(09-21-2020, 10:36 PM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ] (09-21-2020, 09:57 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I've seen him affect games VERY positively on defense during these playoffs
In the 16 playoff games for DEN this year:
Defensive Rating w/ Grant ON:
115.4
Def Rating w/ Grant OFF:
108.8
That is -6.6....but in fairness Jokic is -16.1 (!)...but the offense tanks without Jokic.
Sample size is small, but it was basically the same for Grant in the regular season. Makes me nervous.
I haven’t watched the lakers series, but in the DEN vs LAC series Grant was probably the best defensive player on the court for both teams. Not sure how that wouldn’t help us. Harris was good defensively too. Grant absolutely hides jokics lack of D
(09-21-2020, 10:36 PM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ] (09-21-2020, 09:57 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I've seen him affect games VERY positively on defense during these playoffs
In the 16 playoff games for DEN this year:
Defensive Rating w/ Grant ON:
115.4
Def Rating w/ Grant OFF:
108.8
That is -6.6....but in fairness Jokic is -16.1 (!)...but the offense tanks without Jokic.
Sample size is small, but it was basically the same for Grant in the regular season. Makes me nervous.
The problem with these numbers is that his minutes are basically matched with the best opposing wing scorer. Most teams are looking better on defense when they don´t have to worry about Kawhi or LBJ. Nuggets also have a good 2nd unit with (despite his blunder in the last game) a better defensive big coming from the bench.
Just look at Maxis numbers in the series against the Clippers. Terrible +/- and shooting percentages. Nevertheless I think that no other current Mavs player could have done a better job against Kawhi.
Just had a fever dream where the Mavs trade Powell+Wright+THJ to OKC for CP3. And the Mavs have an agreement with CP3 that he ops out next summer, leaving the Mavs enough room to sign Giannis.
What a weird dream.
(09-21-2020, 03:37 PM)Scott41theMavs Wrote: [ -> ]A few have commented on how they believe player options aren't resolved until after the draft. Not sure how it works, but I'm pretty sure they have to be resolved before the draft so that teams know their situations beforehand. If such is not the case, the league needs to change it in the next CBA, because that's stupid.
BTW, I am ***out*** on the idea of burning the #18 just to get rid of Wright and his contract. We need that player on a rookie deal, or at least to get a win-now player who is better than that guy is as a rookie in return. There's got to be a better way.
Edit: did a little research. The deadline for player options until just a short time ago was Oct. 17, the day before the erstwhile date of the NBA draft. I would assume the new date is Nov. 17, the day before the new draft date. Hot damn!
Sorry, not true.
When the option date was 10/17, the draft was to be 10/16. The final option date is always after the draft.
OPJ has the same after-draft deadline. So, these trade designs where THJ and picks go for OPJ aren't going to work. I'm not sure why we are looking in that direction anyway. The idea would be to ADD OPJ to the core that is here. The reason he is attractive is he is at the same time a good player and an expiring deal (like THJ). Regardless, if there is a THJ for OPJ deal, it will be in the new season and it is highly unlikely 18 will be included. Carry on.
(09-21-2020, 05:29 PM)Jason Terry Wrote: [ -> ]Yes we need a perimeter defender preferably a wing. 6’7” athlete DFS clone. This alone would make a big difference and there’s minutes available there
Maybe also add a defense first guard like Frank Ntilikana to match up with guys like Lillard.
Then throw in someone maybe even vet min or WCS or Baynes ends up being the guy. But a D first big with some toughness and rebounding.
I don’t think THj was that bad. He was asked to do more than he’s ever done in his career. Rick can turn anyone to a team defender if they bring the effort. Haven’t seen any indication that THj isn’t giving it his all. Same with Dorian. They, along with Luka, KP and Maxi played way too many minutes. I think the team defense will be better with a few additions bringing everyones minutes down. Just add a couple dogs and we will be fine. Rick will get everyone to buy in. And if it’s failure next year we can still move on. 2011 Mavs won with team defense
I see a potential starter in Frank depending on what happens elsewhere on the roster. He is just nasty on D and won't be over exposed on O like he was in NY. The Knicks have 13 PG's. A simple Jackson for Frank or Jackson plus 31 for Frank deal makes sense for them. They aren't going to make an $8mm QO for him and he will be gone in a year.
