saw on reddit that Bobby Marks proposed Rozier, Oubre and McDaniels for Tim Hardaway, Davis Bertans and a 2027 top 10 protected first. Thoughts?
(01-18-2023, 04:47 PM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]https://twitter.com/TheNBACentral/status...6267911168
Caruso is someone I would really like. Very good defender and shooter.
I've never really been that high on Lavine for whatever reason. Maybe it's his lack of Defense. Siakam is someone I like as a wing.
All that I know is that Dallas needs to make a move at the deadline if there is an upgrade available.
Caruso would be a sweet get
(01-18-2023, 06:47 PM)Chicagojk Wrote: [ -> ]saw on reddit that Bobby Marks proposed Rozier, Oubre and McDaniels for Tim Hardaway, Davis Bertans and a 2027 top 10 protected first. Thoughts?
I hate the idea of getting back into pick purgatory without a major upgrade involved
Hardy or Green instead makes more sense to me
With the recent Bulls rumors. Would anyone here be willing to gamble on Lonzo´s health. On paper he is the perfect running mate for Luka.
It’s not my most rational take, and I am probably alone on this one, but I hate his dad so much that I think I would prefer wasting the entire Luka era to having to hear that guy interviewed 3-5 times a season.
(01-18-2023, 06:47 PM)Chicagojk Wrote: [ -> ]saw on reddit that Bobby Marks proposed Rozier, Oubre and McDaniels for Tim Hardaway, Davis Bertans and a 2027 top 10 protected first. Thoughts?
THJ might be the more efficient player (not sure about this though), but Rozier provides ballhandling Tim doesn't have. Rozier checks a requirement.
The first round pick is the cost for Bertans. I'd hate losing the FRP but McDaniels balances this out. He is still a young player who can already help.
Oubre helps this season and if the Mavs decide not to re-sign him, I'd be okay with that.
McDaniels could only get better, but even if he stays at his current play, he is a long 3 point shooting forward who can handle the ball as much as Wood can. He isn't your typical Maxi 3-and-D style big, and that's a plus (although Maxi of course trumps him on defense).
This trade is a significant upgrade for the current season, and could still be a good trade for the future depending on how McDaniels develops (which I think he would be a good role player moving forward).
(01-18-2023, 07:41 PM)dirkfansince1998 Wrote: [ -> ]With the recent Bulls rumors. Would anyone here be willing to gamble on Lonzo´s health. On paper he is the perfect running mate for Luka.
I was screaming to sign him instead of THJ, so I completely agree he'd be the perfect running mate with Luka.
I know nothing of his injuries other than he's been injured.
(01-18-2023, 08:04 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]It’s not my most rational take, and I am probably alone on this one, but I hate his dad so much that I think I would prefer wasting the entire Luka era to having to hear that guy interviewed 3-5 times a season.
I'd imagine his dad is too busy slubbering the knob of his more successful son.
Re NY
I see no way they include a FRP to dump Fournier contract. They are gathering assets for a big trade, not dumping them for a couple of role players that perhaps make them just a little bit better. They will not contend this year. Fournier is expiring next season, shorter contract than THJ!
Feels like there is blood in the water and other GM's can feel it. Luckily trading a pick is very difficult for us. I think every team is going to ask for Green and/or Hardy as a small tip in any trade. Hopefully Dallas stays firm.
With teams sensing desperation, I hope we don't panic. Maybe a small move, if that.
Clippers are struggling but the past few years they did find Reggie Jackson for nothing, signed Batum two years ago once released and last year picked up Powell. I wonder if there are any kind of sneaky deals like that out there this year.
(01-18-2023, 01:33 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]Not a fan?
I admit I'm not familiar with his game, but fans in both ATL and NY seem to think he has deserved more opportunity than he has gotten. I think he's a reasonably good stab a low risk, high reward, scoring wing. But again, I'm not super familiar with him.
I’d like to amend my answer a bit. I spent a little time digging into Reddish and could see him being a decent buy-low candidate. I still want something more from NY if the deal is for Reggie, but the something more doesn’t need to be as valuable as my previous post suggested. If the offer was Reddish/Sims for Reggie, I’d probably do it.
BTW, is Reggie playing to stay lately or playing to show the league he’s still got some O in him? This kind of move is predicated on the idea that we aren’t going to the finals this year. Josh can do anything Reggie can do in those minutes (and more), so the loss of Reggie isn’t monstrous. The question is how do you replace Josh off the bench. That would be a loss. We’d have Hardy, Cam and Frank to soak up minutes.
I think Luka could turn Sims into quite the PnR roller. He can rebound, has a live body and more size than Powell. We could REALLY use another big right now. As to Reddish, his numbers are actually decent the few times he’s gotten minutes. Look at his splits when he gets 30+ this season. It is only 9 games, but his TS% and 3% are great. He SUCKS when he gets spot minutes. The year before is similar. Take out one bad game and he shot it well when he got 27+. Give him a solid role the rest of the season and he might be a good bench scorer or a helpful trade piece not too far down the road. It isn’t like Reggie is some indispensable young dude who is locked up for years to come. Give me two kids and unlock Josh a bit more and I’d be for this.
BTW, I agree that this is outside Cuban’s usual in-season pattern. But, this team needs more dynamic athletes. This kind of move isn’t sure-fire by any means. But, you’ve only got Reggie locked up for one more year anyway.
Still kind of risky but you could ask NY to remove the protections on our pick in that swap.
