A simple question: Big Z for Walker -- would you do it?

[kg_veteran]

The salaries match exactly, so it could be a straight-up trade with no other consideration involved on either side.

Would you do it?

Why or why not?

[LRB]

I'm not a huge Big Z fan, but at this point I'd probably do it. We need bigs, and although Big Z isn't the perfect fit, he's better than a 6'8" player. Also, I don't think that the Walker and Jamison are a good combination for this team.

[Max Power]

Nope. I'd do it for Jamison though.

[kg_veteran]

Originally posted by: Max Power
Nope. I'd do it for Jamison though.

Why the distinction?

[Jamisonite]

Id want a lil more...have them send a pick or some cash our way and Big Z is ours

[Drbio]

Yes. It would force us out of the point-forward offense (which I am quickly growing to hate) and place us back into a more traditional offense.

[Jamisonite]

only way i ship jamison to cleveland

Dallas trades: Tariq Abdul-Wahad ( ppg, rpg, apg in minutes)
SF Antawn Jamison (15.4 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 1.0 apg in 29.6 minutes)
Dallas receives: C Zydrunas Illgauskas (14.6 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 1.5 apg in 30.2 minutes)
SF Darius Miles (9.4 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 2.5 apg in 25.3 minutes)
Change in team outlook: +8.6 ppg, +5.2 rpg, and +3.0 apg.

Cleveland trades: C Zydrunas Illgauskas (14.6 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 1.5 apg in 30.2 minutes)
SF Darius Miles (9.4 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 2.5 apg in 25.3 minutes)
Cleveland receives: Tariq Abdul-Wahad ( ppg, rpg, apg in games)
SF Antawn Jamison (15.4 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 1.0 apg in 33 games)
Change in team outlook: -8.6 ppg, -5.2 rpg, and -3.0 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED

[Max Power]

Originally posted by: kg_veteran

Why the distinction?

Because Jamison is such a poor defender.

Even if Z doesn't play much defense, he's better than Jamison. Everything else should remain relatively even - rebounding is a push, scoring is a push, minutes are roughly the same. The huge bonus would be that and everyone would be back to their natural positions.

I wouldn't trade Walker because he can defend small forwards better than Jamison and Z could make up for the low post offense.

[Hitman]

I would do that trade in a New York minute.

[DNNF]

Where do we sign? I think we have too many damn small forwards in our team, and not enough center (the one that actually play). Salary wise, it would make sense too.

[V]

I don't think I would do the trade... but I could be convinced...

The why is simple. (1) Trading Walker means more PT for Jamison... and from what I've seen Jamison may be the worst defender in the NBA, and (2) Like it or not, Walker is the second best playmaker on this team... and the Mavs went to the WCF with a great second playmaker in NVE. I think a second playmaker is necessary for this team.

If you guys convince me that Jamison's defensive troubles are the result of (1) being lost in a new system, (2) lack of effort, or (3) coaching (that is to say, he is capable of getting better) AND someone else e.g. Dirk, Best, Delk, etc., can become a great second playmaker I do the deal without hesitation.

[XERXES]

Yessir.

[kg_veteran]

I would do it. It puts everybody back at natural positions, it gives us a legitimately good center (when was the last time you could say that???), and it gives us a shotblocker in the middle that we don't have now (Z averages 1.8 per).

Admittedly, Walker is more talented than Z. But this is what I mean when I talk about one of those trades that you "lose on paper."

Ilgauskas 30 - Bradley/Fortson 18
Nowitzki 38 - Najera 10 (assuming he comes back healthy)
Jamison 35 - Howard 13
Finley 35 - Howard 13
Nash 32 - Best 16

That looks pretty good to me.

[Cybertx]

This it's a more traditional and better defensive roster

Ilgauskas 30 - Bradley
Nowitzki 38 - Fortson
Jamison 35 - Najera
Finley 35 - Howard 13
Nash 32 - Best /daniels

Think about Najera used to play SF in college and it's his natural pos. and with Fortson, Najera and Howard you have 3 really good defensive/rebounder players and with Bradley you have the shot blocker.

This will be a really good defensive bench and probably the team would have to change the way they play the offense with this bench(more paint and low post and less 3 points shoots) but this will even confuse the other teams think about this your 2,3 and 4 are really good offensive rebounder and they are really good at hustle and your 4 and 5 are really good defensive rebounder.

