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

[mavsfan1000]

Imo the center is the hardest position to be good in. The Mavs have only had 1 good center in the last 15 years.

[Chinook]

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? 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.

For the first paragraph, I already said that. I've already conceded that I don't know for sure that they could have gotten him for less. But seeing as there have been no reports of other suitors, I am not going to assume there was some hot underground market for him.

Yes, they could have. Just like if Cleveland draft, I don't know, James McAdoo first-overall tomorrow night. Even if McAddo becomes the best player in the draft, the Cavs would still have way overdrafted him unless there was real concern that he was going to be taken by some team in the lottery, and Cleveland couldn't trade down. People have to understand that players are actual economic commodities, whose values can rise and fall based solely on perception and consensus. Chandler's actual basketball value in 2014-2015 does not affect is market value right now. Dallas either paid right in line with what New York was willing to take or they overpaid. There is no in-between. If you want to talk about Chandler's potential on-court impact for next year, we can do that. But that's not even remotely part of this conversation.

[Franklin]

There's no type of loss that comes without any sort of gain, and vice versa. Sure Calderon is a solid PG who rarely makes mistakes but he's not the exact type of player we need imho. Even if Calderon stays I believe he and Devin would split the minutes at PG which would be a waste of talent. We don't need Calderon no more with Devin coming back to his best form, and Devin is younger than Calderon if I remember correct. It is the return of Devin that makes Calderon dispensable, and makes the reunion of Dirk and TC possible.

[Chinook]

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.

But that means nothing to New York. That's not actual leverage unless there are other bidders. It's Cuban's job to be smart enough to call Jackson's bluff and to know he has the best offer. Jackson losing out on the best package while trying to play chicken would be a colossal failure.

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.

As I said before, even if Dallas decided to make this exact trade, making every concession that they did so far (which I'm still against), they are making a mistake finalizing it before the moratorium. If they had waited until after, they could have at least used their full cap space first. That is the benefit to not having to use cap space for Chandler, and had Dallas paid out the nose for that privilege, I would be much more laudatory. But instead, they gave up the assets AND the cap space when it wouldn't have hurt New York at all to wait for it. So the Mavs didn't give up the cap space to secure their man. They gave up the cap space to secure their man against all doubt of a New York double-cross.

[Franklin]

Calderon is our version of Splitter. decent player in the regular season but if you count on him for big times, he sucks.

[DPG21920]

I guess my question is then, what do you think Larkin/Calderon/Dalembert/Ellington and the 2 2nd rounders could have obtained?

[Franklin]

I wanted TC back in Dallas as much as Ghazi's wife did, I just didn't know how we could get it done. Calderon is overpaid while Dalembert is plain trash, if we wanna get the deal done, I thought, we'd have to add Wright to the offer but Wright is a good player with massive potential I was afraid it'd turn out a mistake to add him as a filler in the TC deal. Calderon and Dalembert were the two tiest contracts on our squad thank God NY agreed to take them. 11' TC was the best C we've got since Sam Perkins and now we've got him back without giving up no substantial value.

Thank you, Donnie... Thank you, Mark

[mavsfan1000]

I guess my question is then, what do you think Larkin/Calderon/Dalembert/Ellington and the 2 2nd rounders could have obtained?

Not much. A bunch of scrubs for Chandler.

[Chinook]

I guess my question is then, what do you think Larkin/Calderon/Dalembert/Ellington and the 2 2nd rounders could have obtained?

I think Larkin and those seconds were worth keeping and that Calderon/Dalembert/Ellington would have been enough. But if one had to be thrown in, no big loss.

[DPG21920]

I think Larkin and those seconds were worth keeping and that Calderon/Dalembert/Ellington would have been enough. But if one had to be thrown in, no big loss.

I get that, I'm just saying what do you think Larkin + the picks would have garnered had they kept them? Obviously they could have kept the picks, but it seems like league min guys have a better shot at sticking anyways.

[DPG21920]

I think Larkin and those seconds were worth keeping and that Calderon/Dalembert/Ellington would have been enough. But if one had to be thrown in, no big loss.

