Dallas Mavericks Offseason Thread

[Windmill360]

He forgot the departure of Bass and Hollins.

[Nowitzki4President]

Can someone please explain to me what the 'Cats want out of a three way trade?

I've heard they want a pf, which Dallas has no good ones that are on the market, and GS doesn't actually have a real PF. So who are they targeting?

I've also heard they're looking to unload a center. But I don't see us or GS wanting any of their center's. The only plausible one is Chandler, and he's very risky.

[Sportstudi]

Originally Posted by Nowitzki4President

Can someone please explain to me what the 'Cats want out of a three way trade?

I've heard they want a pf, which Dallas has no good ones that are on the market, and GS doesn't actually have a real PF. So who are they targeting?

I've also heard they're looking to unload a center. But I don't see us or GS wanting any of their center's. The only plausible one is Chandler, and he's very risky.

Because he's injury prone as hell and his numbers were mainly based on the game orchestrated by Chris Paul. And during last season his numbers weren't much better than Damps. No, thanks. I'd like to have someone like Biedrins way more than Chandler.

[Quetzalcoatl]

The Mavs-Cats-Warriors rumours have excited me a lot. I hope we have movements and we get any good center. I would love ti have Chandler here.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by Sportstudi

Because he's injury prone as hell and his numbers were mainly based on the game orchestrated by Chris Paul. And during last season his numbers weren't much better than Damps. No, thanks. I'd like to have someone like Biedrins way more than Chandler.

I think the Mavs are easily stacked enough to handle his injuries. Damp, Gooden, and Dirk can all fill in if he does.

[DavidDaMonkey]

Chandler just doesn't really do a whole lot for me. I mean I always love getting new talent, but I'm just not sure he's what we need. I guess he's at least part of what we need though, so if we can get him without giving up any major talent, I'm in.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

I'd rather have Chandler then not have him. I can't imagine with all of the hints of a center that it would be anything but....I just can't see a wing with the minutes crunch. Turiaf, Biedrins, Chandler, and Nazr are the only ones that I think are in play here (obviously providing these rumors are true). I don' t know though, Fish seems fairly certain here. He would eat some major crow if these Warriors talks didn't come through. I would eat some crow too for saying it's dumb to think we'd ever trade with them under Nelson.

[Eman]

I think the Cat's want Monta Ellis. Larry Brown had Iverson before and had success with him. They are similar players. Charlotte gets Ellis, we get ?????, GS gets huge cap relief. We give up the Buck shot plus expirings. That's basically what the new DB.com article says. Maybe we get Felton? Biedrens? I don't know but think we could use either (Biedrens more). Think Charlotte would give Chandler up? He would improve our center position immensely as well.

[Tokey41]

Chandler is vastly overrated on this board for whatever reason. I'm glad someone mentioned his numbers were a product of playing with the leagues best point guard. Throw in the injuries and its too much of a risk. If given the option, Biendris > Chandler.

[Thomas86]

Originally Posted by Tokey41

Chandler is vastly overrated on this board for whatever reason. I'm glad someone mentioned his numbers were a product of playing with the leagues best point guard. Throw in the injuries and its too much of a risk. If given the option, Biendris > Chandler.

And you don't think Chris Kamen doesn't get overrated on this board I mean come on now?....Kamen hasn't played a full season in almost 4 years now and he's overpaid on top of that, the Mavs have alot of dept this season to take on a player like Chandler....when Chandler is healthy the guy is just scary and hard to guard.

[MavsWiLLHaVeRinGs]

Kidd to Chandler all day baby.

[alby]

Who is Kamen

[Tokey41]

Originally Posted by Thomas86

And you don't think Chris Kamen doesn't get overrated on this board I mean come on now?....Kamen hasn't played a full season in almost 4 years now and he's overpaid on top of that, the Mavs have alot of dept this season to take on a player like Chandler....when Chandler is healthy the guy is just scary and hard to guard.

