Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rock and a Hard Place
#1
Every day we write posts about this guy we want or that guy we want to get rid of.  Occasionally, we even give some thought to what the other team might want in our fantasy trades.  Then there are the questions of timing and scale.  Should we go all in?  Should we be sellers?  Should we look for the trade before THE trade which we hope comes this summer.  Should we get two B level guys or wait for that 'second star'.  

What we don't really do much is look at the roster on a multi-year basis taking into account contracts and player ages.  We have that luxury as message board gurus, but teams have to think more strategically and their thinking has to carry beyond just the current season.

Kamm made a comment about being a seller yesterday and it got me to thinking.  Is there a world where we are a seller before the TDL?  Not 'tear-it-down' selling, but maybe a step backwards to take a step forward later.  Some thoughts:

1.  It would be way out of character.  I can only think of one trade in the Cuban era where we dealt a decent veteran for a younger asset (Jamison for Devin) and that happened in the summer.

2.  It would have to be something that didn't harm our ability to make the playoffs right now.  Maybe not Top 4, but still in the playoffs.

3.  There won't be much patience for losing, so there would need to be a clear path to the 'get better later' part.  

4.  There needs to be some thought as to how it impacts when we will pay the repeater tax going forward.  This is year one.  If we pay tax in 23/24, then 24/25 will be three of the last four years.  Even if we are under in 23/24, we will hit three of four in 25/26.  Luka's Super Max will kick in in 26/27.

5.  Moves that use even a single first rounder now have a huge impact on the ability to do a bigger deal later.  If a pick is to be used now, it better be for another long-term piece or someone who can grow into a long term piece.

When I think about the current roster, I divide it into four categories:

Expiring:  Wood and Powell

Do they have value?  Is it wise to retain either past this season?  Powell's value outside of Dallas is mainly as expiring filler.  Unfortunately, given the shortcomings of the roster, he probably has more value in Dallas that he does elsewhere.  

Wood may have more value than Powell, but probably not a ton more.  Yeah, he can score.  His O-EPM puts him in the 86th percentile of centers (top 10).  EPM lists 72 centers ahead of him defensively.  As I've said before, I just can't find a team that would pay us something so that Wood can start for them.  I think his best role is as a scoring bench big.  What do those kinds of guys make?  Unfortunately, the going rate for a scoring bench big is probably under what Wood can be extended for (what does Bobby Portis make).  Dallas is in a Bird Rights Trap here and any team that traded for him will have the same issue.  If Dallas keeps Wood, they need to do one of two things...1. put the right 'big wing' next to him.  2.  Get a starting center who is obviously better who moves Wood back to the bench.  The Wood decision is a great example of Rock and a Hard Place.  

One Year Left:  Reggie and Spencer

Reggie is about to turn 32 and will be 33 a year from now when his contract is up.  Dallas will NOT retain him past his current contract.  If some team wants to pay something for him, he's the ideal 'small step back' trade candidate.  The only reason you keep Reggie is if he has more value this summer as an expiring contract than he does as an on-court contributor for a contender for the next 1.5 seasons.  

Spencer is in a similar contract situation, only two years younger.  Green is a ready made replacement for Bullock, but there is no such thing here if you move Dinwiddie.  Do we extend him this summer or wait until Spencer is a 30 year old UFA in the summer of 24.  Rock and a hard place again.

Two Years Left:  THJ, Bertans and McGee

This is also the place Dallas would extend Wood to with a two year offer (expiring in 2025).  How we deal with the guys in this category is probably as much tax related as it is on-court related.  If we pay tax in 23/24, then the year these guys expire is our repeater year.  As fans, we want Dallas to go-for-it financially in 23/24.  They have a chance to get under the tax this summer and postpone repeater status by a year, which feels like the opposite of going for it.  Right now they sit $19mm under the tax without Wood, Powell and without using any exception to fill out the minimum roster requirement.

