(08-02-2021, 02:01 PM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]4 yrs/$60M is a STEAL for RH IMO.
With $33.5 million in cap space (before WCS), Dallas could probably get Holmes AND still have $17-18 million left over. Fournier + Holmes wouldn't have been bad.
I'm not a fan of picking up the WCS options unless the Mavs already have some other grand plans worked out.
Kammrath4 yrs/$60M is a STEAL for RH IMO.
Hollinger's latest - not his theoretical analysis, but his look at the landscape - is that Homes could get squeezed by lack of suitors with money, and he opines that he could see RH "returning to Sacramento on an “Early Bird” deal for $11 million." That fits with reports they are offering him 4/50M.
Does that leave the door ajar for a possible opportunity at a number north of 50 but maybe not quite 60?
What's your analysis of the defensive comparison between Holmes and Portis? Most importantly, is it significant enough to outweigh the stretch element that Portis can offer, to a Luka-led offense?
It sure seems to me that, in an ideal world, the Mavs would be well-served to replace DP with Holmes (similar rim-runner O game), and KP with Portis (similar stretchy O game), and give them each 55-60M deals over 4 yrs in which you kinda get the same roles filled by way more cost-efficient options.
I would love to have Portis.
3 point shooting
Rebounding
Toughness
Energy and vocal leadership
That's a lot of boxes that we haven't checked yet.
(08-02-2021, 02:18 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]What's your analysis of the defensive comparison between Holmes and Portis? Most importantly, is it significant enough to outweigh the stretch element that Portis can offer, to a Luka-led offense?
I think Holmes is a big who can stay on the floor in the modern NBA. I think he can protect the rim and move his feet exceptionally well. I also love that he is an elite roll man who not only dunks but can get his floater anywhere in the paint (meaning his roll gravity is really good). I think RH improves the Mavs spacing immensely by drawing the defense IN toward the paint in an effort to contain his rolling.
I want RH because of his fit with Luka. I do not know how he fits with KP, if at all. But I would hate to miss on him being so available.
I do not have a strong opinion on Portis, but I think he is a very different player than RH and I get the argument that he fits way better with KP.
(08-02-2021, 02:18 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]Kammrath4 yrs/$60M is a STEAL for RH IMO.
Hollinger's latest - not his theoretical analysis, but his look at the landscape - is that Homes could get squeezed by lack of suitors with money, and he opines that he could see RH "returning to Sacramento on an “Early Bird” deal for $11 million." That fits with reports they are offering him 4/50M.
Does that leave the door ajar for a possible opportunity at a number north of 50 but maybe not quite 60?
What's your analysis of the defensive comparison between Holmes and Portis? Most importantly, is it significant enough to outweigh the stretch element that Portis can offer, to a Luka-led offense?
It sure seems to me that, in an ideal world, the Mavs would be well-served to replace DP with Holmes (similar rim-runner O game), and KP with Portis (similar stretchy O game), and give them each 55-60M deals over 4 yrs in which you kinda get the same roles filled by way more cost-efficient options.
I don't see why not offer Holmes 70/4 same as Wendell Carter. Then see if you can land best remaining shooter whether its THJ, Fournier, or Markanen. Or do a S&T of Powell for Hield. 2021 free agency has no stars available, so then pickup 2 starters instead.
(08-02-2021, 02:18 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]Kammrath4 yrs/$60M is a STEAL for RH IMO.
Hollinger's latest - not his theoretical analysis, but his look at the landscape - is that Homes could get squeezed by lack of suitors with money, and he opines that he could see RH "returning to Sacramento on an “Early Bird” deal for $11 million." That fits with reports they are offering him 4/50M.
Does that leave the door ajar for a possible opportunity at a number north of 50 but maybe not quite 60?
What's your analysis of the defensive comparison between Holmes and Portis? Most importantly, is it significant enough to outweigh the stretch element that Portis can offer, to a Luka-led offense?
It sure seems to me that, in an ideal world, the Mavs would be well-served to replace DP with Holmes (similar rim-runner O game), and KP with Portis (similar stretchy O game), and give them each 55-60M deals over 4 yrs in which you kinda get the same roles filled by way more cost-efficient options.
To be honest, with Holmes at center, you can more easily get away with DFS/Luka at the 3/4. If you want more size at the 4 then go with Maxi. If we are looking to bring in a true 4 to start with Holmes in this scenario, I thing I prefer Batum due to defense and a little play making, but I could be convinced on Portis due to age.
I'm really not a fan of the "fit" narrative particularly in relation to KP who has shown he can't fit with our Superstar. Holmes on a value contract is ammo for the war chest.
RE: Holmes Fit in DAL
One opinion I have on the whole KP situation is that if his D is as broken as it looked last year then I don't think putting another big like RH next to him makes anything any WORSE.
I think four wings and KP will be just as bad defensively as KP with a big. So to me you still go after a guy like RH even if KP is around for now.
(08-02-2021, 02:28 PM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]I'm really not a fan of the "fit" narrative particularly in relation to KP has shown he can't fit with our Superstar. Holmes on a value contract is ammo for the war chest.
Great, until you're stuck playing them together.
Other than that, I totally agree with the logic. Honestly. It's just that in my mind, Holmes at the 5 and KP at 4 (with a new head coach who is probably powerless to bench him) might actually make for a
worse season than the last two.
(08-02-2021, 02:29 PM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]RE: Holmes Fit in DAL
One opinion I have on the whole KP situation is that if his D is as broken as it looked last year then I don't think putting another big like RH next to him makes anything any WORSE.
I think four wings and KP will be just as bad defensively as KP with a big. So to me you still go after a guy like RH even if KP is around for now.
You might be right about this. I don't think that way, but I can't really argue against it.
Honestly, I'm just so ready for us not to have to imagine all of this in such a way that works with KP. It's like fighting with one arm tied behind your back.
I don't see why you can't play Holmes and KP together.
Weren't there some favorable on/off numbers for the KP/DP combo?
nooooooooooooooooooooooooo
(08-02-2021, 02:29 PM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]RE: Holmes Fit in DAL
One opinion I have on the whole KP situation is that if his D is as broken as it looked last year then I don't think putting another big like RH next to him makes anything any WORSE.
I think four wings and KP will be just as bad defensively as KP with a big. So to me you still go after a guy like RH even if KP is around for now.
I look at it the other way. If his D is as broken as it was last year, then they have to do everything they can to dump him. They don't appear to be doing that, so I think they are operating on the assumption that with a healthy offseason he will be closer to what he was before (a slightly above average rim protector).
(08-02-2021, 02:34 PM)StrandedOnBeauboisHill Wrote: [ -> ]https://twitter.com/DailyKnicksFS/status...9966010380
18 for Fournier should mean the same for Hardaway
I would not have hated that for Fournier. I would for THJ.
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media4.giphy.com/media/vWku8YNwyy5vq/giphy.gif)
![[Image: 200w.gif?cid=82a1493bi6vhnc8ttoe4f6o4n2e...w.gif&ct=g]](https://media1.giphy.com/media/mX1htgqHNrcJ9Lx13y/200w.gif?cid=82a1493bi6vhnc8ttoe4f6o4n2ed2yj8fjxp7qjgv03e5xft&rid=200w.gif&ct=g)
![[Image: 200.gif]](https://media1.giphy.com/media/dXjQR8C5I3AlBRa9JW/200.gif)
![[Image: tenor.gif]](https://media.tenor.com/images/43e3571fa6e0937f51f11ba3d056080d/tenor.gif)