MAVS NEWS:

[DanSchwartzgan]

Regarding the post above...

There is a future scenario I would like to see, but it does not appear possible. That scenario would be the players we all had at the beginning of the season... with AD committed to the center position. What we don't know for future reference is whether Kidd and AD will settle on AD's natural position at center.

I wouldn't mind seeing this lineup with AD at the center position.

Kyrie\Bwill\Nemb
Christi\Klay
Naji\PJ
Flagg\PJ
AD\Gaff\Lively\Powell

That's a nice lineup.

But we are horribly thin at center now, and that won't happen. Our center position is AD, Cisse, and Powell. Both Gaff and AD seem terribly frail at present and my optimisim won't stretch that far. And of course, Kyrie is an unknown coming back off injury. So this lineup looks nice on paper, but it's hard to imagine as a sustainable lineup.

My only alternate hope outside of an AD trade is that enough trades can be manufactured outgoing to compensate. That is Gafford going out - with probably Martin and\or Hardy, maybe Klay and maybe Dlo. We get back in return a healthy backup center, and at least a 3-point specialist. But that sounds more like a dream than reality.

I think Gafford still carries real value.  The key to trading him for future value is you have to live with the results (this year at least) of AD/Lively being your two best centers.  It is easy, mid season, to spend too much time worrying about the trees to the exclusion of the forest.

[Winter]

I think Gafford still carries real value.  The key to trading him for future value is you have to live with the results (this year at least) of AD/Lively being your two best centers.  It is easy, mid season, to spend too much time worrying about the trees to the exclusion of the forest.

Agreed, but an out-going Gafford doesn't leave you with an adequate backup center, so I wouldn't expect much in the way of results this year. Kyrie will need time to for conditioning assuming he comes back. So if we even sniff the playoffs, we shouldn't expect much.

Maybe one alternative is to just roll with this lineup with not much expectation, trade Gafford for a good guard, be cautious with Kyrie, and live with the middle-of-the-pack results. Your summer trades will shape you for next year. 

I still don't have much faith in the future with Kyrie and AD for next year, but the Front Office may not see much else take shape.

[F Gump]

Flagg is capable of being the #1 player. But his game and growth has been even better when he is able to be the #2 (with AD) and I wonder if he takes yet another leap in growth if Kyrie returns and he's able to be #3.

To me, those aspects make me cautious with the value of a trade. It makes me solidly entrenched in the idea that any trade of AD outgoing has to give the Mavs a player who is either a star now, or who has the capacity to become one. Otherwise, I want to see them keep AD and Kyrie TO ACCELERATE THE GROWTH OF FLAGG.

[Mavs2021]

Flagg is capable of being the #1 player. But his game and growth has been even better when he is able to be the #2 (with AD) and I wonder if he takes yet another leap in growth if Kyrie returns and he's able to be #3.

To me, those aspects make me cautious with the value of a trade. It makes me solidly entrenched in the idea that any trade of AD outgoing has to give the Mavs a player who is either a star now, or who has the capacity to become one. Otherwise, I want to see them keep AD and Kyrie TO ACCELERATE THE GROWTH OF FLAGG.

  Flagg is clearly the #1 already. AD is more comfortable being the #2.

[rocky164]

Flagg is capable of being the #1 player. But his game and growth has been even better when he is able to be the #2 (with AD) and I wonder if he takes yet another leap in growth if Kyrie returns and he's able to be #3.

To me, those aspects make me cautious with the value of a trade. It makes me solidly entrenched in the idea that any trade of AD outgoing has to give the Mavs a player who is either a star now, or who has the capacity to become one. Otherwise, I want to see them keep AD and Kyrie TO ACCELERATE THE GROWTH OF FLAGG.

