To the well-trained eye, Denver figured to be one of the epicenters of this NBA offseason.

With two starters due for a combined $25.8 million salary increase, and with a potential rising star on the bench determined to land a lucrative contract extension, something had to give. The Nuggets were about to get too expensive for owner Stan Kroenke to stomach. Especially after their debacle of a playoff run, which ended before it could begin.

This was the prevailing sentiment for two months leading up to free agency. Almost all Nuggets-related chatter, both inside and outside Ball Arena, was about which player(s) they would sacrifice in a trade. Team president Josh Kroenke poured jet fuel on the rumor mill when he declared in May that “everything is on the table” except trading three-time MVP center Nikola Jokic.

Another high-ranking official in the Kroenke sports empire, Kevin Demoff, had hinted months earlier that Denver’s inclination might be to avoid the luxury tax entirely next season as to avoid paying the NBA’s punitive “repeater tax” rates. That was long before the Nuggets revealed to their power brokers that they were nowhere close to championship-worthy.

So, uh, what’s going on in Denver?

More than a week since the league’s free agency period began, most teams have completed their offseason business. The Nuggets have been puzzlingly idle. A few highlights so far: Tim Hardaway Jr. leaving for Miami as expected, Jonas Valanciunas getting waived for salary cap relief as expected, Marvin Bagley III and Tyus Jones signing one-year deals.

Going all-in or playing it conservatively?

Something doesn’t add up. As in, it adds up to a sum that continues to leave most NBA observers skeptical. Denver is leaving everyone guessing right now, even other teams.

Should fans be frustrated by the lack of action? Encouraged by it? Or is everything simply on hold?

There are two sides to this to unpack: the financial and basketball perspectives. They’re obviously intertwined, but when trying to make sense of this situation, it’s best to start with the financial side, because that was an obstacle that seemed to be motivating Denver’s roster decisions even before the on-court problems that emerged against Minnesota.

Before last season, the Nuggets were choosing between two extension-eligible 2022 draftees who had one year remaining on their rookie contracts: Christian Braun and Peyton Watson. They chose Braun, the more proven player at that point, an efficient 15-point-per-game starter the previous season, and a strong (if flawed) defender. They signed him to a five-year deal that would go into effect in 2026. They felt comfortable taking Watson to restricted free agency and maybe even losing him. Three years into his career, he seemed to be developing into a solid 3-and-D bench player, and maybe not much more than that.

The Nuggets were looking ahead to their 2026-27 payroll and didn’t want to commit large chunks of money to both players. Watson told The Denver Post in October: “From what I understand, it was just a financial business decision. Obviously, with the new CBA and the second apron, things of that nature, they wanted to stay out of that.”

Braun went on to have an injury-riddled season, the worst of his career. Watson had the best season of his career, particularly by showcasing his off-the-dribble ability when Jokic was hurt in January.

And so the Nuggets knew they would be entering the 2026 offseason with six starter-level players whose combined salary would result in a roster payroll above all three tax thresholds: the luxury tax ($200.4 million), first apron ($209 million) and second apron ($221.7 million). They wanted to keep Watson, recognizing the importance of his two-way talent and athleticism. They signaled as much to other teams.

If their previous actions had already indicated they were prepared to sacrifice him to stay under the second apron, then changing course and keeping him would surely mean sacrificing someone else.

This was the foundational logic that led people around the NBA to believe they were almost guaranteed to trade a starter. An oversimplification of the salary cap math looked like this: Lose one of your six starter-level players to get under the second apron, or lose two to duck the tax entirely. Perhaps other creative ways to shed salary would emerge, but this was the basic state of the union. Jon Wallace and Ben Tenzer would be tasked with threading the needle between cutting payroll and improving the roster.

From this perspective, the fact that Denver has not traded any of the six starter-level players yet can ironically be interpreted as an aggressive stance, not a conservative one. The moves that were expected to have happened by now would’ve been motivated primarily by money, not purely by basketball. Could it be that the Kroenkes are going all-in to chase a second championship? Suddenly, in the last few days, there’s been reporting from national media outlets such as The Athletic that “Denver’s ownership has not given its front office a mandate to cut costs.” The Post has been told similarly.

