This Season's Roster Outlook

[mavs777]

Originally Posted by FreshJive

Why would any of them leave after the bad season has already been endured? You would be looking at a stud rookie, healthy Wes and Parsons, and new cap money to spend. Wouldn't the situation look worse to be coming off a 40 win season, with everyone giving it thier all, and not having a draft pick? You don't think that might make Parsons think twice about returning?

The Mavs wouldn't even be able to land second tier free agents coming off such a poor season. The situation would be much worse than coming off about a 45 win season which projections will have us around when we are done spending. And almost all rookies have a negative effect on team, wiggins, Jabari (when healthy) both had bad plus minuses. Look at exum too. You think parsons is going to want to wait for a rookie to develop? If parsons is healthy enough to play and is cleared he should play

[Bryan_Wilson]

Originally Posted by Just211

Thank goodness this forum wasn't here for the Tony Dumas days.... I'd look like a damn fool ��

Haha, I have similar feelings for the Cowboys. If only people knew just how much I was convinced that Brady Quinn was the savior we all needed.....

[EastTxMFFL]

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

Haha, I have similar feelings for the Cowboys. If only people knew just how much I was convinced that Brady Quinn was the savior we all needed.....

TBH a lot of people thought Brady Quinn was a guaranteed lock to become a really good NFL QB. He had everything that successful NFL QBs usually have. Somewhere along the road he didn't quite get the memo though haha.

[hayth.james.g]

Anyone can update on our remaining cap space? Any projections on how we might fill the backup 4/5 spot? Seems to me it's going to make or break us. Dirk NEEDS help minutes wise and we can't afford as much of a drop off now.

*apologize in advance for needing help with numbers. In Central America right now and Internet access is hit or miss.

[bunkmoreland]

I feel like we're pretty much set as backup 4 with Evans, Powell, Villanueva. Not that those are fantastic options, but they are what we will have.
There are still a few backup 5 free agents out there.
I suspect the Mavs are in talks with a few. They may also be trying to see if any teams have a big they would trade for Felton just because they want to get rid of the big's contract due to a recent new signing.

[hayth.james.g]

Originally Posted by bunkmoreland

I feel like we're pretty much set as backup 4 with Evans, Powell, Villanueva. Not that those are fantastic options, but they are what we will have.
There are still a few backup 5 free agents out there.
I suspect the Mavs are in talks with a few. They may also be trying to see if any teams have a big they would trade for Felton just because they want to get rid of the big's contract due to a recent new signing.

I sure hope so. That just won't cut it IMO. Not if we are serious about contending even for an outside shot of pushing.

[Bryan_Wilson]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

Anyone can update on our remaining cap space? Any projections on how we might fill the backup 4/5 spot? Seems to me it's going to make or break us. Dirk NEEDS help minutes wise and we can't afford as much of a drop off now.

*apologize in advance for needing help with numbers. In Central America right now and Internet access is hit or miss.

http://www.spotrac.com/nba/dallas-mavericks/cap/

I guess if I eyeball what is here I'd say if you renounce holds and add in Deron Williams at 5m and factor in draft picks and minimum roster holds its somewhere in the 5-7m ballpark. Purely a guess and I'm sure someone will correct me soon.

[iggymcfly]

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

I think its debatable. KG even prior to winning that title was taking some very mediocre Timberwolves teams to the playoffs year in and out. I don't think Barkley would've been capable of that. KG could also come out there and guard nearly every position on the court. Barkley wasn't doing that. I wouldn't argue KG over Barkley but i'd understand it.

Sort of happy he's going on with a young Timberwolves team. They need his leadership.

KG's easily a Top 10 player of all-time. At his peak, he might have been the best defensive player ever, and he was still putting up numbers really close to Barkley/Dirk/Malone on the offensive end. He doesn't get that much credit because of the terrible teammates he had in Minnesota, but he dominated both ends of the floor year in and year out, and his Minnesota teams were always massively, massively better with him on the floor than they were with him on the bench.

[iggymcfly]

As for the Mavs' outlook next year, I think it's got 8 seed written all over it. Probably a slightly better chance Phoenix pips us for the 8 seed than that we get by Memphis or New Orleans for the 7 seed. 6 seed's our absolute ceiling though, and I think 9th is probably our floor.

[Bryan_Wilson]

Originally Posted by iggymcfly

KG's easily a Top 10 player of all-time.

Top 10?!?!?! Ugh... Idk... Top 10 is rushmore great. He's not top 10 for me.