My desire to trade AD was due to his wanting to play the 4.  AD at the 4 with everyone healthy never made sense.  Now that he’s playing center I’m perfectly ok keeping AD unless a trade offer just blows me away.  AD/Lively is a great center rotation assuming both are healthy which I know is a big assumption.  Lively is still young enough and his value and contract low enough that I take a chance that he can back up AD at the 5 and eventually replace AD when he ages out.  Flagg in your 4 period.  Maybe eventually a 3 but I much prefer him at the 4.  I definitely want to see Flagg-AD-Kyrie.  For me Gafford is now the odd man out.  His style of play simply no longer fits in a non-Luka world.  I like PJ and at times his fit with Flagg seems great and other times poor.  I simply can’t make up my mind.  But the idea of a front line of AD-PJ-Flagg is appealing.  For me with Kyrie back the hole is a 2 guard who is big-can play the point if needed-shoots the 3 well and can “get his” when needed.  He needs to be a consistent 18-20 ppg scorer.  I don’t know if that player is available or even exists.  But if he does any combination of Gafford-Martin-Klay-Hardy that gets us that type of player on Flagg’s timeline is the goal.

[mvossman]

My desire to trade AD was due to his wanting to play the 4.  AD at the 4 with everyone healthy never made sense.  Now that he’s playing center I’m perfectly ok keeping AD unless a trade offer just blows me away.  AD/Lively is a great center rotation assuming both are healthy which I know is a big assumption.  Lively is still young enough and his value and contract low enough that I take a chance that he can back up AD at the 5 and eventually replace AD when he ages out.  Flagg in your 4 period.  Maybe eventually a 3 but I much prefer him at the 4.  I definitely want to see Flagg-AD-Kyrie.  For me Gafford is now the odd man out.  His style of play simply no longer fits in a non-Luka world.  I like PJ and at times his fit with Flagg seems great and other times poor.  I simply can’t make up my mind.  But the idea of a front line of AD-PJ-Flagg is appealing.  For me with Kyrie back the hole is a 2 guard who is big-can play the point if needed-shoots the 3 well and can “get his” when needed.  He needs to be a consistent 18-20 ppg scorer.  I don’t know if that player is available or even exists.  But if he does any combination of Gafford-Martin-Klay-Hardy that gets us that type of player on Flagg’s timeline is the goal.

I completely agree that is the kind of player needed to give this current version of the team any chance of contending (I have referred to this in the past as a Jrue Holiday trade, and a good example today would be Derrick White).  But you are not getting that guy with Gafford, Martin (LOL!), Klay or Hardy.  You would need to spend every future asset you had to get that player (if it were even possible).  But nobody seems interested in going all in on something like that, and with good reason.  Which is why my mindset has been that if you can get a reasonable return for AD (meaning assets and/or young players to build around Flagg) you do it.

[KillerLeft]

I completely agree that is the kind of player needed to give this current version of the team any chance of contending (I have referred to this in the past as a Jrue Holiday trade, and a good example today would be Derrick White).  But you are not getting that guy with Gafford, Martin (LOL!), Klay or Hardy.  You would need to spend every future asset you had to get that player (if it were even possible).  But nobody seems interested in going all in on something like that, and with good reason.  Which is why my mindset has been that if you can get a reasonable return for AD (meaning assets and/or young players to build around Flagg) you do it.

I'm with you on some of this, but I think a combo of Gafford, PJW, Marshall, Russell, etc, can be stretched a little farther as trade bait than you seem to. I think there will be teams that would want each and every one of those players, tbh. Some because they'd fit perfectly into needs, some because they're on team-friendly deals. Can you get THE guy for a combo of them without giving up way future draft capital? No, I think you're right about that. 

Where I differ is this: why not move THOSE guys to get smaller pieces who fit better with Flagg, which might actually inch you closer than you expect to a world in which the Flagg/Kyrie/AD trio can compete? I honestly think that if 98% of this team wasn't better scoring from the midrange than anywhere else on the court, the team would be better, even if they were a little less talented. At the end of the day, all you're really after is getting younger and hopefully adding a little more draft capital, right? Why MUST that come from an AD trade? I agree with the emboldened, but you're glossing right over the "if" imo, which is the key word.

