(06-05-2023, 01:36 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think so. I've seen several instances of S/W's of only the guaranteed money in the past.
But wouldn’t Bertans have to sit out the required number of games FIRST before his last year PO can be reduced to the small guaranteed buyout?
(06-05-2023, 02:10 PM)Jason Terry Wrote: [ -> ]But wouldn’t Bertans have to sit out the required number of games FIRST before his last year PO can be reduced to the small guaranteed buyout?
No. The guarantee increases IF he plays X games in the prior year on that contract. Once waived it is assured he will play 0 games while being on that contract. That's the nature of guarantee triggers -- if you suck so bad that the team doesn't want you, they can make you be gone with only the fully guaranteed amount, but you can't come back in and somehow obligate them for more.
(06-05-2023, 12:25 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think he makes it to TDL. I think some team, either Mavs or someone else, will s-w him for cap savings both now and in the future.
That may end up being the case, but I hope they try to eat his 17m cap hit this year instead. I don't want to stare at that 4.4m for 5 years. A s-w of 1.7 x 3 is less of an annoyance long term.
(06-05-2023, 05:07 PM)loki Wrote: [ -> ]That may end up being the case, but I hope they try to eat his 17m cap hit this year instead. I don't want to stare at that 4.4m for 5 years. A s-w of 1.7 x 3 is less of an annoyance long term.
This is where I’m at and think his value increases at the TDL.
(06-05-2023, 03:35 PM)Chicagojk Wrote: [ -> ]https://twitter.com/wojespn/status/16658...44034?s=20
Meanwhile the glazier slow Mavs…….
I think coaching staff construction is similar to roster construction. It's about chemistry, strengths and weaknesses. You can't just hire a bunch of high-profile guys with winning records and expect the sum of the parts to be greater.
(06-05-2023, 10:05 PM)DallasMaverick Wrote: [ -> ]I think coaching staff construction is similar to roster construction. It's about chemistry, strengths and weaknesses. You can't just hire a bunch of high-profile guys with winning records and expect the sum of the parts to be greater.
Welp, at least we have our head coach to supply 100% of the weaknesses.
(06-05-2023, 11:05 PM)Scott41theMavs Wrote: [ -> ]Welp, at least we have our head coach to supply 100% of the weaknesses.
Do we currently have the worst head coach in the league?
I'm leaning towards yes
(06-06-2023, 12:03 AM)Jym Wrote: [ -> ]Do we currently have the worst head coach in the league?
I'm leaning towards yes
I'd say on the face of it Wes Unseld Jr. is worse than Kidd.
Other coaches I say have an argument at being worse than Kidd due to a variety of factors:
Darvin Ham
J.B. Bickerstaff
Steve Clifford
Jacque Vaughn
Willie Green
Jamahl Mosely
Chauncy Billups
Jury is out on rookie coach Adrian Griffin as well so he can't be ranked right now.
I'd even go so far as to say Monty Williams has an argument at being worse than Kidd solely because Kidd thoroughly outcoached him in a 7 game series.
So I'd rank Kidd at 20th in the league which feels about right. Bottom 1/3rd of coaches.
(06-05-2023, 05:07 PM)loki Wrote: [ -> ]That may end up being the case, but I hope they try to eat his 17m cap hit this year instead. I don't want to stare at that 4.4m for 5 years. A s-w of 1.7 x 3 is less of an annoyance long term.
"This is where I’m at and think his value increases at the TDL."
None of us want the cap hit. But keeping Bertans' useless carcass on the bench in hopes for a trade down the road (which may or may not ever materialize), you're sacrificing the addition of one full MLE player (or a player using Wood SNT). And you're also clogging the roster which prevents having that slot to sign the most promising minimum salary guy to begin to develop. Would a deadline trade using just Bertans net more value than that? That's the question.
(06-06-2023, 09:58 AM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]"This is where I’m at and think his value increases at the TDL."
None of us want the cap hit. But keeping Bertans' useless carcass on the bench in hopes for a trade down the road (which may or may not ever materialize), you're sacrificing the addition of one full MLE player (or a player using Wood SNT). And you're also clogging the roster which prevents having that slot to sign the most promising minimum salary guy to begin to develop. Would a deadline trade using just Bertans net more value than that? That's the question.
There is no money gained, if we just waive him - the opposite is true, because you have to pay the player you take a flyer on.
And I'm pretty sure no min-player is as good as Bertans.
And S&W handicaps us for years.