There is no way IMO he is above-

MJ
KAJ
Wilt
Oscar
Russell
Magic
Bird
James
Hakeem
Shaq
Erving

I mean top of my head thats already 11 and KG is in no way better than those guys, and you say ****easily****

[bunkmoreland]

Originally Posted by iggymcfly

KG's easily a Top 10 player of his generation.

Fixed.

I'd go into more detail, but there's a good thread here:
http://www.dallas-mavs.com/vb/showthread.php?t=37469

[Melonhead]

Originally Posted by iggymcfly

KG's easily a Top 10 player of all-time. At his peak, he might have been the best defensive player ever, and he was still putting up numbers really close to Barkley/Dirk/Malone on the offensive end. He doesn't get that much credit because of the terrible teammates he had in Minnesota, but he dominated both ends of the floor year in and year out, and his Minnesota teams were always massively, massively better with him on the floor than they were with him on the bench.

woah. Never heard ANYONE put him top 10. I say top 20-25.

[rimrocker]

One thing that concerned me last season was our lack of size. Most of our players were on the thin side and short and we didn't have any bruts.

This season will be the opposite as we have good size and bulk at all starting positions which could be key come PO time...sort of like an offensive line that wears down the defense toward the end of games.

Lack of athleticism in our frontcourt is a concern so far this season and why I wouldn't mind adding McGee.

[Murphy3]

I have him 25-32 range. But I count his inability or unwillingness to take over games offensively against him. Realistically, if you can't take over games on either side of the court in the 4th in the playoffs, well, that's a pretty good knock against you.

[mac222b]

Originally Posted by Murphy3

I have him 25-32 range. But I count his inability or unwillingness to take over games offensively against him. Realistically, if you can't take over games on either side of the court in the 4th in the playoffs, well, that's a pretty good knock against you.

I agree with this take exactly.

[mac222b]

Originally Posted by Murphy3

I have him 25-32 range. But I count his inability or unwillingness to take over games offensively against him. Realistically, if you can't take over games on either side of the court in the 4th in the playoffs, well, that's a pretty good knock against you.

Originally Posted by rimrocker

One thing that concerned me last season was our lack of size. Most of our players were on the thin side and short and we didn't have any bruts.

This season will be the opposite as we have good size and bulk at all starting positions which could be key come PO time...sort of like an offensive line that wears down the defense toward the end of games.

Lack of athleticism in our frontcourt is a concern so far this season and why I wouldn't mind adding McGee.

I'm worried about rebounding, as are others around here. Losing aminu really hurts in that regard. I wonder if Josh Smith is actually on the radar. Would think so. At least some upside and athleticism added to front court. Seraphim doesn't do a lot for me

[iggymcfly]

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

Top 10?!?!?! Ugh... Idk... Top 10 is rushmore great. He's not top 10 for me.

There is no way IMO he is above-

MJ
KAJ
Wilt
Oscar
Russell
Magic
Bird
James
Hakeem
Shaq
Erving

I mean top of my head thats already 11 and KG is in no way better than those guys, and you say ****easily****

Russell's such an overrated joke. He's literally just KG with no offensive game. Equally good on defense, miles worse on offense. Bird and Magic are both great offensive players that didn't play defense. Magic was actually probably a negative on defense. For a one-way player to have the kind of impact that KG had on both ends of the floor, they'd have to have peak-Jordan level offensive output. And Dr. J never even put up good numbers after the ABA and NBA combined. He could only handle a watered-down league back when basketball was very much a niche sport. KG crushes them.

Wilt and Oscar are more of an argument as I'd have them above any of those 4. But the thing to remember is that the NBA in the '60s was nothing like the NBA now. A quota system kept teams to 3 black players per team, international players were non-existent, and most of the top American athletes played baseball or football as many NBA teams only averaged 3000 fans per game. Partial domination in that weak of a league just isn't that impressive. So that leaves 6 players on your list. Add in Duncan for 7 and he's still well within the top 10.

[Murphy3]

Iggymcfly, you're delusional.

[Five-ofan]

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

Top 10?!?!?! Ugh... Idk... Top 10 is rushmore great. He's not top 10 for me.

There is no way IMO he is above-

MJ
KAJ
Wilt
Oscar
Russell
Magic
Bird
James
Hakeem
Shaq
Erving

I mean top of my head thats already 11 and KG is in no way better than those guys, and you say ****easily****

Erving doesn't belong on that list anymore than kg. That being said Kobe and Duncan are unequivocally better than garnett. I also think it's difficult to make an argument that kg is better than pippen. Pippen was a better defender than kg(Minnesota kg is massively overrated as a defender still good but nowhere near as great as he was in Boston) when kg was actually anything resembling an all time level player and every bit as good offensively if not better.

