Should we give Donnie credit?

[omahen]

And if they find a strong long-term player that makes it worth passing on Giannis earlier than expected

Why are you so convinced that signing a long term contract means passing on Giannis? My take is, IF Giannis express a wish to come here, we will find a way, no matter what contracts we have. Did you see Miami as capable of getting Butler before the season with their huge over the cap roster?

[ItsGoTime]

And if they find a strong long-term player that makes it worth passing on Giannis earlier than expected

Why are you so convinced that signing a long term contract means passing on Giannis? My take is, IF Giannis express a wish to come here, we will find a way, no matter what contracts we have. Did you see Miami as capable of getting Butler before the season with their huge over the cap roster?

GSW using us to get KD. Utah moving Favors to get Bogdanovic. I’m sure there are many other examples. If you sign guys to reasonable contracts, you can move them and get assets. If you make a wrong decision and sign someone to a bloated contract, you attach the extra assets. That’s how other FO’s work, why can’t ours? Getting better players is better.

[reckoner07]

And if they find a strong long-term player that makes it worth passing on Giannis earlier than expected

Why are you so convinced that signing a long term contract means passing on Giannis? My take is, IF Giannis express a wish to come here, we will find a way, no matter what contracts we have. Did you see Miami as capable of getting Butler before the season with their huge over the cap roster?

GSW using us to get KD. Utah moving Favors to get Bogdanovic. I’m sure there are many other examples. If you sign guys to reasonable contracts, you can move them and get assets. If you make a wrong decision and sign someone to a bloated contract, you attach the extra assets. That’s how other FO’s work, why can’t ours? Getting better players is better.

Oh yeah, I see impact players being obtained all the time for packages of role players.   With a team to package almost no draft assets with.

Mavs just signed a bunch of role players past '21, who are valuable, but valuable in a system, alongside an ascending all-time great. There might be an impact guy to be had on a short-term deal with these guys sure... but a quality player locked into a deal past '21, with our assets? Forget about it. And I'm not talking about eating a shit Chris Paul contract, and screwing the team (which the Mavs would never do)...just an expectation of fair market value.

[ItsGoTime]

And if they find a strong long-term player that makes it worth passing on Giannis earlier than expected

Why are you so convinced that signing a long term contract means passing on Giannis? My take is, IF Giannis express a wish to come here, we will find a way, no matter what contracts we have. Did you see Miami as capable of getting Butler before the season with their huge over the cap roster?

GSW using us to get KD. Utah moving Favors to get Bogdanovic. I’m sure there are many other examples. If you sign guys to reasonable contracts, you can move them and get assets. If you make a wrong decision and sign someone to a bloated contract, you attach the extra assets. That’s how other FO’s work, why can’t ours? Getting better players is better.

Oh yeah, I see impact players being obtained all the time for packages of role players.   With a team to package almost no draft assets with.

Mavs just signed a bunch of role players past '21, who are valuable, but valuable in a system, alongside an ascending all-time great. There might be an impact guy to be had on a short-term deal with these guys sure... but a quality player locked into a deal past '21, with our assets? Forget about it. And I'm not talking about eating a shit Chris Paul contract, and screwing the team (which the Mavs would never do)...just an expectation of fair market value.

The discussion is around giving credit for Donnie’s performance in the last off-season. Not about what he can do with the assets he got.


I would contend that an off-season where we didn’t sign Curry, Wright and Boban and instead signed Brogdon and acquired Favors (doesn’t actually have to be these two specific names, just better players) by trading Lee and the Utah and GSW seconds for air (similar to the Favors trade) that our team outlook with Luka’s unprecedented rise would be so much better. Add to that that Green sees the moves and decides he wants to join without wondering about the Kawhi decision and we move THJ with our 2025 first rounder for air to another team and sign him. We then have some exceptions for possible further coat-tail riders.

Better players are just better. 

With the availability of so many better players to add to our roster, players that probably wouldn’t mess with our chemistry, I cannot give credit to Donnie for his performance in the off-season. I’m ecstatic that he was able to scramble yet again after multiple plans fell through and got RC a team that he is able to get to do what they’re doing to this point.

