GDT game 29 - Mavs (8-21) at Clips (22-8) 9:30 NBATV/FSSW - Page 2 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Budapest Maverick · 12-24-2016, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Tell that to the players on the floor.

I was responding to his post, didn't imply anything else this time.

Underdog · 12-24-2016, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

I was responding to his post, didn't imply anything else this time.

But you've been advocating tanking on this site consistently... You can't tell the players on the floor to tank games "for the sake of the franchise" -- they don't play to lose, and they certainly won't care about the future of a franchise that wants them to do so.

Budapest Maverick · 12-24-2016, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

But you've been advocating tanking on this site consistently... You can't tell the players on the floor to tank games "for the sake of the franchise" -- they don't play to lose, and they certainly won't care about the future of a franchise that wants them to do so.

I'm not sure that's entirely true. Yes, players want to win games, they also want to play on contending teams, and they are not dumb as far as assessing a team's capabilities go, no matter how many times they repeat the same mantras in front of the camera.

Every Mavs player on the roster knows that this team needs talent badly, and without it, they have no chance to win a championship in the near future. As an owner, you can do a variety of things to ensure that your team is set up for the future, including trading veterans.

As a coach, you can play the young players more. It's not nearly as black & white as you make it out to be, the franchise has options other than "telling players to lose intentionally", nobody says they should do that.

Underdog · 12-24-2016, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

I'm not sure that's entirely true. Yes, players want to win games, they also want to play on contending teams, and they are not dumb as far as assessing a team's capabilities go, no matter how many times they repeat the same mantras in front of the camera.

Which is why they'll leave a losing franchise for a winning one the moment their contract is up -- the only players that have any interest in franchise-building are franchise players. You can't build a winning franchise out of a losing culture -- the Sixers are proof of that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

Every Mavs player on the roster knows that this team needs talent badly, and without it, they have no chance to win a championship in the near future. As an owner, you can do a variety of things to ensure that your team is set up for the future, including trading veterans.

As a coach, you can play the young players more. It's not nearly as black & white as you make it out to be, the franchise has options other than "telling players to lose intentionally", nobody says they should do that.

LOL, these guys know what tanking looks like. Trading/benching veterans isn't going to do anything except keep veterans away from your franchise when free agency rolls around. Good luck becoming a contender again with nothing but high draft picks (again, see the Sixers).

Budapest Maverick · 12-25-2016, 12:51 AM

The team with probably the most talent after the Warriors and Cavs is a good example for why you can't build a winning franchise? Well, LOL at you back, sir. Their core of 20-22 year olds can't win? No s**t, Sherlock. When they are a 60-win team in three-four years, what will you say then? Any team not named Warriors or Cavs would trade their roster for Philly's, or the Wolves' for that matter.

And if you don't trade a horrific contract like Matthews, or a renta player like Bogut to keep Harrison freakin' Barnes or semi-retired Dirk happy, you deserve the decade of mediocrity that awaits you. We are actually half-way there if you think about it, putting out one of the more consistent treadmill teams in the last five seasons. We are beautifully set to remain a treadmill team for the next six-seven seasons. I guess if that's the goal, we are golden.

Budapest Maverick · 12-25-2016, 01:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

LOL, these guys know what tanking looks like. Trading/benching veterans isn't going to do anything except keep veterans away from your franchise when free agency rolls around. Good luck becoming a contender again with nothing but high draft picks (again, see the Sixers).

What evidence do you have to back tbese claims up? Veteran stars stay with their teams for the vast majority of time btw, and this will be even more true with the new mega-giga-super maxes. That's why we should draft a guy who one day actually deserves a contract like that. Also, it's a helluva lot easier to become a contender with nothing but your own high draft picks, then it is without a franchise player. Which is practically impossible. And yeah, trading away or benching veterans wouldn't do anything for this team, except probably allowing it to actually get a player whom you can build a contender around. It's not like being bad worked out for us in the late 90's, right?

Bryan_Wilson · 12-25-2016, 01:13 AM

Minnesota hasn't had a winning record since 04-05 season. Philly has been barely .500 or worse since 03-04. Teams who are quite religiously drafting in the lotto have been mediocre or worse for over a decade. I'd rather trust a magic 8 ball with the Mavericks decisions than follow those models.

Thebo · 12-25-2016, 04:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

Minnesota hasn't had a winning record since 04-05 season. Philly has been barely .500 or worse since 03-04. Teams who are quite religiously drafting in the lotto have been mediocre or worse for over a decade. I'd rather trust a magic 8 ball with the Mavericks decisions than follow those models.

