(03-16-2021, 04:16 PM)vfromlmf Wrote: This is in line with my whole argument that you need to replace at least one of Kleber or DFS. They're both fine role players and starters on most teams ... BUT NOT AT THE SAME TIME.

DFS is a very smart player and a good defender but he's not a game-changing stopper. Good teams leave him totally unguarded. 

Kleber is a plus defender and fantastic, if hesitant, 3pt shooter. Teams won't leave him, which makes him much more valuable than DFS on offense. 

That said, if you run Kleber off the line, he's got nothing, which is why you can't play him with another zero on offense in the playoffs.

If I had the choice, I'd move DFS for Oladipo who can be a lock-down wing defender and give this team 15 efficient points per game. Then you have a decision with JRich & Kleber in the offseason.

Replacing Kleber with Gordon certainly helps but good teams still won't guard DFS in the playoffs.

(03-16-2021, 04:16 PM)vfromlmf Wrote: This is in line with my whole argument that you need to replace at least one of Kleber or DFS. They're both fine role players and starters on most teams ... BUT NOT AT THE SAME TIME.

DFS is a very smart player and a good defender but he's not a game-changing stopper. Good teams leave him totally unguarded. 

Kleber is a plus defender and fantastic, if hesitant, 3pt shooter. Teams won't leave him, which makes him much more valuable than DFS on offense. 

That said, if you run Kleber off the line, he's got nothing, which is why you can't play him with another zero on offense in the playoffs.

If I had the choice, I'd move DFS for Oladipo who can be a lock-down wing defender and give this team 15 efficient points per game. Then you have a decision with JRich & Kleber in the offseason.

Replacing Kleber with Gordon certainly helps but good teams still won't guard DFS in the playoffs.

(03-16-2021, 05:05 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: I don’t agree that DFS is still the logical starter at SF following a Gordon trade.  Gordon is a plus defender, but bad 3 point shooter.  I don’t think you want him and JRich and DFS all in together with KP and Luka.  Logically, you’d go back to THJ as a starter and move Maxi and DFS to the bench with Brunson.  It’s not like we platoon our bench.  The only platoon we tend to run is the starting five.  Post a Gordon trade, I’d propose that be KP/Gordon/THJ/JRich/Luka.

(03-16-2021, 05:09 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: I think you might have just stumbled onto one of the main reasons Gordon won’t be a Mav. 

Me, I’d roll with DFS, hoping his shooting slump ends, and short of that I’d replace Richardson in the starting lineup with THJ, not DFS. I just don’t think there’s anyone else on the roster who fits the bill as a 3.

(03-16-2021, 04:59 PM)F Gump Wrote: That's not who Oladipo is anymore. He's very inefficient shooting and since he's returned from his injury,

(03-16-2021, 05:05 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: Post a Gordon trade, I’d propose that be KP/Gordon/THJ/JRich/Luka.

(03-16-2021, 05:26 PM)Jommybone Wrote: Hard to understand the desire on this board to move Kleeber to the bench and Brunson to another team.

(03-16-2021, 06:11 PM)F Gump Wrote: As much as we are focused on some wonderful trade at the deadline, the Mavs are talking like they've already given up on that.

So what might the summer look like? Maybe there's a player then who is set to be available and can be a major improvement? They probably need big improvement. Trades now seem like lateral moves. With a lot of contracts expiring, it feels like they can spend, so maybe someone there would offer big improvement, not small.

Who might that be?

(03-16-2021, 06:41 PM)dynamicalVoid Wrote: Sound like we like our guys even if they cant dribble or pass or defend.  

(03-16-2021, 06:11 PM)F Gump Wrote: As much as we are focused on some wonderful trade at the deadline, the Mavs are talking like they've already given up on that.

So what might the summer look like? Maybe there's a player then who is set to be available and can be a major improvement? They probably need big improvement. Trades now seem like lateral moves. With a lot of contracts expiring, it feels like they can spend, so maybe someone there would offer big improvement, not small.