[Mavsfan12]

The discussion is around giving credit for Donnie’s performance in the last off-season. Not about what he can do with the assets he got
I would contend that an off-season where we didn’t sign Curry, Wright and Boban and instead signed Brogdon and acquired Favors (doesn’t actually have to be these two specific names, just better players) by trading Lee and the Utah and GSW seconds for air (similar to the Favors trade) that our team outlook with Luka’s unprecedented rise would be so much better. Add to that that Green sees the moves and decides he wants to join without wondering about the Kawhi decision and we move THJ with our 2025 first rounder for air to another team and sign him. We then have some exceptions for possible further coat-tail riders.

Better players are just better. 

With the availability of so many better players to add to our roster, players that probably wouldn’t mess with our chemistry, I cannot give credit to Donnie for his performance in the off-season. I’m ecstatic that he was able to scramble yet again after multiple plans fell through and got RC a team that he is able to get to do what they’re doing to this point.

I disagree with your initial premise.  It is a good GM who is able to pivot when Plan A or B don't pan out and sometimes that means picking up assets that you can LATER do something with.  To ignore that "potential energy" from the off-season is in and of itself denying him credit.  I am not making a value statement on whether or not they are good tradeable assets, just disagreeing that discussion of such is beyond scope of consideration when judging the off-season moves.  If he had used the space to acquire bad contracts along with picks, the clear value there is the future potential.  In this case, the Mavs used the space to acquire younger, less expensive assets that could either grow into valuable contributors (had growth potential), or could be more easily packaged in other trades.  While I tend to think that we may have used some space to get in on the Iggy salary dump - and used it to pick up a player that we now are rumored to be interested in AND a pick, losing out on that type of deal was the opportunity cost of going after primary targets.


As far as comparing what we got to what we potentially could have gotten?  Who knows if players we think they should have gotten (or that we strongly think that the Mavs wanted) actually wanted to come here or were obtainable? 

Players I think that if they had chosen us, would have been Mavs, and have been good this season:

Kemba is having a great season and has been on the fringes of the MVP discussion.  By all accounts, he was signed, sealed and delivered to BOS by the opening bell of FA.  There is still the fit question, but it is safe to assume that if he had wanted the Mavs, he would be here.

Brogdon has come back down to earth and his efficiency from 3 has waned a bit as he has become a primary offensive player.  I still view him as a nice fit in Dal, but he wouldn't be the player he is in IND here.  At 20M, I don't know that he would be viewed as a bargain here.

Players I think that the Mavs got better value with our pickups than if we had acquired them:

Danny Green is a boat I am actually happy that sailed.  At 14.6M, he is 5y and 5M more expensive than Wright.  DWarp has a better off/def/WAR rating than green, and has been much better from deep than I initially thought that he would be.  Obviously, you would look at the Mavs now and take Green over Curry, but he chose the Lakers.

Favors has been injured and/or away from the team for the passing of his mother.  This is a difficult asset to quantify for a couple of reasons - 1) his availability, 2)Dallas' actual interest in him.  I haven't heard reports that Dallas was looking to acquire him outside of fans saying we should.  If we have revisionist vision and could see that THJ would become the starting designated shooter over Curry, then the case could be made that rather than getting Curry/Bobi you acquire Favors.  But I don't think the Mavs viewed THJ in that light.  They viewed him coming off the bench.  And probably more importantly, they viewed Powell as a starter.  If not, you would have heard noise about acquiring him and they wouldn't have extended powell.

While there are plenty more players that could have ended up as mavs (I still wish we could have gotten in on the TJ warren trade from PHX) I think these are the usual suspects.  My conclusion is not really a unique one - there are a couple of players that would have been mavs if they had wanted to be.  We all know that.  I think that the Mavs got a good one in Wright, and that Seth was a solid pickup.  With hindsight they may have focused more on getting a big (or picking up Iggy or another asset) instead of Curry.  But adding shooting around Luka was a consensus requirement of the offseason, and it is hard to fault the Mavs for adding him.  If the mavs get Green to say yes instead of Curry, I think no one is complaining at all today, which is why the importance of 2way players can't be understated. As for Favors, you might have to point to RC rather than Donnie on this.  His value for Powell, whether anyone else agrees or not, is VERY high.  He likes what he does for the team - in production, in the way he facilitates the flow of the schemes, and in his approach, attitude, and "force" he brings with his intangibles. 

