What would you do?

[dalmations202]

You get to be GM and in Marks ear.

What do you do from here through the end of Dirk's ability?

Give specifics and plan to get back to another title.

[Underdog]

I don't think any of us have enough information to forecast the next couple of years, especially since the NBA is expected to face a "market correction" in summer of 2013... Right now you still have teams who seemingly don't care about the 3-in-5 rule (Lakers), other teams who are paying players as if the old CBA rules still existed (Knicks) and of course there are still teams that never really understood the value of an NBA player in the first place (Hawks).

As long as owners are still grossly overpaying players in an increasingly-tighter market, the true value of free agents will remain a bit of an unknown until more players are signed to new contracts. So it's probably best for owners to react to the market instead of trying to set the market... Which is exactly what Mark Cuban said he is going to do.

But for starters, let's spend a little no-brainer money... Sign Deron Williams. Beyond that, we're really just throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks until Cubes and Donnie start unraveling a plan in a certain direction.

[Kidd Karma]

I'd tell Cubes to stick with their guns. He's already thrown out that summer 2013 will be much bigger than this one in terms of that correction in the market. I'd tell him to stick with those guys and stay flexible until you get 3 max level players in hand. Unfortunately we may have to lose another year of Dirk's "prime" but getting Deron in the interim will help that sting.

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by Underdog

I don't think any of us have enough information to forecast the next couple of years, especially since the NBA is expected to face a "market correction" in summer of 2013... Right now you still have teams who seemingly don't care about the 3-in-5 rule (Lakers), other teams who are paying players as if the old CBA rules still existed (Knicks) and of course there are still teams that never really understood the value of an NBA player in the first place (Hawks).

As long as owners are still grossly overpaying players in an increasingly-tighter market, the true value of free agents will remain a bit of an unknown until more players are signed to new contracts. So it's probably best for owners to react to the market instead of trying to set the market... Which is exactly what Mark Cuban said he is going to do.

But for starters, let's spend a little no-brainer money... Sign Deron Williams. Beyond that, we're really just throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks until Cubes and Donnie start unraveling a plan in a certain direction.

I think it really is about 2013. There will be a lot of money tossed around and owners/gms will take risks this offseason to pick up some big name guys. It'll be next offseason when teams are in cap hell that it will really start to sink in.

We can probably pry Hibbert away with the max (around 14.5) but he's probably worth around 8-9 in the new CBA. Now more than ever its not just about getting talent, but getting talent at the right price so your team isnt one dimensional with 2-3 guys getting all your cap space. A max guy at 15m, 1-2 stars at 9mill and a few guys in the 5 range and the rest min should really be what most teams do

[dude1394]

Now, I think they've screwed the pooch, it's over IMO.

Before... Sign chandler, get deron...work it,from there. I dont give a crap about four years from now or luxury tax four years from now. Dirk redoes his contract when up and you figure out how to effing draft.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Now, I think they've screwed the pooch, it's over IMO.

Before... Sign chandler, get deron...work it,from there. I dont give a crap about four years from now or luxury tax four years from now. Dirk redoes his contract when up and you figure out how to effing draft.

Next year's salaries, assuming we matched New York's offer and amnestied Haywood:

Dirk: $20M
Deron: $17M
Chandler: $13.8M
Marion: $8.6M

TOTAL: 59.4M
Salary cap: $58M


We'd be the Dallas Knicks...

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by dude1394

I dont give a crap about four years from now or luxury tax four years from now.

Well, that's logical.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Next year's salaries, assuming we matched New York's offer and amnestied Haywood:

Dirk: $20M
Deron: $17M
Chandler: $13.8M
Marion: $8.6M

TOTAL: 59.4M
Salary cap: $58M


We'd be the Dallas Knicks...

We'd be over the cap for sure...Marion might have to go to get more scoring in house, when do penalties ( not monetarily ) kick in. I thought it was 4 years over the cap or something like that.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Well, that's logical.

It's all bout trying to win another chip now. Tyson is through 2014. Dirk/shawns salaries gets redone in 2013. Shawn may not be here or not next year.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Next year's salaries, assuming we matched New York's offer and amnestied Haywood:

Dirk: $20M
Deron: $17M
Chandler: $13.8M
Marion: $8.6M

TOTAL: 59.4M
Salary cap: $58M


We'd be the Dallas Knicks...

