BRUNSON BURNER: to NYK for 4yrs/$104M (no SnT) | NYK docked 2025 2nd for tampering

[SleepingHero]

https://www.dmagazine.com/sports/2022/07...offseason/


Not sure if this was posted yet.

[F Gump]

1) Less than 48 hours ago I wrote about the Mavs failure to tank properly:

2) I have read your points that you have been restating in multiple threads. I find them completely uncompelling.

3) All I was attempting to do with my comment about "smartest guy in the room" was to point out the "pot calling the kettle black" situation going on. You constantly attack Cuban's arrogance in this forum. Fine, he may be arrogant because he thinks his way is clearly the only right way. That might be true.

If you worked for the Mavs front office that would be very different because you would have access to knowledge and details we don't have as fans. But we are just fans. Our knowledge is incredibly limited. We need the humility to see that. There is so much we simply do not know.

4) You could be right in all this. I just don't think we have enough to know for sure. The failure to execute a SnT might be a terrible sign of things to come. Could be. But I don't think we can be certain.

You criticized those in the current Mavs front office once? Congrats. I didn't see that purple unicorn, I guess.

You already KNEW the point I was making, had seen it explained several times, and yet asked me to explain it to you AGAIN? Disagree with me, that's your right, but being trollish like that is rude.

Yes I know the rules and how they work. They are what they are. If you feel that's arrogant to speak to their implications, rather than being diligent and aware, so be it.
 
The point you make about me not knowing what the Mavs are planning, sure I don't pretend to know what I don't know, but that's irrelevant to this opportunity for the Mavs -- its value isn't dependent on knowing what's up this second. It's gathering an asset that's available and usable for a full year (and sometimes longer), versus not bothering to do so, when there is no cost, almost no effort whatsoever, and no downside to having it. If it could only be used in a few weeks, and only on X type of situation, I could kinda see your point, but when it goes beyond the current horizon, it would take a certain myopia to limit its appeal to what you can see this second. Things can change considerably or arise over the next 365 days in ways no one knows right now.

[Not an evil robot]

1) Less than 48 hours ago I wrote about the Mavs failure to tank properly: "Terrible, terrible, terrible stuff by the MBT from 2015-2020. I blame RC for not losing some key, key games that could have changed the direction of the franchise AND Donnie/Cuban for not stockpiling picks and instead relentlessly trying to get to the playoffs when the writing was on the wall." So it 100% infactual that I (as you said inaccurately), "ALWAYS, without fail, you try to paint their messes as impossible to avoid, or as unfair, or as unknowable." That is 100% false as proved by something I said in the last couple days. 

2) I have read your points that you have been restating in multiple threads. I find them completely uncompelling. I don't see the "freebie" as necessarily desirable to the Mavs nor to NYK. Both teams have desires and plans for what they are doing this summer and in the years ahead, plans we cannot even begin to guess at with any level of accuracy. Those "freebies" may fall completely outside of something they want. All it takes is for one of the two teams to say they are not interested and it is over. AND these two teams are in the midst of fighting over a free agent where tampering is clearly involved. There are emotions involved on both sides certainly. So neither side may desire to do any more favors for the other when they do not want the "freebie" in the first place. 

3) All I was attempting to do with my comment about "smartest guy in the room" was to point out the "pot calling the kettle black" situation going on. You constantly attack Cuban's arrogance in this forum. Fine, he may be arrogant because he thinks his way is clearly the only right way. That might be true. But note that in this instance you are doing the exact same thing. There isn't an ounce of humility or admission that what you are seeing here might not be the smartest and most desirable path. And that is doing so from your couch, where you have zero inside information about what the Mavs are actually planning and desiring. If you worked for the Mavs front office that would be very different because you would have access to knowledge and details we don't have as fans. But we are just fans. Our knowledge is incredibly limited. We need the humility to see that. There is so much we simply do not know.

4) You could be right in all this. I just don't think we have enough to know for sure. The failure to execute a SnT might be a terrible sign of things to come. Could be. But I don't think we can be certain.

I’m far more a lurker than poster so take this for what it’s worth, but you dig your heels in on very odd takes; a yogi would have a hard time contorting to dodge the straight forward mistakes by the Mavs. I won’t pretend to be a cap expert, but if there’s a win-win outcome on the table as FGump describes you’d expect a closer to close it. Sure, maybe the Knicks are crazy and/or spiteful enough to turn down a free voucher that costs them nothing. But if the possibilities are the other guys acting irrationally or our guys (further) bungling a situation… and we’re only in this scenario because they already bungled it before…

[Kammrath]

You criticized those in the current Mavs front office once? Congrats. I didn't see that purple unicorn, I guess.

You already KNEW the point I was making, had seen it explained several times, and yet asked me to explain it to you AGAIN? Disagree with me, that's your right, but being trollish like that is rude.

Yes I know the rules and how they work. They are what they are. If you feel that's arrogant to speak to their implications, rather than being diligent and aware, so be it.
 