I think you can add Kings as an example who last had a winning record in 05-06. They give a better comparison since they have had a franchise player for the last 6 years and are yet to sniff winning record. If someone is going to use "but Boogie is about to start his prime", then they should also keep in mind that his contract is up after next season and those trade rumors are not because of nothing.

Kings may become prime example how drafted star players are lost because of losing culture which equals to not being able to surround that star player with anything relevant, since nobody wants to even consider that culture when free agency is open.

Budapest Maverick · 12-25-2016, 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

Minnesota hasn't had a winning record since 04-05 season. Philly has been barely .500 or worse since 03-04. Teams who are quite religiously drafting in the lotto have been mediocre or worse for over a decade. I'd rather trust a magic 8 ball with the Mavericks decisions than follow those models.

And yet at this moment in time, they are much better equipped for both the immediate or distant future than us. It's like you guys forgot that we got extremely lucky with this German guy back in 1998. He blossomed into a top 20 ever player, one of the greatest who ever played the game. With a Nowitzki on your roster, retooling and trying to find the right pieces made sense.

The Sixers and the Wolves searched for that franchise player, but took them some time until they were in a position to draft them. Btw, the Sixers were a playoff team just five years ago. Now they probably have two franchise players in Embiid and Simmons, who everybody projects to be a great player. The Wolves tried to build a team around Kevin Love, who was not a true Nr.1 option. Now they have Towns, one of the best young talents in the NBA.

They are actually excellent examples why tanking works, and expecting their cores of 21-22 year olds to have a winning record right away, within a year or two of finally being able to draft the right pieces, is a terrible argument. You are a good poster who follows the league, you know that 21-22 year olds don't win in the NBA. Their clock starts around right now, and they are great examples why tanking works.

But answer me this, please. Would you trade Barnes, Matthews and Finney-Smith for Embiid, Simmons, and Saric? Would you trade them for Towns, Wiggins, LaVine?

Budapest Maverick · 12-25-2016, 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thebo

I think you can add Kings as an example who last had a winning record in 05-06. They give a better comparison since they have had a franchise player for the last 6 years and are yet to sniff winning record. If someone is going to use "but Boogie is about to start his prime", then they should also keep in mind that his contract is up after next season and those trade rumors are not because of nothing.

Kings may become prime example how drafted star players are lost because of losing culture which equals to not being able to surround that star player with anything relevant, since nobody wants to even consider that culture when free agency is open.

Nah, the Kings are actually a good example for terrible drafting. Their last six top 10 selections were Marquesse Chriss, Willy Cauley-Stein, Nik Stauskas, Ben McLemore, Bismack Biyombo and Thomas Robinson (some of these players were traded). I mean, no one will save you from yourself. They had top 8 lottery picks in almost every year (several top 5), and wasted them all in the last six years, with the exception of the Cousins pick.

They could have drafted Kemba Walker, Klay Thompson or Kawhi Leonard in 2011, Lillard or Drummond in 2012, McCollum, Steven Adams, Antetekounmpo or Gobert in 2013, LaVine in 2014, or Myles Turner or Booker in 2015. There is literally a dozen difference maker they missed with consistently high picks, and 90% of these guys were in close proximity of their picks. So yeah, if you are terrible at drafting, you will have a hard time building a team with high draft picks. Duh.

Thebo · 12-25-2016, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

They could have drafted Kemba Walker, Klay Thompson or Kawhi Leonard in 2011, Lillard or Drummond in 2012, McCollum, Steven Adams, Antetekounmpo or Gobert in 2013, LaVine in 2014, or Myles Turner or Booker in 2015. There is literally a dozen difference maker they missed with consistently high picks, and 90% of these guys were in close proximity of their picks. So yeah, if you are terrible at drafting, you will have a hard time building a team with high draft picks. Duh.

You finally arrive to a point where Mavs have gotten most of smack in recent years. Drafting... I trust them with small forwards, not sure about any other position.

I can give you Lillard and Drummond, basically whole 2012 draft. If you look at their drafting, they have been too concerned in building front court, rather than have a solid 5 and 1.

When it comes to other names, with the exception of McCollum, who was 10th pick, everyone has been drafted outside top 10. Following that logic, you should not be worried, as long as Mavs miss the playoffs.

It is so easy for everyone else to draft star/strong players outside top 5, it is only the Kings who suck at it. All Mavs need to do, is get that top 5 pick this year and then they are going to finish next few seasons closer to 10th than 5th pick (assuming Mavs will not trade Barnes/Wes). Mavs surely will not stink at drafting as much as Kings and are going to spend less than a decade in lottery.

