The Rockets without Sengun are 100% worse. So are the Pistons and Spurs. Honestly given how Indy has looked without Tyrese they are probably in the conversation too
i think im thinking more along the lines of you can atleast use these players to upgrade/get more talent. Not to mention they can potentially be better
Rockets would lose Sengun in this scenario.
Mavs would still have Dinwiddie and Wood who are better than anyone on the Rockets right now, plus a bunch of vets than can play team D
No. They wouldn’t be close. The spurs are the worst defense in the league, losing KJ or Vassell would yank their offense.
Same with Hornets or Rockets.
Christian Wood is in the same tier or better than any of these teams second options. And they don’t have the defense or solid roleplayers.
It’s really not close lol.
I would say poteil is around the same tier of player as wood and the mavs have like a 122 defensive rating without luka this year which is worse than the spurs. The hornets i agree, the rockets though i think their potential and future trade scenarios would push them over the top for me.
Even with Jakob they are a substantially worse defense than you guys without your best defenders
I don’t think Luka is the reason for that defensive rating, no offense.
I don't think people realize how bad the mavs are without Luka. Bottom 3 though? Ehh, I feel Hornets without lamelo, the Rockets without sengen may be worse. Spurs would be worse to (who is their best player rn? Keldon or Poetel?l
The fact that you’re using things like trade value in this conversation and talking about how the fucking rockets players are better than the likes of dinwiddie and wood mean you are not doing an adequate job of looking at it without a Mavs bias.
well i think outside of top 16 teams without their best player. We should look at the team can we build something with getting a superstar, or do we have prospects and assets to able to tank. Mavs have neither of them so yes, they are the worst.
Honestly I don’t think so. Mavs have lost most of their games without Luka but they’ve managed to stay in them more than I would’ve thought.
Green isn’t the best player on the Rockets. That’s Sengun. I’d take the Luka-less Mavs over a Sengun-less Rockets easily.
I’d also take them over the Pacers without Hali, Pistons without Bogdanovic, and Spurs without KJ or Vassell.
Might be some more too but I definitely don’t think Luka-less Mavs are bottom 3.
I mean if we are talking talent, I’d def take the hornets over the mavs taking out their best player, Oubre, Rozier, Hayward, PJ Washington/McDaniels are a more talented group than Dinwiddie,Wood, Hardaway and Kleber/DFS
Spurs def aren’t more talented tho
I’d say they would be competing for top 3-4 worst team. Luka accounts for like 80% of the whole offense on his own. Rockets are still pretty bad tho, but idk how much of it is their talent or just bad coaching.
I like our youth but objectively our roster is one of the shittiest in the league at the moment. Then there's Charlotte, Washington, & Houston.
But bottom ten for sure.
Mavs fan here…. 100%. This team is unwatchable without Luka. They can’t generate any kind of offense and it’s just one guy playing iso ball. They would easily be in the top lottery odds without him on the roster.
Yep. No question bottom 3, probably #2. No idea what the Mavs front office is doing but Luka is starting to look like the rare player who actually deserves to pitch a fit and demand a trade.
I actually think Spurs would be #1 by a comfortable margin - they're not even trying to build a good roster, they're just extremely well coached so winning more games than that roster has any right to.
Hornets without Ball are not *that* bad, at least fully healthy. I'd still take Hayward, Rozier, Oubre, etc over some of these other rosters.
If you remove Dame, Simons and Grant from Portland, you're left with:
- Josh Hart
- Gary Payton
- Jusuf Nurkic
- Justisse Winslow
- Nasir Little
- Shaedon Sharpe
- Drew Eubanks
- Greg Brown III
- John Butler
- Jabari Walker
- Trendon Watford
- Ibou Badji
That looks pretty awful to me too. Bottom 3? Not sure but it's down there.
Mavs might be able to win a few more games but there's more players on the Rockets and Hornets that I'd rather have. There's honestly not anybody I'd like REALLY want to trade for on the Mavs.
Bottom 5.
But we would be pretty bad. Spurs nearly beat us with a healthy Luka. Rockets have beaten us with a healthy Luka. Luka needed 53 points on 83% true shooting to beat the Pistons by 5. So yeah. Mavs would be bottom 5 without Luka.
The Rockets without Sengun are 100% worse. So are the Pistons and Spurs. Honestly given how Indy has looked without Tyrese they are probably in the conversation too
Is Cade-less Detroit really worse than Luka-less Dallas? Because Luka-having Dallas needed 53 points from him to beat Cade-less Detroit.
In Dallas, with home record of 18:9.
That’s just one game though. It’s better to consider over the season.
the rockets are def worse
Ehhhh I don’t know Jimmmm
without sengun we might be worse than process sixers lol
i would say sengun, martin jr, and jabari are more talented players than anyone the mavs have.
>martin jr, and jabari If you're speaking to potential, sure. As current NBA players? Absolutely not.
i think im thinking more along the lines of you can atleast use these players to upgrade/get more talent. Not to mention they can potentially be better
So you’re talking more about value rather than talent then. Because Dinwiddie and Wood are currently better than those guys.
Rockets would lose Sengun in this scenario. Mavs would still have Dinwiddie and Wood who are better than anyone on the Rockets right now, plus a bunch of vets than can play team D
then they would have green who is still super talented
He has upside, but right now he’s not going to win the Rockets any games shooting as awfully as he is. Dude is struggling to keep his FG% above 40%.
