(03-16-2022, 09:26 PM)Dirknows Wrote: [ -> ]Would rather the Mavs just try and get Turner.
It may take more to get Turner since he is expiring.
(03-17-2022, 12:38 AM)Omega_Supreme Wrote: [ -> ]Even if it was a 1 for 1 trade of Dinwiddie for KP I still love that swap. Bertans is just a sweetener and shooters are always well paid and often hard to find in today's game. Both fit major needs with our team.
As for THJ I disagree with you there as well. You don't walk away from THJ with Brunson being a unknown without Dinwiddie. Dinwiddie is insurance against Brunson and pushes THJ down the pecking order making room for Josh Green.
We are wildly apart on this. If we traded KP for Dinwiddie straight up I would have felt way better about the trade at the time, and would already concede it was a win now. Bertans is not a "sweetener". He is an albatross. We have to pay him 17 mil a year for several years and he is currently playing less than 10 minutes a game. That is not good.
Don't understand your second point. I suggested we should have signed Dinwiddie in the offseason instead of THJ.
(03-17-2022, 01:08 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]We are wildly apart on this. If we traded KP for Dinwiddie straight up I would have felt way better about the trade at the time, and would already concede it was a win now. Bertans is not a "sweetener". He is an albatross. We have to pay him 17 mil a year for several years and he is currently playing less than 10 minutes a game. That is not good.
Don't understand your second point. I suggested we should have signed Dinwiddie in the offseason instead of THJ.
Bertans is a steal as well its just going to take time for his rhythm to come around. Most of you guys are not seeing the big picture. Bertans is a Luka chess piece. He replaces the stretch element we lost with KP. That is a major need for this team in what we do. Him being on the floor to stretch and open things up is all we need.
His contract is on par with other shooters. I pointed this out before. Its a way better contract than the cat got in Miami and he has a low buyout year.
You guys need to give Bertans a little time because he was barely playing in Washington due to the coaching change. He played well when they had Westbrook setting him up. The offense this year is half court with little ball movement. Its a total shit show in Washington.
(03-17-2022, 01:08 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]We are wildly apart on this. If we traded KP for Dinwiddie straight up I would have felt way better about the trade at the time, and would already concede it was a win now. Bertans is not a "sweetener". He is an albatross. We have to pay him 17 mil a year for several years and he is currently playing less than 10 minutes a game. That is not good.
Don't understand your second point. I suggested we should have signed Dinwiddie in the offseason instead of THJ.
They could not have just "dumped" KP in the offseason. You would have just cut him and taken the cap hit?
Then you would have signed SD. So then we would have remained in cap hell with no KP.
Right now we have Bertens contract instead of KP as a bad contract at the worst. At best, Bertens starts to earn his contract which KP never did.
The Mavs are winning right now. For all we know they could win it all this year. With your plan, we were a guaranteed 1st round exit this year.
We knew our ceiling before the trade. Now we have no idea what our ceiling is this year.
Get over your sour grapes. Stop holding on to what you wanted.
(03-16-2022, 11:58 AM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]Say those three guys for THJ+JB... what else is needed to balance that trade in your opinion? Any salary? Any picks?
What I thought Hayes would be is exactly what DAL needs IMO as a replacement for JB (a 6'5" and longer flexible guard/wing who can create sometimes). His shooting has been ATROCIOUS. Do the Mavs believe they can rehab that? If Hayes's shooting can be fixed he will be a starter in this league IMO. He has totally fixed his assist/turnover issues and just needs a shot.
And to me? He looks like a kid with broken confidence that needs a new setting and fresh start.
Let's break it down to two deals and see.
Detroit can sign Brunson outright. They'd be doing us a favor to create a TPE and wouldn't need to provide much in the form of a return. To me, the value for Detroit of sending anyone our way would be to add something beyond just Brunson. I have Detroit with $27mm in room (assumes the #3 pick) minus whatever they give Bagley. He needs to be signed first and then Brunson would go into space to avoid BYC. So, Detroit is only looking at the Room MLE at that point and sending a player back for Brunson (say Hayes) is of little consequence from a cap space standpoint. They have TO's on Diallo and Jackson, but even if they didn't want those guys, they wouldn't have significant cap space.