I believe Kamans name was thrown around when the trade Baron + Kaman for Kidd was discussed. In that scenario when you fill a gigantic hole without giving up a starter position... you should do it. Why we didn't I'll never know but it's worked out fine up to this point so I'm not complaining. Regardless, he was overrated but that deal seemed fair to me.

I'd be happy with a healthy Chandler... but doesn't anyone else remember when OKC pulled the plug on the deal for him because of health issues? The Bobcats did this trade for financial reasons remember. If a young and upcoming team doesn't want to take a risk on him why the hell would a borderline contender? Our window isn't getting any bigger here, and personally despite all the hype I think Marion is a pretty big risk himself. We can only hope his stints in Miami and Toronto were just temporary, but its not like he didn't have Wade and a first class point guard (Calderon) setting him up there.

[ty]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKB0Z1-TTto

I would take Iverson on the Mavs for his swag alone.

Wishlist:

* Jackson
* Ellis
* Iverson

[Thomas86]

Originally Posted by Tokey41

I believe Kamans name was thrown around when the trade Baron + Kaman for Kidd was discussed. In that scenario when you fill a gigantic hole without giving up a starter position... you should do it. Why we didn't I'll never know but it's worked out fine up to this point so I'm not complaining. Regardless, he was overrated but that deal seemed fair to me.

I'd be happy with a healthy Chandler... but doesn't anyone else remember when OKC pulled the plug on the deal for him because of health issues? The Bobcats did this trade for financial reasons remember. If a young and upcoming team doesn't want to take a risk on him why the hell would a borderline contender? Our window isn't getting any bigger here, and personally despite all the hype I think Marion is a pretty big risk himself. We can only hope his stints in Miami and Toronto were just temporary, but its not like he didn't have Wade and a first class point guard (Calderon) setting him up there.

Kaman name is still being tossed around right now and has been for most of the summer and I haven't seen any report saying the Mavs where interested in Chris Kaman, I think the Mavs where smart not to trade Kidd for Davis and Kaman because that would have messed up the team chemistry that Kidd build with the Dirk and the other players....brining in Davis in the middle of the season would have backed fire hard and the Mavs would have been stuck with Davis and Kaman's bad contract's trying to find to team to take them.


As for Chandler....I think the Mavs would be very prepared if Chandler where to come here and happen to get hurt again with all the dept they have this season, Damp could still start and then you would still have Dirk and Gooden taking turns at center, As for Marion....I wouldn't even consider Calderon and Wade who's not even a PG in the same class as Jason Kidd, Kidd is a pure PG something that Marion hasen't played with since Steve Nash and I expect Marion and Kidd to do great thing this season.

[MavsWiLLHaVeRinGs]

Originally Posted by ty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKB0Z1-TTto

I would take Iverson on the Mavs for his swag alone.

Wishlist:

* Jackson
* Ellis
* Iverson

There's still people out there that want Iverson on the Mavs?

[sefant77]

Im curious if we see tomorrow allready a deal....the teams had several weeks of time discussing what to do or trade on 9/9.

[dude1394]

I for one would still have done the davis/kamen deal in a heartbeat. I like jkiddo but solving both problems at once and getting at least a decade younger is a no brainer to me.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

I for one would still have done the davis/kamen deal in a heartbeat. I like jkiddo but solving both problems at once and getting at least a decade younger is a no brainer to me.

Who fills the PG position for the 20+ games Baron is injured?

Who fills the center position for the 20+ games Kaman is injured?

[sefant77]

Originally Posted by dude1394

I for one would still have done the davis/kamen deal in a heartbeat. I like jkiddo but solving both problems at once and getting at least a decade younger is a no brainer to me.

I guess the body from Baron has a "true" age of like 35...

[Kidd Karma]

Originally Posted by sefant77

I guess the body from Baron has a "true" age of like 35...

Baron has other things going on off the court......but more exposure....playoffs, finals, mean more off the court requests, move production, videos. He's going Magic's way, but he hasn't put on the court stuff as priority #1. Maybe coming to Dallas, would have given him that sense of urgency....playing through a bruised tailbone or stubbed toe.

