(09-11-2022, 07:45 PM)Jason Terry Wrote: [ -> ]We can’t do it like we did with dirk and go all in every year.
I don’t think anyone disagrees with this. It’s just the certainty of moving backwards that bothers me. With Brunson, I think this team IS a contender.
And not for nothing, but while this team has been put together pretty well in terms of fit in recent years, I’d say they’re miles behind where they were at this point of Dirk’s career when it comes to overall talent.
(09-12-2022, 12:08 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I don’t think anyone disagrees with this. It’s just the certainty of moving backwards that bothers me. With Brunson, I think this team IS a contender.
And not for nothing, but while this team has been put together pretty well in terms of fit in recent years, I’d say they’re miles behind where they were at this point of Dirk’s career when it comes to overall talent.
Agree with everything you say. I think there’s more to it though. I expect an all in move from Phoenix soon. Denver is all in. Clippers and Warriors are a class above us even with Brunson. So as great of a time to make a run last year was, this year isn’t the time to truly contend
Had we traded Brunson we maybe would’ve got back our own FRP, a protected 23 FRP and Quickly or something. To me the deep playoff run was more valuable than that
Had we re-signed Brunson we would have no chance to get under the apron for a few years which would’ve been bad during non-contention years and held us back
The difference is maybe 4 to 6 seed with and without Brunson. It will all look better when the season gets going and we’re in the mix and the knicks show everyone they’re a clear lottery team
(09-12-2022, 12:08 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I don’t think anyone disagrees with this. It’s just the certainty of moving backwards that bothers me. With Brunson, I think this team IS a contender.
And not for nothing, but while this team has been put together pretty well in terms of fit in recent years, I’d say they’re miles behind where they were at this point of Dirk’s career when it comes to overall talent.
I think a lot of folks would disagree with both statements in your first sentence (certainty of moving backwards and contender with Brunson).
As for the comparison with Dirk's team, the situations were different. The Mavs already had Finely, and they did not have to pay multiple picks for Dirk (and basically used that draft capital to trade for Nash). So they had Finely and Nash in Dirk's first year whereas they were starting almost from scratch with Luka (they did have Dorian and Maxi). They also had much less limitations on what they could do from a cap/tax situation. I would also point out that after Dirk's 4 years they had not made the WCF yet.
(09-12-2022, 09:06 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]I think a lot of folks would disagree with both statements in your first sentence (certainty of moving backwards and contender with Brunson).
Yep, I certainly disagree with them, especially the "certainty" piece.
1) I don't think the Mavs were/are a contender with JB.
2) I don't think the Mavs necessarily have taken any step back on the court.
I am not saying I am "right," but those are my honest positions.
(09-12-2022, 09:06 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]I think a lot of folks would disagree with both statements in your first sentence (certainty of moving backwards and contender with Brunson).
I agree, a lot of folks would. They are incorrect. This team might be better than I anticipate, but it won't be as polished as last season's squad was at the end. Too much leadership/ownership gone and too many oddballs being counted upon. All they have to do now to ensure implosion is to sign Schroeder.
Well I will be disappointed if there was not a move lined up prior to camp, which is what appears to be the case. I think I would be more disappointed in a win now type of trade that doesn't really improve our chances though where we gave up a future pick.
So, I guess I am back to seeing if the Mavs can manufacture a move during the season without giving up valuable assets for a good fitting role player. Moves the Clippers have made in the past are examples. Gambling on a Reggie Jackson player, etc. Maybe it is Powell + something for a player who has two years left on his deal. Something like that.
(09-12-2022, 03:20 PM)Chicagojk Wrote: [ -> ]Well I will be disappointed if there was not a move lined up prior to camp, which is what appears to be the case. I think I would be more disappointed in a win now type of trade that doesn't really improve our chances though where we gave up a future pick.
So, I guess I am back to seeing if the Mavs can manufacture a move during the season without giving up valuable assets for a good fitting role player. Moves the Clippers have made in the past are examples. Gambling on a Reggie Jackson player, etc. Maybe it is Powell + something for a player who has two years left on his deal. Something like that.