If we wanted to expand a deal that sent Brunson to Detroit (based on him wanting to go there, not on a desire on our part to trade him there), then we'd need the incoming to trade match Hardaway (both in terms of salary and value as we don't really get any credit for Brunson as they can sign him outright). My guess is it would be Olynyk and one of the guys on the list of Hayes, Diallo or Stewart. Few here would WANT to "trade" Brunson/Hardway for say Olynyk and Hayes. But Brunson is already lost in this hypothetical. The question is whether we'd have to add anything (pick) to get Hayes as a backup PG to replace Brunson and Olynyk to be another big who happens to actually have a good outside shot.
(03-16-2022, 12:37 PM)StrandedOnBeauboisHill Wrote: [ -> ]MacMahon certainly did not. I still have not seen any of this sourced. The only person I heard mention the pick to Dallas was the Ringer guys on the mismatch who were quoting Fischer.
Zach Lowe and MacMahon talked about the trade at length and not once was a pick being offered ever mentioned.
I'd suggest you go and listen to the Cato/Fischer podcast and see how they frame it. Fischer himself says that Toronto was asking for more than what Dallas felt comfortable offering.
Yes. Any reporting on Toronto plus a first came from Fischer's original report. If you listened to him at the time it was clear he was making a logical leap and not framing that as something he specifically heard was on the table. Fast forward and he's even less sure what was actually on the table from Toronto.
(03-17-2022, 12:38 AM)windjc Wrote: [ -> ]Disagree on all of this.
That's fine but the results suggest I am right.
You can't make this trade without Bertans and his salary.
I think reality speaks for itself that the Mavs made the right deal.
(03-17-2022, 01:39 AM)windjc Wrote: [ -> ]They could not have just "dumped" KP in the offseason. You would have just cut him and taken the cap hit?
Then you would have signed SD. So then we would have remained in cap hell with no KP.
Right now we have Bertens contract instead of KP as a bad contract at the worst. At best, Bertens starts to earn his contract which KP never did.
The Mavs are winning right now. For all we know they could win it all this year. With your plan, we were a guaranteed 1st round exit this year.
We knew our ceiling before the trade. Now we have no idea what our ceiling is this year.
Get over your sour grapes. Stop holding on to what you wanted.
Never suggested to cut KP. That was never a thought. You trade him for overpriced distressed assets like we did at the TDL. The difference is that in the offseason we have the flexibility to actually replace him in the frontcourt.
In my scenario, we would have Dinwiddie, Holmes and whatever distressed asset(s) we traded (dumped) KP for (maybe Tobias Harris) instead of THJ, Bertans, Bullock and WCS. I feel like we would be in a lot better position.
I don't have sour grapes. I am as happy (and surprised) as anyone that Dinwiddie is playing out so well and looks like he will be a quality long term piece. I also try not to view things with homer glasses. Trying to look at it objectively, I think it was a poor trade (as did just about every NBA analyst) that has so far worked out better than could reasonably expected. To me it just highlighted the mistakes we made in the offseason.
To be clear, I did not bring this subject up and have not been harping on it. I don't think I need to be accused of sour grapes just because we don't share the same opinion.
(03-17-2022, 09:41 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]Never suggested to cut KP. That was never a thought. You trade him for overpriced distressed assets like we did at the TDL. The difference is that in the offseason we have the flexibility to actually replace him in the frontcourt.
In my scenario, we would have Dinwiddie, Holmes and whatever distressed asset(s) we traded (dumped) KP for (maybe Tobias Harris) instead of THJ, Bertans, Bullock and WCS. I feel like we would be in a lot better position.
I don't have sour grapes. I am as happy (and surprised) as anyone that Dinwiddie is playing out so well and looks like he will be a quality long term piece. I also try not to view things with homer glasses. Trying to look at it objectively, I think it was a poor trade (as did just about every NBA analyst) that has so far worked out better than could reasonably expected. To me it just highlighted the mistakes we made in the offseason.
To be clear, I did not bring this subject up and have not been harping on it. I don't think I need to be accused of sour grapes just because we don't share the same opinion.
There is no way the 76ers would trade KP for Harris. They could get a better return than KP for Harris.
KP was a bad asset and we traded him to a team that has nothing to lose. There is no way a team like Philly that is a championship contender would do a swap like that.
Our trade options were extremely limited with KP. The Mavs elected for long term cap flexibility and immediate roster help.
By the way by the Mavs trading the way they did it opens up possibilities down the road when Bertans is on the last few years of his deal.