[SMC0007]

Sessions,
GSW player(Turiaf, Biedrins,Jax)
Chandler.

My short list of who I can see us picking up.

[Justin Credible]

I'm amazed at two things:

1. People still want Chandler
2. People still want Iverson

Chandler is overrated, overpaid, and comparable to T Mac with his injuries. Iverson is.. Iverson. He'll never be good on a good team, he'll only be the best on a crappy team. When he gets to a semi-good team they become a crappy team with Iverson "carrying" them, all the while people ignoring that he's doing more damage than good. I'm sorry, I know Iverson can score like no other when he's hot, but the dude is beyond overrated in my opinion.

I'm sorry but I see us getting Chandler as more detrimental in the long run than actually productive. Let's say Chandler gets here and is "healthy." Awesome. The Mavs go on a 20-5 run and everything's looking great. Then, as guaranteed, Chandler gets injured. He's out the rest of the season. Great, now the Mavs have to mold themselves to a different look because one of the key pieces is now out and no comparable 5 is available to take his place. We now have no choice but to hold on to Gooden through his valuable trade period because no one wants to trade a 5 for a 4/5 that's not near as good as the one that they're sending out. Damp can't be traded for the same reason and because the FO wants to hold out for Sammy Superstar. So great, we went from having Chandler/Damp/Gooden at the 5 to just Damp/Gooden and didn't even have the time at the beginning of the season for Kidd to mold to their own capabilities and utilize them properly.

My train of thought derailed. Damn FBI files.

[SeriousSummer]

Ellis to Charlotte; Buckner, Humphries, Williams to Golden State; Chandler to Dallas works on RealGM. Maybe some draft choices or player rights could be involved as well.

Dallas:

Kidd, JJB, Bourbois
Howard, Terry, Carroll
Marion, Ross, Thomas
Dirk, Gooden
Chandler, Dampier, Jawaii

[Robillion]

Originally Posted by dude1394

I for one would still have done the davis/kamen deal in a heartbeat. I like jkiddo but solving both problems at once and getting at least a decade younger is a no brainer to me.

I still do not remember that being a serious request.. I just had Baron and Kaman in my amateur GM wishlist. I am very pissed we did not take it if it really was offered!

We would have had a Davis, Howard, Marion, Dirk, Kaman lineup. CMON! And Still would have Gooden/Damp(and his contract chip) to back up at center, and roddy b/jjb/terry for pg back up.

[Robillion]

Originally Posted by SeriousSummer

Ellis to Charlotte; Buckner, Humphries, Williams to Golden State; Chandler to Dallas works on RealGM. Maybe some draft choices or player rights could be involved as well.

Dallas:

Kidd, JJB, Bourbois
Howard, Terry, Carroll
Marion, Ross, Thomas
Dirk, Gooden
Chandler, Dampier, Jawaii

I can see that deal going down.. and hope it does! Expirings and roster spaces for a starting center! That is if Chandler is healthy.

[sefant77]

Bobcats have several nice pieces and they need and want a PF. Another reason why i hated it to let Bass go for nothing...

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by Justin Credible

Iverson is.. Iverson. He'll never be good on a good team, he'll only be the best on a crappy team. When he gets to a semi-good team they become a crappy team with Iverson "carrying" them, all the while people ignoring that he's doing more damage than good. I'm sorry, I know Iverson can score like no other when he's hot, but the dude is beyond overrated in my opinion.

Totally agree. He IS the team he plays for, and as he shows more and more age, the less he's able to do on a team and he has yet to learn how to translate his game into one that involves 4 other players. Truly not what we need.

I'm sorry but I see us getting Chandler as more detrimental in the long run than actually productive. Let's say Chandler gets here and is "healthy." Awesome. The Mavs go on a 20-5 run and everything's looking great. Then, as guaranteed, Chandler gets injured. He's out the rest of the season. Great, now the Mavs have to mold themselves to a different look because one of the key pieces is now out and no comparable 5 is available to take his place.

truly amazing how you can completely predict the future. 25 games then POW, eh? And its a season-ending injury? Minus the last two seasons, Chandler had 4 straight seasons of missing fewer than 10 games per.

