(06-28-2024, 05:11 PM)F Gump Wrote: I have my computer now, for better math-ing.

KS's number is wrong, for our purposes. Not sure what he included, but someone else (Marks, maybe?) said 14.9, and that number is right - but it doesn't include any cushion for having to stay under the Apron. (There's no chance whatsoever that a team would not leave a cushion - the Apron is unforgiving, there are no exceptions given.)

So I set aside exactly 1M for a cushion, and work from there.

That leaves 13.9 for DJJ, which leaves 1M left over to combine with an outgoing player (in the right trade setup). BOTTOM LINE - If you send out Green, you could acquire a player making up to 13.65M-ish.

(06-28-2024, 11:47 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: I feel ya.  I can live with the versions of this where the decision is Klay for Green.  I think Klay makes us better during the rest of Kyrie's time here.

The one I struggle with is the versions of this where we simply trade Green to keep DJJ.  It is less clear to me that DJJ is better than Green.  I take some solace that Grimes fills the Green 'hole' and DJJ is the backup 3 behind Thompson.  But, it will sting a little.

(06-28-2024, 11:46 PM)F Gump Wrote: That's very close to a match. It works for both GS and DAL, but it's 1M too much incoming for LAC, which is a 2nd Apron team so tricky to solve. Maybe Green or Maxi gets sent elsewhere rather than LAC?

(06-28-2024, 11:51 PM)omahen Wrote: Mavs can just expand the Detroit deal, which requires only one salary (at most) to be sent out...

They can deal with DJJ space in a separate deal

(06-29-2024, 12:16 AM)F Gump Wrote: Yes, just sending either of Green or Maxi to LAC, but not both, is one solution to the LAC-GS-DAL trade (although there will be a LOT of extra minor parts added to that deal, if it becomes a 4-way, because of the NBA's so-called "touch rule").

My premise is that the Mavs will sign DJJ, so the end result is likely to still have both Green and Maxi outgoing. I need to note that I can't get to a way to keep either one of Green or Maxi in this Klay scenario, and also re-sign DJJ. This Hard Cap World is a real limiter on salary once you get past a certain point.

(06-28-2024, 11:49 PM)omahen Wrote: 14,9 mil includes 2 vet min cap holds, if I am not wrong. One of that cap holds is gone, if you bring in a FA. Which means the available salary is over 15 mil with cushion included.

Mavs can't even pay 13.9 to DJJ as it is more than MLE. If DJJ takes less than full MLE, than Mavs have even more spread.

(06-29-2024, 12:03 AM)SleepingHero Wrote: Block Sr. (@517to214)
Klay Thompson is 34 with a cooked acl and Achilles yet still missed less games by far than Maxi and Josh Green the last two years.

(06-28-2024, 10:27 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: Honestly, this question is off the top of my head, because I haven't really thought about the off-season landscape from this strict of an angle, but knowing the Mavs' goal is to keep the team intact while significantly improving their outside shooting, IS there a better shooter even plausibly available this summer than Klay Thompson?

We've been saying "shooting from the wings and above the break" for 2-3 weeks. This would be adding two players who address that exact need by the first day of free agency, and BOTH of them can contribute, defensively (albeit on different levels).

Seriously, if they can do this AND retain DJJ, I don't know how you can be mad at it, I really don't.

(06-29-2024, 01:19 AM)mvossman Wrote: Luke Kennard?  He would be much cheaper, younger, and not expect to be in starting lineup. 

Are we not concerned that golden state is giving up on this guy?

Are we expecting him to start?  He is not a POA defender. Is that no longer a priority?

How could I be mad?  He is 34 with a very scary injury history. He could fall off a cliff at any time at which point that contract is an albatross. We finally cleaned the cap sheet and now we do this?  There are many other options with those salaries that don’t involve near the contract risk. This just feels like an overreaction to the finals loss. It also feels like a classic Cuban move.

(06-29-2024, 01:49 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: Call it an overreaction if you want, there might be some validity to that. But, it is undeniable that something has to change for the Mavs, offensively. That's plain as day. Once you realize Grant isn't an option, due to his salary, the fact that he plays PJ's position and the trade cost (I just listened to a podcast that suggested Dallas has been calling Portland nonstop, and that Portland just doesn't like what Dallas has to offer), then I really don't see any attractive options out there to add offensive pop to the roster, other than just getting a third heliocentric guard to play behind Luka and Kyrie at the sacrifice of Hardy's last rookie contract year. I feel like that's just more of the same and highly unlikely to yield different results.  