But that didn’t seem to be the case three weeks ago when the Nuggets were actively exploring the trade market for Braun and Cam Johnson, as The Post and other outlets reported.

What can it mean? Maybe there’s been a change of heart, and an executive decision has been made to spend lavishly. Maybe it’s connected to the team’s pursuit of LeBron James in free agency (how do you even begin to pitch him on coming to Denver if you’re not willing to pay up?), or maybe it’s a reaction to Jokic’s decision to wait one more year to sign a new extension. As direct as he was in publicly stating his plan to sign next summer, maybe the pressure of him entering the last guaranteed season of his current contract scared the Nuggets straight.

Maybe this is an earnest, full-throttle statement of championship intent.

Or maybe the abrupt timing of this leakage is a little too convenient.

Gauging the Watson market

The Nuggets have multiple reasons to want the rest of the NBA to believe they’re working with a blank check right now. One of those reasons: Watson.

Negotiations have clearly not gone smoothly. The line of demarcation is $25 million. That’s Braun’s average annual value on his new contract — the deal Denver prioritized over Watson — and now it’s the number Watson’s camp can fixate on. His side can point to last season and claim that going forward, he is worth the same amount or more. The Nuggets can point to the previous three years and say Braun’s overall body of work is better so far. As this is happening, another team is reportedly lingering, with a desire to poach Watson. The Clippers reside in his hometown, and they’ve already made moves this summer to get younger and clear their books.

Watson is a restricted free agent, meaning the Clippers must extend him an offer sheet, the terms of which Denver can match to retain him. Offer-sheeting a player can be risky because it ties down your cap until the situation is resolved, with no guarantee that you will successfully land the player you’re targeting. The Nuggets are saying behind the scenes that they’re prepared to match any offer sheet. Basically, they’re trying to scare off LA (and any other suitor) by indicating the offer sheet would be a waste of time, and the only real way to get Watson from them is to execute a sign-and-trade, sending Denver other assets in exchange for the right to sign the RFA. Utah just did this with Walker Kessler, who ended up with the Lakers via sign-and-trade. How can you bolster your leverage in a situation like this? By signaling publicly that you’re willing to pay an exorbitant payroll and tax bill to keep Watson and everyone else.

This also sends a message that you aren’t desperate to trade a starter (or two) to keep Watson — that you’re more than happy to hold on to Johnson, Braun, Aaron Gordon, or Jamal Murray if the offer isn’t strong enough.

If there is a spending mandate, then other teams might look to take advantage with low-ball trade offers.

So maybe the lack of a spending mandate could turn out to be a bluff for leverage. Or maybe it’s a real edict, a genuine commitment to competitiveness at all costs. There’s almost no way to know for sure until the Nuggets take an action to back up their words. For now, inaction has the appearance of aggression, as Denver attempts to feel out the market.

Certainly, it seems like the key domino will be how the Watson dilemma works itself out — either in the form of a contract extension, or an unmatched offer sheet, or a sign-and-trade, or a begrudgingly accepted qualifying offer ($6.5 million).

ESPN front office expert Bobby Marks (a former NBA executive) projected this week that if the Nuggets retain Watson at a $25 million cap hit and don’t trade any starters, their luxury tax bill next season would exceed $170 million — an almost unprecedented amount that includes second apron and repeater tax penalties. That’s in addition to what the raw roster payroll would be.

Between player salaries and taxes, it would be a $400 million team.

Which finally brings us to the basketball perspective on Denver’s offseason holding pattern. It would be one thing to pay that much if the Nuggets had just lost the NBA Finals in a tight six-game series with their current roster — if they knew for a fact that a championship was barely out of reach last season.

But the Nuggets didn’t make the Finals. They didn’t win a single playoff series. They lost in the first round to an injured opponent. They weren’t close.

DENVER — Denver Mayor Mike Johnston is launching a $100 million plan to boost the local economy and support 10,000 jobs over the next three years.

Johnston announced the four-part program Thursday morning, flanked by business leaders while praising downtown businesses like brunch eatery Snooze.

