Marquis traded for Austin Croshere - Page 7 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

madape · 07-06-2006, 08:11 AM

Finally, the legacy of the Maverick #44 Jersey has been passed to someone worthy to carry it on his back. The days of shadow have surrendered to a new dawn! The hero has embraced his destiny to carry on the artifact's legacy and claim the championship that eluded those who wore it in days long past. Behold! The blood stained #44 will be drenched once more. The hero's foes will cower at word of its ressurection and tremble at the knowledge of the inevitablilty of their gruesome death.

Dallas Maverick · 07-06-2006, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vjz

...well put. I do not like this trade at all...I hope they have something else in the works...Marquis was quick as lighting to the hole, and never got the minutes he should have. Don't know about this Austin guy though...

It seems they were trying to dump Marquis' contract more than him...

Dallas Maverick · 07-06-2006, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nashtymavsfan13

Biggest question: Will this team be able to beat Phoenix with Amare next year?

I have no doubt that we can beat the Spurs, but what about the Suns with Amare?

If Amare is healthy, the whole NBA can probably forget about it...they will be extremely tough...

Locked_Up_Tonight · 07-06-2006, 08:24 AM

Quote:

The blood stained #44 will be drenched once more.

Let's just hope Walt Williams doesn't take a swing at Croshere.

DNNF · 07-06-2006, 08:24 AM

Damn, it's sad to see Marquis go. I really do love his game, but Avery and him doesn't see eye to eye. If he's not playing then he should go elsewhere to get his playing time. I have no doubt that he can average 15 pts/game next season for indiana. AC is definitely an upgrade over kVH but not much. Definitely a salary move.

ilMavvento · 07-06-2006, 08:50 AM

This trade gives me a sinking feeling...

slowmo · 07-06-2006, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dallas Maverick

If Amare is healthy, the whole NBA can probably forget about it...they will be extremely tough...

Speaking of paying, this trade was done so it gives Cubes more room to pay out the huge fines he will have next year when he berates the refs again when we play miami and the suns. It will be a tight race to see who gets more free throw ops against the mav's, amare or Dwayne (don't even think about coming close to me or I will fall down) Wade. Matter of fact we should start a survey to see who will be the top freethrow shooter against the mav's next year! I vote for Amare since we will play him more often in the regular season.

lenard_hester · 07-06-2006, 09:46 AM

Man, I think we got took. If we had only held out for a little while longer I think we could have gotten them to throw in some upper-level season tickets with the deal, and a Reggie throwback jersey....we got raked over the coals.

Nash13 · 07-06-2006, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aexchange

wade is also a +++ rebounder for the 2 guard, a fact you conveniently ignore here. i don't give a flying crap if they want to put a 5'11" guard out there if he grabs 5 rebounds a game. but the fact remains that we have all subpar rebounders at the 2 spot right now.

The guy average a little over 5.5rpg in the regular season in 39mpg, which is nothing to throw a parade over. He had more success in the finals on the boards b/c when both teams played zone, nobody could box him out.

DevinHarriswillstart · 07-06-2006, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by #1MavsFan

Ager, Daniels, and another FA would have been even better. Also the Pacers are converting to a run and gun team next season so I doubt they would have traded AC if he could be of any use to them. Also Marquis might start for them now, either at the 1 or 2. Pacers fans are saying the pacers decided to get Marquis instead of chasing Bonzi due to his age and the fact he doesn't have the extra baggage.