Hyperbole is fine to use within an argument. It is ridiculous to use Hyperbole as an argument or as grounds for one.

We now have no choice but to hold on to Gooden through his valuable trade period because no one wants to trade a 5 for a 4/5 that's not near as good as the one that they're sending out. Damp can't be traded for the same reason and because the FO wants to hold out for Sammy Superstar. So great, we went from having Chandler/Damp/Gooden at the 5 to just Damp/Gooden and didn't even have the time at the beginning of the season for Kidd to mold to their own capabilities and utilize them properly.

Again, your apocalyptic hyperbole is ridiculous. Secondly, Gooden's ability to play has nothing to do with his trade value. Teams that are looking to acquire his buck-shot style salary are looking for $$$$$ not talent or players at a position.

Besides, even if Chandler gets injured, which is far from as certain as you assume, we get stuck with Dampier/Dirk plus possibly Gooden/Thomas/Singleton. How is that any worse than Damp/Dirk/Bass?!?! Honestly. We already have learned to play a game with a center last year even if that center was mostly 6'7" or completely immobile. Its not like getting a superior player with a decent personality can somehow make this team WORSE if he gets injured. I mean, play out your same scenario if Dirk goes down for the season 25 games in. What if its Kidd or Howard? Of course things are bad if a major rotation player goes down. Still, if its a major rotation player we got for essentially nothing, I dont see how it can make us much worse than we would be if we didn't acquire them.

So please give me a break when I criticize your argument when the entire thing is mired in hyperbole, pessimism and a predicted worst-case-scenario.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by Justin Credible

I'm amazed at two things:

1. People still want Chandler
2. People still want Iverson

Chandler is overrated, overpaid, and comparable to T Mac with his injuries. Iverson is.. Iverson. He'll never be good on a good team, he'll only be the best on a crappy team. When he gets to a semi-good team they become a crappy team with Iverson "carrying" them, all the while people ignoring that he's doing more damage than good. I'm sorry, I know Iverson can score like no other when he's hot, but the dude is beyond overrated in my opinion.

I'm sorry but I see us getting Chandler as more detrimental in the long run than actually productive. Let's say Chandler gets here and is "healthy." Awesome. The Mavs go on a 20-5 run and everything's looking great. Then, as guaranteed, Chandler gets injured. He's out the rest of the season. Great, now the Mavs have to mold themselves to a different look because one of the key pieces is now out and no comparable 5 is available to take his place. We now have no choice but to hold on to Gooden through his valuable trade period because no one wants to trade a 5 for a 4/5 that's not near as good as the one that they're sending out. Damp can't be traded for the same reason and because the FO wants to hold out for Sammy Superstar. So great, we went from having Chandler/Damp/Gooden at the 5 to just Damp/Gooden and didn't even have the time at the beginning of the season for Kidd to mold to their own capabilities and utilize them properly.

My train of thought derailed. Damn FBI files.

It entirely depends on what you have to give up. Get Chandler for garbage and one would be hard pressed to turn it down imo. I'm pretty sure Damp and Gooden can hold down the fort during those regular season games missed. The fact is, Chandler fills a need for this team. The guy on a gimpy leg at 70% will still get you 8/8/2 which is still better than any true center we have right now. If you know of a better center to get at this juncture who could be had for the Buckshot/garbage then tell me? And would you rather just go into the season with JUST Damp and Gooden (which is what it is right now) and your theory come true without the Chandler addition anyway?

I'm sorry for anyone who overrates Chandler (which I haven't done), but underrating him like this is just as ridiculous. Jiminy Christmas....talk about a fire and brimstone opinion.

