(06-06-2022, 12:53 PM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]I was trying to make KP trades to get White on the team, I like him a lot. I think of him as a Jrue-lite player. I would love to get him here. Since he wax recently traded, I’ve not thought of him much at all, but would for sure look to get him from Boston if they were looking to move on from him. He’s as much a wing as THJ is, so there’s that. Another fav of mine that is like him is Dillon Brooks. I’ve been pretty clear on wanting him too. Mann is another similar player.
Me too. I wanted to send out KP for Poeltl and White. Who knows how far this team would have gone with those two all season.
(06-06-2022, 12:21 PM)SwisherPrice Wrote: [ -> ]White is not really a wing...he's more of a PG/SG hybrid, similar to Dinwiddie. And Dinwiddie actually was better in the playoffs
I meant in my post of finding forward equivalent to Derrick White...ideally a bigger wing. Just curious if we could find a comparable player and if we would be willing to offer a similar package that Boston used to get White.
That article confused me
"Although the Mavericks exceeded expectations in their trip to the Western Conference Finals, their lack of top-end talent was evident once they got there. Dallas was the only conference finalist without multiple players with past All-Star, All-NBA, or All-Defensive team selections on their résumé.
Meanwhile, Golden State and Boston, the last two teams standing, definitely look like the most well-balanced, compatible rosters with no glaring weak spots."
But both of these teams HAVE multiple players with "past All-Star, All-NBA, or All-Defensive team selections on their résumé." So it kinda says have a "well-balanced, compatible rosters with no glaring weak spots" BUT THE BEST TEAMS also have the Stars.
(06-06-2022, 04:54 PM)MFFL Wrote: [ -> ]That article confused me
"Although the Mavericks exceeded expectations in their trip to the Western Conference Finals, their lack of top-end talent was evident once they got there. Dallas was the only conference finalist without multiple players with past All-Star, All-NBA, or All-Defensive team selections on their résumé.
Meanwhile, Golden State and Boston, the last two teams standing, definitely look like the most well-balanced, compatible rosters with no glaring weak spots."
But both of these teams HAVE multiple players with "past All-Star, All-NBA, or All-Defensive team selections on their résumé." So it kinda says have a "well-balanced, compatible rosters with no glaring weak spots" BUT THE BEST TEAMS also have the Stars.
The way I interpret it is that true contenders need to have a well balanced roster that includes a superstar, at least one all-star/all defensive player, and multiple playoff starter and rotation guys. The Mavs are really missing that second piece, Luka's Robin. Maybe Brunson takes another leap and becomes that player, but right now the roster is top heavy (unbalanced) because it does not have another all star level piece on it.
Interestingly, the two Finals team are built differently than Dallas or Phoenix. Same with the Bucks last year and even the Lakers the year before. What's the common thread? They're bigger and much more talented.
I really like the identity Kidd build with the players on the roster but I think it's clear, as much as this team overachieved, this isn't the team that can win a title without a starting center and major improvement from some unlikely places.
The Mavs built their identity around two guards, two wings and a single forward and they were punished on the glass as a result.
I like to think about roles rather than positions to compare how Celtics and Warriors are constructed versus the Mavs
Primary initiator
GSW - Curry, All NBA
BOS - Smart, All Defense
DAL - Doncic, All NBA
So far, so good. Mavs arguably have the best creator, but GSW and BOS counter with their own argument
Two-way Wings
GSW - Wiggins, All Star - Klay, future HOFer
BOS - Tatum, All NBA - Brown, future All Star
DAL - DFS - Bullock
Welp. The Dallas wings aren't even legit two-way guys. They're good at what they do - and crucial to the Mavs success - but they're strictly 3&D guys. Bruce Bowen throwbacks from the way teams were built 15-20 years ago.
Two-way Forward
GSW - Draymond, All Defense
BOS - Horford, future HOFer
DAL - Kleber
Again, Kleber is an underrated defender but that's about the best thing you can say about him. He didn't even start at forward. Or center.
Rim Protector
GSW - Looney
BOS - Williams, All Defense
DAL - N/A
The Mavs don't even employ a rim protector. :-(
Obviously, the Mavs have Brunson who proved to be a starting quality scoring guard, and Dinwiddie (another scoring guard) and THJ (another scoring guard) but if Dallas is going to build a real contender they need to get bigger and much better players around Luka.
The low hanging fruit is to hire a rim protector. The bigger swing for the fence move is to use some combination of assets to upgrade elsewhere without turning this thing into a play-in team.
(06-06-2022, 06:01 PM)vfromlmf Wrote: [ -> ]Interestingly, the two Finals team are built differently than Dallas or Phoenix. Same with the Bucks last year and even the Lakers the year before. What's the common thread? They're bigger and much more talented.
I really like the identity Kidd build with the players on the roster but I think it's clear, as much as this team overachieved, this isn't the team that can win a title without a starting center and major improvement from some unlikely places.
The Mavs built their identity around two guards, two wings and a single forward and they were punished on the glass as a result.