How do you know that the Pacers are turning run and gun next year? I've never seen Carlysle coach that type of basketball ever. We also traded small for big which is also a plus. Versatile bigs are hard to come by where as versatile swing men seem to be a dime a dozen. I really believe thats why players like Howard and Ager fall in the draft because of the plethora of shooting guards to choose from. I always backed up Quis but he can be replaced farely easily for what his role was, and we save cap room doing it too.

aexchange · 07-06-2006, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nash13

The guy average a little over 5.5rpg in the regular season in 39mpg, which is nothing to throw a parade over. He had more success in the finals on the boards b/c when both teams played zone, nobody could box him out.

since when is a 2 guard averaging over 5.5 rpg nothing to throw a parade over? if we play terry and harris at the 1 and 2 spots, wade averages more than both of them combined.

madape · 07-06-2006, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

How do you know that the Pacers are turning run and gun next year? I've never seen Carlysle coach that type of basketball ever. We also traded small for big which is also a plus. Versatile bigs are hard to come by where as versatile swing men seem to be a dime a dozen. I really believe thats why players like Howard and Ager fall in the draft because of the plethora of shooting guards to choose from. I always backed up Quis but he can be replaced farely easily for what his role was, and we save cap room doing it too.

You know, I was thinking about this a little bit this morning. I really beleive Carlysle will be gone by the end of the season, if not before. What better coach to take over than our old friend Don Nelson? He's developed a repulation for turning bad situations around, and Indiana is most definitely a bad situation. He's a midwest guy. He has a following there. I think he'd be a good fit.

Dirkenstien · 07-06-2006, 11:35 AM

The trade hurts because it's tough to let go of a kid who you felt was so close to performing as he should.

For Marquise fans, it's watching time and effort walk out the door; it's deciding to stop playing the slots after a hundred tries when one more pull would have won the jack-pot; it's working hard every day in hopes of finally landing that promotion only to see someone else get it; it's stopping short at purchasing six lottery tickets when the seventh would have been a million-dollar winner.

But just because it hurts doesn't mean it's not a move in the right direction.

I've been sitting back and reading comments while playing a mental tug-of-war match in trying to decide whether the deal is a smart and logical business move or another Nash experience waiting to happen.

After battling over each side of the argument I have come to the conclusion that even though there is a possibility this deal could come back to haunt us, it is the right deal to have made.

In letting KVH go we save a lot of money and by bringing in Croshere we acquire an expiring contract that could prove to be very beneficial next off-season. Especially when considering that Stackhouse is also coming off of the books at year's end. Now I am no financial specialist when it comes to breaking down salary-cap calculations, but this would appear to bring us down in cap-room substantially. More importantly, this would bring another team's cap down substantially which may be an enticing package to a team looking to shave off some money at the expense of sending away talent.

Nonetheless, by making this move we have accomplished two very important tasks:
1) Keeping ourselves in a good situation by shedding some money and landing a better back-up for Dirk; and
2) Placing ourselves in a better situation to make a significant move in the future.

Considering next year's deep draft and decent FA pool, we should have plenty of opportunities to do just that.

GP · 07-06-2006, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by madape

You know, I was thinking about this a little bit this morning. I really beleive Carlysle will be gone by the end of the season, if not before. What better coach to take over than our old friend Don Nelson? He's developed a repulation for turning bad situations around, and Indiana is most definitely a bad situation. He's a midwest guy. He has a following there. I think he'd be a good fit.

I always thought that if Nelson takes another coaching gig the first move he makes is to trade for Marquis.

ballin_boi · 07-06-2006, 11:43 AM

In Cuban we trust.

But damn... I just really really hate Cro. Overrated KVH+.

Plus we lose a really good player in Quise. I can only really hope that this is a set up for a bigger trade that would land us someone good.

mavsjunkie · 07-06-2006, 02:09 PM

Log jam at the 2 - can't dribble that well - defense is good (not great) - way over paid - when you clog up the lane, his game is finished - can't shoot the 3 -

Nice kid, no room for him. Croshere is a nobody and will give us just a tad more than KVH which is not much, but we save money to do other things. Don't grade the offseason until we're done completely.

mavsjunkie · 07-06-2006, 02:15 PM

Let me add this... We don't need 12 man bench. We need 8 really good players, and the rest are fill in guys. You can't have Quis coming off the bench as your 9th or 10th guy at his age and contract.. You either play him a ton of minutes (which their aren't many of) or you get him out of town..

