I was right, Kamm was wrong (ab Gobert)

[michaeltex]

Truly, that’s a terrible salary given his age. But not sure it’s much worse than the combined salaries of THJ, Bertans, and Powell.

It's worse in that it is all rolled up in one contract. We just spent a couple years of angst and frustration arguing whether KP was worth his (much smaller) contract and this would feel like putting our metaphorical head back in the same metaphorical noose. Any of those salaries you named can be traded, or aggregated in a trade, much easier than a single $40MM+ contract. 

We should only jump of the cliff for Gobert if he is the one to put DAL in as a championship favorite and, IMO, there is no foreseeable reality that satisfies that requirement.

[ThisIStheYear]

It's worse in that it is all rolled up in one contract. We just spent a couple years of angst and frustration arguing whether KP was worth his (much smaller) contract and this would feel like putting our metaphorical head back in the same metaphorical noose. Any of those salaries you named can be traded, or aggregated in a trade, much easier than a single $40MM+ contract. 

We should only jump of the cliff for Gobert if he is the one to put DAL in as a championship favorite and, IMO, there is no foreseeable reality that satisfies that requirement.

Of course, as we’ve learned, THJ has no marginal value to Dallas other than what he could bring in a trade. We haven’t missed him at all, in fact the team’s fortunes took off, once he was injured. And Gobert is a far better player and better fit for Dallas, who’s main weakness is interior defense and rebounding, than KP was.  Powell is a nice role player for 20 minutes a game—good pick and role player with below average defense and rebounding. I like him, but he’s no Gobert (an all star). There’s no doubt swapping those players improves Dallas.  How much and would Cuban pay the freight are the real questions.  The Mavs wouldn’t be trading for Gobert to trade him. It would be to complete the team. He’s far less risky of a bet than the injury prone, unproven, KP.

[michaeltex]

Of course, as we’ve learned, THJ has no marginal value to Dallas other than what he could bring in a trade. We haven’t missed him at all, in fact the team’s fortunes took off, once he was injured. And Gobert is a far better player and better fit for Dallas, who’s main weakness is interior defense and rebounding, than KP was.  Powell is a nice role player for 20 minutes a game—good pick and role player with below average defense and rebounding. I like him, but he’s no Gobert (an all star). There’s no doubt swapping those players improves Dallas.  How much and would Cuban pay the freight are the real questions.  The Mavs wouldn’t be trading for Gobert to trade him. It would be to complete the team. He’s far less risky of a bet than the injury prone, unproven, KP.

To me, you have to demonstrate an ability to take over a game if you get $40MM+. Like LBJ, Steph, Hardin, and (soon) Lillard and Giannis. Gobert is not that level of talent and shouldn't be that level of cap hit.

[Fuerza1]

I vote to ban the name Rudy Gobert and any related Gobert news on this forum until at least the 2022 NBA draft.

https://www.change.org/

[mvossman]

Of course, as we’ve learned, THJ has no marginal value to Dallas other than what he could bring in a trade. We haven’t missed him at all, in fact the team’s fortunes took off, once he was injured. And Gobert is a far better player and better fit for Dallas, who’s main weakness is interior defense and rebounding, than KP was.  Powell is a nice role player for 20 minutes a game—good pick and role player with below average defense and rebounding. I like him, but he’s no Gobert (an all star). There’s no doubt swapping those players improves Dallas.  How much and would Cuban pay the freight are the real questions.  The Mavs wouldn’t be trading for Gobert to trade him. It would be to complete the team. He’s far less risky of a bet than the injury prone, unproven, KP.

I disagree with the notion that THJ has no marginal value to Dallas.  The fact that the Mavs got better after he went down feels more like correlation than causation.  There were a lot of factors involved.  He started out cold like the rest of the team (and the NBA as a whole) and was starting to find his shot when he got hurt.  My guess is that he would have been really handy this last series when Din can't get to the rim much, stretching the floor was at a premium and Bullock was putting in over 40 minutes a game.  I realize he is not an ideal fit in Kidd's system and that he is the most suggested player to trade because of that, but this team would be better with him healthy.