▶️ WATCH: Denver7’s Alex Dowd reports on the plan

Denver mayor promises to create 10K jobs in next 3 years

Snooze Co-Founder Adam Schlegel said his business benefited from a similar program when U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper was mayor in the early 2000s.

“The city really was the one that stepped up,” Schlegel said. “We wouldn’t have started if it wouldn’t have been for the economic development office. We ended up getting an incentive from the city to open up, particularly in this space [downtown]. It was a fiscal incentive to do it, in addition to coaching.”

Both of those are offered in the new four-part Denver Jobs Agenda. With funding from the Denver Downtown Development Authority and the Office of Economic Development and Opportunity, Johnston aims to develop start-ups in the city, grow existing businesses and draw in new companies while working to advance the Denver-area workforce across industries.

At the end of the last fiscal quarter, Denver’s unemployment rate hovered around 3.6% — under the national rate of 4.2% — according to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, while office vacancy sits just under 40%, according to commercial real estate broker CBRE.

Johnston and other speakers made multiple references to more jobs bringing more people downtown.

“Denver has so many things going for it, so it will come back,” Schlegel said. “It’s not coming back as fast as I want, or as much as anyone will, but will it have a long-term future? 100%. It’s things like this, though, that I think give us a lot of hope that it can happen sooner than waiting it out.”

▶️ Watch the full press conference

Press conference: Denver mayor announces Denver Jobs Agenda

Chris Berthiaume, the city’s director of workforce industry initiatives, says the three workforce development centers across Denver serve around 20,000 people each year. He’s confident this new initiative will help more of those visitors find employment.

“We want to focus on things like aerospace, cybersecurity, green construction,” Berthiaume said. “This new initiative really just tightens the focus on sectors that we know are growing. Colorado is home to a huge aerospace culture. Quantum technology is emerging and coming. Green workforce are jobs that we know drive around Denver. Construction is everywhere. We need to make sure we have a skilled workforce that’s ready to take on those jobs.”

While also finding employers to hire them and stay within the community for the long haul.

“I think the reason businesses work — certainly restaurants work — is that you are integral to the community specifically where you are,” Schlegel said. “There are so many people in our community that really believe in Denver and want to see what it can be, and so it will get there.”

It’s well on the way. Denver’s Economic Development Corporation says they’re working with 52 active prospects that could bring more than 12,000 jobs to the area.

Victor Marx, a first-time candidate and nonprofit leader with a controversial personal history that’s drawn intense scrutiny, has edged out his more establishment opponent and will be Colorado Republicans’ gubernatorial nominee in November.

The Associated Press called the race for Marx late Thursday afternoon, nearly nine days after polls closed. He led the runner-up, state Sen. Barb Kirkmeyer, 39.9% to 39.4%, with 99% of ballots counted, according to the AP.

Marx had taken his first narrow lead over Kirkmeyer the day after the June 30 primary, and though the race remained close, he never lost the advantage. While outstanding deficient and overseas ballots helped delay a final call on the race, those votes only served to expand Marx’s margin. He led by 2,524 votes at 5:30 p.m. Thursday, out of about 522,000 ballots cast.

State Rep. Scott Bottoms was a distant third, with 20.8% of the vote.

A veteran lawmaker and former Weld County commissioner, Kirkmeyer had jumped to an early advantage on the strength of early ballot returns. But as votes returned on Election Day began to filter in, her lead thinned and collapsed. Within 48 hours of polls closing, and with few ballots left to count in Kirkmeyer’s Front Range strongholds, her path to retake the lead had all but vanished.

Marx will next face Democratic Attorney General Phil Weiser in November. No Republican has been elected to the governor’s office in more than 20 years. Four months out, Weiser appears to be heavily favored to continue Democrats’ electoral dominance.

In an email to supporters after the race was called, Marx said he was humbled to be the nominee and that the victory was “the starting line.”

“My team and I have put together this special message that I want every Coloradan to hear — Republicans, independents, unaffiliated voters, and Democrats who are open to a better way,” he said. “Because what we’re building now is bigger than a primary victory.”