We need guys who can stop the Wades and Kobes of the world, and until we find that guy, these 9th and 10th rotational players are extinct.

Five-ofan · 07-06-2006, 03:46 PM

I have always liked Quis. He wasnt gonna play though so you might as well get what you can for him and getting rid of his contract for a guy that fills a need is a solid move. Besides if nothing else i would imagine you could get more for crosheres contract then you could for marquis' unrealized potential.

mavsman55 · 07-06-2006, 04:20 PM

I'm not worried. Marquis had no place in Avery's system. You may disagree with me, but he was very inconsistent when he did play. He was a bad shooter, turned the ball over a lot and didn't play great defense consistently. He is a reliable scorer from inside but we have Josh Howard to fill that role. We still could have gotten more out of him, but we might as well get rid of his contract ASAP and at the same time replace KVH. I'm not as excited about Croshere as I am about getting rid of 2 parts of this team that simply didn't fit.

fluid.forty.one · 07-06-2006, 05:13 PM

Guys we are missing the big picture here. The new guy is WHITE... that means he will automatically be a good backup for Dirk. Cause Dirk is well...white.

Right?.....RIGHT??

KVH must have just been a fluke.

mattyd · 07-06-2006, 06:54 PM

Here is the ESPN article on the trade. ESPN makes it sound like Quis is being punished for the Finals. Just one more reason to hate the "World Wide Leader."

ESPN.com news services

Somebody had to pay for Dallas' collapse in the NBA Finals. The Mavericks started with someone they owed a lot of money.

Marquis Daniels
Guard-Forward
Dallas Mavericks

Profile
2006 SEASON STATISTICS
GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
62 10.2 3.6 2.8 .480 .754

NBA front-office sources told ESPN's Marc Stein Wednesday night that the Mavs have agreed to trade forward Marquis Daniels to the Indiana Pacers for veteran forward Austin Croshere. The Dallas Morning News also reported that the deal was confirmed by Mavericks officials.

Daniels, who averaged 10.2 points and 3.6 rebounds last year in his third season in Dallas, signed a six-year, $36.8-million contract before the 2004 season. He has three guaranteed years remaining at $6 million per year and a fourth-year team option at $7 million.

Austin Croshere
Power Forward
Indiana Pacers

Profile
2006 SEASON STATISTICS
GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
50 8.2 5.3 1.2 .463 .882

Since he had fallen down the depth chart behind Jerry Stackhouse and Josh Howard in the small forward rotation, he became an expensive luxury. He averaged only 3.4 points per game in this season's playoffs. Dallas' drafting of swingman Maurice Ager out of Michigan State was a very visible sign that the 6-foot-6 Daniels might not be in the Mavs' plans.

"That's a great opportunity to play for a great coach and for a great team," Glenn Schwartzman, Daniels' agent said of his client's impending move. "Marquis feels with the moves they've already made and the fact that they're going younger and more athletic, that they're going to be a tough team to play against."

The 6-foot-10 Croshere, who averaged 8.2 points and 5.3 rebounds last season, has just one year remaining on his contract at $7 million. He helps the Mavs hedge their bets on Keith Van Horn, who is a free agent and appears to be drawing interest around the league.

Daniels is the Pacers' first acquisiton since sharpshooter Peja Stojakovic reached a verbal agreement Saturday to leave Indiana and sign with the New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets. The 25-year-old was not selected in the 2003 draft but promptly earned a big contract after a strong rookie season under Don Nelson.

Nelson viewed Daniels as a player with three-position potential -- point guard, shooting guard and small forward. But when Nelson was re-signed in March 2005 and replaced by Avery Johnson, Daniels gradually faded out of favor.

The Pacers were drawn to Daniels' versatility and will try to reignite his career after finally finding a taker for Croshere, who has been shopped for years after struggling to live up to the sizable contract he received after a strong performance in the 2000 NBA Finals.