Budapest Maverick · 12-25-2016, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thebo

It is so easy for everyone else to draft star/strong players outside top 5, it is only the Kings who suck at it. All Mavs need to do, is get that top 5 pick this year and then they are going to finish next few seasons closer to 10th than 5th pick (assuming Mavs will not trade Barnes/Wes). Mavs surely will not stink at drafting as much as Kings and are going to spend less than a decade in lottery.

I would like to think that with that many top 10 picks, Donnie and co. would have done a lot better. Heck, if only Mark listens to Donnie in 2013, we would be golden right now. I hope that we will have a top 5 pick this year, because GMs recently said that this draft will be the strongest in a decade, and I think this could really turn out to be true. We may end up drafting a really good player with the 7th or 8th pick, but the top 5 would obviously be better. So many potential All-Stars, and four-five prospects with a star ceiling.

DevinHarriswillstart · 12-25-2016, 10:18 AM

"It's like you guys forgot that we got extremely lucky with this German guy back in 1998."

Hey, BM finally hit the nail on the head. LUCK has everything do to with it. Luck landing a big name free agent or luck getting a superstar draft pick.

But the idea that tanking is the only way is misguided. It is.

BM is on this train because of his 0% Barnes becomes a star talk before the season started. So he is all in on this tank bet to prove that we absolutely can't in 1 million years consider Barnes to be a franchise player.

Budapest Maverick · 12-25-2016, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

"It's like you guys forgot that we got extremely lucky with this German guy back in 1998."

Hey, BM finally hit the nail on the head. LUCK has everything do to with it. Luck landing a big name free agent or luck getting a superstar draft pick.

But the idea that tanking is the only way is misguided. It is.

BM is on this train because of his 0% Barnes becomes a star talk before the season started. So he is all in on this tank bet to prove that we absolutely can't in 1 million years consider Barnes to be a franchise player.

I agree that you need luck, considering that even if you have the top pick, you have an about 50-50 chance to draft a superstar. But your chances are much better with higher picks. I never said that the only way is tanking btw, I said that if you want to win a championship, you have to be really bad for at least a season or two. If we refuse to be bad for even a single season now, we will very likely not have that franchise player.

The second part of your post is completely ridiculous. I said the same things last year, you can look it up. We need that franchise player, and there is a very high probability that we will get him through the draft, rather than the FA. You are spinning on this Barnes thing and it makes you look really, really bad. Btw, I am reasonably sure that you are the only poster on this board who considers Barnes to be a franchise player.

Some think he can be an All-star, or even a first option, but a franchise player? Are you flippin' kidding me? You are a good poster, this is shocking coming from you, it's like you got mad when it comes to this topic.

Budapest Maverick · 12-25-2016, 10:44 AM

Barnes is putting up 20/5/1 on 53%TS. He is the 34th small forward in the league in scoring efficiency (still outside of the top 10 if you only count players with bigger roles), 12th in PER, and 34th in RPM among small forwards, with a net neutral offensive impact at 0.00, and a -0.71 defensive impact. These are just the stats. Watching the game, he has a single elite trait as a basketball player, delivering you a tough ISO mid range jumper, the least efficient shot in basketball.

He cannot create for others, he cannot get to the line, can't make the three ball consistently, an average defender, and even an average or slightly above average rebounder. If you think that this player has a chance to become a first option on a championship contender and a franchise player, you should stop posting immediately. I'm sorry, but there is no ifs and buts about this, and it's completely ridiculous that we even have to argue about this. What's the next topic, Finney-Smith being the next Kawhi Leonard?

Bryan_Wilson · 12-25-2016, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

It is very possible that being mediocre this year - if we end up being mediocre - instead of being really bad, will sentence this franchise for a decade of treadmill status.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

And yet at this moment in time, they are much better equipped for both the immediate or distant future than us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

They are actually excellent examples why tanking works

If your plan is to tank at all costs(culture and everything else be damned) to get a top pick to avoid a decade long treadmill... and your "success stories" are stories that took over a decade your logic is entirely flawed. And for someone throwing terms around like "facts" the FACT is that, no... that plan has not worked yet. Those teams have not won a thing, they are still lined up to be terrible right now. They may be set up well in 3-4 years but it is a FACT that nothing has worked yet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

Barnes is putting up 20/5/1 on 53%TS. He is the 34th small forward in the league in scoring efficiency (still outside of the top 10 if you only count players with bigger roles), 12th in PER, and 34th in RPM among small forwards, with a net neutral offensive impact at 0.00, and a -0.71 defensive impact. These are just the stats. Watching the game, he has a single elite trait as a basketball player, delivering you a tough ISO mid range jumper, the least efficient shot in basketball.

