for a few pizzas. He’s certainly not the first. Caitlin Clark, for example, earned more in college than she earns today in the WNBA. That makes sense: she was in a more popular league with a bigger audience. In a major magazine article, it was hinted that she took her entire college team on a yacht vacation in Croatia. Which is perfectly fine. The world should reward genius.

In the NBA they already earn more, but Dybantsa will earn something like between the fourth and seventh pick in the draft. And assuming the phenomenon will only expand, it might encourage more and more players to recognize the (economic) value of higher education. Theoretically, as the Clark case illustrated, there’s no limit to how much a college player can earn. Because it’s not a salary – it’s commercial sponsorship, usually from a business owned by one of the college’s alumni. Coming soon: negotiations between colleges and players not to enter the draft.

Not Good to Be Good

The first trade of December 15th, when players who signed this season are allowed to be traded, actually didn’t include such a player. Brooklyn traded Dennis Schröder, probably their best player, for… nothing. On the other side of the trade is D’Anthony Melton who ended the season with an ACL injury and some second-round picks.

Schröder’s value to the Warriors is quite clear. At age 31, he’s already on his eighth team. In Brooklyn’s case? Brooklyn was too good. Brooklyn invested tremendous efforts to control no less than four first-round picks in the upcoming draft, which is shaping up to be historic in quality. The unsolvable problem is that Phoenix, Milwaukee, and the Knicks are relatively good – and that’s where three such picks come from. So they’ll only come in the second part of the first round.

The solvable problem: Brooklyn itself is too good. They’re better than eight teams, and so their best player is released almost without compensation. The trade proved itself at breathtaking speed: already in the first game without Schröder, they were down by 32 at halftime, at home, to Cleveland, without detracting from the fact that they are of course a great team.

Sophisticated management, vision, complexity – just two issues: 1. Brooklyn will be incredibly lucky if more than one of the players they draft will actually be better than Dennis Schröder. 2. In the old national league, they would have called this selling games.