Utah radio reporting Bryon Russell signing with the Mavs - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

mpb319 · 07-16-2002, 04:18 PM

This sounds pretty fishy to me. I know Russell can play D and he is a decent player but is he what we need?

Here is the link to the ezboard post:

http://pub76.ezboard.com/fnotmesutah...cID=5257.topic

What do you guys think about this?

Rhylan · 07-16-2002, 04:20 PM

Hmmm... finding it hard to believe, unless there's more to the story. Maybe an S&T with Bradley??? lol....

It's possible, though. He's a solid player, obviously could use a change of scenery... but surely it's a short term deal considering the glut of SF's we've already got and the potential "call-ups" of Oggy and Sekularac.

I'd take him, though.

aexchange · 07-16-2002, 04:25 PM

don't want him.

return to sender. and ship marshall instead. unless russell wants to come here for the vet. minimum.

FilthyFinMavs · 07-16-2002, 04:26 PM

Lol Eisley, Manning and now Russell lmao. THe only one we havent got yet was Malone and he is the one who wanted to play for the Mavs in the first place. I dont know Id ont mind this at all especialy with Buck, Wang possibly leaving and Newman Manning both gone I dont see a problem with it. Its a upgrade over Manning and Newman. I was a bit dissapointed in him in the playoffs though if he would havebrough his game I think Jazz would have beaten the Kings. By whaat I saw in the playoffs and what he did last season it looks as if his game is declining. I could be wrong and I hope I am but if he can shoot like he did a season a go then this is a good pickup. I just cant get that shot Mj hit on him in the Finals awhile ago lol when someone Says Russell that is just what comes to mind.

mpb319 · 07-16-2002, 04:27 PM

I agree with that...
...Hey! They both have the same agent....maybe we can do both! LOL

Dooby · 07-16-2002, 04:43 PM

<< Lol Eisley, Manning and now Russell lmao. THe only one we havent got yet was Malone and he is the one who wanted to play for the Mavs in the first place. >>

Greatness.

Charlie Brown · 07-16-2002, 04:56 PM

actually,

if this news is true, i think it would be a great pickup for the mavs. this is a quality veteran guard/forward who has played in many playoff games and has hit big 3s over his career.

considering that newman's basically retired, buckner may be gone and that griffin is injury prone, it doesn't hurt to bring in another "glue" member to the team. particularly someone with his skills to hit the 3 and play solid defense.

but as others have said, i think it'd be great if we could also get marshall. the guy hits over 50% from the field, can rebound, and finish. actually, while we're at it, why don't we just bring the whole utah jazz over to play second string for us

pg nash/stockton
sg finley/russell
sf nowitzki/marshall
sf najera/malone
pf lafrentz/ostertag

woohoo! you got the run-and-gun first string and the slow and old half-court second string. nice variety there. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

Dooby · 07-16-2002, 04:57 PM

edit.

seelenjaeger · 07-16-2002, 05:03 PM

I am not too excited about Russell. What for do we need him?

FilthyFinMavs · 07-16-2002, 05:40 PM

<< I am not too excited about Russell. What for do we need him? >>

Well if Wang, Buck, Newman, Manningn are all gone we are going to need someone to feel in those spots. Getting Russell for the vet minimum if possible is a start.

Dooby · 07-16-2002, 05:44 PM

Last year. he made $5M, I am afraid we aren't brining him here for the minimum.

MavKikiNYC · 07-16-2002, 06:06 PM

Russell? Why not just re-sign Buck?

Rhylan · 07-16-2002, 06:07 PM

I think Buck must really be jonesin' for some PT.

Drbio · 07-16-2002, 08:10 PM

I think Buck is jonesin' for a ring in LA.

madape · 07-16-2002, 08:39 PM

Russel is a much better player IMO

seelenjaeger · 07-16-2002, 08:48 PM

why?

seelenjaeger · 07-16-2002, 08:55 PM

i mean, sure, he´s more versatile and quite a sharp offensive weapon at times, but he kinda seemed to have lost his shooting touch, and i wouldnt call him a defensive stopper either

dude1394 · 07-16-2002, 09:19 PM

Let's see (last year)

Russell - 30 MPG, FG% .38, RPG 4.5, SPG .97, TO 1.67, PPG 9.6
Buck - 20 MPG, FG% .53, RPG 3.9, SPG .79, TO 0.70, PPG 5.9
Griffin - 24 MPG, FG% .50, RPG 3.9, SPG 1.3, TO 0.82, PPG 7.2

I just don't see how I trade russell for griff or buckner. In fact griffin is looking better and better, some real nice steal numbers for limited minutes.

