MavsBoard

(09-30-2020, 12:49 PM)SleepingHero Wrote: [ -> ]I don't see why we would spend a mountain of assets to move up in this shallow draft. The only consensus about this draft is that there really isn't that much of a difference 1-15 and most prospects aren't NBA ready.

Obviously some look better than others, but overall every single top 10 prospect in this draft would barely crack the lottery of past drafts (17,18,19 to name a few).

Mavs should only be moving 18+31 if it nets them a day 1 rotation piece that can start. Anything else would be a HUGE gamble on a shaky prospect coming and being ready to play a heavy role on a playoff team.

I would disagree with your characterization of the draft. It's weak at the top, but has several guys who will be good players.

---

(09-30-2020, 02:45 PM)StepBackJay Wrote: [ -> ]Luka plays 33 mpg. JJB's numbers fluctuated but was somewhere around 20 mpg. If Brunson gets Wright's minutes he will probably be around that. I think the small amount of overlap isn't that significant. I also like that Brunson does (I think) a great job stepping in for Luka when he twists his ankle 4 times a year. That also has a lot of value. To recap, Brunson has potential to take JJB's role as the leader of the 2nd unit, is a solid stand-in for Luka when he misses games and oh ya is on basically a vet min salary.

---

People think Brunson is going to get you 8 spots higher in the draft, but honestly I think a team would look at him like the Mavs looked at Justin Jackson last year. They would say hey nice young prospect that we might pay a small sum for if we have a need. I can't imagine any team giving you something that is better than what you already have in JB.

I have to say, you're making some good points here. I just strongly believe that the Mavs need that second option guy at the two, and that it's not THJ (not good enough at creating his own shot and playmaking, and pretty bad defensively) and it's not Brunson. If we get that guy, I believe he'll more or less obviate Brunson's role. That said, Brunson might still have some value for (as you said) Luka's ankle injuries and as an additional backup point at a very cheap price. As I have said, I only trade Brunson - our best trade chip - if he brings back something good. Our biggest disagreement is on his value to other teams. Curry and Maxi do probably have more value to other teams, but I would only trade Curry if his role on the team was replaced/upgraded and would only trade Maxi for an above average NBA starter (which is to say, definitely one of the best 100 players in the league) due his value and role for the Mavs.

Years later, new board, different era for the team, but the juke box is still stuck on the same song: "Denigrating Legendary Pick and Roll Guard and NBA Champion Jose Juan Barea" by the noted Kansas City area bluegrass/math metal fusion artist @"Kammrath".

You might also be familiar with his other hits from the 2010's:

"Nothing Tyson Did in 2011 Was All That Important"
"Shawn Marion Sucks" 
"Don't Want No Short Armed Man"

There are many others, but my personal favorite is "If Only We Had Frank."  It's a power ballad, and he plays it great live!

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuyI2Dpy06I

(09-30-2020, 02:05 PM)StepBackJay Wrote: [ -> ]Brunson is coming off the bench and largely taking Luka's spot so I don't know why ppl are so hung up on Brunson's fit with Luka.

I just think that come playoff time, you need to know who your 3 best guards are. Your 3rd guy will probably have to be an on-ball type, like Brunson, unless both of your starters are qualified for that. Ideally, you'd like that 3rd guy to be able to spell BOTH of your starting guards, staying in the game for longer stretches at a time. JET, Lou Will, etc, etc. 

I think you and Kamm are making a great point about the sample size being low in year 2, and I think maybe we are making rash judgments on whether or not Brunson can play with Luka in the future, but it's not incorrect to point out that until the coach feels like he can not only spell Luka, but also complement him on court, his role and minutes won't be what they could potentially be on another team. Like, on THIS team, Luka CAN play off ball effectively, but since he's their best player, it would be insane to play that way while Luka's on the court just to maximize Brunson. Another team might not feel that way about their starter, and might be happy to let Brunson work on-ball for stretches NEXT to their starting on-ball guy. 