And with this 2,3 and 4 you have the hustle that you 5 doesn't have(perhaps will motivated him).

With this roster you switch more than benchs players you switch to hustle, defense and a less explosive team so when your starters come back you will surprised them.

[V]

Originally posted by: Cybertx
This it's a more traditional and better defensive roster

Ilgauskas 30 - Bradley
Nowitzki 38 - Fortson
Jamison 35 - Najera
Finley 35 - Howard 13
Nash 32 - Best /daniels

Think about Najera used to play SF in college and it's his natural pos. and with Fortson, Najera and Howard you have 3 really good defensive/rebounder players and with Bradley you have the shot blocker.

This will be a really good defensive bench and probably the team would have to change the way they play the offense with this bench(more paint and low post and less 3 points shoots) but this will even confuse the other teams think about this your 2,3 and 4 are really good offensive rebounder and they are really good at hustle and your 4 and 5 are really good defensive rebounder.

And with this 2,3 and 4 you have the hustle that you 5 doesn't have(perhaps will motivated him).

With this roster you switch more than benchs players you switch to hustle, defense and a less explosive team so when your starters come back you will surprised them.

Start Howard & bring Jamison off the bench for 28 minutes & I'm warming up to this trade....

[Dirkenstien]

I would absolutely do this trade to free up the log jam at the 4, to get our players in their natural position, and to give us some size and presence in the low post.

[grndmstr_c]

I would hesitate because: 1) I sort of have a hunch that this team might be entering a new phase in the chemistry building process and I'm curious to see how it plays out, and 2) if we could turn AJ into either Rasheed or Z, I'd sort of like to wait till the offseason and see just how much Larry Bird likes Walker's game (if we had a big, It'd be pretty nice to turn AW into Artest and change or something like that).

[Murphy3]

It probably wouldn't be my first option. But, if it was that deal or nothing, then I'd make the trade. I believe that one less option and no point forward would make the offense better. Defensively, walker out of the lineup in exchange for a true center (and dirk back at the power forward spot) would also make the team significantly better. No, Z isn't a dominating defender by any means. However, the defense would instantly be significantly improved.

[Cybertx]

Well you could leave walker at 3 and this would be better than AJ in talent but i think AJ stop less the flow of the team he doesn't need to be a star and playing Walker at 3 would just give him more opp. to shoot more 3 and i really don't want that.

And about starting Howar instead of AJ you need Howars in the 2 when Finley go to the bench we don't have a good enough 2 and if you start playing Howard at 3 you cause mismatches because nelson will play Najera instead of Fortson at 4 and Fortson and bradley at 5, and if that happens then we will have the same problems.

Howard can do much more damage at 2 instead of 3 think about it guys a overpower offensive starters and a ultra hustle defensive with daniels,Howard,Najera,Fortson and a blocker with Bradley.

[MavsFanFinley]

I'd do it. I would try pushing them into taking Jamison first though.

[ddh33]

Why I wouldn't do the trade: I think we can get more for Walker. At least, I hope we can. No, I don't mean that I want another star - this team has too many of those as is. I just think we might be able to get more than one good role player for Walker...

Why I would do the trade: I think Z, despite his flaws, is one of the better legit centers in the league. He is still relatively young. Best of all, he is a presence inside, which is something we've never had. Sure, I would worry about whether or not he could run with this team all the time, but we usually play Dirk at center when we want to speed things uip anyway. He shouldn't hurt us there. Besides, I think Walker has actually slowed this team down quite a bit.

Honestly, I would rather trade Walker than Jamison, as well. At least, today I would. It seems like I change my mind every single day. I think one of them has to go, I just don't know which.

In the end, I would do the trade. I think we lose the better all-around player, and in the process become a much better, more balanced team. In other words, it's the exact kind of thing that I've wanted. But before I did it, I would want to know who was available for sure...

I would also want Darius Miles in the deal too...

[Turkey]

of course, I would rather have Jamison near the net than walker anytime of the day... At least Jamison actually "Shoots" the ball..

[Murphy3]

In my opinion, you have to move walker to get away from the point forward system. Nellie simply puts the ball in walker's hands way too often for the mavs offense to truly click on all cylinders.

