Stevenson will stay

[Kante]

Don´t know if it´s worth to open a new Thread but JJB got one so here: http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/nba...ory?id=5214846

[grndmstr_c]

Originally Posted by Kante

Don´t know if it´s worth to open a new Thread but JJB got one so here: http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/nba...ory?id=5214846

It certainly seems threadworthy (attention worthy perhaps not-so-much), but would you people please learn how to title your damn threads? This doesn't mean Stevenson is staying any more than than the news about JJB meant that he's going to stay. It just means his too-large salary next season is now locked in, and hence that he's going to be expiring-contract trade-fodder from now through the trade deadline next February (or until he's traded, whichever comes first).

[Kidd Karma]

He wasn't going to sniff 4 million on the open market, business decison from his end. It does add to our trade chip stable.

[Underdog]

More ammo...

(and worst-case scenario, we have a Kobe/LeBron-stopper!)

[vinylstar]

Originally Posted by Underdog

More ammo...

(and worst-case scenario, we have a Kobe/LeBron-stopper!)

Unless it is the playoffs.

[clutch#41]

Originally Posted by Underdog

More ammo...

(and worst-case scenario, we have a Kobe/LeBron-stopper!)

ya we coulda had a manu,parker, or hill stopper too..but good ole carlise coach of the year played him what..1min??? lmao.

[nowhereman]

Originally Posted by clutch#41

ya we coulda had a manu,parker, or hill stopper too..but good ole carlise coach of the year played him what..1min??? lmao.

you're an idiot.

[Kidd Karma]

Originally Posted by Underdog

More ammo...

(and worst-case scenario, we have a Kobe/LeBron-stopper!)

Yep, in Lebron's case that would be in practice.

[mac222b]

Originally Posted by nowhereman

you're an idiot.

actually, he's right. carlisle should've tried DeShawn on them. and played Roddy more.

[clutch#41]

Originally Posted by nowhereman

you're an idiot.

if im an idiot then you know NOTHING about basketball!!

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by clutch#41

if im an idiot then you know NOTHING about basketball!!

I'm not sure one directly leads to the other. In other words, you could definitely be an idiot (evidence to the contrary is regrettably lacking), and he could still know something about hoops. The two of you aren't joined at the hips, Siamese style.

[clutch#41]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I'm not sure one directly leads to the other. In other words, you could definitely be an idiot (evidence to the contrary is regrettably lacking), and he could still know something about hoops. The two of you aren't joined at the hips, Siamese style.

huh??? lol
i just believe stevenson would of made a huge difference with his defense in the series with playing time..the same with roddyb and his ability to penetrate.Especially after seeing him school duncan..o well seasons over.cant look back now.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by clutch#41

huh??? lol
i just believe stevenson would of made a huge difference with his defense in the series with playing time..the same with roddyb and his ability to penetrate.Especially after seeing him school duncan..o well seasons over.cant look back now.

I know you aren't big on communication skills, but for God's sake, it's "would have made" and not "would of made." What the fuck does "would of made" even mean?

[mavs777]

What happened to clutch he use to be a decent poster a year ago but now he has just gone crazy

[nowhereman]

so we should have played Deshawn ahead of Terry, Butler, Marion, Barea, and Beaubois.

I repeat: you're an idiot. You would be the first one calling for RC's head for playing a one dimensional player. Especially because most of Hill's damage was done in spot up corner 3s, not requiring single coverage, and most of Manu's damage (which was minimal) was done in switch situations on the P&R. Why does Stevenson help in those instances? You don't know a goddamn thing about basketball.

[nowhereman]

Originally Posted by nowhereman

so we should have played Deshawn ahead of Terry, Butler, Marion, Barea, and Beaubois.

I repeat: you're an idiot. You would be the first one calling for RC's head for playing a one dimensional player. Especially because most of Hill's damage was done in spot up corner 3s, not requiring single coverage, and most of Manu's damage (which was minimal) was done in switch situations on the P&R. Why does Stevenson help in those instances? You don't know a goddamn thing about basketball.

yea man clutch41' s a dumbass

[nowhereman]

Originally Posted by clutch#41

huh??? lol
i just believe stevenson would of made a huge difference with his defense in the series with playing time..the same with roddyb and his ability to penetrate.Especially after seeing him school duncan..o well seasons over.cant look back now.

Chum, you used too many big words for him.