Also, why would NY do that deal? They would not improve basketball wise, they would not get cap space this year and they would have actually reduced their cap space in 2015. Is dumping Felton right now that important that they would be willing to lose 5M in cap space to just suck this year? Is Calderon at 3x the cost really that much more tradeable than Felton?

[ElNono]

Yes, they could have. Just like if Cleveland draft, I don't know, James McAdoo first-overall tomorrow night. Even if McAddo becomes the best player in the draft, the Cavs would still have way overdrafted him unless there was real concern that he was going to be taken by some team in the lottery, and Cleveland couldn't trade down. People have to understand that players are actual economic commodities, whose values can rise and fall based solely on perception and consensus. Chandler's actual basketball value in 2014-2015 does not affect is market value right now. Dallas either paid right in line with what New York was willing to take or they overpaid. There is no in-between. If you want to talk about Chandler's potential on-court impact for next year, we can do that. But that's not even remotely part of this conversation.

A player's 'market value' is determined by the maximum amount a team will pay for his services. Dallas just set Chandler's market value right now. For that kind of value, they expect him to produce in a DPOY capacity, and whether he does or not, only time will tell. So yeah, his market value right now was set based on Dallas' expectations for him in the coming seasons. Whether he is all that or not in the future, will determine whether this was a bargain, a deal priced right, or overpaid.

I don't have a problem if you think at this moment in time that they overpaid. But if they're walking away with #2 next July, then I probably will have to call it a bargain.

[Chinook]

A player's 'market value' is determined by the maximum amount a team will pay for his services. Dallas just set Chandler's market value right now. For that kind of value, they expect him to produce in a DPOY capacity, and whether he does or not, only time will tell. So yeah, his market value right now was set based on Dallas' expectations for him in the coming seasons. Whether he is all that or not in the future, will determine whether this was a bargain, a deal priced right, or overpaid.

I don't have a problem if you think at this moment in time that they overpaid. But if they're walking away with #2 next July, then I probably will have to call it a bargain.

And I don't have a problem with everyone else thinking they didn't. As I said, I can't ever know if I am right or wrong on what Chandler's market value was. (I agree that his market value is now what Dallas has paid for him and have been trying to make that distinction. I didn't in the post you quoted, though.). And again, I like the acquisition for Dallas and think they can build a good team if they go for two really good players and not one max player. A Lowery/Ellis/Ariza/Dirk/Chandler lineup is a potential winner, although I don't think they'd beat the Spurs. But I feel like the Mavs could have had a chance at that lineup as well as having a few assets left to either deal or develop. We'll never know.

[Chinook]

Also, why would NY do that deal? They would not improve basketball wise, they would not get cap space this year and they would have actually reduced their cap space in 2015. Is dumping Felton right now that important that they would be willing to lose 5M in cap space to just suck this year? Is Calderon at 3x the cost really that much more tradeable than Felton?

Calderon still has positive value. He had a five-year deal that averaged $9 Million and then signed a new four-year deal averaging $7.5 Million. It's not like he's been on a long deal that's been horrible for years. He's a legitimate starter and has been for a while, so I do think he's either a good starter for New York or a decent trade piece. With Felton being so terrible and Pablo being older than dirt, I do think the Knicks value having a solid PG in place now. Felton, on the other hand, was a cancer there. He needed to be gone.

Also, New York saved almost $6 Million off next year's payroll by making the deal. Why you think they lost cap space?

[DPG21920]

Calderon still has positive value. He had a five-year deal that averaged $9 Million and then signed a new four-year deal averaging $7.5 Million. It's not like he's been on a long deal that's been horrible for years. He's a legitimate starter and has been for a while, so I do think he's either a good starter for New York or a decent trade piece. With Felton being so terrible and Pablo being older than dirt, I do think the Knicks value having a solid PG in place now. Felton, on the other hand, was a cancer there. He needed to be gone.

Also, New York saved almost $6 Million off next year's payroll by making the deal. Why you think they lost cap space?

They saved 3M this year due to salaries out vs in, but they have no cap space anyways. They lost cap space due to Calderon having a bigger/longer deal. Plus Larkin as well.