[Jeremiah]

Yes. I'd like us to have a center that plays, and he'll play. I like Walker, but like Raef, just not on this team. His presence is changing the face of my team, and I don't like it. I like the ball in Nash's hands, not in Walker's. He's a very good player, I'd just rather see him elsewhere.

Z would be nice because, as has been mentioned, it'd slot guys in positions that they can succeed at. It'd also give us two guys that will score most of their points in the paint in aj and z.

[akaarod03]

trade already discussed: http://dallas-mavs.com/forums/messag...AR_MSGDBTABLE=

[MikeB]

At this time I would have to seriously look at doing this trade. I have been supportive of Walker on this board and I think he is a talent that should be able to help this team. However it appears that it is still not working and we are 34 games into the season(that is over 40%...jell time is up). I really do not want Miles included though. He seems disinterested on D and still has no offensive game beyond the dunk.

[Psychedelic Fuzz]

I don't think you can look games like tonight's and say that it's not working.

I keep walker and trade jamison. I'd rather have someone who may turn it over, which COULD lead to an opponent score, than someone who outright blows defensive assignments and directly gives up points.

[Evilmav2]

No; Principally because Big Z is much the lesser talent and he is playing on two fractured feet. Trading away a stud like Walker straight up for a one-dimensional (offense being that dimension), health risk like Ilgauskas just makes no long term sense for the Mavs.

Now if we could net him by sending the Cavs Ed Najera, TAW, and cash... That's obviously a much, much different story.

[Nicky31]

I would do the trade like this if trading with the Cav's...

Dallas trades:
T. Best or T. Delk
A. Walker

Cleveland trades:
D. Wagner
Big Z

The one thing I love about Walker's game is he takes alot of pressure off of Nash handling the ball. So I would want to get some of that in this trade. Big Z could bring some low post scoring to this team, and that would give them a totally different look on offense. My only concern about this trade is how heathly are Big Z's knees, but other then that this trade would diffinitely help the Mav's get to where they need to go...

[MightyToine]

HELL NO TO EVERYTHING!! [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-mad.gif[/img]

[kg_veteran]

No; Principally because Big Z is much the lesser talent and he is playing on two fractured feet.

Evil, I think Z's injury concerns can be put to rest. He's played injury-free for at least a year and a half now.

Z is not as talented as Walker; however, I can't remember the last time that a small forward was dealt for an equally talented center. It just doesn't happen. When you trade "up" (that is, for more size) in the NBA, you always have to give a little in terms of talent.

We need a center. Ilgauskas is a good one of those. He also helps defensively because of his size and shotblocking.

I'm not going to be heartbroken if we don't deal Walker for Z. I like Walker. But somehow we've got to upgrade the center spot. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

[Male30Dan]

I would do this trade for the obvious, to finally have a Center in a Mavs uniform... This would force Dirk, who as you all know, I have crucified time and time again for terrible defense, to actaully play his natural PF position. This would allow us to play two 7 footers in the starting lineup, as well as allow Jamison, (assuming Walker is the one to leave-as the trade suggests), to finally start. We have a great 6th man in Howard, and he will likely get as many/more minutes than Jamison due to his defensive prowess. I dont actually hate Walker manning the point at times, as he can really be effective, but overall, I think we are a better team with this lineup...

Center: Z - 32 minutes, Bradley - 16 minutes
PF: Dirk - 38 minutes, Fortson/Najera - 10 minutes
SF: Jamison - 30 minutes, Howard - 18 minutes
SG: Finley - 38 minutes, Howard - 10 minutes
PG: Nash - 36 minutes, Best - 12 minutes

This puts us at a 10 man rotation, (9 depending on whether or not Fortson/Najera share the 10 minutes or on gets them all), and allows quality players to play quality minutes without over-working them. This would be one helluva trade for us!!!

[cdeleon]

I would do the trade in a heartbeat. I really like Walker but I think the ball being in his hands is really hurting the chemistry. Finley needs the ball up top and he isn't getting it with Walker there. Walker is late on alot of his passes when Dirk is wide open coming around picks and he just isn't picking up the big 3's tendencies. Jamison is the low post scorer we need and he doesn't get in the way. The Big 3 need to be up top with Jamison and the Big Z roaming down low. I've been saying since we traded for Walker to leave this team alone and sign a big man in the offseason but I don't see them starting to gell anytime soon.

