Chandler, Felton to the mavs for Calderon, dalembert and larkin

[Kyle Orton]

Link coming

[jeebus]

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

[IrisHockey]

HOLY SHIT ITS HAPPENING

[baseline bum]

Just gotta get Terry from Sacramento now, and send Felton to a labor camp.

[spurraider21]

Just gotta get Doc's DeLorean.
fify

[IrisHockey]

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11135060/dallas-mavericks-talks-acquire-tyson-chandler-raymond-felton-new-york-knicks

The Dallas Mavericks (http://espn.go.com/nba/team/_/name/dal/dallas-mavericks) are on the verge of reacquiring center Tyson Chandler (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/984/tyson-chandler) from the New York Knicks (http://espn.go.com/nba/team/_/name/ny/new-york-knicks), according to sources close to the process.
[+] Enlargehttp://a.espncdn.com/photo/2014/0315/ny_g_tyson-chandler_mb_300x200.jpg (http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2014/0315/ny_g_tyson-chandler_mb_600x400.jpg)Nathaniel S. Butler/NBAE/Getty ImagesSources say the Mavericks are close to reacquiring Tyson Chandler, who went to the Knicks after helping the Mavs to a title in 2011.


Sources told ESPN.com that the Mavericks, who immediately made reacquiring Chandler one of their priorities after their first-round playoffs exit to San Antonio, soon will complete a trade with the Knicks that they will clinch by agreeing to take back the contract of New York's out-of-favor guard Raymond Felton (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2753/raymond-felton), as well.
The trade is expected to cost Dallas two starters -- point guard Jose Calderon (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2806/jose-calderon) and center Samuel Dalembert (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/991/samuel-dalembert)-- along with prized young point guardShane Larkin (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2596158/shane-larkin), reserve guard Wayne Ellington (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/3981/wayne-ellington) and future second-round draft compensation.
Chandler is the player Dallas has missed most since it decided to let go several key contributors in free agency after the team's championship run in 2011.
Chandler, 31, wound up landing a four-year, $60 million deal in free agency with the Knicks that year that has one season remaining.
The departures of Chandler and Felton are believed to be just the start of a roster overhaul by new Knicks president Phil Jackson, with Jackson pursing as much salary-cap flexibility as he can in hopes of convincing star free agent-to-be Carmelo Anthony (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/1975/carmelo-anthony) to stay.


Calderon to Felton is a downgrade but with Ellis at the helm all we need from the PG position is a 3 point threat..

[baseline bum]

Mavs on verge of deal with Knicks (http://i.imgur.com/K29YJ3m.jpg)
Updated: June 25, 2014, 4:26 PM ET
By Marc Stein | ESPN.com
The Dallas Mavericks are on the verge of reacquiring center Tyson Chandler from the New York Knicks, according to sources close to the process.

Sources say the Mavericks are close to reacquiring Tyson Chandler, who went to the Knicks after helping the Mavs to a title in 2011.
Sources told ESPN.com that the Mavericks, who immediately made reacquiring Chandler one of their priorities after their first-round playoffs exit to San Antonio, soon will complete a trade with the Knicks that they will clinch by agreeing to take back the contract of New York's out-of-favor guard Raymond Felton as well.

[mavsfan1000]

Good trade. But lol at Cuban admitting he should have resigned Chandler.

[IrisHockey]

Dallas would be sending $15,341,893 in the deal. NY would send $18,490.581 in proposed deal.Mavs would then absorb $3,048,688 this season


Still have money to absord a big free agent assuming Nowitzki comes back on 3 years/36 mil

[IrisHockey]

Good trade. But lol at Cuban admitting he should have resigned Chandler.

I thought it never would've happened due to Cubes' ego but props to the guy

[baseline bum]

Fucking West keeps getting tougher.

[Baam]

Don't see the point tbh, Chandler seems almost done... And Felton is a huge downgrade from Calderon...

[Sean Cagney]

Fucking West keeps getting tougher.

Always.

[Trill Clinton]

struggle tradehttp://i57.tinypic.com/2dlrtb4.jpg

[TDMVPDPOY]

lol trying to restore pass glory

[spurraider21]

Don't see the point tbh, Chandler seems almost done... And Felton is a huge downgrade from Calderon...
last gasp. Chandler/Dirk should be OK if they're healthy. They still have Monta and cap room too

[RD2191]

:lolToo late, the Spurs are the Mavs daddy and they know it. We may not repeat but it won't be the Mavs who take us out. Non issue.

[IrisHockey]

:lol there's literally no risk in absorbing Chandler's expiring deal.

[Findog]

He's better than Dalembert/Dirk/Blair trying to guard the rim. Still not a title team, but a good step in the right direction.

Now if you excuse me, I'm going to go masturbate furiously in the bathroom stall here at work.

[spurraider21]

:lol there's literally no risk in absorbing Chandler's expiring deal.
true. i'm not sure of NY's motives here, considering they have Calderon for 3 overpaid seasons... and this move is supposed to entice Melo to stay? yikes

[IrisHockey]

Can't believe Phil is stupid enough to ask for Calderon and not Ellis in return

[Chinook]

What a horrible trade for Dallas. They have the power in negotiations. Why are they capitulating to such stupid demands?

[baseline bum]

Chandler is only 31, so the washed up talk is a bit premature.

[DPG21920]

So for eating ~3M this year and giving up a 2nd rounder, the Mavs get the better player (Chandler), the better contract (Felton) and more cap flexibility beyond next year. What am I missing?

[DPG21920]

What a horrible trade for Dallas. They have the power in negotiations. Why are they capitulating to such stupid demands?

What stupid demands?

[IrisHockey]

If Vince is gone I wouldn't mind JET on vet min..

[IrisHockey]

Adrian Wojnarowski ‏@WojYahooNBA (https://twitter.com/WojYahooNBA) 50s (https://twitter.com/WojYahooNBA/status/481903216838598657)
New York's deal centered on sending Tyson Chandler to Dallas will be finalized today, league sources tell Yahoo Sports.

[Double-Up]

He's better than Dalembert/Dirk/Blair trying to guard the rim. Still not a title team, but a good step in the right direction.

Now if you excuse me, I'm going to go masturbate furiously in the bathroom stall here at work.

Don't forget to wash your hands.

[Donkeybong]

Calderon is a decent upgrade over Felton and a better triangle point guard. Calderone is 32, so it's not like he's super old. Also players better defense than Felton. I like where Phil's head is at. He's trusting the system rather than the star players. (Like what San Antonio does)

[baseline bum]

Now just gotta bring back Beaubois

[spurraider21]

:lol if they actually go after Jason Terry

[Donkeybong]

So for eating ~3M this year and giving up a 2nd rounder, the Mavs get the better player (Chandler), the better contract (Felton) and more cap flexibility beyond next year. What am I missing?
Knicks under the cap now and can receive a sign and trade. Also better stability. Rumors were chandler wasn't thrilled about playing in the triangle (he's more of a run and gun player anyways)

[spurraider21]

Calderon is a decent upgrade over Felton and a better triangle point guard. Calderone is 32, so it's not like he's super old. Also players better defense than Felton. I like where Phil's head is at. He's trusting the system rather than the star players. (Like what San Antonio does)
Calderon is actually a solid fit for a team running the triangle, but that roster is a mess anyway. I'd rather keep the giant expiring deal

[Donkeybong]

Plus I don't think people realize how awful Felton really is.

[AlexJones]

I can't take this shit anymore.

They refuse to use DUST on Al Jefferson. Then they spend it immediately to get Tyson Fucking Chander??????????????????????????????????????

After months of hyping the "DUST chip" and promising miracles, I knew after the Jefferson debacle Cuban was going to have to scramble and use it before a fan mutiny was on his hands. I figured he'd go after the best deal available, Iggy/Brand. Instead he panic trades DUST for TYSON FUCKING CHANDLER?????????

I've had it.

FUCK YOU MARK

FUCK YOU DONNIE

FUCK YOU RICK

TYSON FUCKING CHANDLER, ARE YOU GUYS FUCKING SHITTING ME????????

[Clipper Nation]

Why on Earth are the Mavs doing this trade? Chandler is far from 2011 Chandler, Felton is a joke, and they're giving away draft picks too.... is Cuban trying to become the next Fredo?

[LakerHater]

Samuel Dalembert jus confermed he was bein traded!

[blkroadrunners]

I have a feeling the Mavs ain't done yet for the off-season. Somethin's a :stirpot: up in South Oklahoma.

[LakerHater]

481904930731458561

481906546100535296

[024]

:lol Cuban coaxing Jax to take Calderon's contract. Melo already out the door

[mavsfan1000]

I can't take this shit anymore.

They refuse to use DUST on Al Jefferson. Then they spend it immediately to get Tyson Fucking Chander??????????????????????????????????????

After months of hyping the "DUST chip" and promising miracles, I knew after the Jefferson debacle Cuban was going to have to scramble and use it before a fan mutiny was on his hands. I figured he'd go after the best deal available, Iggy/Brand. Instead he panic trades DUST for TYSON FUCKING CHANDLER?????????

I've had it.

FUCK YOU MARK

FUCK YOU DONNIE

FUCK YOU RICK

TYSON FUCKING CHANDLER, ARE YOU GUYS FUCKING SHITTING ME????????
Dalembert fucking sucks and is older than Chandler.

[mavsfan1000]

Plus I don't think people realize how awful Felton really is.
Who cares? We got a legit center again.

[spurraider21]

http://www.shitivegottohave.com/uploads/it's%20happening.gif

[Raven]

good trade for both, ny needs to blow it up and dallas gets better this way.

[Donkeybong]

Who cares? We got a legit center again.
Definitely better than what you had. I'm just saying watching Felton on the Knicks was fucking agonizing

[Phillip]

Who cares? We got a legit center again.

Plus Felton isn't being asked to be anything more than a role player. If they keep Carter, then the guard rotation will be pretty decent with Harris/Felton and Ellis/Carter.

Hopefully they can now get Luol Deng. And if he is willing to take such a role, getting Gasol to back up Dirk and Chandler would be a great move as well, although it probably won't happen.

[tmtcsc]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_3-h7k_OIJk0/TCo-M-zQjCI/AAAAAAAAC5U/0lHl-pkkJ2M/s1600/terrified1.jpg

What will the Spurs do now?!?!? Who's next, Michael Finley. LOL! They should have never let Chandler walk and they should have never got him back.

[ElNono]

I like it. They're addressing their main problem which was protection around the rim. They do really need to make another move or two, like flipping Felton for a better P&R PG and shoring up the wing... Marion doesn't cut it anymore, IMO.

[DPG21920]

Who cares about Felton sucking. Calderon, while a better player, isn't a good player and hasn't won due in large part to his short-comings as a player. So while he may improve NY due to replacing Felton, losing Tyson for Sam negates that any ways.

They lose future cap space/flexibility, lose the best player on an expiring deal (aka the most tradeable asset) & make no gains on the court. Yes, they might open themselves up to getting below the apron for Sign & Trades, but they literally have no good assets that teams would want :lol

They have no cap space this year to sign FA's outright. They have a terrible team still. They have less cap space in the future. They have less tradeable assets IMO all for the ability to possibly do Sign & Trades this year & 2 2nd round picks. Ok.

[Findog]

Better teammates for Lebron:

Dirk
Tyson
Monta

Or

Wade
Bosh
Norris Cole

[N0 LyF3 ScRuB]

Calderon is the better point guard at this point.. Felton used to be. Felton had a tough year, but hopefully a new environment will change that.. still see mediocrity though.


Chandler is going to be huge for Dallas - obviously. I see Dallas being a top 5-6 seed this year unless Dirk falls off completely.

