Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Only Fantasy Traders in the Building (The Mitchell Case)
#1
I've been playing around with deals and think I may have discovered the original and intermediate plan for Mitchell to NY.  I think it may tell us something about the plan going forward, and a possible Mav's connection.

Let's go back to prior to Walker to Detroit being finalized.  Recall this needed to be done first so Duren could play summer league, but was held open beyond the initial rush of signings on 7/6.  I believe the preference would have been to deal Walker, Noel and Burks all together to Detroit while simultaneously sending Grimes to Utah (with picks) for Mitchell.  Super clean for Utah as they don't want NY's crap contracts like Fournier.  They just took on several bodies in the Gobert deal.  So, going forward, I think the plan has to be to send as little future salary to Utah as possible.  NY dealt it's only expiring deals other than Rose, so more has to be done to meet this goal.

So, how does Dallas enter this other than possibly paying for a $13.86mm TPE in the Brunson deal?  I think expiring Powell may play a role.

There was some talk in another thread about Kemba Walker to Dallas and it got me to digging around a little.  Walker agreed to a buyout, but it never went official as far as I can tell.  The Knox signing hasn't gone official yet.  AND, I found a site that said Detroit might have an $11.8mm TPE large enough to take on Powell (I don't believe this is still true, just taking you through the process).  

Detroit got a $20.95mm TPE in the Grant deal in early July.  I can walk you through the mechanics of how Detroit temporarily had an $11.8mm TPE (big enough for Powell) by netting Kemba against the Grant TPE and staying over the cap, but it no longer matters as it went away when they dipped below the cap to take Burks/Noel into space.  But, there was a moment in time where Powell to Detroit might have fit into the rest of the Grant TPE and Brunson might have generated a $13.86mm TPE.  This would have been in that timeframe between when Kemba was traded, but before Noel/Burks were traded and Brunson was finalized.  Rose and Grimes aren't enough to match Mitchell, but add  Noel to the outgoing (replaced in Detroit by Powell) and you are there.  Not as clean as Grimes alone, but that ship sailed when Detroit finalized the Walker/Duren part of the deal.  At least Rose and Noel are expiring.

So, why bother with Powell?  You have to understand the power behind the throne in Detroit and NY.  Everyone knows by now that Mitchell and Brunson are CAA as are Toppin and Randle as well as Ivey in Detroit and Conley in Utah.  What isn't as well known is Detroit is an Excel shop.  Bagley, Olynyk, Kemba, Bey and most importantly Cunningham are all Schwartz guys.  Schwartz's interest is making sure his people are taken care of and right now Kemba is screwed in Detroit and Powell is screwed in Dallas.  No one gives a crap about Powell (or Kemba really) as players.  But, Detroit gives a crap about keeping Schwartz happy.  BTW, I don't think CAA wants to strand Conley in rebuilding Utah and Powell plus Brunson going out in one big giant 4-way with Detroit, Utah and NY could have landed Conley if Powell went to Det.  I know I'm throwing out a lot of things, but there were many ways this could have happened at different points along the process.

Fast forward to now.  Detroit should have $10mm of room left until Knox is final.  NY still wants Mitchell and Utah doesn't want crap long term contracts.  It is possible too many doors have been closed to include Detroit and Dallas in any Mitchell deal.  But, I think there was a plan along the way to include them.  I also think NY has to come up with a non-aggregated way to add something expiring to Rose and Grimes.  I mentioned last night that CAA structured the Gary Harris extension as NG in the second year and he matches Fournier.  That could be a backup plan as Orlando would surely want compensation.  NY can also go back to the Detroit well and use some of their space as part of their outgoing.   

The way this could go down and still involve Dallas and Detroit is:

Utah sends Mitchell to NY/Gets Noel, Grimes and Rose and a ton of picks

Dallas sends Powell to Detroit with other compensation/Gets Reddish/McBride

Detroit sends Noel to Utah/Gets Powell to make Schwartz happy

NY sends Rose and Grimes to Utah and Reddish/McBride to Dallas and gets Mitchell.

