(01-06-2023, 03:37 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]While OG is certainly desirable, it's hard to see him as a looming all-star. You don't tend to get selected without stellar numbers especially scoring. Nor is he particularly efficient offensively.
I'm also not convinced a player like him (whose primary value is defense) will ever command "all in" offers of picks and players like is being talked about here. While that's the going rate for a proven all-star, it's not what you pay for a good (but not elite) starter. He's a primary player - but not even the best - on a team that isn't even play-in caliber.
I agree that his numbers certainly don't scream all star right now but I would also say that while he isn't the most efficient offensive player out there, he also isn't what I would consider inefficient and there certainly seems to be room to grow. The kid is already averaging 19 points a game as what is basically a 4th option, I think if you plugged him into Hardaway's role here that that number probably bumps up closer to 24ish points a game and when you pair that with his defense I think he would start to get all star consideration. Could be wrong, just kind of making a gamble.
I disagree on what it would cost (although would be super stoked if I'm wrong about that) simply based on all the news coming out of Toronto on what the cost would be (I believe they said "a shitload").
(01-06-2023, 03:46 PM)StrandedOnBeauboisHill Wrote: [ -> ]I think if you plugged him into Hardaway's role here that that number probably bumps up closer to 24ish points a game and when you pair that with his defense I think he would start to get all star consideration.
But he wouldn't replace Hardaway. He's not going to run around off ball screens and get shots off quickly.
The guy he'd replace is DFS, who I thought you didn't want replaced.
SOMEONE does have to play "the Hardaway role" imo. You can't just put Luka out there with Wood and three defenders and call it a day.
(01-06-2023, 03:49 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]But he wouldn't replace Hardaway. He's not going to run around off ball screens and get shots off quickly.
The guy he'd replace is DFS, who I thought you didn't want replaced.
SOMEONE does have to play "the Hardaway role" imo. You can't just put Luka out there with Wood and three defenders and call it a day.
I would say that Siakam is more of a DFS replacement than OG. OG has actually only played 1% of his minutes this year at PF and the majority of them coming at SF just like Hardaway.
Maybe "Hardaway role" was the wrong way to describe it and I mean Hardaway's minutes. I think Luka would quickly find that he has another guy who can create his own shot a little bit and take some of the usage off of him. I also see Hardy as the guy in the future who can come off screens and knock down shots (we've even seen signs of Green doing that this year in the Nugs game where he knocked down 6 threes and I'd like to see more of that).
(01-06-2023, 03:55 PM)StrandedOnBeauboisHill Wrote: [ -> ]I would say that Siakam is more of a DFS replacement than OG.
How? Siakim is a guy you can throw the ball to and say "do something that helps us"...he's an ALL STAR.
I get what you're saying - they both play the 4. But, they can play together (with Green at the two, if he keeps hitting shots).
OG and DFS can play together, too, but I do NOT think Green can be the 5th guy on that team. I think you're still leaning on Hardaway or Dinwiddie there, and once that deal is made you are really, truly stuck hoping one of them gets better soon.
(01-06-2023, 03:39 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I just don't see how you can make this claim.
Either he's a "near future all star" in which case he won't get traded or will cost MORE than Siakim due to age...or he's what I think he is - a very nice role player who's pretty good at everything who will cost less than Siakim.
I think with Barnes, FVV and Siakam in front of him on offense that holds him back. Coming here, with our spacing and an actual floor general who can get him easy baskets very well could make him an allstar or close to it (I've also long said it would be extremely smart for Tor to sell off FVV and Siakam to the highest bidders and build around OG and Barnes as their cemented pieces, which depending on the return packages, they could be up and running sooner rather than later). Him, Luka and Wood with an ever improving Green I think is 1 more 2 way piece away from title contention. It does depend on the package it will take to get him though and if he requires more than 2 seconds, I might be out on that.
(01-06-2023, 03:49 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]You can't just put Luka out there with Wood and three defenders and call it a day.
I don't think you've watched enough OG...
Player A is scoring 13.6 a game on 11.8 FGA with .37/.36/.79 splits
Player B is scoring 18.5 a game on 14.8 shots with .47/.35/.84 splits
Which one is Hardaway?
(01-06-2023, 03:57 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]How? Siakim is a guy you can throw the ball to and say "do something that helps us"...he's an ALL STAR.
I get what you're saying - they both play the 4. But, they can play together (with Green at the two, if he keeps hitting shots).
OG and DFS can play together, too, but I do NOT think Green can be the 5th guy on that team. I think you're still leaning on Hardaway or Dinwiddie there, and once that deal is made you are really, truly stuck hoping one of them gets better soon.
