(05-22-2024, 09:10 AM)mvossman Wrote: I'm a huge Maxi homer, and he is uniquely valuable in the playoffs, but the reality is that he is an aging oft injured defense only player.  I doubt any team wants to take on that contract for a guy they can't trust to be on the court and has significant offensive deficiencies.

(05-22-2024, 12:40 PM)F Gump Wrote: Gafford is far better than he's being depicted here. There's an incredible amount of recency bias and "plus minus tells us everthing" nonsense going on.

In addition, the presence of Gafford makes Lively better, and vice versa, because of things like injuries, fouls, fatigue, bad games at times, and so on. Gafford plays the other teams starter, when he is fresh. If you erase Gafford, you are going to get frustrated with the limits and flaws of Lively, which right now get minimized by having another very playable good center to use.

Most important to consider is that while centers look to be inexpensive, the fact is that the Mavs have shown no ability whatsoever to identify and sign that cheap center. Now that it isn't broke, I don't want to fix it with the next Cauley-Stein, McGee, Powell, etc. I don't care what anyone says, Gafford is WORLDS better than any of those.

(05-22-2024, 12:29 PM)The Jom Wrote: I like you and your smart posts. But I can’t believe this. If OKC had Maxi, we’d be toast. And they know it. Same with LAC.

(05-22-2024, 01:20 PM)F Gump Wrote: Plus minus. Eye test. The last series. So let's make Gafford expendable. "But I really like him, it's just a DJJ thing." That's what I am hearing repeatedly, and I'm not seeing any of it is a good reason.

I seriously think you are way too cavalier with your criteria for replacing a player that is very useful. I

There are WAY better options available, and the disclaimer about DJJ doesn't mitigate the fact you did pick, and bash on, Gafford as your proposed route because of plus minus, eye test (whatever very subjective thing that means), and total recency.

Gafford is still young. He is just now on his first few months with a decent team and learning how to play in this system. He makes plays all the time. His contract is reasonable. For equal or less dollars, he is offering WAY more than players like THJ and Green.

(05-22-2024, 01:20 PM)F Gump Wrote: Plus minus. Eye test. The last series. So let's make Gafford expendable. "But I really like him, it's just a DJJ thing." That's what I am hearing repeatedly, and I'm not seeing any of it is a good reason.

I seriously think you are way too cavalier with your criteria for replacing a player that is very useful. I

There are WAY better options available, and the disclaimer about DJJ doesn't mitigate the fact you did pick, and bash on, Gafford as your proposed route because of plus minus, eye test (whatever very subjective thing that means), and total recency.

Gafford is still young. He is just now on his first few months with a decent team and learning how to play in this system. He makes plays all the time. His contract is reasonable. For equal or less dollars, he is offering WAY more than players like THJ and Green.

(05-22-2024, 01:20 PM)F Gump Wrote: Plus minus. Eye test. The last series. So let's make Gafford expendable. "But I really like him, it's just a DJJ thing." That's what I am hearing repeatedly, and I'm not seeing any of it is a good reason.

I seriously think you are way too cavalier with your criteria for replacing a player that is very useful. I

There are WAY better options available, and the disclaimer about DJJ doesn't mitigate the fact you did pick, and bash on, Gafford as your proposed route because of plus minus, eye test (whatever very subjective thing that means), and total recency.

Gafford is still young. He is just now on his first few months with a decent team and learning how to play in this system. He makes plays all the time. His contract is reasonable. For equal or less dollars, he is offering WAY more than players like THJ and Green.

(05-22-2024, 01:27 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: Simple question: IF the Mavs had to make a choice of who to jettison between Green, Gafford or DJJ (assume they must, because that’s the premise) who do you choose to move? 

I could be talked into either Green or Gafford, but I know Jones is the one I’d want back most!

(05-22-2024, 01:57 PM)F Gump Wrote: Green. For me, it's not even a hard question, if those are the choices. 

I do think Green can net value in return, but I see him as far more expendable.

(05-22-2024, 01:57 PM)F Gump Wrote: Green. For me, it's not even a hard question, if those are the choices. 

