MAVS NEWS:

[F Gump]

ehh he hasn't shot over 30% from 3 since 2019-20 
Much, much more likely he shoots 28% than 38%.

No argument but I would be disappointed if they did not see a need and try to fix it. My preferred solution is to trade him, frankly, but I assume they will not.

[F Gump]

1 Gump, that's Gafford money.
2 I guess I should ask: do you think Gafford is more valuable or of equivalent value to PJW? I sure don't, but you might.
3 If I'm PJW, I want to be paid as a starting 4, because that's what I am. You could convince me to come off the bench...if I'm being paid well.
4 This is why I assumed one of them would be gone, only...to me, it makes more sense to keep the guy with positional flex who helps in a variety of ways (and is just a better player, imo).

1 Nope. 
... 1a Gaff will be 16.67 yr 1. Or less.
... 1b Gaff got more than I wished he did. 
... 1c NBA economics had a seismic change (Jun 30) since Gaff deal was done.
2 I place PJW above Gaff, and my proposed numbers all say as much.
3 I assume PJW starts.
...3a In a Hard Cap World, if you have stars on a team, everyone who starts will not get huge money. For ones who play a big role incl starters but are not stars, it is an MLE-ish world. We're way at the upper end of "-ish." Overall, do the math and add it up, and you see. (See Myles who imo landed a bloated deal, which cannot happen if you want MANY good players w your stars.)
4  I prefer PJW to be a keeper (and Gaff as well) - but of course only if salary makes sense (like everyone else) in a HCW (which is inflexible and unforgiving). Every penny of all deals impact everyone now. PJW is no diff.

[KillerLeft]

1 Nope. 
... 1a Gaff will be 16.67 yr 1. Or less.
... 1b Gaff got more than I wished he did. 
... 1c NBA economics had a seismic change (Jun 30) since Gaff deal was done.
2 I place PJW above Gaff, and my proposed numbers all say as much.
3 I assume PJW starts.
...3a In a Hard Cap World, if you have stars on a team, everyone who starts will not get huge money. For ones who play a big role incl starters but are not stars, it is an MLE-ish world. Do the math and add it up, and you see. We're way at the upper end of "-ish." (See Myles who imo landed a bloated deal, which cannot happen if you want MANY good players w your stars.)
4  I prefer PJW to be a keeper (and Gaff as well) - but of course only if salary makes sense (like everyone else) in a HCW (which is inflexible and unforgiving). Every penny of all deals impact everyone now. PJW is no diff.

Knowing all of the above, and now knowing Gafford’s contractual details, so you still hope they keep him?

[F Gump]

Knowing all of the above, and now knowing Gafford’s contractual details, so you still hope they keep him?

Gaff/Lively is your very good tandem C. I see Gaff's pay (MLE +10%) as a bit rich, but tolerable (for now).

And no I do not want to sell off good pieces because a very bad GM is forcing a very bad fit which is messing up many well-manned positions. Sell off AD and all is resolved.

Find a way to swap AD for a G who can defend, create and score (Jrue of 5 years ago, say) and I'm in. Way in. If I'm greedy, add a 3-and-D SG too.

[KillerLeft]

Gaff/Lively is your very good tandem C. I see Gaff's pay (MLE +10%) as a bit rich, but tolerable (for now).

And no I do not want to sell off good pieces because a very bad GM is forcing a very bad fit which is messing up many well-manned positions. Sell off AD and all is resolved.

Find a way to swap AD for a G who can defend, create and score (Jrue of 5 years ago, say) and I'm in. Way in. If I'm greedy, add a 3-and-D SG too.

What an interesting perspective! I think, when it comes to injury risk and age, you've got a point, and I agree that Lively/Gafford is a good center tandem. So, in a way, it makes sense to do as you suggest. 

