Thoughts on Donnie's Interview with Norm - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

sike · 07-11-2012, 11:50 AM

I posted this elsewhere, but that thread is caught up in "Trade Dirk" arguments,
so what do you think about what Donnie is saying? For the most part, I think he is just confirming what we've been assuming based on their actions/lack of actions so far.

Norm: Do you understand the fans being frustrated?
Donnie: "Unequivocally."...."Gotta move on to plan B"

Norm: What is the plan now?
Donnie: "We can't overpay for good players." "What we can't do at this point is strap ourselves financially"

Norm:Will the club (Mavs) only look to sign 1 year deals or 1 year deals with options?
Donnie: "For the most part we'd like to stay shorter vs. longer." But he did say that they won't ONLY look for those deals.

Donnie said they have been in "constant communication" with Orlando.

Donnie said that Howard coming to Dallas THIS season is now a "long, long, long shot"

Donnie downplayed Dirk's age as a contributing to Star players not wanting to play here. Dirk is "like a fine wine" that will get better with age.

Norm: Will you use the amnesty option?
Donnie: Undecided at this point (But they have 6 days to decide)

Norm: Mavs interested in Brand?
Donnie: Sure we would be interested...at a certain price.

Donnie called the current market "a little weird right now"...in that teams are making decisions that won't vibe well with the new CBA.

Donnie said that some teams are "living in present" in terms of the CBA.

When asked if some teams are acting in ways that will seriously cost them when the penalties of the new CBA kick in after next season, he simply answered a strong "Yes".

Donnie said that star players will be available bc of how teams are mishandling their current signings with the upcoming CBA.

Norm: Have you looked at some of the deals that teams have been signing and said "Are they crazy?"
Donnie: "Oh yeah."

Norm asked about what kind of team the Mavs will be THIS upcoming season.
Donnie: "We want to be in the thick of it for the playoffs and if halfway through the season things are going in a good direction"....if we can get into the second tier "anything can happen". He suggested that they might look for trades.

Norm: will the fans buy into this season's strategy?
Donnie: worst thing we could do is be short sighted and sign players that don't help us win championships...You win championships with stars and we're interested in signing stars.

PS: I love Donnie. He sounded WAY more upbeat than other recent interviews.

But it looks like the MBT is gearing up for this team to be pretty mediocre next season.

jthig32 · 07-11-2012, 11:52 AM

I don't see much new there, just Donnie saying what he's been saying and confirming what the plan is.

I do think it's interesting (and GMC noted it) that he threw in "at a certain price" for their interest in Brand.

The Mavs have to toss away all of their exceptions if they win the Brand claim. I don't think they're going to bid even close to all of their cap room. They want Brand only if they can also have some more cash to play around with.

I bet they don't bid more than 5Mil.

jthig32 · 07-11-2012, 11:55 AM

I was also glad to hear that they're talking with Ian. I hope he doesn't price himself out of the Mavs range. They need to retain him as a young, tradable asset, if at all possible.

sike · 07-11-2012, 11:57 AM

As we've heard for the past year, Donnie once again repeated the mantra of "Don't make moves for 'good' players now that will cost us the ability to sign legit star players in the future."

I thought that was one of the more interesting and honest points he made: Championships are won with stars and we're looking to sign a star.

(This being said just 1 season after his team won the championship with only 1 legit star.)

I like that they are being honest with their pursuit of stars as their Plan. Not just a collection of good guys, but legit stars.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

I don't see much new there, just Donnie saying what he's been saying and confirming what the plan is.

I do think it's interesting (and GMC noted it) that he threw in "at a certain price" for their interest in Brand.

The Mavs have to toss away all of their exceptions if they win the Brand claim. I don't think they're going to bid even close to all of their cap room. They want Brand only if they can also have some more cash to play around with.

I bet they don't bid more than 5Mil.

BGMaverick9 · 07-11-2012, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

I thought that was one of the more interesting and honest points he made: Championships are won with stars and we're looking to sign a star.

(This being said just 1 season after his team won the championship with only 1 legit star.)

Exception, not the rule (duck and cover)...

sike · 07-11-2012, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

I was also glad to hear that they're talking with Ian. I hope he doesn't price himself out of the Mavs range. They need to retain him as a young, tradable asset, if at all possible.

As a player, I'm not excited about Ian...but as a tradable asset, that IS nice.

sike · 07-11-2012, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BGMaverick9

Exception, not the rule (duck and cover)...

Well, "yeah"...I just found the irony interesting.

The MBT has basically been saying for the past year that the way they won it all is NOT the way to do it. Fluke is too strong a word, but the way they won it all then is admittedly NOT the way they are trying to win it all now.

