(01-17-2023, 04:51 PM)SleepingHero Wrote: [ -> ]That's a neat way to embed the stat table there, you got to show me how to do that.
So you're telling me their stats are almost identical? I give you that but raise you that Ayton has been a 1-5 defender his entire career and was the starter on a team that went to the Finals 2 years ago. Wood, while a superior offensive player, isn't in the same league there. That I think is the major difference between them. Ayton gives you surefire defense without losing much offense.
Mavs don't need* an offensive superstar at the 5. But they absolutely do need a guy that can protect the rim and catch lobs consistently and not be hunted off a switch. Ayton wouldn't catapult the Mavs into contention instantly, but a Luka+Ayton foundation absolutely would set them up WAY better long term than a Luka+Wood combo in my mind.
*While it'd be nice, I don't think it's a requirement.
My thinking is that if we come to a deal on a Wood extension, he will cost about half as much. When you add whatever we would have to send to PHX, it is obvious to me that we should roll with Wood. Of course, dirty Mark and the boys could mess up the Wood situation, but we will have to wait and see.
For the table: Go to basketball-reference com -> player comparison finder on the right -> put in the players you want to compare (you can do single seasons, full career, group of seasons) -> hit export data above the table -> use the html table option as it seems to work the best on this site -> copy paste the whole thing into your post.
(01-17-2023, 05:21 PM)Ghost of Podkolzin Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not understanding that. Wouldn't Luka be more about getting help ASAP? When you have Luka, there are no transition years. Look at the twilight of Dirk's years squandered away from 2011 to 2019. Eight freaking years of FO ineptitude.
This franchise has caught draft lightning in the bottle only twice in 30 years. You don't waste a single game with a Dirk/Luka player.
It´s difficult to build without a foundation in place. Something they failed to build and the reason why the Mavs are (as usual) in scrambling mode. All potential scenarios involve risks. Easy to understand that Luka isn´t interested in a transition season where the Mavs aren´t making win now moves. Also easy to understand that some fans are concerned about the consequences of moves that burn the remaining future assets.
Is Luka more likely to ask out because the Mavs punted on the season or more likely to ask out in three years because the Mavs look like the 09/10 Cavs. Stuck with a mediocre and old roster. Without trade assets or young talent. Without any realistic way to improve.
When it comes to big trade proposals I always come back to the same question. Are the Mavs at a point where I feel comfortable with an all in move? With no chance to recover if things don´t work out.
(01-17-2023, 05:59 PM)dirkfansince1998 Wrote: [ -> ]When it comes to big trade proposals I always come back to the same question. Are the Mavs at a point where I feel comfortable with an all in move? With no chance to recover if things don´t work out.
This is it right here. We need to take more account into the idea of "what does this look like if we're wrong". I actually applaud the fact that the front office is recognizing that they shouldn't be moving any future assets this deadline (at least that's what everyone is reporting from Cato to MacMahon) because I feel like it means that they learned from the mistakes they made on team Luka v1 where we did everything too fast and mortgaged too much draft capital to do it (the position we would be in if Cuban simply ate Bazemore's contract instead of giving up the 2019 FRP for Luka is night and day).
Also, just a small rant about the idea that if we don't make this team a contender this season or next that Luka will force his way out. Do people understand how insanely unprecedented that would be? We're all conditioned by social media to think that NBA players get upset and force themselves out of situations whenever they want and while there's a lot of movement, how many forced trades can you actually name? Better yet, how many with more than 2 years on their deal? Ben Simmons? The list of forced trades is basically James Harden twice and Anthony Davis and Ben Simmons if you really want to count that. If anything the KD situation showed us that there's still leverage when it comes to these big deals. If Luka hypothetically asked for a trade right now, do you honestly think Cuban would grant it for anything less than something insane like SGA and all of Presti's picks?
I'm not saying Luka is going to stay past this contract by any stretch of the imagination, but is there anything other than fans on twitter saying "He gone" that makes you think he's going to force a trade? Even MacMahon who LOVES to stir shit up always mentions there's no sign of that (the clock starts next year he likes to say). Luka isn't Dirk, there's a good chance he signs with another team if we don't show build a roster around him by the time his option comes around (or lets us know he's not going to resign so we move him in his last year), but there is absolutely nothing that we've seen to think that Luka is Harden either. We need to operate with his contract as our timetable to build something sustainable instead of doing something rash that totally ruins this franchise for a decade.