(01-18-2023, 06:14 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]To keep the record straight, fiddling with the NY pick doesn't change anything. Not enough to bother with somehow revising it, not enough to stop a trade if one is available.
The Mavs right now could trade the 3 picks (25, 27, 29) with conditions -- ones that wouldn't really matter. They have have to word precisely, such as "if 23 conveys, then 2 years, 4 years, 6 years after" (plus some more wording as to what happens if 23 does not convey to NY) with the other team comfortable the Mavs won't go in the tank and keep 23 pick from going to NY. That's so remote of a chance that it shouldn't matter.
I wrote about conditional wording not long ago, but I’m under the impression there is a benefit currently to removing protections on the 23 pick ‘IF’ the team wants to trade 25, 27 and 29 with conditions. You have to be mindful of the max term for a trade to be completed. The protections on the 23 pick mean it might not convey in time to fit three picks in before seven years is up I guess a work-around could be creating an additional condition that the last pick becomes something else (two seconds) if it gets pushed past the legal window. But, I don’t believe you can guarantee three picks in seven years right now without removing protections on 23.
Something else we all need to bear in mind if Dallas wants to trade 3-4 picks even this summer. The protections on those picks will need to be fairly minimal. As some have said, this summer we can trade 24, 26, 28 and 30. But, Dallas would have to be careful about protections on those future picks as the protections can’t carry the last pick past the 7 year window. So, the picks would need to be unprotected or turn into seconds the next year. Even trading 3 picks you can’t have protections on all of them.
(01-18-2023, 11:36 PM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]Still kind of risky but you could ask NY to remove the protections on our pick in that swap.
Agreed. It would be interesting to hear how both teams would sell such a thing. NY would rightly claim to its fans that it is a benefit to have the unprotected pick. But, there is a precedent for teams paying to adjust protections. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but if Dallas and NY work out a fair deal in its own right (let’s say it is Reddish/Sims for Reggie), did they also get compensated for adjusting the protection? If not, then Dallas could tell fans we got something for free that teams usually have to pay for.
I’m of the mind you only remove the protection if you have a second or bigger deal that requires something you can’t give without removing the protections. It is risky unless we are adding a difference maker. As FG pointed out, you can do 25 and 27 right now by writing in conditions regarding what happens if 23 doesn’t convey. The issue as things stand now would be 29. That would need to be a really big trade if it required three picks.
Edit: We talk a lot about lifting protections, but if I’m NY, I’d gladly take an unprotected 27 or 28 and give back the 23 pick.
I'm working under the assumption that NY covets Reggie and are asking a 2nd for Reddish. No idea on the value of Sims but I don't think removing the protections is too much of an ask in the swap.
-Bullock has been terrible this year. The main benefit is reallocating his minutes to Josh.
-Flier on Reddish/Sims
-Removing the protections could easily backfire. We are a prolonged Luka injury away from a lottery pick.
-I don't think 2FRPs gets you a difference maker. We need a Murray level player and he went for 3FRPs.
(01-19-2023, 12:15 AM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]We are a prolonged Luka injury away from a lottery pick.
And he looks like an injury waiting to happen these days. Looks tired and hobbled to me.
(01-18-2023, 11:55 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: [ -> ]I wrote about conditional wording not long ago, but I’m under the impression there is a benefit currently to removing protections on the 23 pick ‘IF’ the team wants to trade 25, 27 and 29 with conditions. You have to be mindful of the max term for a trade to be completed. The protections on the 23 pick mean it might not convey in time to fit three picks in before seven years is up I guess a work-around could be creating an additional condition that the last pick becomes something else (two seconds) if it gets pushed past the legal window. But, I don’t believe you can guarantee three picks in seven years right now without removing protections on 23..
Yes, that's ^ what I was saying. And yes, the "what if's" in such a trade can't include a pick that extends past year 7 (aka 2029).
But there's one additional piece of info that's crucial to understand, which was the key point I was trying to convey -- which is, they can factor in the "likelihood" (or lack of same) for the 23 pick to convey to NY. The trade partner being willing to make an assumption that 23 FRP will indeed go to NY obviously depends on what this team's record looks like when we get to the TDL, but what I wrote was with the
stated assumption that the other team would be comfortable with the likelihood that Dallas won't end up in the bottom 10 this season.
As bad as the Mavs are playing right now, I don't think anyone thinks it will get that bad. Or, to put it another way, do we think the Mavs could keep their pick if they wanted to? Seems farfetched to me.
Which is my point.
It's an odds game. If you trade after the season, you know for sure 100%. But if you/they are very very confident by the TDL of what will happen, you should be able to do pretty much the same trade now. And in fact, the Mavs being forced to use picks farther out (25-27-29) doing the "3 picks for a star" trade now, instead of the after-draft possibility of 24-26-28, is probably juicier for the trade partner, incentivizing the tiny risk.
(01-19-2023, 12:37 AM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]As bad as the Mavs are playing right now, I don't think anyone thinks it will get that bad. Or, to put it another way, do we think the Mavs could keep their pick if they wanted to? Seems farfetched to me.
I don't think it is all that farfetched. We are going into a meatier part of the schedule and Luka is logging career highs in minutes played and it feels like just about every game he comes up hobbled. The team also feels awfully snake bitten this season but you could say that about a lot of the teams in the league. It's better than a coinflip odds that the pick conveys but it feels like there is a 20-25% chance we could end up in the lottery. There are only six teams with under 20 wins this season.
So is Collins performance/contract similar to what we view THJ as (slightly overpaid and could return minimal value)?