Croshere affords Dallas some future salary-cap flexibility as well as frontcourt experience and proficiency from the perimeter. He is likely to claim minutes as a backup to Dirk Nowitzki, minutes that last season went to Van Horn.

mmmfast · 07-06-2006, 07:44 PM

No more Marquis or KVH passes flying into the stands

Reminds me of a scene from Necessary Roughness - "I thought you were gonna do one of these (turns hand opposite direction of route run).

#1MavsFan · 07-06-2006, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

How do you know that the Pacers are turning run and gun next year? I've never seen Carlysle coach that type of basketball ever. We also traded small for big which is also a plus. Versatile bigs are hard to come by where as versatile swing men seem to be a dime a dozen. I really believe thats why players like Howard and Ager fall in the draft because of the plethora of shooting guards to choose from. I always backed up Quis but he can be replaced farely easily for what his role was, and we save cap room doing it too.

All the pacers fans are tallking about it and they're trying to fill their roster up with guys that can plain out run. I think Carlysle will be given a year to make it work or go his seperate way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by madape

You know, I was thinking about this a little bit this morning. I really beleive Carlysle will be gone by the end of the season, if not before. What better coach to take over than our old friend Don Nelson? He's developed a repulation for turning bad situations around, and Indiana is most definitely a bad situation. He's a midwest guy. He has a following there. I think he'd be a good fit.

That seems like it could happen, and he would get to coach his beloved marquis once again.

fluid.forty.one · 07-06-2006, 09:25 PM

I would love to see dear old Nelson coaching again.

Nash13 · 07-06-2006, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aexchange

since when is a 2 guard averaging over 5.5 rpg nothing to throw a parade over? if we play terry and harris at the 1 and 2 spots, wade averages more than both of them combined.

The guy averages nearly 40mpg. And his net +/- in rebound is a whopping +1.8. +1.8 is nothing to throw a parade over when you're on one of the top rebounding teams in the league.

jleefilled · 07-06-2006, 10:25 PM

For those that say Quis never had potential, just consider how good Quis could be if he had a decent jumper. Mental issues aside (I personally think this is something many are making way too much of a big deal of), he is an 6'6" swingman who has better ball handling skills than probably 95% of the guys his height, can finish at the rim with both hands, and he has a solid turn around jumper from 10ft in. There is a reason why people around the country think Marquis Daniels is a good player. Everytime the Mavs gave him a chance to play with the world watching -- whether it be a TNT regular season game or a playoff game -- the guy contributed well. There is something to be said for that, no? Don't get me wrong, I don't think this was a bad trade. I'm persuaded that he wasn't going to get a chance to develop on the Mavs, and that Croshere might be a very ideal pick-up. But.. I think it is really unfair to say things like he is just trash that the Mavs had to be rid of. Yeah, he was given a contract he probably didn't deserve this early in his career. But, I don't think Mavs' fans are sooooooo utterly in the wrong for believing that the guy had potential. Is he overrated by some? Sure. But on these message boards, in particular, I haven't seen many claim that he was going to be an allstar as Nellie did. I thought that he could perhaps be a solid 15, 5, 5 guy who could be utilized at 3 positions. That's it. That may have been too much, but come on, we are talking about ceilings -- not what he currently is.

aexchange · 07-06-2006, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nash13

The guy averages nearly 40mpg. And his net +/- in rebound is a whopping +1.8. +1.8 is nothing to throw a parade over when you're on one of the top rebounding teams in the league.

his net rebounding is +1.8 over his counterpart. to put that in perspective, when terry is grabbing 3 boards a game, he is grabbing 5. thats an insane amount.

fluid.forty.one · 07-06-2006, 11:12 PM

This is obviously an upgrade from Van Horn (at least the shadow we saw last year), and we knew Quis was leaving. What's with everyones complaints?

chumdawg · 07-06-2006, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jleefilled