The point you make about me not knowing what the Mavs are planning, sure I don't pretend to know what I don't know, but that's irrelevant to this opportunity for the Mavs -- its value isn't dependent on knowing what's up this second. It's gathering an asset that's available and usable for a full year (and sometimes longer), versus not bothering to do so, when there is no cost, almost no effort whatsoever, and no downside to having it. If it could only be used in a few weeks, and only on X type of situation, I could kinda see your point, but when it goes beyond the current horizon, it would take a certain myopia to limit its appeal to what you can see this second. Things can change considerably or arise over the next 365 days in ways no one knows right now.

Hey I hope we are cool. It was the force and certainty with which you stated your opinion that made me chime in. It just felt like you were stating it as a fact and not an opinion and maybe I misread you on that.

You may be 100% right at the end of the day. I just don't think anyone can say for certain if you are or not. 

I think it is a fact that a TPE can be seen as an "asset." But I don't think we know enough about whether the Mavs 1) want one/see one of value at this juncture or 2) if NYK is even willing to give one to the Mavs without an asset being given to NYK. 

It is 100% your right to think the Mavs are failing at negotiating and that they should be able to force NYK to do this deal. But I do not think that is the only reasonable opinion on this matter. That is all.

[KillerLeft]

Depressed Earth

[F Gump]

Hey I hope we are cool. It was the force and certainty with which you stated your opinion that made me chime in. It just felt like you were stating it as a fact and not an opinion and maybe I misread you on that.

You may be 100% right at the end of the day. I just don't think anyone can say for certain if you are or not. 

I think it is a fact that a TPE can be seen as an "asset." But I don't think we know enough about whether the Mavs 1) want one/see one of value at this juncture or 2) if NYK is even willing to give one to the Mavs without an asset being given to NYK. 

It is 100% your right to think the Mavs are failing at negotiating and that they should be able to force NYK to do this deal. But I do not think that is the only reasonable opinion on this matter. That is all.

This was the first respectful reply I've gotten from you in this conversation, Kamm ... not that I am owed respect, but a certain dismissiveness of what I am saying has been conveyed, that fits with your regular and ongoing eagerness to absolve the FO of criticism.

I'm glad you agree that a TPE is an asset. That's a start. I hope you also agree that it is IMPOSSIBLE for them to ascertain today that they definitely would not have any potential need or use for said TPE at any time over the next year. There is no way to know what trade opportunities may arise, and what rules-related obstacles such a trade may create. Remember, this would be available to use into free agency of 2023 before it expired.

It seems like your defense of the Mavs choices is a shift-the-blame thing, but if you'd take a step back, you might see that it's not a good defense, because it's still going to be a Mavs-related inability that it lands on.

1 "It is 100% your right to think the Mavs ... should be able to force NYK to do this deal".... Do you REALLY think this is how deal-making works, and how adept negotiators close deals, and what I am saying? They FORCE the other party to say yes? Good grief. But no, that is so incredibly off base.

2 One of your excuses for the Mavs inability to sell this deal is that 'maybe the Mavs don't want an asset.' Thus, it isn't their negotiating that sucks, but their desire, is the idea. But why is that a valid excuse, their own inability to see value, or to be willing to get an asset that should be easy for the taking?

3 Then you say 'But it might not be easy for the taking' -- and again, how is that a real answer, as it's on the Mavs to be talented at negotiating so that what is easy to negotiate (hey, let's both pick up an asset) is easy and not impossible.

4 Finally, you say that maybe NY's (valid) objection would be that only Dallas gets a benefit. But not so. BOTH teams get TPE's of a similar size by turning it into a SNT. And if they can't sell NY on both of us getting a little extra, instead of getting nothing, see 3. 

We can't sell them.
We can't figure out how to use one.
We can't tell if we might need one later.
We just don't want to bother.

When the benefit costs nothing in tax or salary, doesn't change the transaction (all the same players going same places), and having it won't get in the way of anything they can possibly want to do later, then I don't see any way to paint failing to do it (or be able to do it) as a plus. I really do expect excellence by the front office, for a team that wants to rise above the competition.

[Kammrath]

This was the first respectful reply I've gotten from you in this conversation,

I am done with conversation as it is going nowhere.

But for the record my first reply to you was in full:

I don't track with this.

There are just far too many unknowns to say it should have been "easy" for the Mavs to get a SnT done that they liked. It takes two to tango and if Rick Brunson is any indication of the NYK attitude toward DAL, then NYK refusing to work with DAL is the most natural thing.

And we don't know the rest of the Mavs plans for the summer and once we do it may become really clear why they didn't pursue the SnT path.

Nothing but respect in there. Just disagreement with your opinion.

You then responded with condescending snark and sarcasm. I pointed that out. And I should have not said my "smartest man in the room" comment. That was not ultimately a kind comment. That's my bad. Sorry for that.

[Jmaciscool]

I seem to recall reading something somewhere (vague, I know) about how teams can work as over the cap or under the cap teams with each option having advantages or disadvantages depending on what the team was trying to do.

Is that the case or am I remembering incorrectly? Just trying to figure out if NY wanted to operate as an under the cap team and that's why a SnT didn't happen.

Trying to make sense of it since it's hard for me to imagine that BOTH the Dallas and NY front offices would be obtuse enough to BOTH miss out on a pure win win situation if there truly was no other benefit to NY not doing one.

