PRESEASON GAME 1: DAL @ OKC | 98-96 win

[ItsGoTime]

Your take is a nightmare scenario - unless the Wood experiment turns into absolute crap. Even then I wouldn't say we need Powell - we need a competent 4/5 to replace him.

I think what would be great is to find Maxi's replacement to replace Powell. Some type of salary relief deal that gets us a younger Maxi as the tip. We can find McGee types every year at his price or lower.

[KillerLeft]

That leaves us with Wood/Kleber lineups as the only viable solution.
Making Maxi the most important big on the roster. In that sense I don´t think the Mavs have added flexibility. The pieces aren´t interchangeable and they are still heavily relying on Maxi. Can only hope that he stays healthy.

This is different than the point I've been making, but I think it's a really good one. 

No matter how you slice it, the Mavs are still in a position where the full complement of factors make Kleber so far and away their most important big it's ridiculous. Literally every other option comes with some significant issues on one end or both. He's the only one who we know can contribute successfully in a shortened playoff rotation against a real team.

[mvossman]

Just to clarify a couple of things. The best defensive stretch of the season was in january when KP missed half of the month. Problem was the usual wear and tear that comes with smaller lineups. Wouldn´t be suprised if that was the time were they made the final decision to move him. Overall the Mavs defense was on pace to be better without KP but in the last 10-15 games they ran out of steam.  Maxi missed a lot of games. DFS and Bullock looked tired. Luka was his usual lazy self. If the idea is to have McGee as a guy that can take a beating and reduces the load of key guys I wouldn´t be as concerned.

My biggest concern is the amount of available minutes. Personally I just don´t see any way to pair the Wood, Powell and McGee with each other. I don´t see any scenario where more than one of them can be on the floor.
If Wood shares the floor with Powell or McGee we will have the KP scenario of the past. Next to a non shooting big he probably ends up as a glorified floor spacer and with his questionable defense that´s not worth it. If Wood is on the floor he needs to be featured on offense.
As @"DanSchwartzgan" pointed out having Wood as the single big isn´t a good idea either. That leaves us with Wood/Kleber lineups as the only viable solution.
Making Maxi the most important big on the roster. In that sense I don´t think the Mavs have added flexibility. The pieces aren´t interchangeable and they are still heavily relying on Maxi. Can only hope that he stays healthy.

I'm not convinced the McGee/Wood combo will be as bad as you suggest, but lets assume it is for the moment.  We still have the option of McGee/Powell/Wood as single big when Maxi is not on the court.  That is more options than we had last season.  

I agree that Maxi is our most important big and I would have loved to get another player like him in the offseason.  I just don't think we had the assets to do it.  The next best thing would be to get somebody who can take on some of the regular season wear and tear as you mention so that Maxi can stay fresh and healthy for when we need him.  I think one of the reasons we made it to the WCF was because Maxi was out the last week or two and fully rested when the playoffs started.

[DallasMaverick]

This is also something. After Losing KP, the Mavs had Powell and Kleber (well, Boban and Chriss if you want to count them) and Powell wasn't getting many minutes. Our defense (as pointed out by @"mvossman") dropped significantly and we all know Kidd wants to win starting with defense. 

Those two got dominated by Looney who isn't all that integral to what the Warriors do as evidenced by his minutes and production in all the other playoff series they played last year (meaning he isn't the guy you're describing on an every game basis). He did so well against us cause we are one of the smallest teams in the league after KP left (and one of the slowest). He's an option to spell Green when the other team has big bigs like Jokic, Adams and Horford. That's what he does for them when he's not dominating the Mavs bigs.

Last year, Utah was who Utah has been in the playoffs and I think that's because Gobert isn't the FORCE he needs to be in the paint, he's like our bigs in that they can't push players around and control what happens in THEIR lane but Gobert is required to be out there due to his contract and status. Phoenix was a shocker on the level of 2011 Mavs playoff run IMO. It did, however, put into question how good is Ayton really? He didn't seem to control the paint like I thought he would, and he is required to be out there due to his status. Those two examples are reasons to agree with what you're saying, but we still have to employ the bigs that can take on the bigger guys of the NBA, just like LAC and GSW have and what TOR is trying to get.

