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?
He's checked all those boxes so far in Dallas.
Kidd gets absolutely hated on in /r/mavericks, but in Dallas he has been the very definition of a player's coach. Everyone loves him, and finds him relatable and the team culture has always been good under him, even if the team hasn't been that good. Kyrie has stated repeatedly he likes playing under Kidd, even joking with a smile on his face about having practices on days he wishes they had off.
Which is a long way of saying that Kyrie seems very comfortable in Dallas (he also has a seemingly pleasant relationship with the local media), with his role next to Luka and as a veteran, and with the Mavs org.
Yeah I don’t understand why Kidd got so much hate last season. Not his fault the FO let Brunson walk for nothing and they had to trade whatever defense they had left for Kyrie, on top of the fact that their best big man was Dwight Powell.
Now look, they made moves to improve the team around Luka and Kyrie and it’s paying off so far