[N0 LyF3 ScRuB]

Who cares about Felton sucking. Calderon, while a better player, isn't a good player and hasn't won due in large part to his short-comings as a player. So while he may improve NY due to replacing Felton, losing Tyson for Sam negates that any ways.

They lose future cap space/flexibility, lose the best player on an expiring deal (aka the most tradeable asset) & make no gains on the court. Yes, they might open themselves up to getting below the apron for Sign & Trades, but they literally have no good assets that teams would want :lol

They have no cap space this year to sign FA's outright. They have a terrible team still. They have less cap space in the future. They have less tradeable assets IMO all for the ability topossibly do Sign & Trades this year & 2 2nd round picks. Ok.

Calderon will struggle because of the lack of system in New York.. just like Bargnani. Larkin is a pretty good prospect, though..

Like you said Calderon > Felton at this point.

[Findog]

Mark + Donnie meet Chandler at airport with roses & a "Sorry about that," card.

Tyson accepts. One tear rolls down cheek.

*Credits roll*

[Killakobe81]

Good trade. But lol at Cuban admitting he should have resigned Chandler.

If he is healthy great trade. Like I saiiiid, you keep Tyson let the midget and Lincoln ,,,walk.
Heck Tyson, Calderon Ellis and Dirk is a great starting core.

[Kyle Orton]

Sign Lowry and Deng if we miss out on lebron tbh

[DPG21920]

Calderon will struggle because of the lack of system in New York.. just like Bargnani. Larkin is a pretty good prospect, though..

Like you said Calderon > Felton at this point.

They better feel that Larkin is the next Tony Parker IMO to justify this. It doesn't kill them or anything, but it makes an already awful situation slightly worse IMO. Who cares if Calderon>Felton at this point. That is irrelevant IMO because overall losing Tyson negates that and even if it didn't, Calderon being better doesn't lead to anything tangible because their team is awful.

Other than possibly valuing 2nd round picks, thinking Shane :lolarkin is a good prospect and thinking the ability to do a S&T (with no assets to offer) I can't see why they did this. To me, losing cap space in the near future is not worth any of that ^

[Phillip]

While probably not happening, the thought of getting Carmello is still intriguing to me...

[Raven]

Calderon is actually a solid fit for a team running the triangle, but that roster is a mess anyway. I'd rather keep the giant expiring deal

people keep thinking that's still a good value under the new cba, but it's sooooo isn't man.

[Trill Clinton]

i didn't watch much knick basketball...was tyson chandler sorry as hell last year or nah?

[Trill Clinton]

While probably not happening, the thought of getting Carmello is still intriguing to me...

nah, y'all got a better shot at lowry

[DPG21920]

Mavs can easily get Melo financially. It all depends on what Dirk takes. If Dirk comes in with a low, low contract (like 13M), they should have 20M to offer Melo.

Felton/Monta/Melo/Dirk/Tyson

[Killakobe81]

Breaking up a title team ... should of at least kept daddy Tyson was a perfect complement for Dirk.

[Phillip]

Mavs can easily get Melo financially. It all depends on what Dirk takes. If Dirk comes in with a low, low contract (like 13M), they should have 20M to offer Melo.

Felton/Monta/Melo/Dirk/Tyson
I think Harris would end up starting over Felton most likely. I would hope he does anyways. The defense would be pretty solid and long with that lineup. And hopefully they can get Marion to stay as well for the MLE or something.

[Killakobe81]

Doubt Melo comes but Deng is possible.

Felton
Ellis
Deng
Dirk
Daddy

With the 2nd best coach in the NBA wont win a title but could be dangerous in a playoff. Heck they played the Spurs better than anyone else with crappy center play.

[Chinook]

What stupid demands?

The Mavs are giving up two of their starters, their highest draft pick in a while and at least one second-rounder. They're doing all that while taking back Felton's salary so that they can take back a player the Knicks will be looking to dump in two weeks. What sense does that make? The only things Dallas didn't give up were Ellis instead of Calderon and their first next year (which they can trade starting tomorrow, before anyone tries to say they can't).

Dallas had all the leverage in this deal. They didn't need Chandler. The center trade market is going to be surprisingly strong this off-season. New York, in fact, is likely to get one of those centers, which is why they're looking to trade Chandler right now (in addition to their half-hearted attempt to get a better roster together before the first of July). Tyson is still a good player, but his stock is not very high right now. Have we even heard about any other team wanting him? The Mavs could have waited on this deal for a while, since Chandler's price was only going to decline next month. They weren't in danger of losing cap space by waiting, since they're not using it to complete this deal. In fact, they lose space by doing it now.

Dallas should have offered to take Chandler off the Knicks' hands using their cap space or even doing to the Calderon/Felton swap. But if they went the PG route, they should have tried to get an asset out of New York, or at least not given up a few themselves.

This is as bad as the Bargnani trade from a leverage standpoint, although it's obviously better from a personnel/value standpoint. Dallas can certainly recover by signing a PG like Lowery and picking up a small-forward like Ariza with their cap space. But they still messed up this part of the off-season.

[IrisHockey]

Breaking up a title team ... should of at least kept daddy Tyson was a perfect complement for Dirk.

Oh really? Is there more we need to know?

[spurraider21]

:lol mavfan still getting trolled by the played out "should have kept chandler" shtick

[Raven]

it's clear phil is cleaning house, that's what he has to.

[IrisHockey]

:lol mavfan still getting trolled by the played out "should have kept chandler" shtick

You actually think KillaKobe did it purpose.

[BatManu20]

481917205785739264

[spurraider21]

You actually think KillaKobe did it purpose.
keep digging that hole deeper

[IrisHockey]

keep digging that hole deeper

What hole?

[fevertrees]

struggle tradehttp://i57.tinypic.com/2dlrtb4.jpg


http://i60.tinypic.com/10r0new.png

[BatManu20]

481919058544459777

[Chinook]

481917205785739264

It's pretty much as bad from a leverage standpoint as the Melo-to-Knicks trade. Cuban got wrecked.

[Phillip]

The Mavs are giving up two of their starters, their highest draft pick in a while and at least one second-rounder. They're doing all that while taking back Felton's salary so that they can take back a player the Knicks will be looking to dump in two weeks. What sense does that make? The only things Dallas didn't give up were Ellis instead of Calderon and their first next year (which they can trade starting tomorrow, before anyone tries to say they can't).

Dallas had all the leverage in this deal. They didn't need Chandler. The center trade market is going to be surprisingly strong this off-season. New York, in fact, is likely to get one of those centers, which is why they're looking to trade Chandler right now (in addition to their half-hearted attempt to get a better roster together before the first of July). Tyson is still a good player, but his stock is not very high right now. Have we even heard about any other team wanting him? The Mavs could have waited on this deal for a while, since Chandler's price was only going to decline next month. They weren't in danger of losing cap space by waiting, since they're not using it to complete this deal. In fact, they lose space by doing it now.

Dallas should have offered to take Chandler off the Knicks' hands using their cap space or even doing to the Calderon/Felton swap. But if they went the PG route, they should have tried to get an asset out of New York, or at least not given up a few themselves.

This is as bad as the Bargnani trade from a leverage standpoint, although it's obviously better from a personnel/value standpoint. Dallas can certainly recover by signing a PG like Lowery and picking up a small-forward like Ariza with their cap space. But they still messed up this part of the off-season.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Do yourself a favor and fist yourself with a pair of toy hulk hands.

[baseline bum]

Wow, if Nowitzki takes $10 million they could land Anthony or James with the other $18 million. I still think James stays in Miami, but how would they not be the favorites to land Anthony right now?

[Killakobe81]

Lol truth hurts ...Cuban just man enough to finally admit it

[IrisHockey]

Lol truth hurts ...Cuban just man enough to finally admit it

Hey bro, someone thinks you're trolling with the "should have kept Tyson" stuff.

[Baam]

They better pray that Chandler can still pull his weight cause to me Hibbert ended his career last year... Hell why didn't Cuban trade for Hibbert instead...

[Hoops Czar]

My dream of Splitter for chandler just went up in smoke.

[Chinook]

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Do yourself a favor and fist yourself with a pair of toy hulk hands.

Anything you actually can disagree with, or are you just feeling the acting like your avatar?

[IrisHockey]

:lmao Knicks fans on RealGM are actually naive enough to trust Phil.



'No clear fit/reason'

You have no idea what Phils plans are.. Calderon is easily tradeable if we need to move him for cap space.

Just trust Phil blindly, even for just a little while, let the Zen Master do his thing.

[spurraider21]

people hating on Dallas are weird. they're easily a top 3 contender for the 2011 title

and :lol at trusting P-Jax with teambuilding

[IrisHockey]

Going to Dallas:
Tyson Chandler: $14,596,888
Raymond Felton (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2753/raymond-felton): $3,793,693 (player option for $3,950,313 in 2015-16)
Total for 2013-14: $18,390,581

Going to New York:
Jose Calderon (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2806/jose-calderon): $7,097,191 (guaranteed salaries of $7,402,812 and $7,708,427 next two seasons)
Samuel Dalembert (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/991/samuel-dalembert): $3,867,282 (partially guaranteed)
Shane Larkin (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2596158/shane-larkin): $1,606,080 (team options of $1,675,320 and $2,576,642 next two seasons)
Wayne Ellington (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/3981/wayne-ellington): $2,771,340
Total for 2013-14: $15,341,893


With the cap projected to be $63.2 million, the Mavs have approximately $26.5 million available.

[IrisHockey]

Hopefully they didn't agree to a side deal that would swap Ellis for JR Smith.

[DPG21920]

Anything you actually can disagree with, or are you just feeling the acting like your avatar?

I have to agree with him on this. None of what you said makes a lot of sense to me on this one.

[DPG21920]

Going to Dallas:
Tyson Chandler: $14,596,888
Raymond Felton (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2753/raymond-felton): $3,793,693 (player option for $3,950,313 in 2015-16)
Total for 2013-14: $18,390,581

Going to New York:
Jose Calderon (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2806/jose-calderon): $7,097,191 (guaranteed salaries of $7,402,812 and $7,708,427 next two seasons)
Samuel Dalembert (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/991/samuel-dalembert): $3,867,282 (partially guaranteed)
Shane Larkin (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2596158/shane-larkin): $1,606,080 (team options of $1,675,320 and $2,576,642 next two seasons)
Wayne Ellington (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/3981/wayne-ellington): $2,771,340
Total for 2013-14: $15,341,893


With the cap projected to be $63.2 million, the Mavs have approximately $26.5 million available.

Cap is projected to be 66M IIRC and the Mavs would actually have close to 33M.

[Ghazi]

This is a great trade. Mavs were in the 20s in defensive efficiency and Chandler if healthy will help that. Calderons decense was flammable, although his efficiency will be missed. To me though the Mavs need more otherwise are still a 7-8 seed.

[Malik Hairston]

I don't have an opinion on the actual trade, too many variables, tbh..

- Felton's current state is one of the worst players I've ever seen on an NBA court..he's obese, can't move, can't shoot and can't pass..he's completely useless, and as history has shown us, once a fat PG begins his decline, it's an ugly slide..

- No idea how much Chandler has left in the tank, I don't think anybody really knows..I think we're back to questioning his health, though..he's obviously still a huge upgrade over Dalembert, if healthy..

- The Mavs would be better off signing 2 really good players, rather than signing a superstar IMO..Carlisle is a good enough coach to win with really good system players, and Dirk is still a really good offensive 1st option..his defense is beyond awful at this point, so I'd focus on signing 2-way players to mask him..

