Mavs plan to keep eyes open (DMN-Sefko)

[dirt_dobber]

Mavs plan to keep eyes open at predraft camp

04:11 AM CDT on Tuesday, June 7, 2005

By EDDIE SEFKO / The Dallas Morning News

Donnie Nelson will lead a large Mavericks delegation to Chicago for the NBA's annual predraft camp, which begins today.

And although there will be a lot of effort put into sorting out the army of talent, it may be little more than busy work for the Mavericks.

"I sort of feel like I'm studying for a test I'll never take," Nelson said Monday.
That's because the Mavericks do not have a draft pick. Their first-round choice belongs to Utah for acquiring Pavel Podkolzin last year. Their second-round pick was dealt away in the Darrell Armstrong trade.

Just because the Mavericks have no picks doesn't mean they can't accomplish things in Chicago. In 2003, a young swingman by the name of Marquis Daniels caught their eye there, and he ended up being a steal as an undrafted free agent later in the summer.

However, the Mavericks believe they have a chance to win a championship in the next few seasons. Getting young projects runs counter to that thought process.

"We'll be aware of what's going on out there," Nelson said. "We're not afraid to take on a young player, but because we have a couple of sophomores and a couple of guys who are coming off their rookie seasons, we have to weigh how much another young guy can help us. Right now, our focus is getting deeper in the playoffs and capturing the ultimate prize."

Along with Nelson, the Mavericks' scouts, along with assistant GM Keith Grant and most of the coaching staff, will be in Chicago.

Countdown to the Global Games: The Mavericks again will host the Coca-Cola Global Games during the last week of July.
"We've got a great group of teams lined up," Nelson said. "It should be our best event yet."

The games feature junior teams from numerous countries. Many of the alumni from the event are playing for NBA teams.

.

[Drbio]

Sefko is the master of filling up a page with words and not saying a damn thing.

What a fricking tool.

[EricaLubarsky]

the Mavericks believe they have a chance to win a championship in the next few seasons. Getting young projects runs counter to that thought process.

what a dumb statement.

[#1MavsFan]

Originally posted by: EricaLubarsky

what a dumb statement.

In a way he's correct since young projects generally need playing time to develop and the Mavs simply don't have PT to go around.

[sike]

tell that to SA who developed Parker and Manu while still being the best team in the league....

[seelenjaeger]

Well, yeah, but who were the guys Parker and Ginobili had to fight for to get minutes?

It´s a difference whether you have to outplay Stackhouse / Finley or Bruce Bowen to get mins.

[EricaLubarsky]

I wouldnt think that it would be too hard to get minutes from Terry, or minutes behind Howard, or even if you are NBA ready to get minutes behind Dampier.

We dont HAVE to acquire a shooting guard

Also, after San Antonio wins yet another championship, they will look to add new guys. Its the same thing they've always done. After their 1999 championship they went out and put a lot of energy into scouting, and ended up getting Ginobli who very well could have been an undrafted freeagent.

[sike]

if you have a manu....he'll find his way to the floor with consistancy

[seelenjaeger]

Well, we have the prostpects all over - Ppod, Benga, Howard, Daniels, Harris.

If you leave out the PF position (where we have two guys on max or max-like contracts atm) we have guys labeled at least "promising" for all those slots, so I really don´t see us going for anybody in the draft.

We have the minutes for a 2nd round draft choice given the current set of players under contract and barring major moves.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: seelenjaeger
Well, we have the prostpects all over - Ppod, Benga, Howard, Daniels, Harris.

If you leave out the PF position (where we have two guys on max or max-like contracts atm) we have guys labeled at least "promising" for all those slots, so I really don´t see us going for anybody in the draft.

We have the minutes for a 2nd round draft choice given the current set of players under contract and barring major moves.

I think we would have to dump one or more projects before taking on an 2nd rounder or undrafted free agent. Even a low 1st rounder would probably necessitate that.

Of course what we may do is invite several undrafted free agents to camp and then see if they out perform our existing projects.

[Drbio]

Sefko makes fish look like a Pulitzer candidate.

[The Miles]

Fisher is the best. I am a bias DB.com'er but still, Fish is a better read than Sefko for sure.