If you extend Wood (or trade him for someone making similar money), you can't get under the tax in 23/24.  Which leaves us repeating the next year with nearly $22mm in salary going to McGee and Bertans.  Might you S/W one of them?  Do you pay a cap room team to take one of them?  THJ is about to turn 31 and will be 33 when his contract runs out in 2025.  Like Bullard, he won't get another contract in Dallas.  If you trade him for expiring LeVert, you create some flexibility to improve the team and stay under the tax next season.  But, expiring LeVert essentially wipes out a 'salary slot' that can be used in trade.  It is kind of like Minnesota and Russell.  If you only take back an expiring deal like LeVert, you've damaged a path to improvement for the sake of money (which is why in my LeVert deals, I try to send him to a third team and bring back some young salary).  THJ is having his best On/Off season ever and his 3% is at his career average.  But, there is clear slippage in his advanced stats (VORP, BPM, WS/48, PER and his TS%) the last two years.  A team that shoots a ton of 3's needs good three point shooting.  Tim the starter is still a guy you want.  But, can you play contender D with Tim, SD and Wood playing alongside Luka.  Probably not.  He's basically a one year longer version of the situation you are in with Reggie.  He'll be a Rock and a Hard Place decision then, but because of the financial implications of that final year, you might want to deal with him sooner than later.

Longer than Two Years Left:  DFS and Maxi

I won't spend any time on the longer contracts of Maxi and DFS.  They are the culture-keepers of the team and paid at a rate that will be at or under the MLE by the time they expire.  That means they can transition between starter and bench and you don't feel like you are overpaying.  I'm not figuring the kids into this either.  Josh is becoming exactly what you are  looking for next to Luka and Hardy has a future as a bench microwave at the very least.  I think a Josh extension this summer is an easy decision and if you want to trade Hardy, now is not the time to maximize value.

I think there are two interrelated decisions to be made.  What do you do with Wood?  And, do you trade Reggie or THJ now or later?  I say interrelated because if you move Wood or push him to the bench with a better defender at the spot, then Starter THJ might be OK (despite what I said about his advanced stats slipping, Starter-Tim is still a valuable guy, but Starter-Tim can't start with Wood and SD and the team be a top-10 D).  Interestingly, Reggie's numbers are better off the bench than they are as a starter.  He's the more immediate financial decision, but it is easier to move him to the bench in favor of Josh (when the time is right) than it is with THJ.  All three of these guys look great when they are hitting shots (at least at the offensive end).  But, there is more to roster building than just that.  Two of the three are going to 'age-out' in the not too distant future with no real way to replace them and one wants a big money long-term commitment or we risk losing him for nothing.  He wants starter money and sees himself as being Luka's 1-A right now.  Unfortunately, his game as a starter is much more suited to a bad team that needs to put butts in seats than it is to a team with championship aspirations during the life of his next contract.  You have to either surround him better defensively than we do currently, trade him or find a defensive center who makes him a bench stud...which has its advantages.
[-] The following 10 users Like DanSchwartzgan's post:
  • audiosway, BigDirk41, DallasMaverick, HIMAV, Hypermav, Jmaciscool, Kammrath, KillerLeft, MFFL, StrandedOnBeauboisHill
Like Reply
#2
(01-21-2023, 10:18 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: Is there a world where we are a seller before the TDL?  Not 'tear-it-down' selling, but maybe a step backwards to take a step forward later. 


DFS, Maxi, SD, DP, THJ, and RB are the players I would be looking to "sell" (or Wood if someone has interest for at least a 1st). Not all of them, but figure out who has the most value and sell those players either at the TDL or this summer. And I think ALL of these players are close to having their value disappear so there is an urgency to "cash in" on them soon.

My goal for return assets: 
1) 1st Round Picks
2) Young players with upside.

My long-term goal:
1) Building assets for "THE Move."
Like Reply
#3
"THE Move" is like Plan Powder. If no superstar becomes available during the time that you have all the first round picks then you have wasted several years of Luka's prime.

