Trade & FA 2023-24: HOU Targeting Mikal Bridges again!| Mitchell is LAL #1 Target

[mvossman]

In my opinion, "fit" trumps "talent".  I'd much rather have 55 games of Kyrie than 75 of Murray, even if we somehow decided that they had equal talent.

Kyrie is a great fit, both on the court and off.  He's been hurt, so less available, perhaps, but any player can get hurt.  Lots of Mavs have missed lots of games this season.  And I'd argue that a lot of his recent unavailability (Brooklyn) didn't have anything to do with being hurt, so can't really be used to project forward.

KP was hurt a lot, also, but when healthy, he just wasn't a great fit.

I'm not sure Kyrie is a better fit than Murray.  He is a better fit on offense, but Murray is capable of much better defense.  If Murray feels he needs to run point, then it obviously is not going to work.  His usage is currently only a few percentage points below what it was in SA, and Kyrie currently has a higher usage than Murray did in SA so I am not convinced it wont work.  As I said above, it probably doesn't matter anyways.  I think they plan on holding onto Kyrie long term, and we just have to hope that his next contract is not an albatross.

[SleepingHero]

45/46 games from Murray or 27/47 games from Kyrie. Who is providing more value? Kyrie's issue is health/durability.

The best skill is availability and I'm not arguing against that.

But 45 games of a disgruntled player that has already shown ire playing with a ball dominant player, vs 27 games of a player that has fit and shown potential of a serious duo, I'd go with the 27 games just because it doesn't matter if the other guy plays more games if there is serious disfunction in them.

Again kyries health is a valid concern. Same with the defensive limitations. I'm not opposed to moving him. I'm just not moving him for guys like Dejounte Murray or Tyler Herro.

[BigDirk41]

I'm not saying I would, but would anyone take on Ben Simmons if it got us Bridges? Simmons contract is so bad, what if it got us Bridges and Cam Thomas?

[SleepingHero]

I'm not sure Kyrie is a better fit than Murray.  He is a better fit on offense, but Murray is capable of much better defense.  If Murray feels he needs to run point, then it obviously is not going to work.  His usage is currently only a few percentage points below what it was in SA, and Kyrie currently has a higher usage than Murray did in SA so I am not convinced it wont work.  As I said above, it probably doesn't matter anyways.  I think they plan on holding onto Kyrie long term, and we just have to hope that his next contract is not an albatross.

And bingo. I'm not saying this. Murray said it. It's not going to work.

[KillerLeft]

Yeah I can't argue that. I just don't think it's good for Luka who is the prize in Dallas. The roster around them two doesn't help either.

It's tough to wrap your head around, for sure. We had some debate on this over the summer, with two camps forming. 

Camp 1: Kyrie is the 2nd star they've been desperately trying to get. They have him, but he's old. Go all in as quickly as possible to maximize the Luka/Kyrie window. It's a long shot that you can get good enough, but you can't just let the Luka/Kyrie window close without trying. 

Camp 2: Why'd they even bother re-signing Kyrie if the rest of their summer was going to be about drafting these damn rookies? Why are they trying to get younger, when the Kyrie trade and contract are clearly "win now" moves?? They should trade him immediately. 

I am probably closer to Camp 2, but then again, I wasn't a fan of the trade originally. I have to admit that he has exceeded my expectations. Not so much in terms of availability, which has obviously been sad, but in terms of fitting with Luka by playing mostly off-ball and fitting into the team and city culture. 

So...this is my "difficult to express, even harder to wrap your head around" take on the situation. I believe they wanted Kyrie here for the obvious: to help take pressure off of Luka on the court, and to be a leader in the locker room, hopefully attracting some interesting players here and there. I think they are also hoping he can have some sort of positive impact on how Luka goes about his business, kind of like Kyle Lowry would have back when they were after him, but that's just a hunch. His age is just something they felt they had to overlook for the first point and kind of helpful for the second, but...

...I think they're trying to build a young team, basically. I don't think Kyrie had many other options, so he kind of has to be cool with helping to oversee the development of a young team.  I think the Mavs have often avoided getting this young in the past because they didn't want to lose their collective understanding of "how to be a winning team." I know that's nebulous, but I stand by it. We can plainly see that since Carlisle, Brunson, DFS and even Dinwiddie have gone, the leadership of this team has been in newer, less stable hands. This is something we haven't had to deal with as fans for a LOOOOONG time around here, and I'm not sure all of us recognize the importance of stability. The Mavs have traditionally prioritized it a bit TOO MUCH, tbh. I think part of why they wanted Kyrie is specifically BECAUSE they were getting younger. I think their hope is that he helps this young team the way Van Vleet, Brooks (and Powell, if they had succeeded in signing him away) are helping Houston. The team needed someone to help with all the youngsters, if they were going to have so many. 