Donnie: "Championships are won by stars"

grndmstr_c · 07-11-2012, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

I don't see much new there, just Donnie saying what he's been saying and confirming what the plan is.

I do think it's interesting (and GMC noted it) that he threw in "at a certain price" for their interest in Brand.

The Mavs have to toss away all of their exceptions if they win the Brand claim. I don't think they're going to bid even close to all of their cap room. They want Brand only if they can also have some more cash to play around with.

I bet they don't bid more than 5Mil.

I'm thinking the same way. Brand by himself is fine, but probably doesn't make enough of a difference to really make a difference. On the other hand, if you can get Brand and still swing, say, Sessions, Lee and West to round out the backcourt, you've probably got a chance to at least be in the race for home-court in the first round.

Sikey, curious what you made of the Mahinmi name-drop.

Bayliss · 07-11-2012, 12:05 PM

But what I'm seeing from LMF.com... don't the Mavs have to amnesty Haywood if they do get Brand?

Underdog · 07-11-2012, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bayliss

But what I'm seeing from LMF.com... don't the Mavs have to amnesty Haywood if they do get Brand?

Why? We have more than enough cap space to sign Brand...

Bayliss · 07-11-2012, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Why? We have more than enough cap space to sign Brand...

Here is TMFan's post about Brand....

Quote:

Dallas can easily get about $9 million under the cap by giving up Kidd (gone), Terry (gone), all TE's and the MLE. But $9 million probably isn't enough to fill the hole at PG and win the bid for Brand. We could use $5 million of our Odom TE on a S&T PG and bid $4 million for Brand. But now we have a crappy PG (probably for multiple years) and no guarantee of getting Brand.

sike · 07-11-2012, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

Sikey, curious what you made of the Mahinmi name-drop.

Honestly I was too busy furiously typing the other questions to give it my full attention.

But it felt like a consolation. If Donnie thinks that West and Ian coming back will make the Mav faithful happier (after losing JET and Kidd)...he is nuts. I give him more credit than that though, so if Ian is back, I'm hoping like thig said that it is to be used as a piece for a trade of some kind next season.

Donnie openly mentioned "trades" and the Mavs success at being able to pull off trades 2 or 3 times.

I'm wondering if it was his subtle way of conveying that signing the big FA might not have worked, but we're aiming to make significant trades within the year? At least thats what I'm hoping it meant.

sike · 07-11-2012, 12:13 PM

I'm curious for yall's thoughts on the following question:

Which has more long term value:
Amnesty Haywood or keep him to use as a trade asset?

Bayliss · 07-11-2012, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Which has more long term value:
Amnesty Haywood or keep him to use as a trade asset?

You forgot to sign your post

By:
Jack Handey

Windmill360 · 07-11-2012, 12:19 PM

So Donnie and the mavs believe after a year or so all these high spending teams will be frantically trying to cut ties with their superstar players because they are hemoraging money? Given that the Mavs will have loads of space to absorb one of those contracts theyre gonna be looking to work with the Mavs and say "Here help us take our superstar for nothing. We realized we cant afford the contract."?

I don't buy it.

grndmstr_c · 07-11-2012, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

I'm curious for yall's thoughts on the following question:

Which has more long term value:
Amnesty Haywood or keep him to use as a trade asset?

I suspect it's more a choice between amnestying him now or amnestying him next year. And if you do it now, what are you going to do with the resulting cap space?

jthig, quick quesiton you might know the answer to. Can you sign a free agent to a multi-year deal in which only the first year is guaranteed and the decision deadline on the second-year team option doesn't come until after the moratorium ends the following summer?

oilfieldtrash · 07-11-2012, 12:22 PM

Teams don't drop stars. If anything they trade them for other assets.

jthig32 · 07-11-2012, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bayliss

Here is TMFan's post about Brand....

I need to take a closer look at the numbers, but I think it's closer to ~11 Mil.

And I don't think they spend more than half of that on Brand, which leaves them ~6Mil to spend, plus the 2.5Mil Room Exception.

sike · 07-11-2012, 12:24 PM

I doubt the Mavs are thinking that any Superstar types will be let go...more likely a bunch of very solid guys. Donnie mentioned Joe Johnson by name in this interview.

Norm had the same concern as you, Windy,...he said he hopes that the Mavs are banking on teams dumping their best players but their second tier guys. (Which obviously makes more sense.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Windmill360

So Donnie and the mavs believe after a year or so all these high spending teams will be frantically trying to cut ties with their superstar players because they are hemoraging money? Given that the Mavs will have loads of space to absorb one of those contracts theyre gonna be looking to work with the Mavs and say "Here help us take our superstar for nothing. We realized we cant afford the contract."?

