Trade with the Mavs?

[aussiewill]

Disgruntled Mavs fan here and figured you guys would be in a similar mood after we both got blown out today...

Mavs cant tank this year since we gave away our first rounder this year in the Lamar Odom trade(how that has bitten us in the ass is unfathomable...) and we want to get 'better'.

Without having watched the Pistons with much emphasis this year, it appears you guys need to shuffle the front court somewhat and we need... well... a change in so many ways to contend.

Mavs send-
Wright, Marion, Larkin & Crowder

Pistons send-
Monroe, Jerebko, Bynum, Mitchell

You guys get a (whilst aging I know) very versatile defensive option in Marion to play the 3 and move JSmoove to the 4. Get the most efficient scoring 4/5 in the league, a younger version of Bynum and a hustle player in Crowder.

Mavs get a post presence that we sorely need as the team just takes jumpshot after jumpshot after jumpshot... Jerebko is out of the rotation for you guys and we need some youth that isn't a rookie or D-league material, so he fits the bill somewhat... Bynum would be useful to us as having 2 rookie backup PG's isn't working and we don't know how Harris will return (when he does...). Mitchell, well... I guess he is just heading home to Texas and we might get some production!

Thoughts?

[ComboGuardCity]

God no. You can have josh smith for that package.

[HeroicKennedy]

No dice. The only player with a WS48 over .100 is Wright, who is a quality reserve but not worth a player of Monroe's caliber.

[menten]

why would you want monroe? isnt the mavs defense terrible enough?

[HeroicKennedy]

why would you want monroe? isnt the mavs defense terrible enough?

Dallas is 11th in SRS this year, better than everyone team in the East that isn't the HEAT or Pacers and their defensive rating is only slightly below average. You know, with apparently three terrible defenders in Calderon, Nowitzki, and Ellis.

The Mavericks have a better defense than the Grizzlies this year.

[momed11]

Take smith, give us what you want.

[Natopher]

No dice. The only player with a WS48 over .100 is Wright, who is a quality reserve but not worth a player of Monroe's caliber.

While I agree that it's a bad trade, you need to stop being obsessed with win shares. According to WS/48 Markieff Morris is significantly better than Greg Monroe. And Markieff Morris has 2.3 WS compared to Greg's 2.4. Maybe you disagree, but I don't think Markieff is better than Monroe.

Stats are good when you use several and you don't rely entirely upon them. But when you pick 1 stat and use it as the only basis for all your arguments you're not getting enough information. Not only that, but win shares benefits players on good teams and hinders those on bad teams.

EDIT: Even Marcus Morris has a better WS/48 than Monroe. Marcus' is .118 and Monroe's is .101

[HeroicKennedy]

No dice. The only player with a WS48 over .100 is Wright, who is a quality reserve but not worth a player of Monroe's caliber.

While I agree that it's a bad trade, you need to stop being obsessed with win shares. According to WS/48 Markieff Morris is significantly better than Greg Monroe. And Markieff Morris has 2.3 WS compared to Greg's 2.4. Maybe you disagree, but I don't think Markieff is better than Monroe.

Stats are good when you use several and you don't rely entirely upon them. But when you pick 1 stat and use it as the only basis for all your arguments you're not getting enough information. Not only that, but win shares benefits players on good teams and hinders those on bad teams.

EDIT: Even Marcus Morris has a better WS/48 than Monroe. Marcus' is .118 and Monroe's is .101

I usually reference win shares due to it being the only ones to go back beyond the past two seasons, whereas the more accurate wins produced only gives you two years worth nowadays.

And the truth of the matter is that Markieff is outperforming Monroe this year, though in less minutes. Monroe has been a slightly above average. Of course, Markieff was absolute junk the first two years of his career compared to Monroe, so I would argue that it's possible its a temporary spike in performance that may not last. OR that the Suns are a much better built team, and therefore allow Markieff to perform at a better level, whereas the Pistons are a junk assembled team where no one compliments anyone and everyone is suffering under this type of team. Keep in mind, Markieff has a higher usage rate meaning when they play him they feature him more than Monroe.

I wouldn't care to swap them, mainly cause Morris is already older and I am very suspect of any long term improvements, but it is what it is. Monroe has been slightly above average this year.

[Natopher]

No dice. The only player with a WS48 over .100 is Wright, who is a quality reserve but not worth a player of Monroe's caliber.

While I agree that it's a bad trade, you need to stop being obsessed with win shares. According to WS/48 Markieff Morris is significantly better than Greg Monroe. And Markieff Morris has 2.3 WS compared to Greg's 2.4. Maybe you disagree, but I don't think Markieff is better than Monroe.