It is very hard, even with hindsight, to not credit the Mavs for finding players that were able to align with organizational goals.  We can moan about the Mavs not being able to attract the exact players that we would choose.  Get in line.  Part of being in the NBA - and a reason why '21 needs to be kept available since the odds would be in our favor to an extent that last off-season's uncertain future did not entice the "big fish".

As my final opinion on "should we give donnie credit?"  I give him a B.  I don't think he blew it away, and I don't think he did anything negative.  He acquired good pieces on reasonable contracts that I feel can equally contribute and be assets if necessary to continue shaping the team.  I have a general desire to spend capspace on only the best difference makers (all max contracts are not equal - paying middleton and Giannis the same is not the same thing) and filling up a roster with players that AREN'T difference makers limits upside.  However, in absence of said difference makers CHOOSING to come to Dal, (we can't kidnap them), I am happy with what we have or if we had flipped space for assets... either way.  In hindsight, with how good Luka improved, it is hard to say that I would have been happy sitting with some cap ballast vs wright and curry!

[Scott41theMavs]

My take is that the offseason is largely incomplete. One of our best assets right now is the trade exception from the Barnes trade (which David Lord from the other board consistently told us was gone forever with the Kristaps signing - thank goodness he was wrong for once). If we make good use of the exception, it raises the offseason (counting draft onward only, not KP) from a D to a C. 

When you have over $30 mil in cap room, that cap room should be used to acquire starters. It is a testament to Luka, RC, and great chemistry that the Mavs are doing so well with three spares in the starting lineup. Imagine if Luka and KP had real NBA starters next to them.

[Jommybone]

I sure like how Malcom Brogdon's game has translated to a bigger role with Indy. If he stays healthy, it’s going to be hard to applaud Donnie's summer. But he did a helluva salvage job after that first awful 24 hours of free agency. The Zing trade was outrageously great. And the Doncic deal a once-in-a-lifetime move, which Donnie has now executed twice. Props to him for sure.

[fifteenth]

When you have over $30 mil in cap room, that cap room should be used to acquire starters.

When you say "should' you're creating the criteria with which to grade the thing. Nothing wrong with that, we all do it; we have to do it. But at some point, in this case, I think the criteria has to shift to the results on the court.

It is a testament to Luka, RC, and great chemistry that the Mavs are doing so well with three spares in the starting lineup.

You say that the results on the court are Luka, Rick and chemistry, which I agree with, but it seems like you're using that statement to downplay the contribution that our free agents are making and how well the 3 scrubs who happen to start are playing.

Delon and Seth are part of a bench group that is beating the opponents bench by a substantial margin almost every game. We have several wins due to the impact of the bench. This is huge. Luka essentialy gets to run his race against the opposing starters each night with a head start. Other teams have to face Luka each night while laying points!? Are you kidding me?! Delon and Seth are contributing to winning, and I don't think they've maxed out their potential contribution to the team.

Regarding the three scrubs, they wouldn't win without Luka. But they still get credit in my mind for playing well with Luka. There are better players who might not be able to play those roles as well as our three scrubs are playing them. Rick is a genius for carving out these roles for them, but they still have to do what's asked of them and do it well.

[Mavsfan12]

I love the way you stated this.  Having to contend with the Dallas starters knowing that you are laying points because the Mavs bench is better than yours?  Priceless.

[ItsGoTime]

I disagree with your initial premise.  It is a good GM who is able to pivot when Plan A or B don't pan out and sometimes that means picking up assets that you can LATER do something with.

It is a great GM that can execute plan A. It is a good GM that can execute plan B. It is an OK GM that can pivot when most all else falls through and do what Donnie has done for so long in FA. 