I prefer marginal improvements. You can always blow up your team if a player you desire becomes available (see New York/Brunson).
Like Reply
#4
(01-21-2023, 10:31 AM)Kammrath Wrote:  
My goal for return assets: 
1) 1st Round Picks
2) Young players with upside.
 

There is a section in the long post where I talk about taking a step back, but not too big of a step.  I don't see how the guys we are talking about moving bring back first rounders, let along first rounders and matching salary that keeps us competitive.  I'm with Tim McMahon that missing the playoffs with Luka having an MVP season is not really an option.
Like Reply
#5
(01-21-2023, 10:46 AM)MFFL Wrote: "THE Move" is like Plan Powder. If no superstar becomes available during the time that you have all the first round picks then you have wasted several years of Luka's prime.


1) I would not be looking for a "superstar." Just someone in a talent tier above anyone the Mavs have other than Luka.

2) 1st Round picks (unlike "powder") can be turned into young, talented players on controlled contracts.

3) Luka's prime is already being wasted with mediocre 30 year olds for teammates.
Like Reply
#6
(01-21-2023, 10:47 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: There is a section in the long post where I talk about taking a step back, but not too big of a step.  I don't see how the guys we are talking about moving bring back first rounders, let along first rounders and matching salary that keeps us competitive.  I'm with Tim McMahon that missing the playoffs with Luka having an MVP season is not really an option.


What is worse?

1) Missing the playoffs while riding the likes of DFS and Maxi into the sunset?

OR

2) Missing the playoffs while accumulating something in return for players you developed?


This team is barely and inconsistently competitive as it is. Something needs to be done.


Also, I am not suggesting all those players I listed bring back 1sts. But as the GM you have to figure out how to consolidate whatever desirable veterans you have to get yourself some assets.
Like Reply
#7
By the way, your title is also the title of a GREAT and little known song:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bo4sop80zJU
Like Reply
#8
(01-21-2023, 10:52 AM)Kammrath Wrote: 1) Missing the playoffs while riding the likes of DFS and Maxi into the sunset?


I don't think there's any danger of missing the playoffs this year by riding the status quo, provided Luka is healthy and enough of the good role players are available and playing well down the stretch. 

The second the team starts to play better they're going to need guys like DFS and Kleber. I think @"DanSchwartzgan""s thought of finding some sort of intelligent middle ground is interesting, but there's just no way they're going into a "sell anything but Luka" mindset. Nor should they. They're much, much closer than that.
[-] The following 2 users Like KillerLeft's post:
  • DanSchwartzgan, Jmaciscool
Like Reply
#9
(01-21-2023, 11:01 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: there's just no way they're going into a "sell anything but Luka" mindset.


Again, I am NOT saying you sell ALL the vets. But if you are unwilling to sell the most desirable for assets, then you are not digging this team out of its asset hole. 

If anyone not named Luka is not available on some level, then the IIC are doing this completely wrong. Completely.
Like Reply
#10
(01-21-2023, 11:01 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: playing well


Sure, if the Mavs are playing well they won't miss the playoffs. But based on what I have seen I do not trust that to happen. 

Last year the Mavs were 27-20 at this point and Luka had been BAD and out of shape and hurt for a lot of it. 

This year the Mavs are 25-22 and Luka has been herculean in his efforts. Luka has played out of his mind and this team is barely 0.500. That is terrifying.
[-] The following 2 users Like Kammrath's post:
  • HoosierDaddyKid, Scott41theMavs
Like Reply
#11
(01-21-2023, 10:46 AM)MFFL Wrote: I prefer marginal improvements. You can always blow up your team if a player you desire becomes available (see New York/Brunson).

