damp traded for tyson chandler - Page 4 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

jthig32 · 07-13-2010, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

I must say, as one of the people most excited about the DUST chip and how much it could immediately improve our Mavs - this is, well, incredibly underwhelming. Who right about now wouldn't lick Joe Johnson's nutsack if it would guarantee you his services for the DUST chip? And that is a guy that was low on most people's wish list. That is how much further down the wish list Tyson friggin Chandler is in my opinion.

Maybe this turns into something rather positive near the deadline, but then you still have the whole "short time to mesh" situation that can be difficult to deal with. You also only have Haywood if you do then send out Chandler, unless you are actually depending on one of those two projects to play serious minutes for a Championship-hopeful team.

Harrington doesn't do a ton for me either and his percentages aren't anything to write home about, but that would be a nice pickup for the MLE (I thought he would get more than that - and I thought he would want to start). I don't get the roster makeup at this point. It seems like another trade is mandatory. Check the 1s/2s/3s:

Kidd
JJB
Jet
Booby
Butler
Jones
Marion
Stevenson
Harrington

6 of those guys likely WANT to start (5 if you want to take Jet off the list). Where the hell do you fit everyone's minutes in? I just don't get it I guess. Not without another trade. Sure, great flexibility, but at the expense of adding chaos to the team. Maybe we trade like 4 of those guys for one of the 3 in Miami so they actually have a team and we have a stud, but considering that aint a happenin - yeah, sign me up for not thrilled.

I think my reaction to the trade is coming from the stand point of having already accepted the fact that we weren't getting anything of true impact with Damp this summer. Things just didn't work in the Mavs' favor, as Dirno pointed out earlier.

Having already re-adjusted my expectations, I probably have a bit of a different outlook on this than you do.

Let's also not forget what the Mavs turned into Haywood and Butler last deadline. Just saying...it's good to keep your options open.

And dumping that dead salary has to be huge for Cubes and his willingess to take on more bad contracts.

I absolutely agree with your take on the roster. It's a bit of a mess right now and even more confusing if they sign Harrington.

EricaLubarsky · 07-13-2010, 03:16 PM

I cant see how anyone would hate this unless they really thought we could get CP3 and had some inside scoop that it was the Mavs doing that it didnt happen.

We traded
Dust
Filler

for
trade exception (flexibility)
a nice backup center
a whopping expiring (flexibility)
2 roster spots
and we saved money

Big Boy Laroux · 07-13-2010, 03:17 PM

exactly, Chandler isn't a savior. But if we were going to wait to trade damp mid-season, we can at least get a more athletic guy (chandler) in the meantime, with an expiring contract to trade at mid-season.

Windmill360 · 07-13-2010, 03:18 PM

now let's watch and see what the bobcats can do with DUST.

LonghornDub · 07-13-2010, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

I cant see how anyone would hate this unless they really thought we could get CP3 and had some inside scoop that it was the Mavs doing that it didnt happen.

We traded
Dust
Filler

for
trade exception (flexibility)
a nice backup center
a whopping expiring (flexibility)
2 roster spots
and we saved money

When you talk about all the flexibility, it's really a strong move. Again, just to clarify, my comment was only directed at the first few responses who were seemingly just excited about getting Chandler.

Maybe he'll prove me wrong, but I just don't think much of the guy's skills. He is not as good of a big man as Drew Gooden, IMO.

chumdawg · 07-13-2010, 03:20 PM

I get the sense that the moves of late could be precursor to a huge move somewhere down the road. Like, CP3 huge.

Big Boy Laroux · 07-13-2010, 03:26 PM

also, finding someone to take carroll off our hands is pretty damn huge.

Kidd Karma · 07-13-2010, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

also, finding someone to take carroll off our hands is pretty damn huge.

DUST huge.

Male30Dan · 07-13-2010, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

I think my reaction to the trade is coming from the stand point of having already accepted the fact that we weren't getting anything of true impact with Damp this summer. Things just didn't work in the Mavs' favor, as Dirno pointed out earlier.

Having already re-adjusted my expectations, I probably have a bit of a different outlook on this than you do.

Let's also not forget what the Mavs turned into Haywood and Butler last deadline. Just saying...it's good to keep your options open.

And dumping that dead salary has to be huge for Cubes and his willingess to take on more bad contracts.

I absolutely agree with your take on the roster. It's a bit of a mess right now and even more confusing if they sign Harrington.

Even if you had re-adjusted your expectations, considering what we hoped to get (and even decided we would "settle" for) this can't be anything other than a very deep sigh.

If you believe he will be shipped with other guys at the deadline, fine - that is a legitimate possibility (as you pointed out, just like we did last deadline) but that is an unknown at this point.

Now, if we trade expirings/trade exception/2 of the SG/SF guys on the roster for an Iggy/Brand, well then the roster starts to make more sense. Without a trade like that, I, again, just don't get what we are doing here.