You have to take the good with the bad when you're a beggar. Hopefully next year we can be choosers.

Picking one nit:

I think most NBA teams make decisions in two different realms:  (1) Contract negotiations, and (2) Playing time.

Front-office people are primarily involved in realm 1, although coaches have a fair amount of input, particularly when it comes to assembling the right set of skills.

Coaches are primarily involved in realm 2, although front offices might have some small amount of input as well.

When coaches want to win a game, I don't really think they consider how much a player is making.  It's irrelevant to achieving their primary goal.

[Scott41theMavs]

Picking one nit:

I think most NBA teams make decisions in two different realms:  (1) Contract negotiations, and (2) Playing time.

Front-office people are primarily involved in realm 1, although coaches have a fair amount of input, particularly when it comes to assembling the right set of skills.

Coaches are primarily involved in realm 2, although front offices might have some small amount of input as well.

When coaches want to win a game, I don't really think they consider how much a player is making.  It's irrelevant to achieving their primary goal.

...except in terms of losing a player, or even the whole locker room. I do think that the hierarchy of pay plays out in a locker room. Monta was butthurt at how much Chandlers Parsons was making in comparison to him when Monta was the clear pseudo-Robin to Dirk at that point. 

I think the fact that the Mavs' locker room tolerates Powell's ludicrous salary must speak volumes about what a likeable and respect-worthy dude he must be. He certainly comes nowhere near deserving it in basketball terms.

[michaeltex]

I'm not convinced the McGee/Wood combo will be as bad as you suggest, but lets assume it is for the moment.  We still have the option of McGee/Powell/Wood as single big when Maxi is not on the court.  That is more options than we had last season.  

I agree that Maxi is our most important big and I would have loved to get another player like him in the offseason.  I just don't think we had the assets to do it.  The next best thing would be to get somebody who can take on some of the regular season wear and tear as you mention so that Maxi can stay fresh and healthy for when we need him.  I think one of the reasons we made it to the WCF was because Maxi was out the last week or two and fully rested when the playoffs started.

Thus the validation for Maxi's contract extension.

[KillerLeft]

When coaches want to win a game, I don't really think they consider how much a player is making.  It's irrelevant to achieving their primary goal.

I think this is true, in a sense. 

However, if that coach is "deciding" to sit their highest paid players during crucial stretches too often, they'll soon have problems in the locker room and probably with the front office decision makers, too, since they clearly won't be playing the team in the way the GM intended. That's politically generated pressure from multiple directions, and it calls into question the reality of what a coach's authority actually is. 

The best teams, of course, are the ones with good communication and synergy between the two "realms" you describe. 

Example: I used to marvel at folks around here who would roast Carlisle for leaning so heavily on Jason Terry, as if he simply agreed to coach in Dallas, then examined his roster and finally decided how to approach the team. The reality is that some version of "How would you design an offense around our cornerstone players, Dirk and JET" doubtlessly came up during the interview/decision process while the job was open. Ditto for Josh Howard, who was going through some trouble at the time and whose quality of play was diminishing rapidly. That's why Carlisle had a couple of meetings with Howard right away - because part of his mandate was some version of "we've got to get Howard balling again." Later, all involved decided this was a lost cause and traded Howard to Washington.

Another example: the entire world knew KP wasn't working in Dallas. going into last summer. It's difficult for me to imagine how it could have been more obvious. But, Kidd wasted the better part of a season trying like hell to make it work. Why? Was it because he thought he could? If so, he was way wrong. But I suspect the real answer is that it was a HUGE topic of conversation between the Mavs and potential coaching hires..."how can we get Luka and Porzingis playing well together?"

An extreme and public example of this is playing out right now in LA, where a coach was literally just fired for mishandling Westbrook despite being as justified as possible to sit his ass. He doesn't fit there at all, but rather than admit that they put together a dumb roster, they scapegoated the coach and now you hear nothing but praise for Westbrook coming from the new coach who knows in no uncertain terms what management expects him to do.

[KillerLeft]

Thus the validation for Maxi's contract extension.

One of the best decisions they've made in quite some time.

[cow]

One of the best decisions they've made in quite some time.