MAVS NEWS:

[Winter]

I understand where you're coming from. 

I think I'm more hopeful that "plan B" can be better than stagnant than you, but it's all hypothetical at this point, no matter what we expect. 

I'm also ok with your "plan A," but only if it's the right two players and the right two picks. I suppose there's a decent chance for disagreement over the details, but I'm reasonably comfortable with the lines as you've drawn them. 

Where I disagree is the "shot-sighted" comment. To me, the short-sighted move would be "get AD out of here for the best deal possible, whatever that might be." For context, I'll refer you to the Porzingis situation of a few years ago. There are some posters I respect who were livid about that trade for Dinwiddie/Bertans, but I was thrilled, and would do it again 100/100 times. Why? Because even when healthy, Porzingis was, imo, making the team worse while on the court. It was beyond clear that he and Luka weren't a fit (later we found out why), and defensively, I just couldn't take it anymore. I'm sure you could have found stats that seemed to show he was a positive, and in fact I seem to recall that people did, but I remember wondering how anyone could watch those games and not reach the conclusion that Porzingis was holding that team back in multiple ways. And, whether the trade was good value or not, Diniwiddie ended up adding quite a bit (that first stint, at least), and that trade was one of the reasons the team made it to the Conference Finals, imho. 

So, what's the difference between that situation and this one with AD? Simple. When AD is healthy enough to play, the team is actually better. Significantly better, in fact. I think he's a DREAM of a fit with Flagg, and the injury concerns are literally the only reason I'd even consider shopping him. There is no "addition by subtraction" element to this scenario, as there clearly was with Porzingis. For me, that means you'd have to get a very good offer to move him or you're stupid. I think (hope) any GM would see it that way, personally.

That's reasonable, but I still feel (and I expect a new GM will as well) that we are truly screwed without more draft capital in the next few years. 

There are a few ways to solve that even with Plan B, but it's hard for me to imagine a scenario where "standing pat" is part of our three-year plan.

Good discussion though.