MavsBoard

I think the bottom line for that article is that there is no clear recipe other than strong two-way players. You can't just check some previous all-star games as an absolute must-have for this roster.

This leads me to a spot where I have to believe that if the Mavericks FO drafts a "project" player, I will largely consider that the worst possible outcome of several choices. Maybe it's good in the long-run, but there are clear needs right now on this roster. Unless you make every effort to solve the roster imbalance, then your tires will largely be stuck in the mud until you do.

That's not to say they couldn't draft some immediate help. I have hard time imagining Warren Kessler getting nothing but DNPs the whole season. But if they draft another Josh Green again, it's a loss for the 2022-23 season. Ideally, you would trade that pick for adequate veteran help - but that may just not be in the cards. In which case, you better draft well.

(06-07-2022, 08:56 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]Iztok talked about having a team full of players with accolades on their resume, not necessarily current “stars”. There is a difference.

Genuine question if anyone has any insight...

How many of these All-Conference players from smaller programs work out?

I know that Brunson went to a school that has a good program I believe...I dont know about the conference....but wasnt Brunson like All-Conference but didnt get scooped until 2nd round.

This Alvarado kid was like All-Defense in college...dont know which conference...but he was a useful tool in the playoffs....and he was undrafted I believe.

I know those are only 2 guys that actually might have beat the odds...but Im curious how these D2 All-Conference players have worked out.  Or All-Defense.

It seems like a lot of these NFL prospects that were given awards for college production but dont get scooped early work out(WR for sure).   Maybe "a lot" is not the right wording but you get what Im trying to say.

Why are guy with skills getting overlooked?   Do professional orgs not care about college or high school coaches opinions on if a player is skilled or not?

I know I am pushing a lot of "draft 2way players" posts today...but it seems like there is an issue with going with measurable over skill.

(06-07-2022, 09:09 AM)dynamicalVoid Wrote: [ -> ]How many of these All-Conference players from smaller programs work out?

Very few are ever drafted in the top 30 to begin with. Only Jalen Williams at Santa Clara and Baldwin from a small college in Milwaukee fit that bill this year. But your question still stands as "how many actually work out"? I'm assuming you mean how many players from small programs have reasonably long NBA careers? I can't answer that, but I think it's less with each passing year. 

I think there's a new option will small-time players joining the G-league now, but I still think college pedigree is the strongest training ground for successful NBA careers..

(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

His point was that it's more important to have a full complement of 2-way players, than to chase an extra star, because your weak player will get attacked at his weak point over and over in the playoffs, negating the value of your best players.

His examples to avoid were BKN, LAL, PHI. His examples to follow (GS, BOS) have enough 2-way players to cover all their minutes.

Obviously it's even better if you have multiple stars in your mix, but his thesis is that the one-way players will kill you. The Mavs had 2-way players, but just not enough, and by the time they got to GS, the lack of enough - played extra-long in prior rounds due to a lack of bodies - was brutal and couldn't be overcome.

His solution is the same we have been talking about: add another 2-way center, and another 2-way wing. A star, which will probably cost you some of the few 2-way guys you already have, is taking you the wrong direction.

(06-07-2022, 09:09 AM)dynamicalVoid Wrote: [ -> ]Genuine question if anyone has any insight...

How many of these All-Conference players from smaller programs work out?

I know that Brunson went to a school that has a good program I believe...I dont know about the conference....but wasnt Brunson like All-Conference but didnt get scooped until 2nd round.

Jalen Brunson??? NCAA player of the year Jalen Brunson? Yeah, Villanova has a “good program.” You don’t know about the conference? The Big East? Come on, man.

(06-07-2022, 09:06 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]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.

Who said anything about putting us over the top and what is the “top”? Next question, does Bullock/Kleber/Powell/#26/and the pick swaps put us over this “top”?

Both players are expiring, so future betting is as far out as that for now (of course, I myself would prefer an extend and trade or some bit of assurance Brooks wants to be here before making the deal). Also, Brooks is the exact type of player we should want to bring in. He has all around basketball skill, hustle and plays with an edge all at just-below-allstar level.

As far as injury history, I went back to see and there is no injury that is in the same place, so it’s not a huge deal to me. Him playing with reckless abandon could possibly be curved a bit to find the fine line as he’s entering his prime. 

Why trade with Memphis? To get a good player of course. Why does Memphis trade with us? I don’t know what their team wants exactly, this trade assumes they want JJJ to take over the starting C spot and Adams is a barrier to that. When we add Maxi and Powell to their roster, that should solidify their big rotation with the possibility that Maxi starts for them next to JJJ. There are ?s in there, but I’m mostly trying to figure out an even trade between the teams.

As far as Adams and playing 5 out and how does it all work? I mean, first of all, 5 out is all this group of players we had on the team could do due to the basketball skills they had. Add more basketball skills and maybe Kidd can change things up to be less predictable. At the end of the day, Adams brings rebounding (a large Mavs weakness), rim protection from the start of the game (a large Mavs weakness), toughness (a large Mavs weakness), and good pick setting (something that will not change).

