Dancing with Detroit - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

XERXES · 02-13-2004, 04:00 PM

I just saw on espn.com's insider that Det is trying to move Corliss Williamsons or Chucky Atkinsons contracts off the books. They're going to have to package one of them with a more desirable player to get it done (insider suggests)...

I've always suggested that Det is more replete with big men than any other team in the league.

Any suggestions?

MightyToine · 02-13-2004, 04:08 PM

Would love to get the The Big Hurt here. You can never have too many low-post guys on this team. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

SaltwaterChaffy · 02-13-2004, 04:11 PM

Well, Frank Thomas might be a good upgrade for the Rangers, but we're talking about the mavericks here MT.[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

MightyToine · 02-13-2004, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: SaltwaterChaffy
Well, Frank Thomas might be a good upgrade for the Rangers, but we're talking about the mavericks here MT.[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

Hahah...I know. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

But seriously. I'd love Corliss and it would be awesome to have this guy here. I mean...He KILLS US every game so why not get him on our team so he can kill everyone else? [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

ddh33 · 02-13-2004, 04:58 PM

Corliss Williamson is the "Big Nasty".

I don't see how he could provide anything Jamison doesn't. If one of our forwards were gone, he might be a nice fit. But right now, there's no room for him. Atkins might be a nice addition...

LRB · 02-13-2004, 05:06 PM

ddh33 I agree that Atkins would be the really attractive one of the pair for the Mavs. We'll have even less minutes available at forward next year as Howard matures. What we don't need is more of a logjam at forward.

MightyToine · 02-13-2004, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: ddh33
Corliss Williamson is the "Big Nasty".

I don't see how he could provide anything Jamison doesn't. If one of our forwards were gone, he might be a nice fit. But right now, there's no room for him. Atkins might be a nice addition...

DAMMIT! That's what I meant. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-tongue.gif[/img]

Big "NASTY" is who we could use on this team.

DNNF · 02-13-2004, 05:40 PM

Trade Walker for the Big Nasty. Or just trade Walker to McDonald for a Big Mac.

XERXES · 02-13-2004, 06:01 PM

The idea that I suggested was getting Williamson or Atkins here WITH another more attractive player on the Det roster...that is the idea...not just one of those two players.

dalmations202 · 02-13-2004, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: XERXES
The idea that I suggested was getting Williamson or Atkins here WITH another more attractive player on the Det roster...that is the idea...not just one of those two players.

How about Okur or Wallace with Atkins for one of our forwards not named Dirk ? ?

Poindexter Einstein · 02-13-2004, 07:03 PM

OKUR is going nowhere - he is the reason they are willing to give away Corliss. Wallace is an icon there, he is not going to be traded either.

XERXES · 02-13-2004, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Poindexter Einstein
OKUR is going nowhere - he is the reason they are willing to give away Corliss. Wallace is an icon there, he is not going to be traded either.

Which brings me to my original point...who (do you think) they would they be willing to part with if you gave them salary relief?

akaarod03 · 02-13-2004, 07:22 PM

i have a question...if detroit is trying to clear up salary cap space to resign okur and wallace is considered an icon...where does darko play? again...explain to me why they drafted this kid? carmelo would look terrific in detroit.

Poindexter Einstein · 02-13-2004, 07:54 PM

XERXES ...If you can make a feasible offer to Det, you can have Corliss or Atkins, if you want them. Both have talent, and both are seen as expendable. They would take back a lesser contract, or a draft pick or cash or whatever it would take to get them off the books.

But to be practical, none of this really matters in Dallas. Any deal with Det demands they end up with less cap total for next year - an "expiring contract" is what they are looking for, and Dallas doesnt have any.

AKAA ... Most likely Darko would play at the SF (and maybe a tiny bit at PF), not as a power player. At least, thats how it would start out. They see him as similar to Dirk in his skills and in how they want to develop him. Also keep in mind that he is still VERY raw and a long ways away from being a major contributor. My guess is that he isnt in their plans (as far as the rotation) for next year to a great degree. He barely plays at all this year. With that as the case, they will still have plenty of minutes and a need for both Okur and Wallace as their power players for at least a couple more years.