Apparently the c***sucker that first brought up RC's coaching in this thread is the first to say 'cant look back now.'

[mavsfan1000]

Originally Posted by clutch#41

huh??? lol
i just believe stevenson would of made a huge difference with his defense in the series with playing time..the same with roddyb and his ability to penetrate.Especially after seeing him school duncan..o well seasons over.cant look back now.

I agree that Beaubois and Stevenson would've been key players for this series and annoyed whenever anyone calls a poster an idiot for criticizing Carlisle. Too bad Carlisle fell in love with Terry and Barea.

[chrys]

trade idea
Damp& matt C 2 GS ----- $16.8M
Jet & D Stevenson 2 Phily----- $13M
K Azubuike,M Ellis+SDalemb 2 Mavs----- $26.1M

[jthig32]

My head hurts.

[bobbyfg7]

Originally Posted by mavsfan1000

I agree that Beaubois and Stevenson would've been key players for this series and annoyed whenever anyone calls a poster an idiot for criticizing Carlisle. Too bad Carlisle fell in love with Terry and Barea.

I get annoyed when people dog on Carlisle for playing guys who have had success against the Spurs.

Look, the Spurs only reached their season average in scoring once in those six games; game 2. The Mavs defense wasn't horrible. Was it top notch? Not even close. But something tells me that the potential offense that the Mavs could get from Terry and/or Barea far out weighs that of Stevenson and that’s kind of what they needed. Some offense.

There’s a reason the Suns swept them in the second round. The Sun’s defense wasn’t any better than usual as the media suggests. The Spurs reached their average in 3 out of 4 games. It was a combination of the Spurs fatigued defensive sets and the Suns actually making their shots that caused that embarrassment.

I’m not 100% backing RC. I still think the guy made questionable decisions (i.e. sitting the hot hand in the forth) and I would have loved to see him try to throw more guys at whoever was hot from game to game. Mix it up, give their guards different looks, etc. Stevenson would have been an asset in that respect. And if you’re looking for an offensive spark why not put in Roddy B since the Spurs haven’t had much time to study his game?

But the fact of the matter is that RC had some pretty hard decisions to make, so let’s not pretend like the answer was that obvious and we can’t believe that Carlisle did what he did. He played his veteran “go to, forth quarter” guys who had success against the Spurs just last year.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by bobbyfg7

I’m not 100% backing RC. I still think the guy made questionable decisions (i.e. sitting the hot hand in the forth) and I would have loved to see him try to throw more guys at whoever was hot from game to game. Mix it up, give their guards different looks, etc. Stevenson would have been an asset in that respect. And if you’re looking for an offensive spark why not put in Roddy B since the Spurs haven’t had much time to study his game?

But the fact of the matter is that RC had some pretty hard decisions to make, so let’s not pretend like the answer was that obvious and we can’t believe that Carlisle did what he did. He played his veteran “go to, forth quarter” guys who had success against the Spurs just last year.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

This.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Clutch41 had a whole thread dedicated to venting about this....why find an excuse to keep bringing it up everywhere else?

Originally Posted by jthig32

My head hurts.

This.

[wilmtalk]

When a guys main talent he brings to the game is scoring, is a streak shooter and is throwing up bricks why do you continue to play him? Any player in the NBA can have good offensive games. You don't know unless you insert him in the line up. Terry wasn't scoring and was as always was a defensive libility so what could it have hurt to try a defensive guard who just might also hit a few shots. RC is a methodical Robobrain. He was the same in Indiana.

RC put himself in the difficult position he was in by his lack of preperation during the regular season in preparing a more flexable line up in case the need arose during the playoffs.

[Jack.Kerr]

Originally Posted by bobbyfg7

Hindsight is always 20/20.

And it takes some foresight to have a vision.

[mavsfan1000]

Originally Posted by bobbyfg7

I get annoyed when people dog on Carlisle for playing guys who have had success against the Spurs.

Look, the Spurs only reached their season average in scoring once in those six games; game 2. The Mavs defense wasn't horrible. Was it top notch? Not even close. But something tells me that the potential offense that the Mavs could get from Terry and/or Barea far out weighs that of Stevenson and that’s kind of what they needed. Some offense.

There’s a reason the Suns swept them in the second round. The Sun’s defense wasn’t any better than usual as the media suggests. The Spurs reached their average in 3 out of 4 games. It was a combination of the Spurs fatigued defensive sets and the Suns actually making their shots that caused that embarrassment.

