(04-20-2022, 09:58 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]Given our lack of assets, there is a good chance one of the outgoing pieces will be the pick.
I believe you are correct but boy could we use some production on a rookie contract again. I keep praying the stars align and there is a quality combo 4/5 that falls in our laps at 26.
26 is a spot that isn’t very desirable in trade cause the pick has to be guaranteed money and there is little certainty that high in the draft. Has to be a team really looking for young talent for the pick to be worth much (or a part of a 3 team where a team is using ours to move up…after the fact).
(04-20-2022, 11:25 AM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]I believe you are correct but boy could we use some production on a rookie contract again. I keep praying the stars align and there is a quality combo 4/5 that falls in our laps at 26.
We're much better off doing a two for one trade and resigning Brunson and keeping the pick for that rookie contract as you mention but boy is it hard to guarantee anyone in our range would translate to production (although given our pressing need in the frontcourt, I could see any big being drafted playing right away if we don't address those minutes another way). I do agree though that it really is our only valuable asset this summer from a trade perspective.
(04-20-2022, 12:56 PM)StrandedOnBeauboisHill Wrote: [ -> ]We're much better off doing a two for one trade and resigning Brunson and keeping the pick for that rookie contract as you mention but boy is it hard to guarantee anyone in our range would translate to production (although given our pressing need in the frontcourt, I could see any big being drafted playing right away if we don't address those minutes another way). I do agree though that it really is our only valuable asset this summer from a trade perspective.
Is there a big at #26 better than Chriss, who can’t sniff a playoff minute?
(04-20-2022, 01:22 PM)Jommybone Wrote: [ -> ]Is there a big at #26 better than Chriss, who can’t sniff a playoff minute?
Not sure. Although I hope if they keep their pick that immediate returns is not the end all.
But looking at last years draft, here are the picks at 26 and after who I would be find picking. Even if they don't get immediate minutes:
Bones Hyland
Cam Thomas
Jaden Springer- Not sure on his long term value yet
Herb Jones
Ayo Dosunmu
Not 22 will be a different draft. I think the prospects in the 20's look pretty similar though. There will be at least one guy available at 26 who has a very good NBA career...probably more. Mavs need to find him...if they keep their pick.
(04-20-2022, 06:49 AM)HoosierDaddyKid Wrote: [ -> ]Wow !! Way to crap on Trae Young. Don't you think Miami's scheme has a lot to do with his struggles? Also, Atlanta is not the same team they were last year, and they just lost Capela for probably the series. A lot of what they do is predicated on the Trae Clint P&R. Not having him hurts, and Collins just came back from injury. A lot of variables going on here. As far as his D, what really great small scoring guard was a good defender? Iverson? IT, during his run in Boston ? They all are hidden on defense. I just think you're being a little harsh on Trae, and not giving Miami credit for how they are defending him. But more probably than not, you're going to hear from him before the end of this series.
Yes, Miamis scheme has absolutely to do with Trae's struggles. But remember, superstars can't be schemed for. Trae is definitely not one. Superstars manipulate any scheme thrown at them and change their game accordingly using smart decisions. Trae's decision making has been exposed in playoffs. I expect Hawks to change schemes up, starting next game, only in order to attempt to make the game and the reads more simple for Trae - so that he can become more effective. He will have more productive stretches. We will see more situations suited for his type of game. Trae's defense is horrendous, by far the worst defender in the entire NBA. In 3 first quarters, Cleveland kept switching to Trae and Hawks were in huge trouble, in each situation they could penetrate with ease into the paint. Hawks managed to hide Trae in 4th. No way you can do that going forward against better teams. In the 4th in clutch, Trae gave up huge lanes to the basket for Miami to score. Hawks are playing 4 against 5 with him on defense. No wonder that defense and the entire Hawks team looked better against Cleveland whenever he came out on the bench and Delone Wright came in. Trae is a one dimensional player. The less dimensions you have in your game, the more you are susceptible to be schemed for. In playoffs, scheming becomes at a level or two above regular season. Take last season away as an unusual covid situation with most team being at half strength. This year, is full strength playoffs. Defenses are swarming around and using more tape information to target opponents schemes in deliberate ways. Trae is absolutely outstanding in one-on-one iso situations, where reads are simple. But his one dimensional skills, are an advantage to the opponents coach and a disadvantage to his own coach and schemes as this puts massive restrictions for what you can do, on both ends of the court. Miamis playbook is larger more open one. It will come down to coaching who wins this one, as both teams have so many great players.
(04-20-2022, 01:22 PM)Jommybone Wrote: [ -> ]Is there a big at #26 better than Chriss, who can’t sniff a playoff minute?
I'm a big fan of the Arizona big in our range who had a huge coming out year this year (which I believe is his junior year).
Christian Koloko
The other way to look at the draft is to look at a potential Josh Green replacement (lots of mocks have Wendell Moore from Duke in our range) and then packaging Josh Green with one of our bigger contracts to address the front court in a trade.