[Jason Terry]

Of course, as we’ve learned, THJ has no marginal value to Dallas other than what he could bring in a trade. We haven’t missed him at all, in fact the team’s fortunes took off, once he was injured. And Gobert is a far better player and better fit for Dallas, who’s main weakness is interior defense and rebounding, than KP was.  Powell is a nice role player for 20 minutes a game—good pick and role player with below average defense and rebounding. I like him, but he’s no Gobert (an all star). There’s no doubt swapping those players improves Dallas.  How much and would Cuban pay the freight are the real questions.  The Mavs wouldn’t be trading for Gobert to trade him. It would be to complete the team. He’s far less risky of a bet than the injury prone, unproven, KP.

This is where I’m at too. Gobert would instantly make us the top seed with his regular season performance. It’s worth the risk for that alone

Playoffs and even regular season he would have to be cool with stretches of him riding the bench if the team needs him to. 

I would only do it though if it costs just the pick. I want our future picks available for a finishing move when that arises

[ThisIStheYear]

All I can say is tonight the Mavs would have been far better off paying Gobert $40 million than paying THJ, Bertans, and Powell a combined $48 million.

[Dundalis]

I am not sure about this statement. Powell is an all around defender, not great at any part, but also not bad at any part. Gobert is a spacialist at the paint. Powell is far better in team defense, switching, movement, 3pt protection etc. Sometimes, not having gaps in your game, is the best skill you can have.

The metrics simply don't paint Gobert as a pure specialist in the paint though. Powell might be a bit quicker to switch, but there's no shot Powell defends better than Gobert including the 3 point shot. Gobert defends the 3 to a 32.7% clip, vs Powell's 33.9%. Gobert also defends almost double the number of 3 point field goal attempts compared to Powell, so there is no number of shots defended bias. Also people are forgetting Powell has no offense either. I get he managed to shoot 35% on like 40 3 point attempts during the season, but it's not like anyone really guards Powell's shot at all, to where it has any great affect on spacing. Gobert will be the primary person out setting picks anyway, and then rolling just like what Powell does.

There are plenty of defensive metrics that paint a picture of total defense, not simply paint defense alone, and they all show Gobert as elite.

I think all the risks are worth it. The fact is, the chances of us getting that perfect, wart free player to partner Luka during his prime are low. I hope they can pull something better off, but I think he would definitely have a huge regular season impact, and his playoff impact depends a lot on matchups. He can be effective in the playoffs, and has been. He's a well setup to be as successful as he can be with this team I think. Contract is ugly, but I think the Mavs simply don't have many very good options to improve the team any time soon.

[MrGoat]

It's interesting that folks are saying this.  He scores 15 points a game with unreal efficiency (over 70% TS this year) and is an excellent offensive rebounder.  Advanced stats struggle to capture defensive value, but they do a very good job capturing offensive value.  All of them, whether its box score based or on/off based consider Gobert a significantly better offensive player than Powell.   We saw the difference in Powell's game when playing with Luka vs without in the playoffs.  Gobert would likely see a similar jump playing with Luka, vs Mitchell.  

I'm not sure Gobert can punish small ball enough to force it off the court, even with Luka.  That does not mean he would get played off the court, but it does mean he would have to play more at the perimeter, and that takes away a lot of his defensive value (but not all of it).  

Not crazy about his salary or the issues he seems to have with other NBA players, but if we could get him cheap (filler salary and the first) I feel like you still make that play.

Those regular season numbers mean very little. He's pretty much just limited to dunks and putbacks and he plays on a team with great spacing. Some of what we were able to get away with guarding him with in that series was downright insulting. The high efficiency numbers in the regular season where he gets a few dunks because the defenses aren't fully locked in just doesn't mean much in the playoffs.

And I already said earlier in the thread I'm up to add Gobert for the right price because I think he'd work better in our defense (could have sorely used him against Ayton last night). I'm just tempering the expectations on his offense, he's not a good offensive player, just an opportunist.

[cow]

All I can say is tonight the Mavs would have been far better off paying Gobert $40 million than paying THJ, Bertans, and Powell a combined $48 million.

I just think we need to consider the "neither" option and not lock ourselves into Gobert for four years or at least a few years before having to kick that can further down the road with another Bertans/Dinwiddie style trade.  Gobert comes with some pretty bright personality red flags which we don't often talk about.  We know KP and Luka didn't get along but both of those guys handled that dislike fairly professionally.  I'd really be concerned about Gobert tanking the chemistry in the locker room.

[KillerLeft]

All I can say is tonight the Mavs would have been far better off paying Gobert $40 million than paying THJ, Bertans, and Powell a combined $48 million.

It's possible this is true, but only if Gobert is GOOD here (in this hypothetical). "Good" as in better than he has been for Utah, imo. 

