MAVS NEWS:

[Chicagojk]

I don't believe the two timeline thing is a fantasy. I also don't know if I agree it is not the best path for the Mavericks as constructed. As I have said several times, I would have been fine after lottery night if the Mavs announced they were looking to make a reset. Eventhough that may not be the best decision. With the new CBA, I think there is going to be a lot of uncertainty how you have staying power as a contender. It is going to be tricky. If you rock in the draft with 2/3 really great lottery picks. In time, you will probably need to break those guys up if they are awesome.

I hear how the two timeline thing did not work for Golden State. It didn't, but they did get another championship. I could argue it would have worked if their lottery picks were ready to help a team win in year 1 or 2 or if they developed into all star caliber players in their year 4 or 5 in the league. They didn't and so the plan did not work. Now, I don't think Dallas has the infrastructure of Golden State with Steph, Klay and Draymond, but could they be close? Plus, I think Lively and hopefully Flagg are guys who are winning players and can impact winning as young players. Golden State did not get this so their two timeline approach did not get off the ground. If they picked better and/or gotten a little lucky that strategy may have been awesome with an older team.

[RasheedsBigWhiteSpot]

Quick reminder about the value of first-round draft picks:

https://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

Looking at the stats for each draft position, you’d have to put Gafford as a top-10 pick. And he’s already developed, so there’s no risk involved.

It’s easy to want to trade my dull old quarter for that bright, shiny nickel.

Remember, two drafts ago, Atlanta wanted the 10th pick for an older, more expensive Clint Capella. If I'm the Mavs I want at least the 13th pick from them. I'd probably try and get a late 1st from the Nets and then make the Hawks trade 13+22 for Gafford and 27.

Edit: In fact, a 3 teamer with the Nets could generate the Mavs a $24 mil TPE.
Mavs get 13 and 22
Hawks get Gafford and 25
Nets get Martin

[Winter]

McMahon has an article "The Athletic" now about the two timeline idea and Golden State's attempt to pull it off.

The big difference is Flagg is not Wiseman. Then again, I'm not sure AD is bank-able as a major threat in the way Curry was. It's hard to say much about any of this as a comparison. Golden State had a cutting kind of ball-movement that most teams don't have.

My personal feeling is that just about anything is possible, but going younger sounds a little smarter to me.

[F Gump]

Remember, two drafts ago, Atlanta wanted the 10th pick for an older, more expensive Clint Capella. If I'm the Mavs I want at least the 13th pick from them. I'd probably try and get a late 1st from the Nets and then make the Hawks trade 13+22 for Gafford and 27.

Edit: In fact, a 3 teamer with the Nets could generate the Mavs a $24 mil TPE.
Mavs get 13 and 22
Hawks get Gafford and 25
Nets get Martin

My estimation, you're getting JUNK for Gaff and Martin - the right to pay guaranteed money to 2 guys whose ability to play in the NBA will be quite iffy (so they just clutter the cap and the roster). You need roster slots already. Wrong return, wrong time.

Martin to me isn't a great loss, and if you can trade him for a FUTURE FRP, especially in 2026 draft, that currently seems like it would be mid-round, I'm excited by that. (To me the TPE has no value - they won't have real use for it since they're shedding salary, not adding.) But for Gafford, I don't want him outgoing unless a very useful PG/creator/shooter who has some future utility ahead of him is coming back the other way. Even then, I'd be very reluctant, so the value of the PG/creator is the crucial issue to me.

[ThisIStheYear]

So, in today's NBA, a 26 year old verstatile wing that can play both ways is a net negative value?  Maybe the CBA is so utterly broken that this is true, but I find it hard to believe there won't be a robust market for Washington, and Gafford for that matter.  I guess we'll find out.

They didn’t have a robust market when the Mavs traded for them. Why would they have a robust market now? Unless you’re a contender, they’re not the kind of player you give up real assets for. They’re not good enough to elevate your team unless you already have a couple of great players. They may not be huge salary guys, but they’re still too expensive in the very near future to roster if you don’t already have great players. I’d expect the Mavs to get about 75% of what they gave up for them. They were perfect mid salary guys for the Mavs to surround Luka with, but their success was more about Luka than them. Maybe the Mavs could get a decent asset from LA.

[FireNicoHarrison]

McMahon has an article "The Athletic" now about the two timeline idea and Golden State's attempt to pull it off.

The big difference is Flagg is not Wiseman. Then again, I'm not sure AD is bank-able as a major threat in the way Curry was. It's hard to say much about any of this as a comparison. Golden State had a cutting kind of ball-movement that most teams don't have.

My personal feeling is that just about anything is possible, but going younger sounds a little smarter to me.

AD can't carry a team so no, he is absolutely not bank-able as Curry.

