Luka’s 45-point revenge: Whitlock says Mavs trade is WAY deeper than just stupidity



On Wednesday, April 9, the Los Angeles Lakers and the Dallas Mavericks faced off on Dallas’ home court with the Lakers coming out victorious for the second time since Luka Dončić was traded to the team back in February. In the first game back in February, Dončić put up 19 points.

In the second game, however, his performance was truly astonishing. Dončić scored 45 points against his old team that traded him – a generational talent and the former face of the franchise – for 32-year-old Anthony Davis.

The trade has been condemned by many sports critics as the worst trade in NBA history. In response to Luka's staggering performance, ESPN analyst and former NBA player Jay Williams called the trade “basketball treason” and “self sabotage.” The scoreboard seems to confirm it.

Are the Mavs regretting their decision to let Luka go?

Well, that all depends on why they made the trade in the first place. Jason Whitlock and Jay Skapinac, host of “Skap Attack,” debate the real reason behind the Luka trade.

Skap chalks it up to pure stupidity on the part of Mav’s general manager Nico Harrison.

Harrison and Mavs ownership “lost their minds” when they traded Dončić – “an absolute generational star,” he says.

“The only two players ever to score at least 30 points per game in their playoff careers [are] Michael Jordan and Luka Dončić, and they trade that guy for Anthony Davis and one first round draft pick?” he asks in disbelief.

Skap predicts that the Mavs’ ship will sink early in the play-in tournament, if they can maintain their play-in position, while the Lakers, thanks to their new addition, may become “the best team in the Western conference.”

“Thanks for nothing, Nico Harrison and the Dallas Mavericks,” he sighs.

Whitlock, however, doesn’t think it’s that simple. Anybody who knows the basics of basketball understands that trading Luka is basketball suicide, so there must be another reason behind it.

Two theories have him interested.

Theory #1: The NBA pushed for the trade because they “wanted LeBron to have a playoff run.”

Theory #2: The trade was spurred by the owners — the Adelson family — who want to use the team to “leverage their way into a casino and new arena.”

“Blaming Nico is an easy way out,” says Whitlock.

To hear more of the debate, watch the clip above.

Want more from Jason Whitlock?

To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

In defense of the Dallas Mavericks



The Dallas Mavericks and Los Angeles Lakers shocked the entire sporting world on Sunday when they executed one of the biggest trades in NBA history. In it, the Mavericks shipped the league's reigning scoring champ, Luka Dončić, to the Lakers in exchange for a package headlined by 31-year-old Lakers star Anthony Davis.

Reaction around the league has been extremely negative toward the Mavericks for making the deal. Dallas fans, in particular, have reacted with stunned disbelief to losing a player who many assumed would take the mantle of long-term face of the franchise, much like Dirk Nowitzki before him. The general consensus among basketball critics seems to be that the Mavericks got rooked or at the very least should have held out for more.

If Harrison had any level of doubt about Dončić's long-term commitment to Dallas, unloading him now was definitely the right move.

Not so fast.

While shock and dismay over losing a generational talent like Dončić is a natural reaction from Dallas fans, you can make a decently convincing case that the Mavericks made themselves better — both in the short and long term — with this trade.

Dončić, admittedly, is a one-of-a-kind player in the modern NBA. In a league dominated by the three-point shot (more on that later), Dončić has turned himself into an unstoppable offensive force while driving to the basket. Watching Dončić attack a modern NBA defense is like watching a jackhammer attack a particularly pliant piece of concrete: he seemingly shuffles in, seemingly always finds an angle, and bulldozes his way into territory where he is literally unstoppable.

Once he has entered the key, he is more likely than not going to score and also more than likely going to draw a foul on one of your frontcourt defenders. To stop him, you have to utilize multiple extra defenders, which leads to potentially even worse results since Dončić is also an outstanding and creative passer. Every time Dončić has the ball in his hands, he is a problem that NBA defenses do not have an answer for. In this respect, his only NBA peer is the Milwaukee Bucks' Giannis Antetokounmpo.