I find it interesting that you've mentioned Baynes a couple of times. I see more potential in WCS, but if Willie opts out, then I don't mind a year of Baynes at all. BTW, there isn't anything that says fifth starter can't be "by-committee". You've got KP, DFS, THJ and Luka. If we are playing Portland, maybe Frank starts. Maybe Maxi starts against LAC or LAL to help with the bigger bodies that are too much for DFS. As thin as we were at C this season, we didn't have a bench C who can defend if Maxi started. That would be solved by either WCS or Baynes.
(09-21-2020, 10:42 PM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]I would rather split the MLE on a couple options than blow the whole thing on a player that isn't a sure thing. Get more value contracts on the team that are tradeable assets later.
And you think Grant for full MLE is not a value contract? That is a very value contract despite your fears about his defensive shortcomings...
(09-22-2020, 02:15 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]I see a potential starter in Frank depending on what happens elsewhere on the roster.
I think Mavs should and will aim for bigger and more proven fish. We are not into developing reclamation projects business. As I said before, this is like plan Q - a lot of things should not happen to come to this.
(09-22-2020, 03:21 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ] (09-22-2020, 02:15 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]I see a potential starter in Frank depending on what happens elsewhere on the roster.
I think Mavs should and will aim for bigger and more proven fish. We are not into developing reclamation projects business. As I said before, this is like plan Q - a lot of things should not happen to come to this.
As I've said before. There are three potential paths. 1. Plan Powder. 2. Plan Have it Both Ways and 3. Plan Go for it now (and Powder be damned).
If you said with certainty that we are going through door #3, then yes, there are better ways to spend money. But reclamation projects on expiring contracts are exactly the idea with Door #2. Frank doesn't have to be a star. He just has to be close to as good as Wright and make Wright's contract go away in Plan Powder or Plan HIBW's. Or, as good as Jackson (low bar) and maintain the same cap flexibility.
So, is the issue you have with Frank or with the idea of not going for it now? I'm not advocating HIBW's. But, we've spend a good bit of time on Go for it Now plans. With Giannis sounding somewhat open to change, I thought it was time to think about alternatives.
(09-22-2020, 06:40 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]As I've said before. There are three potential paths. 1. Plan Powder. 2. Plan Have it Both Ways and 3. Plan Go for it now (and Powder be damned).
If you said with certainty that we are going through door #3, then yes, there are better ways to spend money. But reclamation projects on expiring contracts are exactly the idea with Door #2. Frank doesn't have to be a star. He just has to be close to as good as Wright and make Wright's contract go away in Plan Powder or Plan HIBW's. Or, as good as Jackson (low bar) and maintain the same cap flexibility.
So, is the issue you have with Frank or with the idea of not going for it now? I'm not advocating HIBW's. But, we've spend a good bit of time on Go for it Now plans. With Giannis sounding somewhat open to change, I thought it was time to think about alternatives.
Perhaps you have missed my previous answer about HIBW. It may be tricky in situation with a lot of unknowns. What if you don't have any expiring offers on the table? Do you go for (for example) THJ-Gordon straight up or do you say no thank you, I rather do nothing and basically wait a season? Or you get the Young for Wright offer on the table and you don't have anything else. Do you take it, because it will make us better or reject it because it might make us less flexible? A question I have is, is HIBW really possible or will it just swing to Plan Powder or Plan go for it now, based on what it opens on the market? Fortunately, most of the players we are looking at are actually expiring.
Despite the above, going after Frank is far from the only HIBW option. Richardson, Schroeder, Oubre and some vet meh options like Snell or Johsnon are theoretically possible to be had for a combination of Wright, Jackson and picks. And I claim all of these (plus several others) come before Ntilikina for me. If really none of those options work, than I take Frank as consolation prize.
Idea of Wright as a free agent signing should have worked, but it didn't, as Cato put it nicely in his last piece. I think there is at least same level of uncertainty with Frank. In theory it could work. But will it in reality? I would be disapointed if Franky Smokes and (for example) one year rental of Jamaychal Green would be our only offseason moves.
