MavsBoard

(05-21-2023, 02:12 PM)RoyTarpleysGhost Wrote: [ -> ]If I was the Lakers GM, I would not trade Reaves straight up for Kyrie.  Reaves reminds me of Brunson.  He just knows how to play.  Plus he's 24 years old and a wing.  Plus his annual salary will be half of what Kyrie will command.

Reaves, Vanderbilt, and a 1st I think grossly misjudges Kyrie's value around the league and assumes Lebron is gonna strongarm his franchise into trading for Kyrie.  JMO

I think LeBron is known for strong arming his teams personally. That seems to be the way the media and analyst portray him. I agree that Reaves, Vanderbilt and a 1st is unrealistic, but take the first out and it is definitely reasonable for a perennial all star and someone LeBron has won a title with. That being said I also agree that the Lakers shouldn't trade Reaves. I like the Brunson comparison. This will only happen if LeBron demands it imo. You very well could be right and I could be way off...lol

It´s almost like we are back in the bubble. Heat role players cannot miss from 3. Celtics are struggling against Spoelstra´s versatile zone heavy defense.

yall think both finals will be sweeps?

(05-21-2023, 09:30 PM)dmavs4life03 Wrote: [ -> ]yall think both finals will be sweeps?

It's possible. It would be the 1st time it ever happened.

Undrafted players combined for 70+ points for the Heat. Tatum and Brown combined for 26.

Miami is locked in and connected. It's Gabe Vincent's turn to show out with 29 pts and 6 3's. Duncan Robinson is hitting big shots. Last game it was Caleb Martin. Jimmy Butler took the night off basically. Boston just mailed it in. This series is over, only thing left to decide is if they get swept.

However much Spoelstra gets paid, it's not nearly enough

(05-21-2023, 05:38 AM)HoosierDaddyKid Wrote: [ -> ]Lakers are in a 0-3 hole vs Denver and D-Lo and Schroeder have been horrible getting torched by Murray. I could see Kyrie going there, but I disagree with the compensation of Reeves and Vanderbilt. Lakers will probably hold on to those two. The aforementioned Russell, Schroeder and Beasley will surely be moved.

With what leverage? Lakers at the very most if they renounce everyone and trade their pick for essentially no salary will carve out about 32 mil of cap space. That will equate to a tidy 4/140 mil contract for Kyrie. That is the absolute most he can get. Lakers are then left with a roster of Kyrie, Lebron, and AD, and literally no one else. They'd have the exception to fill a roster spot, then a bunch of merry minimums. 

Mavs on the other hand can offer 4 years 210 million. Kyrie might be a pariah, but he's not an idiot. He wouldn't willingly forego 70 million dollars (Ignoring the taxes in California too) to go play for a gutted LA roster. 

Reeves+Vanderbilt would be the absolute minimum starting level conversation for compensation for a Kyrie SnT. I'd ask for their last FRP unprotected along with Rui as well.

Celtics have joined the 76ers, Grizzlies and Sons as FRAUDS.

Reaves won’t be in a SnT deal from the Lakers. What we can hope for is Rui, Vandy, Bamba with Russell going to a 3rd team and we get rights to their 17 and get their 27. That’s the deal to look for. I know Omahen, I know.

ItsgoTime— I can not say yes fast enough to that deal. Two young big wings, another pick in this deep draft and 2027 1st, AND we don’t have to take Russell. Oh and Bamba as a a flyer big? Sign me up.

(05-21-2023, 11:39 PM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]Reaves won’t be in a SnT deal from the Lakers. What we can hope for is Rui, Vandy, Bamba with Russell going to a 3rd team and we get rights to their 17 and get their 27. That’s the deal to look for. I know Omahen, I know.

This is now the second time you have called me out in last couple of days. What kind of board do you want to have here? A bubble, where everyone creates homer deals and there is no discussion?

I am sorry, if my opinion doesn't match yours. Not sure, why you take it personally. I always provide arguments, why I think differently. I would love this kind of deal, its great for Mavs considering they still lose their star. Unfortunately, there is not a single SnT deal in last couple of years (too lazy to check further back in history) that would support thinking, that Mavs could get a huge bag for a player that wants out. Check Lowry, Butler and other SnT deals. This is of course assuming, Kyrie wants out. But if he doesn't want, not sure why Mavs would even look to trade him, as it is still better to have him than a couple of role players and 2 picks. They are just moving back to where they were before the trade.

But if Kyrie wants out, what you are basically "offering" to Lakers is - you give up all the players you have to give up if you want to go the cap space way plus the two picks. I am sorry, but that is just not realistic imho. In my opinion, you either eat bad salary like Russel and you can demand pick(s), or you take the good salaries and Lakers take care how to send the remaining salaries to a third team. In my opinion, Lakers easily say no to this kind of deal. Also, for this deal to happen, Rui would need to want to go to Mavs, meaning Mavs are the team offering him more than anyone else is willing on FA market. Are you sure, that would still be a great contract to have? I don't have a feeling, what his market value is. 