Players like Dončić are simply not traded by NBA teams at the age of 25, especially when they are not in the final year of a contract. Finding a player like Dončić through the draft is the NBA equivalent of hitting the lottery — it is the hope that causes NBA teams to stockpile first-round draft picks in the first place. And as evidenced by the Mavericks' trip to the NBA finals last year, there's solid evidence available that a team built around Dončić as a cornerstone can meaningfully compete for an NBA title right now.

Making a championship team

Dallas fans' reaction to losing Dončić is an understandable one, but there are solid reasons to think Mavericks general manager Nico Harrison made the right move. The reason for that begins with a talent that Anthony Davis brings to the court — one that might well be far more valuable than any of the things even a player like Dončić brings to the court.

Considerable ink has been spilled over the last few years about the number of three-point shots in the NBA. Much of the criticism of modern NBA offenses is overly simplistic and ill informed. In my view, as someone who actually watches a fair number of NBA games, NBA offenses are as varied and creative as they ever have been. However, one thing is inexorably true: NBA offenses are shooting many more three-pointers, and the number of those only goes up in every year that goes by.

But while the Boston Celtics breezed to the NBA title last year on the strength of an unprecedented barrage of three-point shooting, the Celtics (who have been largely healthy and returned the same roster from last year) are at best the third-best team in this year's NBA. One of the teams that has been clearly better than the Celtics this year has been the Mavericks' division rivals, the Oklahoma City Thunder.

Like everyone else, the Thunder shoot a lot of threes, relative to any NBA team from 10 years ago. Relative to other teams in the current league, the Thunder do not shoot very many threes and are not particularly successful when they do shoot. They are 16th out of 30 teams in three-point rate this year, and they are merely 18th out of 30 in three-point efficiency.

The reason the Thunder are compiling one of the best point differentials in NBA history this year is pretty simple and well understood by other NBA general managers: They have stockpiled an almost unbelievable collection of elite perimeter defenders. These defenders do not merely attack passing lanes and gun for steals; rather, they actually block and alter shots from beyond the three-point arc.

The standout in this category is the spindly Chet Holmgren, a 7'1" shot-blocking menace who has disrupted three-point shooters all season. Unfortunately, injuries have sidelined him for significant stretches. When healthy, however, he has averaged an impressive 2.6 blocks per game — many of them on three-point attempts.

But the Thunder’s commitment to contesting long-range shots goes far beyond their 7-footer. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, a 6'6" MVP candidate, has garnered plenty of attention for leading the league in scoring. Yet in interviews, he takes more pride in ranking among the league leaders in steals while also averaging a blocked shot per game.

Lu Dort, a 6'4" defensive specialist, nearly matches that mark, averaging almost a block per game. Off the bench, Alex Caruso (6'5") and Cason Wallace (6'4") each contribute more than half a block per game, adding to the team’s relentless defensive presence.

From top to bottom, Oklahoma City’s roster is packed with defenders at every position who can make shooters think twice before letting it fly. This season, the Thunder are proving to the basketball world that aggressive perimeter defense is a formula for winning — one that is paying off in a big way.

And, if the tropes are to be believed, for league championships.

Questions of health

This reality was clearly front and center in Harrison's mind when he pulled off the trade. "I believe that defense wins championships," Harrison said, by way of explaining himself to a furious Dallas fan base. "I believe that getting an All-Defensive center and an All-NBA player with a defensive mindset gives us a better chance. We’re built to win now and in the future."

This explanation has been widely panned by Mavericks nation, but Harrison is on firmer ground than many Dallas fans are giving him credit for. Advanced metrics and old-school metrics both rate Davis as a far better defender than Dončić. But more importantly, Davis is a player who can really and truly alter every three-point shot taken within his vicinity. How long is the list of such players? It probably includes Davis, Holmgren, and San Antonio phenom Victor Wembanyama. End of list. Others can block reasonable numbers of shots close to the basket. Those who can reliably swat multiple three-pointers out of the air per game are still unicorns. But smart GMs who see what havoc guys like Davis, Holmgren, and Wemby can wreak on a modern NBA offense are doubtless in agreement: Unicorns are great, and you should get one on your team if at all possible.