[Robillion]

Originally Posted by Justin Credible

I'm amazed at two things:

1. People still want Chandler
2. People still want Iverson

Chandler is overrated, overpaid, and comparable to T Mac with his injuries. Iverson is.. Iverson. He'll never be good on a good team, he'll only be the best on a crappy team. When he gets to a semi-good team they become a crappy team with Iverson "carrying" them, all the while people ignoring that he's doing more damage than good. I'm sorry, I know Iverson can score like no other when he's hot, but the dude is beyond overrated in my opinion.

I'm sorry but I see us getting Chandler as more detrimental in the long run than actually productive. Let's say Chandler gets here and is "healthy." Awesome. The Mavs go on a 20-5 run and everything's looking great. Then, as guaranteed, Chandler gets injured. He's out the rest of the season. Great, now the Mavs have to mold themselves to a different look because one of the key pieces is now out and no comparable 5 is available to take his place. We now have no choice but to hold on to Gooden through his valuable trade period because no one wants to trade a 5 for a 4/5 that's not near as good as the one that they're sending out. Damp can't be traded for the same reason and because the FO wants to hold out for Sammy Superstar. So great, we went from having Chandler/Damp/Gooden at the 5 to just Damp/Gooden and didn't even have the time at the beginning of the season for Kidd to mold to their own capabilities and utilize them properly.

My train of thought derailed. Damn FBI files.

Iverson - 20ppg at under 5 mil a year.. and he knows he is not in control anymore in this league. Limit his role and let him know you are on a championship run and only need him 20 minutes a night at certain times. Nuff said.

Chandler - I somewhat agree he is overrated... but what he have now is Gooden/Damp. If we add Chandler then we have Chandler/Good/Damp. MUCH better.. but what you think is that if all of a sudden Chandler is out of the picture Kidd, one of the smartest players in the game, will be totally lost on how to run the team. That is straight up rediculous. One, Kidd know how to play with Damp, he isnt going to forget it. He knows how to play with a Bass like player in Gooden, and if he does not he will learn in training camp. There, in training camp, the team will play multiple lineups especially this year to get new comers to gel. The team wouldnt just forget how to play a style that they have played for.. well their entire existence almost. If we get Chandler for expirings/crap roster pieces, then I am ecstatic.

[SMC0007]

Originally Posted by Justin Credible

I'm amazed at two things:

1. People still want Chandler
2. People still want Iverson

Chandler is overrated, overpaid, and comparable to T Mac with his injuries. Iverson is.. Iverson. He'll never be good on a good team, he'll only be the best on a crappy team. When he gets to a semi-good team they become a crappy team with Iverson "carrying" them, all the while people ignoring that he's doing more damage than good. I'm sorry, I know Iverson can score like no other when he's hot, but the dude is beyond overrated in my opinion.

I'm sorry but I see us getting Chandler as more detrimental in the long run than actually productive. Let's say Chandler gets here and is "healthy." Awesome. The Mavs go on a 20-5 run and everything's looking great. Then, as guaranteed, Chandler gets injured. He's out the rest of the season. Great, now the Mavs have to mold themselves to a different look because one of the key pieces is now out and no comparable 5 is available to take his place. We now have no choice but to hold on to Gooden through his valuable trade period because no one wants to trade a 5 for a 4/5 that's not near as good as the one that they're sending out. Damp can't be traded for the same reason and because the FO wants to hold out for Sammy Superstar. So great, we went from having Chandler/Damp/Gooden at the 5 to just Damp/Gooden and didn't even have the time at the beginning of the season for Kidd to mold to their own capabilities and utilize them properly.

My train of thought derailed. Damn FBI files.

[quietsavant]

Let the BUCKshot countdown BEGIN



But timmay over at dmn says different

http://mavsblog.dallasnews.com/archi...or-mavs-t.html

[Justin Credible]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

truly amazing how you can completely predict the future. 25 games then POW, eh? And its a season-ending injury? Minus the last two seasons, Chandler had 4 straight seasons of missing fewer than 10 games per.

Hyperbole is fine to use within an argument. It is ridiculous to use Hyperbole as an argument or as grounds for one.