Bayliss · 07-16-2002, 09:53 PM

What the stats don't show, though is Russell is more of a consistent scorer and shooter (especially from the outside) than Buck and Griff. And he is not as injury prone. Now whether it makes up for Buck and Griff's ability to defend and rebound better than Russell is the question. Personally, I don't think Russell is as good as Buck. But he is 6'7" and would allow Fin to play the shooting guard position.

dude1394 · 07-16-2002, 10:01 PM

Man if we are trying to push finley to the 2 position, I want someone with a more physical presence. I think najera serves that role better but needs a little more offensive game.(sure wish he were 3 inches taller)....

I like griffins game a LOT as well.

Bayliss · 07-16-2002, 10:04 PM

<< Man if we are trying to push finley to the 2 position, I want someone with a more physical presence. I think najera serves that role better but needs a little more offensive game.(sure wish he were 3 inches taller)....

I like griffins game a LOT as well. >>

The problem with Najera as our 3 is

a) he can't cover a lot of small forwards in this league

b) he can't shoot that well

he would be a liability as a 3, because he has no range or offensive moves, and he would be hard pressed on the defensive end to keep up.

And I like Griffin's game too. I just hope he and TAW stay healthy enough next year to play 70+ games and the playoffs.

dude1394 · 07-16-2002, 10:20 PM

<<

<< Man if we are trying to push finley to the 2 position, I want someone with a more physical presence. I think najera serves that role better but needs a little more offensive game.(sure wish he were 3 inches taller)....

I like griffins game a LOT as well. >>

The problem with Najera as our 3 is

a) he can't cover a lot of small forwards in this league

b) he can't shoot that well

he would be a liability as a 3, because he has no range or offensive moves, and he would be hard pressed on the defensive end to keep up.

And I like Griffin's game too. I just hope he and TAW stay healthy enough next year to play 70+ games and the playoffs. >>

If TAW comes through that may serve the position. I think that the "b" item is the liability. He really doesn't need a lot of offensive moves if he can hit a 10-15 footer and finish a little better. Must shoot free throws better as well. I'm not sure I agree with you about him covering the 3's, but I can't disagree either. If we think the 3's are doug christie types then it looks like griffin or taw are our best bets. But I really like the toughness that najera brings to the team with raef/dirk/najera/finley/nash. Good lineup if najera improves his shooting.

Hoopsmeister · 07-16-2002, 10:22 PM

Najera's not 3. He's an undersized 4. If he were to be in the starting line-up, we are honestly better off with him at the 4 and Dirk at the 3.

I am not particularly happy with this signing if it occurs though I don't hate it. 5 years ago, Russell would have been the perfect pick-up. But I would have thought Manning demonstrated the inefficiency of picking up veterans on the downside of their career which Russell clearly is.

Rhylan · 07-16-2002, 10:29 PM

Yup. It all depends on the length of the deal.. and on the role he is going to be expected to play. If he's expected to come in and scrap, hustle, play D, and hit some shots, then aiiight. If he wants to reinvigorate his career and thinks a change of scenery can do it, aiiight. Give him a 2 year deal, at like $3 mil or so per. It might work. But it does seem like a waste of our exception. I'd rather see them at least wait a while and try to snag someone with the whole exception at the end, a la Michael Redd or something.

Redd probably won't be available but you dig.

dude1394 · 07-16-2002, 10:31 PM

Russell just doesn't do it for me...I'd rather wait as well..

MavKikiNYC · 07-16-2002, 10:45 PM

<< Najera's not 3. He's an undersized 4. If he were to be in the starting line-up, we are honestly better off with him at the 4 and Dirk at the 3.

I am not particularly happy with this signing if it occurs though I don't hate it. 5 years ago, Russell would have been the perfect pick-up. But I would have thought Manning demonstrated the inefficiency of picking up veterans on the downside of their career which Russell clearly is. >>

Absolutely, on all counts.

Eddie is a utility player, slightly more skilled than a Rambis or an Ivarroni. His whole shtick is coming in and playing at high-velocity, without having to worry about picking up the fouls. If he picks up fouls, he picks up fouls, but it's his aggressiveness and hustle that helps drive the Mavs when he's in the game. He can hardly begin to defend most 3s--his contribution is in battling 4s.

The Russell signing is a snooze. He really seems to be on the downturn in terms of his production--a downturn begun when MJ pushed him aside to hit the championship-clenching shot. Mavs are not showing much imagination or ingenuity in their FA signings at all--Eisely, Mannning, Russell just aren't going to cut it. Maybe I'm just late to realize it, but this is starting to look like a weakness for Nellie and Cuban, the retention of the Mavs' own FAs, and the acquisition of signifcant contributors from other teams. I wouldn't have thought it possible to've done worse this year than last, but if Russell is the extent of this year's FA signings, then they have indeed managed to do less.