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally posted by: LRB
I think we would have to dump one or more projects before taking on an 2nd rounder or undrafted free agent. Even a low 1st rounder would probably necessitate that.

Of course what we may do is invite several undrafted free agents to camp and then see if they out perform our existing projects.

Thats exactly what I thought. First, Bradley will not contribute next year and should be taken out of the picture. Second, everyone but Dirk is tradable IMO which means that any position is open to depth issues.

We'll try like hell to get a pick, scout and if we dont get a pick, Im sure we'll give some undrafted players some thought.

[sike]

Originally posted by: The Miles
Fisher is the best. I am a bias DB.com'er but still, Fish is a better read than Sefko for sure.

why compare Spam to Spam? Now compare Spam to Prime Rib.... [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

Fisher is a bit more interesting than Eddie though....

[LRB]

Originally posted by: sike

why compare Spam to Spam? Now compare Spam to Prime Rib.... [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

Fisher is a bit more interesting than Eddie though....

I think that is an incredible insult to compare Sefko to spam, insult to spam that is. I would see it more like coparing spam to dog poop, but that still insults the dog poop.

[SeriousSummer]

For those of you unhappy with the work of Mr. Sefko, I have one word for you:

JodieVelarde

Sefko is what he is--a tired old hack. That made him an enormous step up for the DMN.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: SeriousSummer
For those of you unhappy with the work of Mr. Sefko, I have one word for you:

JodieVelarde

Sefko is what he is--a tired old hack. That made him an enormous step up for the DMN.

Still that's like saying it's better to have dog crap all over your shoes than all over your face. The 1st is much better than the 2nd, but neither one is a desireable situation.

[Drbio]

At this point I'd rather have Jodie Valade back. Sefko is just a piece of shit.

[hairball02]

"Still that's like saying it's better to have dog crap all over your shoes than all over your face"

must be an old family saying

[kg_veteran]

I'd have to think about it. I remember Valade not having a clue, but I don't think she ever just flat-out lied.

[sike]

Originally posted by: LRB

Still that's like saying it's better to have dog crap all over your shoes than all over your face. The 1st is much better than the 2nd, but neither one is a desireable situation.

the Mavs have been a Top 7 team the past several years....they deserve a good writer from the local news. At this point David Lord is better than anything else this area has to offer. the DMN should hire that guy.

[Murphy3]

Originally posted by: The Miles
Fisher is the best. I am a bias DB.com'er but still, Fish is a better read than Sefko for sure.

Fisher is terrible as a writer and as a talk show host.

[chumdawg]

I tell you who's good. That Jason Quick of the Oregonian. He's good.

I think Sefko is a pretty good writer. Now whether you get a lot of insight from him might be a different question. But if you don't, he's not necesarily to blame for that. You could probably blame the tight-lipped Mavs organization. They just don't let a lot of juicy tidbits out there.

But then again, they aren't necessarily "to blame" for that, either. What is there to say right about now?

If you had the task of writing a news story abou the Mavs this week, what would you fill your column with?

[dude1394]

I like fish. Just in case you are lurking around there budda'

[LRB]

If you had the task of writing a news story abou the Mavs this week, what would you fill your column with?

Something besides a lie, err, I mean a "I misquoted myselfism". [img]i/expressions/anim_roller.gif[/img]

Surely there are at least enough human interest aspects about the Mavs to fill the column without making S#!t up. And Cubes and Donnie are exactly nontalkative, they just don't hand out the juicy details until they decide the time is right. Heck, you could even speculate about goings on behind closed doors so long as you make it clear it's speculation and not misrepresent it as "fact".

[chumdawg]

You guys need to cut it out with the "making shit up" criticism of Sefko. If the Mavs considered an offer, then the shop was open for business. Sefko said he wished he would have worded it differently. He didn't say that he woke up one morning with a wild-assed dream and decided to put in the paper. The two concepts are worlds apart. Do you see why?

