MavsBoard

(12-21-2022, 09:42 AM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]1 That article uses the phrase "Dinwiddie Extension" as if it's a widely known technical term, but afaik it must just be Smith's own personal shorthand and I don't see it defined in the article. What is his intended meaning? 

It is his shorthand.  It is nothing more than the 120% of the average salary extension that Dorian signed.  Here is his explanation from a different article:


 
What is the Dinwiddie Extension? As you probably guessed, we’re naming it after Spencer Dinwiddie, as he was the most recent recognizable player to sign this type of extension. When with the Brooklyn Nets, Dinwiddie got his career on track after a series of false starts. That earned Dinwiddie a three-year, $34.4 million extension.

In previous pieces about Jaylen Brown and Pascal Siakam, we wrote about how these two players extending makes little sense. That’s because of the rules limiting many players to only a modest bump in first-year salary of an extension of 120% of the final year’s salary.

However, in a Dinwiddie Extension, players who are on team-friendly (read: underpaid) contracts, they are eligible for a bigger bump in first-year salary. In this case, these players are eligible to sign an extension worth 120% of that season’s estimated average salary. In both a standard Veteran Extension and a Dinwiddie Extension, the player is also eligible for up to 8% raises off the first-year salary.

The current maximum Dinwiddie Extension looks like this:

• • 2023-24: $12,950,400
    
    
  • 2024-25: $13,986,432
    
    
  • 2025-26: $15,022,464
    
    
  • 2026-27: $16,058,496
    
    
  • Total: four years, $58,017,792
    

That’s 120% of the estimated average salary for 2022-23 ($10,792,000) with 8% raises.

IMHO, players like Poetl are great...when you get them before they get paid. Once they start earning the kind of money being discussed, you're really better off looking elsewhere for your part time big man. 

It seems like there's always someone like this who has the board in a frenzy. I still remember when Omer Asik was the "missing piece" like it was yesterday.

If TOR is truly thinking of tearing things down (teams that the media says should think that way rarely actually do, in my experience) then I am 100% all in on Paschal Siakim at pretty much any price. 

That's the kid of player the team needs. Luka/Siakim is a good starting point regardless of what's left here in the aftermath. DFS, Kleber, Dinwiddie, Wood, Hardaway, Green, Hardy, Powell, Ntilikina...any of those players could adapt around a Siakim addition just fine. 

Don't know if they could afford to make a competitive offer or not, BUT, if not, I'm against smaller deals that leave us asking the same question about the next opportunity for an actual difference maker. Because a difference maker is what they need.

(12-21-2022, 10:03 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ] 

Don't know if they could afford to make a competitive offer or not, BUT, if not, I'm against smaller deals that leave us asking the same question about the next opportunity for an actual difference maker. Because a difference maker is what they need.

I am in favor of smaller deals.   I don't want to give up draft picks but I think several of our guys would be attractive to other teams.  For instance, can you move Bullock for a younger player who may fit better moving forward? 

My fear is this team is gearing up for a big move using future draft capital.  My concern is this roster isn't one player away.   They may be closer than they currently feel, but I am not sure one player makes them a strong contender for the next 3-4 years.   Second, I look at New Orleans, Memphis, OKC, Utah, Knicks, etc.   All those teams can offer better packages for a star player who may become available.    I feel we may be waiting for a star that we may not be able to afford with our available draft capital.   

If things don't improve quickly, I want to have an answer on Wood soon and move fast.   Look for younger assets who may be undervalued (preferably a wing or 4 type young player).

(12-21-2022, 10:03 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]If TOR is truly thinking of tearing things down (teams that the media says should think that way rarely actually do, in my experience) then I am 100% all in on Paschal Siakim at pretty much any price. 

That's the kid of player the team needs. Luka/Siakim is a good starting point regardless of what's left here in the aftermath. DFS, Kleber, Dinwiddie, Wood, Hardaway, Green, Hardy, Powell, Ntilikina...any of those players could adapt around a Siakim addition just fine. 

Don't know if they could afford to make a competitive offer or not, BUT, if not, I'm against smaller deals that leave us asking the same question about the next opportunity for an actual difference maker. Because a difference maker is what they need.