But, on the other hand, the only center I'd want more than AD is Jokic, so it catches me off guard that you say he's a bad fit. Is it just because of the position thing? Because no matter what he says, he always ends up at center. My complaining about this is largely about the inconvenience of setting up the roster in such a way that the farce can be carried out with a straight face (as in paying Gafford MLE+10%), but it's a farce. I mean, even in 2020, the last time AD actually played a lot of 4, he spent almost half his time at center. Last year before coming to the Mavs, he had played 96% of his minutes at center. He's a center, and I promise he knows he's going to play there a ton, just like Porzingis did when he was here, regardless of what he said. 

If he doesn't play there enough...well, then I'd agree with you, only I think that's on Kidd, not AD. I mean, Davis is a real difference maker of a player if used correctly (which I admit, probably does include the willingness to play him at the 4 when that causes an advantage). I don't think Gafford has shown that he can even be a plus in a playoff series yet, and we've seen him in quite a few at this point. Davis, alternatively, is so effective that you could build an entire team around him as a concept. I think the most likely way this plays out (if successful at all) is that by the 2nd round of the playoffs, Davis is playing almost all of his minutes at center and Gafford isn't even in the rotation (assuming everyone is healthy). I do think Lively/Davis will be sooooo effective together, defensively, that they'll want to keep some stretches of them together in the playoffs, even, but I can't say I have the same hope for Gafford/Davis. 

Having said all that, I suppose having three centers does at least open the possibility that the one we'd least expect might get traded, only...for who? What guard could possibly be worth that? You'd have the same problem we've all discussed regarding how difficult it was to trade Luka without just selling him for picks, I think. I mean, what level of player would be worth it? I'd say Booker or Donovan Mitchell AT LEAST, and I think Davis (when healthy) is more impactful than either. Anyone better than those guys (a very short list) is likely unavailable in trade. "Jrue Holiday from five years ago" would be an exceptional addition, but not the finishing piece to this team without Anthony Davis, and therefore not remotely worth trading Anthony Davis to get, imho. 

Further, I personally think there's immense value in having Flagg learn every bit of defensive nuance he can from AD over the next few years. I think there's a good chance Flagg's trajectory points higher as a result. And, I think we'll reach a point soon where the combination of the two on the court is ridiculously effective. 

Still, thanks for your perspective on this. It makes quite a few things from past discussions fall into place for me.

[Winter]

I think by mid-season, a coach should be able to explain to AD - statistically and through film - that he is better for the team at the center position.

If he agrees, then you are faced with trading either Gafford or Lively (or possibly AD himself). You can't afford 3 very capable centers.
If he disagrees against the statistical evidence, then I think you simply trade AD.

This assumes all centers and PFs are healthy at mid-season (which is probably less than 50-50). If one has a serious injury, then I think you can play through the entire season before that decision has to be made. Either way, if the Mavs begin the season with the current roster, the PF position will eventually have some statistical clarity with so many players likely playing it for several minutes each game. There should be enough information by mid-season that the coach and GM will like understand the best fit.

The least likely thing to happen in my mind is that the Mavs won-loss record is extraordinarily good at mid-season with the roster as it's configured. In which case, there's no urgency to change it.

[KillerLeft]

I think by mid-season, a coach should be able to explain to AD - statistically and through film - that he is better for the team at the center position.

I agree. To me, players will do what's asked, as long as they understand why. They want to win. 

I'm much more concerned with the implications of how the roster is being put together by Harrison (with a lot of input from Kidd, presumably) and whether or not Kidd is flexible and creative enough to get the most out of them than I am with AD's willingness to buy into whatever role the team needs him to play. The question is: do they know what they want him to do, and is it the right thing? If the answer is yes, and he can stay healthy enough, you don't want to trade him, imo. He's their best player by a mile.

[Winter]

I agree. To me, players will do what's asked, as long as they understand why. They want to win. 

I'm much more concerned with the implications of how the roster is being put together by Harrison (with a lot of input from Kidd, presumably) and whether or not Kidd is flexible and creative enough to get the most out of them than I am with AD's willingness to buy into whatever role the team needs him to play. The question is: do they know what they want him to do, and is it the right thing? If the answer is yes, and he can stay healthy enough, you don't want to trade him, imo. He's their best player by a mile.