There might be a situation where S&W im is the only way. But that would have us to get nothing for something.
So don't look for that.
(06-06-2023, 10:10 AM)Mapka Wrote: [ -> ]There is no money gained, if we just waive him - the opposite is true, because you have to pay the player you take a flyer on.
And I'm pretty sure no min-player is as good as Bertans.
And S&W handicaps us for years.
There might be a situation where S&W im is the only way. But that would have us to get nothing for something.
So don't look for that.
I'm not sure I completely follow what you are saying, but ...
The idea that a s-w of Bertans gains you
nothing, player-wise, is way off track. In a hard-cap-ish world, you have limits of total payroll each season. Moving the vast majority of Bertans' salary to the future, paid in installments, opens up spending room that otherwise does not exist (probably use of the full MLE and BAE), which should be able to be USEFUL players for this season and beyond (instead of Bertans).
The point being, there is indeed much to be gained, and gained immediately this season, if you s-w Bertans and create some room to spend. If you can simply swap DB for a good useful player, because some team wants to do the s-w for their own payroll purposes, then yeah count me in, but
I don't think he will carry anywhere near that value (of yielding a regular useful rotation player similar to the value expected from an MLE player).
As far as the statement that "I'm pretty sure no min-player is as good as Bertans," that might be true for 2023-24 but the value of the difference is minimal since 14th-15th guys will rarely play anyhow. But it's better to use that never-used player slot for working to develop a player who MIGHT end up having future value (whereas, there is no way whatsoever DB will be on the team in 2024-25).
I think we have seen so many coaching changes, because so many teams basically can't really improve the rosters anymore. Coaching change is the only hope for a lot of them. For example teams like Boston, Milwaukee, Phoenix, Atlanta, Clippers, Chicago, GSW, Minnesota, Cleveland and probably some more. They have their stars, their other key players are neutral value contracts at best, picks are mostly gone. No flexibility really to change much. So either they start shuffling their stars or hope a new coach will find a better way to put the existing pieces together.
So concretely for Phoenix, it is probably much easier to try to make the Ayton thing work than trying to replace him, since they won't get a lot for him anyway. Ayton might also respond differently to a new coach. Damn, I might be wrong with my Mavs prediction
(06-06-2023, 01:10 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not sure I completely follow what you are saying, but ...
The idea that a s-w of Bertans gains you nothing, player-wise, is way off track. In a hard-cap-ish world, you have limits of total payroll each season. Moving the vast majority of Bertans' salary to the future, paid in installments, opens up spending room that otherwise does not exist (probably use of the full MLE and BAE), which should be able to be USEFUL players for this season and beyond (instead of Bertans).
The point being, there is indeed much to be gained, and gained immediately this season, if you s-w Bertans and create some room to spend. If you can simply swap DB for a good useful player, because some team wants to do the s-w for their own payroll purposes, then yeah count me in, but I don't think he will carry anywhere near that value (of yielding a .
As far as the statement that "I'm pretty sure no min-player is as good as Bertans," that might be true for 2023-24 but the value of the difference is minimal since 14th-15th guys will rarely play anyhow. But it's better to use that never-used player slot for working to develop a player who MIGHT end up having future value (whereas, there is no way whatsoever DB will be on the team in 2024-25).
Our payroll is already hopeless with Luka/Kyrie so kill it further by dead money can't be worth it.
As I said there might be a moment where I say yes, if we get Vuc with the MLE and have or PF solved with Walker as #10.
But if we want to go anywhere, we have to pay Kyrie not more than Luka.
And then the MLE is available already.
(06-07-2023, 05:25 AM)Mapka Wrote: [ -> ]But if we want to go anywhere, we have to pay Kyrie not more than Luka.
And then the MLE is available already.
That doesn't do it, if they want the full buying power of the big MLE of 12.2M.
With the roster they have now, plus pick 10 and Kyrie at Luka's salary, they would only be able to offer part of the big MLE. With a 15-man roster and some cushion for possible emergencies during the year (because the hard cap has no flexibility, even if there are injuries), it's probably only 1/2 to 2/3 of the MLE. And no BAE, of course.
I will note that if don't try to stay under Apron 1, the choices change.
Between Apron 1 and 2, they don't get the big MLE that way either, but the 5M one instead, and they have to limit trades where they basically don't take back more than they send out. But the plus is that they might have money for DP, and money to help Wood in a snt (if that becomes available), which might offer a decent player in return, who knows.