(@"dirkfansince1998" my rant wasn't aimed at you, I just needed to get that off my chest).
(01-17-2023, 11:21 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]Russell can also walk in the summer. Or Mavs can have the honor to overpay him due to the bird rights trap they are in. Not really a fan
Note: I double posted this earlier and can't read it. Sorry for messing up the thread. Mod's feel free to delete the original two as I'm not able to.
Unlike some of these guys who are limited in their extensions, Russell makes so much money that he could be 'extended and traded' without worrying about the 120% cap. The other thing that might be advantageous about Russell vs. Dinwiddie is an extend and trade is limited to two additional seasons (the same window of time Dallas reportedly wants to offer Wood). We have to figure out what to do with SD a summer from this one and he's going to want to be carried through the point in time Dallas wants (or may want) cap space. The question is whether Russell would add two years in an extension prior to being traded or would he rather give it a go this summer and risk getting jobbed if money runs dry before he 'gets his'. The TWolves might also wait until the summer hoping to S&T Russell. But, man. They are just dead in terms of replacing him if he leaves.
I'm not a huge DR fan, and wouldn't make a deal with SD unless I had him locked up for two more years (instead of SD's one more year).
Secondly, I'm not doing this just to move deck chairs. I want Jaden McDaniels. He's the prize here. I might as well ask for Naz Reid while I'm at it since they probably won't keep him. Opening offer is SD, Reggie and McGee for Russell, McDaniels and Naz. They won't do it and would certainly ask for DFS instead of Reggie. That's a tough one. Love DFS, but McDaniels is younger and longer and better on D. If I'm also getting Russell extended to a term I want and Naz and getting rid of McGee, I do it.
I wouldn't hate Russell...on paper he fits better than SD alongside Luka in my opinion... about Mcdaniel I would love it... but man, it won't happen, they flatly refused to include it in Gobert's trade (and they seemed willing to be robbed) they really value it... they will not use it to convert DR into SD... Apart from this trade... I am not a believer in the politics of everything because of the 2 stars. I think that surrounding Luka with good headlines is the most realistic path.. I would start by letting Turner know that we want him in the Mavs.. Wood+FRP
(01-17-2023, 08:14 PM)Mikelorenzo Wrote: [ -> ]I wouldn't hate Russell...on paper he fits better than SD alongside Luka in my opinion... about Mcdaniel I would love it... but man, it won't happen, they flatly refused to include it in Gobert's trade (and they seemed willing to be robbed) they really value it... they will not use it to convert DR into SD... Apart from this trade... I am not a believer in the politics of everything because of the 2 stars. I think that surrounding Luka with good headlines is the most realistic path.. I would start by letting Turner know that we want him in the Mavs.. Wood+FRP
I'm struggling how Russell fits better next to Luka than SD? Maybe he is not as much of a negative on defense, but his only value on offense is with the ball in his hands. He shoots 30% from three. How is that a good fit with Luka?
(01-17-2023, 05:50 PM)StrandedOnBeauboisHill Wrote: [ -> ]Would you agree that trading the 2027/2029 picks vs the 2024/2026 picks is wayyyyyyyyy more risky. There is no single move that makes this roster a contender so we need to make sure we don’t compound our roster asset mistakes by mortgaging far too far out into the future.
You do not want a situation where Luka is gone and you have no picks, trading picks this deadline opens that door up. I would argue that’s the ultimate form of FO ineptitude.
You're obviously a Mavs fan since at least the days of Roddy B. Have you not been paying attention? This franchise rarely keeps FRP and when they do is abysmal at drafting in the first round (outside of Dirk and Luka).
Explain to me why "
trading the 2027/2029 picks vs the 2024/2026 picks is wayyyyyyyyy more risky", It's win now.
(01-17-2023, 08:14 PM)Mikelorenzo Wrote: [ -> ]I wouldn't hate Russell...on paper he fits better than SD alongside Luka in my opinion... about Mcdaniel I would love it... but man, it won't happen, they flatly refused to include it in Gobert's trade (and they seemed willing to be robbed) they really value it... they will not use it to convert DR into SD... Apart from this trade... I am not a believer in the politics of everything because of the 2 stars. I think that surrounding Luka with good headlines is the most realistic path.. I would start by letting Turner know that we want him in the Mavs.. Wood+FRP
Maybe not your main point, but Russell Westbrook is a nightmare pairing with Luka. See his incompatibility with Lebron, then multiply it by a million.