All the TOR players values have to be considered suspect imo. That's because on paper they are oh-so-valuable, but the ability to win games doesn't seem to follow, despite having a roster full of "high value" talent.

(12-20-2022, 06:08 PM)IamDougieFresh Wrote: [ -> ]BUY “LOW” ON MR. LAVINE

I've been thinking exactly the same.  He's become an empty stat stuffer, and not a great one.  IMO he's not a great match with DeRozen.  If we could get him without losing Luka (of course), Wood, and Green, you do it.

PG - Luka
SG - Green
SF - Lavine
PF - DFS
C - Wood

(12-21-2022, 10:21 AM)Chicagojk Wrote: [ -> ]1 My fear is this team is gearing up for a big move using future draft capital.  My concern is this roster isn't one player away.   They may be closer than they currently feel, but I am not sure one player makes them a strong contender for the next 3-4 years.   

2 Second, I look at New Orleans, Memphis, OKC, Utah, Knicks, etc.   All those teams can offer better packages for a star player who may become available.    I feel we may be waiting for a star that we may not be able to afford with our available draft capital.   

If things don't improve quickly, I want to have an answer on Wood soon and move fast.   Look for younger assets who may be undervalued (preferably a wing or 4 type young player).

I share your concern about item 1, but I think item 2 is typically overstated.

1 I would expect the Mavs are looking for The Trade, because isn't that Cuban's pattern? Try to find that magic trade that will solve everything. They can find a splashy "all-in" type of trade, eventually, but it more often than not turns out to be a disaster.

Rondo. KP. Both would have been better to decline. Who's next?

2 On the idea that other teams can outbid, that sort of idea always assumes the whole league (a) is going to want the same trade DAL does, and (b) will spend "whatever it takes" to outbid the Mavs. Sure, other teams might have pieces that would look good in a trade. But the reality is that those might prefer to KEEP what they have. It's not what you have, but what you would be willing to offer.
.... Also, we have a really skewed idea of trade values - sometimes ours are too low, but other times way too high. I promise that no one here would have expected the Mavs would be able to land Wood for a scrub 1st-rounder and a platter of pure junk that they desperately wanted to get someone to take off their hands.

(12-21-2022, 10:21 AM)Chicagojk Wrote: [ -> ]I am in favor of smaller deals.   I don't want to give up draft picks but I think several of our guys would be attractive to other teams.  For instance, can you move Bullock for a younger player who may fit better moving forward? 

My fear is this team is gearing up for a big move using future draft capital.  My concern is this roster isn't one player away.   They may be closer than they currently feel, but I am not sure one player makes them a strong contender for the next 3-4 years.   Second, I look at New Orleans, Memphis, OKC, Utah, Knicks, etc.   All those teams can offer better packages for a star player who may become available.    I feel we may be waiting for a star that we may not be able to afford with our available draft capital.   

If things don't improve quickly, I want to have an answer on Wood soon and move fast.   Look for younger assets who may be undervalued (preferably a wing or 4 type young player).

I'm in favor of smaller moves as well for this season assuming we're going to make a bigger trade this offseason but if a team like Toronto blows it up then you have to see what your options are because you never know what is going to be available this summer vs what they can offer.

To you first concern, I think your team is always closer than it feels when you have a player as good as Luka and you have to strike while you have him early in his contract.  You can also make a big move and still turn over the rest of the roster (hell, you kind of have to after a big trade anyway).

Your second concern is certainly valid, I don't see OKC in that mix because they have no reason to strike until after the next draft but the other teams are concerning.  I also think it's probably wise of New Orleans to just stand pat because they have so much talent already and can continue to get younger around it with all those picks, they got something special brewing.

You (at least I think it was you) had a post a month or so ago talking about whether a big trade really ensures a team becoming a contender and if a series of trades would be better and I think there's a lot of validity to that point (unless I'm misremembering what you had posted).  But it got me thinking and aside from last year's championship you're looking at this:

2021 - Bucks post Jrue Holiday trade.
2020 - Lakers post Davis trade.
2019 - Raptors post Kawhi trade.

This method has shown success and we have work quickly to build something around Luka during this contract.

---

(12-21-2022, 10:38 AM)Ghost of Podkolzin Wrote: [ -> ]He's become an empty stat stuffer, and not a great one.