I agree conceptually. The salary structure may help determine some of this.

The most likely outcome in my mind is that AD willingly moves to center either this season or next. And Frank Vogel may be helpful here.

[SleepingHero]

https://x.com/billsimmons/status/1941170...94038?s=46&t=kBZghN5pPKEHpi2dWWHV8g


@BillSimmons
I’m already writing down Cooper Flagg in pen for the 2031-32 Celtics roster. Happy July 4th everybody!

[F Gump]

KL, thanks for the long reply. It looks to me like I assess AD (and his value on this roster) very differently than you. You clearly see him as this team's franchise player to build around, and a necessary difference-maker for this team and its upside. So you would plug him into what you see as his best position © and make everything else fit to that.

Makes sense, for how you see AD.

In contrast, I am way less married to AD in my vision - ie I see him as more of one "asset" among many right now (rather than the set-in-stone foundation to the Mavs' best upside possibility) and someone who might prove to be our Batman in a title run, but who might instead be a key trade piece to building a team with higher upside. IOW I don't buy in on the idea that his best use for us is definitely going to be as our new "Luka" or "Dirk" for a decade, necessarily, even though he came here to be that in Nico's vision. 

My biggest issue with a commitment to AD is his lack of dependability. I can use an oft-injured guy as a valuable piece, but if up to me, I would not ever make him The Guy I build everything around, since I don't know when (if) I will have him on the floor. And it's a long long grind - perhaps 110 games - to a ring. I need The Guy to show up every night.

Re Gafford, I clearly value him as a player way more than you do - so what you see as a "problem" to try to be rid of is what I see as a "big help" to the team and its future. And in this iteration of the roster, I think he is very needed, not a surplus.

[F Gump]

I agree conceptually. The salary structure may help determine some of this.

The most likely outcome in my mind is that AD willingly moves to center either this season or next. And Frank Vogel may be helpful here.

I don't see any "move" needed per se or any big drama. He can go in a game as a C where everyone else is smaller. He was LA's only C more or less. He played C regularly, he knows how. 

He just does not like being a C. (Why? I'd guess he prefers a Big Guy on the floor alongside to be the designated "bully," so he will not have the job. Or maybe he prefers to play as a 4 where he will then almost always be bigger/longer than the opponent and naturally more dominant.)

[Scott41theMavs]

KL, thanks for the long reply. It looks to me like I assess AD (and his value on this roster) very differently than you. You clearly see him as this team's franchise player to build around, and a necessary difference-maker for this team and its upside. So you would plug him into what you see as his best position © and make everything else fit to that.

Makes sense, for how you see AD.

In contrast, I am way less married to AD in my vision - ie I see him as more of one "asset" among many right now (rather than the set-in-stone foundation to the Mavs' best upside possibility) and someone who might prove to be our Batman in a title run, but who might instead be a key trade piece to building a team with higher upside. IOW I don't buy in on the idea that his best use for us is definitely going to be as our new "Luka" or "Dirk" for a decade, necessarily, even though he came here to be that in Nico's vision. 

My biggest issue with a commitment to AD is his lack of dependability. I can use an oft-injured guy as a valuable piece, but if up to me, I would not ever make him The Guy I build everything around, since I don't know when (if) I will have him on the floor. And it's a long long grind - perhaps 110 games - to a ring. I need The Guy to show up every night.

Re Gafford, I clearly value him as a player way more than you do - so what you see as a "problem" to try to be rid of is what I see as a "big help" to the team and its future. And in this iteration of the roster, I think he is very needed, not a surplus.

