MAVS NEWS:

[DallasMaverick]

I'm confused. You wanted them to win?

We want them to win.

And we want them to tank.

And we want them to play all the young guys.

And we want the veterans to lead the way.

And we want them to push the ball.

And we want them to work on their half-court playoff-style offense.

And we want them to put pressure on the hoop.

And we want them to shoot threes. As long as they make them.

It’s really quite simple, you see.

[mvossman]

Yeah, this ^ gets overlooked a lot in the discussions. If you have a strong goal of "no less than ___", then to have a strong (although less than certain) chance to get that, you have to enter the lottery at about no worse than 2 slots better. Even that route, where you tank and "overshoot" your real target by a couple of slots, offers no guarantee.

The Mavs current lottery slot is 7. If they enter the lottery at 7, their most likely outcome is 8th (about 34%) and about 14% to land 9-11. They would have total odds of a bit better than 50-50 to land 1,2,3,4, or stay the same at 7, but also about 50-50 to get worse than 7.

If the Mavs cut-off line where they want to draft is 7, they need to be in lottery slot 5 or better. At 5, their most likely outcome is 7th (about 27%) and they have total odds of about 64% to exceed their goal and land 1-6 and about 9% to fail and land 8-9. To be GUARANTEED to get no worse than 7, they have to enter the lottery at seed 3 or better.

And if the Mavs cut-off line where they want to draft is 6, they want to be in lottery slot 4 or better. At 4, their most likely outcome is 6th (about 26%) and they have total odds of about 55% to land 1-5 and about 19% to land 7-8.  To be GUARANTEED to get no worse than 6, they have to enter the lottery at seed 2 or better.

Fortunately, the Mavs know all this. UN-fortunately, so does every other team in the top 10 of the tanking race.

We obviously want to get as low as we can if no other reason to increase the odds of landing top 4, but I would say the secondary goal is top 9.  Seems like there is a bit of a drop off after 9.

[RasheedsBigWhiteSpot]

Based on the schedules and the other Lottery team's rosters, it wouldn't shock me at all if the Mavs finished in the top (er...bottom?) 4 or 5.

I think if, in the next four games, they can go 1-3 or even 0-4, they'll be in a great position. After these four games the schedule gets brutal with top teams in a ridiculously tight calendar. This is gonna be like 2018.

[Scott41theMavs]

Well reality is coming in hard.  This is a bad team.  They fought hard, but Minny could turn it on/turn if off when needed.    I really could care less about almost everyone who played for the Mavs yesterday.  In the first half when they were down quite a bit, it was depressing our lineup was exclusively over 30 guys (for the most part) during a stretch.   

Mavs have a lot of work to do this offseason to get better and better fitting parts.

Nah, several of the players played well last night. And that's a good and important thing.

Look, I'm not sure how aware the folks here (and Mav fans in general) of how bad the Mavs predicament is moving forward (and of course it would be exponentially worse if we didn't have Flagg - at least 7 years' climb back to hope, let alone relevance). We're counting on Flagg, whoever we draft, Kyrie, and whatever the other players we have or can obtain this offseason to bring this team back to relevance next year. We don't have our draft picks for the next. Four. Years. Teams like OKC, the Spurs, the Rockets, and some other playoff teams are not built on two high lottery players, but on four or five. In the 2031-32 season, i.e. the first season after we have our draft pick, Coop will be 24-25 years old, probably solidly into what should be a very long prime. And Kyrie will likely have retired. If our current non-Coop/non-Kyrie players are that bad, how are we going to build a team around Cooper in the intervening years? I think nearly all of the guys who played last night (plus Max and Nembhard, but not Martin or Johnson) have some value, and can at least be penciled in as rotation players for at least a play-in team. There might be some value in retaining Bagley and/or Middleton depending on price.

For the Mavs to be a team that at least threatens to make it to the conference semis every year by '29-'30 or so, it's going to take 
1) nailing the living $hit out of this year's draft pick,
2) getting a top five in the league GM (likely before the draft, due to the importance of #1), and
3) our current players outside of the "big three" (Coop, the draft pick, and Kyrie) having strong value, either on-court or in trade value, or #2 isn't likely to matter much.

We can't do a Nellie (stripping things down to brass tacks while somehow convincing Filthy to stick around in the midst of the poopshow) because we aren't missing one draft pick, but four. Building the team is going to be extremely hard work.

[Smitty]

Nah, several of the players played well last night. And that's a good and important thing.

Look, I'm not sure how aware the folks here (and Mav fans in general) of how bad the Mavs predicament is moving forward (and of course it would be exponentially worse if we didn't have Flagg - at least 7 years' climb back to hope, let alone relevance). We're counting on Flagg, whoever we draft, Kyrie, and whatever the other players we have or can obtain this offseason to bring this team back to relevance next year. We don't have our draft picks for the next. Four. Years. Teams like OKC, the Spurs, the Rockets, and some other playoff teams are not built on two high lottery players, but on four or five. In the 2031-32 season, i.e. the first season after we have our draft pick, Coop will be 24-25 years old, probably solidly into what should be a very long prime. And Kyrie will likely have retired. If our current non-Coop/non-Kyrie players are that bad, how are we going to build a team around Cooper in the intervening years? I think nearly all of the guys who played last night (plus Max and Nembhard, but not Martin or Johnson) have some value, and can at least be penciled in as rotation players for at least a play-in team. There might be some value in retaining Bagley and/or Middleton depending on price.