I’m not 100% backing RC. I still think the guy made questionable decisions (i.e. sitting the hot hand in the forth) and I would have loved to see him try to throw more guys at whoever was hot from game to game. Mix it up, give their guards different looks, etc. Stevenson would have been an asset in that respect. And if you’re looking for an offensive spark why not put in Roddy B since the Spurs haven’t had much time to study his game?

But the fact of the matter is that RC had some pretty hard decisions to make, so let’s not pretend like the answer was that obvious and we can’t believe that Carlisle did what he did. He played his veteran “go to, forth quarter” guys who had success against the Spurs just last year.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

The problem with your logic is you think Barea and Terry helps our offense. Contrary, they hurt the flow of the offense with being black holes and stopping ball movement. You won't see them getting many fastbreak points as well. Stevenson's defense tends to lead to offense if you watched the games when he started. Kind of hard to run when you are always taking the ball out of the basket. We played at the slow Spurs tempo due to this the whole series. The suns know how to speed up the tempo against everyone. And Beaubois can definitely speed up the tempo to our favor if given the opportunity. The vets have failed us for a lot of the season. Terry is just not the player he once was and Carlisle should've noticed that. It was the same last year. Barea is a defensive liability against Parker. Moreso than Nash was for Phoenix.

[Kidd Karma]

Originally Posted by wilmtalk

When a guys main talent he brings to the game is scoring, is a streak shooter and is throwing up bricks why do you continue to play him? Any player in the NBA can have good offensive games. You don't know unless you insert him in the line up. Terry wasn't scoring and was as always was a defensive libility so what could it have hurt to try a defensive guard who just might also hit a few shots. RC is a methodical Robobrain. He was the same in Indiana.

RC put himself in the difficult position he was in by his lack of preperation during the regular season in preparing a more flexable line up in case the need arose during the playoffs.

In the playoffs you essentially have 4 games to make things work, 2 in, it doesn't work, you have to change it up.

[spreedom]

Originally Posted by mavsfan1000

The problem with your logic is you think Barea and Terry helps our offense. Contrary, they hurt the flow of the offense with being black holes and stopping ball movement. You won't see them getting many fastbreak points as well.

I disagree about Jet interrupting our offensive flow. JJ I definitely agree on as it seemed like more often than not, if he had the ball he was going to drive for a layup no matter who was guarding him, the rim, or his teammates. That's his biggest difficiency, though it was nice to have a scorer off the bench who can create his own shot.

Jet for the most part really seemed to take shots when he was open. Granted, he shot EVERY time he was open even if he was ice cold, but I really didn't see him eating up a lot of the clock with pointless dribbling or force up really bad looks. He definitely needs to make better decisions in transition though -- how many times this year was he leading the break and ended up blowing a contested layup? THAT was the frustrating part of his game for me. He needs to be an 18-20MPG guy that isn't finishing games -- let him pick apart second units but don't count on him to play D in close games.

[bobbyfg7]

Originally Posted by mavsfan1000

The problem with your logic is you think Barea and Terry helps our offense. Contrary, they hurt the flow of the offense with being black holes and stopping ball movement. You won't see them getting many fastbreak points as well. Stevenson's defense tends to lead to offense if you watched the games when he started. Kind of hard to run when you are always taking the ball out of the basket. We played at the slow Spurs tempo due to this the whole series. The suns know how to speed up the tempo against everyone. And Beaubois can definitely speed up the tempo to our favor if given the opportunity. The vets have failed us for a lot of the season. Terry is just not the player he once was and Carlisle should've noticed that. It was the same last year. Barea is a defensive liability against Parker. Moreso than Nash was for Phoenix.

I think we can all agree that Roddy B should have seen more action than he did.

And it was a bad offensive series for not only Barea and Terry but Kidd as well. My point is that it's easy to say RC should have done something different now that the series is over because the Mavs lost.

But what if his gamble would have paid off. What if Barea had done what he did last year to the Spurs? He had a game where his +/- was +36!

What if Terry had been as clutch as he's been in the past in the forth quarter like RC was hoping? I mean, Terry couldn't even buy a bucket in game one until the forth quarter. I think RC was hoping for lightning to strike again in the games following.