IF they don't get really, really good offers, I'm ok with smaller reshuffles that bring in the type of value you're wanting, personally. I think it might be EASIER to get value that way, even, and it might also come with the benefit of maintaining a chance to be competitive in the interim.

[mvossman]

I'm with you on some of this, but I think a combo of Gafford, PJW, Marshall, Russell, etc, can be stretched a little farther as trade bait than you seem to. I think there will be teams that would want each and every one of those players, tbh. Some because they'd fit perfectly into needs, some because they're on team-friendly deals. Can you get THE guy for a combo of them without giving up way future draft capital? No, I think you're right about that. 

Where I differ is this: why not move THOSE guys to get smaller pieces who fit better with Flagg, which might actually inch you closer than you expect to a world in which the Flagg/Kyrie/AD trio can compete? I honestly think that if 98% of this team wasn't better scoring from the midrange than anywhere else on the court, the team would be better, even if they were a little less talented. At the end of the day, all you're really after is getting younger and hopefully adding a little more draft capital, right? Why MUST that come from an AD trade? I agree with the emboldened, but you're glossing right over the "if" imo, which is the key word.

IF they don't get really, really good offers, I'm ok with smaller reshuffles that bring in the type of value you're wanting, personally. I think it might be EASIER to get value that way, even, and it might also come with the benefit of maintaining a chance to be competitive in the interim.

I'm on board with moving other pieces as well.  I think Klay and Dlo should be moved at the TDL and we should probably sell high on Gafford.  It may also make sense to move on from PJ when we can.  The reason I focus so much on AD is:

I think (hope) he can generate the biggest long term asset return
I think clearing some of his massive salary will provide a lot of options
I think with his age and injury history he is at most risk of an injury completely tanking his value
I know you are not concerned about this but I worry about an extension that will negative impact in the long term
As long as he is on the roster I think there is a possibility of decisions being made focusing on the short term

[Winter]

What mvossman said is my opinion as well.

Regarding AD, I would also add that every game I watch I reminded that AD may just be a tad too slow for this team. He's become too lumbering, and I don't expect that to change. On top of that, I want no more discussion of Mavericks lineups that include AD at the PF position. That ship has sailed.

[mvossman]

What mvossman said is my opinion as well.

Regarding AD, I would also add that every game I watch I reminded that AD may just be a tad too slow for this team. He's become too lumbering, and I don't expect that to change. On top of that, I want no more discussion of Mavericks lineups that include AD at the PF position. That ship has sailed.

I think there is hope that he is still playing himself into shape and that he has a little more than what we have seen so far.  If not then I think the days of being a top 20 player are over and he is already starting age related decline.

[Winter]

I think there is hope that he is still playing himself into shape and that he has a little more than what we have seen so far.  If not then I think the days of being a top 20 player are over and he is already starting age related decline.

I hear you. I tried to account for that early on, but I'm just not feeling it.  

He's not this guy anymore... and never will be. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkcF9oJG0_c



The two-timeline thing just feels weird when you watch him getting older and juxtapose Flagg's play in the same game.

[Chicagojk]

Mavs have two players on Bobby Marks all value team

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/4736...rks-roster

[KillerLeft]

I know you are not concerned about this but I worry about an extension that will negative impact in the long term
As long as he is on the roster I think there is a possibility of decisions being made focusing on the short term

Some good points made. The two above don't worry me in the least. They're watching the same team we are, and they know what they're watching more than we do. 

No successful team has ever been built around Davis, and the guy who wanted to try doing it again got fired. The team is being built around Cooper Flagg, and I think we can relax with the worry of them shooting themselves in the foot (in those specific ways, at least).

[mvossman]

Some good points made. The two above don't worry me in the least. They're watching the same team we are, and they know what they're watching more than we do. 

No successful team has ever been built around Davis, and the guy who wanted to try doing it again got fired. The team is being built around Cooper Flagg, and I think we can relax with the worry of them shooting themselves in the foot (in those specific ways, at least).