[sike]

first of all, let me address V comments with one of my own: Steve Nash is a pretty darn good play maker!

and now to the deal...I would do it with a spring on my face and a smile in my step!.....oh[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-shocked.gif[/img]

REASONS I DO THIS DEAL:
1. It gives the Mavs a true Center and allows Bradley to play a less demanding role for this team(I have long felt that Shawn is most effective off the bench, he does not usually respond to presure well, and this would take focus off of him and just let him be that disruptive force that is can be about 18-24 minutes a night.

2. It puts the ball in Steve's hands even more. I think we have all seen that a ball not is his hands, is more often than not, not what is best for this team!

3. It puts the Superstar of this team back where he should be, and forces Nellie to give him the ball more often now that his pet player is gone. I long for the day when the majority of plays in the Mavericks O are run through#41(not novice, Dirk). Not all ending in Dirk shots, mind you, just the ball in his hands is enough threat to open things up for this team. Dirk having the ball more is a good thing, Dirk having more plays run his way is a good thing, Dirk and Steve and Fin being the focus of this team(not just in the fourth as some are suggesting, but as a offensive mindset) is a good thing...just keep saying this to yourselves over and over.

4. Z is a decent big man...yeah kg it been a while! He does not need any more than 10-12 shots a game and will block and board.....oh yeah, and he's big!

5. It means one less player on this team who thinks he should average at least 15 points a game. As has been pointed out, this team has one, possibly two to many scorers and needs for the sake of both offensive and defensive reasons to lose at least one scorer.

I dont trade Jamison for a few reasons. I dont think he needs the ball as much as Walker(this is good for the team), and you may be able to keep him as your first guy off the bench...I feel the same about his defensive game as other who have posted, but he seems (to me anyway) to be a better fit for this team. His post activity is more than welcome on this perimiter minded team.

so the short of it is that I would do this deal.

but I'm with Murph, I do if there is nothing else(edited to add this comment)

[ddh33]

Originally posted by: sike
first of all, let me address V comments with one of my own: Steve Nash is a pretty darn good play maker!

and now to the deal...I would do it with a spring on my face and a smile in my step!.....oh[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-shocked.gif[/img]

REASONS I DO THIS DEAL:
1. It gives the Mavs a true Center and allows Bradley to play a less demanding role for this team(I have long felt that Shawn is most effective off the bench, he does not usually respond to presure well, and this would take focus off of him and just let him be that disruptive force that is can be about 18-24 minutes a night.

2. It puts the ball in Steve's hands even more. I think we have all seen that a ball not is his hands, is more often than not, not what is best for this team!

3. It puts the Superstar of this team back where he should be, and forces Nellie to give him the ball more often now that his pet player is gone. I long for the day when the majority of plays in the Mavericks O are run through#41(not novice, Dirk). Not all ending in Dirk shots, mind you, just the ball in his hands is enough threat to open things up for this team. Dirk having the ball more is a good thing, Dirk having more plays run his way is a good thing, Dirk and Steve and Fin being the focus of this team(not just in the fourth as some are suggesting, but as a offensive mindset) is a good thing...just keep saying this to yourselves over and over.

4. Z is a decent big man...yeah kg it been a while! He does not need any more than 10-12 shots a game and will block and board.....oh yeah, and he's big!

5. It means one less player on this team who thinks he should average at least 15 points a game. As has been pointed out, this team has one, possibly two to many scorers and needs for the sake of both offensive and defensive reasons to lose at least one scorer.

I dont trade Jamison for a few reasons. I dont think he needs the ball as much as Walker(this is good for the team), and you may be able to keep him as your first guy off the bench...I feel the same about his defensive game as other who have posted, but he seems (to me anyway) to be a better fit for this team. His post activity is more than welcome on this perimiter minded team.

so the short of it is that I would do this deal.

but I'm with Murph, I do if there is nothing else(edited to add this comment)

Very good post. I would like to add several things, if I may.

Steve Nash, while being a very good playmaker, is not the only one on this team. I think that Dirk could be a fine playmaker. But it seems to me that he is never going to be given the opportunity to grow into that role. His passing is not as bad as advertised, though there is no doubting that he is at his best when scoring. The same can be said of Finley. I think Mike is a better playmaker than a lot of us remember. We concentrate on his lack of ballhandling at times and foget that he used to consistently get 5 assists a game on bad teams. The reasons those numbers have dropped is because Timmy took a lot of that away, then Nick replaced Timmy, then Walker replaced Nick. Our Big Three is good enough to be playmakers for the rest of the team. I don't mean to underestimate Walker's ability to get guys open shots either. He's done a good job here in Dallas, but that doesn't mean he should be the focal point of our offense.