Stats are good when you use several and you don't rely entirely upon them. But when you pick 1 stat and use it as the only basis for all your arguments you're not getting enough information. Not only that, but win shares benefits players on good teams and hinders those on bad teams.

EDIT: Even Marcus Morris has a better WS/48 than Monroe. Marcus' is .118 and Monroe's is .101

I usually reference win shares due to it being the only ones to go back beyond the past two seasons, whereas the more accurate wins produced only gives you two years worth nowadays.

And the truth of the matter is that Markieff is outperforming Monroe this year, though in less minutes. Monroe has been a slightly above average. Of course, Markieff was absolute junk the first two years of his career compared to Monroe, so I would argue that it's possible its a temporary spike in performance that may not last. OR that the Suns are a much better built team, and therefore allow Markieff to perform at a better level, whereas the Pistons are a junk assembled team where no one compliments anyone and everyone is suffering under this type of team. Keep in mind, Markieff has a higher usage rate meaning when they play him they feature him more than Monroe.

I wouldn't care to swap them, mainly cause Morris is already older and I am very suspect of any long term improvements, but it is what it is. Monroe has been slightly above average this year.

Brandan Wright's WS/48 the past 3 years were (least to most recent) .215, .176 and .253 where as Monroe's were .161, .105 and .101, so I fail to see why you don't think he alone would be worth trading Monroe for. Every topic I see you referencing WS/48 to determine whether or not Player X is better than Player Y. Not sure why WS/48 doesn't count this time.

[HeroicKennedy]

While I agree that it's a bad trade, you need to stop being obsessed with win shares. According to WS/48 Markieff Morris is significantly better than Greg Monroe. And Markieff Morris has 2.3 WS compared to Greg's 2.4. Maybe you disagree, but I don't think Markieff is better than Monroe.

Stats are good when you use several and you don't rely entirely upon them. But when you pick 1 stat and use it as the only basis for all your arguments you're not getting enough information. Not only that, but win shares benefits players on good teams and hinders those on bad teams.

EDIT: Even Marcus Morris has a better WS/48 than Monroe. Marcus' is .118 and Monroe's is .101

I usually reference win shares due to it being the only ones to go back beyond the past two seasons, whereas the more accurate wins produced only gives you two years worth nowadays.

And the truth of the matter is that Markieff is outperforming Monroe this year, though in less minutes. Monroe has been a slightly above average. Of course, Markieff was absolute junk the first two years of his career compared to Monroe, so I would argue that it's possible its a temporary spike in performance that may not last. OR that the Suns are a much better built team, and therefore allow Markieff to perform at a better level, whereas the Pistons are a junk assembled team where no one compliments anyone and everyone is suffering under this type of team. Keep in mind, Markieff has a higher usage rate meaning when they play him they feature him more than Monroe.

I wouldn't care to swap them, mainly cause Morris is already older and I am very suspect of any long term improvements, but it is what it is. Monroe has been slightly above average this year.

Brandan Wright's WS/48 the past 3 years were (least to most recent) .215, .176 and .253 where as Monroe's were .161, .105 and .101, so I fail to see why you don't think he alone would be worth trading Monroe for. Every topic I see you referencing WS/48 to determine whether or not Player X is better than Player Y. Not sure why WS/48 doesn't count this time.

Cause Wright could be had as a free agent for less than MLE, so why give up an asset when you could get an asset for nothing? Wright/Monroe is better than Wright or Monroe.

Also, there's significant differences in the usage rates and minutes, so the quick reference method isn't supposed to be the end all, be all. But Wright succeeds tremendously in his role and I will absolutely not discount the value of that.

[Natopher]

I usually reference win shares due to it being the only ones to go back beyond the past two seasons, whereas the more accurate wins produced only gives you two years worth nowadays.

And the truth of the matter is that Markieff is outperforming Monroe this year, though in less minutes. Monroe has been a slightly above average. Of course, Markieff was absolute junk the first two years of his career compared to Monroe, so I would argue that it's possible its a temporary spike in performance that may not last. OR that the Suns are a much better built team, and therefore allow Markieff to perform at a better level, whereas the Pistons are a junk assembled team where no one compliments anyone and everyone is suffering under this type of team. Keep in mind, Markieff has a higher usage rate meaning when they play him they feature him more than Monroe.

I wouldn't care to swap them, mainly cause Morris is already older and I am very suspect of any long term improvements, but it is what it is. Monroe has been slightly above average this year.

