Askrabic Info from ESPN Insider - Page 2 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

PeterVecseyisdumb · 06-11-2002, 05:46 PM

I hope the mavs get Askrabic. The mavs can always try to trade van exel and other players on the mavs, to try to get an interior defender/rebounder and a perimeter defender. I want the mavs to keep stockpiling talent.

Drbio · 06-11-2002, 08:40 PM

good point...you will eventually hit on something special if you stockpile enough talented players.

mick · 06-11-2002, 09:01 PM

<< good point...you will eventually hit on something special if you stockpile enough talented players. >>

Sacramento showed that the best way to play against Shaq is to have quality depth. Keep coming at him, keep him running.

Sacramento is going to better next year, barring any injuries, just because of the experience against the LAL in the playoffs.

We cannot stand pat, if you tread water long enough, you sink. To use another cliche, if you are not going forward you are going backwards. There is no such thing as standing pat.

Drbio · 06-11-2002, 09:03 PM

I don't think that there is any way possible that we stand pat and I am pretty sure we will be one of the leagues elite teams again this upcoming season.

TheKid · 06-12-2002, 09:17 AM

I want to touch on two things:

1. I see where all of you are going with Ascrobic and how Nellie loves him and he's his type of player, he's athletic, etc. etc. However regardless of how good he is, it's going to take him a year or two to adjust. I really don't have a problem with that, but the way you guys are talking like he will come in and really help us out next year and to be honest he probably won't. Look how high they were on Wang and he's going into his 3rd year and he's still adjusting and developing.

Also, I don't doubt the guy is talented enough to warrant the minutes, but realistically, can he just come here and the first year get 15-20 minutes a game? Would Nellie really do that? Think about it, it's not the same Mavericks when Dirk came here and they were winning 20 games, this is a championship caliber team and to get as many minutes on this team you HAVE to be productive in some aspect, and I think it would be asking alot of him to come in next year and be a good defender and produce scoring for the Mavs. NOW, I'm not saying the guy isn't worth our time because as it's been stated he shot 70% from the field, that's impressive and I say you take a guy who shoots like that, but I hear people putting alot of faith in a guy that we really only have hear say about.

<<What I am saying is that if we sure up our perimeter defense, and actually put pressure on the ballhandlers, whether it be shooting or passing into the post AND cut off penetration, then our interior defense won't be a problem.>>

I think we've been round and round on this one. I've said before, we need to improve our perimeter defense but I watched CLOSELY the Sacramento series. I watched Bibby and Jackson at times go by Fisher and the rest and watched them only convert a LOW percentage of shots around the basket when Shaq was there. That made them become jumpshooters. With the exception of one game, Jackson wasn't hitting his shots, but Bibby was on fire so it didn't matter. Although it completely changed the dynamics of Christie's game. When Shaq wasn't there, it was a layup line. So my point is even with excellent perimeter defense, when you have that interior defense, it allows your perimeter to be more aggressive and the opposition isn't as aggressive.

Look at game seven of the Lakers game or even game six and five for that matter. When the Kings needed a basket it ended up being a jump shot. NOW Bibby and Jackson showed they could go by Kobe and Fisher without a problem, but they knew they would be unable to finish with Shaq in there, so they settled for the jumpshot. Against the Mavs the ONE game that went to the wire, what did Bibby do, go to the basket. He made a nice move on Fin (which he would have went by anyone with that move) and went to the basket. NOW if we have an inside presence, I'd be willing to bet Bibby stops and takes a jumpshot. Now I'm not saying he misses it but you prefer him to take the tougher shot than the layup. Also, I'm NOT saying our perimeter defense was good because it sucked also, but I'm saying if we had better perimeter defense and we didn't improve our interior, I'd be willing to bet, we would still look bad defensively.

Murphy3 · 06-12-2002, 09:22 AM

yes, improving the perimeter defense will help the mavs interior defense..it could help it greatly.
however, simply doing that isn't enough. the mavs need dirk to improve defensively (which, i'm sure he will). they need raef to stay out of foul trouble a bit more often and he needs to improve on his lateral quickness.
AND
the mavs need to bring in someone to provide an inside presence especially defensively.

Bayliss · 06-12-2002, 10:12 AM

TheKid, if our perimeter defense was good then he'd have to shoot jumpers because he could get by us and actually drive to the hoop. If you can't drive past your own man, I could be protecting the Mavs bucket and it wouldn't matter. LA has Shaq but Shaq is not a great defensive stopper. The reason there isn't a lot of penetration by their opponent's is because of Fisher and Bryant's D. The same could be said for Sacraemento's d too as well with Christie and Jackson. The same could be said for the Nets D (unless you think Collins and MacCullough are great "goaltenders&quot

with Martin, Kittles, and Kidd. The same could be said for Boston who have Pierce, and Strickland. The same could be said for the Spurs (even though they have Duncan) with Parker and Bowen.

All of the good/elite teams have good perimeter defense. Not all of them have good interior defense. (And the only reason LA is going to win the title is because Sacramento choked big time).

And I may be a homer but Webber and Vlade do not play any better interior defense than Dirk and Raef. The difference between us and Sacramento is that our 1s 2s and 3s do not play good enough perimeter defense and Sacramento's 1s,2s, 3s border on great perimeter defense.

Murphy3 · 06-12-2002, 10:47 AM

i think everyone sees your point bayliss..but i'd personally like to see both issues addressed.