That team would beat the crap out of the Knicks for what it is worth.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

I think it really is about 2013. There will be a lot of money tossed around and owners/gms will take risks this offseason to pick up some big name guys. It'll be next offseason when teams are in cap hell that it will really start to sink in.

We can probably pry Hibbert away with the max (around 14.5) but he's probably worth around 8-9 in the new CBA. Now more than ever its not just about getting talent, but getting talent at the right price so your team isnt one dimensional with 2-3 guys getting all your cap space. A max guy at 15m, 1-2 stars at 9mill and a few guys in the 5 range and the rest min should really be what most teams do

This doesn't happen IMO for almost 5 years.

[crowdseats]

its hard to say what hibbert is worth, but imo there isnt a limit on what a stout defensive true center is worth. with dirk, a great passing point guard, shooters who can spread the floor and a stopper down low, there is no telling where the team can go.

[Ninkobei]

58 mil cap? I was under the impression that the serious luxury tax penalties don't start kicking in until 75 million or so. There's certainly a bit of wiggle room given Mark's past financial expenditures.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by dude1394

It's all bout trying to win another chip now.

I absolutely disagree.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Ninkobei

58 mil cap? I was under the impression that the serious luxury tax penalties don't start kicking in until 75 million or so. There's certainly a bit of wiggle room given Mark's past financial expenditures.

Under the new CBA, there are incredibly strict repeater provisions if you're even a little bit over for multiple years in a row.

[CapitanObvious]

If it was me..

Sign Deron 17 m
Offer Hibbert 8-9M and hope pacers don't match (If this doesnt go thru grab a serviceable big man for 1 year, Kaman maybe...then go for the D.Howard sweepstake next year)
Trade Trix for a couple of second rounders and a sack of potato
Sign DeShawn
Develop Azubuike (Potential to be a defensive SF and a 3 point threat)
Resign Kidd to as low as possible
Resign Boob
Let JET walk if not available for cheaps (Resign Delonte if he walks)
?????
Profit

[CapitanObvious]

With this you play with:

Deron, Kidd
DeShawn, Jet (West), Boob
Azubuike, Old Vince
Dirkie Boy, Wright Stuff
Hibbert (Rent a Center Camby, Mcgee, Camby), Wright, Mahinmi

(NBA 2k12 taught me a lot of things LOLOL)

[rabbitproof]

Yeah.. Dirk/Deron is miles ahead of Melo/Amare.

Short-term, I don't see real downside to a Deron/Dirk/Tyson trio. It would probably also better than we can put together next year. The only difference is Chandler vs another near-max/two mid-tier free agents, which may be favorable but probably not by much. Splitting hairs or clumps of hair. Moreover, having Tyson could actually help us land Deron although bringing in a young 3rd gun who appeals to Deron would work, too. However, we won't make another big move without knowing what Deron's situation is so it's basically asking Deron to come to Dallas as Dallas is today.

With Tyson, we would also would have had a more interesting 2011-2012.

Anyways, the past's the past.

EDIT:
To speak to this post, keep gunning for Deron. If blowing up the championship team was only worth it to get Deron AND Dwight, I question their estimated probability of being able to land both. The only time such a coup was scored in league history was last year and that was with more favorable CBA dynamics to new teams.

After bagging Deron, jettison Haywood and use the remaining assets/cap to reenforce the five. Hibbert would sweet but more realistic options may be Camby/Kaman. I would try to get Dalembert (who I thought was the better target/fit than Odom last year) via trade. Resign Mahinimi and West. Move VC to JET's role. Sign JET/Kidd for minimum only. Develop the young guys minus DoJo and look for buyout targets. Basically, try to mimic the Spurs' team of this year.

If we wiff on Deron, redo last year's model in hopes of striking gold but probably settling for a 1st/2nd round exit. Try to move the young guys for veteran assets to try to win this coming year. Year after, think of life after Dirk. When we rebuild, plan to do the proper 3-4 years in the lotto rebuild ala OKC.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Under the new CBA, there are incredibly strict repeater provisions if you're even a little bit over for multiple years in a row.

How many years? We just wasted one.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

How many years? We just wasted one.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/...pares-last-one

• 2011 CBA: Teams pay $1 for every $1 their salary is above the luxury-tax threshold in 2011-12 and 2012-13. Starting in 2012-13, teams pay an incremental tax that increases with every $5 million above the tax threshold ($1.50, $1.75, $2.50, $3.25, etc.). Teams that are repeat offenders (paying tax at least four out of the past five seasons) have a tax that is higher still -- $1 more at each increment ($2.50, $2.75, $3.50, $4.25, etc.).