If I take your meaning correctly (correct me if I'm not) you seem to be implying that even if Gobert isn't a fix all, he and his contract would somehow be less burdensome than the combo of players you mention. I couldn't disagree with that idea more. I think we're uniquely positioned to see that the opposite of that opinion is likely true based on the objectively positive impact the Porzingis trade made on this season's team. 

By spreading the Porzingis money out into two players, the Mavs accomplished three things:

1) not having one player making so much money lessens the political need to force the one player into situations wherein the game is on the line, even when it's obvious doing so is not in the best interest of the team. If Gobert is here, the team goes right back to "making it work" with him, no matter what. 

2) More players soaking up the same amount of salary means more possibilities, in single games and over the course of a season, to get value on that money. I'd submit that BOTH Dinwiddie and Bertans have fit in here reasonably well for the most part, but I think we'd all admit, if we're being honest, that Dinwiddie alone has been a better fit than Porzingis ever was. Therefore, even if Bertans is (as some believe) a waste of the money, the team is better positioned with only a portion of the money being wasted, rather than the entire amount. I'd submit that it's very possible that the combo of THJ, Bertans and Powell is significantly more positive for the team than turning their money into Gobert alone UNLESS he fits here like a glove. I do not agree that there's no chance of buyer's remorse on such a hypothetical trade at all. In fact, I'd say it's a pretty huge risk when viewed from this angle. 

3) Finally, Dinwiddie and Bertans, while not being "value contracts" at all, are much easier to move in future trades separately or packaged with additional players than Porzingis. Moving Porzingis requires (as we've seen) the stars to align nearly perfectly, and you have to be willing to take what the other team MUST give you in order to make the math work. I think this hardship would be even more burdensome with Gobert, if in fact he didn't work out here. 

Now, to be clear, I think Gobert is a much, much better player than Porzingis. And, I'm not sure I wouldn't take the risk involved in your hypothetical package, were it available. I'm just saying that it could easily result in a worsening of the Mavs' roster effectiveness and near-future prospects. There is risk, imo.

[mvossman]

Those regular season numbers mean very little. He's pretty much just limited to dunks and putbacks and he plays on a team with great spacing. Some of what we were able to get away with guarding him with in that series was downright insulting. The high efficiency numbers in the regular season where he gets a few dunks because the defenses aren't fully locked in just doesn't mean much in the playoffs.

And I already said earlier in the thread I'm up to add Gobert for the right price because I think he'd work better in our defense (could have sorely used him against Ayton last night). I'm just tempering the expectations on his offense, he's not a good offensive player, just an opportunist.

He had a rough series, but still scored 12 points a game on nearly 70% TS with 3.6 offensive boards.  He has been better in prior playoff series.  The best advanced boxscore stats say he was still significantly better than average offensively in that series.  Our base of comparison averaged 4 points and 1 offensive rebound.  

I don't know what it means to be a "good offensive player" but his offensive impact on the court is surprisingly high and significantly more than any center we currently have on the roster.  I know the reason you get Gobert is for his defense, but the reality is that we will be better offensively as well when he is on the court.

[MrGoat]

He had a rough series, but still scored 12 points a game on nearly 70% TS with 3.6 offensive boards.  He has been better in prior playoff series.  The best advanced boxscore stats say he was still significantly better than average offensively in that series.  Our base of comparison averaged 4 points and 1 offensive rebound.  

I don't know what it means to be a "good offensive player" but his offensive impact on the court is surprisingly high and significantly more than any center we currently have on the roster.  I know the reason you get Gobert is for his defense, but the reality is that we will be better offensively as well when he is on the court.

It's an eye test thing but the point is we treated him like the 5th option on offense when he was on the court and he didn't make us pay for it. Sometimes we'd guard him one on one in the paint with someone who wasn't even a big. Utah had one of the deadliest perimeter attacks in the league so we dared them to give Rudy the ball and focused on shutting down the Utah perimeter game and it worked. 12 points, counting some of the times we intentionally fouled him, is pretty pitiful for the way we guarded him. Considering our lack of size the 3.6 offensive rebounds was even disappointing, he looked more sure of himself rebounding on the defensive end and missed several chances for extra offensive rebounds. The high percentage is because with Rudy if it's not just a simple dunk then he's probably not even going to do anything with it if not fouled, he just wasn't adding much offensive value and was a big part of the reason Utah's offense stalled against us

[cow]

...but I think we'd all admit, if we're being honest, that Dinwiddie alone has been a better fit than Porzingis ever was. 

