Only Fantasy Traders in the Building (The Mitchell Case)

[ItsGoTime]

What do you gain by moving them? It helps Cuban pay less payroll, but doesn't put a better team on the court. And you don't get any actual cap room just by getting rid of those 3.

Is it stripping the team down? That is the question. We can move on once that is answered.

[F Gump]

Is it stripping the team down? That is the question. We can move on once that is answered.

You want to nitpick and do a semantics debate? No thanks.

I see no value in adding Westbrook. He doesn't help this season (probably even is a step backwards), and nothing gained for later that's really helpful. Count me out.

[ItsGoTime]

You want to nitpick and do a semantics debate? No thanks.

I see no value in adding Westbrook. He doesn't help this season (probably even is a step backwards), and nothing gained for later that's really helpful. Count me out.

Honestly, that is exactly how I thought you’d respond. The point was, once we can move past the hyperbole in your post and come to a more common ground, we can then discuss the merits of the trade. But if every response is gonna be met with hyperbole read into what I type, and more hyperbole out of your, it’s not worth my time.

[DanSchwartzgan]

Newsflash, Powell/THJ/Bertans is absolutely not stripping the team down.

FG can defend himself, but I think too much attention is being paid to the phrase "stripping down".  There were more elements to his argument than just that.

First of all, those three players don't get it done in terms of a salary match.  So, it is a four for one deal and we have to go out into a depleted market to replace all those bodies.

Second, Westbrook is a culture-killer whose ego and inefficient game would crush any chance we have to compete in 22/23.

Third, there are no good FA's next summer.  So, why bother

Fourth, you've relegated yourself to a single path of talent acquisition.  Without all those salaries you can't trade for a star in a salary matched deal at the TDL without sending out guys you'd like to keep.  Stripping down isn't necessarily about the guys going out in the Westbrook deal.  It is that you have nothing else to trade once you've done that.

The trend is stars moving via trade.  The best free agents are extended before they ever reach the market.  What is left restricted players not good enough to get extended, old dudes and players who fall victim to the extension limitations.  Many in that last group will stay with their team the next summer and the ones who are a threat to leave tend to get traded before the summer arrives (yes, I realize that wasn't our recent experience).  If the argument is we should trade Powell for Gary Harris because his contract gives us options now and later, I'm in.  I'd be all for trading Hardaway for an equivalent player on a shorter deal.  But, I don't want any part of Westbrook.

[ItsGoTime]

FG can defend himself, but I think too much attention is being paid to the phrase "stripping down".  There were more elements to his argument than just that.

I’ve stated my reasons for interacting with FG. You hardly ever resort to hyperbole and don’t read it into people’s posts, so I don’t mind discussing the pros and cons of anything.

First of all, those three players don't get it done in terms of a salary match.  So, it is a four for one deal and we have to go out into a depleted market to replace all those bodies.

ESPN Trademachine and Fanspo both find the 3 for 1 successful. If you say it takes more than that, I believe you more than those machines. Adding a 4th salary for sure is something else to consider as a con and is not insignificant. As far as on court play, the only real loss is THJ (IF he can get back to the player he was under RC) so anything left out there we can get (pickins are for sure slim, I just disagree that their impact on winning would be much less, if at all, than our outgoing). Mind you, I haven’t come to a conclusion as to whether or not I’d do the deal, I think the pros and cons exercise would help to that end.

Second, Westbrook is a culture-killer whose ego and inefficient game would crush any chance we have to compete in 22/23.

Absolutely the biggest con of them all. My thought of RW on the team if it were to happen is to give him the 3rd ball handler role off the bench, but he’s that microwave scorer/distributor that more than makes up for THJ’s perceived loss in scoring (remember THJ is slotted to come off the bench where he hasn’t played as well).

As far as culture killer? Maybe, I’m not sure he has the clout anymore to do much to a team. If it gets bad? Send him home. Stackhouse was once viewed this way too. If the Laker experience hasn’t knocked some sense into him, for sure there is no hope. His own ex-agent is flaming him, time for some introspection.