What the Mavs need is ONE player who can do well at what Brunson brings to the table AND what Curry brings to the table so they're not substituting the way clowns get out of a car at the circus. The deep rotation works ok in the regular season, but not in the playoffs against good teams. 

This is why I'm higher on Burke than many here seem to be. IF what he did against the Clippers is a real indication of what he'll do consistently, moving forward, I think that's more valuable than either Brunson or Curry. I don't dislike either of those players.

So KL the thing is even if Brunson is not the end-all, be-all guard he's great value for the Mavs. His production, fit, attitude, everything else for a tiny contract is great for the Mavs. To build a great team you need some bargains on your bench over-producing.

Now does that mean some other team wants to give us great value for JB in a trade? I don't think so. Even if he's viewed as a good player there's no guarantee he fits as well on another team. 

So my point is just it's very unlikely we would get great ROI in a JB trade. Looking at trade ideas where we are moving up in the draft (which the Mavs don't like to do anyway?) or blockbusters where we get Jrue Holiday or something just aren't realistic to me. JB would be at best a small piece and at worst a throw-in so why include him at all.

---

(09-30-2020, 03:32 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]This is why I'm higher on Burke than many here seem to be. IF what he did against the Clippers is a real indication of what he'll do consistently, moving forward, I think that's more valuable than either Brunson or Curry. I don't dislike either of those players.

I like Burke but its still a small sample size. The issue with Burke of course is that he's not under contract so we don't know how much he will cost to retain. Mavs are hesitant to spend future dollars and JB is already under contract so if the asking price is too high Mavs might just stick with what they got.

If the asking price is not high then why not just have all of Burke, JB, Curry? Rick certainly won't mind and if it makes one of the 3 expendable eventually no problem there. Guys get injured and Rick loves guards so the more the merrier. 

In terms of playoff performance super-small sample size in a really weird environment. We know Burke & JB both played in well college playoffs. JB was hurt this year and Burke played in a bubble that may be one and done. The bubble is its own experience, I think some guys played great in the bubble that would have a hard time with playoff pressure outside of the bubble. All that to say again very small sample size and I don't know that it's enough to say yes Burke is better than JB.

(09-30-2020, 04:13 PM)StepBackJay Wrote: [ -> ]If the asking price is not high then why not just have all of Burke, JB, Curry? Rick certainly won't mind and if it makes one of the 3 expendable eventually no problem there. Guys get injured and Rick loves guards so the more the merrier.

JB
Burke
Curry
Luka
KP

...because of that lineup and RC needing to change shorts hourly, that's why not.

(09-30-2020, 02:45 PM)StepBackJay Wrote: [ -> ]Luka plays 33 mpg. JJB's numbers fluctuated but was somewhere around 20 mpg. If Brunson gets Wright's minutes he will probably be around that. I think the small amount of overlap isn't that significant. I also like that Brunson does (I think) a great job stepping in for Luka when he twists his ankle 4 times a year. That also has a lot of value. To recap, Brunson has potential to take JJB's role as the leader of the 2nd unit, is a solid stand-in for Luka when he misses games and oh ya is on basically a vet min salary.

---

People think Brunson is going to get you 8 spots higher in the draft, but honestly I think a team would look at him like the Mavs looked at Justin Jackson last year. They would say hey nice young prospect that we might pay a small sum for if we have a need. I can't imagine any team giving you something that is better than what you already have in JB.

I don't think anyone has said Brunson gets you 8 spots higher.  I projected 5-6 spots with Burnson + 31.  Teams in that range:


#11 Spurs - 11, 41
#12 Kings - 12, 35, 43, 52
#13 Pelicans - 13, 39, 42, 60
#14 Celtics - 14, 26, 30, 47

I could see 12-14 all trading up our out of this draft for future considerations, especially the Celtics.