And to add - if Mavs really believed Frank is the right piece, they could have traded for him long ago. It wouldn't cost much.
(09-21-2020, 11:11 PM)dirkfansince1998 Wrote: [ -> ]The problem with these numbers is that his minutes are basically matched with the best opposing wing scorer.
Right, that is definitely going on to some extent, especially in the playoffs. I just don't know how Grant was used in the regular season and his numbers for the whole year there are very concerning.....the worst DRating of all the big minute guys by FAR. It is far more unusual in my experience for a player in the regular season to have a sub pattern matched exactly to an opposing player.
(09-22-2020, 07:14 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ] (09-22-2020, 06:40 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]As I've said before. There are three potential paths. 1. Plan Powder. 2. Plan Have it Both Ways and 3. Plan Go for it now (and Powder be damned).
If you said with certainty that we are going through door #3, then yes, there are better ways to spend money. But reclamation projects on expiring contracts are exactly the idea with Door #2. Frank doesn't have to be a star. He just has to be close to as good as Wright and make Wright's contract go away in Plan Powder or Plan HIBW's. Or, as good as Jackson (low bar) and maintain the same cap flexibility.
So, is the issue you have with Frank or with the idea of not going for it now? I'm not advocating HIBW's. But, we've spend a good bit of time on Go for it Now plans. With Giannis sounding somewhat open to change, I thought it was time to think about alternatives.
Despite the above, going after Frank is far from the only HIBW option. Richardson, Schroeder, Oubre and some vet meh options like Snell or Johsnon are theoretically possible to be had for a combination of Wright, Jackson and picks. And I claim all of these (plus several others) come before Ntilikina for me. If really none of those options work, than I take Frank as consolation prize.
Idea of Wright as a free agent signing should have worked, but it didn't, as Cato put it nicely in his last piece. I think there is at least same level of uncertainty with Frank. In theory it could work. But will it in reality? I would be disapointed if Franky Smokes and (for example) one year rental of Jamaychal Green would be our only offseason moves. And to add - if Mavs really believed Frank is the right piece, they could have traded for him long ago. It wouldn't cost much.
Just to be clear, Cato didn't say Frank wouldn't work here. He said he's "baffled" Wright didn't work. There is risk with every acquisition. I just read a piece about possible OKC and NYK deals and the OKC writer seemed pretty enamored with the idea of Ntilikina.
The question regarding your names is one of cost vs. expendibility. Can you get these guys for the package you are imagining? I'm imagining Jackson plus #31 for Frank as a comparison.
I think you can forget about Wright/18 for Richardson. Philly doesn't need another guard who can't shoot. THJ? Curry? Maybe. Now, suddenly, this isn't an inexpensive acquisition.
I see absolutely no upside to Snell and Johnson. But, what is the cost/benefit of getting rid of Wright's salary? Focusing on Snell, if it is Wright plus 31, I'm in. Snell would be useful and the cost wasn't much AND you moved money off the 21 cap. If you are paying 18 for this it is much harder to stomach. Snell is a very known quantity. Frank has much more upside. I'd have to know what other deals for Wright + 18 are on the table. In other words, can you do Jackson plus 31 for Frank and Wright + 18 for a wing?
Schroder was VERY close to being sixth man of the year. OKC has picks out the wazoo. I don't think Wright plus 18 gets this done.
Oubre is intriguing as he doesn't seem to be in their long term plans. I'm not sure Wright does anything for the Rubio led Suns. I would burn 18 for an Oubre rental, but you probably need a third team.
(09-22-2020, 02:15 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]I see a potential starter in Frank
Just here to make sure everyone knows how much I love Frank!
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media.giphy.com/media/l378d3HYZlj3aYe0E/giphy.gif)
(09-22-2020, 07:50 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]I'm imagining Jackson plus #31 for Frank as a comparison.
Which is a high price for a total reclamation project. Do we really want to spend assets for such risk?
(09-22-2020, 07:50 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]The question regarding your names is one of cost vs. expendibility.