I am really eager to see examples and arguments, why you think this deal you proposed is realistic to happen.

(05-22-2023, 04:19 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]  In my opinion, Lakers easily say no to this kind of deal. 

And in the ones you are proposing, in my opinion the Mavs say no as well.

Your thesis that Kyrie will dictate where he goes, and then the Mavs would have to take whatever junk LA opts to offer, and will do so, just isn't realistic on many levels. And you are right that it takes THREE to tango when it comes to a sign-and-trade.

But each of the three have to get something that makes them want to HELP THE OTHERS or they won't play. Deals die all the time because one party or another feels they are putting in more than they are getting back, and Mavs aren't going to put an all-star into one without getting rewarded well.

I think Kyrie will sign with the Mavs. The idea of looking for a different place for him to play? Maybe later, maybe never.

(05-22-2023, 05:46 AM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]And in the ones you are proposing, in my opinion the Mavs say no as well.

Your thesis that Kyrie will dictate where he goes, and then the Mavs would have to take whatever junk LA opts to offer, and will do so, just isn't realistic on many levels. And you are right that it takes THREE to tango when it comes to a sign-and-trade.

But each of the three have to get something that makes them want to HELP THE OTHERS or they won't play. Deals die all the time because one party or another feels they are putting in more than they are getting back, and Mavs aren't going to put an all-star into one without getting rewarded well.

I think Kyrie will sign with the Mavs. The idea of looking for a different place for him to play? Maybe later, maybe never.

I perfectly agree it is by far most likely Kyrie will sign with Mavs. I hope he will. Its the road they chose and if he does not, it is just another failure for them.

As per the bag they could get, I think the main difference I have with some posters is phylosophical about the concept of the SnT. Mavs are not trading Kyrie. He is a FA. They can choose to help him if he wants to play somewhere else. I think that is a huge difference. Of course, they are rewarded for that help, but I think that reward doesn't nearly offset the market value of such a player, if he was under actual contract. I think this is confirmed when looking at previous SnT examples. Philly got just JRich for Butler. Toronto got Achiuwa for Lowry. I am not sure what makes you so confident Irving wouldn't pull all sorts of shit to get his, if he really wanted to.

I never made any proposal, where Mavs were taking back whatever trash Lakers offered. My last one was Reaves and Vandy, which you said is not realistic, because Lakers have limitations to what contract they can offer to Reaves. I don't want Russel. I would take Beasley or Bamba expiring for matching salaries. But we concluded, such a deal is not possible

(05-22-2023, 04:19 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]This is now the second time you have called me out in last couple of days. What kind of board do you want to have here? A bubble, where everyone creates homer deals and there is no discussion?

I am sorry, if my opinion doesn't match yours. Not sure, why you take it personally. I always provide arguments, why I think differently. I would love this kind of deal, its great for Mavs considering they still lose their star. Unfortunately, there is not a single SnT deal in last couple of years (too lazy to check further back in history) that would support thinking, that Mavs could get a huge bag for a player that wants out. Check Lowry, Butler and other SnT deals. This is of course assuming, Kyrie wants out. But if he doesn't want, not sure why Mavs would even look to trade him, as it is still better to have him than a couple of role players and 2 picks. They are just moving back to where they were before the trade.

But if Kyrie wants out, what you are basically "offering" to Lakers is - you give up all the players you have to give up if you want to go the cap space way plus the two picks. I am sorry, but that is just not realistic imho. In my opinion, you either eat bad salary like Russel and you can demand pick(s), or you take the good salaries and Lakers take care how to send the remaining salaries to a third team. In my opinion, Lakers easily say no to this kind of deal. Also, for this deal to happen, Rui would need to want to go to Mavs, meaning Mavs are the team offering him more than anyone else is willing on FA market. Are you sure, that would still be a great contract to have? I don't have a feeling, what his market value is. 

I am really eager to see examples and arguments, why you think this deal you proposed is realistic to happen.

I'm giving you a like, even though they took them away. What makes people think other teams are just going to cave in to proposals some teams throw against the wall? I think it's safe to say Reaves and Rui won't be included in any deal. They're a big reason for their late season push to get to the WCF.

All the credit to the heat. To bad we didn't get to see the rested McGee in the playoffs like we did with Robinson. ha. In all seriousness, Robinson and the Heat deserve a lot of credit. It must be hard after signing a big contract to be out of the rotation. It would be easy to check out or lose confidence. To be ready to play and produce in the playoffs says a lot about him.

Martin has looked great. I remember watching him and his brother player in college. I believe the Heat one was the better college player, but he went undrafted. He looks like a legit guy that every team wants. Long and skilled.

(05-22-2023, 07:12 AM)Chicagojk Wrote: [ -> ]All the credit to the heat.  

Yeah, they really surprised me. Jokic has been phenomenal, but Butler at this point deserves the MVP even more. 