Kg avged over 23 ppg exactly once per game in his entire career and over 22 pp36 exactly once. Kg played massive minutes during his twolves career and while that's impressive it's also why he was able to put up numbers there but never able to put up all that impressive numbers with Boston. Compare that 1 above 22 pp36 season with dirk who has 11 such seasons. And the crappiness of kg teammates in minny has always been overrated. They were slightly inferior but comparable to the post Nash teammates dirk had from 05-10 and dirk damn sure didn't miss the playoffs twice.

The other thing I find funny is that kg is a little like Barry bonds IMO in that he had 2 separate phases to his career and people tend to blend the two and pretend like he was both things at the same time. For bonds people act like he was the greatest hitter ever he was after the steroid usage and the all world all around player he was at the beginning-middle of his career when the truth is while he was absolutely amazing as an all around player obviously including hitting, he had gotten so big after the roids that he really couldn't run well enough to be an asset in the of anymore and was just average on the bases so you can have the all around guy or the top 3 all time hitter but he was never both at the same time. Kg on the other hand was an all around stat guy in minny who put up some crazy impressive numbers but none that really translated to winning and who honestly didn't make that much of a defensive impact relative to his rep, and he was the defensive qb in Boston who no longer put up crazy individual numbers(his best per 36 numbers in Boston were 20.7/10.1/3.8) but who had a massive impact defensively and won. He was never both the all time defender, and crazy stats guy at the same time.

[spreedom]

If your argument is that Bill Russell, he of 11 rings in 13 seasons, is overrated... I don't have anything to say to you.

[hayth.james.g]

In other Mavs off season news

[Bryan_Wilson]

Originally Posted by iggymcfly

Bird and Magic are both great offensive players that didn't play defense.

I mean... Bird wasn't the greatest 1 on 1 lockdown guy but to say he played no defense and was a one way player?? Absolutely no way. I'm not sure I've seen many players with his level of anticipation and BBIQ, he was a tremendous team defender and help defender.

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

Erving doesn't belong on that list anymore than kg.

I suppose I am partial to Erving as he is one of my favorites, before my time, but nonetheless one of my favorites as a basketball fan. I'm not sure if he would be in my top 10 as I've never sat down to actually list one. I was merely naming 10 names I would have for sure placed above Garnett. I don't really list cross generational players in a top 10-150 type list, I list by position. And for KG to be top 10 for me he would need to be top 2 PF all time and he isn't in my book. I agree with everything else you posted though.

[Bryan_Wilson]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

In other Mavs off season news

Oh right hahaha, a little off topic eh?

Apologies.

[Murphy3]

It is Mavs news because Dirk is obviously ahead of KG.

[howdoesmydirktaste]

Originally Posted by iggymcfly

Russell's such an overrated joke. He's literally just KG with no offensive game. Equally good on defense, miles worse on offense. Bird and Magic are both great offensive players that didn't play defense. Magic was actually probably a negative on defense. For a one-way player to have the kind of impact that KG had on both ends of the floor, they'd have to have peak-Jordan level offensive output. And Dr. J never even put up good numbers after the ABA and NBA combined. He could only handle a watered-down league back when basketball was very much a niche sport. KG crushes them.

Wilt and Oscar are more of an argument as I'd have them above any of those 4. But the thing to remember is that the NBA in the '60s was nothing like the NBA now. A quota system kept teams to 3 black players per team, international players were non-existent, and most of the top American athletes played baseball or football as many NBA teams only averaged 3000 fans per game. Partial domination in that weak of a league just isn't that impressive. So that leaves 6 players on your list. Add in Duncan for 7 and he's still well within the top 10.

Dude. Just stop. I agree that he's in the top 10 of power forwards all time. I'd even put him in the top 5 behind Duncan, Barkley, Malone and Dirk. Yes, he plays better D than Dirk, but he didn't carry a team on his back to a championship like Dirk did. He was part of a big three. Yes, I'm a biased Mavs fan, but I don't care. It's my opinion. I put him at #5 for power forwards.

[BigDog63]

Originally Posted by AO41

I think Zaza was a great pick up and can probably give you 10 and 10 with increased minutes plus good D and rebounding.

