MAVS NEWS:

[DallasMaverick]

It's not just a matter of stubborn internal ethics not to trade Klay. It's that we'll never, ever sign a significant FA with Nico as GM again if we trade Klay in-season. That matters, from where I'm sitting anyway.

Just like Grant Williams!

[Scott41theMavs]

Just like Grant Williams!

LOL Grant Williams wasn't a significant free agent. We thought he was, but he wasn't. Klay is an icon whether he's washed or not.

[DallasMaverick]

LOL Grant Williams wasn't a significant free agent. We thought he was, but he wasn't. Klay is an icon whether he's washed or not.

I think the Mavs will make decisions based on merit.

Will the leash be longer for guys with a proven track record? Sure.

[Mavs2021]

As far as long-term strategy goes I´d be very hesitant to let Grimes, Washington, Gafford, Lively or Marshall go. Good contracts are always tradeable. These players are all young enough to be moveable on good deals. Furthermore I feel all of them can be rotational players on a championship team. So you get them on good deals, you should keep them all.

Our focus should probably be on finding the Kyrie replacement. Assuming he can do it at this level for another 2-3 years, you need to start looking now. In three years Luka will be in the prime of his career and it would be nice, if he had a 2nd All-Star next to him. If the player comes from the draft, he´ll need 2-3 years to develop into that player.

That will be very difficult considering that we won´t draft in the lottery and great players are hard to get. Maybe we´ll have to settle for a Sexton/Simons type first next summer that can at least play to JET´s level and then hope they either improve further or we can use them in an upgrade.

I have never been a fan of sleepy eyes, but at 28-30M a year, which is Klay/Kleber S&T territory next summer, you could probably talk me into Ingram. I´d even consider Zion, IF those rumours about 1-2 first round picks are true. Luckily you have all the early termination options and his salary is not that bad against the projected cap increase.

The amount of injuries they have in New Orleans speaks to a level of incompetence in their medical department imho, so maybe (weight issue of Zion aside) there is actually a chance you can fix them, especially Ingram. First 200 games as a Laker he only missed five games.

[KillerLeft]

As far as long-term strategy goes I´d be very hesitant to let Grimes, Washington, Gafford, Lively or Marshall go. Good contracts are always tradeable. These players are all young enough to be moveable on good deals. Furthermore I feel all of them can be rotational players on a championship team. So you get them on good deals, you should keep them all. 

Unfortunately, Grimes turning down that extension offer prompted me to brace myself for him being next summer's version of DJJ, especially if the Mavs have another deep playoff run and he's a factor in it. I sure hope I'm wrong. 

I'm no cap expert, but I really feel like we're nearing a point in time when Gafford will be a luxury this team can't afford, at least without losing stuff they need even more in other areas. I'm not saying I'd do this now or at this trade deadline, but at some point before the end of his contract I think I might look to move him on terms that are favorable for my team, treating him as an asset, rather than just a savings casualty. If they're smart enough about turning some of these guys into cost controlled players with upside and maybe some draft capital, maybe they can avoid being backed into a corner. I realize that's "cart before the horse" thinking, and that maximizing this current window needs to be the primary goal, but as you say, we're not even into Luka's prime yet. 

I agree about planning for life after Kyrie, too. I'm sure I'll be fine with having him around long after you've decided he's too old, but he's obviously not totally synced with Luka's timeline the way some of the other pieces are. This is part of what's so disappointing about Hardy's lack of progress for me.

[Scott41theMavs]

I think the Mavs will make decisions based on merit.

Will the leash be longer for guys with a proven track record? Sure.

I would hope they would make decisions based on not burning bridges and making it impossible to bring in any free agents for the next 5 years or so. But that's just me.

[Scott41theMavs]

Unfortunately, Grimes turning down that extension offer prompted me to brace myself for him being next summer's version of DJJ, especially if the Mavs have another deep playoff run and he's a factor in it. I sure hope I'm wrong. 

I'm no cap expert, but I really feel like we're nearing a point in time when Gafford will be a luxury this team can't afford, at least without losing stuff they need even more in other areas. I'm not saying I'd do this now or at this trade deadline, but at some point before the end of his contract I think I might look to move him on terms that are favorable for my team, treating him as an asset, rather than just a savings casualty. If they're smart enough about turning some of these guys into cost controlled players with upside and maybe some draft capital, maybe they can avoid being backed into a corner. I realize that's "cart before the horse" thinking, and that maximizing this current window needs to be the primary goal, but as you say, we're not even into Luka's prime yet. 

I agree about planning for life after Kyrie, too. I'm sure I'll be fine with having him around long after you've decided he's too old, but he's obviously not totally synced with Luka's timeline the way some of the other pieces are. This is part of what's so disappointing about Hardy's lack of progress for me.

Re: Grimes and Gafford: I think it would be extremely foolish of the Mavs to trade Gafford in season, but I would look for him to be traded for air + picks next summer so that they can afford Grimes. No excuse for losing Grimes. He will not be next year's DJJ, because we have matching rights. If someone offers him a big contract, it's probably because he's shown himself to be worth it.

[KillerLeft]

Re: Grimes and Gafford: I think it would be extremely foolish of the Mavs to trade Gafford in season, but I would look for him to be traded for air + picks next summer so that they can afford Grimes. No excuse for losing Grimes. He will not be next year's DJJ, because we have matching rights. If someone offers him a big contract, it's probably because he's shown himself to be worth it.