Brandan Wright's WS/48 the past 3 years were (least to most recent) .215, .176 and .253 where as Monroe's were .161, .105 and .101, so I fail to see why you don't think he alone would be worth trading Monroe for. Every topic I see you referencing WS/48 to determine whether or not Player X is better than Player Y. Not sure why WS/48 doesn't count this time.

Cause Wright could be had as a free agent for less than MLE, so why give up an asset when you could get an asset for nothing? Wright/Monroe is better than Wright or Monroe.

Also, there's significant differences in the usage rates and minutes, so the quick reference method isn't supposed to be the end all, be all. But Wright succeeds tremendously in his role and I will absolutely not discount the value of that.

No dice. The only player with a WS48 over .100 is Wright, who is a quality reserve but not worth a player of Monroe's caliber.

Free agency wasn't your argument before. You said he was simply a quality reserve. Well win shares say that for the past 3 years he's been quite a bit better than Monroe. And if it's true that the "quick reference method" isn't supposed to be the end all be all, then why is it that your arguments for/against players always start and end with stats?

[HeroicKennedy]

Brandan Wright's WS/48 the past 3 years were (least to most recent) .215, .176 and .253 where as Monroe's were .161, .105 and .101, so I fail to see why you don't think he alone would be worth trading Monroe for. Every topic I see you referencing WS/48 to determine whether or not Player X is better than Player Y. Not sure why WS/48 doesn't count this time.

Cause Wright could be had as a free agent for less than MLE, so why give up an asset when you could get an asset for nothing? Wright/Monroe is better than Wright or Monroe.

Also, there's significant differences in the usage rates and minutes, so the quick reference method isn't supposed to be the end all, be all. But Wright succeeds tremendously in his role and I will absolutely not discount the value of that.

No dice. The only player with a WS48 over .100 is Wright, who is a quality reserve but not worth a player of Monroe's caliber.

Free agency wasn't your argument before. You said he was simply a quality reserve. Well win shares say that for the past 3 years he's been quite a bit better than Monroe. And if it's true that the "quick reference method" isn't supposed to be the end all be all, then why is it that your arguments for/against players always start and end with stats?

Except it generally starts with WS and then moves on to a more nuanced discussion. The truth of the matter is that Wright isn't worth Monroe for a multitude of reasons. Wright isn't under team control for another 4-5 years. Wright is 3 years older than Monroe. Wright has excelled in his reserve role but has never been given a consistent starting role, which makes it a huge risk to trade a player who's been good in the starting role his entire career. Wright is only under contract for two more seasons, meaning if he continues to perform at this level as a starter, he will be unrestricted and incredibly hard to keep around.

Basically, 4-5 years of Monroe is more valuable than 2 years of Wright. The WS argument shows that the other players included have all been below average this season save Wright, and I just demonstrated the issues with Wright.

[Natopher]

Cause Wright could be had as a free agent for less than MLE, so why give up an asset when you could get an asset for nothing? Wright/Monroe is better than Wright or Monroe.

Also, there's significant differences in the usage rates and minutes, so the quick reference method isn't supposed to be the end all, be all. But Wright succeeds tremendously in his role and I will absolutely not discount the value of that.

No dice. The only player with a WS48 over .100 is Wright, who is a quality reserve but not worth a player of Monroe's caliber.

Free agency wasn't your argument before. You said he was simply a quality reserve. Well win shares say that for the past 3 years he's been quite a bit better than Monroe. And if it's true that the "quick reference method" isn't supposed to be the end all be all, then why is it that your arguments for/against players always start and end with stats?

Except it generally starts with WS and then moves on to a more nuanced discussion. The truth of the matter is that Wright isn't worth Monroe for a multitude of reasons. Wright isn't under team control for another 4-5 years. Wright is 3 years older than Monroe. Wright has excelled in his reserve role but has never been given a consistent starting role, which makes it a huge risk to trade a player who's been good in the starting role his entire career. Wright is only under contract for two more seasons, meaning if he continues to perform at this level as a starter, he will be unrestricted and incredibly hard to keep around.

Basically, 4-5 years of Monroe is more valuable than 2 years of Wright. The WS argument shows that the other players included have all been below average this season save Wright, and I just demonstrated the issues with Wright.

Actually, you demonstrated the issues with your numbers argument, because now that they've been used against you you're looking for ways to ignore them.