Of course. And I don't know if it is possible to trade for any of them. But I sure want to try all those options before moving down to Frank.
(09-22-2020, 07:50 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]I think you can forget about Wright/18 for Richardson.
We have been to Richardson plenty of times and I know that. We need third team or Richardson to be moved to a third team - like in a CP3 trade. Seth+31 would also be intriguing.
(09-22-2020, 07:50 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]I see absolutely no upside to Snell and Johnson.
They are better fit than Wright and we gain flexibility. Exactly what HIBW is.
(09-22-2020, 07:50 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]Schroder was VERY close to being sixth man of the year. OKC has picks out the wazoo. I don't think Wright plus 18 gets this done.
Yes, he was. The big question is, can OKC really get more than #18 for his expiring contract? Rebuilders will not be competing for him and contenders have mostly worst picks. Unless someone like Atlanta jumps in, it is very likely Wright+Jackson+#18 matches something a team like Milwaukee or Philly can offer.
(09-22-2020, 07:50 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]Just to be clear, Cato didn't say Frank wouldn't work here.
Never said that
(09-22-2020, 07:50 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]I just read a piece about possible OKC and NYK deals and the OKC writer seemed pretty enamored with the idea of Ntilikina.
Well, if you look at NYK roster and you put Garret and Robinson of the table - who can you be enamored with?
Frank looks smoking good in that bunch of trash NY has under contract
(09-22-2020, 07:50 AM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]Right, that is definitely going on to some extent, especially in the playoffs. I just don't know how Grant was used in the regular season and his numbers for the whole year there are very concerning.....the worst DRating of all the big minute guys by FAR. It is far more unusual in my experience for a player in the regular season to have a sub pattern matched exactly to an opposing player.
One other thing. I don't know what the new formula is, but DRPM is supposed to account for these kind of things (guarding the best player, matchups, etc) and Grant graded as a -1.04 this past year in DRPM.
I am just finding it hard to see anyway in which Grant made DEN a BETTER defensive team as a whole when he played.
Maybe you're missing something Kamm, because Duncan and Hollinger just touched on how Grant had a lot to do with wearing Kawhi down over the course of the series, and if they aren't playing for team analytics then I don't know who is. EDIT: it was just a passing comment giving Grant "lots of credit" for his play against Leonard. There were no numbers used in support. I just think of them as the type to know the numbers you've been sharing with us.
I'm not sure what to think.
(09-22-2020, 09:42 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe you're missing something Kamm
That is ALWAYS a very real possibility.
My major point: Grant's numbers make me nervous. That doesn't mean he would be a bad fit. It just means that if I was GM I would not want to drop the whole MLE into him.
(09-22-2020, 08:02 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ] (09-22-2020, 07:50 AM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]I think you can forget about Wright/18 for Richardson.
We have been to Richardson plenty of times and I know that. We need third team or Richardson to be moved to a third team - like in a CP3 trade. Seth+31 would also be intriguing.
You keep bringing this up but who would Mavs be getting. Mavs can be part of any 3-way where Wright/18 goes out, just like they could be in a 2-way with Wright/18. What matters is who are the Mavs getting in that scenario?
(09-22-2020, 09:59 AM)StepBackJay Wrote: [ -> ]You keep bringing this up but who would Mavs be getting. Mavs can be part of any 3-way where Wright/18 goes out, just like they could be in a 2-way with Wright/18. What matters is who are the Mavs getting in that scenario?
What is not clear? The goal is Richardson, in this particular case.
(09-22-2020, 10:11 AM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ] (09-22-2020, 09:59 AM)StepBackJay Wrote: [ -> ]You keep bringing this up but who would Mavs be getting. Mavs can be part of any 3-way where Wright/18 goes out, just like they could be in a 2-way with Wright/18. What matters is who are the Mavs getting in that scenario?
What is not clear? The goal is Richardson, in this particular case.
How in the world does Wright + 18 get you Richardson??