Who might that be?

(03-16-2021, 08:05 PM)Jym Wrote: Seems so unproductive to just let Hardaway and Richardson walk for nothing, but that would fit into the general pattern of activity
We'd have 33 mil in space if we let them walk plus waived WCS.  Plus that would only give us the smaller MLE 
I don't even see anyone we could get who would be a clear upgrade using that space. No Giannis, I think we have to stay above the cap and trade now to come out ahead talentwise 
We'll see what they do. Maybe they'll just hand out more short term contracts to meh guys and plan powder it yet again

(03-16-2021, 08:05 PM)Jym Wrote: Seems so unproductive to just let Hardaway and Richardson walk for nothing, but that would fit into the general pattern of activity

We'd have 33 mil in space if we let them walk plus waived WCS.  Plus that would only give us the smaller MLE 
I don't even see anyone we could get who would be a clear upgrade using that space. No Giannis, I think we have to stay above the cap and trade now to come out ahead talentwise 

We'll see what they do. Maybe they'll just hand out more short term contracts to meh guys and plan powder it yet again

(03-16-2021, 08:38 PM)F Gump Wrote: I don't disagree with any of your observations. But as to your conclusion ("I think we have to stay above the cap and trade now to come out ahead talentwise "), I'm not sure if such an option even exists for the Mavs. Seriously.

If one is out there in the next week or so, a swap that will make them much better, obviously they have to grab it.

But, like, how do you "come out ahead talentwise" by making a trade in which the other team will always expect you to send them as much talent as you are getting. Or more. Trades - with cap, salary matching, and so on - are designed to be equal-for-equal events. Especially when you don't have any picks teams want. What are the things you can do where you DON'T have to give up equal talent, in order to get top talent back?

(03-16-2021, 08:52 PM)Mapka Wrote: -Take back unwanted salary
-Take contracts, which are to long/short.
-Offer better fit.
-Offer potential (young players).
-Bribe them with up to 5.617 Mio.US $ 
-Give the picks you have.

(03-16-2021, 08:58 PM)dynamicalVoid Wrote: Find a third team?  Is that an option.  I really dont know ha

(03-16-2021, 08:38 PM)F Gump Wrote: I don't disagree with any of your observations. But as to your conclusion ("I think we have to stay above the cap and trade now to come out ahead talentwise "), I'm not sure if such an option even exists for the Mavs. Seriously.

If one is out there in the next week or so, a swap that will make them much better, obviously they have to grab it.

But, like, how do you "come out ahead talentwise" by making a trade in which the other team will always expect you to send them as much talent as you are getting. Or more. Trades - with cap, salary matching, and so on - are designed to be equal-for-equal events. Especially when you don't have any picks teams want. What are the things you can do where you DON'T have to give up equal talent, in order to get top talent back?

(03-16-2021, 05:39 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: That sentence indicates a misunderstanding of the desires of most engaged in conversation on these topics, so I’m not surprised. I don’t think anyone looks at those two and thinks “bench Kleber and get rid of Brunson and we’re good here.” 

The thinking is that the team needs to get better. Kleber’s versatility makes him even more ideal as a 3rd big than he is as a starter (though I don’t think he’s a bad starter at all) and while nobody in their right mind WANTS to trade Brunson, we probably all agree that to get something you have to give something. I wouldn’t move Brunson in just any deal, but buyers don’t get to set the prices. I believe the thinking there is that Brunson is one of the only pieces valued highly enough to bring anything good in return.

(03-16-2021, 09:26 PM)Jommybone Wrote: I can’t believe how many on this board think the fellas who are having the third and fourth biggest, positive impact on our success—and who appear to be our third and fourth best players—and who appear to be improving more rapidly than anybody else on the team—are less valuable than a lotto pick bust who isn’t the third and probably isn’t even the fourth best player on a truly awful team in Orlando.