None of that used up the Detroit cap room.  Another version would send Reddish and McBride to Utah and Powell going into the additional space created by sending back Saben Lee.  In other words, there are still a lot of variations available that might or might not include Dallas.  But, I think Dallas was probably part of the plan once upon a time.  


 


 
[-] The following 4 users Like DanSchwartzgan's post:
  • ballsrchr, Hypermav, Reunion Mav, Tyler
Like Reply
#2
OT: is the show you're referencing in the thread title any good?
Like Reply
#3
(07-15-2022, 10:50 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote:  
None of that used up the Detroit cap room.  Another version would send Reddish and McBride to Utah and Powell going into the additional space created by sending back Saben Lee.  In other words, there are still a lot of variations available that might or might not include Dallas.  But, I think Dallas was probably part of the plan once upon a time.  
 


Actually, the simplest version of this is NY sends Fournier back to Orlando and Gary Harris comes to Dallas for outgoing Powell.  The Jazz get Powell (Reddish or Toppin) and Grimes and the three outgoing NY salaries are enough to match incoming Mitchell.
[-] The following 1 user Likes DanSchwartzgan's post:
  • mvossman
Like Reply
#4
(07-15-2022, 12:35 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: Actually, the simplest version of this is NY sends Fournier back to Orlando and Gary Harris comes to Dallas for outgoing Powell.  The Jazz get Powell (Reddish or Toppin) and Grimes and the three outgoing NY salaries are enough to match incoming Mitchell.

Sold.
Like Reply
#5
(07-15-2022, 12:30 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: OT: is the show you're referencing in the thread title any good?

I thought the first season was.  Haven't seen season two yet.  Like any who-done-it, it takes a few episodes to set up all of the characters.  So, you have to push through the first 3 episodes before it gets interesting.

There are only so many things my wife will watch, so if I want to sit with her through something other than a Hallmark movie, then a non-violent murder mystery (like Broadchurch for instance) has been the winning formula.
[-] The following 2 users Like DanSchwartzgan's post:
  • KillerLeft, MFFL
Like Reply
#6
What's the easiest way for Dallas to end up with Kemba Walker (other than for the minimum after a buyout, of course)?
Like Reply
#7
You're good, still have my head spinning on that one.
[-] The following 1 user Likes HoosierDaddyKid's post:
  • KillerLeft
Like Reply
#8
The problem I see is that whoever ends up with Dallas pick is going to do everything in their power to not work with Dallas in the off chance of improving the Mavs roster.
Like Reply
#9
Another reason I think Kemba might be a target of some kind: he's expiring. 

I'm not as good at the cap stuff as you, @"DanSchwartzgan", but it seems to me like if Dallas just lets everyone expire AND cuts ties with the not-fully-guaranteed guys (Bullock, Dinwiddie and Green all have some voidable money next season, Green's is a complete team option) that would give them north of $12 million in cap space (please confirm)? 

If they can move Bullock or Dinwiddie at the deadline or early next summer (partially guaranteed money might make this really easy), they might even clear more. 

If they can move either Hardaway or Bertans this summer or at the deadline for someone expiring, it's REALLY easy to imagine a MAX slot opening up next summer, if I'm understanding this stuff. 

Now, I personally don't like the idea of stepping back to make another run at free agents at this time. However, IF that's their thinking, I'd much rather do it in 2023 than in 2024. A quick scan of the potential free agents for both of those summers will explain that opinion, I think. 
[-] The following 1 user Likes KillerLeft's post:
  • DanSchwartzgan
Like Reply
#10
(07-15-2022, 02:15 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: Another reason I think Kemba might be a target of some kind: he's expiring. 

I'm not as good at the cap stuff as you, @"DanSchwartzgan", but it seems to me like if Dallas just lets everyone expire AND cuts ties with the not-fully-guaranteed guys (Bullock, Dinwiddie and Green all have some voidable money next season, Green's is a complete team option) that would give them north of $12 million in cap space (please confirm)? 