IMO, the only role Westbrook would have here is at most 20mins in reserve.
Think you guys are confusing D'Lo with Westbrook.
(01-17-2023, 05:58 PM)IamDougieFresh Wrote: [ -> ]My thinking is that if we come to a deal on a Wood extension, he will cost about half as much. When you add whatever we would have to send to PHX, it is obvious to me that we should roll with Wood. Of course, dirty Mark and the boys could mess up the Wood situation, but we will have to wait and see.
For the table: Go to basketball-reference com -> player comparison finder on the right -> put in the players you want to compare (you can do single seasons, full career, group of seasons) -> hit export data above the table -> use the html table option as it seems to work the best on this site -> copy paste the whole thing into your post.
That's fair.
I will say I'm a bit more hesitant to move on from Wood after his newfound defense. It's the consistency I have an issue with. And I question if he'll keep that same defensive intensity after he gets handed a big contract.
Meanwhile Ayton has shown he can bring that defensive intensity consistently. Wood is no doubt a better individual player, at least offensively. I'm open to the extension. Just dubious in Marks ability to nail it down and I'd rather turn Wood into another asset than have him walk for nothing.
Thanks for the bbref table tip! Will definitely use it in the future.
(01-17-2023, 10:12 PM)SleepingHero Wrote: [ -> ]That's fair.
I will say I'm a bit more hesitant to move on from Wood after his newfound defense. .
I am not convinced that Wood's "newfound defense" is as great as all that. He is certainly being acclaimed for it to some degree. The vast majority of the attention comes from the shots blocked, which indeed is a defensive stat. But "number of blocked shots" is not a reliable read on defensive prowess.
It's hard to get a good read on individual defense, unfortunately. There are no truly good stats for it. Much of it is "eye test" stuff.
The blocks do show added effort and attention, and that's definitely a plus. That's a starting point. But I don't see him as a plus defender at all.
Or, to the conversational point, I still see a sizable unfilled hole on this roster for a defensive-oriented big man, that I don't think Wood is anywhere close to filling.
(01-17-2023, 08:59 PM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]Think you guys are confusing D'Lo with Westbrook.
Prolly right. The post was right after a Westbrook trade story, so it looked like it was referencing that, but D'Lo makes more sense.
I'd be more concerned about the level of competition faced when this newfound defensive prowess emerged. Collecting five blocks is nice, but when the team you are playing is running out a 38 year old LeBron James as one of their big men, I'd say that is less impressive. But, you can only play who is on your schedule.
More concerning would be the game he phoned in. Maybe he is taking cues from Luka who can sleep walk his way to 30 points, but if that's the type of effort you can expect to see in a contract year, what does he look like with a 4-year deal in his back pocket?
Wood is a good player with a great offensive toolset. He pairs nicely with Luka and like a lot of other players, he benefits from sharing the court with 77 (the Luka bump). I'm still left with a lot of unanswered questions with half the season gone. I don't think he can pick up enough slack to win you games if Luka misses time. Do you invest him because he's currently your second best player? Feels a bit similar to the THJ situation.
And @F Gump, I think you are right about the hole in the lineup, but if we invest heavily in Wood, I don't think it is wise to invest big dollars in someone to fill that role. Having a massive chunk of your salary cap in multiple players at the 4/5 seems counter to what is successful in today's modern NBA.
(01-17-2023, 11:12 PM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]Do you invest him because he's currently your second best player? Feels a bit similar to the THJ situation.
If he's truly your 2nd best player (I'm not convinced he is), you certainly want to keep him. But that isn't a blank check.
One other vital point - some 2nd-best's are way better than others. To me, the dividing line is whether he can make the team be a winner when the best guy is out, or can't. I don't think Wood is anywhere close to being a guy who can take the Mavs to wins when Luka is out. By that criteria, he's probably way down the list.
(01-17-2023, 11:12 PM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]And @F Gump, I think you are right about the hole in the lineup, but if we invest heavily in Wood, I don't think it is wise to invest big dollars in someone to fill that role. Having a massive chunk of your salary cap in multiple players at the 4/5 seems counter to what is successful in today's modern NBA.