FreshJive · 02-13-2004, 10:26 PM

What about Rebraca? Is he going to be able to play anymore?

Poindexter Einstein · 02-13-2004, 11:14 PM

FJ .... Rebraca will be a FA this summer and Det wont resign him. He will be available

MightyToine · 02-14-2004, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by: DNNF
Trade Walker for the Big Nasty. Or just trade Walker to McDonald for a Big Mac.

[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

How about we Trade Walker for BERNIE MAC? [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

FreshJive · 02-14-2004, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Poindexter Einstein
FJ .... Rebraca will be a FA this summer and Det wont resign him. He will be available

But if he were a throw in with Corliss and Atkins then we would at least be able to try him out, before we decide who we want to spend our free agent money on. I rarely pay much attention to the East so I was mainly wondering about Rebraca's health status (heart).

Poindexter Einstein · 02-15-2004, 12:31 AM

FJ ... Det wont trade Rebraca with another player, because he is an "expiring contract." Det needs more of those, not less, so they wont trade him unless they get an even BIGGER expiring contract in return. We have ZERO of those to offer.

FreshJive · 02-15-2004, 12:44 AM

Yes, but I was assuming that Rebraca was making a low enough amount of money that he could be thrown in to a Corliss/Chucky trade without having to add another player to make the numbers work. I haven't looked into the numbers yet. Is this not the case?

Poindexter Einstein · 02-15-2004, 01:07 AM

FJ ...lets do this equation again. Please listen closely, cause you are wasting your time looking at Det for a trade partner with the Mavs.

The problem Det has, is that they must end up with SMALLER obligations for next year. THAT IS THEIR ONE AND ONLY INCENTIVE TO MAKE A TRADE AND TO GIVE AWAY ANYONE. The players they have targeted to give away are Corliss or Atkins, who are decent players but who do have contracts for 2004-05 - you have to give them a MUCH SMALLER (preferably, $0) obligation for 2004-05 in return. THEY WONT DO A DEAL JUST FOR A MINOR SALARY REDUCTION - you need 3M or more to get their attention, just to start. If you add in Rebraca, you are adding a player that has a 0 for next year - so you have to send them even MORE of a salary reduction. (Rebraca makes 4.2M a year this year, 0 next year.) With Dallas, you cant "add in" Rebraca, which makes the trade harder, cause you dont even have the goods to do the first part.

So you need a HUNK of zero-ness in 2004-05 to send to Det. And if you add in Rebraca, you need even a bigger hunk, or two hunks, of zero-ness in 2004-05. And the Mavs have a complete lack of those (ie, none, nada, zilch, zip) worth messing with, to offer. So it is a waste of time to even think about a Det player right now.

OutletPass · 02-15-2004, 01:21 AM

Quote:

So it is a waste of time to even think about a Det player right now.

Completely, true, PE. Det's MAIN GOAL is to re-sign Okur, period.
And to do that they have to drop money...that would be their only reason for DOING ANYTHING.

FreshJive · 02-15-2004, 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Poindexter Einstein
FJ ...lets do this equation again. Please listen closely, cause you are wasting your time looking at Det for a trade partner with the Mavs.

The problem Det has, is that they must end up with SMALLER obligations for next year. THAT IS THEIR ONE AND ONLY INCENTIVE TO MAKE A TRADE AND TO GIVE AWAY ANYONE. The players they have targeted to give away are Corliss or Atkins, who are decent players but who do have contracts for 2004-05 - you have to give them a MUCH SMALLER (preferably, $0) obligation for 2004-05 in return. THEY WONT DO A DEAL JUST FOR A MINOR SALARY REDUCTION - you need 3M or more to get their attention, just to start. If you add in Rebraca, you are adding a player that has a 0 for next year - so you have to send them even MORE of a salary reduction. (Rebraca makes 4.2M a year this year, 0 next year.) With Dallas, you cant "add in" Rebraca, which makes the trade harder, cause you dont even have the goods to do the first part.