Wouldn't this be a reason not to go after him at this point though?

(12-21-2022, 09:51 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]IMHO, players like Poetl are great...when you get them before they get paid.

Bingo. And that usually means young and it certainly means player potential evaluation.

There is nothing the Mavs suck more at or BETTER SAID are simply not interested in even entertaining in free agency. They always go for the "proven" players.

Somehow they still midjudge those half the time, because just like they cannot recognize the young talent about to climb Mount Everest, they also cannot recognize the old farts dangling from a ridge about to fall into the abyss.

These f*ckers signed 34 year old JaVale McGee for more money than BolBol, Jalen Smith or Thomas Bryant. Even guys like Hartenstein would have been within reach with some strong pitch from Mr. Shark.  

Even contract length aside and without McGee exceeding all negative expectations it was a dumb signing strategically.

(12-21-2022, 10:42 AM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]I share your concern about item 1, but I think item 2 is typically overstated.

1 I would expect the Mavs are looking for The Trade, because isn't that Cuban's pattern? Try to find that magic trade that will solve everything. They can find a splashy "all-in" type of trade, eventually, but it more often than not turns out to be a disaster.

Rondo. KP. Both would have been better to decline. Who's next?

2 On the idea that other teams can outbid, that sort of idea always assumes the whole league (a) is going to want the same trade DAL does, and (b) will spend "whatever it takes" to outbid the Mavs. Sure, other teams might have pieces that would look good in a trade. But the reality is that those might prefer to KEEP what they have. It's not what you have, but what you would be willing to offer.
.... Also, we have a really skewed idea of trade values - sometimes ours are too low, but other times way too high. I promise that no one here would have expected the Mavs would be able to land Wood for a scrub 1st-rounder and a platter of pure junk that they desperately wanted to get someone to take off their hands.

Interesting that we ended up on opposite sides on these two points...

I think last year's run shows that while our roster is certainly full of role players, Luka and Brunson were able to take them all the way to round 3.  I feel like Luka and someone who is a Brunson upgrade could potentially take them further.  But I do understand the concern of giving up too much of what we already have to get to that Brunson upgrade, specifically Green and Hardy and to a lesser extend Maxi and DFS, but if you can do salary filler with what's left plus a ton of picks to get that Brunson upgrade...you have to consider it no matter what the timing is.  I also feel like we should also be assuming that if it doesn't work out this time that Luka will be forcing his way out in a couple seasons which does have collateral damage of reloading our draft assets via trading him.

(12-21-2022, 10:42 AM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]I share your concern about item 1, but I think item 2 is typically overstated.

1 I would expect the Mavs are looking for The Trade, because isn't that Cuban's pattern? Try to find that magic trade that will solve everything. They can find a splashy "all-in" type of trade, eventually, but it more often than not turns out to be a disaster.

Rondo. KP. Both would have been better to decline. Who's next?

2 On the idea that other teams can outbid, that sort of idea always assumes the whole league (a) is going to want the same trade DAL does, and (b) will spend "whatever it takes" to outbid the Mavs. Sure, other teams might have pieces that would look good in a trade. But the reality is that those might prefer to KEEP what they have. It's not what you have, but what you would be willing to offer.
.... Also, we have a really skewed idea of trade values - sometimes ours are too low, but other times way too high. I promise that no one here would have expected the Mavs would be able to land Wood for a scrub 1st-rounder and a platter of pure junk that they desperately wanted to get someone to take off their hands.

Funny you say this. Cause Mr. Negative Nancy made this exact point in regards to the Porzingis trade. Everybody was like: "Mavs pulled a fast one on the whole league - SLAYED" and I raised concerns that the Knicks simply jumped on it, because two bad contracts plus three first round picks was a lot more than they ever expected for a player that they evaluated as 1. injury-prone 2. difficult 3. not a #1 option (proven in Washington again).

So why drag out the process and negotiate with other teams? Maybe it comes down the league grapevine that other teams only evaluate him at one bad contract and one 1st round pick. Suddenly the Mavs get second thoughts. Also Porzingis' agent might have found out that other trade teams would just dangle him in RFA without the full max guarantee and certainly not without any injury protections like our genius in charge.