For those that say Quis never had potential, just consider how good Quis could be if he had a decent jumper. Mental issues aside (I personally think this is something many are making way too much of a big deal of), he is an 6'6" swingman who has better ball handling skills than probably 95% of the guys his height, can finish at the rim with both hands, and he has a solid turn around jumper from 10ft in. There is a reason why people around the country think Marquis Daniels is a good player. Everytime the Mavs gave him a chance to play with the world watching -- whether it be a TNT regular season game or a playoff game -- the guy contributed well. There is something to be said for that, no? Don't get me wrong, I don't think this was a bad trade. I'm persuaded that he wasn't going to get a chance to develop on the Mavs, and that Croshere might be a very ideal pick-up. But.. I think it is really unfair to say things like he is just trash that the Mavs had to be rid of. Yeah, he was given a contract he probably didn't deserve this early in his career. But, I don't think Mavs' fans are sooooooo utterly in the wrong for believing that the guy had potential. Is he overrated by some? Sure. But on these message boards, in particular, I haven't seen many claim that he was going to be an allstar as Nellie did. I thought that he could perhaps be a solid 15, 5, 5 guy who could be utilized at 3 positions. That's it. That may have been too much, but come on, we are talking about ceilings -- not what he currently is.

That's a great post.

The kid definitely has potential, that's for sure. He needs to find his niche. He's an ultimate tweener. He posts up far better than typical twos. As you say, he can get a shot off inside of ten feet no matter who is guarding him, and he can go either way. But he shoots less well than typical twos and he doesn't have the size for typical threes. He is going to be heavily dependent on the "system" his team plays for the rest of his career.

But you cannot deny the athleticism. He's an asset to a team that is creative enough to use him in different roles depending on the opponent. That's not Avery's style, which is why he's gone.

Josh · 07-06-2006, 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fluid.forty.one

This is obviously an upgrade from Van Horn (at least the shadow we saw last year), and we knew Quis was leaving. What's with everyones complaints?

Daniels is 6 years younger.

Daniels is more talented.

Daniels has a much higher upside.

Not only are we giving up the younger, better player, but Croshere isn't that much better than KVH, if he even is at all. Croshere shot 31% in the playoffs, KVH shot 33%. In the 2005 playoffs Croshere averaged 2 points, 2004 he had 4 points on 34% shooting, 2003 4 points on 26% shooting. Whats not worth complaining about?

Nash13 · 07-07-2006, 05:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aexchange

his net rebounding is +1.8 over his counterpart. to put that in perspective, when terry is grabbing 3 boards a game, he is grabbing 5. thats an insane amount.

For the record and to confuse this argument, Terry's net is +3.0. I still think Wade is the better rebounder, but i'm saying he could hold his ground against Wade.

With that said, the scary part is that with Dallas' small backcourt, Wade will be guarded by Harris. And Harris' net is -2.6.

Knickfan · 07-07-2006, 07:03 AM

I don't see why you all are bashing Q so much. I mean I've read so many posts here and all the credit you all have given Cuban for knowing what guys to sign and not sign. I mean Q had to be something special if Cuban gave him the money he did right? I mean Cuban knows talent doesn't he?

Actually I think Q is pretty good. He really hasn't gotten the opportunity because of the emergence of Josh Howard. You all can say what you want, I can't remember which game it was but when Q got his opportunity in the finals he showed up and played VERY well. I personally think he is a better option than Croshere. Croshere is a better outside shooter but that's it! Daniels can play three positions, maybe four and Croshere can play two. Either way, both players are so low in their respective teams rotations that in the end I don't think it has MUCH of a bearing at all. This was CLEARLY a salary move in my opinion. Croshere has ONE year left on his contract.

mary · 07-07-2006, 07:29 AM

Quote:

For those that say Quis never had potential, just consider how good Quis could be if he had a decent jumper.

And if I had a 20" waist, I'd look damn good in a bikini. Sadly, my waistline has improved about as much as Daniels' jumpshot over the past three years.