Finally, I believe they will stay young because of the coach. I think they have a less experienced, less in demand, cheaper head coach specifically because they think he can develop YOUNG players. When you look around the league, the coaches without skins on the wall have to fight and scratch their way to legitimacy by taking the jobs where YOUNG PLAYERS are going to play. Big name coaches want nothing to do with those teams. They wait until guys like Kidd, Mosley, Silas build the teams up to the point where they have a chance to compete, and THEN they come in to get the job done. For a coach to transcend one level and get to the next, he needs to WIN more than expected with his young team opportunity. I think Will Hardy is an example of someone who is in the process of rising through the ranks right now.

Talked about this many times, but I think once that Porzingis thing didn't work out the only good way forward was to replenish the youth of roster, building player assets while draft capital slowly builds back up, simultaneously. Luka is still so young. He's going to sign the next deal Dallas offers. It's the year after that they need to worry about as far as him leaving. They have time to do it RIGHT, so why consider something reckless for no reason? 

Again, if there's a good deal for Kyrie out there, I'd look at it, sure, but I'm in no rush, and frankly I don't think he's viewed as the valuable superstar being wasted here on a developmental team. I think he's close to done, and his availability reflects that. He's great when he plays, so that's awesome! But, I think he and the Mavs both knew exactly what they were agreeing to when that contract was signed. 

All just speculation that makes sense to me, of course.

[KillerLeft]

Im ready for the Mavs to just make Brooklyn an offer they cant refuse for Bridges.

We'd all love to get "the good" Bridges here. No question about it. 

The problem is that Brooklyn can refuse a LOT. They could refuse an offer three times more rich than what the Mavs could even offer, if they wanted. We're kind of forced to speculate about the names that are actually available, because those are the situations in which teams most often meet in the middle.

[omahen]

I don't want to reopen all the Wiggins pro et contra discussions. I am interested in GSW part of it. There was some smoke Mavs are interested and todays rumor is that GSW is exploring player for player options for him. This basically takes out all tanking teams options, as none of them would take that contract without assets. This leaves teams that might see a better fit with Wiggins than what they have with some other players on their roster.

Assuming GSW is only exploring player for player options, what would be their main motivation in the trade? Good players are not on table in such deals and is it even likely any average player changes their chances so much? I don't think so. Are they looking for a specific player position or is the main motivation just to save money? Lets consider player positions. They have Curry and CP3 at guard positions, being backed up by the young Poziemsky who is playing well and Moody as well. So, an average guard will not really make a huge difference.

Forward positions will be dominated by Thompson, Kuminga and Draymond. Center might be their biggest position of need as they are undersized with Looney, Saric and Jackson-Davis.

My conclusion is, that their main motivation in player for player deal would be to have more flexibility in the summer. I will take all GSW rookies of the table, as I don't think they will use any of them to dump Wiggins for some average or worse players. Going from there, I will play a little bit with the options.

THJ for Wiggins works straight up. They would save a lot for next two seasons and THJ contract will be far more moveable than Wiggins in the summer. It would put Mavs in the tax but there are some minor moves like moving Curry that would solve that. But it seems like GSW are the clear winner in this deal. Mavs getting a bad contract in a player that you can only hope would return to at least 90 % of what he was. Huge risk. Kills a lot of Mavs flexibility in summer, where THJ contract would be great to have.

Kleber+GW? Longer term deals not really saving GSW any money and even as bad as Wiggins is playing, both are worse than him. Might be easier for GSW to move two smaller contracts than Wiggins one though. Season is lost anyway. If GSW would want to save more money, they could add GPII and we add Curry. From Mavs perspective, next move could make things very interesting. If they get someone like Grant with THJ/Holmes and the darft assets in the summer. Luka-Kyrie-Wiggins-Grant-Lively could be a very dangerous line-up on both ends of the floor. Ideally we keep Green, Omax, Exum, Hardy as bench options.

Holmes has less money on his deal, but far worse player value than any of Maxi/GW.