Now Seth + 18 will at least keep you on the phone:
https://sixerswire.usatoday.com/2020/09/...eth-curry/
You say Wright + 18 and they hang up, I don't care how many other teams are involved. Richardson is way too valuable. The benefit of Seth is of course he gives them shooting and is very well priced. They could use 18 in one of their other moves and don't have to worry ab having to pay a ton of money to Richardson in 2021. For the Mavs I would probably do that deal, so long as you are prepared to pay Richardson whatever it takes to keep him in 2021.
(09-22-2020, 10:17 AM)StepBackJay Wrote: [ -> ]Now Seth + 18 will at least keep you on the phone:
You say Wright + 18 and they hang up
I agree. Wright + 18 isn't enough and from my seat, Seth + 18 is too steep a price for the Mavs.
JRich would be good on the Mavs but I don't see him as desirable as some of the other wings through trade. I would rather spend MLE on Grant than send Seth+18 for JRich.
(09-21-2020, 10:19 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]But Hell, maybe Brunson turns a corner this year. Wouldn't shock me.
Man I think so, I am super bullish on Brunson. He was still getting his minutes jerked around last year but then also got some opportunities in clutch time. I love his game but I don't think Brunson and Burke are mutually exclusive. The issue with Burke is just how much is he going to cost to retain?
(09-22-2020, 10:24 AM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ] (09-22-2020, 10:17 AM)StepBackJay Wrote: [ -> ]Now Seth + 18 will at least keep you on the phone:
You say Wright + 18 and they hang up
I agree. Wright + 18 isn't enough and from my seat, Seth + 18 is too steep a price for the Mavs.
JRich would be good on the Mavs but I don't see him as desirable as some of the other wings through trade. I would rather spend MLE on Grant than send Seth+18 for JRich.
I don't think you get Grant for that. I expect the Nuggets to pay him whatever it takes and what it takes is going to be higher than MLE. Also even if Mavs *could* get him for MLE (which would be amazing value) they won't bc they aren't going to want to add 10+ mil to their 2021 commitments.
I love Seth, I just think if you want a 3rd guy who isn't super old JRich is ab as good as you are going to get either now or in 2021. Mavs could just wait til '21 and take their chances which I wouldn't hate.
I like Brunson, too.
The issue is that Burke, Brunson and Curry are all small, and that's a lot of small guys needing minutes off the bench. Brunson and Burke are the ones who you want with the ball in their hands, and Curry is the best shooter, so to me, if you're going to eliminate one of them (without other criteria involved, such as who another team wants in a trade you like) then it kind of comes down to Brunson vs. Burke. They're the ones with overlapping roles.
I think Burke is going to make more than the minimum, but I don't see him getting the full MLE, obviously. I know that's a HUGE range, but I think this market is pretty unpredictable. To me, the biggest risk is that you sign the guy and then find out the Clippers series was a flash in the pan. Our own "Linsansity." But for now, let's assume that the contract works and that Clippers series Burke is the guy you're getting.
Regarding Burke vs. Brunson, both players seem to have a high basketball IQ. Both players CAN make plays for others in this offensive system. I feel like Burke is the better creator off the dribble, and way more of a threat to score, which ultimately makes it an easier prospect for him to make plays for others. I also feel like he's farther along with his understanding of how to impose himself in a creative way against a good team than Brunson is, and unfortunately, Brunson STILL doesn't have any playoff experience. With him, you're banking on potential. To be fair, he's really smart and I don't put this out of his reach, but he does have a ways to go.
Haven't really studied this, but I'd be pretty shocked if Burke wasn't the better defender.
What ultimately breaks the tie for me is that I feel like Burke is way, way better at playing WITH Luka than Brunson is. He's a catch and shoot threat and seems to understand where to pick his spots as a secondary creator a little better. In short, he can play on the ball OR off the ball. A major gripe against Brunson that I read often and can't disagree with is that the ball sticks with him in situations where it shouldn't. When Burke doesn't see a way to exploit the defense, he moves the ball to another player.
With all of the above in mind, and knowing that Brunson has some worth as a commodity (some), I'd be willing to move him in the right deal. Not advocating for trading him just to get rid of him, and I would understand if we were to learn that the Mavs are dead set on giving him another year as the backup PG.