I love Lowry, but I worry about him being a fat PG, knowing their history after receiving big contracts..however, unless Ellis learns to play PG in the Summer, which is unlikely, they need a PG, they can't start Felton or Harris..

Something like Ariza and Lowry would be a huge addition and put them at least on the same level as the Clippers IMO ..

[DPG21920]

I think Harris would end up starting over Felton most likely. I would hope he does anyways. The defense would be pretty solid and long with that lineup. And hopefully they can get Marion to stay as well for the MLE or something.

They won't be able to use the MLE this year. They have cap space and can't use the MLE and cap space.

[DPG21920]

I don't have an opinion on the actual trade, too many variables, tbh..

- Felton's current state is one of the worst players I've ever seen on an NBA court..he's obese, can't move, can't shoot and can't pass..he's completely useless, and as history has shown us, once a fat PG begins his decline, it's an ugly slide..

- No idea how much Chandler has left in the tank, I don't think anybody really knows..I think we're back to questioning his health, though..he's obviously still a huge upgrade over Dalembert, if healthy..

- The Mavs would be better off signing 2 really good players, rather than signing a superstar IMO..Carlisle is a good enough coach to win with really good system players, and Dirk is still a really good offensive 1st option..his defense is beyond awful at this point, so I'd focus on signing 2-way players to mask him..

I love Lowry, but I worry about him being a fat PG, knowing their history after receiving big contracts..however, unless Ellis learns to play PG in the Summer, which is unlikely, they need a PG, they can't start Felton or Harris..

Something like Ariza and Lowry would be a huge addition and put them at least on the same level as the Clippers IMO ..

Agree with this. Melo is almost overkill, but still a decent fit with a good coach and Dirk/Tyson (assuming he can stay healthy). But an Ariza/Deng type with a good PG would be very nice.

[Thread]

Not too for late for Chandler, but, where the tragedy rests is in the 3 years of decay that Dirk has undergone.

Difficult to defend a ring that is 3 years old.

[baseline bum]

Cap is projected to be 66M IIRC and the Mavs would actually have close to 33M.

$66.5M is the projected cap for 2015-16.

[IrisHockey]

Gotta be a good shooter at the PG position too. So Mo WIlliams is probably the best bet

[baseline bum]

Not too for late for Chandler, but, where the tragedy rests is in the 3 years of decay that Dirk has undergone.

Difficult to defend a ring that is 3 years old.

I have seen many a Laker fan try to defend a 65 year old Minneosta honkeyball championship here

[m>s]

my inside sources tell me that following this trade both lebron and lowry will be signing with dallas

[IrisHockey]

Not too for late for Chandler, but, where the tragedy rests is in the 3 years of decay that Dirk has undergone.

Difficult to defend a ring that is 3 years old.

We wouldn't have defended that title in 2012 with Chandler anyway.. Kidd and Terry were on their last legs in 2011, and thankfully they got it done.

[Thread]

I have seen many a Laker fan try to defend a 65 year old Minneosta honkeyball championship here

What's that got to do with Chandler coming home 3 years after the fact?

[Thread]

my inside sources tell me that following this trade both lebron and lowry will be signing with dallas

Well, if it'll keep The Bag in Texas count me in.

[Juggity]

way too late. Chandler's not the player he was 3 years ago. Still serviceable but hardly elite.

[Chinook]

I have to agree with him on this. None of what you said makes a lot of sense to me on this one.Did I type it in a weird font or something? Chandler wasn't a hot commodity and Dallas paid like he was. The Mavs pretty much gave New York as much as they could when the Knicks were desperate to dump him. It made no sense from a leverage standpoint.

[Thread]

Chandler wasn't a hot commodity and Dallas paid like he was.

Nookie

[Baam]

Yeah to me this is a clear win for Phil... Chandler is on the downside and Felton is one of the worst PG in the nba...

[Thread]

We wouldn't have defended that title in 2012 with Chandler anyway.. Kidd and Terry were on their last legs in 2011, and thankfully they got it done.

You're too close to it, Shockey.

[Chinook]

Nookie

So that's where I am, eh?

[angrydude]

This is called selling low and buying high.

[Donkeybong]

Isn't Harris a Free agent?

[DPG21920]

The Mavs are giving up two of their starters, their highest draft pick in a while and at least one second-rounder. They're doing all that while taking back Felton's salary so that they can take back a player the Knicks will be looking to dump in two weeks. What sense does that make? The only things Dallas didn't give up were Ellis instead of Calderon and their first next year (which they can trade starting tomorrow, before anyone tries to say they can't).

Technically, yes. They are giving up two starters. Both of which don't have a major impact. One who is clearly overpaid vs his actual impact on the court (Calderon). They also got back two starters with one of them being the clear cut best player in the deal (Tyson). Again, technically, the Mavs gave up their highest draft pick. It's a 2nd rounder. While that clearly has value, it's not a lot to give up in order to dump the worst contract in the deal (Calderon) and free up more space in the near future.

Taking on Felton's contract? It's not only half the money per year of Calderon's (7.1M v 3.8M) it's less total and shorter (Calderon is owed 22M over 3 years/ Felton is owed 7.7M over two years). There is no question Calderon has a worse contract and I don't care how bad a guy is, if you get the best player in a deal, taking on a 3/4M contract that is short is no big issue. Especially when there are odds that Felton can play better in a better situation.


Dallas had all the leverage in this deal. They didn't need Chandler. The center trade market is going to be surprisingly strong this off-season. New York, in fact, is likely to get one of those centers, which is why they're looking to trade Chandler right now (in addition to their half-hearted attempt to get a better roster together before the first of July). Tyson is still a good player, but his stock is not very high right now. Have we even heard about any other team wanting him? The Mavs could have waited on this deal for a while, since Chandler's price was only going to decline next month. They weren't in danger of losing cap space by waiting, since they're not using it to complete this deal. In fact, they lose space by doing it now.

They lose 3M in cap space which depending on Dirk's contract could end up being a non-issue. This came out of nowhere and who knows who wants Tyson. Moving early not only is advantageous because you free up future cap space while getting the best player, but it appeases Dirk who still has to sign. Not only that, it shows FA's (Melo/Bron/ect..) that you are putting together a talented team now and still have cap space to build on. It's clearly smart IMO to do the move now, especially since you didn't give up any first rounders, got future cap space & got the best player in the deal (even if there are question marks about his health). Dallas knows him well. They know the fit. He's much more valuable to Dallas because he's a known phenomenal fit next to Dirk (championship level fit).


Dallas should have offered to take Chandler off the Knicks' hands using their cap space or even doing to the Calderon/Felton swap. But if they went the PG route, they should have tried to get an asset out of New York, or at least not given up a few themselves.

This is as bad as the Bargnani trade from a leverage standpoint, although it's obviously better from a personnel/value standpoint. Dallas can certainly recover by signing a PG like Lowery and picking up a small-forward like Ariza with their cap space. But they still messed up this part of the off-season.

Using their cap space would have left them with some useless assets and less flexibility. With this trade, they didn't lose any starters (net) and still have their cap space + a higher ceiling. All they had to do was give up two 2nd rounders and 3M in cap space this year (and they can still have a ton of cap space despite that). If that 3M makes the difference in getting some players (yet to be seen), then you might have a slight point IMO, but I doubt that is true.

[DPG21920]

Wow, if Nowitzki takes $10 million they could land Anthony or James with the other $18 million. I still think James stays in Miami, but how would they not be the favorites to land Anthony right now?

If Dirk takes only 10M, they would have approximately 23M in cap space..

[Thread]

This is called selling low and buying high.

And finding the horses after you've closed the barn door 3 years later.

[Thread]

So that's where I am, eh?

You do have that cute little way about ya.

[Baam]

Taking on Felton's contract? It's not only half the money per year of Calderon's (7.1M v 3.8M) it's less total and shorter (Calderon is owed 22M over 3 years/ Felton is owed 7.7M over two years). There is no question Calderon has a worse contract and I don't care how bad a guy is, if you get the best player in a deal, taking on a 3/4M contract that is short is no big issue. Especially when there are odds that Felton can play better in a better situation.

Trying to argue that Felton is better value on his deal than Calderon is just dumb sorry...

You can argue about Tyson being the clear cut best player but his trajectory is pretty scary...

[DPG21920]

Trying to argue that Felton is better value on his deal than Calderon is just dumb sorry...

You can argue about Tyson being the clear cut best player but his trajectory is pretty scary...

Didn't say he was a better value - said he has the more favorable contract and since neither really matter basketball wise, I'll take the more favorable contract.

[Franklin]

This is a great trade. Mavs were in the 20s in defensive efficiency and Chandler if healthy will help that. Calderons decense was flammable, although his efficiency will be missed. To me though the Mavs need more otherwise are still a 7-8 seed.
We RESTACKED!!!!! :king:

[Thread]

& it's swell of Media to just let The Cubes to utilize the time machine without so much as a howdy do. But, why not, the first word out of their mouth in inquisition now would have no link to when he lit the match after they rang.

[DPG21920]

Yeah to me this is a clear win for Phil... Chandler is on the downside and Felton is one of the worst PG in the nba...

How does this tangibly help NY? They lost their best trade asset (Tyson), didn't improve their team basketball wise (Calderon/Dalembert =/< Tyson) and they lost cap space in the near future. All to get Shane Larkin and 2 2nd rounders.

[Thread]

How does this tangibly help NY? They lost their best trade asset (Tyson), didn't improve their team basketball wise (Calderon/Dalembert =/< Tyson) and they lost cap space in the near future. All to get Shane Larkin and 2 2nd rounders.

Simple....because Phil did it and he needs a hand down. Like now.

[IrisHockey]

Larkin is the next Beaubois. Short 2 guard that can't play the 1.

[Donkeybong]

Word is dalembert and Larkin trying to be moved in separate deal.

[Franklin]

Should've never let big daddy TC walk, tbh :cry

[Baam]

How does this tangibly help NY? They lost their best trade asset (Tyson), didn't improve their team basketball wise (Calderon/Dalembert =/< Tyson) and they lost cap space in the near future. All to get Shane Larkin and 2 2nd rounders.

Feel like you're talking about prime Chandler, not the tosb version that got bukkaked by Hibbert (who everyone is looking as a scrub these days)...

[Franklin]

We're probably even more stacked than 3yrs ago tbh, all we need to do now is sign some ring-chasing veterans (including VC who's likely to stay). We didn't even have a legit 2nd option back in 2011 but now we have Monta, not to mention the possibility of getting some A-listers like Lebron this summer... we STACKED!!!

[DPG21920]

Feel like you're talking about prime Chandler, not the tosb version that got bukkaked by Hibbert (who everyone is looking as a scrub these days)...

Doesn't matter if it's prime Tyson. He's no risk, a fantastic fit next to Dirk (this is a known variable) and many can easily suggest that he played poorly because NY was a damn mess. Even if he's not prime, he's still better than Dalembert. Anyways, that doesn't answer my question. How does this help NY tangibly?

They lose salary in a year where they won't have cap space anyways, add salary in a year in which they would have cap space and even if Calderon is an upgrade over Felton (even if you want to argue Dalembert = Felton) it only adds a few meaningless wins to a non-playoff team.

So unless you are trying to argue that Larkin is a real prize (maybe) and that those 2nd round picks are incredibly valuable (possibly), was it really worth losing cap space/flexibility and your best trade asset (Tyson the player and Tyson the expiring contract) on such gambles?

[Chinook]

Technically, yes. They are giving up two starters. Both of which don't have a major impact. One who is clearly overpaid vs his actual impact on the court (Calderon). They also got back two starters with one of them being the clear cut best player in the deal (Tyson). Again, technically, the Mavs gave up their highest draft pick. It's a 2nd rounder. While that clearly has value, it's not a lot to give up in order to dump the worst contract in the deal (Calderon) and free up more space in the near future.