You got meh. It was a completely hypothetical situation based off of his injury -ridden past (and play on the court when unmotivated, which seems to be every time he stubs his toe). I should've specified that it was a hypothetical situation, that's my bad.

Again, your apocalyptic hyperbole is ridiculous. Secondly, Gooden's ability to play has nothing to do with his trade value. Teams that are looking to acquire his buck-shot style salary are looking for $$$$$ not talent or players at a position.

Gooden's ability to play becomes a hell of a lot more serious if he's the only option behind Damp.

Let's say, hypothetically, that we get Chandler and Chandler goes down for the rest of the season after 20 games. I'm not wishing it on the guy, but I'm just skeptical of his ability to stay healthy and play motivated basketball.

Anyways, so we now have Damp/Gooden at the 5. Who do you see honestly taking on Gooden's contract savings for a replacement 5 (offensive minded rotation center)? I don't see anyone out there that would be willing to. That's what I was meaning to say when I was implying that his play would be crucial for us in this situation.

Besides, even if Chandler gets injured, which is far from as certain as you assume, we get stuck with Dampier/Dirk plus possibly Gooden/Thomas/Singleton. How is that any worse than Damp/Dirk/Bass?!?! Honestly. We already have learned to play a game with a center last year even if that center was mostly 6'7" or completely immobile. Its not like getting a superior player with a decent personality can somehow make this team WORSE if he gets injured. I mean, play out your same scenario if Dirk goes down for the season 25 games in. What if its Kidd or Howard? Of course things are bad if a major rotation player goes down. Still, if its a major rotation player we got for essentially nothing, I dont see how it can make us much worse than we would be if we didn't acquire them.

So please give me a break when I criticize your argument when the entire thing is mired in hyperbole, pessimism and a predicted worst-case-scenario.

Nah, you're fine. I take no offense at all. I would hope that throughout my short tenure here I would have made it perfectly clear that I love being called out and proven wrong.

That being said, isn't the goal of making a trade like this to improve? How do we improve with an unmotivated injury-ridden 5? I guess it's that in my mind that Chandler, in this fantasy trade, would be directly chosen over Biedrins. I know that Biedrins isn't without injuries, but at the same time when he's on the court he seems to be dedicated to actually playing good ball.

I know that picking up Chandler would, at face value, be a great acquisition for the Mavs.. I just don't see it working out like the awesome fantasy team center pick up that people seem to make it sound like. I mean, I guess it makes me wonder why, if he were that great, the Hornets would've been so desperate to get rid of him. I mean, him and cp3 were a perfect match.. Chris Paul could cut the perimeter, draw defenders, then feed him the ball. At one point it was supposedly going to be Paul/Chandler/West as the Big 3 in New Orleans, and they immediately abandoned that and tried to unload Chandler. Why, if he's as good as the members here make it seem, would they be so desperate to unload Chandler? Then why, if he's as good as the members here make it seem, would the Bobcats be so eager to get rid of him? That would be them intentionally choosing Diop and Nazr over Tyson Chandler. I know that the contracts of Diop and Nazr are more feasible, but that doesn't change the fact that they're both supposedly half the player that Tyson Chandler is and the Bobcats are already (again, supposedly) looking to unload Chandler for a bench PF and random savings.

Am I completely off base with this? Tyson Chandler is supposedly a top 5 center in the west and yet a team in desperate need of a starting center is trying to unload him. This is after he was traded to them by a team that was trying to unload him (and finally succeeded). I don't know, it just seems like everything that the people here say about him are completely disproven by taking a quick look at the last couple of seasons of his career.

Last thing regarding his injuries; Last season he missed 37 games.. Call me crazy but when I see that it makes me nervous about his being a reliable starter on a contending team.

[MavsWiLLHaVeRinGs]

I like Chandler but I would wonder why the hell Charlotte would be moving Chandler, when they just acquired him. You look back to the physical that he failed with OKC and wonder if Charlotte found something too. It makes no sense for them to try to move him already, unless whoever they land i.e. Ellis is someone they want more. But do they really want Diop/Nazr the cover the 5?