[Scott41theMavs]

I don't want to reopen all the Wiggins pro et contra discussions. I am interested in GSW part of it. There was some smoke Mavs are interested and todays rumor is that GSW is exploring player for player options for him. This basically takes out all tanking teams options, as none of them would take that contract without assets. This leaves teams that might see a better fit with Wiggins than what they have with some other players on their roster.

Assuming GSW is only exploring player for player options, what would be their main motivation in the trade? Good players are not on table in such deals and is it even likely any average player changes their chances so much? I don't think so. Are they looking for a specific player position or is the main motivation just to save money? Lets consider player positions. They have Curry and CP3 at guard positions, being backed up by the young Poziemsky who is playing well and Moody as well. So, an average guard will not really make a huge difference.

Forward positions will be dominated by Thompson, Kuminga and Draymond. Center might be their biggest position of need as they are undersized with Looney, Saric and Jackson-Davis.

My conclusion is, that their main motivation in player for player deal would be to have more flexibility in the summer. I will take all GSW rookies of the table, as I don't think they will use any of them to dump Wiggins for some average or worse players. Going from there, I will play a little bit with the options.

THJ for Wiggins works straight up. They would save a lot for next two seasons and THJ contract will be far more moveable than Wiggins in the summer. It would put Mavs in the tax but there are some minor moves like moving Curry that would solve that. But it seems like GSW are the clear winner in this deal. Mavs getting a bad contract in a player that you can only hope would return to at least 90 % of what he was. Huge risk. Kills a lot of Mavs flexibility in summer, where THJ contract would be great to have.

Kleber+GW? Longer term deals not really saving GSW any money and even as bad as Wiggins is playing, both are worse than him. Might be easier for GSW to move two smaller contracts than Wiggins one though. Season is lost anyway. If GSW would want to save more money, they could add GPII and we add Curry. From Mavs perspective, next move could make things very interesting. If they get someone like Grant with THJ/Holmes and the darft assets in the summer. Luka-Kyrie-Wiggins-Grant-Lively could be a very dangerous line-up on both ends of the floor. Ideally we keep Green, Omax, Exum, Hardy as bench options.

Holmes has less money on his deal, but far worse player value than any of Maxi/GW.

Don't forget that KL is a throw-in on any Mavs trade for Wiggins.

[KillerLeft]

Don't forget that KL is a throw-in on any Mavs trade for Wiggins.

Hahaha, I'm sure that's a notch in the "pros" column for Omahen.

[Scott41theMavs]

Hahaha, I'm sure that's a notch in the "pros" column for Omahen.

Nah, we all appreciate you, and that's why bringing Wiggins here is, like trading OMax, forbidden.

[omahen]

Found the source of the rumor that GSW are (were) exploring player for player deals for Wiggins. As usual, only a piece of article was aggregated and the important part left out. So no one needs to worry, Wiggins trade is not likely to happen at all. Remaining information:

But nothing has made them jump. Wiggins has upped his production and activity lately. He’s back in their starting and closing lineup, able finally to play next to Kuminga (a huge factor in his future) because of Green’s return as the starting center. The Warriors are plus-41 with that trio on the court together in 66 minutes over last four games.

There has been no mandate from Joe Lacob and the Warriors’ ownership group to shed money, according to team sources, despite a record tax bill and 19-24 record. Even without trading Wiggins, there’s a clear path to ducking the second-tax apron this summer because of their other expiring contracts. It’s conceivable they could hold Wiggins and explore his market again in the summer, when he only has three seasons left and theoretically finished this season better than he started.

https://theathletic.com/5230513/2024/01/...ne-rumors/

[DanSchwartzgan]

I don't want to reopen all the Wiggins pro et contra discussions. I am interested in GSW part of it. There was some smoke Mavs are interested and todays rumor is that GSW is exploring player for player options for him. This basically takes out all tanking teams options, as none of them would take that contract without assets. This leaves teams that might see a better fit with Wiggins than what they have with some other players on their roster.

Assuming GSW is only exploring player for player options, what would be their main motivation in the trade? Good players are not on table in such deals and is it even likely any average player changes their chances so much? I don't think so. Are they looking for a specific player position or is the main motivation just to save money? Lets consider player positions. They have Curry and CP3 at guard positions, being backed up by the young Poziemsky who is playing well and Moody as well. So, an average guard will not really make a huge difference.

Forward positions will be dominated by Thompson, Kuminga and Draymond. Center might be their biggest position of need as they are undersized with Looney, Saric and Jackson-Davis.