In a video, he appealed to Coloradans who are frustrated with the status quo and don’t think things can change — citing his victory as proof they can.

“Now Phil Weiser, he’s a smart fella — but he represents the current system, because he is part of it,” Marx said. “And that current system has made Colorado more expensive, less safe and harder for regular families to trust government.”

In a separate statement, Kirkmeyer said she was proud of the race that she had run and the “clear vision” she had laid out for the Republican Party here.

“While we came up short in what appears to be the closest Republican gubernatorial primary in Colorado history, I’m grateful for every voter who placed their trust in us,” she wrote.

Echoing the pledge she’d made before Election Day, she pointedly did not endorse Marx. She said only that she hoped voters “choose the path that is best for Colorado” in November.

Kirkmeyer also threw a final jab at Marx, who declined in late May to tell 9News how many people he’d killed as an adult.

Kirkmeyer wrote that, “for the record, I still haven’t killed anyone.”

First-time candidate shrugged off questions

Marx’s primary win is a remarkable result for the embattled Colorado GOP and for Marx, a former Marine, martial arts instructor and nonprofit leader whose extensive and much-scrutinized personal history had drawn national headlines. It’s also attracted sharp criticism from other Republicans.

In his video, Marx appealed to Republican primary voters, saying there was room in his campaign for those who supported his opponents.

Marx had entered the fray last fall with no political profile and no experience as a political candidate. But by the time voters began receiving ballots last month, he’d ridden an atypical — if thoroughly modern — campaign to fundraising dominance and front-runner status.

Kirkmeyer’s support largely flowed from northern Front Range counties, nudging her ahead initially. But Marx picked up bigger margins among Election Day voters — meaning those more conservative voters skeptical of mail-in balloting.

He also won ruby-red El Paso County while racking up smaller wins in rural counties and grabbing enough in the Front Range to edge Kirkmeyer.

Map: Where did the votes come from in the Colorado primary races for governor?

In a pitch reminiscent of President Donald Trump, the arch-dealmaker, Marx has cast himself as a solutions-focused negotiator disinterested in partisan squabbles. In 2003, he founded All Things Possible Ministries, a Christian nonprofit that has provided stuffed animals and trauma support to people. It has also done work in conflict areas in Syria and Iraq, where Marx primarily worked away from the front lines as a funder and facilitator.

By 2024, the nonprofit’s annual revenue had surpassed $7.5 million, and Marx has said the group — from which he has resigned — now primarily works to help law enforcement.

Despite his outsider status, Marx was considered the likely winner in the weeks before Election Day. His narrow victory, then, came as something of a surprise, and, on election night, he speculated that Bottoms — a conservative pastor from Colorado Springs — had pulled votes from him. In El Paso County, Bottoms earned more than 20,000 votes, or 24% of the county’s Republican total.

Though Marx out-raised and out-spent both Kirkmeyer and Bottoms, it was Kirkmeyer who had been perceived as the expected nominee when she entered the race last year. Marx had never run for office before, and the stories he’s told about his life — that he’d killed a man at age 7, been involved in “high-risk humanitarian” operations across the globe and could free people from demonic possession — drew intense scrutiny and national punchlines.

But he repeatedly shrugged off questions about his background and said he stood by all that he had said and written.

Through his personality-heavy, direct-to-voter campaign, he encouraged Colorado Republicans to shrug it off, too. He spent heavily on direct mailers, which provided a boost to both his fundraising and name recognition.

Marx eschewed policy discussions and skipped nearly every debate. When he did participate in one, he spent part of the event leaning on the lectern, with his dog at his feet. Rather than deliver a closing statement, he prayed.

Campaigning his own way

Though he leaned into his outsider status, the aw-shucks appeal belied a careful campaign shaped by Marx’s emergence from a political environment forged by Trump: He skipped one debate after a moderator pressed him about his background, and he held a rally instead; his campaign later highlighted how many more people attended the rally than the debate.

His media operation was led by a former Turning Points USA staffer, and his campaign touted its social media posts’ views at Marx’s watch party last week. He was comfortable as a podcast guest, regularly released videos of himself and repeatedly assured voters that he was no politician.