He will be next year’s Jones if he’s offered a contract they don’t think can or just don't want to match. It’s not my preferred outcome at this time, but you should mentally prepare yourself for it as a possibility, because negotiating the tax penalties will legitimately be a struggle.

I agree that Grimes is more worth keeping than Gafford, at least the way Grimes is playing right now, and with every indication that Lively is a legit high 30 minutes per guy, but there’s no way of knowing whether the Mavs are with us. I’d say the extension offer they made proves that they are interested in keeping Grimes around, but I am sure they have a dollar amount in mind that fits with their long-term roster building plans.

It’s also worth noting that there’s a lot of season left for Grimes. We might feel differently at some point.

[Scott41theMavs]

He will be next year’s Jones if he’s offered a contract they don’t think can or just want to match. It’s not my preferred outcome at this time, but you should mentally prepare yourself for it as a possibility, because negotiating the tax penalties will legitimately be a struggle.

I agree that Grimes is more worth keeping than Gafford, at least the way Grimes is playing right now, and with every indication that Lively is a legit high 30 minutes per guy, but there’s no way of knowing whether the Mavs are with us. I’d say the extension offer they made proves that they are interested in keeping Grimes around, but I am sure they have a dollar amount in mind that fits with their long-term roster building plans.

It’s also worth noting that there’s a lot of season left for Grimes. We might feel differently at some point.

I think they had a dollar amount they wanted to spend on Grimes, but I think that he is opening their eyes to be willing to spend more. If what we've seen the past 5-10 games isn't fool's gold, he could be a future all-star.

[KillerLeft]

I think they had a dollar amount they wanted to spend on Grimes, but I think that he is opening their eyes to be willing to spend more. If what we've seen the past 5-10 games isn't fool's gold, he could be a future all-star.

Preaching to the choir, my guy, but I'm preparing myself, personally. Easier that way. It has taken me multiple years to get over the Brunson thing (if I even have).

It's also worth noting that we couldn't envision a successful off-season that didn't include bringing DJJ back not too long ago. Things change in a hurry!

[KillerLeft]

Good stuff from Jason Timpf here:

https://youtu.be/yolJcCDqUA0?si=CojDuqf1Lr7vYHeu

At around the 27 minute mark, he discusses last night's game, and then supports his new claim that Dallas is the 3rd best team in the league. Roster versatility is one of the reasons given and expounded upon. It's a good sign, imo, because this dude was right on target with everything about the Mavs last year. Now all I need to feel great is some praise from Legler.

[Ghost of Podkolzin]

Klay will be our sixth man soon. Let Grimes and Naji fight it out for the starting spot.

[MarkAguirreWrathofGod]

So what would be the nearest recent analogies for Grimes as a RFA this summer? Okoro is the only one that immediately comes to mind. He was 3yr-38m. Obi Toppin 4yr-60. Quickley 5yr-175m. Almost all RFA stayed home.

I think Grimes at his current pace will get between 15-20. I was advocating for them offering him Josh Green money as an extension offer. I think they low-balled him a bit. No way he was taking 8m or whatever they were offering.

[rocky164]

Can Grimes not sign an extension or new contract before hitting free agency?

[mvossman]

So what would be the nearest recent analogies for Grimes as a RFA this summer? Okoro is the only one that immediately comes to mind. He was 3yr-38m. Obi Toppin 4yr-60. Quickley 5yr-175m. Almost all RFA stayed home.

I think Grimes at his current pace will get between 15-20. I was advocating for them offering him Josh Green money as an extension offer. I think they low-balled him a bit. No way he was taking 8m or whatever they were offering.

Its understandable that they didn't offer him MLE money before he played a minute.  He was easily worth that after his second season, but he had a really weird third season and his market could not have been very good considering what we paid for him in the trade.  As well as he is playing right now, he is still only scoring 9 points a game, and if the team stays relatively healthy he probably wont be playing a whole lot more minutes from the bench.  That will hopefully keep his price close to that MLE level (which I think is over 14 next year).

[F Gump]

Can Grimes not sign an extension or new contract before hitting free agency?

He cannot. But he will be RFA, which means Mavs can match any offer if they wish (and that matching aspect, with a waiting period, does tend to scare away offers).

[KillerLeft]

...and that matching aspect, with a waiting period, does tend to scare away offers.

Good reminder, this part.

[Chicagojk]

Interesting

https://www.reddit.com/r/Mavericks/comme...n_how_the/

[KillerLeft]

Interesting

https://www.reddit.com/r/Mavericks/comme...n_how_the/

Super interesting, thanks for posting. 

The Celtics ALSO didn't leave the weak side corner open in the Finals, so this isn't a cure all for everything. Some teams have long enough defenders to make playing Luka straight up a winning choice, actually. So, the true benefit of this will (hopefully) be finding ways to put Thomspon (and Grimes, and Dinwiddie) in places other spots, where that decision becomes harder to make for the players in live time.

Last season, teams stopped leaving PJ and DJJ open in the weak side corner, but they were very content to leave them when they were above the break. I heard the other day that PJ is shooting like 56% (maybe it was 46%) on above the break 3's so far this season, so that has clearly been a point of focus for him. Grimes has looked good from there, too, and we know Thompson will probably get this treatment anywhere on the court. Can Kidd/Luka find ways of using this that bumfuzzles great defenses? That's the part that remains to be seen.

[michaeltex]

If Klay getting special attention is consistent across opponents, could this contribute to his reduced shooting efficiency? He came here as a player who benefitted from movement, not just as a stand in the corner kick out target. At least that's what I recall the party line was last summer. Is that his role going forward? Is he OK with being reduced to that?