(09-30-2020, 05:30 PM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-30-2020, 02:45 PM)StepBackJay Wrote: [ -> ]Luka plays 33 mpg. JJB's numbers fluctuated but was somewhere around 20 mpg. If Brunson gets Wright's minutes he will probably be around that. I think the small amount of overlap isn't that significant. I also like that Brunson does (I think) a great job stepping in for Luka when he twists his ankle 4 times a year. That also has a lot of value. To recap, Brunson has potential to take JJB's role as the leader of the 2nd unit, is a solid stand-in for Luka when he misses games and oh ya is on basically a vet min salary.

---

People think Brunson is going to get you 8 spots higher in the draft, but honestly I think a team would look at him like the Mavs looked at Justin Jackson last year. They would say hey nice young prospect that we might pay a small sum for if we have a need. I can't imagine any team giving you something that is better than what you already have in JB.

I don't think anyone has said Brunson gets you 8 spots higher.  I projected 5-6 spots with Burnson + 31.  Teams in that range:


#11 Spurs - 11, 41
#12 Kings - 12, 35, 43, 52
#13 Pelicans - 13, 39, 42, 60
#14 Celtics - 14, 26, 30, 47

I could see 12-14 all trading up our out of this draft for future considerations, especially the Celtics.

In all honesty, I'm not interested if all we can get for Brunson and our 2 picks is 5-6 spots in the draft. There was already discussion with Dan that said 18 and 31 is worth something like that anyway. With JB, we'd have to get into the top 8-10 for it to be worth it for us to trade him IMO. Also, even then, I'm not sure I want to trade a good player and 2 picks for 1 pick that may be really good.

@"StepBackJay" I'm not claiming to know what Brunson is worth in a trade, just arguing that, because he's a good young player stuck behind a generational talent, I could see someone making an offer. 

And yes, I agree he's great in his role. As long as he's this cheap I have absolutely no burning desire to move him. I'm just saying that IF teams are knocking, and IF there's something valuable offered, I think they consider it. I'm not suggesting they're going into the off season trying to unload him.

I really don't disagree with much of your position on this matter. 

I DO think the Mavs look at the overall state of their guard play and wonder how they can improve on it, by A) adding defensive skill and B) combining Brunson's role and Curry's role. If you can do A and B together in one player, that could be your 5th starter.

I’ll stay out of the trade Brunson discussion (mostly) and just point out that the Mav’s seem/seemed very interested putting a ball handler next to Luka in the starting lineup.  The Kemba thing was real.  I believe, but can’t substantiate that they were interested in Beverly.  And, I think they had Wright slotted as a starter.  None of that is to discount Brunson.  He’s pretty good at his role, but it appears it is a limited minutes role on a team with Luka, a starting ball handler and Curry.  

Of course, they weren’t any better than most of us at understanding what they really had and how it would fit together.  The Wright experiment failed.  They were wrong about THJ off the bench.  What complicates looking forward is whether they see their ideal as THJ/DFS as a 2/3 combo or a 3/4 combo.  If the former, a Power Wing might start (Grant) or a roll man.  If the latter, then that means they still want a ball handler next to Luka (and it would be nice if that ball handler could handle on the ball D and off the ball O too).  There are times I wonder if they don’t need six starters as the answer to my question might be “yes”.

(09-30-2020, 06:51 PM)DanSchwartzman Wrote: [ -> ]I’ll stay out of the trade Brunson discussion (mostly) and just point out that the Mav’s seem/seemed very interested putting a ball handler next to Luka in the starting lineup.  The Kemba thing was real.  I believe, but can’t substantiate that they were interested in Beverly.  And, I think they had Wright slotted as a starter.  None of that is to discount Brunson.  He’s pretty good at his role, but it appears it is a limited minutes role on a team with Luka, a starting ball handler and Curry.  

Of course, they weren’t any better than most of us at understanding what they really had and how it would fit together.  The Wright experiment failed.  They were wrong about THJ off the bench.  What complicates looking forward is whether they see their ideal as THJ/DFS as a 2/3 combo or a 3/4 combo.  If the former, a Power Wing might start (Grant) or a roll man.  If the latter, then that means they still want a ball handler next to Luka (and it would be nice if that ball handler could handle on the ball D and off the ball O too).  There are times I wonder if they don’t need six starters as the answer to my question might be “yes”.