As far as chance to compete? It depends on what you think competing means. Championship? Was never gonna happen anyway. WCF berth, was highly unlikely either. Win a 1st round matchup? I don’t see the trade making that unrealistic.

Third, there are no good FA's next summer.  So, why bother

There are good FA every year, depends on how high up the totem pole you’re looking. We’ve also seen other teams use capspace for more than FA. Get creative with it, use it to punt to 24 while collecting draft assets, use it to outbid teams with only a TPE to spend, use it for any number of other uses.

Fourth, you've relegated yourself to a single path of talent acquisition.  Without all those salaries you can't trade for a star in a salary matched deal at the TDL without sending out guys you'd like to keep.  Stripping down isn't necessarily about the guys going out in the Westbrook deal.  It is that you have nothing else to trade once you've done that.

If the goal is to get a disgruntled star, I’d propose one or some of our guys we would want to keep is a part of the cost. This option only comes available next offseason too. How much better is using mostly capspace and a few smaller contracts along with picks to get a Murray type deal? I think SA would have preferred that to what they got for Murray. The only limit to what can be done is a person’s creativity. DS, you are plenty creative to know this.

The trend is stars moving via trade.  The best free agents are extended before they ever reach the market.  What is left restricted players not good enough to get extended, old dudes and players who fall victim to the extension limitations.  Many in that last group will stay with their team the next summer and the ones who are a threat to leave tend to get traded before the summer arrives (yes, I realize that wasn't our recent experience).  If the argument is we should trade Powell for Gary Harris because his contract gives us options now and later, I'm in.  I'd be all for trading Hardaway for an equivalent player on a shorter deal.  But, I don't want any part of Westbrook.

My 2 goals in this is not to argue FOR a trade, it’s to open up dialogue to the possibility that IF the Mavs make a trade like this, it could work out in our favor. A ”strip down” of the team could be a good thing (could also be a bad thing), but making this trade doesn’t mean we’re stripping down the team.


The other goal is an attempt to compile a pros and cons list.

In all, as far as how realistic it is that MC ok’s a trade for RW after what he’s said about him on social media and in the press? Chances are slim to none.

[DanSchwartzgan]

Well, you would have been right to believe the Trade Machine's on this one.  Was doing math in my head and just flat out forgot to carry the 1 early on a Saturday morning.

[KillerLeft]

I think the "stripping down" part happens when you have to say goodbye to people like Bullock, Dinwiddie, and Green or you have to renounce cap holds for Wood and/or Kleber. The "stripping down" would happen at the trade deadline and/or next summer. BUT, I feel like it could probably be done without losing all of them and I vehemently disagree with the "no good free agents" part. The list is WAY better in '23 than it is in '24. It's not remotely close, imho. 

However, I'm absolutely in agreement with the idea that "clear the space and hope" is not a viable team building method. I think teams were willing to do that for Giannis (didn't work), but Dallas has too much going for them right now to just give it all up for a chance. I certainly hope that if they ever go the cap space route again, they'll be doing so because they've 'tampered' and have some idea that a specific player or group of players wants to come here to play with Luka. 

Look, I brought up the topic to begin with because with the exception of the trade to dump Porzingis, when they kind of had no choice, they just keep targeting players with only 1 year left on their deals. That might be behind them, and it might be coincidence in Wood's case, but IDK. I'm just asking myself: was Wood the best player out there they could afford, or was he the best player out there on the last year of his deal? Was he chosen because they believe he's the missing piece, or because he represents a way to get way out of the luxury tax, or maybe even as a route to cap space? It's easy to make assumptions based on our own personal biases, but those assumptions have been wrong before, up to and including things that happened this very summer.  

It's just something I'm keeping my eye on. If THJ, Bertans, Green or worse - Dinwiddie or Bullock is moved this summer or at the deadline for any player on the last year of their deal my radar will be up. To me, that will either mean they're thinking cap space in the near future or they simply want to reduce payroll. I know which one would make me angrier. 

[mvossman]

Yes, really as I can easily leverage the same criticisms about our current modus operandi.  The MBT have failed spectacularly in just about every facet.  Nico and Kidd have never hard cap room to recruit free agents.  You have to give them a shot at some point.  And our disagreements on method aside, there is no correct answer.  I disagree with calling it a shortcut too.  The shortcut was the KP trade.  The shortcut is trading away every FRP/SRP as soon as it is available to us.  