[F Gump]

JMac, yes this is a case of operating one way or the other for NY. All the advantages flow to the team operating over the cap. For NY, getting Brunson via SNT would enable them to do that, while still getting the free agent(s) they had cleared cap room to get -- plus pick up some side opportunities, that they would perhaps put to good use.

[Jmaciscool]

JMac, yes this is a case of operating one way or the other for NY. All the advantages flow to the team operating over the cap. For NY, getting Brunson via SNT would enable them to do that, while still getting the free agent(s) they had cleared cap room to get -- plus pick up some side opportunities, that they would perhaps put to good use.

Thanks for the info - is there ever a situation where it is more advantageous to operate as an under the cap team? Or is it always more advantageous to be over the cap?

(From my limited understanding and what you describe above it sounds like there never would be but wanted to make sure I'm understanding correctly)

[F Gump]

Thanks for the info - is there ever a situation where it is more advantageous to operate as an under the cap team? Or is it always more advantageous to be over the cap?

(From my limited understanding and what you describe above it sounds like there never would be but wanted to make sure I'm understanding correctly)

Being under the cap means your payroll will be lower, saving some cash.

Being under the cap gives you a chance to sign a free agent for more than the big MLE, whereas you can't do that if you are over (except with the cooperation of the old team).

But if you are over the cap, and can still get the same player(s), there is far more opportunity to build out the roster with players you prefer. Bigger exceptions, trade exceptions, those are tools not available to the under-cap team.

[F Gump]

Nothing but respect in there. Just disagreement with your opinion.

You then responded with condescending snark and sarcasm. I pointed that out. And I should have not said my "smartest man in the room" comment. That was not ultimately a kind comment. That's my bad. Sorry for that.

The snark/or whatever was by simply underlining the conflict between assertions that the Mavs are incapable of accomplishing this or that tasks that front offices need to be experts at, but at the same time can do no wrong.

Thank you for the apology. Let's let that go.

My summary: When the benefit costs nothing in tax or salary, doesn't change the transaction (all the same players going same places), and having it won't get in the way of anything they can possibly want to do later, then I don't see any way to paint failing to do it (or be able to do it) as a plus. I really do expect excellence by the front office, even at the margins, for a team that wants to rise above the competition.

[cow]

 I really do expect excellence by the front office, even at the margins, for a team that wants to rise above the competition.

[Kammrath]

https://twitter.com/TommyBeer/status/154...1401963524

[Kammrath]

It's over. It's finally over. The drama is done. Praise the Lord.

[omahen]

In the end it was all about the money. Mavs don't want to pay for the team...

[omahen]

To explain the thought. Mavs knew Brunson wants to go. Mavs should know NY can easily create cap space. So basically they had two options:

A: lose Brunson for nothing
B: take Kemba, Burks, Noel (all three expiring) for 2023 FRP and two SRP

They would get three expiring contracts they could trade, cut or use and draft assets. This move has absolutely zero impact on any further moves they might make. It would just increase the assets to make it actually happen. Obviously they value money more.

[Tyler]

It's over. It's finally over. The drama is done. Praise the Lord.

The S&T possibilities aren't over until Brunson signs. It's only the large 3-team deals that have sailed. For example, Dallas could still pay NY to take Brunson in a S&T into all of that space (while sending a big TPE back with no extra salary) by removing the conditions on the 23 pick. That's similar to what Charlotte and Boston did when Charlotte signed away Hayward. And it could still benefit both teams.

I'll believe it when I see it, though.

[Mavs2021]

To explain the thought. Mavs knew Brunson wants to go. Mavs should know NY can easily create cap space. So basically they had two options:

A: lose Brunson for nothing
B: take Kemba, Burks, Noel (all three expiring) for 2023 FRP and two SRP

They would get three expiring contracts they could trade, cut or use and draft assets. This move has absolutely zero impact on any further moves they might make. It would just increase the assets to make it actually happen. Obviously they value money more.

I have more bad news for you. I sense some of the same loyalty gene in Luka that Dirk has. You might have to suffer from this for far longer than another two years.

[Kammrath]

To explain the thought. Mavs knew Brunson wants to go. Mavs should know NY can easily create cap space. So basically they had two options:

A: lose Brunson for nothing
B: take Kemba, Burks, Noel (all three expiring) for 2023 FRP and two SRP

They would get three expiring contracts they could trade, cut or use and draft assets. This move has absolutely zero impact on any further moves they might make. It would just increase the assets to make it actually happen. Obviously they value money more.

But to absorb those three players they would have to cut two guys on the current roster. So you lose those players/assets and you are straddled with three contracts that nobody in the league wants. So to trade those three guys you would have to use assets to dump them. 

Also could the Mavs really have salary-matched such a SnT with those three guys with Brunson as a base year guy? 

I could see the Mavs not thinking those three guys are worth the 2023 1st, especially if that would limit other trade options this summer. 


My biggest stance on this summer:

We need to wait and see if any trades unfold before training camp before making judgments on the Mavs decisions. Only then will we have the proper data and hindsight to be able to assess the Mavs decisions with JB, etc.