"The guy" is clearly Cooper, but it's hard to gauge how long it will take him to be that guy. He will be interesting to build around because I believe he will be a perennial all-star and frequent at-least-2nd-team-All-NBA-guy, but probably never the scoring champion. He will always need to have two or so other players next to him who can create their own shot, with at least one being one of the top guys in the league at it. TLDR: our rich man's Scottie needs a poor man's Jordan. Kyrie can probably be that for a while if he can come back at anything close to his pre-injury skill level.

The front office and coaching staff (sorry Rick) goofed with Luka because, while they clearly valued him, they failed to see and establish to the roster that he was the guy from day one, leading to the abject idiocy we saw from Wes and DAJ (and, to a lesser extent, Harry and DSJ) until they were traded. Cooper isn't the guy like that, but will hopefully be according strong respect by the vets and be a major focal point from day one. 

In the debate between the two of you, while you two are probably my favorite posters here, I'd have to lean toward F Gump on this one.

[Scott41theMavs]

I don't see any "move" needed per se or any big drama. He can go in a game as a C where everyone else is smaller. He was LA's only C more or less. He played C regularly, he knows how. 

He just does not like being a C. (Why? I'd guess he prefers a Big Guy on the floor alongside to be the designated "bully," so he will not have the job. Or maybe he prefers to play as a 4 where he will then almost always be bigger/longer than the opponent and naturally more dominant.)

The "move" is that he plays more than half of his time at center without being pissed off about it. That requires that the coaching staff gains his trust, which shouldn't be too hard given their history together. 

AD might fear playing center due to his injury history, but his first big injury as a Mav was a non-contact and very much PF sort of injury.

[Jym]

The only realistic path to the WCF or even Finals that I see is for Davis to go full Bubble Davis and play like the best player on the planet for a couple months
It's there, it could happen. So I get why we'd keep him.

[Winter]

I don't see any "move" needed per se or any big drama. He can go in a game as a C where everyone else is smaller. He was LA's only C more or less. He played C regularly, he knows how. 

He just does not like being a C. (Why? I'd guess he prefers a Big Guy on the floor alongside to be the designated "bully," so he will not have the job. Or maybe he prefers to play as a 4 where he will then almost always be bigger/longer than the opponent and naturally more dominant.)

Well, I'm not sure there's sound reasoning for keeping 3 quality paid centers on the roster. That was in my previous post you quoted.

If AD could move infrequently into the center position (willingly), then I think it makes more sense to have AD, Lively, and Kai then AD, Lively, and Gafford. I would be interested in your thoughts on this.

[Ghost of Podkolzin]

Well, I'm not sure there's sound reasoning for keeping 3 quality paid centers on the roster. That was in my previous post you quoted.

If AD could move infrequently into the center position (willingly), then I think it makes more sense to have AD, Lively, and Kai then AD, Lively, and Gafford. I would be interested in your thoughts on this.

This.  This is the Mavs' strategic advantage.  Size.  I don't see AD playing that much at C.

[BigDirk41]

"The guy" is clearly Cooper, but it's hard to gauge how long it will take him to be that guy. He will be interesting to build around because I believe he will be a perennial all-star and frequent at-least-2nd-team-All-NBA-guy, but probably never the scoring champion. He will always need to have two or so other players next to him who can create their own shot, with at least one being one of the top guys in the league at it. TLDR: our rich man's Scottie needs a poor man's Jordan. Kyrie can probably be that for a while if he can come back at anything close to his pre-injury skill level.

The front office and coaching staff (sorry Rick) goofed with Luka because, while they clearly valued him, they failed to see and establish to the roster that he was the guy from day one, leading to the abject idiocy we saw from Wes and DAJ (and, to a lesser extent, Harry and DSJ) until they were traded. Cooper isn't the guy like that, but will hopefully be according strong respect by the vets and be a major focal point from day one. 

In the debate between the two of you, while you two are probably my favorite posters here, I'd have to lean toward F Gump on this one.

I think Flagg will be prime Grant Hill almost immediately and definitely by year 2. I can definitely see him averaging something like 19-20 PPG, 7 plus rbs and 7 plus assist a game his rookie year. He's a 2 way player so different impact than Luka. He's going to be a stud.

