(12-02-2019, 04:17 PM)vfromlmf Wrote:Did not intend to overstate your position. I thought you wanted to make significant moves because it seemed to me that it would take more than one or two moderate upgrades to put together a championship roster this season. Maybe you see it differently.(12-02-2019, 04:12 PM)mavsluvr Wrote: 1. If you think the Mavs are already a championship defender, why do you want to make a bunch of trades?
Who says I want to make a bunch of trades? I said this team is a contender and the focus should now shift to matchups. The Mavs match up well with the Lakers. If the BT thinks they need to add a piece to match up with the Clippers then I do think they should make a move so they can go compete for a title.
(12-02-2019, 04:12 PM)mavsluvr Wrote: The Mavs don't have a history of abandoning their plans and going in a different direction
I'd argue they made the move to get Porzingis precisely because they believed Doncic changed the trajectory of the franchise.
(12-02-2019, 04:12 PM)mavsluvr Wrote: Perhaps more importantly, what assets do the Mavs have to trade for all these transformative players?
Again, I didn't say "all these transformative players". I suggested a move to match up with the Clippers.
The Mavs have a $12 million exception, expiring deals, a young & efficient recent lottery pick (Jackson), Brunson, GSW 2nd, future 1st, and most importantly the Mavs have imagination and motivation.
I don't see any team with a player who can score and lock down Kawhi as being eager to trade said player for any or all of those assets.
These assets just aren't that great.
The trade exception requires finding a trade partner who needs to unload a player the Mavs want within the one-year expiration date. The vast majority of trade exceptions expire unused. I can see the Mavs finding someone who is not a game-changer, at best, since it has to be used in-season. Or maybe you have someone in mind.
The is Jackson's fourth year in the league. He has never made it off the bench in Sacramento or Dallas. Brunson was a second-round pick. Neither of them has a consistent place in the rotation.
Those picks aren't anything special. We would likely have to add sweeteners to unload the expiring deals.
I don't like to be a negative Nancy. I like our guys, just as you do. I just think it is unrealistic to think any other team is going to want to trade a starting-quality two-way guy for them. And if one is not available, it doesn't make sense to just rearrange a few deck chairs during the season if you want to contend with a bunch of youngsters.
Agree that the Mavs are imaginative and motivated, and I am sure they could make creative use of the salary cap rules, but that doesn't make their assets any more valuable than they are.
Of course, this is all theoretical, so I guess it doesn't hurt to imagine scenarios. Do you have a realistic possibility in mind? We could consider that, if so. If you're engaged in happily fan-tasizing, then, by all means, dream on! If you turn out to be right, I will celebrate along with you!
P.S. I see that you identified a few possibilities. Maybe Iggy would be available for some kind of manageable price. I haven't dug into the details, but I think his salary is too high to use the trade exception. Not sure why Memphis would want to take on Courtney Lee's or Tim Hardaway's contract at this point in their development cycle, but maybe they have some use for them. I don't know the details on it, but the Grizz weren't able to get any kind of quality asset when they tried to trade him before, so possibly they would be willing to lower their expectations now. (Believe they wanted a high draft pick or valuable young player, iirc.) He is old at this point, but he is, or at least used to be, a big-time player. The chances of winning the title are low this season, with or without him, but he might help.