I see your point about tempo. Maybe Stevenson could have sparked a little more transition and up the tempo. But there was already a couple of guys on the bench that have proven that they could do it on this team last year.

So maybe we can both agree that RC just went with his tried and true lineup for too long. After it didn't work the first couple of times, change it up, give them different looks (I think I mentioned that already). Someone needs to share with RC that lightning doesn't strike the same place twice. Much like Karma said:

Originally Posted by Kidd Karma

In the playoffs you essentially have 4 games to make things work, 2 in, it doesn't work, you have to change it up.

[clutch#41]

Originally Posted by nowhereman

so we should have played Deshawn ahead of Terry, Butler, Marion, Barea, and Beaubois.

I repeat: you're an idiot. You would be the first one calling for RC's head for playing a one dimensional player. Especially because most of Hill's damage was done in spot up corner 3s, not requiring single coverage, and most of Manu's damage (which was minimal) was done in switch situations on the P&R. Why does Stevenson help in those instances? You don't know a goddamn thing about basketball.

huh??? hahahha this is funny. im tired of talking about old news. chill man before you have a heart attack!

[clutch#41]

Originally Posted by nowhereman

yea man clutch41' s a dumbass

hahahahah did i jus see this correctly?? your lame as phuck! had to comment your own post! hahaha

[clutch#41]

Originally Posted by wilmtalk

When a guys main talent he brings to the game is scoring, is a streak shooter and is throwing up bricks why do you continue to play him? Any player in the NBA can have good offensive games. You don't know unless you insert him in the line up. Terry wasn't scoring and was as always was a defensive libility so what could it have hurt to try a defensive guard who just might also hit a few shots. RC is a methodical Robobrain. He was the same in Indiana.

RC put himself in the difficult position he was in by his lack of preperation during the regular season in preparing a more flexable line up in case the need arose during the playoffs.

this is my exact point jus made by more of an intelligent person than myself! lol

[Mavericks Rockets Fan]

Originally Posted by clutch#41

this is my exact point jus made by more of an intelligent person than myself! lol

My problem is that we have already had this discussion about Carlisle and his rotations and almost everybody agrees that he made a big mistake by not playing Roddy in that series. This is not to mention when he decided to play Terry & Barea for the whole 2nd half of a game.

Believe it or not, you bringing this up constantly does not add anything to the discussion...

[fluid.forty.one]

lol @ the one-two knockout punch by chum.


My only addition to the rest of this thread: If hindsight is 20/20, then what is RCs excuse for not using it after the first 3 losses.

[MavsX]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I'm not sure one directly leads to the other. In other words, you could definitely be an idiot (evidence to the contrary is regrettably lacking), and he could still know something about hoops. The two of you aren't joined at the hips, Siamese style.

quoted for truth. hahah. god dammit this is freaking funny

[dude1394]

stephenson is a flat out spare. We already had a defense only dude on the floor in shawn.

[KINGBEEF]

I think that it's pretty obvious that Stevenson will be used for trade bait. But at the same time I will miss his NO FEAR charisma. There's only one other player on this team with the NO FEAR personality and that player is Eddie Najera. After that slingshot move that he did on Manu, I have had an all new respect for his bold and willingness to be tough, no matter what the score. Eddie goes into the game with 6 fouls, and you better believe before the 4th quarter reads 0:00, Eddie will try to use all 6 of those fouls.

[dude1394]

I will agree Kingbeef that stevenson exudes "crazy-ass" that is lacking on the mavs. But if you can't play, you can't play.

If he could begin to reliably nail a 3ptr then we could talk. I'd like that guy on the roster.

[KINGBEEF]

Originally Posted by dude1394

I will agree Kingbeef that stevenson exudes "crazy-ass" that is lacking on the mavs. But if you can't play, you can't play.

If he could begin to reliably nail a 3ptr then we could talk. I'd like that guy on the roster.

Yeah he kinda hurts us offensively. I am all for trading him hands down. But someone else made a comment that Marion is our shut down guy, in which I do not doubt that he is, but just not sure to why Marion can't hit the easy baskets which hurt us offensively also. I'm not comparing the two, i'm just saying there's no need for both of our defensive guys to hurt us on the offensive end.

[dude1394]

The problem with shawn imo is that he cannot hit the 3, so he kind of clogs things or has to get his stuff on cuts, which is good but not as reliable as stretching the floor. Najera is actually interesting in that he can do that and is not afraid to take that shot.