On Big Z himself, the guy is a role-player. That's what most of us have been clamoring for. He does his job, and does it pretty well. Sure, he has some flaws. So does everyone on this team. I think he would definitely upgrade this team, however.

Now, none of this is to say that we should rush right out and spend the farm to get Z. If the price isn't right, don't buy. We may be able to get more for Walker or Jamison. I don't know. That's why I think we should shop around, but there is no doubt in my mind that Z is an upgrade to this team.

[Sweet Daddy]

I say no to Z if it costs us one of the big 6 (I include Howard ... man, what a find he's turning into. We'd have to be crazy to trade him right now. When was the last time Dallas found a real talent this low in the draft?). It isn't because of anything to do with Z himself. Heck, he's definitely a top 10 center, and probably a little higher than that.

It's because I believe that any more major changes to the Mavericks rotation this year would throw them into total disarray. Just my opinion, but I think if they keep mucking with the lineup they can kiss this year goodbye. They've already got enough to deal with trying to mesh the talent that they've got.

[ddh33]

Originally posted by: Sweet Daddy
I say no to Z if it costs us one of the big 6 (I include Howard ... man, what a find he's turning into. We'd have to be crazy to trade him right now. When was the last time Dallas found a real talent this low in the draft?). It isn't because of anything to do with Z himself. Heck, he's definitely a top 10 center, and probably a little higher than that.

It's because I believe that any more major changes to the Mavericks rotation this year would throw them into total disarray. Just my opinion, but I think if they keep mucking with the lineup they can kiss this year goodbye. They've already got enough to deal with trying to mesh the talent that they've got.

I understand what you're saying, and a big part of me can appreciate that fact. My only contention is that without any inside presence, and by relying on the Twins to do the dirty work, we may be forced to kiss this season goodbye anyway. I hope not, but I sure have my concerns.

[sike]

I believe that any more major changes to the Mavericks rotation this year would throw them into total disarray.

actually this proposed trade would make this team much more like they have been in the past: a team run and led by the big three....DOWN WITH THE BIG 5!

[Sweet Daddy]

Actually, I agree with both Sike and DDH on this being an unusual group of talent. But I just took the question at face value ... would I make this trade right now? I think it's a matter of picking the lesser of evils. Do we let the team get used to each other and see what happens this year, or do we make changes that are good for the future and bad for the present?

I don't know. I'm a believer in keeping positive momentum. We've had 3 really good years after a long string of really bad ones, and as disfunctional as they sometimes are this year, we seem to be more capable of beating the good teams than in the past. It's a little hard to understand, but hey, don't look a gift horse in the mouth, right?!

My first instinct says let them play together this year, and if we think we screwed up the chemistry, try to fix it next off season.

[ddh33]

Originally posted by: Sweet Daddy
Actually, I agree with both Sike and DDH on this being an unusual group of talent. But I just took the question at face value ... would I make this trade right now? I think it's a matter of picking the lesser of evils. Do we let the team get used to each other and see what happens this year, or do we make changes that are good for the future and bad for the present?

I don't know. I'm a believer in keeping positive momentum. We've had 3 really good years after a long string of really bad ones, and as disfunctional as they sometimes are this year, we seem to be more capable of beating the good teams than in the past. It's a little hard to understand, but hey, don't look a gift horse in the mouth, right?!

My first instinct says let them play together this year, and if we think we screwed up the chemistry, try to fix it next off season.

I think there is a very real possibility that management is thinking along the same lines as you...

I don't know...I don't know what's happening in the lockerroom or on the practice court. All I see is a team that struggles when they shouldn't a lot of times. I think that is probably due to the redundant parts and similar players on the court always.

My gut says that this team, as constructed, may make a little noise in the playoffs and flame out. I think they would do that every year they were together.

I kind of subscribe to the NVE line of thought. Guys need to go through the wars together before they get better. That's why I would support bringing in guys immediately who would get us closer to a championship. Sure, we may flame out this season, but it will have been a learning experience and something to grow on for next year...

But that line of thinking also has many flaws.