If they can move Bullock or Dinwiddie at the deadline or early next summer (partially guaranteed money might make this really easy), they might even clear more. 

If they can move either Hardaway or Bertans this summer or at the deadline for someone expiring, it's REALLY easy to imagine a MAX slot opening up next summer, if I'm understanding this stuff. 

Now, I personally don't like the idea of stepping back to make another run at free agents at this time. However, IF that's their thinking, I'd much rather do it in 2023 than in 2024. A quick scan of the potential free agents for both of those summers will explain that opinion, I think. 

If you want cap space next summer, and I haven't looked a the free agent class, there is a realistic trade to make now.  Tim + Bertans + Powell.

[Image: br9.gif]

I guess that's dependent on the Lakers/Kyrie negotiations and how much of an asset you think THJ will become the last two years of his deal and further how much you think THJ will help the team this year.  I'd say both are marginal.  You'd also have to talk to Westbrook and convince him to come off the bench which he may not like and certainly may not work.  The high probability is you'd need to send him home.
[-] The following 1 user Likes cow's post:
  • KillerLeft
Like Reply
#11
(07-15-2022, 02:38 PM)cow Wrote: If you want cap space next summer, and I haven't looked a the free agent class, there is a realistic trade to make now.  Tim + Bertans + Powell.


You know, this thought has seemed bonkers to me until I looked at the FA lists for '23 and '24 this afternoon. 

I LOATHE Westbrook's game, but if getting to a MAX slot is the goal, '23 would be preferable to '24 because of potential targets, and it would happen faster, which is obviously better for the "Luka clock" aspect. 

And, I haven't done the math, but moving BOTH Bertans AND Hardaway might even provide for keeping Wood and/or Kleber's cap holds? Not sure about that part. 

I don't hate it as much as I did a week ago. It would absolutely be punting on this season, I think, but then again, they DO need another creator. Would Westbrook be willing to come off the bench? Probably not, I'd think.
Like Reply
#12
(07-15-2022, 02:47 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: You know, this thought has seemed bonkers to me until I looked at the FA lists for '23 and '24 this afternoon. 

I LOATHE Westbrook's game, but if getting to a MAX slot is the goal, '23 would be so preferable than '24 because of potential targets, and it would happen faster, which is obviously better for the "Luka clock" aspect. 

And, I haven't done the math, but moving BOTH Bertans AND Hardaway might even provide for keeping Wood and/or Kleber's cap holds? Not sure about that part. 

I don't hate it as much as I did a week ago. It would absolutely be punting on this season, I think, but then again, they DO need another creator. Would Westbrook be willing to come off the bench? Probably not, I'd think.

Depending on how you pick up the options on Bullock, Green and Dinwiddie, you'd only have ~$70m committed next year.  I did the math the other day and don't remember the exact figure and I'd certainly need Dan or Gump to double check that.  

And to be clear, this isn't trading for Westbrook.  This is ditching Bertans contract using the value that THJ has and how much the Lakers loath Westbrook.

We know they've sniffed around Buddy Love for years and Tim is as good of an analogue to Buddy as there gets.  Powell is filler.  Bertans is why we aren't asking for picks back and the Lakers need shooting anyway.  I think he could be useful.  Overpriced but useful.

We didn't miss a beat when Tim was out last year but it does take away firepower now that Brusnon is gone.  We'd need to get a few quality vet minimums to stay within the margins.
Like Reply
#13
(07-15-2022, 02:52 PM)cow Wrote: And to be clear, this isn't trading for Westbrook.  This is ditching Bertans contract using the value that THJ has and how much the Laker loath Westbrook.

That part was obvious, loud and clear. I just think you have to pretend to care about this season for Luka's sake. I was just trying to imagine how Westbrook might fit in during the interim season that we'd all need to suffer through. Wood might qualify as such a "double threat" move. I think were they to do something on the Westbrook front they'd undoubtedly sell it as a move for now.