I don't disagree with this with the Siakam assessment! Just saying he's the one more likely to displace DFS to the 3 is all.
(01-06-2023, 03:58 PM)StrandedOnBeauboisHill Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think you've watched enough OG...
Player A is scoring 13.6 a game on 11.8 FGA with .37/.36/.79 splits
Player B is scoring 18.5 a game on 14.8 shots with .47/.35/.84 splits
Which one is Hardaway?
That's about results. I'm talking about the
hows of attempts.
I'm in no way trying to argue that Hardaway is a better player than Annunoby. That couldn't be farther from my point. One is an off-ball guard and the other is a forward.
If your point is that OG can hit catch-and-shoot attempts better than I think he can, that's awesome. I've never said I didn't like or want the player.
I just don't think Luka/Green/OG/DFS/Wood is a contending team. I think Luka/Green/DFS/Siakim/Wood IS a contending team. It's that simple for me. Since I view both players as costing a king's ransom in trade (which I admit, @"F Gump" has me second guessing a bit) I don't think it's even a debate.
(01-06-2023, 03:58 PM)StrandedOnBeauboisHill Wrote: [ -> ]I don't disagree with this with the Siakam assessment! Just saying he's the one more likely to displace DFS to the 3 is all.
Right, I get you.
I guess for me, it just seems like adding a 4 who can create offense frees you up to add your point of attack defender into the lineup.
I don't think you can go defense first at every position except Luka/Wood, especially with Kidd coaching.
You think OG is mislabeled as "defense first" and I get that. Maybe you're right, but I'm not paying three firsts and Hardy to find out. If he doesn't cost that much, wake me up when we have clarity on that and my opinion might change.
(01-06-2023, 04:03 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I just don't think Luka/Green/OG/DFS/Wood is a contending team. I think Luka/Green/DFS/Siakim/Wood IS a contending team. It's that simple for me. Since I view both players as costing a king's ransom in trade (which I admit, @F Gump has me second guessing a bit) I don't think it's even a debate.
Absolutely right about the lineups and which team is contending or not. I think however, after an OG trade, we have enough to get a player that can put DFS on the bench. you are right though, we wouldn't have to find that guy if we got Siakam. Another thing, you earlier talked about retooling around Luka. If we did go all in on Siakam, there won't be much left in assets to retool with when all players usefulness goes away. Getting OG and then a young guy to replace DFS, we don't have to worry too much about retooling until Wood's usefulness goes, and then it's just a starting C we need to find.
(01-06-2023, 04:11 PM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]If we did go all in on Siakam, there won't be much left in assets to retool with when all players usefulness goes away. What are then retooling with? Getting OG and then a young guy to replace DFS, we don't have to worry too much about retooling until Wood's usefulness goes, and then it's just a starting C we need to find.
Well, that situation is what it is, regardless of who they target with this multi-pick trade that we all know is coming (surely, none among us believe the Mavs are suddenly going to adopt a conservative "collect assets" mindset).
So, if the guy you get is near 30, you get as good as you can until the recent extensions run out, making smaller, short term deals as you go, then you get to the point where it's just Luka and a few cheap guys on the roster and actually sign a big free agent. My hope is that by then players will be lining up to play with Luka.
If they're not, you're kind of toast at that point, but I don't think this one trade target being 2-3 years younger changes that.
(01-06-2023, 04:16 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]Well, that situation is what it is, regardless of who they target with this multi-pick trade that we all know is coming (surely, none among us believe the Mavs are suddenly going to adopt a conservative "collect assets" mindset).
So, if the guy you get is near 30, you get as good as you can until the recent extensions run out, making smaller, short term deals as you go, then you get to the point where it's just Luka and a few cheap guys on the roster and actually sign a big free agent. My hope is that by then players will be lining up to play with Luka.
If they're not, you're kind of toast at that point, but I don't think this one trade target being 2-3 years younger changes that.
You've made very good points, I just lean the other way on this.
(01-06-2023, 04:16 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]Well, that situation is what it is, regardless of who they target with this multi-pick trade that we all know is coming (surely, none among us believe the Mavs are suddenly going to adopt a conservative "collect assets" mindset).
I think the the asset market will balance out somewhat, but the Gobert trade has definitely put the advantage towards sellers. A player like OG or Siakam "star status" might empty the Mavs cupboard (picks (2-3FRP), swaps (2-3), established veteran (DFS) and youngster (Green or Hardy). It just seems like a bad time to be a buyer and the MBT certainly can't be considered shrewd.
