Why the Mavs are Potentially Much Better Already...

[mavsluvr]

And the ON-COURT situation without JR is the Mavs outscoring their opponents at a rate of +6.1, which would have ranked them 2nd in the whole NBA last year. 

The data suggests that the Mavs don't NEED to improve the ON-COURT situation of the team when JR isn't one of the five. They were already performing as one of the better teams in the whole league last year on the court when he wasn't playing.

If you were in a deposition, I would say this answer is non-responsive. Once more, the on-court situation is exactly the same with or without the trade, except that they no longer have the option to play JR in his good lineups. No talent has been added as a result of his departure. 

They could have played JR as much or as little as they wanted to if he were still here. You are arguing that the Mavs would potentially be much better if they played JR less. They had the option to play him less, whether they traded him or not. Even if we acknowledge that he was bad in some of his lineups compared to the alternatives, the trade did not help in terms of their on-court options. Whether JR was a good fit, and whether the Mavs are better on-court as a result of his trade are separate issues.

Tbh, it seems like you are straining to come up with an argument that the front office has made the team much better and solved their "worst problem" simply by dropping a player they didn't want and not acquiring talent that can fill that position.

Cuban has led us down this sort of primrose path for years now -- the idea that clearing out space/exceptions means that the team is already much better. The team isn't better at all until the requisite new talent is actually acquired.