“BREAKING: The Dallas Mavericks are trading Luka Dončić, Maxi Kleber and Markieff Morris to the Los Angeles Lakers for Anthony Davis, Max Christie and a 2029 first-round pick, sources tell ESPN. Three-team deal that includes Utah.”
This post on X, from NBA reporter Shams Charania, dropped just after midnight on Feb. 2. The NBA world came to a screeching halt.
At first, fans and analysts assumed Charania had been hacked — the trade was too outrageous to be real. But as other reputable sources confirmed the deal, disbelief turned to chaos.
Emergency podcasts aired late into the morning, protests erupted in Dallas, and Mavericks General Manager Nico Harrison reportedly received death threats and hired personal security for safety.
The trade wasn’t just a blockbuster, it was an unmitigated disaster.
Fans scrambled for the right analogy — I think it’s something like trading a Lamborghini for a Honda Civic.
Behind this chaos lies Miriam Adelson, an industry in moral decline and the high-stakes battle over gambling laws in Texas.
Adelson, billionaire casino magnate and owner of the Dallas Mavericks, is not just another wealthy team owner — she inexplicably holds a Presidential Medal of Freedom, awarded by Donald Trump, after donating over $100 million to his political campaigns.
These donations were part of a quid pro quo arrangement, with Adelson leveraging her influence to push Trump toward supporting Israel’s illegal annexation of the Palestinian West Bank, according to Haaretz. She is a person who is willing to bribe a president to further war crimes and what Amnesty International has called a genocide. She is not losing sleep over the Luka Dončić trade.
Adelson’s interest in the Mavericks has never been about basketball — it’s about power and profit. The Las Vegas Sands Casino empire she inherited from her late husband, Sheldon Adelson, is eager to expand into Texas. Adelson attempted to buy the Texas state legislature to legalize gambling pouring millions into Texas election and lobbying groups.
For years, she has lobbied aggressively to legalize casinos in the state, eyeing Dallas as a prime location for a massive resort-style gambling complex, possibly tied to the Mavericks’ arena. But with Texas maintaining its long-standing prohibition on gambling, her ambitions of stealing from the working class have been stalled. So, what does a billionaire oligarch do when met with political resistance?
Here’s my theory — Adelson is deliberately sabotaging the Mavericks to gain political leverage, either to push for gambling legalization or to justify relocating the team to Las Vegas. Trading Luka Dončić in such a reckless manner destabilizes the Mavericks, weakening the team’s appeal in Dallas and creating the conditions for either outcome.
By gutting the franchise of its biggest star, Adelson can manufacture fan discontent, erode local political support for the team and pressure lawmakers to back casino legislation under the guise of “saving” Dallas sports.
If the Mavericks flounder post-trade, she can point to the team’s decline as justification for a move to Las Vegas, a rapidly expanding sports market where her Sands Corporation has deep financial interests.
Meanwhile, if Texas legislators fear losing a marquee franchise that generates an estimated $116 million annually for the Texas economy, they may be more inclined to pass gambling laws to keep the team profitable and competitive. Either outcome serves Adelson’s broader goals — she wins if she can legalize casinos in Texas, and she wins if she can move the Mavericks to a gambling empire she already controls.
Adelson has a history of political influence peddling, transactional relationships with world leaders and a cutthroat commitment to the accumulation of capital. Is it really that far-fetched that she would sabotage an NBA team’s championship window for financial gain?
Texas Governor Greg Abbott doesn’t seem to think so. Just days after the trade, he suddenly reversed his policy and announced his support for legalizing online gambling, a sector where Adelson has significant financial stakes.
Now, let’s be clear: there is no concrete evidence that this trade was part of a larger scheme. It is entirely possible that the Mavericks’ front office simply made a horrendous decision. Bad trades happen all the time.
I also want to be keenly aware of a variety of antisemitic tropes that exist around wealthy Jewish people — scrutiny of her actions, including her political donations and her role in the Mavericks’ decision-making, is not about her identity but about her immense power and the ways in which she wields it.
When billionaires leverage sports franchises as tools for financial and political gain, it is essential to ask hard questions about their motivations and the consequences of their actions.
This entire situation highlights a deeper issue with modern sports.
Many people, like myself, enjoy sports as a refuge from the ever-increasing terrors of the real world. But increasingly, they have become another battleground for corporate greed and political maneuvering.
Adelson’s involvement in the Mavericks is a stark example of this, where team-building decisions may be driven not by competition but by financial and political interests.
In an era where gambling companies hold immense sway over leagues and billionaire owners prioritize their broader ambitions over winning, the Mavericks’ trade of their franchise player forces us to confront an unsettling reality — teams may no longer be making moves with the goal of winning as long as they are victorious in a much larger game of power and profit.