I’ve been looking at the expiring contracts around the size of Powell. Alec Burks makes the most sense. Maybe for a 2nd. Detroit is also a team i could see valuing Hardaway
DET: THJ
DAL: Conley and Burks
UTA: Powell, Green, Diallo
THJ, Green, Bertans, Powell could have greater trade value if they play well to start the year. We have the luxury of waiting
Also, there’s no way we go over the tax apron in 23/24. So future trades will need to make sense with that. After we guarantee Green’s option we will be $21 million under with 10 players signed
(09-12-2022, 06:07 PM)Jason Terry Wrote: [ -> ]I’ve been looking at the expiring contracts around the size of Powell. Alec Burks makes the most sense. Maybe for a 2nd. Detroit is also a team i could see valuing Hardaway
DET: THJ
DAL: Conley and Burks
UTA: Powell, Green, Diallo
I like this idea a lot. Makes sense for everyone and nothing too crazy. Utah gets off salary and gets a (small) prospect. Detroit might value Timmy over Burks. I would be willing to send out a second to make this work. This is the best trade idea I have seen from a Mavs perspective that does not seem too far fetched.
(09-12-2022, 07:06 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]I like this idea a lot. Makes sense for everyone and nothing too crazy. Utah gets off salary and gets a (small) prospect. Detroit might value Timmy over Burks. I would be willing to send out a second to make this work. This is the best trade idea I have seen from a Mavs perspective that does not seem too far fetched.
Utah would get off current and future money. Mavs could still extend wood and get under the apron for 23-24
(09-12-2022, 07:06 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]I like this idea a lot. Makes sense for everyone and nothing too crazy. Utah gets off salary and gets a (small) prospect. Detroit might value Timmy over Burks. I would be willing to send out a second to make this work. This is the best trade idea I have seen from a Mavs perspective that does not seem too far fetched.
I like it, too.
But, I have been wondering lately if shipping out THJ on top of some of the other changes might add to what worries me about team chemistry. I’m not sure I’m worried enough to pass this deal up, but it crossed my mind.
Also, no idea if this is true, but Windhorst said yesterday that he thought the Jazz might want to keep Conley more than Bogdanovich and/or Clarkson. I found it surprising, but I guess I can see the logic. Maybe they want him to set the right tone for all the youngsters they’ll have around.
(09-12-2022, 08:30 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I like it, too.
But, I have been wondering lately if shipping out THJ on top of some of the other changes might add to what worries me about team chemistry. I’m not sure I’m worried enough to pass this deal up, but it crossed my mind.
Also, no idea if this is true, but Windhorst said yesterday that he thought the Jazz might want to keep Conley more than Bogdanovich and/or Clarkson. I found it surprising, but I guess I can see the logic. Maybe they want him to set the right tone for all the youngsters they’ll have around.
Maybe, but that is one of the reasons I don't worry about team chemistry sending Timmy out if Conley is replacing him. My understanding is that he is a class dude. Can't imagine he would be excited about ending his career as tank commander though.
(09-12-2022, 07:16 PM)Jason Terry Wrote: [ -> ]Mavs could still extend wood and get under the apron for 23-24
"Get under the tax line" is far more likely to be the goal. A team between the tax line and the apron is still paying tax, and racking up a Taxpayer Year (to determine whether to pay repeater tax too)
(09-13-2022, 05:37 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]"Get under the tax line" is far more likely to be the goal. A team between the tax line and the apron is still paying tax, and racking up a Taxpayer Year (to determine whether to pay repeater tax too)
This is a good point. What would the tax line be if there was a 10% increase?
(09-13-2022, 06:25 PM)Jason Terry Wrote: [ -> ]This is a good point. What would the tax line be if there was a 10% increase?
With a $134M cap, my guesstimate on tax line is $162.75M.
My "magic formula" for them to stay below that line has them exercising option on Green, Wood extended at 15.03M (the current ceiling on an extension for him), Franky takes one-year MLE, Dorsey is converted to 2-year minimum near the end of this year, and 1 min-salary rookie. Pinson and Powell are gone.
However, I expect they will be looking for a trade this season that helps free some future room. For example, if they were able to move Bertans for an expiring at the deadline, they would be able to do all of the above PLUS use full MLE and BAE, and still be tax free.
(09-13-2022, 06:44 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]With a $134M cap, my guesstimate on tax line is $162.75M.
My "magic formula" for them to stay below that line has them exercising option on Green, Wood extended at 15.03M (the current ceiling on an extension for him), Franky takes one-year MLE, Dorsey is converted to 2-year minimum near the end of this year, and 1 min-salary rookie. Pinson and Powell are gone.
However, I expect they will be looking for a trade this season that helps free some future room. For example, if they were able to move Bertans for an expiring at the deadline, they would be able to do all of the above PLUS use full MLE and BAE, and still be tax free.
That’s a good formula. 150.267*1.1 = 165.293 is what i was hoping it would rise to