Dallas Maverick · 07-07-2006, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowmo

Speaking of paying, this trade was done so it gives Cubes more room to pay out the huge fines he will have next year when he berates the refs again when we play miami and the suns. It will be a tight race to see who gets more free throw ops against the mav's, amare or Dwayne (don't even think about coming close to me or I will fall down) Wade. Matter of fact we should start a survey to see who will be the top freethrow shooter against the mav's next year! I vote for Amare since we will play him more often in the regular season.

Interresting point about Amare and Wade...I don't think Cuban will be running out of money anytime soon, however!

sike · 07-07-2006, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mary

And if I had a 20" waist, I'd look damn good in a bikini. Sadly, my waistline has improved about as much as Daniels' jumpshot over the past three years.

"I have to paint you"

V2M · 07-07-2006, 01:43 PM

Nice summary of this trade by David Lord.

==============================================

Lost 'Quis
Details On Daniels-Croshere Swap

By David Lord – DallasBasketball.com
News leaked from Mavs headquarters Tuesday that a deal is in place to trade Marquis Daniels to Indiana for Austin Croshere. Let's take a look at the deal and its ramifications.

Is the deal a simple one-for-one?
Although league rules mandate that no official pronouncement can be made by the team until July 12, apparently the deal has been agreed to and is as simple as it sounds.

I thought Croshere's salary was too big to absorb by trading only Daniels. Is there more to the deal?
Croshere's salary for 2006/07 had been listed by various sources as exceeding $9M, but those were apparently erroneous. His salary will actually be $7.3M, which is close enough to that of Daniels ($5.88M) to fit the NBA's trade requirements.

Are there limits on re-trading Croshere? How about a 3-way deal?
The trade can't be consummated until July 12 or later, so the possibility to make it a 3-way deal certainly exists. In addition, Croshere can be re-traded at any time to another team as long as he is traded alone, or in a package after 60 days.

Since the Mavs already have Van Horn, does this mean another trade is in the works? Does Toronto or someone else want Croshere or Van Horn as part of a sign-and-trade deal?
This move looks like it fits exactly into what the Mavs wanted to do this summer - find a better replacement for Van Horn. Van Horn was on this roster to be an outside force against teams like San Antonio and Miami, who have imposing big men. In the Finals, the Mavs badly needed a player with his skill set (outside shooting big man) to hit shots and force Mourning to the bench, and Van Horn didn't. One very telling stat from the Finals was that Mourning's plus-minus was +32, and Van Horn's was -31. That's your title - and that's a major reason why Croshere is coming and Van Horn is leaving.

Are the Mavs on track, or did they veer astray with this move?
The Mavs’ summer plan was to get two players (a big man and a perimeter scorer) using a trade and the MLE. This move was the trade and landed one of those targets. The perimeter target is Mike James, and Toronto reportedly wasn't interested in Daniels.

Croshere has an expiring contract. Isn’t this a short term deal to dump salary?
While money is always an issue, we think there were other factors at play that made this much more than a pure dump of Daniels' contract. Croshere is as close to a KVH clone as you can find, albeit hopefully a more productive version with a bit better defensive ability. The Mavs want the ability to have that sort of player available to play alongside Dirk at times, and also to back up Dirk. As a result, if he produces, we wouldn’t be surprised to see the Mavs offer him a new (but less expensive) deal at year's end.

Why would the Mavs give up Daniels for Croshere? Couldnt they just re-sign Van Horn and get to keep Daniels and all his potential?
In spite of his potential, Daniels just didn’t find a niche here in Avery's system. At his position, the Mavs wanted a scorer who could hit the outside shot and then slash to the basket, and Marquis could do the slashing but couldn't hit the perimeter shots needed to keep defenses honest. It made no sense to have his salary buried on the bench, and the additions of Maurice Ager and perhaps James put him deeper down the rotation. Also, it's important to understand that by trading Daniels for Croshere rather than re-signing Van Horn, the team saved several million in payroll this year - and that amount may be enough to keep them below the tax threshold. With this trade, the team has 13 players in place at about $59M in taxable payroll. The tax limit has yet to be announced but may be at about $65M.

