(03-17-2022, 09:41 AM)mvossman Wrote: Never suggested to cut KP. That was never a thought. You trade him for overpriced distressed assets like we did at the TDL. The difference is that in the offseason we have the flexibility to actually replace him in the frontcourt.
In my scenario, we would have Dinwiddie, Holmes and whatever distressed asset(s) we traded (dumped) KP for (maybe Tobias Harris) instead of THJ, Bertans, Bullock and WCS. I feel like we would be in a lot better position.
I don't have sour grapes. I am as happy (and surprised) as anyone that Dinwiddie is playing out so well and looks like he will be a quality long term piece. I also try not to view things with homer glasses. Trying to look at it objectively, I think it was a poor trade (as did just about every NBA analyst) that has so far worked out better than could reasonably expected. To me it just highlighted the mistakes we made in the offseason.
To be clear, I did not bring this subject up and have not been harping on it. I don't think I need to be accused of sour grapes just because we don't share the same opinion.
Your scenario suggests a number of "what-ifs". We have no idea if SD would have wanted to sign with Mavs. Or if we could have traded KP for something else. Arm chair criticism based on countless what ifs instead of just admitting we are a better team NOW than we were before, seems silly to me. You come across as having some other agenda or grudge with the management.
(03-17-2022, 11:08 AM)omahen Wrote: I have a problem with the "if Brunson decides to leave" aspect and I think this immediately throws a very bad light on the franchise. I think Mavs should already know (as in be very sure about it) what will happen with Brunson in the summer, otherwise they should trade him. I think receiving an asset at TDL (lets be modest and say this is a mid FRP and a young player) beats losing him for nothing in the summer. I think that is worth more than the ability to use his contract in a trade. We lack assets and that additional FRP could be worth more. Mavs have plenty of suitable contracts. I think the chance of winning it all is not that great to have significant impact regarding the value of keeping him.
Acceptable scenarios would be:
- Mavs know he will resign
- Mavs know who they will trade using Brunson contract (probably difficult to know so far in advance)
- One idea that could be realistic. NY is reportedly having Brunson as their first target and I think there could be a very strong appeal on his side. Big city, family links, lead PG role. NY this season is realistically not in a position to win it all, even if they traded for Brunson. So why spending a bunch of assets at TDL if you can have him in the summer for the price of creating the cap space? Based on NY situation, they need to drop 20-25 mil of salaries (expiring Kemba and expiring Burks, Noel or Rose) and the Mavs 2023 FRP could be the fair price for that. Mavs on the other hand could prefer to keep Brunson for the rest of this season while making an agreement with NY to do the SnT in the summer. NY doesn't need to drop so much salary trading for him. Mavs get the ability to be compensated either with salary coming from NY or use his contract for someone else and they have half a year to negotiate potential deals for his contract. I would prefer someone better than those NY expiring contracts.
What is ALL this chatter about Mavs not resigning Brunson?? Of course they will. Why are so many people nervous nannies about this?
![[-]](https://www.mavsboard.com/images/collapse.png)