I do not share your confidence.  The new owner is very green and has already been led into one of the worst trades in NBA history.  The guys currently handling GM duties were here when that happened and one of them could very well become the permanent GM.  This organization has done so many wildly unexpected things recently that I have no idea what they might do.  Building around Flagg can mean different things.  If this group gets it in their head that the current version of this team is just one piece away from contention, why wouldn't they pull the trigger on a win now move with Flagg?

[KillerLeft]

I do not share your confidence.  The new owner is very green and has already been led into one of the worst trades in NBA history.  The guys currently handling GM duties were here when that happened and one of them could very well become the permanent GM.  This organization has done so many wildly unexpected things recently that I have no idea what they might do.  Building around Flagg can mean different things.  If this group gets it in their head that the current version of this team is just one piece away from contention, why wouldn't they pull the trigger on a win now move with Flagg?

Well, depending on what that one move might be, it's possible I'd agree with them. 

I just think only a true idiot would consider stripping assets to the extent you mean at this point, when we haven't even be able to see the team on the floor together, or would've reached the point where any type of new contract for Davis is even being considered. I'm just not worried about either of those things at this time. 

For some, simply not trading Davis represents a mistake on that same level. All I'm saying is that I can support waiting until A) you get knocked out by offers or B) you at least see the team enough to wrap your head around what you have. I think that's a SAFER way to go, not a more dangerous one.

[mvossman]

Well, depending on what that one move might be, it's possible I'd agree with them. 

I just think only a true idiot would consider stripping assets to the extent you mean at this point, when we haven't even be able to see the team on the floor together, or would've reached the point where any type of new contract for Davis is even being considered. I'm just not worried about either of those things at this time. 

For some, simply not trading Davis represents a mistake on that same level. All I'm saying is that I can support waiting until A) you get knocked out by offers or B) you at least see the team enough to wrap your head around what you have. I think that's a SAFER way to go, not a more dangerous one.

See this gets back to the difference between rooting for process vs outcome.  I of course hope they use good process, but I have no way of knowing what their process was other than by the outcome we see.  

For clarification, I'm not worried about them sending out all of their assets in a win now move right now or at the TDL.  I'm worried about the case where we have enough successes the rest of this season with those three guys playing together that the organization has in their head they can compete with the right moves.  Is it possible with good process to navigate that situation correctly?  Yes.  Is it possible this organization will not navigate that situation correctly and greatly delay the long term in a short sighted grab at the short term?  I think the answer is yes.  

For me its about probabilities.  If AD gets traded at the TDL, it will be a clear sign of what direction they are taking.  This organization could still completely screw up the build around Flagg, but I think it will be easier with less chance of failure if they are not constantly juggling win now vs win later decisions.

[KillerLeft]

For clarification, I'm not worried about them sending out all of their assets in a win now move right now or at the TDL.  I'm worried about the case where we have enough successes the rest of this season with those three guys playing together that the organization has in their head they can compete with the right moves.  Is it possible with good process to navigate that situation correctly?  Yes.  Is it possible this organization will not navigate that situation correctly and greatly delay the long term in a short sighted grab at the short term?  I think the answer is yes.  

Very true, but not a good enough reason (for me) to hope they rush into an action that might close the door on what could potentially be the best way of moving forward. I just don't agree with you, based on the information (or lack thereof) at our disposal, currently.

I do think it's possible (maybe not likely) that this team competes for a title next year, and possibly the one after. Until I'm convinced otherwise, or unless more of a "sure thing" option presents itself through a better than expected offer, I can understand why they'd want to avoid relinquishing those chances. Again, in a binary, non-qualified way, Flagg/AD/Kyrie represents the most top of the roster talent the Dallas Mavericks have EVER assembled at one time. Sure, there are tons of qualifications that beg to be mentioned, such as age related decline, the cap, health...but I believe they're closer than we're inclined to feel after the events of the past year. 