Zaza was a desperation move, because they needed SOMEBODY who could play center. That said, he wasn't a bad pickup. He can be a serviceable center. Giving the Mavs....one.

Idk I think if Williams is healthy and recommits we could win 50 + and have even more cap space next summer with Harris gone and Johnson/ Zaza off the books.

If Williams is healthy? What about Parsons and Matthews? The Mavs have long term max contract money tied up in two guys who may never be the players they were signed to be. I'd be a bit more concerned about THAT than I would about Williams health.

[iggymcfly]

Originally Posted by spreedom

If your argument is that Bill Russell, he of 11 rings in 13 seasons, is overrated... I don't have anything to say to you.

Winning rings in the '60s is much less impressive than making the conference finals nowadays. It was an 8 team league back when basketball was still a niche sport in the US, and the system was rigged so that the Celtics got "territorial rights" to all the big stars. Bart Starr won 5 NFL titles in 7 years. Does that make him better than Peyton Manning? No, it means he was playing in a primitive league that wasn't very competitive.

I mean Bill Russell was facing 6'8" white centers game in, game out that were making like $10K a year and had to work normal jobs in the offseason to support themselves and he still scored 15 PPG on 44% from the field and 56% from the line. You really think he'd be an elite player in today's NBA?

In the 1964 Olympics, Bob Hayes tied the world record in the 100 meters by running 10.06 seconds. In the 2012 Olympics, that wouldn't even have been good enough to qualify for the final. And that's just due to natural advances in a sport that's equally as popular today as it was in the 60s. Basketball has gone from a niche entertainment that mostly employed white Americans to sell a few thousand tickets to a global sport that finds great athletes in every nook and cranny all across the world. The advances there will be much greater. So even if Russell was the best player in the '60s by a mile, the odds are he'd have a hard time competing with the best today. But he wasn't even that! He was just the defensive anchor on a great team that was capable of covering his weaknesses. Put him in the modern NBA and he's more Tyson Chandler than Kevin Garnett.

[Five-ofan]

Originally Posted by iggymcfly

Winning rings in the '60s is much less impressive than making the conference finals nowadays. It was an 8 team league back when basketball was still a niche sport in the US, and the system was rigged so that the Celtics got "territorial rights" to all the big stars. Bart Starr won 5 NFL titles in 7 years. Does that make him better than Peyton Manning? No, it means he was playing in a primitive league that wasn't very competitive.

I mean Bill Russell was facing 6'8" white centers game in, game out that were making like $10K a year and had to work normal jobs in the offseason to support themselves and he still scored 15 PPG on 44% from the field and 56% from the line. You really think he'd be an elite player in today's NBA?

In the 1964 Olympics, Bob Hayes tied the world record in the 100 meters by running 10.06 seconds. In the 2012 Olympics, that wouldn't even have been good enough to qualify for the final. And that's just due to natural advances in a sport that's equally as popular today as it was in the 60s. Basketball has gone from a niche entertainment that mostly employed white Americans to sell a few thousand tickets to a global sport that finds great athletes in every nook and cranny all across the world. The advances there will be much greater. So even if Russell was the best player in the '60s by a mile, the odds are he'd have a hard time competing with the best today. But he wasn't even that! He was just the defensive anchor on a great team that was capable of covering his weaknesses. Put him in the modern NBA and he's more Tyson Chandler than Kevin Garnett.

Yes and no. Yes athletes have gotten better since the 60s but that's generally not how all time greats are measured. They are generally measured by how they dominated their own era.

Also while you pointed out the fact that it was an 8 team league as a negative for Russell, remember that that means in a league with wilt, Nate Thurmond, bob Pettit and Zelmo Beaty he was playing one of those at least half the time whereas while kg played in the golden age of pfs, he was still really only going up against a good pf about half the time.

Also I'm curious how well you understand Garnett's game. Russell was the archetype for the player that kg was in Boston. Solid but not elite scorer who controlled the game defensively while using his superb passing for a big to set others up(Russell is one of the best passing bigs ever). You talk about kg like he was a great scorer when he just... Wasn't. And that's what puts him behind all of the guys previously mentioned and someone like dirk. If you ask me to make an all time team I actually need to play together kg is very likely my starting pf because of his versatility and ability to blend in to just about any system. But as a building block for his own team? Nope because the single most important thing for a go to guy IMO is the ability for the last 5 or so possessions in the game for me to know having you on the court means we are getting a good look and kg was never that guy. With dirk you can always get the one footed fade off. And he might very well miss it, but it's a look I can live with and it's a shot I love if it's the floor for my offensive possession.

