Why No Drew Gooden Trade? 3 Mavs 'If's' Don't Align

Mike Fisher -- DB.com

   For the Mavs to swap Drew Gooden and his insta-expiring contract before this week’s deadline, three "if's'' needed to align:

   1. Dallas needed to find a trade partner so desperate for cap relief that it would swap talent for it.

   2. That talent needed to be capable of contributing more to the Mavs than Gooden is projected to contribute.

   3. That talent needed to justify its financial costs to a Dallas franchise already bloated with an $88-million payroll.

   We don’t know which of those factors didn’t align; but all it took was one, so Gooden – especially productive on the court at $1.9 mil and, in the opinion of his employers, also well worth his now-guaranteed $4.5 mil -- remains a Mav …  

    Some quick thoughts on the non-transaction:

   *Early in the process of our coverage of this, colleague Marc Stein of ESPN noted that one motivation for the cleverly-written contract was to allow the two parties to part ways if for some reason the Gooden-Mavs union went sour. As true as that is – and it speaks to our reporting of the Mavs’ relationship with agent Dan Fegan – is would be inaccurate to suggest that Dallas wasn’t also fully mindful of the insta-expiring advantages here.

   Let me put it this way: If “the union went sour,’’ what would the Mavs have done?

   Traded him. To a team desperate for cap relief. In exchange for a player who could help the Mavs more.

So the bottom line would’ve been the same.

    It is prudent of Fegan and the Mavs' braintrust to spread the word that Dallas loves Gooden, and always did, and always will. ... That spinny word will pop up all over the media in coming days. ... But the Mavs were completely aware of what they were doing by creating an insta-expiring -- and were also aware that they were planting a seed that might or might not have grown into a fruit-bearer.

   *What was out there to be turned down? We don’t have details (yet?) … But certainly the Mavs kicked the tires with potential trade partners who are down-in-the-dumps, either financially, lux-tax-wise or standings-wise.

   *None of this is reflection on a dislike for Gooden’s work. It says here that Gooden could’ve been having an All-Star first-half season and exploring ways to flip his contract into something even better would’ve and should’ve been explored.

   Hey, there are other guys on this roster who have had fine seasons and fine careers. … as much as Donnie says “We love our Boys in Blue,’’ you think Dallas isn’t always “exploring’’?

   *One more thing about the performance of Gooden, who when he’s started here has been a consistent double-double guy: Had a deal been done, he would’ve been released by his new team (to save that tax room) … and would’ve quickly been gobbled up off the market. Maybe by the Mavs, but certainly by one of many suitors. So this was never about his talent or performance.

   *Remember that a trade would’ve almost certainly had to bring in return a player who would play (at least some) center, otherwise a Dallas roster stripped of Gooden would be exposed at the position. That would seem to narrow the options that might’ve been out there.

   *Is money an issue with the Mavs? I’m not telling you to like it. I’m just telling you the way it is. The club has the second-highest payroll in basketball at $88 million, so it’s spending $18 mil in lux-tax, so there’s $106 million it’s costing to put that team on the floor. You can’t say they don’t spend. … you can only say you wish they’d spend more.

   *Avid DB.com reader “Scott4TheMavs’’ passionately insists that he “promises’’ the Mavs could’ve acquired somebody better than Gooden to come to Dallas. But of course, once we calm our “passion,’’ we understand that the structure of Gooden’s contract was a "created-opportunity if.’’ And by this deadline time, “if’’ – or rather, all three “ifs’’ – never aligned.

   There is another finish line, the NBA’s official deadline on Feb. 18. Gooden is still in play because now he’s simply a conventional expiring contract. We already know that Shawne Williams is on the sales shelf, we know that Kris Humphries is, too, and we know all about how Erick Dampier and Josh Howard could be utilized in this fashion.

   In the specific case of Gooden, the Mavs will explore his value as a player vs. his value as a trade chip vs. who can be acquired and how much it will cost. They will do the same with a variety of other players and a variety of other options.

   They will consider, as they sure did here, the wisdom of breaking up what is a 24-11 team. If all the “ifs’’ align, they will do a deal. If there is no alignment, there will be no deal.