• Who benefits? I'll tell you which teams don't benefit -- the perennial taxpayers, like the Lakers and Mavericks. When the league was unable to negotiate a hard cap, they settled for the next best thing -- a more punitive luxury tax that will make teams think twice before committing to a higher payroll. For example, the Lakers' tax bill in 2011 (when the tax was dollar-for-dollar) was about $19.9 million. Under the new system, being that far over the tax line would cost them $44.68 million. If they were a repeat offender (paying tax at least four of the previous five years) they would owe $64.58 million!

also

Starting in 2013-14, teams more than $4 million above the tax level cannot receive a player in a sign-and-trade transaction.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by dude1394

How many years? We just wasted one.

If you lock guys in right now, you're completely hamstringing yourself in a few years. And you're doing it for a small, small chance of repeating.

And yes, it is a small chance. I'm sorry. I know you (and others, to be fair) want to talk about how a re-signed 2011 team (or close) would have had "just as good a chance as anyone," but 1) that's really not even true, and 2) even if it were true, you're competing against the field, not any one other team.

It is not worth crippling this franchise for several years to sell out for what is undeniably a small chance of winning another title. The first title? Different story, which is why the "Dirk's window" arguments were immensely more compelling before last June than they are now.

[chumdawg]

You can carry that logic all the way out to "it's never a good idea to sign anyone." It's the Cuban model. He'd love one-year contracts for everyone...and that would certainly fit the model being vouched for here.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

You can carry that logic all the way out to "it's never a good idea to sign anyone."

No, you can't.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

And yes, it is a small chance. I'm sorry. I know you (and others, to be fair) want to talk about how a re-signed 2011 team (or close) would have had "just as good a chance as anyone," but 1) that's really not even true, and 2) even if it were true, you're competing against the field, not any one other team.

Not to get off on a tangent, but I'm not sure if last year's Mavs would beat this year's Thunder - they've improved a lot, especially Westbrook and Harden... And the addition of Fisher hasn't hurt them either.

The Spurs are better too. And the Clippers. And the Nuggets are also heading in the right direction...

Wins aren't guaranteed in this league, but salaries are. Going all-in for nothing but a CHANCE to repeat isn't worth the potential long-term ramifications under the new CBA...

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Not to get off on a tangent, but I'm not sure if last year's Mavs would beat this year's Thunder - they've improved a lot, especially Westbrook and Harden... And the addition of Fisher hasn't hurt them either.

The Spurs are better too. And the Clippers. And the Nuggets are also heading in the right direction...

Wins aren't guaranteed in this league, but salaries are. Going all-in for nothing but a CHANCE to repeat isn't worth the potential long-term ramifications under the new CBA...

Spot on.

[chumdawg]

Are they going to go away? Is that the deal? The Thunder and the Spurs and the Clippers and the Nuggets are going to go away soon? And all we have to do is wait them out?

You guys need to open your eyes and realize that when those teams go away, if they do, someone else is going to fill the void.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

No, you can't.

Miami did it, and they are in the Final Four two years in a row, and maybe the Finals twice. Right?

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Miami did it, and they are in the Final Four two years in a row, and maybe the Finals twice. Right?

Miami did what? Signed 2 of the 5 best players in the NBA and another guy in the top 20 or so?

Yeah, they did do that. Let me know which day it was that the Mavs passed up a similar opportunity.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Are they going to go away? Is that the deal? The Thunder and the Spurs and the Clippers and the Nuggets are going to go away soon? And all we have to do is wait them out?

You guys need to open your eyes and realize that when those teams go away, if they do, someone else is going to fill the void.

Hello, straw man - nobody is having that conversation...

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Miami did what? Signed 2 of the 5 best players in the NBA and another guy in the top 20 or so?

Yeah, they did do that. Let me know which day it was that the Mavs passed up a similar opportunity.

When they re-upped with Dirk.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Hello, straw man - nobody is having that conversation...

Where's the straw man? You've got a bunch of teams in the conference who are presently better situated than you (by most accounts). Where is this straw man?