Nico and Kidd had over 30 mil in cap room last offseason.  They chose not to use it and re sign Timmy and WCS and sign Bullock, Brown and Boban with exceptions.  You can make the argument that they did not have a lot of time on the job, but they have had that opportunity.

[ItsGoTime]

However, I'm absolutely in agreement with the idea that "clear the space and hope" is not a viable team building method. I think teams were willing to do that for Giannis (didn't work), but Dallas has too much going for them right now to just give it all up for a chance. I certainly hope that if they ever go the cap space route again, they'll be doing so because they've 'tampered' and have some idea that a specific player or group of players wants to come here to play with Luka. 

This is true IF they keep the same old boring way they used powder in the past (HEY, maaaaybeeee it’ll work this time!!!). There are more ways to use that capspace than signing a FA. Those ways are also not limited to my creativity used in my post.

[mvossman]

FG can defend himself, but I think too much attention is being paid to the phrase "stripping down".  There were more elements to his argument than just that.

First of all, those three players don't get it done in terms of a salary match.  So, it is a four for one deal and we have to go out into a depleted market to replace all those bodies.

Second, Westbrook is a culture-killer whose ego and inefficient game would crush any chance we have to compete in 22/23.

Third, there are no good FA's next summer.  So, why bother

Fourth, you've relegated yourself to a single path of talent acquisition.  Without all those salaries you can't trade for a star in a salary matched deal at the TDL without sending out guys you'd like to keep.  Stripping down isn't necessarily about the guys going out in the Westbrook deal.  It is that you have nothing else to trade once you've done that.

The trend is stars moving via trade.  The best free agents are extended before they ever reach the market.  What is left restricted players not good enough to get extended, old dudes and players who fall victim to the extension limitations.  Many in that last group will stay with their team the next summer and the ones who are a threat to leave tend to get traded before the summer arrives (yes, I realize that wasn't our recent experience).  If the argument is we should trade Powell for Gary Harris because his contract gives us options now and later, I'm in.  I'd be all for trading Hardaway for an equivalent player on a shorter deal.  But, I don't want any part of Westbrook.

I think stripping the team of trade ballast is a really good point.  It makes it much harder to make a trade and it makes it much harder to be significantly over the cap (which will be necessary to have enough talent to compete).  

I think Cow asked the question what does this FO do well?  The answer is clearly not in free agency, which has been epic failure.  This franchise success has been built on two things, Donnie's ability to find a generational European talent every 10 years (Cuban ignored him for Giannis) and Cuban's willingness to make many trades until somethings hits and pay for his mistakes.  Unfortunately Donnie is gone and the CBA plus Cuban's frugalness has made paying for mistakes less of an option.

In my mind the best option is the trade route.  We have not had one single big success story in free agency ever, and as extensions become more and more frequent, it becomes less and less likely this changes.  We have made some terrible trades in the past, but also some great ones.  There is no way we should have been able to get Luka from the 5 spot.  That was one of the greatest trades in recent NBA history.

[KillerLeft]

There are more ways to use that capspace than signing a FA. Those ways are also not limited to my creativity used in my post.

Agree, BUT...

1) I can maybe get behind the idea that as Luka matures and Harrison wraps his head around the job, that duo will eventually represent improvement over the Donnie years when it comes to convincing players they want to be here in Dallas. That, to me, tracks, as Luka WILL be the main "draw" in the NBA at some point when he's older and Harrison's strength does seem to be his relationships. 

sidebar: those notes should help in the ways you're referring to, as well, however: 

2) I've pretty much lost any faith in the idea that Mavs will ever use cap space in the creative ways you're talking about. I flatly wonder if they have that skillset at all, and think the failure to capitalize on Brunson's departure in even a minor, peripheral way adds more doubt there. The departure of Keith Grant, who we've been led to believe was the mind behind every interesting and advantageous bit of contract creativity for the past 20 years doesn't really instill hope, either, although I suppose it's possible they replace him with someone even better. 

