(02-18-2022, 04:19 AM)Mikelo Wrote: [ -> ]not wanting Holmes.. marginal improvement of Powell. same defects and virtues.. lack of size, average defender for the position (in the best of cases) and does not solve the problem with rebounds.. how does this make us better? .I hope to get a defensive anchor..Turner expires this year and I don't think he wants to stay on a lottery team.(they'll have to move him).. MRobinson is coming to FA.. Wizards are over 5..maybe we could get Gafford out.. these 3 or Gobert if he is available (I think he will be and with that contract he should not be very valuable)
Disagree on the Holmes take. He is a better rebounder (+2 per 36) and a much better rim protector (he is considered a good defender, so don't get the average at best comment) than Powell. It seems like Kidd's focus has been on mobile centers who don't get abused on switches. Holmes fits that while providing more traditional center qualities than Powell does.
(02-18-2022, 11:29 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, we shall see. He actually got more minutes and shots on the Wiz than he did on the Spurs until this year, and that is because he has been unplayable. He only had two seasons in his career where he averaged more than 8 points a game, and one more that 12 and he has never been a starter. At 29, I'm not sure why expect him to take a huge leap. We see all the time that a player can have a certain efficiency with limited minutes against bench units, but that it does not scale well when you increase their minutes. If we rehab his career, a reasonable expectation is 20 minutes and 10 points a game on efficient shooting. With nothing else to provide on the court, that is not worth more than MLE. At 17 mil a year, that is still a bad contract that requires an asset to move.
I don't really want to weigh in on this yet in either direction because I don't feel passionate enough about the info we have to throw a take out there.
But, as an objective reader, I've noticed that people who feel as you do about Bertans (very negative) seem to think it's a question about whether or not the Mavs can somehow make him
better, while people on the extreme positive end of the spectrum feel like he's going to be exactly who he is and has always been without improving at all, and think that exact, already existing skillset will be more valued here in Dallas and put to better use. I think that's pretty interesting in a variety of ways.
What if Harrison and Kidd see the same things you see in the player and have simply calculated that those deficiencies aren't as detrimental to
this team in its current situation as the positives are needed? What if all they
want is for him to run around pin downs or stand in the corner for 15-20 minutes and give the other guys some space to work out there, and they aren't actually all that worried about his defense?
(02-18-2022, 11:42 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]What if Harrison and Kidd see the same things you see in the player and have simply calculated that those deficiencies aren't as detrimental to this team in its current situation as the positives are needed? What if all they want is for him to run around pin downs or stand in the corner for 15-20 minutes and give the other guys some space to work out there, and they aren't actually all that worried about his defense?
I think that is all true and I think it is a role he is capable of playing well. But as Mvossman said, this is not worth 16 per. I would say even MLE is rich for it.
Will be interesting to see if Green keeps his starting job when Bullock comes back. He's played extremely well over the last two games and if you forget about who has the ball on offense and think about defense, rotations and roles, it makes some sense. Obviously Luka will have the ball in his hands as Point Forward (PF).
Something like this generally makes a lot of sense to keep multiple ball handlers, scorers, shooters and point of attack defenders on the floor at all times:
G - Brunson (34) G - Dinwiddie (30)
G - Green (20). G/F - Bullock (24)
F - DFS (34)
PF - Luka (34) F - Bertans (14)
C - Powell (24) F/C - Kleber (24)
(02-18-2022, 11:44 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]I think that is all true and I think it is a role he is capable of playing well. But as Mvossman said, this is not worth 16 per. I would say even MLE is rich for it.
I agree with that, too.
But, hard to call him unplayable with a straight face. And, while the contract probably won't ever look good, I think it's fairly easy to envision a path to a place where it looks considerably better than it did in Washington this season. That's all.
Still early days, of course.
(02-18-2022, 11:42 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I don't really want to weigh in on this yet in either direction because I don't feel passionate enough about the info we have to throw a take out there.