(03-17-2022, 07:57 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: [ -> ]Let's break it down to two deals and see.
Detroit can sign Brunson outright. They'd be doing us a favor to create a TPE and wouldn't need to provide much in the form of a return. To me, the value for Detroit of sending anyone our way would be to add something beyond just Brunson. I have Detroit with $27mm in room (assumes the #3 pick) minus whatever they give Bagley. He needs to be signed first and then Brunson would go into space to avoid BYC. So, Detroit is only looking at the Room MLE at that point and sending a player back for Brunson (say Hayes) is of little consequence from a cap space standpoint. They have TO's on Diallo and Jackson, but even if they didn't want those guys, they wouldn't have significant cap space.
If we wanted to expand a deal that sent Brunson to Detroit (based on him wanting to go there, not on a desire on our part to trade him there), then we'd need the incoming to trade match Hardaway (both in terms of salary and value as we don't really get any credit for Brunson as they can sign him outright). My guess is it would be Olynyk and one of the guys on the list of Hayes, Diallo or Stewart. Few here would WANT to "trade" Brunson/Hardway for say Olynyk and Hayes. But Brunson is already lost in this hypothetical. The question is whether we'd have to add anything (pick) to get Hayes as a backup PG to replace Brunson and Olynyk to be another big who happens to actually have a good outside shot.
If we are sending out THJ, do we really want/need another big who can't rebound or protect the rim? If we somehow acquire a legit center via another method, we are looking at new guy/Powell/Maxi/DFS/Olynk/Bertans in our big rotation. Even if we send one of those guys out we still have a crowded frontcourt.
(03-17-2022, 09:47 AM)Omega_Supreme Wrote: [ -> ]There is no way the 76ers would trade KP for Harris. They could get a better return than KP for Harris.
KP was a bad asset and we traded him to a team that has nothing to lose. There is no way a team like Philly that is a championship contender would do a swap like that.
Our trade options were extremely limited with KP. The Mavs elected for long term cap flexibility and immediate roster help.
By the way by the Mavs trading the way they did it opens up possibilities down the road when Bertans is on the last few years of his deal.
Its kind of a catch 22 on value. If Dinwiddie and Bertans are so great then maybe KP value was not that low, right? An interesting question is would you rather have Tobias Harris or Dinwiddie and Bertans?
A straight trade with Philly would not have made sense. Just coming up with a similar high priced distressed asset. The Tobias Harris contract is not good. He is a good player making max money. No idea what it could have been, but there would have been more options in the offseason.
There is no point in hashing out who won the trade anymore. Lets just say that I have some trepidation regarding what this FO will do in the coming offseason.
(03-17-2022, 09:51 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe this is a way to make lemonade out of the lemon of Brunson deciding to leave (if indeed that happens).
I have a problem with the "if Brunson decides to leave" aspect and I think this immediately throws a very bad light on the franchise. I think Mavs should already know (as in be very sure about it) what will happen with Brunson in the summer, otherwise they should trade him. I think receiving an asset at TDL (lets be modest and say this is a mid FRP and a young player) beats losing him for nothing in the summer. I think that is worth more than the ability to use his contract in a trade. We lack assets and that additional FRP could be worth more. Mavs have plenty of suitable contracts. I think the chance of winning it all is not that great to have significant impact regarding the value of keeping him.
Acceptable scenarios would be:
- Mavs know he will resign
- Mavs know who they will trade using Brunson contract (probably difficult to know so far in advance)
- One idea that could be realistic. NY is reportedly having Brunson as their first target and I think there could be a very strong appeal on his side. Big city, family links, lead PG role. NY this season is realistically not in a position to win it all, even if they traded for Brunson. So why spending a bunch of assets at TDL if you can have him in the summer for the price of creating the cap space? Based on NY situation, they need to drop 20-25 mil of salaries (expiring Kemba and expiring Burks, Noel or Rose) and the Mavs 2023 FRP could be the fair price for that. Mavs on the other hand could prefer to keep Brunson for the rest of this season while making an agreement with NY to do the SnT in the summer. NY doesn't need to drop so much salary trading for him. Mavs get the ability to be compensated either with salary coming from NY or use his contract for someone else and they have half a year to negotiate potential deals for his contract. I would prefer someone better than those NY expiring contracts.