Taking on Felton's contract? It's not only half the money per year of Calderon's (7.1M v 3.8M) it's less total and shorter (Calderon is owed 22M over 3 years/ Felton is owed 7.7M over two years). There is no question Calderon has a worse contract and I don't care how bad a guy is, if you get the best player in a deal, taking on a 3/4M contract that is short is no big issue. Especially when there are odds that Felton can play better in a better situation.

As I said later in the post you've quoted, Calderon/Dalembert for Felton/Chandler isn't a bad trade by itself. Calderon is better than Felton, who hasn't looked like a starting PG in years. Losing Jose creates a hole. Chandler is the best player in the deal, but he didn't have high stock. Dallas big against themselves. As far as picks go, I was talking about Larkin as the highest one they had in a while. The 34th pick is a pretty good piece, too, as should be able to bring in a first-round talent. 51 is not really valuable, but it's not quite a throw-in. Trading it stinks of "the kitchen sink".


They lose 3M in cap space which depending on Dirk's contract could end up being a non-issue. This came out of nowhere and who knows who wants Tyson. Moving early not only is advantageous because you free up future cap space while getting the best player, but it appeases Dirk who still has to sign. Not only that, it shows FA's (Melo/Bron/ect..) that you are putting together a talented team now and still have cap space to build on. It's clearly smart IMO to do the move now, especially since you didn't give up any first rounders, got future cap space & got the best player in the deal (even if there are question marks about his health). Dallas knows him well. They know the fit. He's much more valuable to Dallas because he's a known phenomenal fit next to Dirk (championship level fit).

It's not a non-issue to lose cap space. Dirk is still going to make seven figures, so we're talking about the difference between having a max contract to offer and not having it. Dallas only has $27 Million left now (as opposed to $30-$32 Million, which is too little to offer Melo and Dirk unless Dirk makes about $4-6 Million. As I said later on, they can still add a combo like Ariza/Lowery, but it's harder now than it was before. As far as the rest of what you said, no it doesn't really give Dirk or any FAs more hope. All Cuban had to do to appease Dirk is tell him they have a standing (cheaper) offer on Chandler and will be willing to increase their bid if they need to. For free agents, they could tell them the same, or actually pull the trigger during the moratorium before anyone could officially sign anywhere.


Using their cap space would have left them with some useless assets and less flexibility. With this trade, they didn't lose any starters (net) and still have their cap space + a higher ceiling. All they had to do was give up two 2nd rounders and 3M in cap space this year (and they can still have a ton of cap space despite that). If that 3M makes the difference in getting some players (yet to be seen), then you might have a slight point IMO, but I doubt that is true.

Let's just be clear here: Dallas has lost cap space. They didn't protect any of it by doing this trade now. They could have done this trade later when they actually used their cap space, and THEN, they would have been able to have Tyson along with their other free-agent acquisitions. They also would have had two draft picks to use on player they need to fill their roster. Obviously, they would have also had Larkin, whom they liked enough to pass on Antetokoumpo and Schoder for. Instead, they have three starters, a huge question mark in Felton and limited actual cap space to add at least six more players.

It wasn't a smart trade at all. It wasn't the worst trade ever, since they did get the best player, as you said. But they aren't beating the Spurs/Thunder/Clippers or even the Rockets/Blazers unless they get a superstar or two All-Stars to supplement their new core.

[DPG21920]

To contrast the above: Lowry/Monta/Ariza/Dirk/Tyson or Felton/Monta/Bron/Dirk/Tyson is pretty damn good and for the cost of 2 2nd rounders and taking on only 3M this year (while winning long-term financially) has wayyyyyyy more upside than NY's end.

[baseline bum]

If Dirk takes only 10M, they would have approximately 23M in cap space..

Show your work or you get no credit tbh

[Chinook]

How does this tangibly help NY? They lost their best trade asset (Tyson), didn't improve their team basketball wise (Calderon/Dalembert =/< Tyson) and they lost cap space in the near future. All to get Shane Larkin and 2 2nd rounders.

Honestly, what were you expecting them to get for Chandler? A mid-first-rounder, a pick that's practically in the first and a second is a hell of a lot to get for any decent under this new CBA.

[DPG21920]

I'm seeing, the even with Dirk taking 10M, Dallas still has 20M in cap space. Am I wrong here? Read that in several places..

[dg7md]

Losing Calderon is a huge loss for Dallas tbh.

[DPG21920]

Honestly, what were you expecting them to get for Chandler? A mid-first-rounder, a pick that's practically in the first and a second is a hell of a lot to get for any decent under this new CBA.

Who cares if Larkin was a mid-first rounder. If re-done, he would be no where near that pick so it's a non-event. They gave up their best asset for 2 2nd rounders and nothing that matters actually basketball wise.

And they gave up cap space/flexibility in the future.

[Franklin]

bringing TC back justifies it all tbh

[Chinook]

To contrast the above: Lowry/Monta/Ariza/Dirk/Tyson or Felton/Monta/Bron/Dirk/Tyson is pretty damn good and for the cost of 2 2nd rounders and taking on only 3M this year (while winning long-term financially) has wayyyyyyy more upside than NY's end.

You seem to be missing the point a little. Those lineups (especially the second one) aren't attainable anymore unless Dirk is taking the minimum. Even so, they Mavs gave up those picks for nothing. From everything we know, they would have been able to get Chandler without using their picks eventually.

[DPG21920]

You seem to be missing the point a little. Those lineups (especially the second one) aren't attainable anymore unless Dirk is taking the minimum. Even so, they Mavs gave up those picks for nothing. From everything we know, they would have been able to get Chandler without using their picks eventually.

Huh? They are attainable. Mavs, even with Dirk taking 10M, have about 20M in cap space.

[Franklin]

Losing Calderon is a huge loss for Dallas tbh.
Calderon was no more than a clutch 3pt shooter on our squad imho, Monta was the true PG of our team. All we needed from Calderon was 3pt shooting and Felton will provide just that.

[Chinook]

Who cares if Larkin was a mid-first rounder. If re-done, he would be no where near that pick so it's a non-event. They gave up their best asset for 2 2nd rounders and nothing that matters actually basketball wise.

And they gave up cap space/flexibility in the future.

No, you don't get to retroactively downgrade Larkin. That was like TD21 trying to tell me last year that Indiana didn't give up too much for Scola because Plumlee was pretty much a second-rounder who got picked too high.

[Chinook]

Huh? They are attainable. Mavs, even with Dirk taking 10M, have about 20M in cap space.

No, they don't. You're forgetting roster-charges. That knocks off $2-$3 Million from their cap space.

[DPG21920]

Projected Cap: 63M

Dallas Salaries with Dirk taking 10M:

44M

That leaves 19M left. Am I missing something?

[DMC]

Anyone thinking Mark is trying to build a championship contender is fucking hilariously naive. Dude took his winnings and blew shit to hell. He knew what he had, and he could have paid for another season, but nope.

It's all just smoke and mirrors to keep selling season tickets based on the hope they will acquire the right pieces, meanwhile Dirk is wasting away his life on the fringe of contention.

[DPG21920]

No, they don't. You're forgetting roster-charges. That knocks off $2-$3 Million from their cap space.

OK, even with the roster charges, they still have significant cap space with Dirk taking 10M and a roster core of:

Monta/Dirk/Tyson

[Thread]

Show your work or you get no credit tbh

You've become just about insufferable because of a fuckin' ring. Miserable little bastard.

[Thread]

Projected Cap: 63M

Dallas Salaries with Dirk taking 10M:

44M

That leaves 19M left. Am I missing something?

C'mon, deeps, me & you against the Bum. I hate that fucker. What say, old horse?

[DPG21920]

No, you don't get to retroactively downgrade Larkin. That was like TD21 trying to tell me last year that Indiana didn't give up too much for Scola because Plumlee was pretty much a second-rounder who got picked too high.

:lol This is why I (and Phillip) don't agree with you. I don't give a damn if Larkin was drafted in the first round. I am downgrading him because he has not proven to be very good. What kind of logic is that? After the draft is over all that matters is can you play. So if MIA trades Oden, they should get #1 pick value back?

[cjw]

Given NY actually has its first rounder next year, I'd imagine they are tanking the heck out of this season to get the best asset possible. Amare and Bargnani are both expiring. Surprising they took back long-term money in Calderon but otherwise they did what they had to do and got younger.

Now they have Larkin, Shumpert, Hardaway and two second rounders and most importantly an ability to hit the reset button well before their Brooklyn counterparts.

[dg7md]

Calderon was no more than a clutch 3pt shooter on our squad imho, Monta was the true PG of our team. All we needed from Calderon was 3pt shooting and Felton will provide just that.

He was a very good player in the playoff series and one I felt like could have big games at any moment. He was always a good ballhandler and decent passer, so unless you guys get Lowry or another solid PG, this move might hurt the Mavs. Sure, Tyson Chandler is great for you guys but losing Calderon and gaining :lol Felton :lol seems like it could cause some issues.

[Chinook]

Projected Cap: 63M

Dallas Salaries with Dirk taking 10M:

44M

That leaves 19M left. Am I missing something?

Yes. Dallas will have seven players under contract. Per the CBA, teams have to account for 12 roster spots before they can use cap space. That means Dallas has to have five "roster charges" added to their salary before they can sign anyone. Each roster charge is about $400k (that's what it was last year, but it's going to be a bit more this year). Dallas thusly has only $16-$17 Million to offer.

[DMC]

Tells me is a TC vs Melo ordeal and Ray Ray is the scapegoat.

[The Batman]

lol Felton, and Chandler is never healthy anymore

[Chinook]

:lol This is why I (and Phillip) don't agree with you. I don't give a damn if Larkin was drafted in the first round. I am downgrading him because he has not proven to be very good. What kind of logic is that? After the draft is over all that matters is can you play. So if MIA trades Oden, they should get #1 pick value back?

Because Dallas apparently saw something in him they liked. They passed over much more highly rated prospects for him. One year is not enough time to know it was a mistake (as it wasn't with Plumlee). It's one thing to know he has a price (not like they did with Beaubois), but it's another to just throw him in like it was nothing.

The Oden example is poor. He's been in the league for eight years now. He's not a draft pick anymore (even if a lot of people were acting like he was last year).

[DPG21920]

Yes. Dallas will have seven players under contract. Per the CBA, teams have to account for 12 roster spots before they can use cap space. That means Dallas has to have five "roster charges" added to their salary before they can sign anyone. Each roster charge is about $400k (that's what it was last year, but it's going to be a bit more this year). Dallas thusly has only $16-$17 Million to offer.

7? I am counting 9:

Dirk: 10M
Tyson:
Monta:
Felton:
Wright:
Crowder:
James:
Ledo:
Mekel:

=============
Total Salary: 44M
Total Cap Est: 63M

Why would Sham have James' salary count against Dallas if he was released?

[Chinook]

7? I am counting 9:

Dirk: 10M
Tyson:
Monta:
Felton:
Wright:
Crowder:
James:
Ledo:
Mekel:

=============
Total Salary: 44M
Total Cap Est: 63M

Why would Sham have James' salary count against Dallas if he was released?

He doesn't. Do the math yourself and you'll see. James is not under contract next year. That's his QO. If Dallas picks it up, their cap space goes down even more.

But yes, it's eight, not seven. You're right that I miscounted. That's only $400k or so, though.

[ElNono]

Mavs *are* paying for Chandler like he is a hot commodity, because that's exactly who he was in Dallas, under the same coach and system.