GREATNESS. MVP.

(09-30-2020, 05:49 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]As long as he's this cheap I have absolutely no burning desire to move him. I'm just saying that IF teams are knocking, and IF there's something valuable offered, I think they consider it.

This. He's also too cheap to get anything all that good in return for him. Have to include another player which becomes a question of how much are they valuing JB's worth in the trade? But, if he's what someone wants and that someone is willing to give up a better-than-him fitting piece to our team puzzle, I have no problem letting him go.

(09-30-2020, 05:38 PM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-30-2020, 05:30 PM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-30-2020, 02:45 PM)StepBackJay Wrote: [ -> ]Luka plays 33 mpg. JJB's numbers fluctuated but was somewhere around 20 mpg. If Brunson gets Wright's minutes he will probably be around that. I think the small amount of overlap isn't that significant. I also like that Brunson does (I think) a great job stepping in for Luka when he twists his ankle 4 times a year. That also has a lot of value. To recap, Brunson has potential to take JJB's role as the leader of the 2nd unit, is a solid stand-in for Luka when he misses games and oh ya is on basically a vet min salary.

---

People think Brunson is going to get you 8 spots higher in the draft, but honestly I think a team would look at him like the Mavs looked at Justin Jackson last year. They would say hey nice young prospect that we might pay a small sum for if we have a need. I can't imagine any team giving you something that is better than what you already have in JB.

I don't think anyone has said Brunson gets you 8 spots higher.  I projected 5-6 spots with Burnson + 31.  Teams in that range:


#11 Spurs - 11, 41
#12 Kings - 12, 35, 43, 52
#13 Pelicans - 13, 39, 42, 60
#14 Celtics - 14, 26, 30, 47

I could see 12-14 all trading up our out of this draft for future considerations, especially the Celtics.

In all honesty, I'm not interested if all we can get for Brunson and our 2 picks is 5-6 spots in the draft. There was already discussion with Dan that said 18 and 31 is worth something like that anyway. With JB, we'd have to get into the top 8-10 for it to be worth it for us to trade him IMO. Also, even then, I'm not sure I want to trade a good player and 2 picks for 1 pick that may be really good.

My 5-6 is conservative but we need to look at this differently.  We made that trade for 3 with Atlanta because Luka fell to that spot and he was our guy.  If the Mavs have someone they love and is at a spot with a trade partner, pull the trigger.  I don't really care if that is #9 or #15.  The real question is, do the MBT really love anyone realistically obtainable in this draft?

True, all draft picks are lottery tickets.  You know what you have in Brunson and you know his limitations.  He was pretty easily replaced by Burke off the scrap heap so I wouldn't treat Brunson as too precious.

(09-30-2020, 07:43 PM)cow Wrote: [ -> ]True, all draft picks are lottery tickets.  You know what you have in Brunson and you know his limitations.  He was pretty easily replaced by Burke off the scrap heap so I wouldn't treat Brunson as too precious.

I'm not trying to take either side this extreme. There is value in drafting guys that can play. There is value in having lots of picks to get lots of guys with the end goal that 1 or 2 actually stick around. I think the team needs some constant flow of new blood from the draft, from trades and from FA until they find their core of guys that will take them to the Finals.

A lot of discussion about the need for a ball-handler and/or wing and/or 3rd star. We need to compare where Mavs were in the summer of 2019 against where they are now. What is the same, what is different?

2019 primary expressed needs:
- Secondary ball-handler and solid defender next to Luka
- Athletic defensive wing
- 3rd star player

What we netted in 2019:
- Missed on Danny Green who was slotted for the defensive wing
- Missed on Kemba who would have been the secondary ball-handler and 3rd star
- Missed on Beverley who was the defender, shooter and sort of ball-handler next to Luka
- Signed Wright to be the secondary ball-handler and defender next to Luka
- Signed Curry as primarily a shooter, maybe just a BPA/value pick-up although he has some ability to create as well.