But, as an objective reader, I've noticed that people who feel as you do about Bertans (very negative) seem to think it's a question about whether or not the Mavs can somehow make him better, while people on the extreme positive end of the spectrum feel like he's going to be exactly who he is and has always been without improving at all, and think that exact, already existing skillset will be more valued here in Dallas and put to better use. I think that's pretty interesting in a variety of ways.
What if Harrison and Kidd see the same things you see in the player and have simply calculated that those deficiencies aren't as detrimental to this team in its current situation as the positives are needed? What if all they want is for him to run around pin downs or stand in the corner for 15-20 minutes and give the other guys some space to work out there, and they aren't actually all that worried about his defense?
Agree with all of this. But that means we are intending to rehab a terrible asset into a bad one. Folks have been talking about jacking up his value so we could move him for a different piece. That is not realistic. We are stuck with him for a couple years on that contract, because we can't afford the assets to move it. When folks talk about having more flexibility after the trade, I don't think that includes this contract anytime soon.
(02-18-2022, 11:47 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I agree with that, too.
But, hard to call him unplayable with a straight face. And, while the contract probably won't ever look good, I think it's fairly easy to envision a path to a place where it looks considerably better than it did in Washington this season. That's all.
Still early days, of course.
The unplayable comment is related to this year at Washington. When your shoot only player is hitting 31%, he is a complete negative on the court. You can argue they should have had more patience or put him in better position to succeed, but his value on the court this year has been less than a vet min guy.
(02-18-2022, 12:02 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]The unplayable comment is related to this year at Washington. When your shoot only player is hitting 31%, he is a complete negative on the court. You can argue they should have had more patience or put him in better position to succeed, but his value on the court this year has been less than a vet min guy.
Fair enough.
I'm not ready to say he's going to be a success here yet like some, but the way people were talking (I haven't watched him much since the bubble season, so I didn't know) made it seem like the guy could barely move. I was afraid he wouldn't be able to run around those off-ball screens, but already, in game 2, they're putting stuff like that in for him. Actions installed into the offense for the sole purpose of creating shots for Bertans, the likes of which we haven't seen here since Carlisle used to do it for Hardaway and Curry.
Again, I don't want to get my hopes up, because the defense might really bother me after a while. But, I have to think that if the team is committed to this approach with Bertans he'll shoot the ball just fine. And, early indications are that he won't just be limping from one corner to another and waiting for the ball.
Over the last 3 seasons
Doug McDermott: ~12ppg and 42% from three
He signed a 3/$41 deal with the Spurs. That is probably Bertans upside on the Mavs if we really want to lean into the narrative that he was just mailing it in with the Wizards and he's still the same player he was three seasons ago.
I'm not on the trade Brunson train, I love having him as part of the starting rotation.
BUT...if the opportunity comes to get an established star, JB's $20MM-ish new contract will likely not be enough. However, JB+DB would be more than enough for a star and a pick or role player or rookie deal.
So rehabbing the perception of what DB brings is a worthwhile investment. The NOP wasn't his best game, but he seemed active and engaged with trying to support the team concepts. After 2 games, that's probably all you can ask. ASB gives a chance for the new guys to get more acclimatized, so I'm interested in how he's used during the stretch run.
About Brunson... I feel bad, for proposing commercial scenarios, where to leave Mavs...
I like Jalen, and I want him to do well.. But I really think his ideal role in a Mavs title contender would be like a 6 man, he deserves more than that and we shouldn't pay 18/20 for an endorsement (no matter how elite). lucky enough to have a 6'7 guard (future all-time top)...(why lose that size advantage...?) surround him with long, athletic guys (great for the Kidd defensive system) who can take a 3 .. If Greem eventually continues to develop and improves handling a bit and loses fear of shooting...we have our perfect 2...(this offseason looks like jump time)...