My conclusion is, that their main motivation in player for player deal would be to have more flexibility in the summer. I will take all GSW rookies of the table, as I don't think they will use any of them to dump Wiggins for some average or worse players. Going from there, I will play a little bit with the options.

THJ for Wiggins works straight up. They would save a lot for next two seasons and THJ contract will be far more moveable than Wiggins in the summer. It would put Mavs in the tax but there are some minor moves like moving Curry that would solve that. But it seems like GSW are the clear winner in this deal. Mavs getting a bad contract in a player that you can only hope would return to at least 90 % of what he was. Huge risk. Kills a lot of Mavs flexibility in summer, where THJ contract would be great to have.

Kleber+GW? Longer term deals not really saving GSW any money and even as bad as Wiggins is playing, both are worse than him. Might be easier for GSW to move two smaller contracts than Wiggins one though. Season is lost anyway. If GSW would want to save more money, they could add GPII and we add Curry. From Mavs perspective, next move could make things very interesting. If they get someone like Grant with THJ/Holmes and the darft assets in the summer. Luka-Kyrie-Wiggins-Grant-Lively could be a very dangerous line-up on both ends of the floor. Ideally we keep Green, Omax, Exum, Hardy as bench options.

Holmes has less money on his deal, but far worse player value than any of Maxi/GW.

Jackson-Davis keeps popping up on my YouTube home page.  It is almost as if YouTube is trying to tell me something.

I think something like this has to involve a third team that can get GSW under the 2nd apron for 24-25 with CP3 presumed gone and Thompson presumed retained at a more reasonable number.  It doesn't have to be a GSW player going to the third team.  It could be GWill going to Washington and Holmes to GSW (or visa-versa).  GS would have to pay to get the third team to take a Dallas contract (or a GS contract).

The Warriors are kind of in Late-Dirk mode and I'm not sure there is a win-now move that gets them there.  But, they have to play out the string to honor the Curry legacy.  Moving Wiggins for something useful would be helpful, but they can't completely abandon the post-Curry era either.  Do they give up a pick with Wiggins?  Jackson-Davis?  I could see Wiggins ending up in Dallas or Washington with Gafford and THJ in GS.  I'd give up the unprotected first if we ended up with TJD and Kuzma or TJD and Avdija.  It just seems like there are some good mix/match opportunities if we bring the Washington TPE into the picture.

[RGP1981]

And bingo. I'm not saying this. Murray said it. It's not going to work.

Are you referring to the Twitter or Instagram exchcange that Dejounte Murray had with a fan? Or something else? Cause if it's the former, Murray never said he absolutely needs to run the point there. Seemed like he was talking about something else.

And even if he did, I wager it's far easier to concede primary play-making duties to Luka than it is to Trae.

I think the FO should get Dejounte + Quentin Grimes. Then sort out the PF problem.

[RoyTarpleysGhost]

Nah, we all appreciate you, and that's why bringing Wiggins here is, like trading OMax, forbidden.

I have hope Omax turns into something but this guy is already insanely overhyped. For a three year college player to look this overwhelmed in the NBA isn’t a great sign. I’m not sure the Mavs do that trade again with Sacramento if you gave them the choice.

[SleepingHero]

Evan Sidery (@esidery)
The Warriors have been fielding trade offers on Andrew Wiggins in potential player-for-player swaps, per @anthonyVslater (https://theathletic.com/5230513/2024/01/...ed_article).

There appears to be enough interest in Wiggins where Golden State won’t have to attach draft assets.

NBACentral (@TheDunkCentral)
The Warriors are considering player-for-player trade offers for Andrew Wiggins, who remains the most likely member of the team to be traded, per @anthonyVslater

[KillerLeft]

I have hope Omax turns into something but this guy is already insanely overhyped. For a three year college player to look this overwhelmed in the NBA isn’t a great sign. I’m not sure the Mavs do that trade again with Sacramento if you gave them the choice.

Part of the hype is over the top for comedic effect, as I'm sure you realize. 

But, while I agree with some of your POV here, I stand by the concept that his is an athletic/body style profile that's just so freaking hard to find. 

Doing the trade again...hmm. I suppose it depends on whether they expected anything from Holmes. I didn't, so I'd do it again (at this point). Not sure about the Mavs though.

[SleepingHero]

We shouldn't be looking to do the Warriors a favor. Taking on Wiggins KILLS the Mavs flexibility for years. And if he continues looking like he does he is one of the hardest contracts to move in the league.