What can we deem are the needs in 2020?
- Still need an athletic defensive wing, I don't see anything that changed that. Mavs tried and missed on both Danny Green and Iguodala at the TDL. They ended up signing MKG as a flyer. This reinforces they idea that there has been no change here.
- 3rd star is still a want/need. Everything we have seen or heard is that Mavs are all a 3rd star through trade or 2021 FA.
- Secondary ball-handler is the big question mark. Wright was a bust. THJ was much better than the Mavs thought he would be. He is a shooter, scorer, *decent* creator and okay defensively (better than we thought at least). I think THJ having such a good such year for the Mavs lessened the urgency for a second ball-handler. Luka is a very high usage player but that's not necessary a problem, at least in the short term. To me this went from a major need to a lower priority behind the other two big needs which is the 3rd star and athletic, defensive wing.

So to wrap-up, I see a lot of chatter ab the Kemba pursuit last year being interpreted to mean that Mavs are hot after a star secondary ball-handler. In my view, that pursuit was much more about getting a 3rd star than getting a ball-handler. Many Mavs media types acknowledged that the fit of Kemba and Luka was not perfect. Kemba was all ab basically best star available that was gettable.

All that to say I would not bank on the Mavs prioritizing a secondary ball-handler this offseason just bc they were hot after Kemba last year.

(10-01-2020, 09:29 AM)StepBackJay Wrote: [ -> ]So to wrap-up, I see a lot of chatter ab the Kemba pursuit last year being interpreted to mean that Mavs are hot after a star secondary ball-handler. In my view, that pursuit was much more about getting a 3rd star than getting a ball-handler. 

Jay, when people use the word "star" they are, by definition, almost exclusively talking about a ball-handler. Those two terms don't HAVE to mean the same thing, but the way the media uses the word "star" does mean that. One almost never becomes a "star" WITHOUT handling the ball. 

The Mavericks absolutely DO need people other than Luka who can make DECISIONS with the ball. This is a fact. That's why they wanted Kemba. 

I don't think this necessarily has to come from a guard. If your other guard is Beverly, for example, then you'll need a forward who can handle (like Hayward, who you like). DFS, Kleber, Curry and THJ are all nice SPACERS, but not one of them is scary if the defensive rotations are done well, so there has to be more than one player on the court at all times who can put pressure on the defense. To this point, the Mavs have struggled to make KP that player. For the most part, he has just been an INSANELY good spacer, a pretty good cutter, and a pretty good roll man. 

Again, this is why Carlisle played Burke, who you insist is a situational player, as if he was the 3rd or 4th most important player on the roster during the Clippers series. Because he WAS. They were unbelievably lucky he played as well as he did, or they might've gotten their asses swept. 

I 100% promise you that the Mavs are hoping to fix this, one way or another. There wasn't a single team who even made the second round who didn't have multiple playmakers on the floor. Not one. The SMALLEST amount of playmaking for any of those 2nd round teams was Houston, who literally plays two All-Star point guards at the same time.

So @KL when I see ball-handler I think more like a guard. I think the Mavs would be perfectly happy with a star wing but I take your point that most stars are playmakers. Mavs were big on Khris Middleton who is an all-star player who can make plays but isn't a high usage Kemba type ball-handling guard. He can do a lot of off-ball stuff, defend and make plays when called upon.

I guess I was interpreting people's comments as needing a guard who handles the ball a lot and so that's where my opinion differs.

---

The other thing is I don't want to draw too many conclusions from games in the Mavs/Clippers series where KP wasn't playing. Mavs played the Clippers in 6 games and KP was played in 3 of those games. Trying to glean too much from the other 3 games to me is difficult. We obviously are not going anywhere without our 2 best players so in terms of how guys were used where I don't put a lot of stock in the final 3 games.

I think maybe the miscommunication is around the term "ball-handler." I don't mean this as a synonym for "point guard." Kemba IS a point guard, but I don't think that's why they wanted him. Jason Tatum (just an example from the same team) is NOT a point guard, but he absolutely is a ball-handler. While I agree that it wasn't Kemba's "point guard" ability that necessarily attracted the Mavs (I think that's your point, Jay) it absolutely was his ability to not only catch and shoot, but drive and pass off the drive that interested them.