I'm not so confident that I'd refuse to listen to offers that can bridge me to the future, but I'm FAR from feeling like the best of those offers is the only way to go if it's not "good enough," and I think it's nut bar factor 7 to assume they'll get this wrong at the specific point in history when they seem to be pretty focused on the idea that who the GM is matters for maybe the first time in our fandom. Tell me who the GM is, and my opinion will change. Tell me what Kyrie looks like, and it will change. If he looks good, will he have chemistry with Flagg?? The answers to these questions are of uber importance to how I'd move forward.

[mvossman]

Very true, but not a good enough reason (for me) to hope they rush into an action that might close the door on what could potentially be the best way of moving forward. I just don't agree with you, based on the information (or lack thereof) at our disposal, currently.

I do think it's possible (maybe not likely) that this team competes for a title next year, and possibly the one after. Until I'm convinced otherwise, or unless more of a "sure thing" option presents itself through a better than expected offer, I can understand why they'd want to avoid relinquishing those chances. Again, in a binary, non-qualified way, Flagg/AD/Kyrie represents the most top of the roster talent the Dallas Mavericks have EVER assembled at one time. Sure, there are tons of qualifications that beg to be mentioned, such as age related decline, the cap, health...but I believe they're closer than we're inclined to feel after the events of the past year. 

I'm not so confident that I'd refuse to listen to offers that can bridge me to the future, but I'm FAR from feeling like the best of those offers is the only way to go if it's not "good enough," and I think it's nut bar factor 7 to assume they'll get this wrong at the specific point in history when they seem to be pretty focused on the idea that who the GM is matters for maybe the first time in our fandom. Tell me who the GM is, and my opinion will change. Tell me what Kyrie looks like, and it will change. If he looks good, will he have chemistry with Flagg?? The answers to these questions are of uber importance to how I'd move forward.

Yeah, that's where you and I are on different pages.  I don't see a route to this roster wining a title.  Way too many hurdles and not enough time.  I would be glad to be wrong.  It wouldn't be the first time.

I don't think trepidation over this organization making the right decisions is "nut bar factor 7".  The guy hiring that GM is clearly an NBA idiot.  My thoughts may change on this when we see who that GM is, but until then I am team rebuild/reset.

[KillerLeft]

The guy hiring that GM is clearly an NBA idiot.  My thoughts may change on this when we see who that GM is, but until then I am team rebuild/reset.

Second sentence is reasonable, of course. I think we're actually pretty close to being on the same page, only I'm leaning a little more optimistic than you. This IS a lot of talent at the top of the roster, after all, and Flagg IS better than I expected already. But yeah, we can agree that more info can/will change the equation. 

I think the think YOU have more faith in than I do is that the starting over process (that's what it is once you ditch AD and/or Kyrie, regardless of how you want to qualify it) can be sped up by trading one or both of those two guys. I just feel like there's a better chance of the team being good with them than there is of lucking your way out of paying the price of sending all those assets out to build around a player you don't have anymore. Not a single player on the team today will still be here when Flagg hits his true prime, so...why not just try to be as good as you can while he's in the incubator? 

As far as the emboldened, I don't know if that's clear yet. It might be true, but he might've just been super out of his depth regarding the business of the NBA at first. This is why Cuban being (just a little) involved doesn't scare me. I think it might be a help in some ways. But, it's possible Dumont is a pretty smart dude who will (or even has) learn from mistakes as he goes. Again, the more info we get, the more we'll know. 

It really is all about who the GM is. That hire will tell us quite a bit. I guess my underlying hope is that nothing huge happens until that person is here. Since I feel that way, and since we haven't even seen the full team on the court, I think caution is advised in the near future. I'd really hate to see AD get Porzingis'd. That might be the final nail in the coffin.

[Winter]

Next year may be a surprise, but I have a hard time imagining two 33-year olds and a 19-year old competing for the top spot in the west. Especially when you look at Houston, San Antonio, and OKC.

Irving hasn't even played 60 games in a season since the 2019-20 season. Davis has just done it once in that time frame