[HeroicKennedy]

Free agency wasn't your argument before. You said he was simply a quality reserve. Well win shares say that for the past 3 years he's been quite a bit better than Monroe. And if it's true that the "quick reference method" isn't supposed to be the end all be all, then why is it that your arguments for/against players always start and end with stats?

Except it generally starts with WS and then moves on to a more nuanced discussion. The truth of the matter is that Wright isn't worth Monroe for a multitude of reasons. Wright isn't under team control for another 4-5 years. Wright is 3 years older than Monroe. Wright has excelled in his reserve role but has never been given a consistent starting role, which makes it a huge risk to trade a player who's been good in the starting role his entire career. Wright is only under contract for two more seasons, meaning if he continues to perform at this level as a starter, he will be unrestricted and incredibly hard to keep around.

Basically, 4-5 years of Monroe is more valuable than 2 years of Wright. The WS argument shows that the other players included have all been below average this season save Wright, and I just demonstrated the issues with Wright.

Actually, you demonstrated the issues with your numbers argument, because now that they've been used against you you're looking for ways to ignore them.

I love how I directly address the issue and all I get is "you ignore them." I explained the difference in Wright and Monroe's roles and how the stats actively reflect that. I explain the risks of a player like Wright and expecting him to move into a 30+ minute role and continuing to be a productive player at the same level, especially this far into his career.

What exactly is your goal here? "If I compare a back-up's WS48 to a starter's WS48 and there's a huge gap, that proves that stats are useless!" Or if anyone bothers with context, you can see the problem with this comparison AND if you understand how statistical analysis works, you can understand why this isn't a "gotcha" moment in the slightest.

[aussiewill]

Aside from this WS48 argument (which no one else wold be willing to read all the way through), I sincerly doubt you guys are going to give Monroe the contract he will attract as a RFA, he will get 14-15M a year and that will be ear marked for Drummond obviously.

Bottom line is you guys need defence and efficiency and you're getting that with Marion and Wright whilst addressing the need of moving Smith to the 4 and defensive stalwart who really hasn't missed a beat this year. Marion would be the only player in the league who has been given defensive assignments to all 5 positions this season.

Basically you're getting a starter where you need one more than any other position, probably your 7th man in Wright, a very serviceable bench player in Crowder and a 1st round pick who wont be worse than Bynum in years to come.

In return you're giving up a player who is taking up the position of what I'd deem to be your best upside player (as Im sure you would all agree) and is likely to be playing for another team next year anyway. You have another 2 fringe rotation players who aren't playing meaningful minutes and a D-league player.

BTW, no one is taking Smith right now with that contract, maybe NY might trade you Stoudamire...

[Phenomenonsense]

Aside from this WS48 argument (which no one else wold be willing to read all the way through), I sincerly doubt you guys are going to give Monroe the contract he will attract as a RFA, he will get 14-15M a year and that will be ear marked for Drummond obviously.

Bottom line is you guys need defence and efficiency and you're getting that with Marion and Wright whilst addressing the need of moving Smith to the 4 and defensive stalwart who really hasn't missed a beat this year. Marion would be the only player in the league who has been given defensive assignments to all 5 positions this season.

Basically you're getting a starter where you need one more than any other position, probably your 7th man in Wright, a very serviceable bench player in Crowder and a 1st round pick who wont be worse than Bynum in years to come.

In return you're giving up a player who is taking up the position of what I'd deem to be your best upside player (as Im sure you would all agree) and is likely to be playing for another team next year anyway. You have another 2 fringe rotation players who aren't playing meaningful minutes and a D-league player.

BTW, no one is taking Smith right now with that contract, maybe NY might trade you Stoudamire...

We have plenty of money coming off the books the same year Drummond comes up for extension. Monroe's contract will not affect Drummond. Marion is 90 years too old to be of consideration. (Who cares if he is good? dude will not be here if this team gets it together and wins a championship when drummond is in his prime in 6-8 years). Monroe is not in Drummond's way. Mitchell has all the athleticism of Drummond so waiting and seeing how he develops is my preferred method of dealing with him. I just don't see the need or care for your deal in any way. You want smith with that trade then by all means.

[Mr. Krabs]

We can do much better than that.

[ImHeisenberg]

HAHAHA!!! Worst Monroe trade I've ever read.

No, No, No. Sorry Mavs, you have absolutely zero assets to make a trade for any quality players. That's the result of building your team out of 40+ aged players.

[No-Man]

why would you want monroe? isnt the mavs defense terrible enough?

We won't
that trade make the Mavs terrible, Monroe is way worse than Marion and Wright for us, no way we even consider that.