For the Mavs to be a team that at least threatens to make it to the conference semis every year by '29-'30 or so, it's going to take 
1) nailing the living $hit out of this year's draft pick,
2) getting a top five in the league GM (likely before the draft, due to the importance of #1), and
3) our current players outside of the "big three" (Coop, the draft pick, and Kyrie) having strong value, either on-court or in trade value, or #2 isn't likely to matter much.

We can't do a Nellie (stripping things down to brass tacks while somehow convincing Filthy to stick around in the midst of the poopshow) because we aren't missing one draft pick, but four. Building the team is going to be extremely hard work.

I agree with a LOT of this. Nearly everything actually. Just one small pushback. The Mavs do have first round picks the next 4 years. In fact, they currently have 4. One in ‘28, ‘29 and two in ‘30. I know you probably meant they don’t control their own pick with 2 of those having swap rights owed to OKC and SAS and the other two being other teams’ picks in LAL and GSW. But they do have picks. They even have a possibility for a pick in ‘27 if it lands in the Top-2.

It’s not as dire as you make it seem is all. It will take a good GM like you said. One that can draft well outside of the lottery (most likely) in some of those years.

BUT isn’t that okay after all? IF we hit on this pick… Do we expect those swaps to matter all that much? Do we expect to be bottom dwellers in Year 3 and Year 5 Flagg seasons when those swap rights matter? Also Year 2 and Year 4 of this next Top-10 pick..

Of course, a lot can happen between now and then. But you said it, we HAVE Flagg. And we NEED to hit on this pick. Then, we need a good GM to continue hitting on guys in the draft, even (likely) outside the lottery.

[cow]

Even if we hit on this pick, those OKC/SAS swaps will have our pick moving backward, maybe a little or maybe a lot. We'll have no reason to tank and we'll have a decent roster, so you'd probably be looking at a 15-20 pick becoming 25-30 pick. The GSW pick will most likely get converted into a second as GSW will most likely be rebuilding that point. As long as Luka is with the Lakers, that's probably a pick in the low 20s which would make it the best asset. I agree it's not dire, but it's not exactly rosy either.

[ThisIStheYear]

As long as Cooper turns into the player we think he’ll be, the Mavs have enough to work with. They’ll need at least one rabbit out of the hat, like finding a Josh Howard level player deep in the draft, and some solid work in free agency and trades, but that’s manageable. Many contenders were in that boat.

[Scott41theMavs]

I agree with a LOT of this. Nearly everything actually. Just one small pushback. The Mavs do have first round picks the next 4 years. In fact, they currently have 4. One in ‘28, ‘29 and two in ‘30. I know you probably meant they don’t control their own pick with 2 of those having swap rights owed to OKC and SAS and the other two being other teams’ picks in LAL and GSW. But they do have picks. They even have a possibility for a pick in ‘27 if it lands in the Top-2.

It’s not as dire as you make it seem is all. It will take a good GM like you said. One that can draft well outside of the lottery (most likely) in some of those years.

BUT isn’t that okay after all? IF we hit on this pick… Do we expect those swaps to matter all that much? Do we expect to be bottom dwellers in Year 3 and Year 5 Flagg seasons when those swap rights matter? Also Year 2 and Year 4 of this next Top-10 pick..

Of course, a lot can happen between now and then. But you said it, we HAVE Flagg. And we NEED to hit on this pick. Then, we need a good GM to continue hitting on guys in the draft, even (likely) outside the lottery.

Let's put it this way - we don't have any lottery picks, our own or otherwise, for the next four years. I was pointing out that those several other teams at the top of the standings were built on multiple lottery picks.

I was very happy and excited back in '97 when they hired Nellie, because he had the well-earned reputation of finding very solid or better players with not great draft picks. And well, well, well, he found Dirk, trading down to get him, and probably deserves credit for pegging Nash, the buried third-stringer, as a high-level starting point guard. The Mavs' first criterion for their new GM needs to be that sort of genius-level talent evaluation.

[Scott41theMavs]

Based on the schedules and the other Lottery team's rosters, it wouldn't shock me at all if the Mavs finished in the top (er...bottom?) 4 or 5.

I think if, in the next four games, they can go 1-3 or even 0-4, they'll be in a great position. After these four games the schedule gets brutal with top teams in a ridiculously tight calendar. This is gonna be like 2018.

I said earlier that if I were the front office, Kidd's marching orders would be that he was allowed to win an absolute max of 7 more games. That estimate was waaaayyyy too high. The Mavs might finish 4-5 if they don't win *any* more games. While I don't think there's any reasonable chance of them falling below seventh (that 26 wins guess would probably land them there), this year is unprecedented in terms of the lengths the bottom dwellers are going in terms of tanking aggressively. If they're dang lucky, one of the Pels, the Wizards (who are too dumb to tank right), or Utah (lulz, yeah right) will pass them in wins.