Sleepinghero deleted his post, but what he said is extremely true. Donnie is a great-to-best talent scout in the business. That does not make him a good GM, it makes him one of the best talent finders in the league. (Edit) Even when he knows a guy is gonna be really good, he doesn’t even have the negotiating skill to convince the guy who hired him to take that player.

[Fuerza1]

Credit is due for Luka no doubt. Donnie can screw up every transaction for the rest of Luka's career and the Mavs will still be good if not great because of Luka a la Dirk or LeBron. That's the funny thing, you just gotta make 1 right move. The Bulls, for example, have hit on way more draft picks than us but they just can't find that transcendent superstar.

As for our offseason, any way you slice it, it was a disappointment. There were major opportunities to take advantage of and Donnie fell short. 

Bid against themselves for Powell and Seth, handing them long term contracts. Had to give up 2 second rounders and space for a bench player in Delon. Then you have those trying to spin the offseason as a success because we signed KP. Ok well so far he's not playing like a max contract player either. 

A lot of love for Brogdon but even doing something as small as signing Marcus Morris instead of Seth Curry, and the Mavs would be 17-4 right now. It's those little things that have been bugging us for years.

But so far it doesn't matter because we have Luka covering up for them. I suppose the best compliment you can give Donnie is that he hasn't surrounded Luka with G-League talent.

The ultimate question is can Donnie and the Mavs form the next dynasty? I have little doubt we'll be a consistent contender, at least a second round team who makes the WCF every now and then. It's the next level or two I am wondering about.

[jesusshuttlesworth82]

Credit is due for Luka no doubt. Donnie can screw up every transaction for the rest of Luka's career and the Mavs will still be good if not great because of Luka a la Dirk or LeBron. That's the funny thing, you just gotta make 1 right move. 

Agree

Perhaps this is me just unwilling to admit I was wrong about free agency failure(s) but I still see Luka carrying this thing.  Offensively, he's playing at historic levels.  That's not hyperbole.  If he ever gets his 3pt % near 40%, he might be the best offensive player maybe ever.  We have the star and we have a top 5 coach: the two most important factors for winning in the NBA.

Seth, Wright, Powell, etc have been what most of us thought.  They have 2 good games out of every 5 games.  

Will be interesting to see how the Mavs react if he's given the box and one treatment Steph got in the Finals or Harden gets sometimes.

[SleepingHero]

Donnie scouted Steve Nash when he worked with the Suns. He found Dirk and was adamant to get him.

He told Cuban that Giannis was the real deal and we should draft him. He kept tabs on Luka since he was 13 and made sure the Mavs were in a position to snag him.

Nash, Dirk, Giannis, and Luka. 4 MVP's between them (as of now). All 4 generational talents. There is also a reason why the Mavs consistently called NYK and asked about KP. Donnie has an unbelievable knack at finding foreign talent, and deserves all the credit for making sure Luka was a Mav and building this team. 

With that said after the offseason I was severely disappointed in the moves they made. Would Malcom Brogdon being here as the starting shooting guard be better than THJ? Of course. I think that would put this team in an incredible position, considering how consistent and efficient Brogdon is. However, just looking back and saying that the Mavs should've just signed Brogdon is disingenuous. The Pacers paid the Bucks 3 picks (a first and two 2nds), which was something the Mavs couldn't match. Unless the Bucks valued several additional 2nd rounders (which at the time no one thought the GSW 2nd would've had much, if any, value) in lieu of a first, I don't think the Mavs had a real chance in the Brog sweepstakes.

Thankfully, the team Donnie built is working out right now. I had a serious level of disappointment after free agency, but was optimistic that Luka could carry us. He's doing exactly that and we have to thank Donnie!

[jesusshuttlesworth82]

For the 100th time, Brogdon was traded only after he agreed to 4/$85 with Indiana.  If we are assuming he's a rational human being, that's the highest offer he got.

If you offer him 4/$86 or more, he signs your offer sheet.  Then you wait to see if Mil matches.  It's not like the Mavs did anything with their cap space while they would've waited.  I would've given him 4/$95 and seen how much tax Mil is willing to pay.

