Any Word on Dalembert?

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

Fixed.

Seriously. Are you twelve?

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by nowhereman

You guys are ridiculous.

I saw a series of things that seemed to me like the Mavs didn't have a viable backup plan. For instance, having the first backup option being chicken and waffles with a guy that they couldn't even extend an offer to, having future plans be for guys they were late to express interest in signing, messing around with James' deadline, making a huge signing only because another had an injured toe, etc. etc. These moves seem haphazard to me and I think that's a reasonable inference to draw, and a reasonable basis on which to criticize the FO. Thiggy is pretty much the only that has had the courtesy to actually discuss whether or not these moves reasonably show a plan or just shuffling around.

Why do you feel the need to keep exaggerating the facts about their meeting with Bynum? They met with him at the Crescent, which is where they've conducted several meetings over the years. You said Dennys, now you're saying this...just comes across as purposefully twisting the facts to make it sound like they called the dude up for a quick Taco Bell run instead of sitting down with him for a business meeting. And why are you suggesting that they met with him knowing that they couldn't make him an offer? That is clearly not what happened.

And so you don't get mad about me picking on one thing: I, again, believe this Bynum stuff is indicative of a pattern of you distorting the facts behind this free agency period. It doesn't matter where they met with him--it matters that, as you're trying to make a point, you're repeatedly lacing it with falsities and exaggerations.

If you'd like a substantive discussion of this issue, I would really, really like you to stop ignoring the question a couple folks have posed to you:

What, exactly, would a "viable backup plan" have looked like from our (i.e., the uninformed the public's) perspective? Start from the point in time at which Dwight calls Cuban and says no thanks. What would look different between what they've done and what you're saying they should have done? And please don't answer in generalities.

[Budapest Maverick]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

From the looks of it though, we didn't really "overpay" for anyone...at least not compared to what they were making. 3.7 a year for Dalembert is still reasonably cheap. I mean, we did pay Kaman 8 million last year.

Kaman was an expiring contract, a former all-star if i remember correctly, and younger. In hindsight, he wasn't worth that money, but Dalambert can end up being just as bad for us. Hopefully being the starter will lit a fire under him.

[spreedom]

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

Kaman was an expiring contract, a former all-star if i remember correctly, and younger. In hindsight, he wasn't worth that money, but Dalambert can end up being just as bad for us. Hopefully being the starter will lit a fire under him.

Really, do we factor that in when comparing a 31-year-old to a 32-year-old? Especially when you consider that Kaman's youthful endurance has allowed him to play over 65 games exactly half of the seasons of his career?

And from everything we've been told, it sounds like only the first year of this contract, which is cheaper even though it's longer than Kaman's deal, is guaranteed. Kaman was a value signing but Dalembert is a cheap signing. And Dalembert is miles ahead of Kaman defensively.

[Budapest Maverick]

You are right about their age, they are basically the same age. If really only the first year of his contract guaranteed, then yeah, it could not backfire that bad, at least from a cap standpoint for the summer of 2014.

[sike]

Originally Posted by spreedom

Really, do we factor that in when comparing a 31-year-old to a 32-year-old? Especially when you consider that Kaman's youthful endurance has allowed him to play over 65 games exactly half of the seasons of his career?

And from everything we've been told, it sounds like only the first year of this contract, which is cheaper even though it's longer than Kaman's deal, is guaranteed. Kaman was a value signing but Dalembert is a cheap signing. And Dalembert is miles ahead of Kaman defensively.

+rep

[zakarumes]

Dalembert has signed

[dirt_dobber]

Mavericks sign Samuel Dalembert
Updated: July 19, 2013, 11:04 PM ET
By Bryan Gutierrez --------------------- (our very own and talented)
http://espn.go.com/dallas/nba/story/...muel-dalembert

Las Vegas -- The Dallas Mavericks have signed free-agent center Samuel Dalembert, the team announced Friday.

SPN.com's Marc Stein first reported on Thursday that Dallas and Dalembert reached a verbal agreement on a deal. Yahoo! Sports reported that it will be a two-year deal with the second year of the contract partially guaranteed.

"We are glad to have Sam on board," Mavs coach Rick Carlisle said via text message. "He is a rebounder/rim protector who I believe is a bit underrated offensively. He's by far the best unrestricted free-agent center available at this time."

By joining the Mavs, Dalembert is joining his fifth team in five years. Dalember, 32, will be a stop-gap option for the Mavs as they missed out on Dwight Howard and decided to not make an offer to Andrew Bynum.

Dalembert likely will be the team's starting center on opening night. Dalembert has played a total of 774 games (605 starts) and has career averages of 8.0 points, 8.1 rebounds and 1.8 blocks in 25.2 minutes per game.

Last season, the 6-foot-11, 250-pound big man started 23 games for the Milwaukee Bucks and averaged 6.7 points, 5.9 rebounds and 1.1 blocks in 16.3 minutes per game.

ESPNDallas.com has reported the Mavs will bring back forward Brandan Wright, barring an unforeseen development.

Information from ESPNDallas.com's Tim MacMahon was used in this report.

[LSMF]

Sammy D looked like an All-Star that night...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38Sz3nEC4KI