He cannot create for others, he cannot get to the line, can't make the three ball consistently, an average defender, and even an average or slightly above average rebounder. If you think that this player has a chance to become a first option on a championship contender and a franchise player, you should stop posting immediately. I'm sorry, but there is no ifs and buts about this, and it's completely ridiculous that we even have to argue about this. What's the next topic, Finney-Smith being the next Kawhi Leonard?

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Nobody should stop posting immediately simply because you disagree with them. And there is no if's and's or but's about that. I'm sure you were mostly joking, however you have made similar comments anytime the Barnes subject comes up. That people do not know basketball if they think he can be a star. An otterly ridiculous statement considering our own Derek Harper says during broadcasts "Harrison Barnes is on his way to being a star in this league". Even with rose colored glasses on if it's not ridiculous to say on air then it's not ridiculous to be positive about him on a fan forum.

We get it you think he is who he is but If someone thought he would develop into a purple giraffe they would be entitled to think as such, and you are entitled to disagree with them. And frankly all that was said is that he has a higher than 0% chance to be a star. And you have said recently that he has a higher than 0% chance, albeit just barely. So I'm not sure why you are getting so bent out of shape when people are merely choosing to believe that a 24year old is not a finished product. That no matter how many stats you toss out right now he has a chance to become better. So the only argument I've seen is people being optimistic and you saying they don't know basketball and should stop posting.

Budapest Maverick · 12-25-2016, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

If your plan is to tank at all costs(culture and everything else be damned) to get a top pick to avoid a decade long treadmill... and your "success stories" are stories that took over a decade your logic is entirely flawed. And for someone throwing terms around like "facts" the FACT is that, no... that plan has not worked yet. Those teams have not won a thing, they are still lined up to be terrible right now. They may be set up well in 3-4 years but it is a FACT that nothing has worked yet.

Would you trade Barnes, Matthews and Finney-Smith for Embiid, Simmons and Saric? Ignore salaries, let's say you can make that trade. Would you do it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Nobody should stop posting immediately simply because you disagree with them. And there is no if's and's or but's about that. I'm sure you were mostly joking, however you have made similar comments anytime the Barnes subject comes up. That people do not know basketball if they think he can be a star. An otterly ridiculous statement considering our own Derek Harper says during broadcasts "Harrison Barnes is on his way to being a star in this league". Even with rose colored glasses on if it's not ridiculous to say on air then it's not ridiculous to be positive about him on a fan forum.

Dirk said Bargnani was a better prospect than he was, so what? Basketball people make all kinds of ridiculous comments, and team broadcasters are always the biggest homers. Justifying a ridiculous opinion with another one is not sound logic, no matter where it comes from.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

We get it you think he is who he is but If someone thought he would develop into a purple giraffe they would be entitled to think as such, and you are entitled to disagree with them. And frankly all that was said is that he has a higher than 0% chance to be a star. And you have said recently that he has a higher than 0% chance, albeit just barely. So I'm not sure why you are getting so bent out of shape when people are merely choosing to believe that a 24year old is not a finished product. That no matter how many stats you toss out right now he has a chance to become better. So the only argument I've seen is people being optimistic and you saying they don't know basketball and should stop posting.

DevinHarriswillstart clearly implied numerous times that he sees Barnes as a star player, and not in the sense of an All-Star or a first option on a mediocre team, but someone who can carry a franchise. Heck, he just mentioned the words "franchise player". Also, you are "strawmaning" me again, I don't have a problem if someone is optimistic, but they ridicule me and call me out on my realistic opinion that's based - in my opinion - on facts, or a realistic interpretation of the NBA and how teams develop, I will defend my argument. And the problem is, you guys barely react directly to my points. My main points in these arguments were:

Do you guys think a team can win without a franchise player?

Do you guys think we have more talent than the Sixers or the Wolves?

Can you give me examples of perimeter players becoming stars after the age of 24, without showing any signs previously in multiple seasons? If you can, was this player's style similar to Barnes, with no playmaking, no foul drawing, and not being an elite three point shooter? Can you find a single star in NBA history that fits these criteria?

Do you guys think that winning more games does not reduce our chances of getting a high pick?

Do you think that we can sign a superstar FA, or we have a bigger chance of drafting one?

These are some of my direct points that, for some reason, nobody touches, instead you guys go straight into strawman mode. Please, answer my questions, and I want to hear your actual opinion on these topics.

