(07-24-2023, 03:10 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote:  In either case, Nowell, DJJ, Oubre and the like are just guys to fill the 14th slot (since we’ve presumably have two outgoing players for one returning in any trade for a center and would have to fill the roster back to 14.  I don’t think we will start the season with 15.

(07-24-2023, 03:28 PM)mvossman Wrote: I must have a much higher opinion of DJJ than most folks.  In my mind he is at least worth roughly the BAE, and by far the best option available.  I'm not convinced that Exum would get more minutes than him.  I see him in the 10-12 range on the roster.

(07-24-2023, 03:26 PM)F Gump Wrote: So much of this blather from Minny, on its face, is certainly irrational.
1 Mavs already have a full roster, assuming they intend to carry 14.
2 There's nothing about Nowell that screams "Mavs badly need that guy."
3 Nowell is UFA, and if the Mavs really wanted him, they don't have to involve the Wolves. Just sign him with a minimum, or some of the MLE leftovers.

It's hard to even see how this guy would be trade filler, because MIN doesn't have him on their roster. They would have to create a contract for him, in order to trade it.

So that would take us to the idea that he is not the target, but instead he would be added to a deal so that MIN has enough matching, and that makes sense. The match numbers on a THJ-Anderson swap certainly align with such an idea, as would the idea that both players are fairly decent rotation players whose teams would rather move them. But it's hard to see how that swap fills any particular hole in the rotation for the Mavs.

(07-24-2023, 03:40 PM)mvossman Wrote: For a team in need of defense and rebounding/size, that swap makes a lot of sense, especially since we are intending to fill Tim's offense with Hardy and Curry.  Not sure why Minny does it.  Anderson is not worth adding assets (maybe a second or two).

(07-24-2023, 03:46 PM)F Gump Wrote: There have been serious issues between Anderson and Gobert. Like with Draymond and Poole, you wouldn't expect Minny to keep both on the roster going forward.

(07-24-2023, 03:19 PM)Jym Wrote: Yeah Holmes outgoing in any center trade just makes too much sense
And it looks like he'd be eligible for aggregation on September 4th. Which is pretty perfect right before camp. Hopefully can avoid major in-season trades this time

(07-24-2023, 03:19 PM)Jym Wrote: Yeah Holmes outgoing in any center trade just makes too much sense
And it looks like he'd be eligible for aggregation on September 4th. Which is pretty perfect right before camp. Hopefully can avoid major in-season trades this time

(07-24-2023, 02:02 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: If you explain the joke, it isn't as funny.

(07-24-2023, 11:29 PM)SleepingHero Wrote: Tim Cato had a mailbag today and answered a bunch of questions. This one stood out to me:

John J. asks, “Is the Deandre Ayton trade dead?”

Yes, the Phoenix Suns decided not to trade him. It had nothing to do with Dallas. I’m not sure Phoenix seriously considered the reported package — Hardaway, Holmes and JaVale McGee, per Marc Stein — and I’m not sure Dallas would have been willing to offer more. As a pure talent upgrade, it made sense even with Ayton’s uncertain fit. (My perception is that there was a wide range of opinions within the Mavericks’ organization about Ayton and how he would perform here.) But unless Phoenix has renewed interest in trading Ayton far below his potential trade value, which to my understanding was the primary reason the team decided not to deal him, I can’t see him ending up in Dallas, even at a later point.

(07-24-2023, 11:29 PM)SleepingHero Wrote: Tim Cato had a mailbag today and answered a bunch of questions. This one stood out to me:

John J. asks, “Is the Deandre Ayton trade dead?”

Yes, the Phoenix Suns decided not to trade him. It had nothing to do with Dallas. I’m not sure Phoenix seriously considered the reported package — Hardaway, Holmes and JaVale McGee, per Marc Stein — and I’m not sure Dallas would have been willing to offer more. As a pure talent upgrade, it made sense even with Ayton’s uncertain fit. (My perception is that there was a wide range of opinions within the Mavericks’ organization about Ayton and how he would perform here.) But unless Phoenix has renewed interest in trading Ayton far below his potential trade value, which to my understanding was the primary reason the team decided not to deal him, I can’t see him ending up in Dallas, even at a later point.

(07-24-2023, 03:26 PM)F Gump Wrote: So that would take us to the idea that he is not the target, but instead he would be added to a deal so that MIN has enough matching, and that makes sense. The match numbers on a THJ-Anderson swap certainly align with such an idea, as would the idea that both players are fairly decent rotation players whose teams would rather move them.

(07-25-2023, 11:11 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: Yeah, with Nowell it could certainly be that.  Or, it could be like all the other guys who’ve gotten a Mav’s mention.  Dallas has no plan to add anyone unless or until they do a 2 for 1 swap and need to get back to 14 players.

I wonder if Atlanta ultimately turns to KAT and Bufkin is part of what the TWolves want in the deal.  Maybe we get Anderson and Capela as you designed below, but it ends up being one big deal with Minnesota and Atlanta

(07-25-2023, 11:54 AM)mvossman Wrote: If we are sending out Timmy and Holmes and getting back Capela and Anderson, that has to include a first (if not Green or Hardy).  Maybe a protected first using one of those seconds we traded for.

(07-25-2023, 12:08 PM)Hooper21 Wrote: Why does it 'have' to include Hardy or Green?  I would think Anderson is distressed due to the incident with Gobert and the Hawks have been shopping Capela and his too-big contract for a while.  I hope Nico and Co. are sticking to contract $$ matching and not throwing sweetners in.

(07-25-2023, 12:24 PM)mvossman Wrote: I could be convinced we could do an Anderson for Timmy swap, but Holmes is also a distressed asset (we just got a first to take on that contract) and the ask for Capela was Green or Hardy.  The price may go down a little in order to facilitate a big trade, but they are not going to go from Hardy or Green to distressed asset and a couple of seconds.  At least I find it very unlikely, and I don't like to get my hopes up on that kind of thing.

(07-25-2023, 01:46 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: This is all logical.  My response to the post before this would be “so”?

The 2028 second provides an easy way to protect the 2027 pick.  You have to give to get, so the question then becomes whether you are getting enough for what you are giving.  I feel like this front office has earned some trust (at least relative to years past).  I won’t know what I think about dealing the 2027 pick until I see the details.  But, I’m not against trading it in absolute terms.  It is a question of value for me.

(07-25-2023, 12:24 PM)mvossman Wrote: I could be convinced we could do an Anderson for Timmy swap, but Holmes is also a distressed asset (we just got a first to take on that contract) and the ask for Capela was Green or Hardy.  The price may go down a little in order to facilitate a big trade, but they are not going to go from Hardy or Green to distressed asset and a couple of seconds.  At least I find it very unlikely, and I don't like to get my hopes up on that kind of thing.