Trade & FA 2023-24: Sexton On the Market? | ORL Likes Hartenstein?

[KillerLeft]

 
Duly noted.

Let me add - my major area of disagreement with your thoughts is that that I think you completely fail to credit the importance of Gafford to both the Mavs in general, and also to Lively. I'm seeing a Mavs team that overall is now turning games into a war, and wear down the opponent. Even one as big as Minny. It's a different style but one in which the net effect works in the playoffs (think Miami, as a good example), where there are fewer whistles, and it also complements Luka's ability to be a physical force on offense and consistently create half-court offense when games are in grind-it-out mode.

Gafford is more physical than Lively, which you see as a negative, but I think that it instead is a positive, and not just while Gafford is on the floor but for the full 48 minutes. The physicality of Gafford, banging on the opponent big men when Lively is not in the game, softens them up. How long have we been wishing for a physical presence? If you take Gafford out of the equation, there is no longer the same 48-minute grind wearing down the other team. What you see as easily dispensible, replaceable, and an unneeded luxury is something I believe is integral to the overall product and priced reasonably.

In addition, I think your mindset that Gafford is somehow holding Lively back is the opposite of the truth. Not only does Gafford's play make Lively's more effective, it also allows Lively to play with more freedom (fouls), with more than enough talent on deck should either have issues with fouls or injury. Minutes can be adjusted as needed. I agree that Lively is the better and more impactful center, but part of what is making him that good is the ability to spell him and help him with Gafford as needed. And Gafford hasn't even been through camp with the team, which is a path to even bigger things for team-player, and is young enough to grow his game as well.

As for where Kleber fits, it's hard to depend on him, but he's a great piece when he's healthy. His versatility is valuable, as a potential change-of-pace center when one might be needed, but also a great solution to spell PJW at PF. But all of that works way better when there is plenty of talent to man C in a strong way without him (which is Gafford, not Powell!). If only he can be healthy.

I guess you missed my write up in the game thread, where I mentioned how well I thought gafford played. I was way wrong about rebounding in game one and said so hours and hours ago. In that context, the post above seems a little mean spirited to me, but I welcome your thoughts anyway because I respect you.

However, where on earth did you get the idea that I see Gafford’s physicality as a negative???? That’s one of my favorite things about him! I think lively is physical, too, and I think maybe even a little bit more so than Gafford in some effective ways, but we can disagree on that.

I actually made the point weeks ago that part of the rationale for starting Gafford might be that he sets devastating screens and might be loosening up the defense some by wearing it down. The concept of him helping Lively become a better player through things like that as well as just general competition is not lost on me at all, I totally agree. I also agree that it’s amazing to have a player like him (have called it a luxury I don’t know how many times in this thread - luxury is a good thing) for insurance against Lively foul trouble or injury. I mentioned that as a possible rationale for him starting weeks ago, too, despite my feeling that Lively has done very well for a rookie in avoiding rookie fouls. 

The only things I have listed as negatives about Gafford, which I believe are factually negatives, and rather undebatable, are that he does not move his feet in space on defense, and he is not good on the short roll when he has to make quick decisions and/or floor the ball! I think I also called him an overrated rebounder, especially on the defensive end, but that one is debatable, I suppose.

I don’t really get why people are reacting the way they are to the conversation from yesterday. I’m not bashing him, I just see what he is, and I am not one of the people who spent the last eight years hoping to God the Mavs could get a player like this on the roster. I see what’s good about him, FOR SURE, but LIVELY Is the type of guy I have been waiting for. 

And sure, having them both helps the team, and to your point helps both players. Believe me, I understand your point about that. But, they still have two centers who both think they should be high minute centers. that’s obviously not a bad thing, but the context of the conversation was finding expendable areas to create more opportunity to spend salary to get BETTER. I personally think Lively could be playing a lot more, and might not need as much help as you think (at this point). 

And whether I am right or wrong about that last point is irrelevant, because all this was about was creating money for DJJ! The second you said you would trade Green instead, the conversation was over in my book. I think I might agree with that.