Mavs trade deadline and draft thread

[Melonhead]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Man, I'm kind of blown away how negative the takes are outside of Dallas. Everyone is blathering on about how we went "all in" on two mid players. They're just going on about the draft capital we gave up, and don't acknowledge at all the capital we got back. They seem to think we have absolutely nothing left to work with for trades for the next five years.

The way I read it was IF things go south with Luka in a few years (it won?t) there?s very little draft capital to keep the team from turning into a bball wasteland.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by Melonhead

The way I read it was IF things go south with Luka in a few years (it won?t) there?s very little draft capital to keep the team from turning into a bball wasteland.

I guess. But honestly, who cares? I certainly don't. If Luka leaves, we're f***ed no matter what. That's why I didn't understand people bitching about giving up a pick swap for Grant Williams seven years down the road. If we haven't made a serious title run by the year 2030, then we need to tear everything down to the studs anyway. If Luka does leave and the Mavs need to enter a full rebuild, it's not like you can't trade players for picks. We can scrape together a few picks if, god forbid it comes to that.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by Melonhead

The way I read it was IF things go south with Luka in a few years (it won?t) there?s very little draft capital to keep the team from turning into a bball wasteland.

Remember that we got a first just by taking on Holmes. Firsts aren't the impossible to acquire assets they used to be and depends on the draft.

We also have players that equate to firsts IMO in Green, Hardy, and Omax.

And lastly, most of our contracts are now very tradable salary-wise. That "bad" contract in Holmes turned into Gafford.

Good FOs make things happen.

If it was Luka/Irving and 0 valued talent, then I'd be more worried.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Remember that we got a first just by taking on Holmes. Firsts aren't the impossible to acquire assets they used to be and depends on the draft.

We also have players that equate to firsts IMO in Green, Hardy, and Omax.

And lastly, most of our contracts are now very tradable salary-wise. That "bad" contract in Holmes turned into Gafford.

Good FOs make things happen.

If it was Luka/Irving and 0 valued talent, then I'd be more worried.

All of this. The only thing I'd hedge on is that I think FRPs tend to be more valuable in trades than even talented young players like Green or Hardy, and certainly more than someone totally unproven like Omax. Even if the odds are slim that you'd actually draft a player that turns out to be better than them, I feel like GMs just seem to value picks more, because they believe in their own ability to evaluate talent.

That being said, I totally agree that players like that are very tradeable and could easily be part of a package to land a star.

[Melonhead]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Remember that we got a first just by taking on Holmes. Firsts aren't the impossible to acquire assets they used to be and depends on the draft.

We also have players that equate to firsts IMO in Green, Hardy, and Omax.

And lastly, most of our contracts are now very tradable salary-wise. That "bad" contract in Holmes turned into Gafford.

Good FOs make things happen.

If it was Luka/Irving and 0 valued talent, then I'd be more worried.

Totally agreed. This is exactly what I want from the front office.

[rimrocker]

Originally Posted by Melonhead

The way I read it was IF things go south with Luka in a few years (it won?t) there?s very little draft capital to keep the team from turning into a bball wasteland.

We should have young players and draft picks coming out of our ears if we ever decide to move on from Luka in his prime.
Trading him alone could put together a solid foundation for our future...or at least give us one he'll of a good start to a rebuild.