To Cubes, the "center market in two weeks" is immaterial, because the center they want is Chandler.

He is a known quantity to them. They already know how to maximize his game, how he complements the team's star, etc.

Obviously, this move doesn't guarantee anything.

There's also another spin here: Tyson was a teammate of Melo for a couple years, it wouldn't be surprising if he starts pitching the Mavs to him.

[rogues]

:lol @ all the armchair GM's ITT

[DPG21920]

Because Dallas apparently saw something in him they liked. They passed over much more highly rated prospects for him. One year is not enough time to know it was a mistake (as it wasn't with Plumlee). It's one thing to know he has a price (not like they did with Beaubois), but it's another to just throw him in like it was nothing.

The Oden example is poor. He's been in the league for eight years now. He's not a draft pick anymore (even if a lot of people were acting like he was last year).

Who cares what one team (dallas) saw in him? Drafting is very difficult and more teams miss than not. Having a person who hasn't shown much (Larkin) even if it's one year, is no where near as valuable as having an actual draft pick equivalent to where he was taken.

I fully understand the difference in the Oden/Larkin example - it was to prove a broader point. Either your logic holds up or it doesn't. In the event of this, even though one has had more time to "prove" himself, it doesn't hold up. I agree it's too little time to "tell" but do you think anyone, anyone in the NBA would give up a near lottery pick for Larkin having seen what they have seen? Of course not.

[TheGoldStandard]

Mavs desperate to try to wrangle some FA to Dallas

[DPG21920]

He doesn't. Do the math yourself and you'll see. James is not under contract next year. That's his QO. If Dallas picks it up, their cap space goes down even more.

But yes, it's eight, not seven. You're right that I miscounted. That's only $400k or so, though.

I was counting that salary - so with the 8 players (assuming Dirk takes 10M) that leaves Dallas with 44M in payroll and 63M total cap (so 19M in cap space less the roster holds). Still a significant amount. I'm not arguing the 3M lost in cap space was a good thing. I am saying it was more than worth it considering the cap space they would still have and what it means to get Tyson now and gain cap space in the future.

[Chinook]

Mavs *are* paying for Chandler like he is a hot commodity, because that's exactly who he was in Dallas, under the same coach and system.

To Cubes, the "center market in two weeks" is immaterial, because the center they want is Chandler.

He is a known quantity to them. They already know how to maximize his game, how he complements the team's star, etc.

Obviously, this move doesn't guarantee anything.

There's also another spin here: Tyson was a teammate of Melo for a couple years, it wouldn't be surprising if he starts pitching the Mavs to him.

The problem isn't that Chandler isn't worth the price to the Mavs. That's debatable, but I pretty much agree that he is. I like them getting him and have been saying that here for weeks.

The problem is that that wasn't Chandler's market value. They bid against themselves (as far as we know). It's like finding a rare coin at a garage sale and paying ten times what the seller wants for it because you know it may be worth 15-20 times at an auction. You can get good value if things work out, but you still spent a lot more money than you needed to without any guarantee you'll get rewarded for it.

[RD2191]

As a German French Spanish African I'm not sure how I feel about this.:wakeup

[m>s]

what does it matter if tyson is overpaid? we got rid of some bad contracts to get him..

[DPG21920]

We just disagree that they overpaid. The gave up a player who doesn't look great (Larkin) and two 2nd rounders (losing the cap space doesn't go to the Knicks) to get the Center they want and more long term flexibility while still having a ton of cap space.

Also, assuming Dirk takes 10M, I count 9 players on the roster and ~18M in cap space even with the 3 other cap holds.

You are adding in "a first rounder" which IMO is very intellectually dishonest and changes the trade drastically.

Giving Larkin vs giving up an actual top 20 pick in the upcoming draft(s) is way different.

[Chinook]

I was counting that salary - so with the 8 players (assuming Dirk takes 10M) that leaves Dallas with 44M in payroll and 63M total cap (so 19M in cap space less the roster holds). Still a significant amount. I'm not arguing the 3M lost in cap space was a good thing. I am saying it was more than worth it considering the cap space they would still have and what it means to get Tyson now and gain cap space in the future.

Why do you keep missing the fact that mavs still have to deal with their roster charges? It wouldn't be $19 Million; it would be $17.5-ish Million. That, the room exception and min salaries would be the only things Dallas would have to fix fill their roster. Even with Lebron taking less, the Mavs would still be at best third in the West coming into the year.

[ElNono]

The problem isn't that Chandler isn't worth the price to the Mavs. That's debatable, but I pretty much agree that he is. I like them getting him and have been saying that here for weeks.

The problem is that that wasn't Chandler's market value. They bid against themselves (as far as we know). It's like finding a rare coin at a garage sale and paying ten times what the seller wants for it because you know it may be worth 15-20 times at an auction. You can get good value if things work out, but you still spent a lot more money than you needed to without any guarantee you'll get rewarded for it.

It's a double-edged sword. If some team shows up and enters a bidding war with the Mavs later on, then the opportunity vanishes for them.

Plus, not all teams wait to establish "market value" before making a move. Especially like in this case where the Mavs already know the kind of fit Chandler is with them.

It's like the Spurs paying perhaps a little extra to renew Manu last season, but making sure he's off the market.

[Trill Clinton]

The problem isn't that Chandler isn't worth the price to the Mavs. That's debatable, but I pretty much agree that he is. I like them getting him and have been saying that here for weeks.

The problem is that that wasn't Chandler's market value. They bid against themselves (as far as we know). It's like finding a rare coin at a garage sale and paying ten times what the seller wants for it because you know it may be worth 15-20 times at an auction. You can get good value if things work out, but you still spent a lot more money than you needed to without any guarantee you'll get rewarded for it.


http://i60.tinypic.com/n2fk9j.gif

great analogy

[DPG21920]

Why do you keep missing the fact that mavs still have to deal with their roster charges? It wouldn't be $19 Million; it would be $17.5-ish Million. That, the room exception and min salaries would be the only things Dallas would have to fix fill their roster. Even with Lebron taking less, the Mavs would still be at best third in the West coming into the year.

I'm not missing it. You miscounted the players. With Dirk (assumption) they have 9 players under contract which would leave them with 3 roster charges, not the 5 you said. That still leaves them with nearly a full roster and a ton of cap space. You seem to act like having 18M is a little bit and a giant gap from ~20M like I originally thought.

[Chinook]

what does it matter if tyson is overpaid? we got rid of some bad contracts to get him..

One "bad" contract. Dalembert's contract was great. And Chandler isn't overpaid (or at least wasn't when he signed the deal). The draft picks and taking Felton was the overpaying part.


We just disagree that they overpaid. The gave up a player who doesn't look great (Larkin) and two 2nd rounders (losing the cap space doesn't go to the Knicks) to get the Center they want and more long term flexibility while still having a ton of cap space.

Also, assuming Dirk takes 10M, I count 9 players on the roster and ~18M in cap space even with the 3 other cap holds.

We can agree to disagree (didn't see this post before my last response). But I just think it was a poor move. Even if Larkin and those two seconds end up sucking, Dallas traded them for nothing, in my opinion.

[Chinook]

I'm not missing it. You miscounted the players. With Dirk (assumption) they have 9 players under contract which would leave them with 3 roster charges, not the 5 you said. That still leaves them with nearly a full roster and a ton of cap space. You seem to act like having 18M is a little bit and a giant gap from ~20M like I originally thought.

I didn't see your other post before I replied. But $17 Million isn't a big jump from $20 Million. But it is a big jump from the $23 Million from what Melo can get in New York or $22 Million James can get in Miami. Don't Achillies paradox this. And their roster would be full of unknowns and bench-warmers.

[DPG21920]

It's also only Chinook setting the market value which very few seem to agree with. He's made up a scenario (which is fine, it's his opinion), but no one here seems to agree with his market value.

So the analogy doesn't hold water with me personally (nor some others) because we violently disagree on his notion of what the Mavs gave up in terms of relative value. I easily think NY could have and would have gotten 2 2nd rounders, a lame prospect for Tyson especially if it meant a team gets a better financial future and the best player/biggest expiring deal.

[ElNono]

This is a chance for the Mavs to re-establish a defensive identity. It's huge. Obviously, every move is a gamble, and there's no guarantees. But that applies to every move more or less.

The potential upside of this move is way better than holding on to Larkin or a couple of picks, tbh.

Plus, how does Donnie faces Dirk and tells him "We didn't get Tyson because they wanted Larkin and a couple of picks"??? It's a no brainer for Dallas, IMO.

[RD2191]

:corn:

[DPG21920]

I didn't see your other post before I replied. But $17 Million isn't a big jump from $20 Million. But it is a big jump from the $23 Million from what Melo can get in New York or $22 Million James can get in Miami. Don't Achillies paradox this. And their roster would be full of unknowns and bench-warmers.

Strictly financially speaking, yes, the gap between ~18M and 23M is big. But then you have to ask yourself if you think it's likely the teams that can offer more money seem appealing to those two for other basketball reasons and other variables. It seems to be generally accepted that for the right team, those guys would take a paycut and ~18M seems to be in the ball par of semi-realistic IMO.

Plus, there is the Lowry/Ariza option like you said which is also a win (and some may say better). Point is, I don't think Dallas gave up anything truly valuable (except cap space this year - but thats in a year where they still have a healthy amount so the impact is negated some) to get their man. I think the value was very fair in a bubble but in the real world I have no idea why NY did this trade and how it benefits them. They can make other moves, but IMO, it makes their path even harder than it already was.

[DPG21920]

This is a chance for the Mavs to re-establish a defensive identity. It's huge. Obviously, every move is a gamble, and there's no guarantees. But that applies to every move more or less.

The potential upside of this move is way better than holding on to Larkin or a couple of picks, tbh.

Plus, how does Donnie faces Dirk and tells him "We didn't get Tyson because they wanted Larkin and a couple of picks"??? It's a no brainer for Dallas, IMO.

That summarizes my thoughts well. Basically, NY gave up their best trade asset/best player & their a chunk of their future cap space for things with little to no upside (Larkin and what are the statistical odds of a 2nd rounder sticking in the NBA). Dallas gave up 3M in cap space (in a year where they could realistically have ~18M after Dirk/Monta/Tyson are on the roster), a prospect that looks average to below average in Larkin and 2 2nd rounders that statistically don't have good odds at sticking for the potential of pairing a known great fit in Dirk/Tyson and getting Melo/Bron or two really solid guys.

[m>s]

One "bad" contract. Dalembert's contract was great. And Chandler isn't overpaid (or at least wasn't when he signed the deal). The draft picks and taking Felton was the overpaying part.



We can agree to disagree (didn't see this post before my last response). But I just think it was a poor move. Even if Larkin and those two seconds end up sucking, Dallas traded them for nothing, in my opinion.

no dalembert fucking sucks for anything over 1-2 mil per year..dude is straight up fucking garbage and slow. couldn't get minutes over even blair at times.

[Chinook]

It's also only Chinook setting the market value which very few seem to agree with. He's made up a scenario (which is fine, it's his opinion), but no one here seems to agree with his market value.

So the analogy doesn't hold water with me personally (nor some others) because we violently disagree on his notion of what the Mavs gave up in terms of relative value. I easily think NY could have and would have gotten 2 2nd rounders, a lame prospect for Tyson especially if it meant a team gets a better financial future and the best player/biggest expiring deal.

Answer the question I posed earlier, then? What was Chandler's value before this trade? I know we don't know for sure, but that doesn't change the fact that Chandler got a bigger haul than most players have recently. Only Scola, KG and Pierce had this type of price tag.