Personally, I hope the next time cap space comes around it will be because Harrison and Luka have tampered their balls off.

[KillerLeft]

I think stripping the team of trade ballast is a really good point.  It makes it much harder to make a trade and it makes it much harder to be significantly over the cap (which will be necessary to have enough talent to compete).  

Right. In my mind, the "trade route" only works from where they are now, in the tax without Brunson, if they're willing to ADD salary just to add it. 

Ask yourself: do we think they're currently searching for deals for Dwight Powell that ADD salary, even for a talent upgrade, or do we think they'd only move his expiring deal for another expiring deal attached to a player who might fit into their plans for the season a little better?

[mvossman]

This is true IF they keep the same old boring way they used powder in the past (HEY, maaaaybeeee it’ll work this time!!!). There are more ways to use that capspace than signing a FA. Those ways are also not limited to my creativity used in my post.

So by using cap space creatively, I assume you are talking about eating some bad salary for picks?  I don't think that kind of move fits our current timeline.  The goal right now is to keep Luka happy and thinking he can win here.  We only have 2 or 3 seasons before this potentially comes to a head.  Its not like we could trade those picks anytime soon because our only useful ballast would be the bad contracts we just ate.

[ItsGoTime]

Agree, BUT...

1) I can maybe get behind the idea that as Luka matures and Harrison wraps his head around the job, that duo will eventually represent improvement over the Donnie years when it comes to convincing players they want to be here in Dallas. That, to me, tracks, as Luka WILL be the main "draw" in the NBA at some point when he's older and Harrison's strength does seem to be his relationships. 

sidebar: those notes should help in the ways you're referring to, as well, however: 

To add to this thought, the last 4 years of MVPs have been non-American, the world has pretty much caught up to AAU in terms of quality. I think currently America still has the quantity, but the Euro bias is going by the wayside. Even if AAU keeps that bias, there’s plenty enough good Euros out there to make a championship team. Luka will AT LEAST draw some of those guys!

2) I've pretty much lost any faith in the idea that Mavs will ever use cap space in the creative ways you're talking about. I flatly wonder if they have that skillset at all, and think the failure to capitalize on Brunson's departure in even a minor, peripheral way adds more doubt there. The departure of Keith Grant, who we've been led to believe was the mind behind every interesting and advantageous bit of contract creativity for the past 20 years doesn't really instill hope, either, although I suppose it's possible they replace him with someone even better. 

Man, my opinion of Grant is pretty far in the other direction from you. We did bring in a replacement for him last year was my understanding. Young guy full of ideas was my takeaway from what I read about his hiring. This will be his first year unhindered by Grant, of course, IMO.

I mean, is Grant not the enabler, if not creator, of plan powder? Execution was more the problem with that plan, but year after year and him not getting them to bite on a different way? Sounds like a creativity problem to me.

Personally, I hope the next time cap space comes around it will be because Harrison and Luka have tampered their balls off.

I do share your reluctance to go plan powder yet again. I just think with so many new voices toward the top, there is a chance that other things can be worked out, much like other organizations are doing.

[ItsGoTime]

So by using cap space creatively, I assume you are talking about eating some bad salary for picks?  I don't think that kind of move fits our current timeline.  The goal right now is to keep Luka happy and thinking he can win here.  We only have 2 or 3 seasons before this potentially comes to a head.  Its not like we could trade those picks anytime soon because our only useful ballast would be the bad contracts we just ate.

Creativity doesn’t narrow down to one thing like you just did. 


Detroit just used capspace to get 3 expiring contracts for a pick swap and 6 seconds. The worse the contract, the better the return. 

SA didn’t worry much about the player contract, they worried about the number of picks. 

OKC has gathered 2 superstars (if not more) worth of picks by being creative.

[Jommybone]

What is this "everything else" to be gained by having WB? Nothing.

It’s not hard to see. Mavs would be “giving up” 3 guys. Losing one of them is a loss. Losing the other 2 is a gain. 

You make sense when you say you don’t want RW. You make sense when you say the option to get under the cap isn’t valuable to you. You don’t make sense when you call sending these 3 guys out the door stripping down the roster.