[cow]

McMahon has an article "The Athletic" now about the two timeline idea and Golden State's attempt to pull it off.

The big difference is Flagg is not Wiseman. Then again, I'm not sure AD is bank-able as a major threat in the way Curry was. It's hard to say much about any of this as a comparison. Golden State had a cutting kind of ball-movement that most teams don't have.

My personal feeling is that just about anything is possible, but going younger sounds a little smarter to me.

I just look at it from the standpoint of even in an ideal scenario, would our roster compete with OKC in the next two years not to mention some of the other power players or up-and-comers should San Antonio get Giannis.  That answer seems obvious to me short of injury and that can never be ruled out (Tatum), but 2/3rds of our core are also major injury red flags.  Asset wise, it's not the best time for us to be a bad team, but I don't think we have a true competitor so I'd rather just develop Flagg and make moves to better build around him in the future.  I wouldn't trade anyone, just to trade them, but I'd take on bad contracts and sell our pieces for future picks.  

Someone asked earlier or maybe in another thread how much power Nico has.  The obvious answer is "too much".  He's certainly on the hot seat after our ownership group was blindsided by the fan reaction to the Luka trade.  He's going to try the two timeline thing to save his career, but half-measures rarely work.  You just have hope he isn't allowed to do too much damage before he is replaced and the earliest I see that happening is post-TDL so there is a lot of potential to damage the team further.

[Kidnova]

They didn’t have a robust market when the Mavs traded for them. Why would they have a robust market now? Unless you’re a contender, they’re not the kind of player you give up real assets for. They’re not good enough to elevate your team unless you already have a couple of great players.  They may not be huge salary guys, but they’re still too expensive in the very near future to roster if you don’t already have great players. I’d expect the Mavs to get about 75% of what they gave up for them.  They were perfect mid salary guys for the Mavs to surround Luka with, but their success was more about Luka than them. Maybe the Mavs could get a decent asset from LA.

Who said there wasn't a strong market for PJ?  You keep seeming to imply that the Mavs gave up nothing for PJ Washington, but they did in fact give up a decent player in Williams (even if he didn't fit here), plus an effectively unprotected first round pick to get him.  Nico is incompetent, so perhaps he just woefully overpaid, but the return would imply to me that there were other suitors for PJ as well.  No, I don't think they're going to get a king's ransom for him, but I feel like he'd bring back a pretty good return, likely similar to what they gave up for him.

[cow]

Thibs is out. Smart move.

[Winter]

Thibs is out.  Smart move.

Agree. Their rotations were a mess. You shouldn't be having those problems in the playoffs.

[FireNicoHarrison]

This+street clothes = Nico fired.

Do it.

[Chicagojk]

Interesting. I think Thibs is a good coach. Probably a short term coach as he wears out his welcome after awhile, but he is good. He got out coached by Carlisle, but I would think he is probably a top 10 coach. Maybe the Knicks can do better. As good as Jalen is, I think there offense is too Jalen dependent. Do they have the roster to take some pressure off his shoulders? The East is wide open though. So the Knicks are in a pretty good position, I think.

One more thing, I give Nico a ton of crap for not speaking. Compared to Leon Rose he is a chatterbox. I am not a fan of leaders of teams not talking to the press. I don't think Rose has talked in forever. At least I don't believe he has.

Also, as much stability as the Knicks appear to have, you can't totally right off the crazy owner. And they have a crazy owner.

[Winter]

Interesting.  I think Thibs is a good coach.  Probably a short term coach as he wears out his welcome after awhile, but he is good.  He got out coached by Carlisle, but I would think he is probably a top 10 coach.  Maybe the Knicks can do better.  As good as Jalen is, I think there offense is too Jalen dependent.    Do they have the roster to take some pressure off his shoulders?  The East is wide open though.    So the Knicks are in a pretty good position, I think.

One more thing, I give Nico a ton of crap for not speaking.    Compared to Leon Rose he is a chatterbox.  I am not a fan of leaders of teams not talking to the press.  I don't think Rose has talked in forever.  At least I don't believe he has. 

Also, as much stability as the Knicks appear to have, you can't totally right off the crazy owner.  And they have a crazy owner.

I am starting to wonder if Towns is some kind of roster grenade. When he's in the lineup, everyone looks uncertain. It's like you don't know what's going to happen when you put him in the game.

[Chicagojk]

I am starting to wonder if Towns is some kind of roster grenade. When he's in the lineup, everyone looks uncertain. It's like you don't know what's going to happen when you put him in the game.

They don't have enough for Giannis, but I wonder if they do for KD.  That could be spicy.   I have no idea if Mitchell Robinson can stay healthy, but I think he has proven he can give you good minutes if he is available.   Maybe you get a backup center to fill in minutes.

Not sure PHX would want Towns terrible contract though.