[kg_veteran]

Chum - Stop defending the dude. He said the Mavs "shopped" Dampier. The clear implication was that they were soliciting offers, but the bigger implication was that they were unhappy with him and were already trying to get rid of him. Sefko was offering that up to support his premise that the Mavs made a mistake in signing Dampier, because he doesn't like Dampier. Maybe they made a mistake, maybe they didn't. Time will bear that out, but Sefko was a worm for trying to support his opinion with an out-and-out fabrication.

[chumdawg]

Not so fast, KG. If the flip side is true--that the Mavs did NOT feel that they had made a mistake in signing him, and that they were NOT unhappy with him--then it stands to reason that they would NOT have considered an offer for what apparently was a lesser center with a less cumbersome contract.

It's all semantics here. You want to focus on "shopped," I want to focus on "considered." Both terms have implications. You, nor I, should not focus on one and ignore the other.

I just say to have an open mind about it and consider that that there was probably a lot going on that we don't know about, Sefko's brief comments notwithstanding, and not resort to the (frankly, very homerish) argument that Sefko pulled something out of his ass thanks to a personal dislike for Erick Dampier.

Out of curiosity, is there anything else you can point to that indicates Sefko dislikes Damp?

[Misfit Mav]

Originally posted by: chumdawg
Not so fast, KG. If the flip side is true--that the Mavs did NOT feel that they had made a mistake in signing him, and that they were NOT unhappy with him--then it stands to reason that they would NOT have considered an offer for what apparently was a lesser center with a less cumbersome contract.

It's all semantics here. You want to focus on "shopped," I want to focus on "considered." Both terms have implications. You, nor I, should not focus on one and ignore the other.

I just say to have an open mind about it and consider that that there was probably a lot going on that we don't know about, Sefko's brief comments notwithstanding, and not resort to the (frankly, very homerish) argument that Sefko pulled something out of his ass thanks to a personal dislike for Erick Dampier.

Out of curiosity, is there anything else you can point to that indicates Sefko dislikes Damp?

I wouldn't call it simply semantics. "Considered" is an almost meaningless term. I would expect that the Mavs "consider" every offer they receive-- at least enough for Donnie to call Cuban and say something like "do we have any interest in Lorenzen Wright," or whatever.

"Consider" is so vague that the same situation could be used to justify the exact opposite point of view. For example: let's say the situation was that the Knicks offered Nazr Mohammed and a pick for Damp. The Mavs discuss it, and eventually turn it down. Sefko could have just as easily written that the Mavs are happy with Damp, so much so that they turned down offers for him at the trade deadline.

[Drbio]

Sefko always pulls this kind of crap. He hasn't reported an original idea since he was hired. That in an of itself is unethical.

[kg_veteran]

Not so fast, KG. If the flip side is true--that the Mavs did NOT feel that they had made a mistake in signing him, and that they were NOT unhappy with him--then it stands to reason that they would NOT have considered an offer for what apparently was a lesser center with a less cumbersome contract.

Two thoughts. First, what's the source for saying they considered the offer (whatever it was)? Sefko? If so, I don't know if they considered the offer or not. Second, as Misfit pointed out, what the heck does "considering" the offer mean? Without knowing what the offer was and without knowing how much "consideration" the offer actually received, it's very difficult for me to read anything into the fact that the Mavs fielded the phone call and didn't hang up immediately.

I just say to have an open mind about it and consider that that there was probably a lot going on that we don't know about, Sefko's brief comments notwithstanding, and not resort to the (frankly, very homerish) argument that Sefko pulled something out of his ass thanks to a personal dislike for Erick Dampier.

I'm sure there was a lot going on we didn't know about. Like another team making an offer for Dampier. Still, it's not "homerish" for me to say Sefko made it up. He DID. The Mavs weren't the ones making offers.

Out of curiosity, is there anything else you can point to that indicates Sefko dislikes Damp?

Read any of the editions of Inside the Mavericks, and you'll see how blatantly Sefko dislikes him. From a recent edition:

Q: With the current contention between Erick Dampier and Dirk Nowitzki, I want to know if Dampier will be back next season. Also would he be considered a bust at this point?