[SleepingHero]

For the 100th time, Brogdon was traded only after he agreed to 4/$85 with Indiana.  If we are assuming he's a rational human being, that's the highest offer he got.

If you offer him 4/$86 or more, he signs your offer sheet.  Then you wait to see if Mil matches.  It's not like the Mavs did anything with their cap space while they would've waited.  I would've given him 4/$95 and seen how much tax Mil is willing to pay.

I mean that's just not how it works. Why would the Pacers voluntarily give up 3 picks for a free agent they signed, regardless if he was restricted or not?  If what you said is true, and Indiana was the highest offer Brogdon received, then they could've literally done that exact same "wait-and-see" approach plan the Mavs could've hypothetically done, and force MIL to pay the tax.

So if we're rational human beings, what most likely happened was Brogdon went out and fielded offers. He chose the highest one he got, and went back to Milwaukee. MIL then went to the Pacers and said if you want us to not match the offer sheet, then make it a sign and trade and give us assets. And because the Pacers really wanted Brogdon instead of making MIL pay tax (because that doesn't make their team better) they paid the price. 

Which means once again the Mavs wouldn't have been able to sign Brogdon.

[Mavsfan12]

I disagree with your initial premise.  It is a good GM who is able to pivot when Plan A or B don't pan out and sometimes that means picking up assets that you can LATER do something with.

It is a great GM that can execute plan A. It is a good GM that can execute plan B. It is an OK GM that can pivot when most all else falls through and do what Donnie has done for so long in FA. 


Sleepinghero deleted his post, but what he said is extremely true. Donnie is a great-to-best talent scout in the business. That does not make him a good GM, it makes him one of the best talent finders in the league. (Edit) Even when he knows a guy is gonna be really good, he doesn’t even have the negotiating skill to convince the guy who hired him to take that player.

I also firmly disagree with this statement.  The NBA has a few GM's that I would like to re-introduce you to:

Raptors GM Masai Ujiri.  Plan A this summer, resign Leonard.  Result: did NOT resign Leonard despite having just won a ring with player and holding his bird rights and ability to pay more than ANY OTHER TEAM...  basically, every possible advantage and team separate of location/roster could possess.  Conclusion: did not make Ujiri less than a great GM... Widely considered one of the best in the biz.

Spurs GM RC Buford.  Plan A Insert starter and solid role players here.  Result: Got left at alter by morris, signed Carroll, lyles, and resigned Gay. Just a devestating offseason that will likely result in Spurs missing playoffs for the first time in 2 decades.  Conclusion: I don't think that Buford has any job security issues.

Lakers GM Rob Pelinka.  Plan A Big splash move to get running mate for Lebron, fill out roster with shooters and value role players.  Result: traded for Davis, signs Danny Green and Cousins.  Signs value contracts with 2 shot blocking centers and borderline hall of fame pg.  Conclusion:  Pelinka is still regarded as a douche that no one likes or will do business with unless absolutely necessary.  Widely considered one of the worst GM's in the game.  
 
I could keep going.  Context matters.  Just because a GM doesn't get a particular player that they target, it DOES NOT equate to that GM being any more/less skilled than the guy who gets the player.  Markets matter, existing players/coaches matters, past success in the playoffs matters, future outlook, etc...  If what you said was accurate, you would have to rate almost every GM less than good EVERY year, scarcity of resources being what they are.  You can be disappointed that you live in Dallas and not LA, but that is not Donnie's fault.  He does an amazing job with what he has to work with.  Dallas does not have the skins on the wall to just snap and have people come running.  Until this season, they haven't had a bonafide all-star to build around in years.  Aging Dirk was simply not enough to entice the AAU crowd even when we had max caproom.  Dallas is a town that needs "the process" to rebuild vs clear the decks and watch the players flock. just the facts.

[Sigma4Life]

For the 100th time, Brogdon was traded only after he agreed to 4/$85 with Indiana.  If we are assuming he's a rational human being, that's the highest offer he got.

If you offer him 4/$86 or more, he signs your offer sheet.  Then you wait to see if Mil matches.  It's not like the Mavs did anything with their cap space while they would've waited.  I would've given him 4/$95 and seen how much tax Mil is willing to pay.