If we complete a trade, it´s usually not because we have the most assets (whether it´s picks, young or/and talented players). It only means nobody chose to outbid us. We are always in the bottom 5 in the league in terms of pure trade assets (unless you put Luka on the table, then we are #1). So any trade the Mavs make, it usually means at least 25 other teams were not that interested at that price.

That´s already a bad position to bargain from. Gets worse when you only do trades for PROVEN TALENT like Odom, Rondo or Porzingis. The chances that you outsmarted 25 other teams are very slim.

(12-21-2022, 10:28 AM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]All the TOR players values have to be considered suspect imo. That's because on paper they are oh-so-valuable, but the ability to win games doesn't seem to follow, despite having a roster full of "high value" talent.

Well, that's kind of the whole point. Siakim and FVV both fall a little short of being the engine for a great team, but the Raptors have been able to stay relevant (until now, apparently) because every player on that team is good, and they all fit within a smarter-than-average, synergetic roster/team building approach that seems from a far to use the franchise's real lead asset, Nick Nurse, for everything he's worth. (side bar: why was Ujiri not considered here??? blech)

But, if they're breaking the team up, then FVV and Siakim both represent great opportunities to put another all-star caliber guy next to Luka, imo, though I'd much prefer Siakim. 

Heck, even if you favor smaller deals for slight rotation upgrades, there are many to be had from Toronto if this all really goes down.

In terms of cost, I have given up predicting that because I feel each deal in recent memory (basically since the Porzingis deal between NY and DAL) has been shocking, details wise, and not always because the price was higher than I expected. At some point, 3-4 teams are going to have effectively all the draft capital in play, and those just aren't the teams that will seem like fits for 28-yo all star types. Something has to give, eventually.

Then again, Ujiri is too smart to give away assets, so...

Just saying, if I knew I could snag any player in the NBA to play with Luka, that list would obviously start with Giannis, but Siakim, for me, would pretty high. Top 10, maybe? It's an ideal fit, imho. Much better than John Colins, for example, another name we've talked about nonstop. 

If you don't believe in Wood, the equation might change, but I'm still hopeful about that one, so a ball-handling, non-screen and roll guy with the ideal size, length and athletic ability to play the 4 is just what the doctor ordered, I think. In fact, I can see Luka/Siakim/Wood being an amazing trio if things work out just right. Then again, Wood probably goes out in that deal, so that's probably not worth arguing.

(12-21-2022, 10:21 AM)Chicagojk Wrote: [ -> ]I am in favor of smaller deals.   I don't want to give up draft picks but I think several of our guys would be attractive to other teams.  For instance, can you move Bullock for a younger player who may fit better moving forward? 

Loaded conversation - lots to unpack. 

I, too, am into "smaller deals" if what that means to you is acquiring marginally improved and better fitting talent without giving up picks. That doesn't do anything but improve circumstances. Now, it doesn't seem like that type of trade actually happens in the NBA much anymore, but that's neither here not there - if it's possible, I'm for it. 

What I'm against is "smaller deals" that accomplish the same thing described above, only with draft capital included. And my friend, I'm sorry to say, but THAT is what the deals you're envisioning would look like. 

The Mavericks are not going to be sellers. They're not going to turn the players you're sick of watching into draft capital or youth with potential. Point blank, period. It doesn't really matter whether you or I think they should, because they never have before, and they're not about to start now, with Luka, coming off of a WCF season. I 100% promise you they are meeting or texting each other right now trying to figure out a path to being more competitive THIS SEASON. That's just the way it is. 

So, I have a feeling the "smaller deal" they'd end up with would involve someone like Jae Crowder (not him, specifically, but that level of player) coming in with a first, Hardy, or both, outgoing. THAT's what I'm hoping to avoid.

Toronto is kind of opposite than Dallas. They have a great supporting cast but not a star to take them all the way. They got one once and they got a title. I think if you would put Luka on that team, they would be a very serious contender for years. They can get a star through trade, free agency or draft. Some seem to think that draft way is their best chance, since Toronto was never an attractive destination for stars.

(12-21-2022, 12:55 PM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]Toronto is kind of opposite than Dallas. They have a great supporting cast but not a star to take them all the way. They got one once and they got a title. I think if you would put Luka on that team, they would be a very serious contender for years. They can get a star through trade, free agency or draft. Some seem to think that draft way is their best chance, since Toronto was never an attractive destination for stars.

