11-05-2020, 06:21 PM
(11-05-2020, 06:08 PM)Kammrath Wrote:(11-05-2020, 05:55 PM)omahen Wrote: 1. Even if Utah "sells low", it would take all our assets to trade for Gobert
2. Gobert turns to a negative asset as soon as he gets his max contract.
1) I personally don't think that is true. If Gobert gets dealt at any point soon we'll have to see what kind of haul he gets. I don't think the offers will be such that he would literally take "all our assets."
2) The only way Gobert becomes a "negative asset" is if he gets an achilles injury or something. He is an elite defender and has a severely underrated impact on team offense. He is 28. And I believe he will become more valuable once under team control and not now when he is holding UTA hostage over the super max and has the ability to walk soon.
#2 - The thing is, in 2021's NBA, Gobert, no matter how skilled he is at what he's skilled at, is binarily not a max player in the NBA. I would put Gobert in the Dipo category - if you're the team that has his rights in the 2021 offseason and offer him his true value in contract (i.e., not a max), then he's leaving in a huff. He'll end up signing for less than the max with someone else, but you're still out your assets that you used to trade for him. If you are willing to bend over for him and give him the max, then you have a player like Tobias who can't be traded without adding assets as sweeteners.
I believe that Gobert and Dipo hurt the Mavs moving forward because 1) they won't stay with the Mavs when their contracts expire unless we pay them more than they're worth, and 2) if we pay them more than they're worth, then we destroy flexibility for several years. No thanks on both. I don't think that all 2021 free agents are like that, but I think those two will be. Visions of psychotic grandiosity.