DevinHarriswillstart · 12-25-2016, 01:18 PM

History can be a guide, but your claims are all in absolution versus being open to discussion. The problem is anything I say to the contrary will just be shot down with your so-called facts which just turn into tit for tats that people don't really want to read.

And you strawman as much as anyone around here. I never claimed Barnes was a superstar ever. I said the quickest way to getting that would be for him to take those next steps which are absolutely within the realm of reason. I just don't know how on earth after watching him that you still think there is a 0% chance of that happening. To me, that's just plain denial. His is a hybrid of Finley, Dirk, and himself...and you say there is no way?

And he is slowly but surely attacking the rim more, but there is no point if he is so good in the high and low post making shots. You act like his only value is the mid range jump shot, but if you watch the games, then you know it's so much more nuanced than that.

But your response will just be more of the same, so I'll be the adult and move on.

Budapest Maverick · 12-25-2016, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

His is a hybrid of Finley, Dirk, and himself...and you say there is no way?

LOL, as you said, we should indeed move on.

Bryan_Wilson · 12-25-2016, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

And he is slowly but surely attacking the rim more, but there is no point if he is so good in the high and low post making shots.

What has been standing out to me in recent games especially is how money he has been down the stretch so I looked up his clutch stats-

He's shooting 19/31(61%) in clutch situations this year. He's taken the 20th most shots in those situations. And of the people above him in attempts PG13 is only one close in terms of shot making. And I only went through the top 50 but nobody increases their fg% more than Barnes does in clutch situations. He just needs to work on finding ways to get to the FT line to your point going forward but he's showing early that you can go to him when it matters most.

http://www.nbaminer.com/clutch-time-stats/

Thebo · 12-26-2016, 07:20 AM

I know you guys are trying to move on, but just to conclude since you both seem to be missing where you are coming from.

DHwillstart has argued that it is too early to definitely say Barnes can not become a star/first option player. That is all. Not that he will become, simply according to DHwillstart it is too early. Why someone would try so hard to rebut this simple statement, is beyond me. It is a matter of personal view and nothing else.

BPMaverick has gone long way trying to define what star player means for him. I think we have finally gotten that it is a guy who is either good at handles or averaging 6+FTA per game, or doing both. BP has not made understanding him any easier by not definitively saiying who he considers a star player. I mean, BP has separated in one post all-star, star, first option and franchise players without clearly giving out criteria for each. Most of the arguments have been because people define similar titles differently. It has been clear from the start that BP has different definition for star player than most others. Since BP has not put down his clear criteria, you guys arguing makes no sense.

If BP has higher criteria for star player than someone else, then obviously you are going to have arguments, when you are not setting the baseline.

It has also been established that BP favors tanking this year. I think most on this board favor tanking for this season because of strong draft. I have not argued against tanking, I have argued against it being fastest way to become contender. My argument has not been that there is another fastest way, just that this is not so clearly the best, fastest option. It has its own problems.

People are just arguing too much and trying to change beliefs. I do not get it. You should argue out of fun, entertaining your mind, not trying to seem stubborn. If this was a situation that you had any control or influence over, then I get it. In the end it comes down to Mavs' FO and there is no reason to waste a lot of time and effort to prove someone is right or wrong. Have arguments that entertain your mind, there is no point in trying to constantly remind in every post or thread where your stance is. Dallas-Mavs.com is too small community for that.

Bryan_Wilson · 12-26-2016, 08:54 AM

Speaking of tank, those Clippers yesterday without CP3 and BG32 got beat by the Lakers, The Lakers had just had the brakes beat off them by the Magic. So even though we have won 2 games, they are still very suspect as wins. I'm still pretty sure we are a top 7-8 pick which is fine in this draft.

Thebo · 12-26-2016, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

Speaking of tank, those Clippers yesterday without CP3 and BG32 got beat by the Lakers, The Lakers had just had the brakes beat off them by the Magic. So even though we have won 2 games, they are still very suspect as wins. I'm still pretty sure we are a top 7-8 pick which is fine in this draft.

That open 8th spot in the West may actually be a blessing in disguise. Yes, fears of Mavs not giving up are justified but at the same time you have other teams that are kind of desperate for that long awaited playoff seeding (Kings, Wolves, etc), who would otherwise tank really hard, probably harder than Mavs.

FreshJive · 12-26-2016, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

Speaking of tank, those Clippers yesterday without CP3 and BG32 got beat by the Lakers, The Lakers had just had the brakes beat off them by the Magic. So even though we have won 2 games, they are still very suspect as wins. I'm still pretty sure we are a top 7-8 pick which is fine in this draft.

Even by scoreboard standards, one and two point wins are letting the basketball gods decide.