I totally agree, provided Luka was willing to buy in to whatever subtle changes to his style Nurse would demand, which I'm sure he would. 

Lol, maybe the Mavs should just send Luka there and put all involved (including us) out of their misery? (I kid, obviously)

(12-21-2022, 12:14 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]What I'm against is "smaller deals" that accomplish the same thing described above, only with draft capital included. And my friend, I'm sorry to say, but THAT is what the deals you're envisioning would look like. 

The Mavericks are not going to be sellers. They're not going to turn the players you're sick of watching into draft capital or youth with potential. Point blank, period. It doesn't really matter whether you or I think they should, because they never have before, and they're not about to start now, with Luka, coming off of a WCF season. I 100% promise you they are meeting or texting each other right now trying to figure out a path to being more competitive THIS SEASON. That's just the way it is. 

100% accurate. If we want to unload Bullock or McGee or whoever else. We're not getting P.J. Washington or any 23 year old asset unless we include picks. 

The Mavs just dont have it in them to sell off. They think this team is only a minor tweak away from a championship. So they are going to try to for some major blockbuster by trading away all of our remaining 1sts for the next decade or they are going to nibble on the edges and improve the 7,8,or 9th man in the rotation.

(12-21-2022, 01:02 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]Lol, maybe the Mavs should just send Luka there and put all involved (including us) out of their misery? (I kid, obviously)

If things don't go right in the next few years, we might not be kidding. That's a scary thought. But fun to think about what Luka could fetch. Interestingly i think the Raptors would be one of the top teams that would match up with assets for us. 

They would want to build around Luka / Barnes / Siakam. Supposedly they wouldnt give up Barnes for Durant. But i wouldnt do it without getting Barnes in return. 

So we take Barnes / Anunoby / Trent / as many 1st rounders as allowed

Would be interesting to see what people here would take for Luka. Or do most fans say he's untouchable no matter what the price. 

Its like going back 20 years and asking yourself if you would trade a 23 year old Dirk for a "godfather offer"

(12-21-2022, 01:27 PM)Nowitzki Way Wrote: [ -> ]Would be interesting to see what people here would take for Luka. Or do most fans say he's untouchable no matter what the price. 

Very interesting to think about, actually, I agree. According to Bill Simmons, Luka is one of only like three players who shouldn't/wouldn't be offered for Wemby.

(12-21-2022, 01:29 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]Very interesting to think about, actually, I agree. According to Bill Simmons, Luka is one of only like three players who shouldn't/wouldn't be offered for Wemby.

I'm working up fantasy trades in my head, but don't want to get blasted by the board for trading away our golden son. 

While i wouldnt trade him for the Wemby straight up.  It would depend on what team gets him and what are they willing to include with him to get Luka.

If OKC gets him and offers SGA, Wemby, and Giddey. I'm not hanging up the phone.

Houston offers Wemby, Jalen Green, and Sengun

NOP offers Wemby, Brandon Ingram, Dyson Daniels

Orlando offers Wemby, Suggs, Wendell Carter

The best one might be Detroit and i dont say not to this one. Wemby, Cunningham, Duren, Hayes

(12-21-2022, 01:42 PM)Nowitzki Way Wrote: [ -> ]I'm working up fantasy trades in my head, but don't want to get blasted by the board for trading away our golden son. 

While i wouldnt trade him for the Wemby straight up.  It would depend on what team gets him and what are they willing to include with him to get Luka.

If OKC gets him and offers SGA, Wemby, and Giddey. I'm not hanging up the phone.

Houston offers Wemby, Jalen Green, and Sengun

NOP offers Wemby, Brandon Ingram, Dyson Daniels

Orlando offers Wemby, Suggs, Wendell Carter

Not blasting you or anyone who agrees but you hang up the phone easily for any of these packages and then some. We've got a potential top 10 player of all time whos 23. When given the slightest bit of help he took us to the WCF. 

If we can just surround him with a top half of the league supporting cast he's taking us to the finals almost every year in the west. The league for the next decade should be Luka vs Giannis. Only MBT stands in the way.