That trade above would put us here:

Kidd/Roddy/JJB
Iggy/Roddy/Jones
Marion/Harrington
Dirk/Harrington/Brand
Haywood/Chandler/Projects

Something like that gets Roddy all minutes available when one of Kidd/Iggy sit and lets Marion continue to defend the best 2/3 while bringing instant offense off the bench with Al. You have a good backup for Dirk also with Harrington/Brand and you still have Chandler to trade at the deadline for the right piece.

I am not saying we are now looking at that trade, but it would definitely make us a more complete team (albeit expensive) than we are currently constructed.

Underdog · 07-13-2010, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowitzki4President

And once again we didn't address our issue at the 2. I think the only reason Cuban didn't do Iggy/Brand for Damp/(Terry or garbage) was because he didn't want to take on Brand's contract. Since when did Cuban become "that guy"? I barely even wanna watch the nba now.

When did Cuban become "that guy"?

I dunno, maybe after he gave Diop the full MLE?

I'd rather see him make smart moves than ballsy bank-breaking moves that put us in the hole that we're finally crawling out of...

Jon Avalon · 07-13-2010, 03:34 PM

Donnie on coop and nate (103.3FM ESPN) talking about the deal etc.

http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/rad...age=listenlive

tcat075 · 07-13-2010, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

also, finding someone to take carroll off our hands is pretty damn huge.

Ironically, the same team we got him from.

Big Boy Laroux · 07-13-2010, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

I'd rather see him make smart moves than ballsy bank-breaking moves that put us in the hole that we're finally crawling out of...

A-FREAKING-MEN. (See: Damp's contract (which we love in this fleeting moment, but HATED for years))

41mvp · 07-13-2010, 03:38 PM

Well done Donnie Nelson
Tyson,Alexis it's great day for Mavericks welcome to Dallas!!!

jthig32 · 07-13-2010, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

A-FREAKING-MEN. (See: Damp's contract (which we love in this fleeting moment, but HATED for years))

*sigh*

You're killing me BBL. Do you hate Haywood's contract too?

jthig32 · 07-13-2010, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

When you talk about all the flexibility, it's really a strong move. Again, just to clarify, my comment was only directed at the first few responses who were seemingly just excited about getting Chandler.

Maybe he'll prove me wrong, but I just don't think much of the guy's skills. He is not as good of a big man as Drew Gooden, IMO.

For this team??? That's crazy talk.

And I mean that in the nicest way possible, Dub. You know that.

Big Boy Laroux · 07-13-2010, 03:40 PM

6 years, 55 is more palatable than 7 years, 73, when EVERYONE on the planet knew damp was coming off a contract year.

Big Boy Laroux · 07-13-2010, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

*sigh*

You're killing me BBL. Do you hate Haywood's contract too?

also, how am i killing you? i thought we were agreeing...

CadBane · 07-13-2010, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

People are actually happy about this? Tyson Chandler blows.

Yes Sir. Economics aside, a lotttt of people don't seem to realize how much Chandler sucks. I've seen a lot of him the past two years. If possible, he's a worse FINISHER than Damp. He's also a baby, and not a great rebounder anymore. Still pretty solid defensively.

Big Boy Laroux · 07-13-2010, 03:42 PM

Worse defender than damp but solid defensively?

tcat075 · 07-13-2010, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SMC0007

I wouldn't say Mahinmi is a defensive minded center, at least not yet.

I disagree, I think Mahinmi is more solid defensively while Ajinca needs some improvement. I think its safe to say they both need to develop defensively, but Mahinmi seems a little more solid, both a shot blocker and a solid one on one defender, while I read that while Ajinca can block some shots, he can struggle defending in the post.

CadBane · 07-13-2010, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

Worse defender than damp but solid defensively?

It's a riddle.

jthig32 · 07-13-2010, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

6 years, 55 is more palatable than 7 years, 73, when EVERYONE on the planet knew damp was coming off a contract year.

Damp's contract was 6/60 for all intents and purposes.

Just saying..I have hard time understanding how it was horrible when Damp was younger and had a more proven track record than Haywood at the time.

And yes, other than that we're agreeing. Just confused by the difference in perspectives of the two contracts in question.

Male30Dan · 07-13-2010, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CadBane

Yes Sir. Economics aside, a lotttt of people don't seem to realize how much Chandler sucks. I've seen a lot of him the past two years. If possible, he's a worse defender than Damp. He's also a baby, and not a great rebounder anymore. Still pretty solid defensively.

endtroducing MASKED · 07-13-2010, 03:50 PM

Well, we're about to sign Al Harrington.

grndmstr_c · 07-13-2010, 03:54 PM

Man, stuff got crazy around here the last day and a half.

Not a move to get excited about, but it ensures that the Mavs won't find themselves in a situation later in the summer where they have no choice but to waive Damp themselves, gives them a guy who should be more than adequate as a backup center in the short term and who comes with a large expiring deal to use at the trade deadline if an opportunity arises, and clears away some long-term contracts owed to non-rotation types. I can deal with that.