I like to think about roles rather than positions to compare how Celtics and Warriors are constructed versus the Mavs
Primary initiator
GSW - Curry, All NBA
BOS - Smart, All Defense
DAL - Doncic, All NBA
So far, so good. Mavs arguably have the best creator, but GSW and BOS counter with their own argument
Two-way Wings
GSW - Wiggins, All Star - Klay, future HOFer
BOS - Tatum, All NBA - Brown, future All Star
DAL - DFS - Bullock
Welp. The Dallas wings aren't even legit two-way guys. They're good at what they do - and crucial to the Mavs success - but they're strictly 3&D guys. Bruce Bowen throwbacks from the way teams were built 15-20 years ago.
Two-way Forward
GSW - Draymond, All Defense
BOS - Horford, future HOFer
DAL - Kleber
Again, Kleber is an underrated defender but that's about the best thing you can say about him. He didn't even start at forward. Or center.
Rim Protector
GSW - Looney
BOS - Williams, All Defense
DAL - N/A
The Mavs don't even employ a rim protector. :-(
Obviously, the Mavs have Brunson who proved to be a starting quality scoring guard, and Dinwiddie (another scoring guard) and THJ (another scoring guard) but if Dallas is going to build a real contender they need to get bigger and much better players around Luka.
The low hanging fruit is to hire a rim protector. The bigger swing for the fence move is to use some combination of assets to upgrade elsewhere without turning this thing into a play-in team.
Your data is oddly skewed towards your premise. Maxi is a better rim protector than Looney, roughly the same size (actually taller) and played every minute at center in the playoffs. Your forward seems to be what most folks would call a big who can play the 4 or 5.
There is no doubt we need another big who can ideally protect the rim, but after that I don't think the issue is we need to get bigger as much as those teams have multiple 2 way players and the only plus defenders on this team are 3&D guys. I have not seen one reasonable proposal for the Mavs to acquire a legit 2 way player this offseason, but many to upgrade at center (much easier to do). I think long term we do need at least one 2 way player to be true contenders, but going to need to be a little patient on that one.
I get the point about wings, Boston is elite there but I like our wings a lot. Horford and Draymond are old, I don't think the advantage there is insurmountable. Center is the easiest place to upgrade.
(06-06-2022, 12:54 PM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]Excellent piece, imho
The Question Isn't Whether the Mavs Can Add a Second Star Player. It's Whether They Should. - D Magazine
Iztok nails it as always. Today's playoff basketball is about exploiting matchups and hunting weak defenders. You need 5 guys that can shoot AND defend to be able to win. This is why I totally agree with Cuban's comments about needing more players like Doe Doe more than anything. I'm not interested at all in any bigs that can't defend the switch, they'll just get played off the floor when it really matters. Unless you have Jokic or Embiid, you're better off investing big money into wings that can shoot and defend rather than a big. All you really need is a Javale McGee/Steven Adams type that can give you 15-20 minutes of toughness and rebounding in situations you need it.
(06-06-2022, 08:17 PM)sterlingmallory Wrote: [ -> ]Iztok nails it as always. Today's playoff basketball is about exploiting matchups and hunting weak defenders. You need 5 guys that can shoot AND defend to be able to win. This is why I totally agree with Cuban's comments about needing more players like Doe Doe more than anything. I'm not interested at all in any bigs that can't defend the switch, they'll just get played off the floor when it really matters. Unless you have Jokic or Embiid, you're better off investing big money into wings that can shoot and defend rather than a big. All you really need is a Javale McGee/Steven Adams type that can give you 15-20 minutes of toughness and rebounding in situations you need it.
I totally agree, and I think the wording is where the argument comes into play.
If given the choice, you (I assume) would of course take a 6'9" guy who can do the stuff Finney-Smith does over a 6'4" guy. It's not the absence of "big" players that's required, it's the presence of certain skills from ALL players on the court. Obviously, you want some big options who qualify.
(06-06-2022, 06:58 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]Maxi is a better rim protector than Looney, roughly the same size (actually taller) and played every minute at center in the playoffs.
Yes but I short handed Looney and Williams as "rim protector". The role is more than that. It's an ass kicker who will set screens, rebound, block shots, offensive rebound, finish. Kleber is a fine player but size doesn't have anything to do with it ... Maxi doesn't fit the role.
Of course, you can argue that role isn't important, but my point was to contrast how the Warriors and Celtics are built versus how the Mavs are built.
The Warriors start Draymond and Looney at 4-5. A two-way big and an ass kicker.
The Celtics start Horford and Williams at 4-5. A two-way big and an ass kicker.
The Mavs start DFS and Powell at 4-5. A 3&D wing and a non-factor.
(06-06-2022, 06:58 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]Your forward seems to be what most folks would call a big who can play the 4 or 5.
It's whatever Draymond and Horford are. Big guys who are two way players. Good defensively and good offensively. Obviously they do different things but both guys have superpowers. Draymond is an All NBA defender and point forward/center. Horford is and outstanding defender and will beat you inside and out.