(04-20-2022, 01:41 PM)SleepingHero Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5vPv62B178
Good video recapping the absolute romp of the Nuggets on Monday. Warriors are scary again unfortunately.
LOL, "with future 6th man of the year, Steph Curry on the bench...."
(04-20-2022, 01:50 PM)StrandedOnBeauboisHill Wrote: [ -> ]The other way to look at the draft is to look at a potential Josh Green replacement (lots of mocks have Wendell Moore from Duke in our range) and then packaging Josh Green with one of our bigger contracts to address the front court in a trade.
I'll start by saying that I love the idea of getting young, cheap talent you can watch grow into successful NBA players.
That said, the draft is something of a crap shoot. I mean the whole thing starts with a bingo game to see who gets the first few picks (as a reward for trying hard to lose). Then teams have to make a decision on who to select, often teenagers with limited time in higher level competitive situations. Who may have had one meaningful segment of the season (maybe for only one season) with no guarantee that represents their real ability (see Manning, Danny). Often a player's image is as much PR as it is actual court stats. Everyone gets all starry eyed about potential.
To paraphrase..."The road to hell is paved with good potential."
It's a lot of fun to discuss and argue about, but most of these kids will be digging into their fall back plans inside of 5 years. (NBA average career length is 4.5 years). Some of them will have a little nest egg to ease the transition, but most will be trying to figure it out like the rest of us. But 60 draft picks calculate as 11.75% of the available league slots (full + 2-way). That is below US annual personnel turnover rates, but throw in undrafted prospects plus incumbents, and the competition can get heated for a few openings.
I guess I'm saying drafting is only successful in hindsight. So I hope the MBT does their due diligence before handing in their selection. If they don't want to spend that effort, then trade the pick for the best proven talent available.
(04-20-2022, 02:47 PM)michaeltex Wrote: [ -> ]I'll start by saying that I love the idea of getting young, cheap talent you can watch grow into successful NBA players.
That said, the draft is something of a crap shoot. I mean the whole thing starts with a bingo game to see who gets the first few picks (as a reward for trying hard to lose). Then teams have to make a decision on who to select, often teenagers with limited time in higher level competitive situations. Who may have had one meaningful segment of the season (maybe for only one season) with no guarantee that represents their real ability (see Manning, Danny). Often a player's image is as much PR as it is actual court stats. Everyone gets all starry eyed about potential.
To paraphrase..."The road to hell is paved with good potential."
It's a lot of fun to discuss and argue about, but most of these kids will be digging into their fall back plans inside of 5 years. (NBA average career length is 4.5 years). Some of them will have a little nest egg to ease the transition, but most will be trying to figure it out like the rest of us. But 60 draft picks calculate as 11.75% of the available league slots (full + 2-way). That is below US annual personnel turnover rates, but throw in undrafted prospects plus incumbents, and the competition can get heated for a few openings.
I guess I'm saying drafting is only successful in hindsight. So I hope the MBT does their due diligence before handing in their selection. If they don't want to spend that effort, then trade the pick for the best proven talent available.
Sure you are going to miss in the draft, but you need need to hit at a considerably higher rate than the Mavs do currently.
Look at the Warriors and Suns. There are misses, bench players, starters and stars sprinkled throughout their recent draft histories and those range from high first rounders to second round picks. The Mavs have one good draft in the last decade+. If they don't want to spend the effort, they'll never be successful. You can't just build through free agency and trades, both of which are things they haven't been great at either.
(04-20-2022, 02:47 PM)michaeltex Wrote: [ -> ]I'll start by saying that I love the idea of getting young, cheap talent you can watch grow into successful NBA players.
That said, the draft is something of a crap shoot. I mean the whole thing starts with a bingo game to see who gets the first few picks (as a reward for trying hard to lose). Then teams have to make a decision on who to select, often teenagers with limited time in higher level competitive situations. Who may have had one meaningful segment of the season (maybe for only one season) with no guarantee that represents their real ability (see Manning, Danny). Often a player's image is as much PR as it is actual court stats. Everyone gets all starry eyed about potential.
To paraphrase..."The road to hell is paved with good potential."
It's a lot of fun to discuss and argue about, but most of these kids will be digging into their fall back plans inside of 5 years. (NBA average career length is 4.5 years). Some of them will have a little nest egg to ease the transition, but most will be trying to figure it out like the rest of us. But 60 draft picks calculate as 11.75% of the available league slots (full + 2-way). That is below US annual personnel turnover rates, but throw in undrafted prospects plus incumbents, and the competition can get heated for a few openings.
I guess I'm saying drafting is only successful in hindsight. So I hope the MBT does their due diligence before handing in their selection. If they don't want to spend that effort, then trade the pick for the best proven talent available.