I do think Green can net value in return, but I see him as far more expendable.

(05-22-2024, 02:17 PM)dirkfansince1998 Wrote: Phrasing it differently. If the Mavs need to create space for DJJ. Who would you prefer to let go? I want to have it all isn't an option.

1) THJ + 2025 1st (+Hardy)
2) Green
3) Gafford
4) Kleber
5) Don't resign DJJ

For me this would the order. I think THJ + 2025 is the best option because the Mavs should be trying to improve but I can understand that some people would prefer to use his contract at the deadline because it is going to be more valuable (no matter how he performs). It's hard to tell what a package of THJ, Hardy and pick can get in return but it should at the very least be an improvement.

Green is solid all around and only two years younger than Gafford. More versatile and probably a 20 minutes per game player no matter how the Mavs construct the roster. On the other hand it shouldn't be all that difficult to replace him. Mavs already have Exum on a cheap deal and the list SG/SF sized 3&D players is longer than the list of playable bigs.

Gafford has been more impactful than Green since he arrived and is a great fit in a 1a-1b scenario next to Lively. But Lively is already better and has more upside. Should be starting sooner than later.  As long as his durability is questionable it still wouldn't hurt to have a backup that can also play starter minutes when Lively is out.
He is also the most valuable asset among the mentioned names. Opening opportunties to add assets for a bigger THJ deal at the deadline (or even in the same offseason).

I don't think Kleber has real trade value. Just not playing enough due to never ending injury issues. But when he is playing he has the most on court value. Also difficult to replace because his skillset is unique. But it might be the best longterm solution because the Mavs need more than the on paper version. They need a reliable stretch five that is actually available in the playoffs. Just not sure if the best time is this summer. With limited picks available and no salary space to work with.

(05-22-2024, 01:40 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: The eye test can be subjective, sure, but much more so when it’s coming from some than others.

The premise started a few pages ago, and not by me, was that it might be beneficial to find a way besides dumping Hardaway to come up with the money to re-sign Jones. I’m not convinced that’s true, because it is clear that Hardaway is no longer wanted on this team, but that’s the thought exercise.

So, a simple question: between Green, Gafford and Jones, who would you be most OK with losing? I understand that there might be even a more creative way to get all accomplished, and I have a long track record of thinking that Jones’ price tag probably won’t be as crazy as people suspect it will be around here…but, he is far exceeding expectations and I’m starting to get a little worried. 

We don’t have to totally agree on where Gafford is as a player, because the sample size on that is pretty small. But even if you think he is the second best center in the league, you’d agree, I hope, that he has not been as impactful as Jones, correct? Hand, you degree that they have TWO centers, of which he is the lesser, I’m sure!

That’s all I’m saying, that if push came to shove, I’d much rather move the depth then the one, key player in Jones. 

What you call bashing him I call pointing out obvious flaws in his game. He doesn’t move his feet well in space, defensively. That, alone, is enough to sour me on him because that’s the only thing I really care about with centers. I also think he’s a pretty overrated rebounder. He is great on the offensive glass when he is playing well, and that’s nice, but I’d say he’s below average as a starting center on the defensive glass. He is also really bad at getting the ball on the short role and making effective decisions quickly (this is an area where he might improve, to be fair. None of that is meant to distract from the things he does well, which are energy and vertical spacing. I’m glad he’s on the team!

(05-22-2024, 03:20 PM)DallasMaverick Wrote: Hmm.  

Ok, which do you like better? Powell at $4m, or Gafford at $14m. 

From your description, it sounds like they’re pretty similar players.

(05-22-2024, 02:06 PM)mvossman Wrote: What if Green is a straight dump and Gafford can land you a weak first?  Add additional options stretch waiving Timmy or sending out strongly protected 25 to dump Timmy.

(05-22-2024, 03:20 PM)DallasMaverick Wrote: Hmm.  

Ok, which do you like better? Powell at $4m, or Gafford at $14m. 

From your description, it sounds like they’re pretty similar players.