That's a good observation. Unfortunately it doesn't offer answers, only questions. How do you roster-build to a title team, if you have opportunity to invest in a flawed player who will then keep you from fixing your core need for a strong defensive presence?
I do think that's the conundrum Wood brings to the table. Ideally, you want him to become that guy. But if he simply doesn't have the tools, and never will, what then?
(01-17-2023, 11:01 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]I am not convinced that Wood's "newfound defense" is as great as all that. He is certainly being acclaimed for it to some degree. The vast majority of the attention comes from the shots blocked, which indeed is a defensive stat. But "number of blocked shots" is not a reliable read on defensive prowess.
It's hard to get a good read on individual defense, unfortunately. There are no truly good stats for it. Much of it is "eye test" stuff.
The blocks do show added effort and attention, and that's definitely a plus. That's a starting point. But I don't see him as a plus defender at all.
Or, to the conversational point, I still see a sizable unfilled hole on this roster for a defensive-oriented big man, that I don't think Wood is anywhere close to filling.
No one is saying he's become a good defender. The point is he's not the bad defender advertised, and what he DOES do well does outweigh what he doesn't making him something like something above average arguably. We did look way worse defensively the game he missed. That combined with his offense makes him a much better fit and more valuable than the all offense no defense tweener big he was advertised as being. He doesn't need to be a big defensive difference maker to be a piece we cannot afford to let go for nothing.
I also think while a defensive oriented big next to Wood would be desirable, a much bigger help would actually be having multiple high level defensive wings/guards limiting penetration in the first place, would make his life defensively much much easier. A starting lineup of Luka, Green, DFS and Bullock playing at the defensive level they reached last season and Wood would have our defense much closer to the level of defensive play we were playing at last season as a top 10 team in defensive rating, than having another defensive big in the starting unit(especially if that big can't shoot messing up our offensive spacing), though a defensive big designated for the bench with Kleber out for the season should be a priority.
(01-17-2023, 11:19 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]To me, the dividing line is whether he can make the team be a winner when the best guy is out, or can't. I don't think Wood is anywhere close to being a guy who can take the Mavs to wins when Luka is out. By that criteria, he's probably way down the list.
Because he is still remains a big at the end of the day. There is some increased dependency compared to the other position.
Against OKC he was somewhat dominant, and ending up with a statline of 27 Pts on 8-13 FG with a plus minus of +1. While the ball hog brothers of SD/THJ ending up with 6-16 and and 6-18 lines. Luka doing whatever he wants on offense is one thing, but Kidd letting SD/THJ do whatever they want without any coaching influence is hard to watch at times.
There were some bafflings games early on from a coaching stand point ignoring Wood and playing him < 20 min. First Nuggets and 2nd Nuggets game was a fireable offence from Kidd.
127 scored first Denver game -> 26 min from Wood, 28 pts on 11-16 FG
98 scored 2nd Denver game -> 17 min from Wood, 5 pts on 2-3 FG
The Luka/Wood PnR made a mockery out of Deandre Jordan in that 1st game. 2nd game Kidd & coaching staff suffering from dementia 2 days later.
The Locked-On guys did a trade pod yesterday talking about some of the rumor dump that went on yesterday (thanks to Kamm for posting most of them).
Nothing earth shattering. Pissed me off a bit that Green was included in just about every trade they made. I also found it interesting how many times they had Wood in a deal. They had one question where they asked if it is the 11th hour on trade deadline day and you don't have a Wood extension in place, would you...
It was a deal with Charlotte that brought back Mason Plumlee and Rozier. Can't recall the specifics (but I'm sure it included Josh Green).
I've said on several occasions that I think Charlotte is the most logical destination if Wood is traded (in fact, I find it hard to find other spots that make sense). So, I played around with my own version (that didn't include Green...good grief). Mine had Wood and LeVert going to Charlotte, THJ to Cleveland and Mason Plumlee and Rozier to Dallas. I go to all this trouble to say that the most shocking thing about plugging that into the Trade Machine is its LEBRON calculation gave Dallas FIVE more wins. LEBRON has a 1.82 for Rozier compared to a slightly negative rating for THJ (EPM has those two swapped). Both LEBRON and EPM rate Plumlee over Wood as does VORP as does WS.
An indictment of the the advanced stat world? Or, an indictment of our eye tests regarding Wood? Or, does Mason Plumlee not suck nearly as much as the next half dozen posters are about to tell me.