[Chinook]

no dalembert fucking sucks for anything over 1-2 mil per year..dude is straight up fucking garbage and slow. couldn't get minutes over even blair at times.

His contract is great. He himself is not.

[baseline bum]

7? I am counting 9:

Dirk: 10M
Tyson:
Monta:
Felton:
Wright:
Crowder:
James:
Ledo:
Mekel:

=============
Total Salary: 44M
Total Cap Est: 63M

Why would Sham have James' salary count against Dallas if he was released?

I was a little off in my numbers because I thought $400,000 for the empty roster slot and that only slots under 11 were counted, and I rounded numbers to get he $18M figure. But this is what I get from Hoopshype:


Let's say Dirk gets $10 million

1. Dirk Nowitzki: $10M
2. Monta Ellis: $8.72M
3. Brandan Wright: $5.0M
4. Jae Crowder: $0.915M
5. Ricky Ledo: $0.816M
6. Gay Mekel: $0.816M
7. Tyson Chandler: $14.597M
8. Raymond Felton: $4.46M
9. Empty Roster Spot Under 12: $0.473M
10. Empty Roster Spot Under 12: $0.473M
11. Empty Roster Spot Under 12: $0.473M
12. Empty Roster Spot Under 12: $0.473M

TOTAL: $47.216M
SALARY CAP: $63.2M
REMAINING CAPSPACE: $15.984M

[Buddy Mignon]

Get a grip guys... you cant recapture what's lost. No Kidd... no Turtle... no Stevenson. Cuban was a jackass for breaking up that team. Hood chance they would have repeated keeping James ringless but Cuban had to short change niggas.

[spurraider21]

Chandler is easily the best player in the deal and many would argue that due to his contract being large/expiring that his contract was the most valuable as well.

[Chinook]

It's a double-edged sword. If some team shows up and enters a bidding war with the Mavs later on, then the opportunity vanishes for them.

Plus, not all teams wait to establish "market value" before making a move. Especially like in this case where the Mavs already know the kind of fit Chandler is with them.

It's like the Spurs paying perhaps a little extra to renew Manu last season, but making sure he's off the market.

You have to know when something's a good deal, though. Teams that fail to understand or ignore leverage don't usually come out on top, which is why New York screwed up on both the Melo trade and the Lowery non-trade.

[baseline bum]

You've become just about insufferable because of a fuckin' ring. Miserable little bastard.

I was a bastard before 5, but you were too caught up in 5>4 to realize Kobe and the 48ers had taken the bag. Now you know better though you're still kicking and screaming because you're left there holding it. I got no sympathy. Now go get your fucking shinebox.

[Chinook]

Chandler is easily the best player in the deal and many would argue that due to his contract being large/expiring that his contract was the most valuable as well.

Chandler beingan expiring hurts Dallas, because Cuban may go fool and let him go again.

[spurraider21]

Chandler beingan expiring hurts Dallas, because Cuban may go fool and let him go again.
i'm pretty sure this trade is evidence that he has learned his lesson :lol... not to mention that with his age, he will likely be cheaper on his next contract

[HI-FI]

not sure if this has been mentioned on ST before, but I think letting Tyson go in the first place was a bad idea, imho of course.

[Baam]

481926677178884096

[Hoops Czar]

It's a double-edged sword. If some team shows up and enters a bidding war with the Mavs later on, then the opportunity vanishes for them.

Plus, not all teams wait to establish "market value" before making a move. Especially like in this case where the Mavs already know the kind of fit Chandler is with them.

It's like the Spurs paying perhaps a little extra to renew Manu last season, but making sure he's off the market.

No, it's like dipping into the MLE to pay Ayres early in free agency so the Spurs could avoid the bidding war later.

[Hoops Czar]

You have to know when something's a good deal, though. Teams that fail to understand or ignore leverage don't usually come out on top, which is why New York screwed up on both the Melo trade and the Lowery non-trade.

In two years, nobody's going to know who Shane Larkin is/was. Dallas gets a bonefied big time center, who, when healthy, is one of the best defensive bigs in the game. I'm pretty sure this deal is just a precurser of things to come. If Chandler stinks it up, he's off the books in 2015. Felton is a serviceable backup PG so if they can land a starting PG, they go from pretender to contender.

[ElNono]

You have to know when something's a good deal, though. Teams that fail to understand or ignore leverage don't usually come out on top, which is why New York screwed up on both the Melo trade and the Lowery non-trade.

Dallas feels it's a great deal, with the best-case scenario being a championship/contender. It doesn't get any better than that.

Tyson's value is, to a certain extent, relative to what situation he's in. In many ways, it's no different than Diaw. He's an absolutely amazing fit for the Spurs, but he could struggle in a different situation, and he has struggled.

[ElNono]

No, it's like dipping into the MLE to pay Ayres early in free agency so the Spurs could avoid the bidding war later.

Completely different situation. Chandler is a known commodity for Dallas, and a key ingredient in their aspirations.

Ayres was hired to replace Blair burning minutes, and burn minutes he did. Definitely the Manu comparison is much more apt.

[Hoops Czar]

Completely different situation. Chandler is a known commodity for Dallas, and a key ingredient in their aspirations.

Ayres was hired to replace Blair burning minutes, and burn minutes he did. Definitely the Manu comparison is much more apt.

I should have used blue font. Totally my fault.

[Chinook]

Dallas feels it's a great deal, with the best-case scenario being a championship/contender. It doesn't get any better than that.

Tyson's value is, to a certain extent, relative to what situation he's in. In many ways, it's no different than Diaw. He's an absolutely amazing fit for the Spurs, but he could struggle in a different situation, and he has struggled.

So should the Spurs have traded Green, Bonner and a first for Diaw in 2012?

[ElNono]

I should have used blue font. Totally my fault.

no prob :lol

[ElNono]

So should the Spurs have traded Green, Bonner and a first for Diaw in 2012?

We didn't know anything about Diaw's fit with the Spurs in 2012...

and I'm not sure who are you equating Green to....

[ElNono]

I would've definitely done a Mason Jr, Bonner & two 2nd rounders for Nazr Mohammed in 2009...

[Chinook]

In two years, nobody's going to know who Shane Larkin is/was. Dallas gets a bonefied big time center, who, when healthy, is one of the best defensive bigs in the game. I'm pretty sure this deal is just a precurser of things to come. If Chandler stinks it up, he's off the books in 2015. Felton is a serviceable backup PG so if they can land a starting PG, they go from pretender to contender.

All speculative. Could just as easily be another Scola. The Mavs aren't near contenders yet.

[Chinook]

We didn't know anything about Diaw's fit with the Spurs in 2012...

and I'm not sure who are you equating Green to....

Danny was still pretty unknown then. He'd be somewhere between Calderon and Larkin.

[Aztecfan03]

No, you don't get to retroactively downgrade Larkin. That was like TD21 trying to tell me last year that Indiana didn't give up too much for Scola because Plumlee was pretty much a second-rounder who got picked too high.

So if a player was rookie of the year was the 30th pick in the draft, You can't get anything more than the value of a 30th pick in a trade? If you can't retroactively downgrade someone, you can't retroactively upgrade them either, right?

[Chinook]

So if a player was rookie of the year was the 30th pick in the draft, You can't get anything more than the value of a 30th pick in a trade? If you can't retroactively downgrade someone, you can't retroactively upgrade them either, right?

Bro, read the thread first. We've been through this. Larkin wasn't untradeable, but his value isn't soley determined by last season. He could be another Kendall Marshall, but he could also be another Plumlee. That's why you develop players rather than trade them in an overpayment.

[ElNono]

Danny was still pretty unknown then. He'd be somewhere between Calderon and Larkin.

Ok, I'll buy that. I mean, we've taken a bigger gamble trading Hill. In hindsight, I'm glad it all worked out.

[mavsfan1000]

We badly needed a goalie type center. We got it. Now we go after a point guard.

[Nathan89]

Why would the Knicks do this deal without a young prospect and 2nd rounders involved?

[Thread]

no dalembert fucking sucks for anything over 1-2 mil per year..dude is straight up fucking garbage and slow. couldn't get minutes over even blair at times.

Yep, and it could have been and should have been different. He's laid an egg wherever he's been and yet he still draws a crowd on the open market.

[Chinook]

Ok, I'll buy that. I mean, we've taken a bigger gamble trading Hill. In hindsight, I'm glad it all worked out.

And they didn't trade Hill for Vince Carter two years earlier even though he hadn't really shown anything as a rookie. The Spurs saw a scoring SF as their missing piece, but they still didn't give up their rookie PG as a throwaway.

And that doesn't even use the leverage argument I've been making.

[Hoops Czar]

All speculative. Could just as easily be another Scola. The Mavs aren't near contenders yet.

Speculation goes both ways. He could be the next Jack Mcclinton. Maybe he can carve himself out a nice little niche in the NBA someday but, he's hardly a can't miss prospect and to this point, I haven't seen anything in his game that would suggest holding up this deal just because he was labeled a 1st rounder. Who's to say Dallas didn't due their due diligence during practices and limited game play to know the kind of player he was and if he fit Carlisle's system before dangling him in a trade. There are a lot of unknown variables. However, under the given circumstances, if it were the Spurs, I wouldn't think twice about giving up a player like Bertans to get a defensive stopper like Chandler. When healthy, and at 31, he can be a game changer.

[Chinook]

Speculation goes both ways. He could be the next Jack Mcclinton. Maybe he can carve himself out a nice little niche in the NBA someday but, he's hardly a can't miss prospect and to this point, I haven't seen anything in his game that would suggest holding up this deal just because he was labeled a 1st rounder. Who's to say Dallas didn't due their due diligence during practices and limited game play to know the kind of player he was and if he fit Carlisle's system before dangling him in a trade. There are a lot of unknown variables. However, under the given circumstances, if it were the Spurs, I wouldn't think twice about giving up a player like Bertans to get a defensive stopper like Chandler. When healthy, and at 31, he can be a game changer.

Larkin is closer to 2009 Hill/2013 Marshall/2013 Plumlee than he is to Bertans.

[Hoops Czar]

Larkin is closer to 2009 Hill/2013 Marshall/2013 Plumlee than he is to Bertans.

Based on what?

[Chinook]

Based on what?

The fact that he's a former first-rounder who's actually in the league but can't crack the rotation.

[tlongII]

Felton?

:lmao

[mavsfan1000]

Felton?

:lmao
Dalembert?

:lmao

[Chinook]

Felton?

:lmao

Damn. I take it back. It was a great trade by Dallas.

[Baam]

Damn. I take it back. It was a great trade by Dallas.

:lol

edit damn Pelicans getting Asik

[Jacob1983]

Good trade for the Mavs. I think every NBA would take Chandler over Dalember 100 percent of the time. Is Felton still having problems with his weight?

[tlongII]

Felton is one of the worst PG's in the league.

[100%duncan]

Good to see Mavs getting stronger though. West is becoming a badder bitch, which is bad for us.

[Dverde]

I believe they'll push hard to sign Deng. Felton, Ellis, Deng, Dirk, Chandler starting. Devin Harris, Carter, Blair off the bench. I think they would be contenders if they stay healthy. They have one of the best coaches, too.

[Chinook]

Felton is one of the worst PG's in the league.

I agree with you. It's just that now we know he's gonna shine in Dallas.

[Hoops Czar]

The fact that he's a former first-rounder who's actually in the league but can't crack the rotation.

That's a stretch.. Lots of mid to late first rounders flame out or don't live up to one's projected expectations. I think his first round selection had more to do with name recognition than anything else. This is his third team in a year. Where was this argument when Atlanta traded him to Dallas for Nogueira, Cunningham and Muscala?