[DanSchwartzgan]

They don't have enough for Giannis, but I wonder if they do for KD.  That could be spicy.   I have no idea if Mitchell Robinson can stay healthy, but I think he has proven he can give you good minutes if he is available.   Maybe you get a backup center to fill in minutes.

Not sure PHX would want Towns terrible contract though.

Apparently Towns and Booker are friends and have wanted to play with each other.  Towns makes slightly less, so the Phoenix side works.  It isn’t hard to make the NY side work as well.

[cow]

Apparently Towns and Booker are friends and have wanted to play with each other.  Towns makes slightly less, so the Phoenix side works.  It isn’t hard to make the NY side work as well.

I could see it as a saving throw by the Suns to try to make things work with Booker before he eventually asks to be traded, but it doesn't solve the Beal problem or change their fortunes much (imo), though they'd get younger.  Not sure the Knicks would do it.

[F Gump]

It's really hard to trade these mega-sized contracts because of the hard cap restrictions that are likely to come into play during or after such a trade. I wonder if such players - who presumably are the best players (isn't that why they have such big deals) - become more out of favor just because of the issues their contract does (or will) cause to the roster?

And speaking of players out of favor, NO is at a real crossroads with Zion -- and this was BEFORE this bimbo eruption thing. I never thought we'd get here, but I have to think they are going to be seriously considering waiving him in June, or trading him, because of the difference between contract and actual production. Right now he has NO guaranteed money iiuc.

[omahen]

And speaking of players out of favor, NO is at a real crossroads with Zion -- and this was BEFORE this bimbo eruption thing. I never thought we'd get here, but I have to think they are going to be seriously considering waiving him in June, or trading him, because of the difference between contract and actual production. Right now he has NO guaranteed money iiuc.

I think Williams has 20 % of his salary guaranteed for next season, as he passed his weight checks. Neglectable in the decision making process, basically.

I think they have two paths, assuming no one is offering anything of value for him at this point. Option 1 is cut the cord, similar to as Mavs did with KP. Eat the loss and move on. Either trade him for the very little they can get or cut him. This option includes more or less trading all vets and start a (long?) rebuild. Tank in hope of getting a star through draft. 

Option 2 is run it for another season, hope he can stay healthy and increase his value. His next two years after next season are not guaranteed anyway and they can cut him later. This option is basically more of the same they had for last five seasons or so. Trying to build a very specific roster around a very specific player who is rarely available (with roster obviously not functioning without him).

Neither option is attractive, I am not sure which one I would take. Probably more inclined towards first one.

[DanSchwartzgan]

I think Williams has 20 % of his salary guaranteed for next season, as he passed his weight checks. Neglectable in the decision making process, basically.

I think they have two paths, assuming no one is offering anything of value for him at this point. Option 1 is cut the cord, similar to as Mavs did with KP. Eat the loss and move on. Either trade him for the very little they can get or cut him. This option includes more or less trading all vets and start a (long?) rebuild. Tank in hope of getting a star through draft. 

Option 2 is run it for another season, hope he can stay healthy and increase his value. His next two years after next season are not guaranteed anyway and they can cut him later. This option is basically more of the same they had for last five seasons or so. Trying to build a very specific roster around a very specific player who is rarely available (with roster obviously not functioning without him).

Neither option is attractive, I am not sure which one I would take. Probably more inclined towards first one.

This is largely how I see it also.  The only thing I'll add is that NO controls two of the future Buck's picks through swap rights (26 & 27).  They could be a player in a Giannis trade.  But, they need to extract that value before making their tank decision (your door #1) known.  Otherwise, if NO is going to be really bad, the risk to Milwaukee of not controlling their pick is lessened.

[michaeltex]

Zion Williamson contract per Sport Trac:

Contract Notes
-No All-NBA: $193M (25%)
-All-NBA: $231M (30%)

Contract details per The Athletic/Mike Vorkunov (12/21/23)

Guaranteed seasons became non-guaranteed due to games played clause:
     2024-25: 50% guaranteed, fully guaranteed 1/7/25
     2025-26: non-guaranteed, fully guaranteed 7/15/25
     2026-27: non-guaranteed, fully guaranteed 7/15/26
     2027-28: non-guaranteed, fully guaranteed 7/15/27

Guarantee triggers exist if certain criteria has been met:
     20% of 2025-26 salary becomes guaranteed if passes all six of his weigh-in checkpoints during the 2024-25 season
     40% of 2025-26 salary becomes guaranteed if plays >= 41 games during 2024-25 season, additional 20% if plays >= 51                   games, remaining 20% if plays >= 61 games.

Salaries for 2026-27 and 2027-28 seasons can be re-guaranteed if above metrics are hit the season prior
Further protections via:

     Weight must be less than 295 lbs; body fat monitored
     Injury sustained to right foot