[Justin Credible]

Originally Posted by Robillion

Iverson - 20ppg at under 5 mil a year.. and he knows he is not in control anymore in this league. Limit his role and let him know you are on a championship run and only need him 20 minutes a night at certain times. Nuff said.

Last season:

GP---GS---MPG---FG%---3P%---FT%---RPG---APG---SPG---BPG---PPG
AI
54---50---36.5---.416---.286---.786----3.1---4.9----1.6----.1----17.4
Jet
74---11---33.7---.463---.366---.880----2.4---3.4----1.3----.3----19.6

Take in the locker room presence and AI is a step back from Jet.. That's a pretty significant thing. I don't see what the fascination is. Jet was a bench player last season and AI was a starter, and Jet put up more points at a higher fg% (including 3pt fg%) in less minutes.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by MavsWiLLHaVeRinGs

I like Chandler but I would wonder why the hell Charlotte would be moving Chandler, when they just acquired him. You look back to the physical that he failed with OKC and wonder if Charlotte found something too. It makes no sense for them to try to move him already, unless whoever they land i.e. Ellis is someone they want more. But do they really want Diop/Nazr the cover the 5?

Charlotte is looking to sell the franchise - trading Chandler for a young PG they can build around makes a bit of sense (it might also clarify the Okafor/Chandler trade - better to build around someone like Ellis than Okafor...)

[Kidd Karma]

Originally Posted by Robillion

Iverson - 20ppg at under 5 mil a year.. and he knows he is not in control anymore in this league. Limit his role and let him know you are on a championship run and only need him 20 minutes a night at certain times. Nuff said.

Chandler - I somewhat agree he is overrated... but what he have now is Gooden/Damp. If we add Chandler then we have Chandler/Good/Damp. MUCH better.. but what you think is that if all of a sudden Chandler is out of the picture Kidd, one of the smartest players in the game, will be totally lost on how to run the team. That is straight up rediculous. One, Kidd know how to play with Damp, he isnt going to forget it. He knows how to play with a Bass like player in Gooden, and if he does not he will learn in training camp. There, in training camp, the team will play multiple lineups especially this year to get new comers to gel. The team wouldnt just forget how to play a style that they have played for.. well their entire existence almost. If we get Chandler for expirings/crap roster pieces, then I am ecstatic.

Chandler has 2 years left on his deal. It's a risk worth taking, if we're not giving up anything of value personnel wise. I mean, seems brass was perfectly happy going into the season with a Damp-Gooden tag team....giving Carlisle another chip in Chandler to work with, we would at least be 2, even 1 in the west. I would want Chandler in the postseason, regular season wise, I'd use him sparingly, not to the point of how the Spurs used Horry, but if he's 95%, start him, play him 24-30 a night, Damp and Gooden would be nice options off the bench to pick up fouls or additional scoring. We are in the sense...."all in" at this point. Chandler solidifies our backline defense, and I'm sure, Terry and Barea will have an easier time getting him lobs with the extra wing span versus Bass.

[Kidd Karma]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Charlotte is looking to sell the franchise - trading Chandler for a young PG they can build around makes a bit of sense (it might also clarify the Okafor/Chandler trade - better to build around someone like Ellis than Okafor...)

The league has evolved into a guard dominated league and what better way to grab a marketing tool than Ellis.

[SMC0007]

Originally Posted by Justin Credible

Last season:

GP---GS---MPG---FG%---3P%---FT%---RPG---APG---SPG---BPG---PPG
AI
54---50---36.5---.416---.286---.786----3.1---4.9----1.6----.1----17.4
Jet
74---11---33.7---.463---.366---.880----2.4---3.4----1.3----.3----19.6

Take in the locker room presence and AI is a step back from Jet.. That's a pretty significant thing. I don't see what the fascination is. Jet was a bench player last season and AI was a starter, and Jet put up more points at a higher fg% (including 3pt fg%) in less minutes.