As good as Luka is (and as ball dominant), I tend to agree.  If we had 8 guys who made sense together to where we had enough O and enough D in lineups to give us a fighting chance, I'd be for giving up picks.  My issue is we aren't one move from getting there.  I like giving up a pick in a deal for someone like Myles Turner.  He could push Wood to the bench, but the two of them could also play together in stretches.  I think he would help the defensive issues also.  I'd see the roster looking like:

Turner      Wood
DFS         Maxi
Green      
SD           Reggie
Luka        

But, we still have holes.  If we are going to use one pick to fill one hole, we might as well use another to finish things off.  In the scenario above Powell, THJ and two picks could be used to acquire Turner and that one more guy.  Depending on the quality of that 'one-more-guy', that might be enough (I'll now wait for Killer to tell me we had that guy and let him go).  Even if we still had Brunson, we'd still need a Turner-type IMHO.
Like Reply
#12
(01-21-2023, 11:04 AM)Kammrath Wrote: Again, I am NOT saying you sell ALL the vets. But if you are unwilling to sell the most desirable for assets, then you are not digging this team out of its asset hole. 

If anyone not named Luka is not available on some level, then the IIC are doing this completely wrong. Completely.


Well sure, there is a price that would make anyone available. No argument there. 

I just think that selling DFS/Kleber, in particular, would be shortsighted, despite your motivations clearly being the opposite of that. I think you'd be surprised how much worse the team can get if you take even more key vets out of the mix. Those are the guys the team looks to for leadership - the ones who have been here the longest and who play the most minutes. Now, no question a shakeup is needed (maybe more than one) but as Dan said, after the shakeup you'll want good, solid players at cheap prices, and they can't all be replaced by rookie contracts because too many young players will set this thing back to the very beginning, talent increase (which is not guaranteed just through change) or not. You kind of want the majority of the team to be in that 27-32 year old sweet spot from now until the Luka era has ended. Absolutely agreed that doing so will require seeing three moves ahead on the chess board, which is where I think you're coming from, but DFS/Kleber on those good contracts IS the goal, imo. It would take an improved player, also on a good contract, to get me to come off of either. 

I would be trying to sell Bullock, Ntilikina, Bertans, McGee and one of THJ or Dinwiddie FOR SURE. Good players, draft capital, young talent with potential, whatever I can get. Maybe that's not much, but as long as each move heads in the right direction and the team stays within striking distance on the floor, you'll get there eventually...

...as long as the coach can coach. More and more, I'm wondering if he can.
[-] The following 1 user Likes KillerLeft's post:
  • ballsrchr
Like Reply
#13
(01-21-2023, 11:01 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: I don't think there's any danger of missing the playoffs this year by riding the status quo, provided Luka is healthy and enough of the good role players are available and playing well down the stretch. 

The second the team starts to play better they're going to need guys like DFS and Kleber. I think @"DanSchwartzgan""s thought of finding some sort of intelligent middle ground is interesting, but there's just no way they're going into a "sell anything but Luka" mindset. Nor should they. They're much, much closer than that.

One of the things I took from writing the OP is I'm not sure riding the status quo is the right thing to do either.  It doesn't solve the Wood dilemma and it doesn't maximize Reggie's contract situation or help with the Repeater Tax issue that is right around the corner.
Like Reply
#14
(01-21-2023, 11:15 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: One of the things I took from writing the OP is I'm not sure riding the status quo is the right thing to do either.  It doesn't solve the Wood dilemma and it doesn't maximize Reggie's contract situation or help with the Repeater Tax issue that is right around the corner.


It's definitely not the best way to go (I assume, without truly knowing what's out there and available) but I'd wager it's far from the worst.
Like Reply
#15
(01-21-2023, 11:15 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: I just think that selling DFS/Kleber, in particular, would be shortsighted, despite your motivations clearly being the opposite of that. I think you'd be surprised how much worse the team can get if you take even more key vets out of the mix.


I don't think we are that far off in our thinking.

1) Maybe DFS and Maxi don't have 1st round value to anyone in the league, then sure keep them. 

2) But if they do, I would sell at least one.


If this team can get a lot worse just because DFS/Maxi are gone, then I question two things: 1) Is Luka really as good as I think or is he potentially overrated by me? 2) Is Kidd really that bad of a coach?