I don't buy it.

Bayliss · 07-11-2012, 12:26 PM

Quote:

I need to take a closer look at the numbers, but I think it's closer to ~11 Mil.

And I don't think they spend more than half of that on Brand, which leaves them ~6Mil to spend, plus the 2.5Mil Room Exception.

So with what you propose, you think Sessions will take less than 6 million? And is there anybody good that the Mavs could get for 2.5?

rabbitproof · 07-11-2012, 12:28 PM

I wonder why we didn't gun for Lowry. Lowry and Brand would've made this team quite competitive this year without sacrificing the future.

BGMaverick9 · 07-11-2012, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bayliss

So with what you propose, you think Sessions will take less than 6 million? And is there anybody good that the Mavs could get for 2.5?

6 Million or less, I'm thinking it's possible. That buffer range still gives him a chance of a 20% raise, which is nothing to scoff at.

With Brand, you're not looking for "anybody good" at the center position, which would be hard to do. You shift your attention to the 2-guard position and I think at 2.5, you might be able to find someone.

grndmstr_c · 07-11-2012, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rabbitproof

I wonder why we didn't gun for Lowry. Lowry and Brand would've made this team quite competitive this year without sacrificing the future.

I suspect it would have been a combination of not wanting to be on the hook for the last year of Lowry's current deal (though we'll see what they work out with whichever point guard they eventually sign), and not wanting to give up a first-rounder when there are players on the market of comparable quality who can be signed without sacrificing a draft pick.

mac222b · 07-11-2012, 12:41 PM

Could somebody please post the Mavs available Trade Exceptions again.
I keep get conflicting/old news when i search for.

Bayliss · 07-11-2012, 12:42 PM

Quote:

With Brand, you're not looking for "anybody good" at the center position, which would be hard to do. You shift your attention to the 2-guard position and I think at 2.5, you might be able to find someone.

But not Courtney Lee or Mayo. Both will get paid more than that. But I'd have to look at the list again and see who is decent besides those two.

BGMaverick9 · 07-11-2012, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bayliss

But not Courtney Lee or Mayo. Both will get paid more than that. But I'd have to look at the list again and see who is decent besides those two.

I'm pretty sure everyone needs to move on from Mayo...

Bayliss · 07-11-2012, 12:44 PM

I agree. He's good as gone. Hornets will match Gordon. So Phx will probably get him.

BGMaverick9 · 07-11-2012, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bayliss

I agree. He's good as gone. Hornets will match Gordon. So Phx will probably get him.

Even before that news came out last night, I think you'd have to find the price tag fall much, much lower than what he's looking for before they start taking a look at him.

bigcat · 07-11-2012, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

Donnie: "We can't overpay for good players." "What we can't do at this point is strap ourselves financially"

Donnie called the current market "a little weird right now"...in that teams are making decisions that won't vibe well with the new CBA.

Donnie said that some teams are "living in present" in terms of the CBA.

When asked if some teams are acting in ways that will seriously cost them when the penalties of the new CBA kick in after next season, he simply answered a strong "Yes".

Donnie said that star players will be available bc of how teams are mishandling their current signings with the upcoming CBA.

Norm: Have you looked at some of the deals that teams have been signing and said "Are they crazy?"
Donnie: "Oh yeah."

ok, i may be out of the loop for this, but can some CBA experts clarify exactly how this new cba differs from the old one that so drastically altered cuban's strategy going forward?

iirc, in the new cba, there's no hard cap, thus teams are not legally forbidden to spend however much money they want on signing players.

so, is the difference the level of the LT penalty? in old cba, you pay twice if you go above lt threshold, in the new one, you must pay three times? five times? ten times?

there got to be more than that, right? otherwise, the new cba is not that much different than the old one. actually it'll be basically the same: under old cba, cuban can use his cash to overpay good players, and under new cba, cuban-on-steroid (i.e., prokhorov) will still be able use his cash to overpay good players.

actually, cuban in his email basically said something like if teams have bad contracts, it doesn't matter how much money you have.

so, calling those cba experts: could you please help me to understand exactly the new cba's mechanism through which max contracts to roddy and vince carter will prevent mavs from improving the team in the future, even if cuban would have, say, 20 billion in cash?

Thanks in advance!

Underdog · 07-11-2012, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac222b

Could somebody please post the Mavs available Trade Exceptions again.
I keep get conflicting/old news when i search for.