Problem is that Dinwiddie has SHRUNK in the playoffs.  I know KP had to go, but I'm not sure the trade has impacted our playoff success.  Utah was a favorable matchup for our team and it really feels like a team that had its' last few gasps of air as currently constructed.  

I hope Dinwiddie serves me some crow but he's been the biggest disappointment of the playoffs along with Green's regression to what looks like a major draft bust and one the last missteps by the old MBT.

[ThisIStheYear]

It's possible this is true, but only if Gobert is GOOD here (in this hypothetical). "Good" as in better than he has been for Utah, imo. 

If I take your meaning correctly (correct me if I'm not) you seem to be implying that even if Gobert isn't a fix all, he and his contract would somehow be less burdensome than the combo of players you mention. I couldn't disagree with that idea more. I think we're uniquely positioned to see that the opposite of that opinion is likely true based on the objectively positive impact the Porzingis trade made on this season's team. 

By spreading the Porzingis money out into two players, the Mavs accomplished three things:

1) not having one player making so much money lessens the political need to force the one player into situations wherein the game is on the line, even when it's obvious doing so is not in the best interest of the team. If Gobert is here, the team goes right back to "making it work" with him, no matter what. 

2) More players soaking up the same amount of salary means more possibilities, in single games and over the course of a season, to get value on that money. I'd submit that BOTH Dinwiddie and Bertans have fit in here reasonably well for the most part, but I think we'd all admit, if we're being honest, that Dinwiddie alone has been a better fit than Porzingis ever was. Therefore, even if Bertans is (as some believe) a waste of the money, the team is better positioned with only a portion of the money being wasted, rather than the entire amount. I'd submit that it's very possible that the combo of THJ, Bertans and Powell is significantly more positive for the team than turning their money into Gobert alone UNLESS he fits here like a glove. I do not agree that there's no chance of buyer's remorse on such a hypothetical trade at all. In fact, I'd say it's a pretty huge risk when viewed from this angle. 

3) Finally, Dinwiddie and Bertans, while not being "value contracts" at all, are much easier to move in future trades separately or packaged with additional players than Porzingis. Moving Porzingis requires (as we've seen) the stars to align nearly perfectly, and you have to be willing to take what the other team MUST give you in order to make the math work. I think this hardship would be even more burdensome with Gobert, if in fact he didn't work out here. 

Now, to be clear, I think Gobert is a much, much better player than Porzingis. And, I'm not sure I wouldn't take the risk involved in your hypothetical package, were it available. I'm just saying that it could easily result in a worsening of the Mavs' roster effectiveness and near-future prospects. There is risk, imo.

I’m implying that THJ and Bertans are zero marginal product players on this roster, that Gobert is a top 10 all time interior defensive presence, and is a miles better than Powell (who’s not horrible and at least isn’t a ZMP). The Mavs might just slow down a team like Phoenix with defensive control of the paint.  It’s also difficult to get a player like Gobert. He’d have to basically force his way out.  So I’d have no illusions this trade is available, even if you throw in some other assets. My main point to those complaining about Rudy’s cost is to point out that we’re paying even more for a collection of overpaid, very low value players, unlike Gobert, who is a legitimate, occasional all star.

[SleepingHero]

Does anyone else see the irony that the Mavs are again 1 defensive center away from being great? It took Cuban nearly 12 years to realize Dirk needs someone better than Eric Dampier to compete. He gets Tyson and they win, only to let him go the next summer...

Gobert is about as elite of a defensive center as it gets. If he can truly be had for pennies on the dollar (and given the going rate for centers now we have reason to believe he can be), the Mavs would be dumb not to do it.

Someone else said it, but I also agree I'd rather pay Gobert 40 mil than THJ+Powell+Bertans 47 mil. Add on Chriss+Frank+Brown+Burke and thats another 10 mil of straight dead cap with players that cannot play in the playoffs (though only 8 mil of it is guaranteed). 

If 7 of the 15 guys in the rotation can't play in the playoffs without significant drawbacks then there's something wrong with the roster.

[Chicagojk]

Does anyone else see the irony that the Mavs are again 1 defensive center away from being great? It took Cuban nearly 12 years to realize Dirk needs someone better than Eric Dampier to compete. He gets Tyson and they win, only to let him go the next summer...