This trade makes us thinner in the front court? It swaps Maxi (really our only playoff playable big) for Adams while having all the same lower end big options (Hartenstein, Muscala et al) as has been discussed (we could still do Holmes and Harkless for THJ). I don’t see the big issue. On top of that, Adams is expiring, if he works, resign him at an appropriate salary. If not, move on.

The trade may not be fully even, I don’t know, but I can’t see why the Mavs (or Mavs fans) wouldn’t do this deal.

Jalen Brunson won two NCAA championships LOL Villanova isn't a "smaller program"

(06-07-2022, 10:05 AM)Jommybone Wrote: [ -> ]Jalen Brunson??? NCAA player of the year Jalen Brunson? Yeah, Villanova has a “good program.” You don’t know about the conference? The Big East? Come on, man.

Im a casual.

All the draft avoidance and talk about only lottery picks are worth anything...why pay attention to College?

---

(06-07-2022, 10:08 AM)Branduil Wrote: [ -> ]Jalen Brunson won two NCAA championships LOL Villanova isn't a "smaller program"

Whos more of a fool?  Me for not remembering correctly Jalens Player of the Year award and not knowing if Villanova was an elite program?  

Or all the non-lottery decisions made before Jalen was scooped?

Question about pick swaps if anyone knows?

Let’s say the Kings trade with the Wizards and get the less favorable pick swap in 24 out of the deal. The Mavs then trade with the Wizards and get the more favorable swap in 24. Does the order of draft picks in 24 then go - Mavs get the best pick of the 3 teams, then Wiz, then Kings? 

So, if the records in 24 are such that the Kings get the 12th pick, the Wiz get the 15th pick and the Mavs get the 28th pick, do the Kings get the 28th pick, Wiz get the 15th and Mavs get the 12th? Or do the Wiz get the 28, Kings get the 15 and Mavs get the 12? Or is it something else?

(06-07-2022, 10:59 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]Question about pick swaps if anyone knows?

Let’s say the Kings trade with the Wizards and get the less favorable pick swap in 24 out of the deal. The Mavs then trade with the Wizards and get the more favorable swap in 24. Does the order of draft picks in 24 then go - Mavs get the best pick of the 3 teams, then Wiz, then Kings? 

So, if the records in 24 are such that the Kings get the 12th pick, the Wiz get the 15th pick and the Mavs get the 28th pick, do the Kings get the 28th pick, Wiz get the 15th and Mavs get the 12th? Or do the Wiz get the 28, Kings get the 15 and Mavs get the 12? Or is it something else?

The Kings get the less favorable of the Kings and Wiz picks. (15th)

The Mavs get the more favorable between their own what the Wiz got in the first swap. (12th)

The Wiz get whatever is left. (28th)

(06-07-2022, 11:13 AM)Mapka Wrote: [ -> ]The Kings get the less favorable of the Kings and Wiz picks. (15th)

The Mavs get the more favorable between their own what the Wiz got. (12th)

The Wiz get whatever is left. (28th)

Ok, so the order of operation is based on when the trades are made in relation to eachother. The Kings/Wiz trade was made first, so that is satisfied first.

(06-07-2022, 11:18 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]Ok, so the order of operation is based on when the trades are made in relation to eachother. The Kings/Wiz trade was made first, so that is satisfied first.

Yes. Logische Verknüpfung.

You could of course add the Kings again to the new trade, if there is something else you want from them and change the order as needed.

(06-07-2022, 11:23 AM)Mapka Wrote: [ -> ]Yes. Logische Verknüpfung.

You could of course add the Kings again to the new trade, if there is something else you want from them and change the order as needed.

So technically, if all the teams wanted to get together and determine the draft order they want, they could pick swap to make it happen.

(06-07-2022, 10:08 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]Who said anything about putting us over the top and what is the “top”? Next question, does Bullock/Kleber/Powell/#26/and the pick swaps put us over this “top”?

Both players are expiring, so future betting is as far out as that for now (of course, I myself would prefer an extend and trade or some bit of assurance Brooks wants to be here before making the deal). Also, Brooks is the exact type of player we should want to bring in. He has all around basketball skill, hustle and plays with an edge all at just-below-allstar level.

As far as injury history, I went back to see and there is no injury that is in the same place, so it’s not a huge deal to me. Him playing with reckless abandon could possibly be curved a bit to find the fine line as he’s entering his prime. 

Why trade with Memphis? To get a good player of course. Why does Memphis trade with us? I don’t know what their team wants exactly, this trade assumes they want JJJ to take over the starting C spot and Adams is a barrier to that. When we add Maxi and Powell to their roster, that should solidify their big rotation with the possibility that Maxi starts for them next to JJJ. There are ?s in there, but I’m mostly trying to figure out an even trade between the teams.