[myconsumerclub]

Davis and everyone on this team needs to improve shot selections and stop missing shots that should not have been taken in the first place. We needs to focus on scoring inside and facilitating for others who can hit the open 3 at the best %.

Davis is a point forward and needs to feed to the open guy more since he is not shooting it at the best % like his fellow centers do.

Cooper is a better option to be the point forward so Davis needs to adapt and fit in better. LeBron was a point forward as well so he knew how to do it in LA playing next to Bron and he can do it here as well.

Cooper can play 4 maybe 5 positions on the team. He will be bringing up the ball and getting first crack at things just like Luka used to do.

Then Irving too will be bringing up the ball when he returns but by then Cooper will have either proven he can play PG too so they can split that duty, or he has shown he is incapable of facilitating that way and we wont want to encourage him in playing that role.

7-10 is 6 days away and that is when we get our first look at Cooper at the point. Should be interesting to see the new king get started building his legacy.

Point Cooper is an experiment we need to see him succeed at. If he can play that part on this team we can start to use our assets on 3 and D wings and bigs maybe even trade off some of our PG talents.

We have 5 PG's now and 4 is probably more than we need but with injured Kyrie we need that extra PG but if Cooper can develop and stick it out as a point forward then why would we not want to gather our assets to use them for finding better 3 and D wings.

Every wing can hit 3's but Naji and he still helps us by being a creator. He needs to improve his 3 and focus on shooting better shots and not taking bad ones. We have the guys that can create better than him in Irving and Cooper so he needs to reel in the instincts he has to create and start being more selective with his 3 pointers and play as a more opportunistic talent.

Evaluating Kelly should be fun as well. What if he comes in and develops into a wing that can shoot 3's and defend better than who we have now. That would really make me happy.

Nembhard ditto he could find his role as a Chris Paul clone so we have a lot to do evaluating those 2 let alone Cooper at the point.

Summer league should be a lot of fun given all the talent we have. Cooper, Sharp, Nembhard, Kelly, Ajinca, and Cisse that is some nice talent to play for a summer league team, now I know why they haven't just given out that 3rd 2 way yet. Frisco is going to have a great team this year.

We still need to ditch a guy or more to make room for Exum and if possible to clear room for Kai Jones. Here is to waving a fond farewell to guys like Martin, Omax, and Powell. Lots of guys are going to get cut at the start of the season so we may want to only keep 14 roster spots for early season and TDL opportunities.

[Chicagojk]

The only realistic path to the WCF or even Finals that I see is for Davis to go full Bubble Davis and play like the best player on the planet for a couple months
It's there, it could happen. So I get why we'd keep him.

 
I am treating next year as an evaluation year and hopefully an enjoy watching basketball again year.  I don't believe title contention is realistic.  I would love to be proven wrong.  

I think the best way for this team to be a contender in the next 3-4 years is for AD to be really good.   I am not sure if I see an avenue to be a contender if he is moved for parts.   I could be wrong and this year will form my opinion of what I think.  Maybe they aren't a contender in the next 3-4 years anyway.   

I think AD and Kyrie if both are healthy have a 3 maybe 4 year run.  After that, hopefully you can move to phase 2 for Flagg.  Maybe it will take a year or two to reset, but that is my vision currently.

Although if the AD thing does not hit, I will be singing a different tune quickly.

[Chicagojk]

This.  This is the Mavs' strategic advantage.  Size.  I don't see AD playing that much at C.

It will be interesting to see.  I think most think he is best at center.  If that is true, he loses appeal to me because I am really high on Lively.   I think in my evaluation year is can he amplify the centers.  What I loved about our centers with Luka is how hard they could play and as a tandem would give you 20 plus points, 10 plus rebounds most games.  Can they do that playing next to Lively.  If it is more like 14 points 10 rebounds combined, it loses some appeal to me.