And are you happy that your all-in move is going to be a core of Luka/Wood/OG or Luka/Wood/Siakam? Depending on who the salary filler is, you'll probably be locked into THJ or Dinwiddie long term too. Further, once you do that, you need to start crushing it in the draft when you do have picks.
(01-06-2023, 04:27 PM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]And are you happy that your all-in move is going to be a core of Luka/Wood/OG or Luka/Wood/Siakam?
Much more so with Siakim for me, personally, which is kind of where I've been going with the last two pages of discussion.
I pretty much agree with your interpretation of what's at stake. It seems like you don't think
either player gets you there, which is possibly the bottom line. For me, I think optimism would come with a big Siakim trade.
(01-06-2023, 04:27 PM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]I think the the asset market will balance out somewhat, but the Gobert trade has definitely put the advantage towards sellers. A player like OG or Siakam "star status" might empty the Mavs cupboard (picks (2-3FRP), swaps (2-3), established veteran (DFS) and youngster (Green or Hardy). It just seems like a bad time to be a buyer and the MBT certainly can't be considered shrewd.
And are you happy that your all-in move is going to be a core of Luka/Wood/OG or Luka/Wood/Siakam? Depending on who the salary filler is, you'll probably be locked into THJ or Dinwiddie long term too. Further, once you do that, you need to start crushing it in the draft when you do have picks.
I agree that the market will balance out somewhat as well but I would argue that you almost contradicted yourself right after. Everyone focuses the Gobert trade but I think GMs all see that as a giant mistake and the market will fall back to stars being moved at the Dejounte Murray/Jrue Holiday price tag which isn't actually as high as what you stated. Murray was basically just moved for three picks and salary filler (Gallo was quickly bought out) and that's a package we can put together this offseason without adding a DFS or a Green or a Hardy.
(01-06-2023, 04:38 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]Much more so with Siakim for me, personally, which is kind of where I've been going with the last two pages of discussion.
I pretty much agree with your interpretation of what's at stake. It seems like you don't think either player gets you there, which is possibly the bottom line. For me, I think optimism would come with a big Siakim trade.
I like Siakim a lot. He has a two-way toolset and I think you need guys like him that can do a little bit of everything (to varying degrees) to surround Luka with since his skillset and usage are always going make him one dimensional. It's hard to think of many players that are as ideal next to Luka as Siakam (Bam would be the other one). I think where my issue would be the price and what you are left with after the acquisition.
(01-06-2023, 04:42 PM)StrandedOnBeauboisHill Wrote: [ -> ]I agree that the market will balance out somewhat as well but I would argue that you almost contradicted yourself right after. Everyone focuses the Gobert trade but I think GMs all see that as a giant mistake and the market will fall back to stars being moved at the Dejounte Murray/Jrue Holiday price tag which isn't actually as high as what you stated. Murray was basically just moved for three picks and salary filler (Gallo was quickly bought out) and that's a package we can put together this offseason without adding a DFS or a Green or a Hardy.
Two things. I think Murray was pretty expensive relatively. Three picks is a lot. Not only do you lose the picks, but you also handcuff yourself on future trades. MBT has also proven to be one of the worst front offices in the league. If I had to guess, we are going to get squeezed on any move we make.
(01-06-2023, 05:00 PM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]Two things. I think Murray was pretty expensive relatively. Three picks is a lot. Not only do you lose the picks, but you also handcuff yourself on future trades. MBT has also proven to be one of the worst front offices in the league. If I had to guess, we are going to get squeezed on any move we make.
Don’t disagree I was just saying I don’t think the cost for another big name won’t be 2-3 FRP AND finney AND Hardy is all. Dallas’ best path to adding a star is that Murray price I mentioned. It’s actually the one benefit of keeping Bullock into the offseason is that now you can pair his contract with all these picks otherwise it’s going to be Dinwiddie or Hardaway and picks which are both more useful players than Bullock.
(01-06-2023, 03:46 PM)StrandedOnBeauboisHill Wrote: [ -> ]I disagree on what it would cost (although would be super stoked if I'm wrong about that) simply based on all the news coming out of Toronto on what the cost would be (I believe they said "a shitload").
That may indeed be their expectations. Teams can set whatever prices they want on their players. But I think he's going nowhere at THAT ask, at THIS caliber of play.
(01-06-2023, 05:55 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]That may indeed be their expectations. Teams can set whatever prices they want on their players. But I think he's going nowhere at THAT ask, at THIS caliber of play.
That’s fair and I hope you’re right because the I think the most recent market prices aren’t really sustainable long term. We can’t end up with 5 teams hoarding like 3 entire drafts of picks.