...not to mention the fact that it takes two or three years, minimum, to figure out if the draft pick can make the transition and contribute, often longer for big men or players that leave college early. Even high first-round picks rarely contribute significantly in their first year.
So if Dallas keeps the pick, it would be a stellar home run to get a starter-level player that actually contributes during Luka's current contract.
And Josh Green? He's passed that initial testing period. He can, indeed, contribute. His ceiling remains a mystery, but his floor has been established as at least a marginal rotation player.
Wouldn't you rather keep him and trade away the pick?
(04-20-2022, 02:53 PM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]If they don't want to spend the effort, they'll never be successful.
That's what I sort of ended with. If you don't want to invest in the pre-draft research, then don't just send your stats guy in to make a choice. Do something positive with the asset while you can.
(04-19-2022, 07:52 PM)DrMav Wrote: [ -> ]I also think he’s overrated and gets treated and marketed as a superstar which he is not. Part of my hate is probably irrational though, I admit, and stems from DSJ getting screwed in the dunk contest which Mitchell won.
Mitchell's definitely near the bottom of the totem pole of superstars when it comes to favoritism/marketability, which a lot of it has to do with him playing in Utah. I mean he got disrespected last year in the all-star draft along with Gobert although they had the best team in the NBA. Best offensive player on the #1 offense in the league. Superstar is probably accurate although it varies by fan interpretation.
The dunk contest part is funny though, especially when it's the judges who pick the winner; I remember on the old board I posted a pic with Mitchell holding the trophy and got downvoted to oblivion. Good times.
(04-20-2022, 02:58 PM)DallasMaverick Wrote: [ -> ]...not to mention the fact that it takes two or three years, minimum, to figure out if the draft pick can make the transition and contribute, often longer for big men or players that leave college early. Even high first-round picks rarely contribute significantly in their first year.
So if Dallas keeps the pick, it would be a stellar home run to get a starter-level player that actually contributes during Luka's current contract.
And Josh Green? He's passed that initial testing period. He can, indeed, contribute. His ceiling remains a mystery, but his floor has been established as at least a marginal rotation player.
Wouldn't you rather keep him and trade away the pick?
That's what I meant by success is determined in hindsight.
I don't know about Josh. I like his athleticism. I like the way he moves. I like that he plays hard. I like that his personality meshes. I don't like him as a zero on offense. If it's a confidence thing, then drive and get fouled for FTs to calm your jitters and see your shot go in. If it's an ability thing...I dunno since he's had 2+ seasons to figure out his shot. Maybe it's time to let someone else try to get him playable.
Depends on whether Kidd thinks he can get Josh to another level with an offseason of work.
(04-20-2022, 11:33 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]26 is a spot that isn’t very desirable in trade cause the pick has to be guaranteed money and there is little certainty that high in the draft. Has to be a team really looking for young talent for the pick to be worth much (or a part of a 3 team where a team is using ours to move up…after the fact).
Even though this has been the Mavs mind set for the better part of the last two decades,
I hate this kind of thinking. It shows an utter lack of confidence in your scouting department and developmental staff.
There are NBA players every single year drafted below 26. The Mavs need to find and develop them. Guaranteeing a prospect 3 million or so for three year period shouldn't prevent teams from trading into the first round.
Just recently if the Mavs had traded back into the first round or bought a pick they could have had Bane.
(04-20-2022, 03:09 PM)michaeltex Wrote: [ -> ]That's what I meant by success is determined in hindsight.
I don't know about Josh. I like his athleticism. I like the way he moves. I like that he plays hard. I like that his personality meshes. I don't like him as a zero on offense. If it's a confidence thing, then drive and get fouled for FTs to calm your jitters and see your shot go in. If it's an ability thing...I dunno since he's had 2+ seasons to figure out his shot. Maybe it's time to let someone else try to get him playable.
Depends on whether Kidd thinks he can get Josh to another level with an offseason of work.
I mean the kid is 21. You would expect to get another level next season and beyond. It took Dorian 4 seasons to figure out his shot, and he started 3 years older. If Josh can just take a few more 3's a game at the same percentage, he will be a very useful rotational player.
(04-20-2022, 03:50 PM)Playmaker Wrote: [ -> ]Even though this has been the Mavs mind set for the better part of the last two decades, I hate this kind of thinking. It shows an utter lack of confidence in your scouting department and developmental staff.
There are NBA players every single year drafted below 26. The Mavs need to find and develop them. Guaranteeing a prospect 3 million or so for three year period shouldn't prevent teams from trading into the first round.
Just recently if the Mavs had traded back into the first round or bought a pick they could have had Bane.
I don't think his comment had anything to do with Mavs valuation of the pick. I think it was an observation of the general value of a late first round pick in trades.
(04-20-2022, 03:51 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think his comment had anything to do with Mavs valuation of the pick. I think it was an observation of the general value of a late first round pick in trades.
Nailed it. I didn't even realize he was replying to me until I saw my name in the quote box on your post.