I posted that somewhere but it got buried and I can't find the info with all the crap sloshing around in Google right now... I know the two bigger ones are in the ballpark of $8.2M for Odom and $4.5M left on Chandler... Then I think we have a couple $2M or $3M exceptions as well.

mac222b · 07-11-2012, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

I posted that somewhere but it got buried and I can't find the info with all the crap sloshing around in Google right now... I know the two bigger ones are in the ballpark of $8.2M for Odom and $4.5M left on Chandler... Then I think we have a couple $2M or $3M exceptions as well.

Sounds about right from what i remember. Wasn't the Chandler TE
originally like 12 million. Did that go to Odom? Dear god
that would be useful right about now...

jthig32 · 07-11-2012, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigcat

ok, i may be out of the loop for this, but can some CBA experts clarify exactly how this new cba differs from the old one that so drastically altered cuban's strategy going forward?

iirc, in the new cba, there's no hard cap, thus teams are not legally forbidden to spend however much money they want on signing players.

so, is the difference the level of the LT penalty? in old cba, you pay twice if you go above lt threshold, in the new one, you must pay three times? five times? ten times?

there got to be more than that, right? otherwise, the new cba is not that much different than the old one. actually it'll be basically the same: under old cba, cuban can use his cash to overpay good players, and under new cba, cuban-on-steroid (i.e., prokhorov) will still be able use his cash to overpay good players.

actually, cuban in his email basically said something like if teams have bad contracts, it doesn't matter how much money you have.

so, calling those cba experts: could you please help me to understand exactly the new cba's mechanism through which max contracts to roddy and vince carter will prevent mavs from improving the team in the future, even if cuban would have, say, 20 billion in cash?

Thanks in advance!

I've explained this multiple times over the past few days. Read through the major threads and you'll find it. I don't have the energy to explain it all again.

Underdog · 07-11-2012, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac222b

Sounds about right from what i remember. Wasn't the Chandler TE
originally like 12 million. Did that go to Odom? Dear god
that would be useful right about now...

Yeah, a big chunk of the Chandler TE went to absorb Odom...

Underdog · 07-11-2012, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigcat

ok, i may be out of the loop for this, but can some CBA experts clarify exactly how this new cba differs from the old one that so drastically altered cuban's strategy going forward?

iirc, in the new cba, there's no hard cap, thus teams are not legally forbidden to spend however much money they want on signing players.

so, is the difference the level of the LT penalty? in old cba, you pay twice if you go above lt threshold, in the new one, you must pay three times? five times? ten times?

there got to be more than that, right? otherwise, the new cba is not that much different than the old one. actually it'll be basically the same: under old cba, cuban can use his cash to overpay good players, and under new cba, cuban-on-steroid (i.e., prokhorov) will still be able use his cash to overpay good players.

actually, cuban in his email basically said something like if teams have bad contracts, it doesn't matter how much money you have.

so, calling those cba experts: could you please help me to understand exactly the new cba's mechanism through which max contracts to roddy and vince carter will prevent mavs from improving the team in the future, even if cuban would have, say, 20 billion in cash?

Thanks in advance!

Larry Coon to the rescue!

mac222b · 07-11-2012, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Yeah, a big chunk of the Chandler TE went to absorb Odom...

Uncanny how that Odom trade continues to haunt...
Not that i think MBT would be down with absorbing Hedo to get Dwight.
But at least the option would exist.

Underdog · 07-11-2012, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac222b

Uncanny how that Odom trade continues to haunt...
Not that i think MBT would be down with absorbing Hedo to get Dwight.
But at least the option would exist.

Yeah, it's the gift you never wanted that keeps on giving - like herpes...

saclare · 07-11-2012, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BGMaverick9

Even before that news came out last night, I think you'd have to find the price tag fall much, much lower than what he's looking for before they start taking a look at him.

What is he looking for?

BGMaverick9 · 07-11-2012, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saclare

What is he looking for?

At least MLE money.

saclare · 07-11-2012, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BGMaverick9

At least MLE money.

Hmm. And that is also what Sessions is after as well?

What are your thoughts on positional additions the Mavs will make in the coming days?

Is anything going to happen soon, or are we waiting on the amnesty period to end first?

BGMaverick9 · 07-11-2012, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saclare

Hmm. And that is also what Sessions is after as well?

What are your thoughts on positional additions the Mavs will make in the coming days?

Is anything going to happen soon, or are we waiting on the amnesty period to end first?

I'm pretty much on board with what thig and everyone else has said. They're going to wait to see what happens with the Brand move (once he's actually amnestied).

I'll be somewhat surprised if Delonte isn't back. For whatever reason (I'm guessing his past is still hurting him), his name just isn't popping up heavily on the radar. Teams are looking at guys the Mavs might be looking at - Sessions, Brooks, Felton, etc. etc. - and THEN looking at West.