Moody should be at least available as a sweetener. As well as 2nds. I'd give them THJ+Maxi for Wiggins+Looney+Moody and a 2nd.

Mavs head into the tax but just barely.

This is really the only acceptable deal in my eyes.

[KillerLeft]

We shouldn't be looking to do the Warriors a favor. Taking on Wiggins KILLS the Mavs flexibility for years. And if he continues looking like he does he is one of the hardest contracts to move in the league.

Moody should be at least available as a sweetener. As well as 2nds. I'd give them THJ+Maxi for Wiggins+Looney+Moody and a 2nd.

Mavs head into the tax but just barely.

This is really the only acceptable deal in my eyes.

I agree. 

As much as I have heard Cuban talk about the 2nd apron recently, I have faith that Wiggins won't be landing here.

[Chicagojk]

I don't want to reopen all the Wiggins pro et contra discussions. I am interested in GSW part of it. There was some smoke Mavs are interested and todays rumor is that GSW is exploring player for player options for him. This basically takes out all tanking teams options, as none of them would take that contract without assets. This leaves teams that might see a better fit with Wiggins than what they have with some other players on their roster.

Assuming GSW is only exploring player for player options, what would be their main motivation in the trade? Good players are not on table in such deals and is it even likely any average player changes their chances so much? I don't think so. Are they looking for a specific player position or is the main motivation just to save money? Lets consider player positions. They have Curry and CP3 at guard positions, being backed up by the young Poziemsky who is playing well and Moody as well. So, an average guard will not really make a huge difference.

Forward positions will be dominated by Thompson, Kuminga and Draymond. Center might be their biggest position of need as they are undersized with Looney, Saric and Jackson-Davis.

My conclusion is, that their main motivation in player for player deal would be to have more flexibility in the summer. I will take all GSW rookies of the table, as I don't think they will use any of them to dump Wiggins for some average or worse players. Going from there, I will play a little bit with the options.

THJ for Wiggins works straight up. They would save a lot for next two seasons and THJ contract will be far more moveable than Wiggins in the summer. It would put Mavs in the tax but there are some minor moves like moving Curry that would solve that. But it seems like GSW are the clear winner in this deal. Mavs getting a bad contract in a player that you can only hope would return to at least 90 % of what he was. Huge risk. Kills a lot of Mavs flexibility in summer, where THJ contract would be great to have.

Kleber+GW? Longer term deals not really saving GSW any money and even as bad as Wiggins is playing, both are worse than him. Might be easier for GSW to move two smaller contracts than Wiggins one though. Season is lost anyway. If GSW would want to save more money, they could add GPII and we add Curry. From Mavs perspective, next move could make things very interesting. If they get someone like Grant with THJ/Holmes and the darft assets in the summer. Luka-Kyrie-Wiggins-Grant-Lively could be a very dangerous line-up on both ends of the floor. Ideally we keep Green, Omax, Exum, Hardy as bench options.

Holmes has less money on his deal, but far worse player value than any of Maxi/GW.

Wiggins scares me.  Typically players play well in GS.   A lot of questions there.  But Wiggins at least fits the porotype of a type of player we would need.  

I would imagine Dallas would not include a young player or pick and neither would GS.  So it could be Dallas is offering Holmes & GW or Holmes and Maxi for Wiggins.   I am really not sure who they would less likely want to give up between GW and Maxi.  I think one would need to be included.   I would guess the Mavs have proposed something along these lines and GS just needs to decide if they can find a better deal.  

Also Mavs did like GP3 last summer....and they typically like to hold their crushes for a long time.  

Not sure if I would be on board with a Wiggins trade.

[MarkAguirreWrathofGod]

Wiggins scares me.  Typically players play well in GS.   A lot of questions there.  But Wiggins at least fits the porotype of a type of player we would need.  

I would imagine Dallas would not include a young player or pick and neither would GS.  So it could be Dallas is offering Holmes & GW or Holmes and Maxi for Wiggins.   I am really not sure who they would less likely want to give up between GW and Maxi.  I think one would need to be included.   I would guess the Mavs have proposed something along these lines and GS just needs to decide if they can find a better deal.  

Also Mavs did like GP3 last summer....and they typically like to hold their crushes for a long time.  

Not sure if I would be on board with a Wiggins trade.

This is where I’m at too. I’d rather just pass on him if there isn’t an asset attached. There have always been questions about Wiggins desire. Not what this team needs.