[ElNono]

And I don't have a problem with everyone else thinking they didn't. As I said, I can't ever know if I am right or wrong on what Chandler's market value was. (I agree that his market value is now what Dallas has paid for him and have been trying to make that distinction. I didn't in the post you quoted, though.). And again, I like the acquisition for Dallas and think they can build a good team if they go for two really good players and not one max player. A Lowery/Ellis/Ariza/Dirk/Chandler lineup is a potential winner, although I don't think they'd beat the Spurs. But I feel like the Mavs could have had a chance at that lineup as well as having a few assets left to either deal or develop. We'll never know.

I'm with you this isn't enough. They need to make some more moves. But they did address perhaps their biggest need outside of the wing.

[Pelicans78]

Chandler contributes a of a lot offensively. Always has. Super efficient, understands the pick n roll, offensive rebounder, super high FG%. His offensive rating is always through the roof.

[Chinook]

They saved 3M this year due to salaries out vs in, but they have no cap space anyways. They lost cap space due to Calderon having a bigger/longer deal.

They also will save another $2 Million by waiving Dalembert. Or it they trade him for something of value, that's a good thing. So I guess they lost $3 Million against the cap, long term. Do I think Calderon is a million bucks better per-year than Felton? Yes.

[Chinook]

Chandler contributes a of a lot offensively. Always has. Super efficient, understands the pick n roll, offensive rebounder, super high FG%. His offensive rating is always through the roof.

Yeah. I've been thinking about that a lot. Chandler is a fine PnR player, which is a stable of Carlisle's offense. Ellis/Chandler PnRs are going to be hard to stop, especially since Duncan will be on Chandler (while Splitter is on Dirk). I will say, though, that Wright and Blair are also elite PnR players, so it's not like the Spurs are going to be taken by surprise by Dallas running those plays with Duncan's man.

[DPG21920]

They also will save another $2 Million by waiving Dalembert. Or it they trade him for something of value, that's a good thing. So I guess they lost $3 Million against the cap, long term. Do I think Calderon is a million bucks better per-year than Felton? Yes.

Sure, so they save $5M in a year where it won't net them cap space & they lost 5M in a year where they would cap space all for the pleasure of watching Calderon play slightly better than Felton while missing the playoffs. Larkin+Calderon's contracts being longer cost them 5M in cap space in a year where it matters.

[DPG21920]

They also will save another $2 Million by waiving Dalembert. Or it they trade him for something of value, that's a good thing. So I guess they lost $3 Million against the cap, long term. Do I think Calderon is a million bucks better per-year than Felton? Yes.

Sure, so they save $5M in a year where it won't net them cap space & they lost 5M in a year where they would have cap space all for the pleasure of watching Calderon play slightly better than Felton while missing the playoffs. Larkin+Calderon's contracts being longer cost them 5M in cap space in a year where it matters.

[ElNono]

On a side note, I never thought Calderon was a legitimate starter for a contender. Extremely overrated in my opinion. Dallas did well to move him if they're really looking to put together a contender.

Felton isn't the answer either. They're going to have to flip him for a harder-working PG that can play P&R... can they trade for Barea?

[Pelicans78]

They also will save another $2 Million by waiving Dalembert. Or it they trade him for something of value, that's a good thing. So I guess they lost $3 Million against the cap, long term. Do I think Calderon is a million bucks better per-year than Felton? Yes.

He's probably 5 million per year better than Felton. Calderon is much better than Felton and has been for a few years now.

[DPG21920]

He's probably 5 million per year better than Felton. Calderon is much better than Felton and has been for a few years now.

Who cares if he's better? He's owed double the money in a single year and 3x as much total. He's not that much better than Felton. Even if he was, who cares, it adds nothing to NY's roster because they will suck anyways.

[Chinook]

Sure, so they save $5M in a year where it won't net them cap space & they lost 5M in a year where they would cap space all for the pleasure of watching Calderon play slightly better than Felton while missing the playoffs. Larkin+Calderon's contracts being longer cost them 5M in cap space in a year where it matters.

So now you're on the "a couple of million bucks in cap space makes all the difference" train? I thought I saw you at the stop when I was driving away. Anyway, New York's situation in 2015 is not like Dallas' now. Calderon is a decent player, and the Knicks will have the cap space to have two max contracts on the books, with or without Calderon/Larkin. It's a good thing that they already have their 2015 PG without having to fit him into the $49 Million of space.