(12-17-2021, 03:10 PM)michaeltex Wrote: Trying to pull all this together:Good observations.
KP needs to have better results to (supposedly) - 1) validate the salary cap investment and 2) improve team effectiveness while 3) increasing trade value potential.
Getting KP productive means elevation to #2 status behind Luka and all the deference that goes with that.
While KP seems to be having a better year, about the same offensively and better(?) defensively, it feels like it's coming at the expense of other contributors.
Overall team performance is about equivalent with last year in W/L, better defense but sorry offense.
So the question becomes when does KP's performance validate a big in-season trade by a contender or near-contender and how much value can the new MBT extract from the deal?
On the bolded paragraph, I guess that's a question.
Now that it is clear that KP is as healthy as he gets, I question how much incremental changes in his on-court performance really affect his trade value. The most trade-value-increasing move they are making might be limiting his time and required effort on the court, in hopes that he doesn't get hurt again, which really might crater his value. Otherwise, I don't know how including him in those horrible lineups would make him seem more attractive to other teams.
I think the Mavs might well be open to a mid-season trade, but I don't think they'll force one, if all they can salvage is crumbs. I don't really think that KP would flourish best as an add-on to a contender. It seems like, to have a chance of doing what he wants, he needs a team that is willing to build around him. But he's too expensive for a rebuilding team, or to serve as anything other than a first or second option, so I don't exactly know where the most demand for him will be.
Another question might be, when does it get to the point that you get a coach who can run a modern, creative system suited to the talents of his players? Or, when do you get a GM who knows how to put together a roster designed to suit a particular system (as opposed to the Cuban-as-de facto-GM model)? I don't think those come up in the immediate term, and I'm not holding my breath on when/if they get addressed at all, but it seems to me that the jury is far from out on the big-picture questions.