He's a PG but, couldn't crack the rotation or beat out Devin Harris for back up PG duties during the RS. Maybe Dallas is in win now mode and doesn't want to wait the 4 or 5 years for him to develop or maybe he isn't anything special.

[Chinook]

That's a stretch.. Lots of mid to late first rounders flame out or don't live up to one's projected expectations. I think his first round selection had more to do with name recognition than anything else. This is his third team in a year. Where was this argument when Atlanta traded him to Dallas for Nogueira, Cunningham and Muscala?

He's a PG but, couldn't crack the rotation or beat out Devin Harris for back up PG duties during the RS. Maybe Dallas is in win now mode and don't want to wait the 4 or 5 years for him to develop or maybe he isn't anything special.

Most first-rounders get more than a year, though, especially those taken that high. That's why Thabeet and Marshall being traded was so telling.

[ElNono]

And they didn't trade Hill for Vince Carter two years earlier even though he hadn't really shown anything as a rookie. The Spurs saw a scoring SF as their missing piece, but they still didn't give up their rookie PG as a throwaway.

And that doesn't even use the leverage argument I've been making.

But Vince Carter doesn't enter this equation because the Spurs had no clue how Vince would fit. This is a case where a former great fit under the same coach/system/star was let go, was recognized as a mistake, and now that they have the money, they're going all out to amend such mistake and hope that old mix can still work.

If anything, trades like Kawhi or RJ goes to show that when teams get desperate, they'll gamble, and that includes the Spurs. Some pan out (Kawhi), some do not (RJ). This is a particular case where the Mavs already have hindsight and know Tyson, if healthy, gives them a huge boost. It's still a gamble, but Dallas already knows what's the best-case scenario looks like if it works out.

No other center in the league works for the Mavs trying to re-capture that. Everyone else is a bigger gamble.

And Larkin might end up being an All-Star, but also immaterial. It's clear the Mavs are decided to try to surround Dirk with a cast to make another run now, not in 3-4 years.

[Chinook]

By the way, draft-day trades are different. Dallas trade Nougeira for the right to tell Atlanta to pick Larkin for them.. The Hawks didn't pick him and trade him later.

[DPG21920]

Obviously, there may be more moves and that could change perspectives, but as of now, I just don't see why NY did this. In a bubble, they got decent value I guess, but I truly feel they could have gotten at least that much (mediocre prospect, 2 2nd rounders) especially if they were willing to give longer term salary relief (taking on Calderon-esque contract).

I feel that was Tyson Chandler's floor. Talented big man (even with health issues) that is an expiring deal is usually a pretty valuable asset (like an actual first round pick that has been unused on someone that has underwhelmed) especially for teams trying to shed future money (can get more talented guys on longer deals) and/or contenders needing that final piece (even though it's conjuncture at this point, I am sure many teams are very high on Tyson and blame the level of play on the crappy situation. Right or wrong).

As an aside, Chinook knows I respect his takes. I even understand his arguments, I just really don't agree. But time will tell. IMO, even if Tyson sucks, the logic was good and IMO they did things early so they have more wiggle room/clarity and they paid a very minimal price in the real world.

Instead of the analogy that Chinook used, I equate it to the %'s vs real $ argument. If someone tells you that paying 100% more than something is worth is a bad deal, but then you find out that really only equates to one dollar, it has no impact despite the principle. I don't really agree the paid too much even with some leverage they may or may not have had, but even if that is true, when you look at the price for a known quantiy in Tyson/Dirk, who cares? It was not egregious at all and outside of the 3M in cap space lost, no real loss at all.

[Jacob1983]

Will Jim Carey put up with Felton's attitude and fatness?

[Chinook]

But Vince Carter doesn't enter this equation because the Spurs had no clue how Vince would fit. This is a case where a former great fit under the same coach/system/star was let go, was recognized as a mistake, and now that they have the money, they're going all out to amend such mistake and hope that old mix can still work.

If anything, trades like Kawhi or RJ goes to show that when teams get desperate, they'll gamble, and that includes the Spurs. Some pan out (Kawhi), some do not (RJ). This is a particular case where the Mavs already have hindsight and know Tyson, if healthy, gives them a huge boost. It's still a gamble, but Dallas already knows what's the best-case scenario looks like if it works out.

No other center in the league works for the Mavs trying to re-capture that. Everyone else is a bigger gamble.

And Larkin might end up being an All-Star, but also immaterial. It's clear the Mavs are decided to try to surround Dirk with a cast to make another run now, not in 3-4 years.

We're getting away from the crux of the issue. My argument isn't that Chandler isn't going to have the enough impact to warrant the trade. It's that the Mavs gave up some of those assets for no reason. Had it been just Larkin, fine. Had it been 34, fine. Had it been taking back Felton, fine. Had it been two of the three, fine. But it was pretty much a max offer for Tyson.

It's just like the Knicks trading for Melo. Even if Anthony is worth the price, why pay it when no one else has a bid nearly as high?

[Floyd Pacquiao]

eh chandler Is a past prime monkeyballer and felton is trash, this move merely moves the mavs from 8 to 6 seed imo

[MarioSpeedwagon]

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Do yourself a favor and fist yourself with a pair of toy hulk hands.every take I've seen from him is bad.

[ElNono]

We're getting away from the crux of the issue. My argument isn't that Chandler isn't going to have the enough impact to warrant the trade. It's that the Mavs gave up some of those assets for no reason. Had it been just Larkin, fine. Had it been 34, fine. Had it been taking back Felton, fine. Had it been two of the three, fine. But it was pretty much a max offer for Tyson.

It's just like the Knicks trading for Melo. Even if Anthony is worth the price, why pay it when no one else has a bid nearly as high?

Chandler's value in Dallas was worth a championship. I don't know how you really 'measure' that.

They gave up whatever it took to get what they feel is an integral piece to make them contenders again, after wasting the last 3 years trying to find a similar fit.

I'm sure they're going to keep wheeling and dealing, they still have some other positions to fill out and I don't think Felton is going to stay... we'll see.

[Thread]

They gave up whatever it took to get what they feel is an integral piece to make them contenders again, after wasting the last 3 years trying to find a similar fit.

Again, it's not the 3 years of Chandler that is so debilitating it is the tragedy of giving away the 3 from Dirk. Dirk didn't have 3 to put in the piss pot. Grim business.

[mavsfan1000]

Will Jim Carey put up with Felton's attitude and fatness?
He might pull a Diop and lose a bunch of weight during the summer. :)

[DPG21920]

eh chandler Is a past prime monkeyballer and felton is trash, this move merely moves the mavs from 8 to 6 seed imo

That's the point. This move likely moves them up (even if it doesn't, no real loss IMO), but it has a lot of upside because of the cap space they still have AFTER the move. NY has very little upside after this move (they might do good things, but their path just got a little harder IMO) and they gave up their best asset. If they wouldn't have taken on Calderon and been able to dump Felton, fine, but in order to dump Felton's small contract, they took on longer term salary and gave up their most tradeable asset who is likely their best player too.


every take I've seen from him is bad.

What? He has way more good takes than most posters on here.

[ElNono]

Again, it's not the 3 years of Chandler that is so debilitating it is the tragedy of giving away the 3 from Dirk. Dirk didn't have 3 to put in the piss pot. Grim business.

Completely agree. That's why I'm saying Donnie couldn't look Dirk in the face and tell him they didn't get Chandler because they didn't want to give up a rookie and a couple of 2nd round picks...

[Killakobe81]

I believe they'll push hard to sign Deng. Felton, Ellis, Deng, Dirk, Chandler starting. Devin Harris, Carter, Blair off the bench. I think they would be contenders if they stay healthy. They have one of the best coaches, too.

Said the same

[sook]

great move imo.

[Killakobe81]

Doubt Dirk takes 10 he said deal he takes will be fair to both sides.

[Chinook]

Chandler's value in Dallas was worth a championship. I don't know how you really 'measure' that.

They gave up whatever it took to get what they feel is an integral piece to make them contenders again, after wasting the last 3 years trying to find a similar fit.

I'm sure they're going to keep wheeling and dealing, they still have some other positions to fill out and I don't think Felton is going to stay... we'll see.

I don't see Dallas as being big dealers for a while, since they blew their load overpaying for Chandler. There's a difference between paying whatever it takes and paying more than it takes. They'll have to depend on free agency to finish their roster. But again, Chandler's actual value is not part of my argument. His market value is. It would be like if Sacramento could go back to the 2011 draft (without any other team being able to), and they pick Isaiah Thomas at 10 instead of at 60. Yes, Thomas is better than Freddette and perhaps deserved to be a lottery pick, but they still would be overdrafting Thomas, since no other team was going to pick him.

[DPG21920]

Doubt Dirk takes 10 he said deal he takes will be fair to both sides.

That's the big what if. What will Dirk take. Might be a chicken and the egg type deal where Dirk see's who they can sign and takes a contract accordingly (less if it's Bron/Melo, more if it's Deng).

[IrisHockey]

3 years/36 mil is my guess

[DPG21920]

I don't see Dallas as being big dealers for a while, since they blew their load overpaying for Chandler. There's a difference between paying whatever it takes and paying more than it takes. They'll have to depend on free agency to finish their roster. But again, Chandler's actual value is not part of my argument. His market value is. It would be like if Sacramento could go back to the 2011 draft (without any other team being able to), and they pick Isaiah Thomas at 10 instead of at 60. Yes, Thomas is better than Freddette and perhaps deserved to be a lottery pick, but they still would be overdrafting Thomas, since no other team was going to pick him.

I get your argument, but your analogies are wayyyyyyyyy different. An underwhelming Shane Larkin, 2 2nd rounders and 2 average to below average players (especially considering the longer term $ for Calderon) is no where near the same as the difference in your analogy (60th pick vs 10th pick). None of those assets (outside of maybe Dalemberts non-guaranteed deal and the 34th pick) where going to net you anything of great value. They were average to below average assets.

[DPG21920]

It's like saying that a 100% return on two investments is the same worth when one person invested $1 and the other $1,000,000. Sure, in principle they got the same rate of return, but one is clearly more valuable. I believe that to be the case in the Mavs deal. They might have "overpaid" (which I don't agree with given my stance on Tyson's likely market value) but even if they did it was a non-issue.

[Chinook]

Obviously, there may be more moves and that could change perspectives, but as of now, I just don't see why NY did this. In a bubble, they got decent value I guess, but I truly feel they could have gotten at least that much (mediocre prospect, 2 2nd rounders) especially if they were willing to give longer term salary relief (taking on Calderon-esque contract).

I feel that was Tyson Chandler's floor. Talented big man (even with health issues) that is an expiring deal is usually a pretty valuable asset (like an actual first round pick that has been unused on someone that has underwhelmed) especially for teams trying to shed future money (can get more talented guys on longer deals) and/or contenders needing that final piece (even though it's conjuncture at this point, I am sure many teams are very high on Tyson and blame the level of play on the crappy situation. Right or wrong).

New York did it because they know they aren't really going to be able to reload. They got back three pretty good trade assets in addition to a starting PG. Provided Melo walks, they'll probably get a couple more. After that, it's just suffering through a terrible season, probably finding a taker for Shumpert, giving them another asset or two. Then, they can start again in 2015, hoping that some big name doesn't get traded/extended and would be willing to come to the Knicks.

Chandler didn't really have value on the market; the Knicks killed it. There was no reason to keep him, since the team as constructed wasn't going to be good enough to keep Melo unless the Knicks made some trades, and the team minus Melo wasn't good enough to keep Chandler on it. With Asik going to the bayou, Jackson better hope the Bulls come calling for a S&T.