The value of Davis' defensive presence, when healthy, probably cannot be overstated. Additionally, it should be noted that Davis is no offensive slouch. On a per-game basis, he scores at roughly the same clip as Kevin Durant. He can shoot from range, he can drive the basket in isolation, and he is a lethal pick-and-roll partner. In the present NBA, if both Dončić and Davis were healthy and I had to choose one to help me win a playoff game, I would personally pick Davis, as genius as Dončić's offensive ability is.

There are two major reasons, however, for skepticism about what the Mavericks have done. The first is that everything I've said about Davis has been preceded by the phrase "when healthy." The problem with Davis is and always has been that he's frequently not healthy. Over the last three seasons, Davis has missed an average of 24 games per year, which means that he's been unavailable roughly one-third of the time.

The other major reason is somewhat related to the first: Dončić is 25 and Davis is 31. Across all American professional sports, athletes tend to reach peak professional performance at age 26 or 27, which means that Dončić is on the right side of the aging curve while Davis is four full years on the wrong side of it. I think that Davis is currently a better overall player than Dončić, when healthy, although some might disagree. However, I think two years from now it's highly unlikely that that will still be true. Every year that goes by in the future, the normal expectation is that Dončić's performance will exceed Davis' by a wider margin. Even the best-case scenario for the Mavs would concede that in three years, Dončić will almost certainly be a much better player than Davis.

A tough call on the title trail

Good reasons exist to question Dončić’s long-term future with the Mavericks. The most obvious is his contract situation. His current deal effectively runs through next season, with a player option for the following year. When that contract expires, he could walk away in free agency, leaving Dallas with nothing in return.

Assessing the likelihood of that outcome remains difficult. Dončić has never publicly indicated unhappiness in Dallas or signaled an intent to aggressively test free agency. However, Harrison likely had insight into Dončić’s mindset that extended beyond public perception. He may have believed Dončić felt frustrated with the Mavericks’ title-chasing efforts.

Even if he had no such information from Dončić, the threat of it must have loomed large in Harrison's mind. And every month closer to the end of Dončić's contract likely reduced the return the Mavs would get for him as a trade asset. If we can imagine a world in which Dončić told Harrison, even privately, that he intended to test the free agent market during next season, there is no circumstance in which he could expect to receive a player of Davis' quality in addition to a first-round pick for Dončić on the trade market.

If Harrison had any level of doubt about Dončić's long-term commitment to Dallas, unloading him now was definitely the right move.

The second concerns the other stated reason the Mavs entered into this trade: concerns about Dončić's conditioning. I don't know how truthful Harrison's remarks and the leaks from the Dallas camp have been when it comes to Dončić's commitment to maintaining his body in NBA shape. I doknow that despite being a young player, Dončić regularly misses games due to various ailments. He has not played more than 70 games in a season since his rookie year. This year, he won't play in 60. You don't have to squint very hard at Dončić's career to see a player who is likely to become every bit as much of an injury concern as Davis has been, sooner rather than later. As the Philadelphia 76ers are currently demonstrating with Joel Embiid, building a franchise around a player who regularly misses a third of the season or more is a losing proposition, no matter how talented that player is.

At the end of the day, I think it's fair to ask whether the Mavs could have gotten more draft pick capital out of this trade. I think if the Mavs had been free to talk more openly with other teams about the possibility of the trade, or if they had been willing to accept more draft picks in exchange for a lower caliber of current player than Davis, then those are valid concerns. But from Harrison's standpoint, the view that the Mavericks are title contenders isn't a crazy one, even if they are currently eighth in the Western Conference standings. The Mavericks have performed very well in a tough conference despite the fact that their star player has missed more than half this season's games thus far.