I'm not sure there is a fascination but I can say that the intriguing thing and the major difference about the two is that A.I. can get to the rim and finish much better. He is a better passer too. I'm not championing A.I. at all. I care not for him to be here, but just saying we could use that type of penetration on this team. He gets where ever he wants to go pretty much when ever he wants... as opposed to Jet.

[mavErika]

Originally Posted by MavsWiLLHaVeRinGs

I like Chandler but I would wonder why the hell Charlotte would be moving Chandler, when they just acquired him. You look back to the physical that he failed with OKC and wonder if Charlotte found something too. It makes no sense for them to try to move him already, unless whoever they land i.e. Ellis is someone they want more. But do they really want Diop/Nazr the cover the 5?

Exactly, and I don't think we've heard anything about Charlotte wanting to unload Chandler as yet. The only thing pointing in that direction I remember reading is the rumor about them wanting to acquire a PF, possibly for a C.
I think it's much more likely they're shopping Diop or Nazr, as they would have had probably much more bargaining power if they were offering Okafor in the first place. But you never know what GM's are thinking, maybe the longevity of Okafor's contract makes it actually less attractive to most of them.
On a related note, I saw this post from David Lord buried in a ridicoulus thread on DB.com and thought it's pretty insightful and worthwhile of posting it here. I hope DLord does't mind. It's in response to another comment:

"I'm getting sick and tired of hearing media/rumors stuff, whether from Fish or others, about the MBT balking on big contracts..."

I've written about this several times, because I kept running into it being stated by people who are very close to the inner circle. There was an initial shock of learning that there is indeed a limit to what Cuban will spend on upgrading the team. (And as much as we might dislike that idea, it's gotta be noted that he's consistently in the top 2-3 payrolls in the league EVERY year. He's not being miserly.)

But in subsequent conversations, I believe I now know more, and the actual situation is more practical than him having a strict cap on spending more.

As I now understand it, Cuban will spend, but he won't add to payroll (a) for idle additions of random talent, nor (b) by spending way more for an upgrade than its value would be worth. So we see them spending most of the MLE for Gooden - to add to a very thin rotation in the middle - but unwilling to consider spending a similar amount for a talented Sessions - whose role would have been hard to define here with minutes already in short supply between Kidd, JJB, and developing Bobo. Another example might be someone like Dalembert, who perhaps would give them added minutes from a traditional center but if they see him as a backup, they'd only get maybe 10 minutes or less a game and over 2 years they'd be spending more than $25M - plus another $25M for tax. Now if they thought he was going to be playing 25-30 minutes a game, and/or play better than Dampier, I can see them saying yes (think of someone like Biedrins or Camby in this example).

I think they also have some sense of payroll slotting going on, in wanting to maintain a team payroll where the pay is somewhat tiered with the contribution. So Dirk gets paid way more because he's the superstar. Then you have over-MLE money going to the other big minutes players at the core - JHo, JET, Damp, Marion, Kidd. And everyone else is $5M or less. If Cuban is to approve adding a $10M player to the payroll, I think in his mind the play had better be capable of adding the same kind of contribution as those other core players.

"..., especially long ones that extend past '10."

They don't talk about this hardly at all (in part because of a league-imposed gag order), but I think this comes less from being miserly or from trying to save mythical spending room, and more from a real wariness about how Stern might try to punish big spenders in the new CBA. Being stuck with a huge payroll from 2011 and onward might lead to punitive consequences that they don't want to deal with. On this issue, while I'll snipe a bit here and there when they try to PR it, I'm inclined to let them do what they gotta do.

"If big, bad contracts are the only thing standing between the Mavs and a good center, then that consideration needs to step out of the way"

I don't think that's an issue to them at all - as long as it's a GOOD center. However, they aren't going to pay huge money for someone who won't make them better - there are lots of centers that are mediocre centers who get labeled here as "good" or "desirable" just because they're a starting center on another team.

dammit Stern!

http://dallasbasketballdotcom.yuku.c...ry.html?page=2