Gobert is about as elite of a defensive center as it gets. If he can truly be had for pennies on the dollar (and given the going rate for centers now we have reason to believe he can be), the Mavs would be dumb not to do it.

Someone else said it, but I also agree I'd rather pay Gobert 40 mil than THJ+Powell+Bertans 47 mil. Add on Chriss+Frank+Brown+Burke and thats another 10 mil of straight dead cap with players that cannot play in the playoffs (though only 8 mil of it is guaranteed). 

If 7 of the 15 guys in the rotation can't play in the playoffs without significant drawbacks then there's something wrong with the roster.

I think the faulty assumption you make is he is going to be available for pennies on the dollar.  In no way do I think Utah would have any interest in THJ and Bertans as assets.   I tend to believe the asking prices will be closer to what Hollinger thinks.

Now maybe the Mavs could get into the bidding by offering multiple first round picks.  But that is a double edged sword for Utah knowing they are taking future picks for a team with Luka on it.  Could Powell, Maxi, Josh Green, salary filler and multiple first round picks interest Utah?  Maybe.  It just appears other teams have cleaner offers if interested.

[DanSchwartzgan]

Gobert is about as elite of a defensive center as it gets. If he can truly be had for pennies on the dollar (and given the going rate for centers now we have reason to believe he can be), the Mavs would be dumb not to do it.

Someone else said it, but I also agree I'd rather pay Gobert 40 mil than THJ+Powell+Bertans 47 mil. Add on Chriss+Frank+Brown+Burke and thats another 10 mil of straight dead cap with players that cannot play in the playoffs (though only 8 mil of it is guaranteed). 
 

Not to pick on you, but I think you are answering the wrong question.  It seems largely accepted that many here would trade our trash for an overpaid "elite defensive center".  I mean why wouldn't we.  He's enough of a difference maker to win us a championship.  The better question is what do we have to give up to beat the bids of other teams.  Utah doesn't have to take our trash.  There will be other bidders.  An eventual package, if we end up going there, will be more painful than what is being discussed here.

I think the better question is whether we are willing to give up two picks and at least one of our core players...probably from among Brunson (in a 3 way), DFS and Maxi.  Otherwise, Rudy is in Charlotte, Atlanta or Golden State next year.  Those teams will be offering more than THJ/Powell and a late first.

[ItsGoTime]

I think the faulty assumption you make is he is going to be available for pennies on the dollar.  In no way do I think Utah would have any interest in THJ and Bertans as assets.   I tend to believe the asking prices will be closer to what Hollinger thinks.

Now maybe the Mavs could get into the bidding by offering multiple first round picks.  But that is a double edged sword for Utah knowing they are taking future picks for a team with Luka on it.  Could Powell, Maxi, Josh Green, salary filler and multiple first round picks interest Utah?  Maybe.  It just appears other teams have cleaner offers if interested.

I totally agree with this. I also think offers are not going to take the shape of something Utah will want in return though, which is why I think their best path to stay relevant is to trade Mitchell. I said earlier I think a package that included either Shai Gilgeous-Alexander or Dejuante Murray would give Rudy some of the perimeter defense he needs and if he and one of those two could click on offense…look out!

[DanSchwartzgan]

I think the faulty assumption you make is he is going to be available for pennies on the dollar.  In no way do I think Utah would have any interest in THJ and Bertans as assets.   I tend to believe the asking prices will be closer to what Hollinger thinks.

Now maybe the Mavs could get into the bidding by offering multiple first round picks.  But that is a double edged sword for Utah knowing they are taking future picks for a team with Luka on it.  Could Powell, Maxi, Josh Green, salary filler and multiple first round picks interest Utah?  Maybe.  It just appears other teams have cleaner offers if interested.

Beat me to it.  I think the most likely path to Gobert would be using Brunson's outgoing S&T to NY as part of the salary.  We need to get to $30.5mm in outgoing and Brunson can count $10-$13 million of that.  Add THJ (or Maxi and Bullock) and we've hit the mark.  From there, add our 2025 pick and some of the assets NY is giving up for Brunson (our 23 pick with protections lifted and enough players to match Brunson's incoming salary...probably includes Noel or Robinson and some of their youngsters).  Depending on which NY players we are talking about, we may be starting to get there.  If Robinson is included, Utah would need to end up under the Apron, but I think that is doable.  You don't get a top 20 player, even an overpaid one, without feeling some pain.