Will this trade mess up team chemistry? Since Daniels and Josh Howard were close friends, and the Mavs are wanting to work out an extension with JHo, isn’t this the wrong time to do such a trade?
As much as Daniels fit into the team locker-room chemistry here, it wasn’t in his best interest or the team's to keep him here rotting on the bench. He will get more opportunity in Indy. This should have no detrimental effect on the team's relationship with JHo.

Couldn’t the Mavs get more for Daniels than an aging backup forward?
Obviously not. Reports said they offered him to Toronto in a sign-and-trade for James and were turned down, which means his value was less than the value of a 31-year-old player available for the MLE. Toronto preferred to keep their cap space instead. In spite of his potential, Marquis apparently just hadn't produced consistently enough to be greatly coveted by GM's around the league.

What else might happen with the Mavs this summer?
The primary target is Mike James. There may be contract talks Thursday in Las Vegas. If the team can land him, that will fill the 14th slot. If not, they will still be shopping for the perimeter scorer.

With the trade of Daniels, doesn’t that limit their options if they can’t make a deal with James?
Let's back up a bit before we start worrying too much about doomsday scenarios. When the Mavs spoke last week of looking for the two players, they spoke in a way that seemed to imply they knew exactly who they wanted and were confident they could get them. With this trade, we are now hearing that it was essentially in place a week ago and just needed a few details to be hammered out. Maybe one of those details was that the team wanted to first be sure that they could get James with the MLE. Let's give the front office the benefit of the doubt that all this is planned to work together.

But how about a hypothetical. What if the Mavs can’t get James for the MLE?
The team still has the ability to offer the MLE elsewhere. Or they could package sign-and-trade players like Van Horn and Griffin with perhaps a young player like PPod or Marshall to put together a salary match package that might work for someone, even Toronto.

If the Mavs sign James, who will be the 15th man?
We think money issues could be a major consideration, since the MLE for James may put the Mavs very close to the tax threshold. They could even leave the slot unused. But if they have room, we think the choice will be between Griffin and Armstrong. If both are available at the same price, we strongly favor keeping Griffin who lest we forget was regularly needed as the starter at SG and provides some glue-guy intangibles when he plays.

Are there longer term benefits to this trade?
Yes. By moving Daniels' contract off the books, the Mavs added spending room - essentially the amount of the MLE - for future years. When you can get players like James, Radmanovic, Thomas, Claxton, Przybilla, Mohammed, and so on with an MLE, and usable players like Piatkowski, Mbenga, Buckner, Finley, Harpring etc for even less, it is important to have some spending room to use when needed. This team will continue to make tweaks each year, and having some flexibility is a great value. Although it hurts to let go of a talent like Marquis, it has to be recognized that he had been here 3 years and still hadn't developed into what the team needed, to get him playing time. At some point, you have to cut the cord and go on your way. They did.

734am July 6 06

alexamenos · 07-07-2006, 01:57 PM

my two cents....

Marquis for Croshere = B.F.D.

fluid.forty.one · 07-07-2006, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mary

And if I had a 20" waist, I'd look damn good in a bikini. Sadly, my waistline has improved about as much as Daniels' jumpshot over the past three years.

lmao

Hey he did hit that night fadeaway 3 in one series (forgot which one already, man I'm getting old.)

birdsanctuary · 07-07-2006, 11:18 PM

Isn't Croshere younger than Killer?

jthig32 · 07-07-2006, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by birdsanctuary

Isn't Croshere younger than Killer?

Pretty sure they were drafted the same year.

Edit to add: Yep, both drafted in '97, both born in '75. Croshere's actually a few months older.