The Harrington rumors are interesting. He's certainly MLE-worthy in my book. The fit may seem questionable with Caron and Marion already here, but to be honest I think at least one of them is probably going to get traded before the trade deadline gets here, and signing Harrington would put the Mavs in a position to still have a good stock of talent at forward in that case.

mac222b · 07-13-2010, 03:55 PM

i understand that the "Chandler Chip" is supposed to provide us w/ flexibility at the trade deadline. but wouldn't that leave us lacking a proven back-up Center? (as someone above pointed out)
it's nice having 2 young guys to develop. but chances are neither will be ready for a playoff series.

tcat075 · 07-13-2010, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FINtastic

I absolutely disagree. It's quite clearly b. EL is simply off her rocker.

Its very debatable, and truthfully, the answer probably lies somewhere in the middle. Maybe its AB, or some sort of fraction. a/b (a over b)? Maybe its actually "aba". Maybe we'll never know...

tcat075 · 07-13-2010, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Agreed (and eagerly awaiting...)

mac222b · 07-13-2010, 04:00 PM

and Harrington is a decent pick-up. we can definitely use his scoring. but he's played for the Warriors and the Knicks his last two stops, places where volume chucking is encouraged. all the people who hated on Stack for poor shot selection are gonna just love Al Harrington.

LonghornDub · 07-13-2010, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

For this team??? That's crazy talk.

And I mean that in the nicest way possible, Dub. You know that.

Yes, for this team. I don't even really think it's that close, really. And I was a big, big Gooden basher when he first showed up here.

Not that Gooden is even an option, obviously, I'm just mentioning my frame of reference for rating Chandler.

Big Boy Laroux · 07-13-2010, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Damp's contract was 6/60 for all intents and purposes.

Just saying..I have hard time understanding how it was horrible when Damp was younger and had a more proven track record than Haywood at the time.

And yes, other than that we're agreeing. Just confused by the difference in perspectives of the two contracts in question.

yes, that is why i said we love it now. We didn't know then that year 7 wouldn't happen. When the deal happened, NO ONE was praising it as a good deal. Everyone said we overpaid.

with Haywood, i don't love the deal either. I didn't say that the damp deal was bad and the haywood deal was good. I haven't said that anywhere on this board. I said amen to cuban NOT taking on another huge contract in this trade specifically, and used his previous FA signing as an example of overspending while bringing in players. Mavs used to be known as the dumping ground for huge contracts, and I'd prefer we NOT be that.

i would have preferred 5 years for Haywood. But we needed to keep him or he would have bolted. We kept our own guy. We knew what we had. With Damp, we outbid other teams (don't remember other teams in the running) and overpaid, based on one good season (a 12-12 with GS). to me, there's a little more of a pass for spending money to keep a known commodity (that fans like) than overspending to bring in an unknown (although it was known that damp wouldn't live up to his previous year

).

Now, Haywood can just as easily tank and not produce like last year. it was a contract year and all.

CadBane · 07-13-2010, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

Do not read edit.

BGMaverick9 · 07-13-2010, 04:06 PM

Harrington definite makes the roster even more interesting if he comes on board...I really wonder how they would balance the rotation. You can go different ways, depending on if Roddy starts at SG or not...

LonghornDub · 07-13-2010, 04:12 PM

Harrington is most useful in a Nellie or D'Antoni style offense. Wonder how he would fit in a more traditional system like ours.

BGMaverick9 · 07-13-2010, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Harrington is most useful in a Nellie or D'Antoni style offense. Wonder how he would fit in a more traditional system like ours.

If he can still provide scoring and play "in control" then it's solid for the bench. I really don't know how his defensive abilities are...if he played for nellie and D'Antoni, that tells me something haha.

jthig32 · 07-13-2010, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BGMaverick9

If he can still provide scoring and play "in control" then it's solid for the bench. I really don't know how his defensive abilities are...if he played for nellie and D'Antoni, that tells me something haha.

I've always seen him as a pretty crappy defender.

grndmstr_c · 07-13-2010, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Harrington is most useful in a Nellie or D'Antoni style offense. Wonder how he would fit in a more traditional system like ours.

Carlisle has coached him before...

Completely unrelated factoid: by my count Dallas is now sitting on over 34 million in expiring contracts (if you include the non-guaranteed portion of the last year of JET's deal).

Nowitzki4President · 07-13-2010, 04:16 PM

If we can sign someone like Barnes at the backup 3, or maybe even starting 3. We can still move Caron/JJB/DeShawn for Iggy something like that

CadBane · 07-13-2010, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

I've always seen him as a pretty crappy defender.

You have seen correctly. He is an awful defender and doesn't care about defense. Like I said, he's also a notorious ballhog and ego case. That said, I'd take him because, quite frankly, our bench needs a guy that can and will score. Roddy, JJB, Terry, DeShawn, Ian, AA, Chandler. That bench has absolutely NO scoring from a 3, 4, or 5. So he could be beneficial.