FanPost

Mavs Front Office, Dry Powder, And Middle tier Free Agents.

Hear me out, this isnt a post about what the Mavs Front Office did wrong.

This isnt a post about what the Mavs Front Office could have done.

This Isnt a post about why the Mavs Front office.

This is about an opportunity, in hindsight, which we have given up on, by going with the existing strategy of roster building which seems to be exceptionally Mavericks-only.

What strategy of roster building, you ask?

The strategy of:

-Trying to get a max contract guy in Free agency.

-Retaining a loyal to mavs guy via a 4-5mil/year multiyear type of contract (which is kinda overvalued)

-Signing a bunch of veteran minimums to fill out a roster.

This is basically what the mavs has been doing ever since Collison+Mayo type of whole team 1 year contract style strategy failed, so that the Mavs could theoretically "stay competitive" whilst being able to "be opportunistic enough in the FA market and waiver market".

Is it really true that it's the only way though?

Before answering that question, let me give a short concept about how most teams go about team building (on paper):

Since the NBA has a pretty strict salary cap, with going over the cap only possible from signing your own free agents, using certain exceptions, and trades, every single team is essentially trying to get as much production out of the same salary size. (ok, Cleveland is playing a different game, but lets just play with this in mind first, we'll go into complications later).

This is done using the following:

-Rookie Contracts: Rookies who are able to produce typically produce much more than what their contract is worth. Look at Jae Crowder. Look at guys like Andre Drummond. Look at ANTHONY DAVIS for example. This basically means drafting well for most parts, since good players on rookie contract rarely get traded except for supposed final pieces for a team (well, unless u're Rondo, that is).

-Maximum Contract stars: U cant pay anymore than this, so some players who make a huge ton of contribution for their maximum (read: typically guys coming off their 1st/2nd contract and their maximum isnt too high yet) are going to be able to produce more than they cost. Simply concept really.

-Minimum contract vets: These guys typically are forgotten, are looking to rebuilding their reputation, find their way in the league, etc, and sign a short minimum contract deal so as to join a team they want so as to path their way to a championship/rebuilding their reputation/find their place in the nba.

-Reasonable contracts: Guys who are undervalued by the league and hence got a decent sized contract. This is often in the form of guys who basically came in with 1 expectation and outdid expectation, and u could see it as somewhat of a Monta Ellis situation.

In the first year going into the new CBA, the mavs essentially did nothing, well, worse than nothing (thanks, Odom), and then some. After which they proceeded to suck even more by giving out overvalued single year contracts which doesnt fall into any of the above category (which doesnt help the cause of winning, since they missed the playoffs).

After which they went and signed Monta to a reasonably sized contract, Calderon to an arguably reasonably sized contract

What i'm saying is this: Reasonable contracts in the middle tier matter, and the lack of it is a reason why mavs have been lacking in the asset department for a while. Mavs havent been exactly striking it in the drafting department, so the first option of guys outperforming on rookie scale is basically out (until this year, that is). So Mavs FO has to get extra value back by trade and in Free agency. Signing max contract players is almost like gambling, so what it essentially comes down to, in terms of what differentiates the good from the bad FO, is the capability to sign guys to reasonable contracts such that they perform better than expected, and also such that they can become assets for the team to trade.

Mavs hasnt exactly given up on the middle tier free agents since the CBA started either, but the trend the past few years since signing Monta/Calderon has been to only sign guys on our own team to such deals, and it's typically "loyalty" deals which are long, somewhat dubious, and pretty much un-trade-able from a organizational perspective (a lot of it was to retain guys who are loyal to the team, and trading away Harris/Barea is essentially just supporting the concept of Mavs as a high-turnover mercenary-like team, considering the ridiculously high turnover already). However, what happens is that the team has basically focused on only Max and minimum free agents through the free agency process the past few years.

What the team has given up on, from there, is the presence of assets. When we traded for Tyson Chandler, what was the most important piece? No Shane Larkin, Not the multitude of (almost useless for the mavs) 2nd rounders. It was the contract and worth of Jose Calderon. When we traded for Rondo, it was the semi-mid-level contract of Jameer Nelson, Brandon Wright, which made it work. Veteran minimums are able to outperform their value, yes, but they also happen to be almost unable to get anything of value back since their salary value is so low. Max contract guys are guys u're hoping to be your core, and if u are trying to improve on your team, then they are basically untradeable. So essentially to upgrade on a team, u have to trade your mid-level free agents, together with any picks/young talent u might happen to pick up on the way, which allows u to match the contract.

What makes it infuriating, is that there's a lot of success stories of teams going in such an approach, assuming a competent coaching staff. Atlanta went with a ton of mid-level signings in the past few years, with almost their entire core outside of Al Horford built up of either rookie contracts, mid-level guys, and has been a pretty good team for years. Masai Ujiri and Raptors basically thrive off these whole concept, and are able to maintain a huge amount of assets by replenishing their amount of these contracts in the FA (look, they even added freaking Bismack Biyombo on such a contract). Rockets were able to make the trade for Harden because they had a bunch of such contracts (kevin martin was one), together with a bunch of 1st rounders. Phoenix Suns traded freaking Jared Dudley (a middle size contract) and some garbage for Eric Bledsoe for crying out loud because they had such a contract in Jared Dudley.

And it's not like these contracts compromise the team's ability to sign maximum free agents either. When Lamarcus Aldridge told Spurs that he's interested, what did they do? Send their reasonable size contract in splitter away for free. Who wouldnt want a reasonable size contract to their team for free in free agency period if they couldnt get a maximum free agent to sign?

As the salary cap is bound to explode into the next offseason, and maximum contracts fly all around the place, i hope the Mavs FO could take this opportunity to capitalize on this class of Free agents, some of whom might end up being max contract due to the presence of cap space around the league. whilst their value might not be as apparent during the initial signing, their value as trade assets, as what comes to mind as steady presence in the locker room (and continuity in the team), along with their mobility when u do get a serious chance to go for a maximum FA, means that there's almost no opportunity cost in paying more attention to such contracts.

Note: What i meant through the whole term of "veteran mid-level free agent" typically refers to 3-4 year contracts of anywhere from 5-12million a year, for guys who has a well defined skillset (like Aaron Afflalo, Brandon Wright, Nicholas Batum, etc), and the likes.

Reader submitted. Opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of our editorial staff.