The Mavs plus Davis remind you an awful lot of the Thunder and probably pose the most serious threat to the Thunder's own title run. I don't know that they can beat the Thunder (or Cavs or Celtics), but I think it's reasonable to dream that they can. And in such a universe, making this trade does make some level of sense.

If I had been in Harrison’s position last weekend, deciding on this trade would have been tough. I probably would have hesitated to make the move. But Harrison no doubt has access to more inside information on key factors, such as Dončić’s health and long-term satisfaction in Dallas.

Given that context, five years from now, we may look back and conclude that Harrison and the Mavericks deserve an apology for all the criticism they are currently facing.

Will Luka Dončić’s 'case of the flops' cost the Mavs the NBA championship tonight?



The Dallas Mavericks have now lost three consecutive games to the Boston Celtics in the 2024 NBA finals. If Boston wins tonight, the hopes of an NBA championship, which hasn’t happened since 2011, are dashed for Mavs fans.

NBA sports writer Brian Windhorst pointed at the Mav’s all-star point guard, Luka Dončić, as the reason the team has not prevailed against the Celtics.

“His defensive performance is unacceptable. He is a hole on the court ... [The Celtics] are ahead in this series because they have attacked [Dončić] defensively,” Windhorst reported, adding that Dončić is also “costing the team because of how he treats the officials.”

Windhorst even went as far as saying that Dončić is “the reason why the Mavericks are not going to win” the series.

“There were some uncalled fouls in that game that could’ve gone Luka’s way,” says Blaze Media’s sports expert Jason Whitlock. However, he also acknowledges that the superstar is guilty of “flopping,” “[baiting the referees],” and “trying to draw all these fouls.”

“Luka Dončić has an acute case of the flops,” he says, playing a clip of the athlete’s dramatic tumbles from the last game.

Jay Skapinac, the voice behind Skap Attack agrees.

“Luka came into the series with a lot of shine on him,” he tells Jason. “It looked like he was getting ready to insinuate himself into that best player in the world type conversation in my estimation.”

However, in light of the last three games, “there is no denying that Luca has been absolutely pitiful throughout the course of this series.”

What’s strange is that “many would take a look at just the raw box score and say 30 points per game, nine rebounds a game, six assists, two and a half steals, 47% and think what a great series this guy's playing.”

According to Jay, however, Luka is “unmitigated trash whenever it matters most in the fourth quarters,” which is evidenced by the fact that he’s shot “three of 15 in the fourth quarters” of the last three matches and was “loafing up and down the court on defense.”

“This guy is the European LeBron James,” he criticizes.

To hear the rest of the conversation and predictions for tonight’s match, watch the clip below.


Want more from Jason Whitlock?

To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

WATCH: Dallas Mavs CEO openly admits she fires anyone who doesn’t support woke protocols



Rather than focusing on being the best basketball team in the NBA, the Dallas Mavericks are more focused on implementing DEI and other woke practices.

The team’s CEO, Cynt Marshall, says so herself. Dave Rubin plays the video of her boldly stating she will not hesitate to get rid of anyone who opposes DEI protocols.

“We wanted to also focus on emotional safety, and I told the team these values would be on the walls, but more importantly, they would operate in the halls,” Marshall explained, “so then we went through a series of sessions to really dig into those values and what it meant to have values-based employment at the Dallas Mavericks.”

Marshall then implemented a “100 days plan” designed to “model zero tolerance.” Part of this plan included a “hotline” and a “complaint process” that would allow her to “purge what [she] needed to purge,” insinuating that she fires anyone who isn’t on board with her woke protocols.

Another part of the plan was to implement a “Mav’s women’s agenda” that revolved around “elevating, empowering, and educating women,” as well as emphasize “cultural transformation, which is all the things around diversity and inclusion.”

According to Marshall, her “200 initiatives” were necessary to “institutionalize an inclusive culture.”