The big deficit is in starting center(Powell is perfect in the 2nd unit and after sucking up his contract, I hope he renews in very generous terms)....an elite llama protector that places good screens and can roll and bounce...
I've had a wet dream, with Rudy arriving in Dallas... I've already shared it several times with you and if it depended on me I would do it...
I am convinced that he will be available, with an aging Jazz and failing in the Playoffs... I cannot imagine many teams interested in a 29-year-old supermax center who needs an elite PG to produce in attack.
just playing ..
does this catch him ..?
Brunson(ST)/2Round to KNICKS
THJ/Dallas23/25 to PISTONS
Robinson/Grant/Maxi to JAZZ
Gobert to MAVS..
Gobert/Powell
DFS/Bertans
Bullock/Green
SD/FN
Luka/FA(Dragic or Rubio)
(02-18-2022, 04:20 PM)michaeltex Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not on the trade Brunson train, I love having him as part of the starting rotation.
BUT...if the opportunity comes to get an established star, JB's $20MM-ish new contract will likely not be enough. However, JB+DB would be more than enough for a star and a pick or role player or rookie deal.
So rehabbing the perception of what DB brings is a worthwhile investment. The NOP wasn't his best game, but he seemed active and engaged with trying to support the team concepts. After 2 games, that's probably all you can ask. ASB gives a chance for the new guys to get more acclimatized, so I'm interested in how he's used during the stretch run.
You might get some value from Brunson in an S&T if the buyer is cap strapped, but not sure how much that would be. My guess if you are going to do something like that, THJ probably makes more sense than Bertans because he will be less of a negative asset.
(02-18-2022, 07:29 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]You might get some value from Brunson in an S&T if the buyer is cap strapped, but not sure how much that would be.
In order to complete a SnT we are in a situation, where a player wants to go to a certain team, that certain team wants to get him and doesn't have the cap space. This means it is not really favorable to prevent the player from doing that and blackmail him and the team. It would have both short and long term consequences (agent relationship, perception of the team with other players,...). I think the price in such scenario is basically the value of the contracts you are getting. If they are shitty contracts, you are compensated. Because alternative for this is basically that the team trading with you dumps this contracts to someone else. You can also demand that the team finds the taker, because you don't want to take crappy contracts - in this case your compensation is minimal.
Couple of examples:
- Boston paid #16 pick and future SRP to dump two years of Kemba max
- Philly paid protected 2025 FRP to dump Horford
Both cases are horrible contracts on more than a year remaining.
Lower contracts vary a lot in price:
- Favors to OKC (20 mil remaining) costed UTH a protected 2024 FRP and they received a SRP
- Jordan to Detroit (I think he had 30 mil remaining) costed BKN just 4 SRP
If we take the often mentioned NY. They have a bunch of expiring contracts and would be likely trading an expiring Rose contract or a two player combination of Walker/Noel/Burks. Since all are expiring other than perhaps Walker can all be flipped later, the cost of taking them from a third team like OKC would not be high. I think a couple of SRP would do it.
Mavs would basically have an option: take a combination of those contracts and a compensation or NY finds a third team and Mavs get a SRP and TE for their troubles.
Recent examples of UFA SnT:
Toronto received Achiuwa and they took Dragic contract
Philly received JRich for Butler
San Antonio took expiring Young and Aminu (25 mil total) for protected FRP and two SRP
Charlotte received Rozier from Boston to execute the Walker SnT
(02-19-2022, 04:28 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]Recent examples of UFA SnT:
Toronto received Achiuwa and they took Dragic contract
Philly received JRich for Butler
San Antonio took expiring Young and Aminu (25 mil total) for protected FRP and two SRP
Charlotte received Rozier from Boston to execute the Walker SnT
Or they can just pay JB his money.
I don't think, there is a way to improve the team by not doing so.
(02-19-2022, 06:07 AM)Mapka Wrote: [ -> ]Or they can just pay JB his money.