Sorry, Dan - I didn't mean to veer so far off of your topic. I would be interested in your thoughts on this angle, however.
[-] The following 1 user Likes KillerLeft's post:
  • DanSchwartzgan
Like Reply
#14
(07-15-2022, 02:55 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: That part was obvious, loud and clear. I just think you have to pretend to care about this season for Luka's sake. I was just trying to imagine how Westbrick might fit in during the interim season that we'd all need to suffer through. Wood might qualify as such a "double threat" move. I think were they to do something on the Westbrook front they'd undoubtedly sell it as a move for now.

I know you get it but I don't want anyone accusing me of lusting after Westbrook.  Smile

Sometimes you need to take a step back to move forward and honestly, with a few veteran minimums I don't think the fortune of this team changes much.  I see us as a 5-8 seed.

Now, I think there is a 1% chance Cuban does this.  And an even slimmer chance that you could turn Westbrook into something useful for ONE season.  And there is a chance the Lakers might say no but if Kyrie falls through, I kind of doubt they would.

Pulling this off would also be putting a ton of faith in MBT 2.0 turning around their free agency recruiting blunders.  It's one of the few path forwards that I see being viable though.

I was going to create a thread for "the case for a Westbrook trade" but I'm far too lazy and have already laid it out.  Sorry Dan.
Like Reply
#15
I don't think stripping the roster bare and starting over from scratch is the way to go. The Mavs aren't good at landing a star that way. Is the best they have ever done H Barnes? Or Parsons?
[-] The following 1 user Likes F Gump's post:
  • DanSchwartzgan
Like Reply
#16
(07-15-2022, 03:25 PM)F Gump Wrote: I don't think stripping the roster bare and starting over from scratch is the way to go. The Mavs aren't good at landing a star that way. Is the best they have ever done H Barnes? Or Parsons?

Maybe valid. I'm just coming around to considering it as a very real option that they might think is the way to go. I honestly didn't realize how possible it was to do it so quickly before I started poking around today.
Like Reply
#17
(07-15-2022, 03:25 PM)F Gump Wrote: I don't think stripping the roster bare and starting over from scratch is the way to go. The Mavs aren't good at landing a star that way. Is the best they have ever done H Barnes? Or Parsons?

Ditching Bertans, Powell and THJ is not stripping the roster bare though.  If you renounce Din and Bullock, you'd have a point.  But if you run Din into the ground this season, there is no way we should invest in him long term.  

I'd argue DAJ 2.0 is the best they've done.  Barnes is better than Parsons but both were overpays and really reaching on what their potential could be.  I'd put Wes Matthews above both of them too.  At least everyone knew who he was as a player.  

Further, what exactly are the Mavs good at from a roster building standpoint?  At some point, they need to get better and we need to stop making excuses for why they shouldn't do something because they suck at it.
Like Reply
#18
They'd still have (probably) Luka, DFS, Hardy and McGee. 

For me, the question is: can this be done in a way where you can keep some of Dinwiddie, Bullock, Kleber and Wood?
Like Reply
#19
(07-15-2022, 03:42 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: They'd still have (probably) Luka, DFS, Hardy and McGee. 

For me, the question is: can this be done in a way where you can keep some of Dinwiddie, Bullock, Kleber and Wood?

You'd have all those guys next season.  Maxi and Wood are expiring and Din and Bullock have options so you'd have choices to make the following season.
Like Reply
#20
(07-15-2022, 03:45 PM)cow Wrote: You'd have all those guys next season.  Maxi and Wood and Din and Bullock have options so you'd have choices to make the following season.

Yes, the following season is what I'm thinking about. If you really could move both Hardaway and Bertans, somehow, is that good enough to get to the max slot, keep one of Bullock/Dinwiddie on the roster AND keep one of Wood/Kleber's cap holds in place to re-sign them once the cap space is used? 

My guess (haven't done the math) is that keeping one of those four players would be fairly possible, but two of them might not work.
Like Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)