Quote:
Originally Posted by tcat075
Roddy had a really great, limited rookie year. I don't think that we can assume he's going to be a 50/40/80 guy for the rest of his year, average 20 ppg, and make the all-NBA team a few times just because of some nice games against crappy teams the coaches knew he'd excel at. I'm a huge Roddy fan, love his potential, and fully believe he can do that. Assuming he can, though, especially due to his injury that appears troublesome, is rather ludicrous. Once again, I love Roddy and I want him back as soon as possible because I know that if he can translate his skills we saw last year into extending minutes, he will be a huge help. But its too early to know that for sure.
|
I basically agree with all your points. I would just like to see the team put some emphasis on developing younger players that show that kind of potential instead of trading them ( especially as a throw in ) for a veteran on the decline who may not even turn out to be what this team needs. The mavs have been doing this sort of thing for some time now and it has not worked for them. Though I am and have been a Mav fan for years I live within 40 miles of Arco so I am very familier with the Kings. Like you I also was a former fan of Martin. I just don't think he is a good fit for this team for a variety of reasons.
Sure Roddy is some what of an unknown as to his future potential but so are some of the veterans that show up in these trade rumors. Numbers don't always translate from on team to the next. A lot depends on team needs and chemistry and those players ability to adapt to Dallas. Butler appears to now be making that transition. It even took two years for the team to become in sync with Kidd ( or visa versa ). An offensive force such as Martin would be a good fit for a team that needed offense desperately. But for the Mavs one has to consider that with the scorers on this team he would not be putting up the numbers that he did with Sac or Houston. So one needs to weigh if those numbers justify the trade off for his defensive libilities and a potenial disruption of team chemistry. I love the zone but we need to be able to have a man to man option and this requires good on ball defenders.
Yes Roddy is a gamble but the potential payoff far out weighs any risk taken. What is the gamble anyway. He is already on the team. The only cost is just the time spent this year to see how much more he can develop.
Two years ago this team was in desperate need of a scoring two guard. The situation is not as desperate anymore. It would be nice to have one but it is not as imparative so it's important to consider the cost involved in any such aquisition. I think the window to win is longer than first thought so we do have the option of short term player development. My main objection to acquiring a top flight offensive two would be the long term cost. We are not that desperate. I think too many of the posters on this site are still locked into the "We desperately need a two at any cost mentality"