“This is the CEO of the Dallas Mavericks,” sighs Dave. “Her job is to make the Dallas Mavericks basketball team as functional as possible, to win as much as possible, to make as much money as possible, to bring in the proper coach, proper GM ... so they have the best freaking basketball team.”

And yet, “everything she talked about there had nothing to do with that.”


Want more from Dave Rubin?

To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

'The loss of DEI-Phobic companies is my gain': Mark Cuban defends diversity programs as good business practice



Billionaire entrepreneur Mark Cuban defended diversity, equity, and inclusion as a business strategy in a thread of comments where he explained his interpretation of what the controversial programs mean.

Cuban was responding on X to owner Elon Musk who had described DEI as "racism" the day before.

"DEI is just another word for racism. Shame on anyone who uses it," Musk wrote in a post on X. "Discrimination on the basis of race, which DEI does, is literally the definition of racism," he noted in another post.

Directly replying to Musk, the tech mogul explained what he thought defined each portion of DEI.

For diversity, Cuban simply stated that businesses should look to hire diverse work forces to "put your business in the best possible position to succeed."

"You may not agree, but I take it as a given that there are people of various races, ethnicities, orientation, etc that are regularly excluded from hiring consideration," Cuban continued. He went on to conclude that simply extending hiring searches to include such people means more qualified individuals would be found.

"The loss of DEI-Phobic companies is my gain," he added.

Let me help you out and give you my thoughts on DEI\n1. Diversity\nGood businesses look where others don't, to find the employees that will put your business in the best possible position to succeed. \nYou may not agree, but I take it as a given that there are people of various\xe2\x80\xa6
— (@)

"Treating people equally does not mean treating them the same," Cuban said for equity. The billionaire then explained that employers should put their employees "in a position to succeed."

"Recognize their differences and play to their strengths where ever possible."

It is important to note that typical DEI programs do not define equity as allowing employees to succeed; it is usually related to providing advantages based on race or other immutable characteristics, theoretically to make up for prior alleged injustices.

For example, the National Association of Colleges and Employers describes equity in part as attempting to "identify and overcome intentional and unintentional barriers arising from bias or systemic structures."

Inclusion, which is often used to justify the hiring of an employee based on their race or sexual orientation, was described by Cuban as "making all employees, no matter who they are or how they see themselves, feel comfortable in their environment and able to do their jobs."

The "Shark Tank" star concluded by throwing to the replies to his thread, seemingly implying that DEI programs are needed due to certain "feelings" that are expressed in the workplace:

5. So what's the conclusion ?
If you don't think there is a need for DEI and it doesn't create a competitive advantage for your company, just look at the @x posts/replies/quotes below.

These are the same people that work for you or are your co-workers. Everyone is…
— Mark Cuban (@mcuban) January 3, 2024

Many notable respondents did not agree with Cuban's framing of the DEI definitions:

"Mark you are defining words in a way nobody else does, and certainly not how they put them into practice," said commentator Dave Rubin.

"Unclear if you're being dishonest here, redefining words to win a twitter argument, or if you truly just have no idea how DEI has worked throughout the country. but 'equity' in practice has meant race-based hiring quotas and bonuses. it is evil," added Mike Solana, editor in chief of tech brand Pirate Wires.

@mcuban @stclairashley Mark you are defining words in a way nobody else does, and certainly not how they put them into practice.
— (@)

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

CVS’s Shift In Drug Markups Could Stop Big Pharma’s Price Gouging

If other companies follow CVS’s lead, patients should benefit from lower prices.

Mark Cuban stopped playing the national anthem at Mavericks' games. Texas Republicans hit back by passing new bill.



Mark Cuban's Dallas Mavericks stopped playing the national anthem before their NBA home games in February, in what is believed to be the first professional sports team to ban "The Star-Spangled Banner" before games. Texas Republicans were dismayed that the Mavericks wouldn't play the national anthem before their games, so they hit back at Cuban where it hurts: in the purse strings.