As far as Adams and playing 5 out and how does it all work? I mean, first of all, 5 out is all this group of players we had on the team could do due to the basketball skills they had. Add more basketball skills and maybe Kidd can change things up to be less predictable. At the end of the day, Adams brings rebounding (a large Mavs weakness), rim protection from the start of the game (a large Mavs weakness), toughness (a large Mavs weakness), and good pick setting (something that will not change).

This trade makes us thinner in the front court? It swaps Maxi (really our only playoff playable big) for Adams while having all the same lower end big options (Hartenstein, Muscala et al) as has been discussed (we could still do Holmes and Harkless for THJ). I don’t see the big issue. On top of that, Adams is expiring, if he works, resign him at an appropriate salary. If not, move on.

The trade may not be fully even, I don’t know, but I can’t see why the Mavs (or Mavs fans) wouldn’t do this deal.

A couple of things.  First, I misread your proposal.  I interpreted your #26 to be the 26' pick (it was right there with 24' and 25' swaps).  That obviously changes things.  It would have been years before we could reasonably trade picks, which was the driver of putting us over the top question.  I feel like we have one big trade left in us, and I want that to be the Kawhi/Jrue trade that hopefully puts us over the top (makes us legit contenders).

I'm not sure how those swaps would impact our ability to trade picks?  They would obviously downgrade their value to some degree, but don't know if they block us from trading picks or not.

Adams played 26 minutes a game in the regular season and 16 in the playoffs.  Maxi and Powell (who was useful in the regular season) played a combined 47 minutes in the regular season and Maxi played 25 in the playoffs (and outplayed Adams).  We would definitely be losing regular season and playoff depth and potentially playoff performance.  I'm not sure Adams is mobile enough to do what we like to do defensively and we could probably get roughly his production for a lot cheaper (17 mil plus assets).

Its not often two teams in the same division and roughly the same window (in this case teams on the upswing looking to compete now) make trades.  If they each had blatant surpluses and gaping holes that matched, maybe.  But I don't really see that here.  No reason for them to downgrade Brooks to Bullock unless they are weary of his injury history (A reason for us to stay away as well).

I think our most likely way to get that high level two way player is to trade with a rebuilding team looking for assets.  In roughly 14 months we will have access to all of our picks and in a much better position to make a big trade, assuming we don't send out any picks other than the 22 before then.

(06-07-2022, 01:08 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]A couple of things.  First, I misread your proposal.  I interpreted your #26 to be the 26' pick (it was right there with 24' and 25' swaps).  That obviously changes things.  It would have been years before we could reasonably trade picks, which was the driver of putting us over the top question.  I feel like we have one big trade left in us, and I want that to be the Kawhi/Jrue trade that hopefully puts us over the top (makes us legit contenders).

I'm not sure how those swaps would impact our ability to trade picks?  They would obviously downgrade their value to some degree, but don't know if they block us from trading picks or not.

Adams played 26 minutes a game in the regular season and 16 in the playoffs.  Maxi and Powell (who was useful in the regular season) played a combined 47 minutes in the regular season and Maxi played 25 in the playoffs (and outplayed Adams).  We would definitely be losing regular season and playoff depth and potentially playoff performance.  I'm not sure Adams is mobile enough to do what we like to do defensively and we could probably get roughly his production for a lot cheaper (17 mil plus assets).

Its not often two teams in the same division and roughly the same window (in this case teams on the upswing looking to compete now) make trades.  If they each had blatant surpluses and gaping holes that matched, maybe.  But I don't really see that here.  No reason for them to downgrade Brooks to Bullock unless they are weary of his injury history (A reason for us to stay away as well).

I think our most likely way to get that high level two way player is to trade with a rebuilding team looking for assets.  In roughly 14 months we will have access to all of our picks and in a much better position to make a big trade, assuming we don't send out any picks other than the 22 before then.

Adams is replacing Powell (upgrade) and Maxi and Bullock (as well as the picks) are the cost to acquire Brooks. After the trade we have quite a few avenues to bolster the bench. I want us to look for trades that upgrade our starter group, I think this does. As far as who I’m trading with in this trade? Your points are valid, but they don’t invalidate a trade if both teams believe they are gaining from it. 

The better argument is that Brooks is said to be the heart and soul of the Mem team. I have, however, heard about what it might take to retain him might be too much when figuring out the salaries of JJJ and Ja. There is another possible in for a trade like this.

(06-07-2022, 12:40 PM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]So technically, if all the teams wanted to get together and determine the draft order they want, they could pick swap to make it happen.

Or they could give all picks to OKC and then pick the players they want of the waiver.

(06-07-2022, 02:19 PM)Mapka Wrote: [ -> ]Or they could give all picks to OKC and then pick the players they want of the waiver.

I thought that plan was already underway!

Nico joined the Ticket yesterday

https://omny.fm/shows/the-ticket-top-10/...the-musers

1) I love Nico running this team.

2) I love that the "we love stars" mantra is gone. It has me convinced Cuban isn't the GM anymore.

3) I love that you really get the sense he always finds a way to tell you the truth and not BS you, but without tipping his hand too much. 

4) I am super excited to see how he handles the draft.