[Jommybone]

I think the "stripping down" part happens when you have to say goodbye to people like Bullock, Dinwiddie, and Green or you have to renounce cap holds for Wood and/or Kleber. The "stripping down" would happen at the trade deadline and/or next summer.

Exactly. Except that this stripping down next summer would be optional. Hard for me to think having the option is anything but good.

[F Gump]

It’s not hard to see. Mavs would be “giving up” 3 guys. Losing one of them is a loss. Losing the other 2 is a gain. 

You make sense when you say you don’t want RW. You make sense when you say the option to get under the cap isn’t valuable to you. You don’t make sense when you call sending these 3 guys out the door stripping down the roster.

Please stop strawmanning me. I never said "sending these 3 guys out the door [would be] stripping down the roster." I never said trading for RW would, either. That's a fabrication of you and others who have chosen to make this discussion personal.

The proposed plan (which is what I replied to) was to get a top-level free agent, by trading for RW. That plan does require stripping down the roster.

For the plan to work, you need two things, which no one can answer so they circle around to attack the messenger --
(1) to have excellent FA choices that are likely to come to Dallas ...I keep being told "That's not a problem" but no one is giving me 4-5 names that will be out there that the Mavs would want and that could very likely want Dallas, to make it desirable to head down that path. Not a single name, just personal attacks.
... Looking at the list, the 2 best FA choices for Dallas might be Wood and Kleber, and imo the Mavs would be wise to try to extend both and keep them out of the FA mix.
(2) to strip down the roster ... Assuming you keep your players and don't strip down the roster, you don't get any cap room by trading for RW and letting him walk away. None.

I'm also reading the idea that the Mavs could merely do the RW swap and then could go out into free agency, with the rest of the team intact, and add a couple of mid-tier players. Again, no, that isn't an option because you have no cap room.

The fact is that the Mavs are about 42M over the cap. If they did this trade for RW, that number would be even bigger. Then when he walks, his 47M salary is gone, and they will be near or a bit over the cap assuming they want to keep players like Wood and Kleber, and can do so at about the same salary.

So as I pointed out, this plan is predicated on stripping down the roster, as there will be no cap room without stripping the roster of players you really need.

So if you don't really intend to strip down the roster, take that end result out of the equation, and in that light, I think you're way better off to have your smaller pieces than RW for a year, followed by air.

[mvossman]

Creativity doesn’t narrow down to one thing like you just did. 


Detroit just used capspace to get 3 expiring contracts for a pick swap and 6 seconds. The worse the contract, the better the return. 

SA didn’t worry much about the player contract, they worried about the number of picks. 

OKC has gathered 2 superstars (if not more) worth of picks by being creative.

Those are all bad/tanking teams that are doing what they can to take advantage of that.  They don't have a superstar that they are trying to build around and convince to stay on his next contract.  As Gump just pointed out, dumping those three players just gets us to the cap line.  We would have to dump useful players in order to use cap space creatively to get some additional draft capital.  Given that we need to be good soon and have shown no ability to be creative in this area in the past, it does not seem like a very good tradeoff.

[Mavs2021]

Those are all bad/tanking teams that are doing what they can to take advantage of that.  They don't have a superstar that they are trying to build around and convince to stay on his next contract.  As Gump just pointed out, dumping those three players just gets us to the cap line.  We would have to dump useful players in order to use cap space creatively to get some additional draft capital.  Given that we need to be good soon and have shown no ability to be creative in this area in the past, it does not seem like a very good tradeoff.

As opposed to trading three 1st round picks and a couple of 2nds to end up with THJ, Bertans and Dinwiddie. Or trading Crowder + 1st to end up with Powell? Or trading Barnes for Jackson+2nd then not using the capspace it generated. Or trading a 1st for a suicidial drug addict? Or trading a 2nd for a retired podcaster and a scrub. Or trading Curry for Richardson? Or trading four 2nd round picks for the whole Delon Wright experience.

The Mavs haven´t won a trade since 2010, except for a draft day trade, that they would not have needed, if they weren´t completely stupid. And that would not exist, if the Kings weren´t completely stupid.

So what makes trading a more viable strategy than free agency?