If Luka is as good as I think, then building a 25-22 team around him should require nothing more than below average players and average coaching, especially in this highly mediocre Western conference.
Like Reply
#16
I don't want to trade any FRP's this season.  Lets find a reasonable trade for a defensive minded center.  McGee was/is a failure but the idea of what he could bring was correct.  Let the season roll with this group less whatever it takes to secure that rotation center.  Then have fun in the summer looking for that big move.  Obviously if another team is willing to discuss a great player, see if it can be done now, I just doubt that will happen.

If we get a real center and Wood starts, then Tim or Reggie would be your trade pieces for that center.  Likely Tim because he is less effective coming off the bench.  If Wood is coming off the bench, then maybe he is the trade piece.  Powell (gulp) is likely retained either way.  Mavs are in a R. bullOCK and a HARDaway place.

Always like reading your thoughts Dan.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Hypermav's post:
  • DanSchwartzgan
Like Reply
#17
I’m ok with the status quo wait for summer approach. My ideal (realistic) outcome would be trading for a future core piece, let’s say Vanderbilt for arguments sake. I’d include Dinwiddie in a deal like that. If we can turn Dinwiddie, Bullock and some second round picks into Vanderbilt/Conley (or even Vandy/D.Rose) without giving up a first round pick or Hardy that’s the ideal to me. This requires a third team to include a first round pick for Utah and thus is unlikely. But something like this.

Accelerate Hardy’s development schedule and play him 20 minutes per night no matter what. Josh Green is a 30 minute per night player with no Bullock blocking him. Then you re-sign Wood with Vanderbilt “protecting” him at the 4.

Young core: Wood/Vandy/Green/Hardy/Luka. All picks available this summer to trade. Vet leaders like Powell, Maxi, DFS, THJ remain. You have Bertans and THJ here as salary matching to acquire a “star” this summer. Re-sign Powell as backup C. Best way I can see to maximize what we have going here. We have flexibility for the all in love to be for Turner, OG, Siakam, Dame. In fact, we’d probably be looking for another shooter/playmaker at this point that isn’t a sieve on defense like Spencer is. And someone like FVV would actually fit quite neatly to bridge the gap during Hardy’s development and still leave us with some assets to spare for depth or to actually draft young players with.
Like Reply
#18
I think the sweet spot is selling Bullock and/or Hardaway. They should have at least some value while Bertans and Mcgee do not. Bring back whatever small assets while still retaining enough to still be competitive. Something like THJ for Levert and a 2nd. Bullock for Covington and a 2nd. 

Another goal should be a youth movement to build a core that can grow together. Maybe buy low on a guy. Something like Frank and a 2nd for Thybulle. A small gamble on a player like that 

The Wood angle is so important. Extend him and i believe it immediately raises his value. Gamble on him and if it doesn’t work starting he can score from the bench

As far as a multi year look, i don’t see us going into the tax next season. Makes more sense long term to avoid the repeater
[-] The following 1 user Likes Jason Terry's post:
  • mvossman
Like Reply
#19
(01-21-2023, 12:29 PM)Jason Terry Wrote: I think the sweet spot is selling Bullock and/or Hardaway. They should have at least some value while Bertans and Mcgee do not. Bring back whatever small assets while still retaining enough to still be competitive. 

Is Bullock for Hartenstein a balanced deal?  Sims has looked good with Robinson out.  NY probably needs Reggie more than it does three centers once Robinson returns.

Maybe add McGee/Cam to the deal and we give them the second they want.  But, even without that, IH is an asset beyond his current contract.  I’m not sure the same is true with Reggie.
Like Reply
#20
Reggie for RoCo could possibly be something after watching the no center group last night.

Hartenstein would also be a good get. Reggie and Frank and a second or 2 for Hartenstein and Reddish (I am a bit irrationally obsessed with getting Reddish on this team, he’s the pick we gave in the Luka trade and in my head, getting him closes that slight blunder). Both Reggie and Frank were fan favs, so getting them back might be something to sell for moving on from Hartenstein.
Like Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)