Jay Madden, Fort Worth

SEFKO: Since we had dozens of Dampier-related questions this week, we took the one that best summarized them all. First off, Dampier has six more seasons and nearly $60 million guaranteed for the remainder of the contract. Coming off this season, can't see any team out there that would want to trade for him. Not even New York, which pursued him last summer. As for whether he's a bust, it's a shade early to be calling him Chan Ho Dampier. He's a bust so far the same way Drew Henson has been a bust for the Cowboys, with one major difference - Henson is young enough to improve. With Dampier, I fear what we see is what we get.

[kg_veteran]

For example: let's say the situation was that the Knicks offered Nazr Mohammed and a pick for Damp. The Mavs discuss it, and eventually turn it down. Sefko could have just as easily written that the Mavs are happy with Damp, so much so that they turned down offers for him at the trade deadline.

Good point, Misfit. Sounds like they were happy with him. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

[LRB]

If the flip side is true--that the Mavs did NOT feel that they had made a mistake in signing him, and that they were NOT unhappy with him--then it stands to reason that they would NOT have considered an offer for what apparently was a lesser center with a less cumbersome contract.

1st of all, we don't know what the offer was. All the info we have is from Sefko, which is self admittedly "misquoting himself". And even is his blatant misquote, Sefko never gives us the details. Was it a center, a pair of guards, or a two for one coupon at Friday's that was offered? We don't know. Even if it was a center, we don't know what the contract was.

2nd of all does it mean that the Mavs feel that they made a mistake in signing Dirk if they answer the phone and consider an offer for him? I would say that it is definitely a extremely narrow and highly prejudicial intrepretation that you've made. Some a Homer of Sefko might do for example.

It's all semantics here. You want to focus on "shopped," I want to focus on "considered." Both terms have implications. You, nor I, should not focus on one and ignore the other.

I think that this is much more than "semantics". "Shopped" connotates and active marketing of Dampier to ascertain his price and to attempt to move him if a good deal can be found. It also indicates the desire of the Mavs to be rid of Damp. "Consider" has a passive connutation on the other hand. It indicates only that the Mavs listen to and think over any offer before responding. It's like the difference of actively sending resumes out to companies in hopes of finding a interview for a job, versus listening if someone calls you unsolicited asking if you'd be interested in another job. In the 1st you most definitely want another job and are taking active steps to acquire one. In the 2nd, it's would appear that you are at least satisfied to stay at the present job since you are taking no active steps to change jobs.

I don't know of any team that would not consider an offer for one of their players no matter who the player is. Take LeBron for example, I'm sure the Cavs "consider" offers on him, but that hardly means that they are "shopping" him. But hey if San Antonio called and wanted to swap TD, Ginobli, and Parker + Picks + $3 million for LeBron + filler, I'm sure they'd consider that one long and hard. But only a basketball idiot would think that the Cavs feel that they made a mistake sigining LeBron.

Certainly any journalist worthy of being called even loosely by that title would know the difference between "shopped" and "considered". Maybe Sefko isn't worthy to even loosely be called a journalist, but still I find it almost impossible to believe that he doesn't know the difference. In fact he as much as admitted it when he claimed to have misquoted himself.

I just say to have an open mind about it and consider that that there was probably a lot going on that we don't know about, Sefko's brief comments notwithstanding, and not resort to the (frankly, very homerish) argument that Sefko pulled something out of his ass thanks to a personal dislike for Erick Dampier.

Sure there are tons of things that go on with the Mavs that we don't know about. But that doesn't prove anything. Sure it's possible that the Mavs could have actively shopped Dampier. It's possible to win the lottery. It's possible to be struck by lightning twice. It's possible to fall from an air plane at 30,000 feet and live. Lots of things are possible. But the question is not if it's possible, but whether Sefko related something as being true that was not true. Sefko said that he knew for a fact that the Mavs shopped Damp. Then Sefko came back and retracted that statement and said that he didn't know for a fact that the Mavs shopped Damp. He calls it misquoting himself, I call it a lie. But I fail to see how arguing that Sefko lied is being homerish. It's just looking at the facts in evidence and using them to form a conclusion. Homerism, tends to ignore the facts and then draw a conclusion on what you want to believe. Wait a minute, that's sort what Sefko did.