[quietsavant]

This thread right now

[Murphy3]

Plus, Kg didn't even want the ball down the stretch. It's hard to rank a guy too highly when he was a vagina in the last few minutes of close games.

[DGM]

Originally Posted by spreedom

If your argument is that Bill Russell, he of 11 rings in 13 seasons, is overrated... I don't have anything to say to you.

Agreed

[Murphy3]

Well, actually when you have fewer NBA teams, it does become a little less impressive although it is still amazing.

[Bryan_Wilson]

I was looking at some synergy catch and shoot/drive stats

Out:
(as a mav)Nelson- Frequency: 33.7% Percentile: 53.6% (Average)
(as a mav)Rondo- Frequency: 14.7% Percentile: 34.6% ()
Ellis- Frequency: 14% Percentile: 40.9% (below average)
Aminu- Frequency: 30.5% Percentile: 30.9% ()
(as a mav)Crowder- Frequency: 37.8% Percentile: 56% (Average)

In:
Barea- Frequency: 18.8% Percentile: 84% ()
Harris- Frequency: 28.7% Percentile: 86.7% ()
Parsons- Frequency: 35.2% Percentile: 83.4% ()
Dirk- Frequency: 20.7% Percentile: 70% ()
Jefferson- Frequency: 42.2% Percentile: 76.6% ()
Villanueva- Frequency: 36.9% Percentile: 90.8% ()
(Portland)Matthews- Frequency: 30.3% Percentile 90.4% ()
(Brooklyn)Williams- Frequency 15.2% Percentile 81.2% ()

It's easy to see why Cuban made the comment of wanting to find a Big who can roll and finish above the rim. The spacing this team *should* have would really open up things inside with a good roll man... Wright would have been so perfect off the bench for this team.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

I was looking at some synergy catch and shoot/drive stats

Out:
(as a mav)Nelson- Frequency: 33.7% Percentile: 53.6% (Average)
(as a mav)Rondo- Frequency: 14.7% Percentile: 34.6% ()
Ellis- Frequency: 14% Percentile: 40.9% (below average)
Aminu- Frequency: 30.5% Percentile: 30.9% ()
(as a mav)Crowder- Frequency: 37.8% Percentile: 56% (Average)

In:
Barea- Frequency: 18.8% Percentile: 84% ()
Harris- Frequency: 28.7% Percentile: 86.7% ()
Parsons- Frequency: 35.2% Percentile: 83.4% ()
Dirk- Frequency: 20.7% Percentile: 70% ()
Jefferson- Frequency: 42.2% Percentile: 76.6% ()
Villanueva- Frequency: 36.9% Percentile: 90.8% ()
(Portland)Matthews- Frequency: 30.3% Percentile 90.4% ()
(Brooklyn)Williams- Frequency 15.2% Percentile 81.2% ()

It's easy to see why Cuban made the comment of wanting to find a Big who can roll and finish above the rim. The spacing this team *should* have would really open up things inside with a good roll man... Wright would have been so perfect off the bench for this team.

So far it looks like we're going to have a very good offensive team, and a very, very bad defensive team. Like last year, but more so.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Also, this is my reaction to the idea of KG being top 10 all-time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctr9ZfeyvXg

[bunkmoreland]

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

Yes and no. Yes athletes have gotten better since the 60s but that's generally not how all time greats are measured. They are generally measured by how they dominated their own era.

This is an important point. It points to the limitations of being able to compare players 30, 40, 50 years apart on the same scale. Times change and the league changes. It may very well be true that dominant players from the 60s couldn't keep up with the greats of today's league. But as you say, most people rank players all time based on their performance against the competition they faced.

[Thespiralgoeson]

KG isn't even top 5 of the modern era, let alone top 10 all time. Kobe, Shaq, Duncan, and Lebron are all equivocally, without question better than KG. After that Dirk, Wade, and Durant are all arguably better than KG (and I believe they are.) You could even throw Nash on that list too.

[hayth.james.g]

Garnett has zero to do with this thread. Go make a thread where you guys talk in circles about who the top 25 players ever are.

[Murphy3]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

Garnett has zero to do with this thread. Go make a thread where you guys talk in circles about who the top 25 players ever are.

Threads evolve.. Get over it.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by hayth.james.g

Garnett has zero to do with this thread. Go make a thread where you guys talk in circles about who the top 25 players ever are.

No.