(08-23-2023, 02:15 PM)michaeltex Wrote: Stupid question here...

IF they can waive this year + Stretch waive next year (didn't know it was possible, thanks for the education!), are they locked into a simple waive for this year or can they change it to a SW later if the extra cap space is needed?

(08-23-2023, 07:27 PM)F Gump Wrote: Deadline for payroll stretch for this season on a waiver is Sep 1.

Once designated, the stretch will apply to this season and all that follow.

Miss the deadline for this season and this season can't be stretched. But next season's can, any time before Sep 1 of next season. Again, once designated, the stretch will apply to that season and all that follow (if any).

Hope that helps.

(08-23-2023, 10:08 PM)DallasMaverick Wrote: Sure feels like they have something specific lined up, if indeed the report that he’s being S/W this year. Otherwise they’d just keep him, or waive.

(08-23-2023, 10:54 AM)mvossman Wrote: Given that the difference between paying the most we can and avoiding tax is only 6-7 million, and there are significant penalties for repeater tax I can live with it.  I mean if the only decision regarding avoiding tax is to stretch waive McGee, then I have no problem with it.

(08-23-2023, 10:08 PM)DallasMaverick Wrote: Sure feels like they have something specific lined up, if indeed the report that he’s being S/W this year. Otherwise they’d just keep him, or waive.

(08-24-2023, 03:33 AM)surfpuckmd Wrote: There's no benefit to announcing the McGee stretch waive prior to announcing a trade to justify it.  If the Mavericks do anticipate a trade, they should have waited to tell the world about the McGee stretch.  Otherwise, it simply hurts our leverage. 

I think this is likely Mark Cuban buying magic beans again and proudly displaying them to the world.  Only he's traded one of them already for a turd (Markieff Morris).

(08-24-2023, 03:23 AM)surfpuckmd Wrote: I believe the serious penalties only occur when above the 2nd apron.  We are nowhere near that.  Paying the luxury tax would only affect Mark Cuban's personal take from the Mavericks.  There would be no restrictions on player acquisitions/movement by moving into the luxury tax.

(08-24-2023, 11:53 AM)Ghost of Podkolzin Wrote: In S/W'ing McGee, can his contract be traded?

(08-24-2023, 03:03 PM)surfpuckmd Wrote: No.  

That's one of the reasons this is a losing move.  

That contract may have had some value next summer for salary matching.  Now it does not.

It also defers part of McGee's salary over an additional three years.  Those future years will presumably also include big salary increases to retain Josh Green and Jaden Hardy.  This will potentially affect other player acquisitions for the next four off-seasons.  

There would be more logic to just waiving this season's salary then stretch waiving his last year's salary next off-season.  Instead, they've apparently chosen to stretch waive this summer.  

There is no upside to this move.  They could have simply asked McGee to stay at home for two years or negotiated a buyout.

This remains a good season of progress overall but this particular move is peculiar and full of nonsense.

(08-24-2023, 03:27 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: ...unless there's a reason the extra room (under the tax line) is needed. 

As cheap as I sometimes think Cuban is becoming, I can't imagine he'd put the team through this hardship for two extra years just to save a few million dollars immediately. I can see him making that choice if it's the difference between paying the tax and not paying it, but that isn't the case here. I think the obvious conclusion to draw is that either they have another move in mind for the near future that will bring in more money than they send out, or at the very least they're hoping to find such a move and wanted to give themselves the option. And honestly, I think it's kind of most likely that it's the former, not the latter.

(08-24-2023, 04:09 PM)surfpuckmd Wrote: Maybe so.

I think it's more likely though that someone on the Mavericks just insisted that Javale no longer be a Maverick.  I think the Mavs have a history of breaking up badly with players and I don't think that is typical in the NBA.  I am concerned that they tend to scapegoat certain players publicly.  This off-season it's been Christian Wood and Javale McGee.   It didn't work out with Javale but he was a useful rotation player on multiple winning teams prior to coming here as a free agent.  I don't see the advantage of the Mavericks publicly shaming him all summer.   Even more concerning, I don't like how they released to the media that they wanted to trade Tim Hardaway Jr.  That guy has certainly not been the problem with the Mavericks over the past few years.  Mark Cuban has aimed to be a player-friendly owner throughout his reign.   However, the Mavs often don't treat their players with much respect.

I think the other reason they're stretch-waiving McGee is because they wanted a tough guy on the team.  I think Cuban likes the idea of having a player on the Mavericks who is reckless with a history of violence.  Markieff Morris has that reputation and I think Mark wants him on the bench as a threat to retaliate for anyone taking cheap shots at Luka.  Markieff Morris the basketball player has declined but his reputation as a brawler remains.  

I think these moves are pure Mark Cuban because these are the kind of moves that we were making prior to Nico and Dennis Lindsay.  

These moves probably won't have much effect on our team this season but they were unnecessary and overall a small step backward.  It's just discouraging because this off-season was the best we have had in a long time.

(08-24-2023, 03:27 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: ...unless there's a reason the extra room (under the tax line) is needed. 

As cheap as I sometimes think Cuban is becoming, I can't imagine he'd put the team through this hardship for two extra years just to save a few million dollars immediately. I can see him making that choice if it's the difference between paying the tax and not paying it, but that isn't the case here. I think the obvious conclusion to draw is that either they have another move in mind for the near future that will bring in more money than they send out, or at the very least they're hoping to find such a move and wanted to give themselves the option. And honestly, I think it's kind of most likely that it's the former, not the latter.

(08-24-2023, 04:29 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: All I’m saying is that a stretch-waive, ANY stretch-waive, is quite atypical of the Mavs during the Cuban era. It’s really not like him to make the team less flexible for no reason. Heck, it’s not like him to make the team less flexible for a GOOD reason, lately. 

Maybe this is about McGee being ultra-undesirable, as you suggest, but it just feels like we’d have heard SOMETHING during the season if he had been that hated.

(08-24-2023, 03:27 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: ...unless there's a reason the extra room (under the tax line) is needed. 

As cheap as I sometimes think Cuban is becoming, I can't imagine he'd put the team through this hardship for two extra years just to save a few million dollars immediately.

(08-25-2023, 12:06 AM)F Gump Wrote: To keep the record straight....

This would not be about Cuban's pocket. Cuban doesn't save a penny by stretching the cap hit. The payment stays the same either way. The only diff is in the cap accounting.

(08-25-2023, 12:06 AM)F Gump Wrote: Cuban doesn't save a penny by stretching the cap hit. The payment stays the same either way. The only diff is in the cap accounting.

(08-25-2023, 05:22 AM)surfpuckmd Wrote: Dante Exum looked good against Finland.  Giddey got into foul trouble in the third and Exum took over at point and seemed capable.  He was able to get to the rim multiple times.  He hit both his threes and the form looked nice.  He scored 10 points on 5 shots.   Had a nice assist on a drive and dish.  He might serve as our emergency third point guard.  I think he’ll be in our rotation and we’ll be grateful to have a team option on him next offseason.