Kleber is a
little bit like those guys. He's a great defender but not nearly as good as Draymond. And he's a good shooter but not nearly the offensive threat that Horford is. Draymond and Horford are multidimensional. Again, Kleber is a fine player, but he's not in the same league as those guys and it's not really close.
(06-06-2022, 08:31 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I totally agree, and I think the wording is where the argument comes into play.
If given the choice, you (I assume) would of course take a 6'9" guy who can do the stuff Finney-Smith does over a 6'4" guy. It's not the absence of "big" players that's required, it's the presence of certain skills from ALL players on the court. Obviously, you want some big options who qualify.
No you're exactly right, it's not that lack of size that's important, it's the presence of those necessary skills in all 5 guys that matters most. If you can find someone that has size AND those skills, obviously that's the ideal. It goes without saying that those guys are very hard to come by though. IMO, Myles Turner is the big that has enough of those skills to be viable in the playoffs and is actually potentially obtainable this offseason so he would be my first choice. It remains to be seen if we actually have the assets to get him though.
What it comes down to is we need to upgrade the minutes that were filled by Powell, Ntilikina, and Green this year in order to reduce the load on DFS, Bullock, and Maxi. HOW we go about doing that is what is up for debate. For me, unless we can get Turner, then I think the best bet would be to get another wing or two and then sign or trade for a cheap big to replace Powell as your 15-20 mpg token starter (our own version of Kevon Looney or Javale McGee basically).
(06-06-2022, 09:10 PM)vfromlmf Wrote: [ -> ]It's whatever Draymond and Horford are. Big guys who are two way players. Good defensively and good offensively. Obviously they do different things but both guys have superpowers. Draymond is an All NBA defender and point forward/center. Horford is and outstanding defender and will beat you inside and out.
Kleber is a little bit like those guys. He's a great defender but not nearly as good as Draymond. And he's a good shooter but not nearly the offensive threat that Horford is. Draymond and Horford are multidimensional. Again, Kleber is a fine player, but he's not in the same league as those guys and it's not really close.
You can probably expect a little unnecessary pushback/disagreement when misappropriating terms like "rim protector" for an "ass kicker" and "forward" for a "2 way big".
Personally, when I compare the Mavs to those two teams its not the player size that stands out, its the number of 2 way players those teams have compared to Dallas.
(06-06-2022, 11:24 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]You can probably expect a little unnecessary pushback/disagreement when misappropriating terms like "rim protector" for an "ass kicker" and "forward" for a "2 way big".
Personally, when I compare the Mavs to those two teams its not the player size that stands out, its the number of 2 way players those teams have compared to Dallas.
And the skillsets that they have.
Draft day trade:
Bullock/Kleber/Powell/#26/‘24 and ‘25 pick swap for Brooks/Adams
We get our rebounding/rim protection/toughness/non-guard ball handling all in 1 trade. If the pick swaps get us to a worse pick, it shouldn’t be that bad of a drop, but we retain the flexibility of having a pick during those years.
We then have the TPE, TP-MLE and a THJ trade to fill out the bench with guys like those who have been proposed here (Hartenstein/Muscala and bench wing types like Ross)
(06-06-2022, 05:19 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]The way I interpret it is that true contenders need to have a well balanced roster that includes a superstar, at least one all-star/all defensive player, and multiple playoff starter and rotation guys. The Mavs are really missing that second piece, Luka's Robin. Maybe Brunson takes another leap and becomes that player, but right now the roster is top heavy (unbalanced) because it does not have another all star level piece on it.
The Question Isn't Whether the Mavs Can Add a Second Star Player. It's Whether They Should. - D Magazine
That's what confused me. The title indicated we didn't need another "star" yet he used examples of two teams with at least 3 each
The author is basically saying we need better two way players. Those are usually All Stars
(06-07-2022, 08:40 AM)MFFL Wrote: [ -> ]The Question Isn't Whether the Mavs Can Add a Second Star Player. It's Whether They Should. - D Magazine
That's what confused me. The title indicated we didn't need another "star" yet he used examples of two teams with at least 3 each
Iztok talked about having a team full of players with accolades on their resume, not necessarily
current “stars”. There is a difference.
(06-07-2022, 08:30 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]Draft day trade:
Bullock/Kleber/Powell/#26/‘24 and ‘25 pick swap for Brooks/Adams
We get our rebounding/rim protection/toughness/non-guard ball handling all in 1 trade. If the pick swaps get us to a worse pick, it shouldn’t be that bad of a drop, but we retain the flexibility of having a pick during those years.
We then have the TPE, TP-MLE and a THJ trade to fill out the bench with guys like those who have been proposed here (Hartenstein/Muscala and bench wing types like Ross)
Is Dillon Brooks the 2 way player to put us over the top? He has a concerning injury history. I'm not sure he is the player I want to bet my future on. This trade also leaves us even thinner in the frontcourt and leaves us with no reasonable way to play 5 out, which was our most effective offense in the playoffs. Memphis is one of the last teams I would want to trade with, and I don't know why a win now team would make a trade like this unless they are swindling us from an asset perspective. I think I would rather be patient than do something like this.