I wonder what is wrong with Celtics. Quite difficult to imagine it would be possible to put better players around Tatum and Brown. I wonder if there will be any shake-up

(05-22-2023, 04:19 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]This is now the second time you have called me out in last couple of days. What kind of board do you want to have here? A bubble, where everyone creates homer deals and there is no discussion?

I am sorry, if my opinion doesn't match yours. Not sure, why you take it personally. I always provide arguments, why I think differently. I would love this kind of deal, its great for Mavs considering they still lose their star. Unfortunately, there is not a single SnT deal in last couple of years (too lazy to check further back in history) that would support thinking, that Mavs could get a huge bag for a player that wants out. Check Lowry, Butler and other SnT deals. This is of course assuming, Kyrie wants out. But if he doesn't want, not sure why Mavs would even look to trade him, as it is still better to have him than a couple of role players and 2 picks. They are just moving back to where they were before the trade.

But if Kyrie wants out, what you are basically "offering" to Lakers is - you give up all the players you have to give up if you want to go the cap space way plus the two picks. I am sorry, but that is just not realistic imho. In my opinion, you either eat bad salary like Russel and you can demand pick(s), or you take the good salaries and Lakers take care how to send the remaining salaries to a third team. In my opinion, Lakers easily say no to this kind of deal. Also, for this deal to happen, Rui would need to want to go to Mavs, meaning Mavs are the team offering him more than anyone else is willing on FA market. Are you sure, that would still be a great contract to have? I don't have a feeling, what his market value is. 

I am really eager to see examples and arguments, why you think this deal you proposed is realistic to happen.

Because the Lakers have 0 salary matching for a contract as big as Kyrie’s (unless we’re putting LBJ or AD in the deal). The deal you proposed? How was that for salary matching? Are you signing Reaves to a $35M deal (if you could)? It’s easy to throw out 2 names and say, this is the best we can get. Don’t forget the Mavs can say no and then what are the Lakers gonna do? It’s a delicate balance both ways. Mavs just paid a cheap bounty to get him on the team. There’s no reason to work with anyone if they don’t get more than that back. Teams with no capspace are not in the driver’s seat of this deal (we aren’t exactly either, but we don’t have to give in to a beating of an offer). Kyrie wants that team? Fine, we’ll sign him to his accepted deal, then trade him at earliest convenience. We still will not, however, give him away. That’s not disrespecting Kyrie, it’s just not disrespecting ourselves.

Edit: there is a difference between an echo chamber and every single thought getting shut down immediately. I have to give a dissertation on why the trade makes sense every single time making the post a wall of text just to appease the limited thinking mind of Omahen. It gets tiresome and has gone on for as long as I can remember. Sometimes a person gets tired of it.

(05-22-2023, 07:35 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, they really surprised me. Jokic has been phenomenal, but Butler at this point deserves the MVP even more. 

I wonder what is wrong with Celtics. Quite difficult to imagine it would be possible to put better players around Tatum and Brown. I wonder if there will be any shake-up

He has no answer for Spoelstra´s 2-3 zone it and looking at his post game quotes it seems like he lost/is losing the locker room.

(05-22-2023, 07:53 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]Because the Lakers have 0 salary matching for a contract as big as Kyrie’s (unless we’re putting LBJ or AD in the deal). The deal you proposed? How was that for salary matching? Are you signing Reaves to a $35M deal (if you could)? It’s easy to throw out 2 names and say, this is the best we can get. Don’t forget the Mavs can say no and then what are the Lakers gonna do? It’s a delicate balance both ways. Mavs just paid a cheap bounty to get him on the team. There’s no reason to work with anyone if they don’t get more than that back. Teams with no capspace are not in the driver’s seat of this deal (we aren’t exactly either, but we don’t have to give in to a beating of an offer). Kyrie wants that team? Fine, we’ll sign him to his accepted deal, then trade him at earliest convenience. We still will not, however, give him away. That’s not disrespecting Kyrie, it’s just not disrespecting ourselves.

Edit: there is a difference between an echo chamber and every single thought getting shut down immediately. I have to give a dissertation on why the trade makes sense every single time making the post a wall of text just to appease the limited thinking mind of Omahen. It gets tiresome and has gone on for as long as I can remember. Sometimes a person gets tired of it.

That is not true, they have zero salary matching for a contract as big, well, if you count the players they could SnT. The deal I proposed included the thought that he could be signed for more than 50/4. After that was discarded, I am retracting it. 

Mavs got Kyrie on a team for 6 months. He is FA now. They can't force him to resign with them, if he doesn't want to. They are also not obliged to take back trash to get him to a team he would want. Mavs are not much more in a driver seat than Lakers. I outlined possibilities Kyrie has several times. 

Thanks for further insulting me. There are plenty of ideas I like here or give minor tweaks proposals. However, there are some I don't agree with. Not sure why you are posting ideas if you can't handle different opinions.

Edit: Reaves at 20, Vandy at 4 and Bamba gets you to over 40 mil salary for Kyrie. Put Beasley instead of Bamba and you can get even higher. And I do realize now, Reaves can't be SnT at 20, so not possible.