Again, I'm only on board with this IF Jones is retained AND Klay understands that he's going to sit during crucial stretches when needed. Past that, you're still retaining DJJ and adding Grimes (whose POA defense you like, right?). I assume if Jones is back it will be with the understanding that he's coming back for a big role, minutes wise, and I think Grimes will get a huge chance to earn a role. I believe he'll prove more up to it than Green was, but time will tell. 

For all we know, this is "starting" but really just a suped up version of the Hardaway role (only from a forward spot, which will make rotations easier) and for all we know, Klay is cool with that. I'll worry about minutes/lineup combos if/when this is all official, but I think there's a way to make this work. 

As far as it being a Cuban move, I'd agree if this was instead of Jones, or more accurately, if they had paid a toll to dump Hardaway, not done anything else (like Grimes) and were planning to show up on Klay's doorstep as the clock made free agency legal to roll the dice, but this feels, to me, like borderline tampering, which as we all know is how the winning teams have been operating for years. It's important to remember that he (Klay) seems to be trying to find a way here. It's definitely not as sexy as it would be if he was 28-29, but it's still kind of a big deal, and he's got to understand that he's jumping onto a bus already moving pretty fast here. That's very likely why he's interested. I'm hopeful he understands that both the role and (hopefully) the salary amount will have to involve some sacrifice from him to be here, rather than in Orlando, but we'll see. 

What I can't believe people aren't seeing, is that this is EXTRA. You're already comparing it to things they could've done with the money, but they don't even have to spend the money. 48 hours ago we would've been happy just to know they found a way to dump THJ and re-sign DJJ, and now that they're going above and beyond that, we're pissed? The alternative might very well have been Grimes, DJJ, a vet minimum guy and then call it a summer. 

They're turning Josh Green and Kleber (a guy you, yourself have called a negative asset - I don't even agree with that) into Klay Thompson. I assume they're doing it because they think he helps shore up what they consider to be their biggest weakness, and I also assume Kyrie and Luka have both signed off on it. As long as they're not giving away their POA guy in Jones (and in fact, it seems as though they've added another one in Grimes) I don't get the angst. Yes, there's a chance he steals money for three years, but there's also a chance he makes a difference. They NEEDED more offense.

(06-29-2024, 01:19 AM)mvossman Wrote: Luke Kennard?  He would be much cheaper, younger, and not expect to be in starting lineup. 

(06-29-2024, 01:57 AM)mvossman Wrote: Calling this extra ignores opportunity cost. I would match rather go after someone like brogdon, who is much less risk, better fit (both team and Kyrie timeline). If that contract goes bad it hampers for years

(06-29-2024, 01:57 AM)mvossman Wrote: Calling this extra ignores opportunity cost. I would match rather go after someone like brogdon, who is much less risk, better fit (both team and Kyrie timeline). If that contract goes bad it hampers for years

(06-29-2024, 01:49 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: They're turning Josh Green and Kleber (a guy you, yourself have called a negative asset - I don't even agree with that) into Klay Thompson.

(06-29-2024, 02:03 AM)RGP1981 Wrote: I'm not a fan of this move. I'd rather have the Aussie Airballer and the Wurzburg Wanker than Klay... although I'd be fine with trading Josh Green for a better backup to Luka/Kyrie and trading Kleber for a better backup to PJW.

(06-29-2024, 01:19 AM)mvossman Wrote: Luke Kennard?  He would be much cheaper, younger, and not expect to be in starting lineup. 

Are we not concerned that golden state is giving up on this guy?

Are we expecting him to start?  He is not a POA defender. Is that no longer a priority?

How could I be mad?  He is 34 with a very scary injury history. He could fall off a cliff at any time at which point that contract is an albatross. We finally cleaned the cap sheet and now we do this?  There are many other options with those salaries that don’t involve near the contract risk. This just feels like an overreaction to the finals loss. It also feels like a classic Cuban move.