"The Mavericks did not publicize the anthem's removal," The Athletic writer Tim Cato reported in February of the NBA team's decision to stop playing the national anthem. "Multiple team employees described only noticing the anthem's removal on their own, as it was also not announced or explained internally."

Cuban attempted to justify not playing the national anthem in 11 regular-season games in February.

"We respect and always have respected the passion people have for the anthem and our country. I have always stood for the anthem with the hand over my heart — no matter where I hear it played," Cuban told NPR. "But we also hear the voices of those who do not feel the anthem represents them. We feel they also need to be respected and heard, because they have not been heard. The hope is that those who feel passionate about the anthem being played will be just as passionate in listening to those who do not feel it represents them."

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick was outraged that the Dallas Mavericks stopped playing "The Star-Spangled Banner," and fired off a rebuttal to Cuban.

"Your decision to cancel our National Anthem at @dallasmavs games is a slap in the face to every American & an embarrassment to Texas," Patrick tweeted. "Sell the franchise & some Texas Patriots will buy it. We ARE the land of free & the home of the brave."

With pushback from the NBA, the Mavericks resumed playing the national anthem on Feb. 10.

In March, Republican state Rep. Dustin Burrows reacted by sponsoring Senate Bill 4, also known as the "Star-Spangled Banner Act." The bill allows sports franchises the option to play or not play the national anthem, but teams who don't play "The Star-Spangled Banner" will forgo any funding from the state.

"It's very simple. If they do not want to play the national anthem, they don't take the tax dollars," Burrows said, according to the Texas Tribune. "If we're going to go ahead and subsidize with hard-earned American dollars the sporting facilities and the teams in the different ways that I think is articulated in this bill, then this would apply."

Texas Republicans passed "The Star Spangled Banner Act" on Tuesday, and the bill now heads to the desk of Gov. Greg Abbott to be signed into law.

However, opponents of Senate Bill 4 question the constitutionality of the legislation, and whether linking funding to the playing of the national anthem is an attack on free speech.

"Once again, we're carrying legislation that is openly and aggressively unconstitutional," Democratic state Rep. Gene Wu said.

During the debate over the "The Star-Spangled Banner Act" on Monday, Texas Democrats proposed that teams be required to play both the "Star-Spangled Banner" and "Lift Every Voice and Sing," which is the so-called "black national anthem."

"I don't even understand why we would feel the need to force someone into singing any song," Rep. Jasmine Felicia Crockett said. "But if we are going to force people to sing a song, we should at least be mindful of the people playing on these teams, the people that are actually in the stands supporting these teams."

Despite the decision by the Mavericks, the Texas Rangers and Dallas Stars both pledged to play "The Star-Spangled Banner" before games this season.

'We as a country haven’t lived up to our highest ideals': Biden backs athletes' right to protest during national anthem, Psaki says



On the heels of the NBA's roller-coaster ride this week over the playing of "The Star-Spangled Banner," White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Thursday told reporters that while President Joe Biden respects the national anthem, he also respects the right of players to kneel in protest while it's played.

What are the details?

A reporter asked Psaki what position Biden is taking on Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban reportedly deciding to stop playing the anthem before his squad's home games.

While Psaki said she hasn't spoken to Biden about the specific issue, she did say, "I know he's incredibly proud to be an American and has great respect for the anthem and all that it represents — especially for our men and women serving in uniform around the world."

She added, however, that Biden also would say "that part of pride in our country means recognizing moments where we as a country haven't lived up to our highest ideals, which is often and at times what people are speaking to when they take action at sporting events. And it means respecting the right of people, granted to them in the Constitution, to peacefully protest. That's why he ran for president in the first place, and that's what he's focused on doing every day."

MARK CUBAN/NATIONAL ANTHEM: Jen Psaki: “I know [President Biden's] incredibly proud to be an American and has great… https://t.co/QvYeVIF2Af
— Forbes (@Forbes)1613058300.0

What's the background?

After the anthem has't being played before Mavericks home games, the National Basketball Association on Wednesday issued a statement saying the anthem indeed will be played at every league game for every team.