Drbio · 06-12-2002, 11:05 AM

Perimeter defense is huge. It opens up rebounding opportunites for they big guys, misses from the opposing shooters, and relief down low. Bayliss is dead on here. I don't understand the argument. Of course we do need to couple an improvement at perimeter defense with a better inside presence too.

Bayliss · 06-12-2002, 11:06 AM

<< I think everyone sees your point bayliss..but i'd personally like to see both issues addressed. >>

I would too...

Milos D · 06-12-2002, 11:18 AM

Hi again. I read the espn article today. Again with the SF stuff. First I was confused but then when I got to the "Peja Stojakovic clone" part I just had to LOL!!! That part alone says that the writer does not know what he's talking about. I am sorry, but that comparison is ridiculous. I am no basketball expert, I just love to watch the game. And I made wrong predictions before (yeah, I thought Tarlac would play better than crappy). But Askrabic and Peja are two completely different players. Once again, Askrabic has a PF body, he is stronger, better rebounder, has better court vision and passing skills. He is more into passing than Peja and he does it better. He is better in the post. Peja is faster, moves great without the ball and obviously a better shooter.

Drbio · 06-12-2002, 11:23 AM

And Askrabic has????

TheKid · 06-12-2002, 11:46 AM

<<And I may be a homer but Webber and Vlade do not play any better interior defense than Dirk and Raef. The difference between us and Sacramento is that our 1s 2s and 3s do not play good enough perimeter defense and Sacramento's 1s,2s, 3s border on great perimeter defense.>>

You're not a homer because Webber or Vlade aren't better interior defensively, but personally I don't think Sacramento plays defense either. People say Christie is a good defender BUT let's see so far in the playoffs he's guarded Kobe who averaged more than 25 a game against him. People said he did a good job against Fin, who also averaged almost 25 a game against him.

Also I'm not saying Shaq is a defensive stopper but a shot blocking presence makes a difference. Like I said, I understand if you have weak perimeter defense, it doesn't matter whose inside, they'll foul out. I do recognize it's a two fold situation but a solid interior defense where's on the opponent psychologically. My point is this, keep that same Laker team and put Bradley back there who can block shots. Do NOT tell me people wouldn't be getting to the basket successfully and finishing. If Kobe and Fisher are that good defensively then you could put someone like Shaq back there and there wouldn't be any fall off right?

As far as the Spurs goes also, Parker and Daniels both are good because of Duncan and Robinson. Look at the game when neither of them where there, it was a joke how many times Payton and gang went to the basket without even being contested, like no one was there. While Malike Rose is a good inside presence, he wasn't NEARLY enough. The next game Duncan came back, NOTHING!

From a defensive standpoint we need to improve in EVERY aspect, but this I do know, right now if we improve our perimeter defense, I'm saying we will have people who will get to the basket and finish or go the free throw line. When I think of tough interior defense I think of Oakley. Oakley will NEVER be known for his man to man defense or his blocked shots, but people think twice before they go driving down the lane don't they. He has a psychological effect on his opponents, that's what I'm saying. That mixed in with GOOD consistent perimeter defense (which the Mavericks lack right now) is a good ingredient for solid defense.

Murphy3 · 06-12-2002, 11:50 AM

kobe's 25 wasn't necessarily a "good" 25 per game when facing sac-town

TheKid · 06-12-2002, 12:00 PM

True he shot 42% for the series but he still managed to get 27 points a game. If you're really that good defensively and shoot 42% from the field, if he didn't get his average then I would say, Christie did a hell of a job, but not only did he get his average, he exceeded his average.

Murphy3 · 06-12-2002, 12:58 PM

he was much less efficient in reaching his average.. therefore, christie did a good job

Murphy3 · 06-12-2002, 01:01 PM

why would anyone say dirk had a bad series against sacramento if your reasoning is true?

because dirk was much less efficient than usual in reaching and surpassing his average.
the same holds true for kobe in the sactown series. And christie deserves alot of the credit

Drbio · 06-12-2002, 02:34 PM

Christie had one hell of a series against Dallas.

TheKid · 06-12-2002, 03:20 PM

Well I didn't really hear people say Dirk had a bad series, they said he had a poor shooting series and compared to the top players in the league people thought he didn't play up to par, and people thought he didn't play as well as Webber. (Or atleast that's what I thought anyway) However when you look at Dirk's numbers you can't say he played a poor series. He had ONE game that he looked pretty bad in but despite that game, overall I wouldn't say he played poorly.

Like I said before, if the Mavs win, NO ONE SAYS A WORD about Dirk's shooting or defense because the Mavs win. When someone loses, the bad parts of their game comes out and people recognizes it more.

Think about it, if the Mavs win, people wouldn't really be bothered by the defense. That defense has been pathetic all season but we were winning and the only time people complained was when we lost. Like I said, I didn't think we played stellar defense against the Timberwolves myself but we won so it didn't matter. Just my opinion though.

Nellie · 06-12-2002, 03:27 PM

One thing that needs to be pointed out in this discussion: Dirk having an off game while scoring a double-double is something only Dallas fans will be able to understand. To anybody else that would sound weird but we know what it means here.

Drbio · 06-12-2002, 05:26 PM

strangely...that's a good point.

Murphy3 · 06-12-2002, 06:32 PM

yes, we can understand how dirk has a bad game but still puts up a double double...

It's also easy for many of us to see where even though kobe may reach his average, he might not be playing at near the level he was accustomed to... which had much to do with Christie's defense

Drbio · 06-12-2002, 06:58 PM

Why is there Christie bashing? He played very well.