My post was intended just to show what a potential return in SnT could look like and it is not great. Mavs are not really in any position to shop Brunson. He will choose where he wants to be and if that team doesn't have cap space, SnT could be discussed.
From Mavs perspective basically their only option to keep the asset base is to resign him. Hopefully he will prefer Mavs.
The only feasible alternative would be if his contract helps facilitate a star trade. For example if Mavs are trading for a star with 40 mil per year contract and the team isn't really enthusiastic about our contracts. Than it would be beneficial if they SnT Brunson to wherever he wants to go, as they would need only to add like 20 mil of contracts to facilitate the deal.
(02-19-2022, 06:15 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]My post was intended just to show what a potential return in SnT could look like and it is not great. Mavs are not really in any position to shop Brunson. He will choose where he wants to be and if that team doesn't have cap space, SnT could be discussed.
From Mavs perspective basically their only option to keep the asset base is to resign him. Hopefully he will prefer Mavs.
The only feasible alternative would be if his contract helps facilitate a star trade. For example if Mavs are trading for a star with 40 mil per year contract and the team isn't really enthusiastic about our contracts. Than it would be beneficial if they SnT Brunson to wherever he wants to go, as they would need only to add like 20 mil of contracts to facilitate the deal.
Are you looking at Gorbert?
(02-19-2022, 06:40 AM)Mapka Wrote: [ -> ]Are you looking at Gorbert?
I am not a fan. I doubt you can win it all paying a limited center max contract. And I would be affraid as hell of that contract and Mavs likely paying a huge amount of assets to get him. I don't think he is the robin on a championship team. I think he is a great regular season player, but his weaknesses get exposed every single year in playoffs. His non shooting enables opponents to focus more on primary offensive weapons. His inability to punish smaller opponents enables opponents to play small ball. Utah defense was always great in regular season but every single year felt appart in the playoffs. Same goes for Gobert. Not saying he is the only reason, but his weaknesses can definitely be exploited and Utah has so far failed to hide them. Sure I would be interested if you can get him for like THJ, Dinwiddie and a pick, but I think Utah will demand a lot more and then some.
Utah defense with Gobert in regular season and playoffs:
2020/21: regular season def rating with Gobert 100,9, playoff def rating with Gobert 117,1
2019/20: 106,6; 119,4
2018/19: 103,6; 114,3
With all being said, I would not target Gobert. I think ideally Mavs would be thinking of true two way players, not necessary stars. I think Luka "sun shines too bright" and there would be difficult to integrate another true star wanting the ball a lot. I think JRue and Middleton are prime examples of what Mavs should be looking for. Players capable to do damage on their own but comfortable in the shadow of the big star. I think it takes years to gather such players and when opportunity happens, you have to be ready having the assets to execute deal.
Players I would target and are perhaps available: Collins, Grant, Brogdon
(02-19-2022, 07:48 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]I am not a fan. I doubt you can win it all paying a limited center max contract. And I would be affraid as hell of that contract and Mavs likely paying a huge amount of assets to get him. I don't think he is the robin on a championship team. I think he is a great regular season player, but his weaknesses get exposed every single year in playoffs. His non shooting enables opponents to focus more on primary offensive weapons. His inability to punish smaller opponents enables opponents to play small ball. Utah defense was always great in regular season but every single year felt appart in the playoffs. Same goes for Gobert. Not saying he is the only reason, but his weaknesses can definitely be exploited and Utah has so far failed to hide them. Sure I would be interested if you can get him for like THJ, Dinwiddie and a pick, but I think Utah will demand a lot more and then some.