According to MarketWatch, the league's statement was "in response" to the Mavericks' omitting the anthem. And it was quite a shift from NBA spokesman Tim Frank's earlier statement to the Associated Press, according to NBC Sports: "Under the unique circumstances of this season, teams are permitted to run their pregame operations as they see fit."

The New York Times reported that Cuban said "we are good with it" in regard to the league's insistence on the anthem being played — but the opinionated owner reportedly had other things to say following the NBA's declaration.

Shams Charania of the Athletic tweeted a partial statement from the Mavericks owner: "We respect and always have respected the passion people have for the anthem and our country. I have always stood for the anthem with [my] hand over my heart — no matter where I hear it play. But we also hear the voices of those who do not feel the anthem represents them. We feel they also need to be respected and heard, because they have not been heard."

Cuban reportedly added in the statement that "the hope is that those who feel passionate about the anthem being played will be just as passionate in listening to those who do not feel it represents them," Charania noted.

NBA says national anthem will be played before games — reportedly in response to Mark Cuban saying Mavericks weren't playing it



That didn't take long.

On the heels of Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban saying the national anthem wasn't being played before his team's home games, the National Basketball Association on Wednesday issued a statement saying the anthem indeed will be played.

"With NBA teams now in the process of welcoming fans back into their arenas, all teams will play the national anthem in keeping with longstanding league policy," NBA Chief Communications Officer Mike Bass said in a statement.

According to MarketWatch, the league's statement was "in response" to Cuban's anthem revelation.

NBA announces all teams will play national anthem in keeping with longstanding league policy. https://t.co/h66Q7sm7Ge
— Josh Caplan (@Josh Caplan)1612984327.0

Which is quite a shift from NBA spokesman Tim Frank's earlier statement to the Associated Press, according to NBC Sports: "Under the unique circumstances of this season, teams are permitted to run their pregame operations as they see fit."

Did Cuban have anything else to say?

The New York Times reported that Cuban said "we are good with it" in regard to the league's insistence on the anthem being played:

Mavericks owner Mark Cuban to @NYTSports on the league's decision to mandate the playing of the national anthem bef… https://t.co/9cOePDPYcD
— Marc Stein (@Marc Stein)1612983882.0

But as you might expect, the opinionated owner reportedly had other things to say following the NBA's declaration.

Shams Charania of the Athletic tweeted that "Cuban and the Dallas Mavericks will resume playing the Anthem tonight vs. Atlanta."

Charania added a partial statement from Cuban: "We respect and always have respected the passion people have for the anthem and our country. I have always stood for the anthem with [my] hand over my heart — not matter where I hear it play. But we also hear the voices of those who do not feel the anthem represents them. We feel they also need to be respected and heard, because they have not been heard."

Cuban reportedly added in the statement that "the hope is that those who feel passionate about the anthem being played will be just as passionate in listening to those who do not feel it represents them."

Mark Cuban and the Dallas Mavericks will resume playing the Anthem tonight vs. Atlanta. Statement from Cuban, in pa… https://t.co/iq3mjqWfPC
— Shams Charania (@Shams Charania)1612984432.0

Anything else?

NBC Sports added that the Mavericks didn't play "The Star-Spangled Banner" through 11 home games this season and were the only NBA team to not play it — and that the decision was a direct order from Cuban. The outlet added that "there was no discussion of this because there were no fans in the building, and since the anthem is rarely shown on broadcasts it was barely noticed."

The Los Angeles Times said Cuban said last year in the Florida bubble that players and coaches have the right to kneel during the anthem. The paper said Cuban wrote — in a since-deleted tweet from July — that the "National Anthem Police in this country are out of control. If you want to complain, complain to your boss and ask why they don't play the National Anthem every day before you start work."

Cuban told the New York Times on Tuesday night that he told the Mavericks to stop playing the anthem before its home games — and that "it was my decision, and I made it in November." He declined to comment further, the paper said.