Dallas-Mavs.com Forums - View Single Post - Mavs at the Trade Deadline ... Ideas, Rumors, Thoughts ....Where do they fit?

DLord · 02-11-2009, 06:03 PM

1. Regarding the Shaq idea ...

a. If you didn't see it, we wrote a long detailed explanation of this trade idea two weeks ago, that gave all the thinking behind it. None of that has changed (other than the Suns are even more desperate than before to save money.) It was linked in this article but didn't get copied on putting it here. Here's the link: http://www.dallasbasketball.com/full...mn.php?id=1281

b. If they get Shaq and the Mavs don't win a title this season, have they lost an opportunity they otherwise had? I think he makes them better - whether or not he gets them all the way there, who knows.
... Also, adding Shaq wouldn't bring nearly as many struggles to fit him in, as trading for Kidd to run the team.

c. What are you giving up? Besides the money angle, you give up Josh Howard. I like Josh, but I just think Dallas-with-Shaq is much more of a title threat than Dallas-with-Josh.
...Also, if the Mavs are truly serious about grabbing a free agent in 2010, they will have to decline Josh's option - so he's gone in the summer of 2010. That erases the "Josh is younger and will be here longer" issue from being a factor.

2. To me, the window they need to work in is 2009 playoffs and 2010 playoffs. Then they hit the 2010 free agent chase with a chance to try to get a big talent on build a different way. That makes this a short-term trade - and Shaq would be ideal.

3. So I keep coming back to one issue: what if anything is out there that can make this team a contender for 2009 and 2010 before they go for a new core? There are many ideas that add a role player, but is that enough to put them on the same tier as the LA's and SA's in the West? There are certainly no guarantees, but I think Shaq could do that.

4. Why would Phoenix trade Shaq? Well, besides the fact that they ARE shopping him making moot the need to prove they would, the pure reality is that Shaq+Amare hasn't worked. Shaq takes up all the space that Nash and Amare need left open to thrive. And now Sarver has ramped up the prioritizing of his money issues (one national report this week went to far as to say Sarver has expressed in trade talks that he doesn't really prioritize at this point the talent balance of a trade, just so long as he ends up with huge money savings and a team that draws fans.)

5. I don't trust Davis, so I'm rolling with Kidd for that 2-year window (assuming I can). I think this has become Kidd's team anyhow.

6. But if the Clipps offered Davis-Kaman for Kidd, do we really think they did that expecting to keep Kidd? The fact that Kidd is playing great is pointless to a lottery-bound team, so it's obvious that offer was made as a pure salary dump.
...Therefore isn't the thing to do to go back to them after saying "we don't want to eat ALL of that" and offer them HALF of that salary dump? I'll take Camby off their hands for expiring stuff, any day. I'd take Kaman instead if they insisted, but like it less. And they can keep Davis.

02-11-2009, 06:03 PM	#76
DLord Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 210	1. Regarding the Shaq idea ... a. If you didn't see it, we wrote a long detailed explanation of this trade idea two weeks ago, that gave all the thinking behind it. None of that has changed (other than the Suns are even more desperate than before to save money.) It was linked in this article but didn't get copied on putting it here. Here's the link: http://www.dallasbasketball.com/full...mn.php?id=1281 b. If they get Shaq and the Mavs don't win a title this season, have they lost an opportunity they otherwise had? I think he makes them better - whether or not he gets them all the way there, who knows. ... Also, adding Shaq wouldn't bring nearly as many struggles to fit him in, as trading for Kidd to run the team. c. What are you giving up? Besides the money angle, you give up Josh Howard. I like Josh, but I just think Dallas-with-Shaq is much more of a title threat than Dallas-with-Josh. ...Also, if the Mavs are truly serious about grabbing a free agent in 2010, they will have to decline Josh's option - so he's gone in the summer of 2010. That erases the "Josh is younger and will be here longer" issue from being a factor. 2. To me, the window they need to work in is 2009 playoffs and 2010 playoffs. Then they hit the 2010 free agent chase with a chance to try to get a big talent on build a different way. That makes this a short-term trade - and Shaq would be ideal. 3. So I keep coming back to one issue: what if anything is out there that can make this team a contender for 2009 and 2010 before they go for a new core? There are many ideas that add a role player, but is that enough to put them on the same tier as the LA's and SA's in the West? There are certainly no guarantees, but I think Shaq could do that. 4. Why would Phoenix trade Shaq? Well, besides the fact that they ARE shopping him making moot the need to prove they would, the pure reality is that Shaq+Amare hasn't worked. Shaq takes up all the space that Nash and Amare need left open to thrive. And now Sarver has ramped up the prioritizing of his money issues (one national report this week went to far as to say Sarver has expressed in trade talks that he doesn't really prioritize at this point the talent balance of a trade, just so long as he ends up with huge money savings and a team that draws fans.) 5. I don't trust Davis, so I'm rolling with Kidd for that 2-year window (assuming I can). I think this has become Kidd's team anyhow. 6. But if the Clipps offered Davis-Kaman for Kidd, do we really think they did that expecting to keep Kidd? The fact that Kidd is playing great is pointless to a lottery-bound team, so it's obvious that offer was made as a pure salary dump. ...Therefore isn't the thing to do to go back to them after saying "we don't want to eat ALL of that" and offer them HALF of that salary dump? I'll take Camby off their hands for expiring stuff, any day. I'd take Kaman instead if they insisted, but like it less. And they can keep Davis.