Rhylan · 07-16-2002, 10:48 PM

Well, I wouldn't cry that the sky is falling just yet. If Russell comes in for about the same contract as Manning got last year, and is behind Griff (and TAW's attempt)... then he'll be a good pickup. More reliable than Buck, at least, health-wise.

If they spend more than half the mid-level, then I'll be disappointed.

DirkNash1341 · 07-17-2002, 12:10 AM

The one thing I like a lot about him is his experience in the playoffs. He has been through a lot with the Jazz and would provide leadership hopefully. However, as a player I don't think he would help all that much. I am not in favor of using our exception to get him. We need to concentrate that money on a PF/C.

scooterj5 · 07-17-2002, 02:39 AM

Byron Russell would be an awesome addition! He is a serious player, who is coming off a mediocre year (for him)... That's good for us. He is an excellent defender, and does not need the ball too much on offence, which again means DIRK CAN PLAY POWER and does not need to be chasing around quicker, smaller 3s.

David · 07-17-2002, 05:30 AM

<< Byron Russell would be an awesome addition! He is a serious player, who is coming off a mediocre year (for him)... That's good for us. He is an excellent defender, and does not need the ball too much on offence, which again means DIRK CAN PLAY POWER and does not need to be chasing around quicker, smaller 3s. >>

I tend to agree. Russell is solid on offense and defense. He's not a star. The Mavs don't need a star unless they can get a top player in the league. The Mavs are trying to fill their roster with the best players they can get. If they lose Buck and bring in Russell, that's not a bad trade off. Buck has been a bench player his whole career and Russell has been a starter on a top NBA team as recently as last year. True, he is probably headed down, but he's not there yet, and I don't think they would be asking him to play heavy minutes.

dude1394 · 07-17-2002, 07:09 AM

<<

<< Byron Russell would be an awesome addition! He is a serious player, who is coming off a mediocre year (for him)... That's good for us. He is an excellent defender, and does not need the ball too much on offence, which again means DIRK CAN PLAY POWER and does not need to be chasing around quicker, smaller 3s. >>

I tend to agree. Russell is solid on offense and defense. He's not a star. The Mavs don't need a star unless they can get a top player in the league. The Mavs are trying to fill their roster with the best players they can get. If they lose Buck and bring in Russell, that's not a bad trade off. Buck has been a bench player his whole career and Russell has been a starter on a top NBA team as recently as last year. True, he is probably headed down, but he's not there yet, and I don't think they would be asking him to play heavy minutes. >>

I tend to think that Buck will be gone, but only if Griffin comes back and TAW continues to show something. If they do then there just are not enough minutes there. Are we thinking that he starts at 3 in front of najera. Not bad having najera/van excel coming off the bench now that I think about it.

Nellie · 07-17-2002, 09:49 AM

I don't understand what the fuss is about. If Russel sucks, he will replace Newman's spot on the bench and be bought out at the end of the season. If Russel is decent, he will join the Tariq/Griffin/Najera comittee which won't equal a whole lot of minutes anyway. I see this signing as nothing more than veteran insurance, it's not like we are relying on him for success. There is nothing here to get up in arms about, it won't realy matter in the end.

mpb319 · 07-17-2002, 10:09 AM

If this comes to fruition then I think it is a safe bet that Russell will start at SF. This will allow a bench of Van Exel, Najera, Griffin or Abdul-Wahad(whichever is not on the DL at the time)as the top 3 reserves.
I think the news that Nellie wants to go BIG with a starting lineup of Dirk at 3, Raef at 4 and a combo of Bradley/Eschmeyer at the 5 is pure smokescreen. There may be times Nellie plays/starts a lineup like that but we all know he loves matchups and offense...Bradley and Esch bring no O to the table so my best guess is Russell at the 3 in place of Griff who is better suited because of his back trouble to come off the bench. My hope is that if we sign Russell(who has the same agent as Donyell Marshall)that we can then entice Marshall to Dallas...we could then go Big without Bradley/Esch and Dirk won't have to play the 3.

Nellie · 07-17-2002, 10:15 AM

Is Marshall a true 3 or does he just play there cause Malone is the 4? I never realy knew for sure.

mpb319 · 07-17-2002, 10:22 AM

He has played there and can post up most 3s on offense. He lacks some of the speed that the smaller 3s have but will punish them on the other end. He can D up some PF and rebounds well. He is not the prototypical 3...but he would fill some needs on this team.