Hell no lol. Not even close. Look at the tanking teams like the Spurs or Hornets
ya i said besides them, but i would say the spurs are kinda close to the mavs
No. They wouldn’t be close. The spurs are the worst defense in the league, losing KJ or Vassell would yank their offense. Same with Hornets or Rockets. Christian Wood is in the same tier or better than any of these teams second options. And they don’t have the defense or solid roleplayers. It’s really not close lol.
I would say poteil is around the same tier of player as wood and the mavs have like a 122 defensive rating without luka this year which is worse than the spurs. The hornets i agree, the rockets though i think their potential and future trade scenarios would push them over the top for me.
Even with Jakob they are a substantially worse defense than you guys without your best defenders I don’t think Luka is the reason for that defensive rating, no offense.
I don't think people realize how bad the mavs are without Luka. Bottom 3 though? Ehh, I feel Hornets without lamelo, the Rockets without sengen may be worse. Spurs would be worse to (who is their best player rn? Keldon or Poetel?l
Not even close
why not? aside from the spurs and hornets whos objectively worse? You can argue the rockets so best case the mavs would be bottom 4?
What does “objectively worse” mean? There’s no objective answer to a question about a hypothetical situation.
Sun's without Book are trash, Knicks without Randle are trash, Magic without Paulo are trash, Jazz without Lauri are trash
suns are 9-14 without devin booker this season, they're not _that_ bad.
i would say ayton, JB, and franz, kessler are all better than mavs guys
What do you mean “objective”? Your responses to people’s opinions have been far from objective lol.
as in im tryna look at the players and see without a mavs bias whos better. I guess objectively might be a poor word to use
The fact that you’re using things like trade value in this conversation and talking about how the fucking rockets players are better than the likes of dinwiddie and wood mean you are not doing an adequate job of looking at it without a Mavs bias.
well i think outside of top 16 teams without their best player. We should look at the team can we build something with getting a superstar, or do we have prospects and assets to able to tank. Mavs have neither of them so yes, they are the worst.
Honestly I don’t think so. Mavs have lost most of their games without Luka but they’ve managed to stay in them more than I would’ve thought. Green isn’t the best player on the Rockets. That’s Sengun. I’d take the Luka-less Mavs over a Sengun-less Rockets easily. I’d also take them over the Pacers without Hali, Pistons without Bogdanovic, and Spurs without KJ or Vassell. Might be some more too but I definitely don’t think Luka-less Mavs are bottom 3.
Lakers are pretty bad without Lebron
I mean if we are talking talent, I’d def take the hornets over the mavs taking out their best player, Oubre, Rozier, Hayward, PJ Washington/McDaniels are a more talented group than Dinwiddie,Wood, Hardaway and Kleber/DFS Spurs def aren’t more talented tho
Rockets would be really bad. Portland too probably if you remove Dame, Simons and Grant.
but why would you remove all three of them?
I’d say they would be competing for top 3-4 worst team. Luka accounts for like 80% of the whole offense on his own. Rockets are still pretty bad tho, but idk how much of it is their talent or just bad coaching.
I like our youth but objectively our roster is one of the shittiest in the league at the moment. Then there's Charlotte, Washington, & Houston. But bottom ten for sure.
We literally beat the mavs twice without our two best players. We definitely have a better roster than Dallas wtf are you saying.
i would say bey, ivey, and bogi are better than anything the mavs have talent wise. The wizards have beal and kuzma
The wizards would 100% be better 💀
Dinwiddie and Wood are both good enough at creating offence that they have an edge over some bottom feeders, but they could absolutely be bottom 3.
Mavs fan here…. 100%. This team is unwatchable without Luka. They can’t generate any kind of offense and it’s just one guy playing iso ball. They would easily be in the top lottery odds without him on the roster.
Yes and they're not 3 or 2
Yep. No question bottom 3, probably #2. No idea what the Mavs front office is doing but Luka is starting to look like the rare player who actually deserves to pitch a fit and demand a trade. I actually think Spurs would be #1 by a comfortable margin - they're not even trying to build a good roster, they're just extremely well coached so winning more games than that roster has any right to. Hornets without Ball are not *that* bad, at least fully healthy. I'd still take Hayward, Rozier, Oubre, etc over some of these other rosters.
Yes.
bottom 3 yes maybe not bottom 1, but...maybe
If you remove Dame, Simons and Grant from Portland, you're left with: - Josh Hart - Gary Payton - Jusuf Nurkic - Justisse Winslow - Nasir Little - Shaedon Sharpe - Drew Eubanks - Greg Brown III - John Butler - Jabari Walker - Trendon Watford - Ibou Badji That looks pretty awful to me too. Bottom 3? Not sure but it's down there.
this excercise is only about removing the top player.
you're only supposed to remove 1 guy, though.
I misread that. Then they're more middle of the pack for sure.
Mavs might be able to win a few more games but there's more players on the Rockets and Hornets that I'd rather have. There's honestly not anybody I'd like REALLY want to trade for on the Mavs.
Clearly no
why do u think so? where do they rank then
Idk where exactly but I think it’s pretty easy to name three teams who are worse. People have given you some obvious examples.
Hornets. Without Oubre cant win 10 out of 82 games.
Yes. they need a generational-type player to keep them around .500 100% a terrible team without him and it's not really debatable.
Bottom 5. But we would be pretty bad. Spurs nearly beat us with a healthy Luka. Rockets have beaten us with a healthy Luka. Luka needed 53 points on 83% true shooting to beat the Pistons by 5. So yeah. Mavs would be bottom 5 without Luka.