Utah defense with Gobert in regular season and playoffs:
2020/21: regular season def rating with Gobert 100,9, playoff def rating with Gobert 117,1
2019/20: 106,6; 119,4
2018/19: 103,6; 114,3
With all being said, I would not target Gobert. I think ideally Mavs would be thinking of true two way players, not necessary stars. I think Luka "sun shines too bright" and there would be difficult to integrate another true star wanting the ball a lot. I think JRue and Middleton are prime examples of what Mavs should be looking for. Players capable to do damage on their own but comfortable in the shadow of the big star. I think it takes years to gather such players and when opportunity happens, you have to be ready having the assets to execute deal.
Players I would target and are perhaps available: Collins, Grant, Brogdon
I'm kinda with you on Gorbert, I think Collins would be nice, but giving up Brunson for him more risk than chance.
Don't like the others or any 40Mio"star".
(02-19-2022, 04:28 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]Recent examples of UFA SnT:
Toronto received Achiuwa and they took Dragic contract
Philly received JRich for Butler
San Antonio took expiring Young and Aminu (25 mil total) for protected FRP and two SRP
Charlotte received Rozier from Boston to execute the Walker SnT
Good analysis between this and the previous post. Even with these types of returns, there is a reason people say teams "lost" their player in free agency. You might add Mike Conley to your list...Crowder, Korver, Grayson Allen, Bazley and a Protected first.
Only thing to add is the difference between these guys and Brunson is BYC. These guys were all being paid already and their previous contracts were substantial. If Brunson goes to a team that doesn't have cap room, then salary matching is a little more challenging. It is made even more challenging since Dallas is now a taxpaying team. The spread on trades is 125% plus $100,000 and not the $5mm plus $100k we are accustomed to. We also can't take a S&T player back unless we end up under the apron as a result of the deal. That doesn't seem likely unless we've already done some cap clearing trade prior to this.
Looking at an example... Say Brunson wants to sign with NY for a starting number of $19mm. He will count as $9.5 of outgoing salary (so, that will match $11.975mm of incoming salary). He will count as $19mm of incoming salary for NY (so, that can be matched by as little as $15.1 of outgoing NY salary). The loss of the $5mm Plus $100k trade rule is huge here. $11.975 and $15.1mm don't overlap. But, with a $5mm spread a contract or contracts worth between $13.9mm and $14.6mm would have matched both sides. Derrick Rose will make $14.52mm next year and would have worked if Dallas wasn't a taxpaying team. I had this wrong the other day because I forgot about the smaller spread for taxpaying teams.
It can be fixed. As deals become larger, the 125% spread is more valuable than the $5mm spread anyway. So, THJ going somewhere in the same deal Brunson goes to NY makes this fairly easy. The most simple version would be to just add Burke going to a third team as part of the deal. Using Burke's $3.3mm plus Brunson's outgoing of $9.5mm, Dallas can take back as much as $16.1mm. Rose and McBride combine to make $16.05mm next season. If Dallas talks NY into sending more salary our way, it can be sent into our TPE. There are other ways to get to a number between $15.1mm and $16.1mm of incoming from NY. Walker and Reddish get you there also. NY has a number of contracts in the $2mm-$5mm range that can be mixed and matched and Brunson's starting number can be adjusted to accommodate what is needed. The thing that likely doesn't happen is a S&T of Robinson as we'd have to be under the apron following the deal in order to take back a S&T player.
(02-19-2022, 07:48 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]I think ideally Mavs would be thinking of true two way players, not necessary stars. I think Luka "sun shines too bright" and there would be difficult to integrate another true star wanting the ball a lot. I think JRue and Middleton are prime examples of what Mavs should be looking for. Players capable to do damage on their own but comfortable in the shadow of the big star. I think it takes years to gather such players and when opportunity happens, you have to be ready having the assets to execute deal.
Players I would target and are perhaps available: Collins, Grant, Brogdon.
I agree with the thinking in terms of a Jrue/Middleton type of mindset. I'm not sure what to think in terms of a name. None of those guys play center and even if you get one of them, we still have a C rotation of expiring Powell and expiring Maxi. We've improved the roster (depending on the outgoing), yet still have a fairly substantial weakness.