Instead of the analogy that Chinook used, I equate it to the %'s vs real $ argument. If someone tells you that paying 100% more than something is worth is a bad deal, but then you find out that really only equates to one dollar, it has no impact despite the principle. I don't really agree the paid too much even with some leverage they may or may not have had, but even if that is true, when you look at the price for a known quantiy in Tyson/Dirk, who cares? It was not egregious at all and outside of the 3M in cap space lost, no real loss at all.

To me, that's an old-CBA view. Rookie deals are extremely important to filling out rosters, especially for older teams. Rather than signing some ring-chasers (the ones who can't latch onto a better contender at that) to fill their final spots, Dallas could have had some players with upside and who could be valuable trade pieces down the line. It would be one thing if the Mavs traded those young players away for cap space, like the Heat did in 2010. But they traded them away to add cap space, hurting their free-agency and their draft at the same time. That's hardly something of little consequence.

[Chinook]

I get your argument, but your analogies are wayyyyyyyyy different. An underwhelming Shane Larkin, 2 2nd rounders and 2 average to below average players (especially considering the longer term $ for Calderon) is no where near the same as the difference in your analogy (60th pick vs 10th pick). None of those assets (outside of maybe Dalemberts non-guaranteed deal and the 34th pick) where going to net you anything of great value. They were average to below average assets.

And now their value ended up being zero since the Mavericks threw them in a trade they could have completed without them. That's the kind of thing the Spurs used to do.

The Thomas analogy holds, even if it is extreme. What if I said the 35th pick instead of the 60th pick? It still wouldn't be any more logical on the Kings part.

[DAF86]

As long as they have Monta as a key player I won't be able to take them seriously.

[ElNono]

I don't see Dallas as being big dealers for a while, since they blew their load overpaying for Chandler. There's a difference between paying whatever it takes and paying more than it takes. They'll have to depend on free agency to finish their roster. But again, Chandler's actual value is not part of my argument. His market value is. It would be like if Sacramento could go back to the 2011 draft (without any other team being able to), and they pick Isaiah Thomas at 10 instead of at 60. Yes, Thomas is better than Freddette and perhaps deserved to be a lottery pick, but they still would be overdrafting Thomas, since no other team was going to pick him.

I'll just agree to disagree. I don't think "market value" even enters the picture here. After 3 years of trying to find a replacement, they have not been able to, and now they have the urgency of Dirk's career coming to an end. He was obviously a priority, and they got that done, whatever the cost.

Whether they overpaid or not, time will tell. There's obviously the expectation that he can be again that defensive presence he was on a championship team (and IMO, he was the 2nd best player on that Mavs team). I also don't buy that if they waited two weeks, they get him for cheaper. I think there would be suitors for a well regarded player, former DPOY.

[Chinook]

I'll just agree to disagree. I don't think "market value" even enters the picture here. After 3 years of trying to find a replacement, they have not been able to, and now they have the urgency of Dirk's career coming to an end. He was obviously a priority, and they got that done, whatever the cost.

Whether they overpaid or not, time will tell. There's obviously the expectation that he can be again that defensive presence he was on a championship team (and IMO, he was the 2nd best player on that Mavs team). I also don't buy that if they waited two weeks, they get him for cheaper. I think there would be suitors for a well regarded player, former DPOY.

That's where we disagree. Time won't tell. There's nothing Chandler can do that will affect whether Dallas overpaid or not relative to my argument. That's what I've been trying to say. The only thing that determines that is what minimum offer it would have taken for Jackson to trade Chandler back to Dallas. If this seriously was the only way Dallas could get Chandler, then they paid market value, and I approve of the deal (but still lament the timing) even if Chandler bombs and Larkin and the picks become good players. If Jackson would have taken less, then Dallas overpaid, even if Chandler is a DPOY. And it's no small thing, as Dallas gave could have really used those assets and that cap space if they could have preserved it.

That's why the issue is murky. I believe Dallas could have gotten Chandler for a more favorable deal in terms of assets and timing. There's no way to prove that, though. But that's the case for all trades, and we still judge them based on perceived market value. I don't see why this is different. But yes, we can agree to disagree.

[The Batman]

Felton is worse than Lin.

[Baam]

Pelton graded it a C+ for the Mavs and a B+ for the Knicks :

http://bbs.hupu.com/9809664.html (http://bbs.hupu.com/9809664.html)

[DPG21920]

Chinook, you really think, especially considering the fact NY took on long term money with Jose, that a team wouldn't have at least given a Larkin quality thrown in, 2 2nd rounders and the quality of players of Dalembert/Jose for Tyson/Cap Relief down the road?

What do you think out of what Dallas paid, that other suitors would not have paid? That would determine two things:

1) What they theoretically overpaid compared to the market

2) If it really matters.

You asked about changing your argument from the 10th to the 35th and if that would make any more sense. The point is, Dallas didn't have the leverage you say IMO because of how good of a fit Tyson has proven to be. He was more valuable to Dallas than anyone else. So with that in mind, it probably was very close to what they had to pay.

Beyond that, I explained what I thought Tyson's value was and I can't imagine it would be much less than what Dallas paid and IMO, for the right team (and it just takes one) it could have gone significantly higher. Getting back to your question about changing your argument - yes it does matter. It goes back to my analogies. While in theory/principle you are correct, sometimes even if you overpay, as long as it's not egregious who really cares.

It's the same argument that baffles me with regards to people harping on the "Jose is a huge upgrade over Felton!!". Is that true? Sure - especially last year's Felton. But who cares :lol? Cool, have fun with a guy owed 3x the money over longer years that while he's better than Felton will not move the needle at all on anything of note. You aren't making the playoffs with Felton all the same as you won't with Calderon and he's owed more money and eats into your cap space when you actually have it.

[HemisfairArena]

Jackson doing work,,,, already better executive decisions than Fredo and Kupchak.

[Thread]

Jackson doing work,,,, already better executive decisions than Fredo and Kupchak.

Oh, yeah, Kerr smacked him in the face and there is nary a murmur from the peanut gallery.

[ElNono]

That's where we disagree. Time won't tell. There's nothing Chandler can do that will affect whether Dallas overpaid or not relative to my argument. That's what I've been trying to say. The only thing that determines that is what minimum offer it would have taken for Jackson to trade Chandler back to Dallas. If this seriously was the only way Dallas could get Chandler, then they paid market value, and I approve of the deal (but still lament the timing) even if Chandler bombs and Larkin and the picks become good players. If Jackson would have taken less, then Dallas overpaid, even if Chandler is a DPOY. And it's no small thing, as Dallas gave could have really used those assets and that cap space if they could have preserved it.

That's why the issue is murky. I believe Dallas could have gotten Chandler for a more favorable deal in terms of assets and timing. There's no way to prove that, though. But that's the case for all trades, and we still judge them based on perceived market value. I don't see why this is different. But yes, we can agree to disagree.

Absolutely not true, and for a number of reasons.

First reason is that nobody is privy to the negotiation that took place. While you feel (might even feel certain) that perhaps the Mavs might've been able to get it done for less, you don't really know that at all. You don't really know if the Knicks have already been approached by other teams about Chandler, you just don't know that. What we're all definitely certain about, is that this is the package that allowed Dallas to get it done.

And the second reason is that if Chandlers turns out to be THAT guy for the Mavs again, did they really overpay? What was his value when he walked off from Dallas as a champ? Was he worth more than a decent PG, a project and a couple of picks? Hell yeah, he was worth more than that. All these trades are a gamble. A leap of faith. In due time, all these deals always look different. RJ now looks like a terrible pickup and doubling down on extending him looks completely stupid. When the Kawhi/Hill trade was made, the consensus was that it was an even trade. Most people don't buy that anymore. Getting Diaw looks like a steal now, but if he stays fat and unmotivated, we would probably be singing a different tune.

[Chinook]

Chinook, you really think, especially considering the fact NY took on long term money with Jose, that a team wouldn't have at least given a Larkin quality thrown in, 2 2nd rounders and the quality of players of Dalembert/Jose for Tyson/Cap Relief down the road?

Down the road? You mean, in like two weeks? No. I don't think anyone would have outbid Dallas in two weeks. I don't think any team would have outbid Dallas at all. That's the point.


What do you think out of what Dallas paid, that other suitors would not have paid? That would determine two things:

1) What they theoretically overpaid compared to the market

2) If it really matters.

I think another team would have just taken Felton off New York's hands. Assuming Calderon has a bad contract (which you seem to be doing but of which I am not sure), perhaps an asset would be in order. Which is why I don't know why people think that I care about Larkin in particular. I don't care about him at all; I just don't think he's a throw-in. I think he and Dalembert's contract could have been shopped for a decent asset, like New York is trying to do with him now. If Larkin were the absolute lynch-pin, that's all right. But why both him and the picks (which I don't think are to be dismissed in this draft)? Dallas needs players, too. They are in a precarious cap situation and could use an almost-first-rounder who doesn't count against the cap.

The biggest problem is the fact that they completely capitulated to New York, especially if they are finalizing the deal this season. After the moritorium would be much more defensible, since, Dallas would at least not be losing cap space over this. But no, they gave that up too. I don't think any other team would have even thought of offering so much before seeing how the market shook out.


You asked about changing your argument from the 10th to the 35th and if that would make any more sense. The point is, Dallas didn't have the leverage you say IMO because of how good of a fit Tyson has proven to be. He was more valuable to Dallas than anyone else. So with that in mind, it probably was very close to what they had to pay.

Beyond that, I explained what I thought Tyson's value was and I can't imagine it would be much less than what Dallas paid and IMO, for the right team (and it just takes one) it could have gone significantly higher. Getting back to your question about changing your argument - yes it does matter. It goes back to my analogies. While in theory/principle you are correct, sometimes even if you overpay, as long as it's not egregious who really cares.

It's the same argument that baffles me with regards to people harping on the "Jose is a huge upgrade over Felton!!". Is that true? Sure - especially last year's Felton. But who cares :lol? Cool, have fun with a guy owed 3x the money over longer years that while he's better than Felton will not move the needle at all on anything of note. You aren't making the playoffs with Felton all the same as you won't with Calderon and he's owed more money and eats into your cap space when you actually have it.

That doesn't make sense, unless Jackson drove up the price for Dallas specifically because he knew they would become a legit competitor to New York if they made the trade. Would Phil have taken a smaller offer from Orlando, since Tyson doesn't fit the Magic's system as well? That seems crazy to me. Jackson can't afford to think about how his trade affects the eight-seed in the opposite conference. He has to get the best deal for his team that he can. This isn't like free agency, where a team will overpay to keep a critical player. Dallas is giving up every trade asset they have when they were the only team confirmed to be in the running. They could have had their cake an eaten it too.

And, no, picking Thomas at 35 instead of 60 is still dumb, since the Kings would know they could get Thomas at 60 in addition to and, say, Parsons at 35.

As I said, the Knicks are rebuilding, even if they are holding out hope that they aren't Calderon still has a market if they want to move him. He's been traded while making this much before.

[DPG21920]

Sure he has a market, but it's probably not very big without having to give something up. You aren't getting anything of note for him.

My point about Dallas was with regards to leverage. You said Dallas had it. My point was to refute that because Dallas and NY knew Chandler was more important to Dallas than anyone else.

[DPG21920]

Also, getting Tyson with their cap space would mean in order to get the cap space they have now, Dallas would be forced to find takers for Dalembert/Calderon/Larkin/Ellington which IMO is not that easy as none of them are really great assets at all. They would have been forced to give up their picks anyways, so this just takes the suspense out of it while getting their man.