(03-17-2022, 09:41 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]Never suggested to cut KP. That was never a thought. You trade him for overpriced distressed assets like we did at the TDL. The difference is that in the offseason we have the flexibility to actually replace him in the frontcourt.
In my scenario, we would have Dinwiddie, Holmes and whatever distressed asset(s) we traded (dumped) KP for (maybe Tobias Harris) instead of THJ, Bertans, Bullock and WCS. I feel like we would be in a lot better position.
I don't have sour grapes. I am as happy (and surprised) as anyone that Dinwiddie is playing out so well and looks like he will be a quality long term piece. I also try not to view things with homer glasses. Trying to look at it objectively, I think it was a poor trade (as did just about every NBA analyst) that has so far worked out better than could reasonably expected. To me it just highlighted the mistakes we made in the offseason.
To be clear, I did not bring this subject up and have not been harping on it. I don't think I need to be accused of sour grapes just because we don't share the same opinion.
Your scenario suggests a number of "what-ifs". We have no idea if SD would have wanted to sign with Mavs. Or if we could have traded KP for something else. Arm chair criticism based on countless what ifs instead of just admitting we are a better team NOW than we were before, seems silly to me. You come across as having some other agenda or grudge with the management.
(03-17-2022, 11:08 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]I have a problem with the "if Brunson decides to leave" aspect and I think this immediately throws a very bad light on the franchise. I think Mavs should already know (as in be very sure about it) what will happen with Brunson in the summer, otherwise they should trade him. I think receiving an asset at TDL (lets be modest and say this is a mid FRP and a young player) beats losing him for nothing in the summer. I think that is worth more than the ability to use his contract in a trade. We lack assets and that additional FRP could be worth more. Mavs have plenty of suitable contracts. I think the chance of winning it all is not that great to have significant impact regarding the value of keeping him.
Acceptable scenarios would be:
- Mavs know he will resign
- Mavs know who they will trade using Brunson contract (probably difficult to know so far in advance)
- One idea that could be realistic. NY is reportedly having Brunson as their first target and I think there could be a very strong appeal on his side. Big city, family links, lead PG role. NY this season is realistically not in a position to win it all, even if they traded for Brunson. So why spending a bunch of assets at TDL if you can have him in the summer for the price of creating the cap space? Based on NY situation, they need to drop 20-25 mil of salaries (expiring Kemba and expiring Burks, Noel or Rose) and the Mavs 2023 FRP could be the fair price for that. Mavs on the other hand could prefer to keep Brunson for the rest of this season while making an agreement with NY to do the SnT in the summer. NY doesn't need to drop so much salary trading for him. Mavs get the ability to be compensated either with salary coming from NY or use his contract for someone else and they have half a year to negotiate potential deals for his contract. I would prefer someone better than those NY expiring contracts.
What is ALL this chatter about Mavs not resigning Brunson?? Of course they will. Why are so many people nervous nannies about this?
(03-17-2022, 10:06 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]An interesting question is would you rather have Tobias Harris or Dinwiddie and Bertans?
Dinwiddie and Bertans. Easily. I would've said that before I learned how wrong I was about Dinwiddie, even.
To the point of the discussion, I think:
1) Dallas was one of the few teams who valued Dinwiddie enough to dismiss the talk from early season.
2) Washington was one of the few teams who still had any interest whatsoever in Porzingis.
So, I'm kind of agreeing with your point, but I feel like the value of all players in the discussion, Harris included, relies so much on the beholder that I can't really equate the scenarios as choices.
(03-17-2022, 11:34 AM)windjc Wrote: [ -> ]What is ALL this chatter about Mavs not resigning Brunson?? Of course they will. Why are so many people nervous nannies about this?
Jake Fischer brought it up in a podcast with Cato yesterday. Said it may not be cut and dried that Brunson is resigned. He’ll have a story out soon and we will see if there is any substance. That was the reason behind the sudden surge in Brunson discussion.
(03-17-2022, 12:57 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: [ -> ]Jake Fischer brought it up in a podcast with Cato yesterday. Said it may not be cut and dried that Brunson is resigned. He’ll have a story out soon and we will see if there is any substance. That was the reason behind the sudden surge in Brunson discussion.
I myself put the odds somewhere in the 60-65% range that he signs here, but it's far from a foregone conclusion with what has been reported.
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media.giphy.com/media/VEbWCzD3FPu9pUDXkE/giphy.gif)