[howdoesmydirktaste]

Miami will get steamrolled in the Finals by the Thunder. With Bosh hurt, the interior of OKC will destroy them. The second Miami tries to adjust to that Durant, Harden and Westbrook will reign down threes. The Spurs would take Miami too IMHO. Those teams have home grown talent at their core. Those players salaries are far lower than LBJ and Dwayne Wade. Therefore they can have better role players.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Where's the straw man? You've got a bunch of teams in the conference who are presently better situated than you (by most accounts). Where is this straw man?

Every straw man contains a piece of truth, but the point is twisted.

Sure, you've got "a bunch of teams in the conference who are presently better situated than you" - but nobody implied that those teams were going away... Where did you get that crazy idea? Has anyone here said that doing absolutely nothing is a smart option?

Straw man.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Every straw man contains a piece of truth, but the point is twisted.

Sure, you've got "a bunch of teams in the conference who are presently better situated than you" - but nobody implied that those teams were going away... Where did you get that crazy idea? Has anyone here said that doing absolutely nothing is a smart option?

Straw man.

You're damn right they have implied it! And in a very big way! It's what passing on Chandler was.

Hello?

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

You're damn right they have implied it! And in a very big way! It's what passing on Chandler was.

Hello?

Passing on Chandler was an implication that the Thunder and Spurs are soon going to be dismantled?

You're not making any sense.

[dude1394]

Well I've stated what I would do and in spite of all the posts telling me why I would be dumb to do that, the only counter-opinion I've seen is:

- beats me, I don't know
- sign deron and then see what else Cuban/Donnie will do
- wait until 2013 to hopefully get a bunch of really good players on the cheap

Well to be honest I don't see a decent CEO in the bunch. Every scenario is to get under the cap and become just as mediocre as everyone else when the dirkster rides off into the sunset.

[oilfieldtrash]

DWill,Kidd
Marco Belineli, Roddy
Marion
Dirk, Humphries/Wright
Mahinmi,?


Plan B
Dragic,Kidd
Terry, Marco Belineli
Marion,?
Dirk,Wright/Humphries
Mahinmi

[aexchange]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Under the new CBA, there are incredibly strict repeater provisions if you're even a little bit over for multiple years in a row.

I could be confused, but I thought the repeater provisions applied to teams that were classified as being charged the luxury tax, but not who were simply over the salary cap.

Meaning if the cap is at $58M, luxury tax is at $70M, and your salary commitments are at $65M, you wouldn't be charged the luxury tax.

Can someone clarify?

[ibivibiv]

Originally Posted by jthig32

Passing on Chandler was an implication that the Thunder and Spurs are soon going to be dismantled?

You're not making any sense.

I think he is trying to illustrate that there are 2 ways to have gone at this and both really have merits.

Way 1: Dump the roster and go under the cap and hope that other teams feel the strain and you are in a position to pick up their "leftover" assets when they shed players because of the new CBA. This might mean wasting away Dirks final useful years.

Way 2: Do what a lot of teams have done and go for it now and deal with the new CBA when it becomes an issue finally knowing that everyone will be moving players then too and the deals will abound.

I think they both are valid strategies myself. Saying that strategy 1 is better because OKC and SA are too good is silly though. I think his point is that if you are "waiting out" a potential good team then you will be waiting forever.

Choosing to get in a position to buy up assets this year/next is good because you think you can build a better team for the long haul, not because you think you might have too much competition this year.

For the record I think I would go with way 1 btw. I am more of a long term guy though. Although I probably would have amnestied Wood this year and used that money to try harder to keep Chandler. I'm not too big on getting Howard atm. I think Deron + Dirk + Chandler would be my first pick with only Hibbert as a second pick. Howard seems like too much drama/money right now to me. Chandler just had that selfless leader kind of charm that I liked.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by ibivibiv

I think they both are valid strategies myself. Saying that strategy 1 is better because OKC and SA are too good is silly though. I think his point is that if you are "waiting out" a potential good team then you will be waiting forever.

The problem is that chum's point is not actually responsive to anything that it was supposedly offered in response to, which unfortunately has become the norm.

Originally Posted by aexchange

I could be confused, but I thought the repeater provisions applied to teams that were classified as being charged the luxury tax, but not who were simply over the salary cap.

Meaning if the cap is at $58M, luxury tax is at $70M, and your salary commitments are at $65M, you wouldn't be charged the luxury tax.

Can someone clarify?

I just re-read my previous post and I see that I made it sound like being over the cap (rather than the luxury threshold) is the cutoff. It is based on the tax threshold, which has a minimum of about $70M until 2013, at which point there's no longer any minimum.