I mean that's just not how it works. Why would the Pacers voluntarily give up 3 picks for a free agent they signed, regardless if he was restricted or not?  If what you said is true, and Indiana was the highest offer Brogdon received, then they could've literally done that exact same "wait-and-see" approach plan the Mavs could've hypothetically done, and force MIL to pay the tax.

So if we're rational human beings, what most likely happened was Brogdon went out and fielded offers. He chose the highest one he got, and went back to Milwaukee. MIL then went to the Pacers and said if you want us to not match the offer sheet, then make it a sign and trade and give us assets. And because the Pacers really wanted Brogdon instead of making MIL pay tax (because that doesn't make their team better) they paid the price. 

Which means once again the Mavs wouldn't have been able to sign Brogdon.

We also don't know if Brogdon took the highest offer. Clearly Brogdon wanted to go to Indy. He may have taken less money to go there. I don't understand the mentality of some fans who think players are mindless tools that chase money with no personal preferences on where they want to play.

[audiosway]

For the 100th time, Brogdon was traded only after he agreed to 4/$85 with Indiana.  If we are assuming he's a rational human being, that's the highest offer he got.

If you offer him 4/$86 or more, he signs your offer sheet.  Then you wait to see if Mil matches.  It's not like the Mavs did anything with their cap space while they would've waited.  I would've given him 4/$95 and seen how much tax Mil is willing to pay.

I see how it can look that simple on the outside but it's normally just not. Yes the Mavs had cap space but they also had a few holes to fill in along with giving KP a max deal. Then, you have the release of Brogdon involved. I would be willing to bet that the only reason Mil released his rights to Indiana was because of those picks in the trade they got. Mil probably came back and said "ok look you can have him in a trade...otherwise we just match him and you get nothing". They could have matched and just waited until the 15th of Dec to trade him if they couldn't afford to keep him.

And by the way, if Mil signs him to 4/$95 and trades him before the TDL they get the package of returns and don't pay tax on him. That's basically what happened with Blake Griffin. They didn't want to let him walk for nothing so they signed him to a max deal and traded him a few months later.

[ItsGoTime]

Just because a GM doesn't get a particular player that they target, it DOES NOT equate to that GM being any more/less skilled than the guy who gets the player.

Yes, I worded it in a way that made the job as a whole good or bad, that was not my thought, just didn't come out in words well. For an offseason grade or "credit" for the offseason, what was said is very much true, and in the context of what this whole thread is about. Have you read the genesis of this discussion? It started in the mavsluvr's Mavs Lakers recap.

---

Also, my thoughts have nothing to do with specific names. Any names given are purely for example purposes as we have no clue, even with statements made public what has or would happen in any given scenario, one way or the opposite.

[Mavsfan12]

Just because a GM doesn't get a particular player that they target, it DOES NOT equate to that GM being any more/less skilled than the guy who gets the player.

Yes, I worded it in a way that made the job as a whole good or bad, that was not my thought, just didn't come out in words well. For an offseason grade or "credit" for the offseason, what was said is very much true, and in the context of what this whole thread is about. Have you read the genesis of this discussion? It started in the mavsluvr's Mavs Lakers recap.

---

Also, my thoughts have nothing to do with specific names. Any names given are purely for example purposes as we have no clue, even with statements made public what has or would happen in any given scenario, one way or the opposite.

I was there when you started discussing it there and I moved my comment to one of the first posts on this thread.  The NBA is not a level playing field.  At any given year, any number of teams could have an elevated advantage for any number of reasons.  Usually, clubs have to go through a period of accumulating assets before they can cash in that stockpile to acquire players that make it attractive to players.  Some teams have to work harder/longer at it before they break through, as their market limits their attractiveness.  Some clubs, are attractive good bad or ugly.  Some teams are well run despite market limitations.  Some have all the market advantages and incompetence still limits them.  Dallas has an upper level GM that is well respected in the league.  

Anyway, I think I have said my piece on this thread.  Have at it!