Author Topic: Wouldn't the Mavs be a good trading partner?  (Read 1424 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Wouldn't the Mavs be a good trading partner?
« on: July 16, 2013, 10:55:01 AM »

Offline TheRev72

  • Kristaps Porzingis
  • Posts: 191
  • Tommy Points: 29
The Mavs currently have five quality players on the team (Calderon, Monta, Vince, Marion, and Dirk) but not much else. They actually seem like they could be competitive with some depth.

Wouldn't some combination of Humphries and/or Bass and/or Lee work pretty well on their roster? They have cap space so the Celtics could basically shed a salary like Bass's (who's played there before) for spare change(2nd round pick, etc.). And the Mavs salaries after next year get even lower so they might not even be averse to taking on some contracts(Wallace? Okay, I'm pushing it there...).

It just seems like the Celtics need to shed players/salary while the Mavs have cap space and could be competitive with more depth. Looks like a match to me.

Re: Wouldn't the Mavs be a good trading partner?
« Reply #1 on: July 16, 2013, 11:02:46 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
I don't see why they'll need Humphries and Bass, who play Nowitzki/Marion's position. They also have Brandan Wright, who showed some flashes last season, and can play alongside their PFs efficiently.

I don't see why they'll need Lee, when they have Crowder and Larkin (and even Ledo). It's easier for them to just retain Mike James or Anthony Morrow.

So the short answer is, not really.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: Wouldn't the Mavs be a good trading partner?
« Reply #2 on: July 16, 2013, 11:05:38 AM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7022
  • Tommy Points: 468
Cap space is gold in today's NBA.  You don't trade gold for the guys we are trying to unload.

Period.  Point blank.  End of discussion.

Re: Wouldn't the Mavs be a good trading partner?
« Reply #3 on: July 16, 2013, 11:11:39 AM »

Offline action781

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5227
  • Tommy Points: 611
Cap space is gold in today's NBA.  You don't trade gold for the guys we are trying to unload.

Period.  Point blank.  End of discussion.
Not exactly.  If the free agent market has dried up and you're trying to be competitive, then it might very well be in your interest to make a trade like that.  Cap space is useless if there's nobody of quality to spend it on.

Unless you are talking about saving cap space for next offseason, when they already are freeing up a lot of space by Dirk and Marion's contracts expiring.  In that sense, yes they may want to have some free cap space.
2020 CelticsStrong All-2000s Draft -- Utah Jazz
 
Finals Starters:  Jason Kidd - Reggie Miller - PJ Tucker - Al Horford - Shaq
Bench:  Rajon Rondo - Trae Young - Marcus Smart - Jaylen Brown -  Peja Stojakovic - Jamal Mashburn - Carlos Boozer - Tristan Thompson - Mehmet Okur

Re: Wouldn't the Mavs be a good trading partner?
« Reply #4 on: July 16, 2013, 11:12:55 AM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
Looks like what they need most is a proven backup point guard and a quality starting center.

Unfortunately you could say the same thing about our team right now.

So no, not really.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: Wouldn't the Mavs be a good trading partner?
« Reply #5 on: July 16, 2013, 11:53:20 AM »

Offline connor

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 568
  • Tommy Points: 37
I could see them being interested in Kris Humprhies. Expiring deal so he won't affect their 2014 free agent pursuit. Doesn't really fill their need at center, but they still need to fill out their front court anyway and Humprhies is overpaid but more than serviceable.

Cuban would probably revel in the attention that Mr. Kardashian brings anyway since the Mavs failed to make any high profile additions.

I just don't know what they'd be willing to give up for a 1 year rental when they know they aren't going anywhere. 

Re: Wouldn't the Mavs be a good trading partner?
« Reply #6 on: July 16, 2013, 11:57:12 AM »

Offline moylana25

  • Xavier Tillman
  • Posts: 44
  • Tommy Points: 4
I don't see why they'll need Humphries and Bass, who play Nowitzki/Marion's position. They also have Brandan Wright, who showed some flashes last season, and can play alongside their PFs efficiently.

I don't see why they'll need Lee, when they have Crowder and Larkin (and even Ledo). It's easier for them to just retain Mike James or Anthony Morrow.

So the short answer is, not really.

Your point is valid but missing the Mavs recent moves. Morrow is gone to Nola, Larkin is out 2-3 months with a broken ankle, and Wright has yet to be resigned. I believe he's a UFA.

Re: Wouldn't the Mavs be a good trading partner?
« Reply #7 on: July 16, 2013, 12:44:29 PM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7022
  • Tommy Points: 468
Cap space is gold in today's NBA.  You don't trade gold for the guys we are trying to unload.

Period.  Point blank.  End of discussion.
Not exactly.  If the free agent market has dried up and you're trying to be competitive, then it might very well be in your interest to make a trade like that.  Cap space is useless if there's nobody of quality to spend it on.

Unless you are talking about saving cap space for next offseason, when they already are freeing up a lot of space by Dirk and Marion's contracts expiring.  In that sense, yes they may want to have some free cap space.
You're right.  But the only thing you can do to make it worse is by using cap space on guys that are not worth it.  And yes, better to save for another shot next year than to waste on JAGs (Just Another Guy). 

And, does anyone think the Mavs can seriously contend next year, expecially by adding our leftovers?  Heck no!  So basically, they are better off being worse (just like us) so that they may get better draft picks.