Quote:
Originally Posted by turin
I get what you're saying, but this is only one game. Being able to deliver consistently against high level competition are what's important. Brunson is a defensive liability who disappears against athletic length on defense. I think it's still way too premature to be doling out $20m/yr to Brunson, but unfortunately, the Mavs aren't going to get too many more looks at him during the playoffs before signing him. Everybody got all excited when THJ had a couple of hot shooting nights in the playoffs against the LAC, and now we are stuck with him and his contract. :-( $40m/yr for a small guard whose a defensive liability paired with a streaky, black hole with no defensive is a cap disaster in the making, and I'm not bagging on Luka, but those 3 together are going to be a huge liability on defense, and that's going to be what $70m/yr? That's crazy.
The Mavs need a big man and some bigger ball handlers. IMO, Brunson's spot isn't worth more than $15m/yr. I'd rather have $20m+ tied up in a productive big. You can't teach size.
|
Mavs are a team that
1) Is perfect for Brunson. With a 6'8" PG, we are the best team in the league for a 6'1" combo-guard who plays mostly like a SG, but can play PG in a pinch.
2) A team that is totally starved of talent. We simply cannot afford to let a starting-caliber player walk for nothing, just because you can find faults with their game.
3) A team that will be over the cap/tax regardless of whether or not we re-sign Brunson. It's great to talk about what Brunson is worth. 10? 15? 20? 25?. But what Brunson gets is going to be set by other teams and after a 41-8-5 game in the playoffs, we either pay for him a lot or he walks away for nothing. If he walks away for more money, we don't magically go under the cap and clear room for a max contract either. We're either in the tax or WAY over the tax.