So you need a HUNK of zero-ness in 2004-05 to send to Det. And if you add in Rebraca, you need even a bigger hunk, or two hunks, of zero-ness in 2004-05. And the Mavs have a complete lack of those (ie, none, nada, zilch, zip) worth messing with, to offer. So it is a waste of time to even think about a Det player right now.

It wasn't really my idea in the first place. I only asked about Rebraca's health status. I didn't start the thread, and it was The Insider that suggests that Detroit will have to give up something else desirable to get a deal done.

Honestly, I'm wasting my time anytime I decide to think about the Mavericks, and per your opinion of the possibility of a trade with Detroit, you wasted your time when you decided to click on the link for this thread.

Poindexter Einstein · 02-15-2004, 02:27 AM

Didnt see any questions about Rebracas health (and I think it is under control, according to what I have seen this year) ... just saw questions about the money working and throwing in players ....Yes it hs been speculated that Detroit might have to add "more" to make a deal, but that deal would involve a team that DOES have assets desirable to the Pistons..

If you dont like to think about the Mavs, you sure are in the wrong chat room, cause thats about all that goes on in this world. But while you are here, you will most definitely find out plenty of news and speculation of every kind about them, I have discovered.

My opinion is that a trade with Detroit is desirable but next to impossible to do, cause we dont have the assets they desire - however, since they have the things the Mavs need (big men in abundance), then to me it makes sense to see if someone has something workable for all parties.

FreshJive · 02-15-2004, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Poindexter Einstein
Didnt see any questions about Rebracas health

This is my first post:
"What about Rebraca? Is he going to be able to play anymore?"
That's what I meant by is he going to be able to play anymore. That was vague of me so in my next post I explained: "I rarely pay much attention to the East so I was mainly wondering about Rebraca's health status (heart)."

Quote:

If you dont like to think about the Mavs, you sure are in the wrong chat room, cause thats about all that goes on in this world.

I didn't say I don't like to think about the Mavs. I said it is most likely a waste of time. I enjoy wasting time in many ways.

Quote:

My opinion is that a trade with Detroit is desirable but next to impossible to do, cause we dont have the assets they desire - however, since they have the things the Mavs need (big men in abundance), then to me it makes sense to see if someone has something workable for all parties.

Yep I agree. So why did you call me out as wasting my time because I was speculating about trading with Detroit? Round Round Round we go......

Poindexter Einstein · 02-15-2004, 06:29 AM

FJ ...wasnt trying to call you out ... rather, when I told you in the prior post that a deal for Rebraca was a non-starter for the Mavs, you seemed to pursue it from a different angle ...so i was trying to help by emphasizing the futility, in the latter reply.

If you took it as "calling you out," then you misunderstood my tone as having a hostile air that wasnt there. I probably didnt write the correct words, cause that surely wasnt my intent. I was merely adding emphasis to try to adequately convey what it seemed I had failed to do the first try - ie, the fact that Det is almost impossible for Dallas to trade with (cause of a bad match of desires-vs-assets from Dets end).

FreshJive · 02-15-2004, 07:08 AM

I agree that it is unlikely that Detroit is an unlikely trading partner for the Mavs, because of what we have to offer. I was only thinking of players they might include in a trade. No worries mate.

Poindexter Einstein · 02-15-2004, 07:23 AM

Other than the contract situation, Rebraca would certainly seem to be expendable. But he isnt a top tier center so he wont be a hot commodity that would induce someone to send Det that luscious zero contract in exchange.

And Rebraca has a nasty kicker on the other end - even if you trade for him, you dont get matching ability to keep him: you will have to use up cap room or MLE space to keep him. So he is a rent-a-player (only) that is of moderate ability: that makes him not very desirable in a trade.

Rebraca's best deal for his future would be to re-sign with Det to get that 3rd consecutive year that will carry matching rights in the future - but Det is almost certain to be unable to do that, for cap reasons. If things dont work out for the Mavs this summer with 'Tag or 'Sheed for the MLE, he could definitely be another one to keep an eye on. You might be able to get him for much less than the full MLE and then also end up with MLE leftovers to offer to MDaniels.