To stick with the Celtics, EVERYONE in their starting lineup is a ball-handler except for Theis. This is not an accident, it's by design. I would argue that Smart isn't nearly as competent with this as he thinks he is, but he CAN change direction on his drive and pass off of the dribble. 

EVERYONE in the Heat starting lineup is a ball-handler except for Crowder (who is probably better at it than DFS, for example) and Robinson. Herro comes off the bench there, and is better with the ball than anyone on the Mavericks not named Luka. 

The Lakers have Lebron, Davis and Rondo (who is playing maybe the best offensive basketball I've ever seen him play right now). Caruso is allowed to make decisions and create, to varying degrees of success. 

The Nuggets have Murray, Jokic (who might be better at it than Murray). Grant and Milsap both have their moments. 

On and on and on. You can do this for every team who made the second round. The Mavs have NO chance to beat these teams in a 7 game series when everyone in the arena knows that Luka will have the ball on every play, and where he's going with it.

---

(10-01-2020, 12:02 PM)StepBackJay Wrote: [ -> ]So @KL when I see ball-handler I think more like a guard. I think the Mavs would be perfectly happy with a star wing but I take your point that most stars are playmakers. Mavs were big on Khris Middleton who is an all-star player who can make plays but isn't a high usage Kemba type ball-handling guard. He can do a lot of off-ball stuff, defend and make plays when called upon.

I guess I was interpreting people's comments as needing a guard who handles the ball a lot and so that's where my opinion differs.

---

The other thing is I don't want to draw too many conclusions from games in the Mavs/Clippers series where KP wasn't playing. Mavs played the Clippers in 6 games and KP was played in 3 of those games. Trying to glean too much from the other 3 games to me is difficult. We obviously are not going anywhere without our 2 best players so in terms of how guys were used where I don't put a lot of stock in the final 3 games.

We were typing at the same time, sorry. 

Middleton absolutely fits the bill. Now we're speaking the same language. I do think Carlisle LIKES to have two guards who can do this, but I don't think it's set in stone. 

KP's mere presence on the court is so scary for the defense that there ends up being a gravitational pull, which makes things easier for everyone else, especially Luka. I agree this helps, and could even make someone who's only 'ok' at pressuring the defense with the ball seem better. I would think this helps guys like Curry and DFS look better as drivers, for example. But, I do not believe they've figured out how to weaponize KP as an initiator of offense yet. I really hope they can. They SHOULD be able to.

I get your point KL and think I am on the same page. If people aren't advocating for like a co-point guard then I am good with that. Schroeder presents an opportunity, otherwise I feel like options to fill the playmaker role are thin this year. 

I contend that finding a defensive wing this year is easier to do with the focus on big player-maker, potential star being a 2021 task. THJ to me is suitable for now, I know he isn't considered a huge playmaker but he was NYK's entire offense for a year and a half and can make plays. We certainly know he can score. Not saying he's necessarily a long-term solution but considering he's on a 1-yr deal I am good with THJ for at least half a season unless/until we can pull off a bigger move to upgrade his spot.

It would strategically be in the Mavericks best interest to trade up in the draft if they see a potential superstar. Luka will not be on a rookie deal forever and eventually you could have 3 max players on this roster. The Mavericks need to have young talent that is on Luka's timeline and acquired talent that may or may not be.

I guess my point is why sacrifice the assets you do have to acquire something you need when you can do both. If you can package 18 plus 31 and something else to move into the top 10 you do it. I would not use existing assets to acquire Oladipo I would only use future assets. So if Indiana wants something I offer Hardaway Jr. . ,maybe Justin Jackson, and a future pick otherwise I keep Hardaway Jr. and go into next year with cap flexibility. The Mavericks may be looking to win now and not put everything in the Giannis sweepstakes which I hope they do.