A,B, C, or D?? - Page 2 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 11:28 AM

nellie, i don't think there was anything said with the intention to offend you. it's not like he was calling you a "fair weather fan" or anything else.
david's a good poster, i'm sure he didn't mean to offend you

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 11:30 AM

the thing is nellie, is that neither me or doc responded in a poor way to the situation. we simply said that your statement was uncalled for. there was no name calling..we simply said that it would be a good idea to watch it..and that if you were going to make a statement like you did that you should probably have some facts to back up what you had to say..

nothing more..

Nellie · 06-13-2002, 11:36 AM

It doesn't matter cause I am done with this. Everything I have tried to contribute to this board has ended up discouraging. Congragulations, you just ran off a fellow Mavs fan. Enjoy your day.

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 11:47 AM

what has anyone done to run you off?
if you're going to get upset with someone, anyone when they challenge an opinion then you're going to be upset all the time on any kind of sports board.

that's part of discussing and debating. if someone challenges your ideas, you come back with something to back up what you said. no one has a personal vendetta against you. if david challenges some of your ideas, come back with something to support what you had to say. it makes for excellent debates.

me and hoops have been disagreeing for a couple of weeks now about whether or not the mavs should stand pat or not..he comes up something to back up his side and i do the same..
it's nothing personal..i respect the guy more than anyone else here when it comes to basketball...but we disagree ..we debate...we argue... and in the end, we probably end up respecting each other more because of it

FilthyFinMavs · 06-13-2002, 11:47 AM

Everyone is saying that we will be unsuccessful if we just stay pat and we need to get interior defense but what kind of interior defense does Kings have? Or what kind interior defense did the Bulls have when they were contending? Im with the staying pat thing here but if we could trade NVE and get a young guy that can provide and that isnt Kandiman then ill be happy for mavs. But if mavs dont do any trades and some how sign Malik Rose or a Posey or Harpring or any free agents I wouldnt be upset. I think u guyz have forgot we have only been a good team for 2 seasons. Its gonna take more than 2 seasons to be a championship contender. Tho I realize that Nash is 28 and Finley is 29 we still have time to gel this team together and get a championship. What we really need to do is worry about winning Championships rather than a championship.

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 11:51 AM

the kings and the bulls both had much more interior defense than the mavs...
dennis rodman was a very good interior defender..
the first three peat, bill cartwright wasn't a slouch by any means.. horace grant wasn't bad..

the combination of scott pollard and vlade divac is better than what the mavs have...

FilthyFinMavs · 06-13-2002, 11:56 AM

Yea its better but I wouldnt call the Kings interior defense superior over ours. We dont need a guy like Kandiman or Mourning to get some interior defense in my opinion. But if this off season we wont improve on our interior defense I want call the season a failure. Cuban and Nellie believe in that outscore ur opponent method so I dont believe they will improve the interior defense. Zo is too questionable to trade NVE and Lafrentz for.

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 12:11 PM

I don't care if cuban and nellie think that they can simply outscore their opponents. since when has that been proven to work?
the mavs need to improve their interior defense.

steps to doing so
1.dirk and raef continue to do that
2.get something from esch and bradley
3.have the perimeter defense improve which will in turn improve the interior defense
4.have a healthy enough 3 that can help with the rebounding some
5.change the coaching style a bit to help out the mavs interior defense (fronting rarely works for the mavs..ditch that plan)
6.bring someone in to help the mavs interior defense

1.will happen, it has to happen
2.they can't get much less
3.in the playoffs at least, it can't get much worse
4.surely buck, griff, and taw can help out with relatively good health
5.probably won't happen
6.must happen because after the improvements you make in steps 1-4, the mavs interior defense still needs step 6 to compete for the title

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 12:21 PM

filthymav, there's more options than simply zo for NVE and lafrentz.

FilthyFinMavs · 06-13-2002, 12:25 PM

YEa I heard u say that before but can u atleast give me 1 option there is? Im not trying to give u a hard time I just cant think of an option there is to help our interior defense.

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 12:43 PM

i'll see if i can find the thread that had a list of some of the possibilities...it's fine filthy, i would expect nothing less than for you to ask me to show you some of the possibilities.

Hoopsmeister · 06-13-2002, 12:46 PM

<< the mavs need to improve their interior defense.

steps to doing so
1.dirk and raef continue to do that
2.get something from esch and bradley
3.have the perimeter defense improve which will in turn improve the interior defense
4.have a healthy enough 3 that can help with the rebounding some
5.change the coaching style a bit to help out the mavs interior defense (fronting rarely works for the mavs..ditch that plan)
6.bring someone in to help the mavs interior defense >>

I am completely with you up until #6. And I don't even disagree with you about 6, I just don't think its the priority you do. I think 1-3, particularly with players having time to improve not only as individuals but to spend a training camp getting used to each other, can provide the necessary improvement.

Of course, I also think 2 could include 'getting something for esch & bradley'. And as I say, I'm not going to be upset if we do make a move to pick up Jerome James or Malik Rose, etc. My main thing is that 6 cannot be prioritized to the point that you sacrifice NVE without making sure our ass is covered at the back-up point guard spot first.

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 01:01 PM

i dont' think nve is a good option as the backup pg.
his abilities don't match his mentality and his mentality doesn't match what the mavs need..

Drbio · 06-13-2002, 01:02 PM

Nellie- noone said anything to offend you. I hope you reconsider.

The thing about NVE...noone is trying to just get rid of him. NVE has the most trade value right now outside of the four that most of us do not want to trade (Dirk, Nash, Fin & Raef). I would love to see Bradley and Esch moved for a Pollard type guy that Nellie would actually play.

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 01:18 PM

NVE has trade value and he's a bad fit. that makes it more likely that the mavs will look to move him

Drbio · 06-13-2002, 01:19 PM

couldn't agree more.

Nellie · 06-13-2002, 01:46 PM

<< Nellie- noone said anything to offend you. >>

This realy isn't for you to decide.

<< I hope you reconsider. >>

I am doing that as we speak. I suppose admitting that I have had a bad day so far could suggest a little as far as the way I am interpreting things today. But that is not to say that I agree with the way people are talked to around here. Disagreement is a fact of life and I am not above that. But there is a way to disagree without belittling others and that is what set me off. I don't expect people that have been posting here long to see it because you are used to it by now. However, I am still new and maybe some of you don't realize the impression you are leaving. In this case, David left a bad one. I will take your word that David is an honorable poster and didn't mean anything by that. But I urge you to not settle with the "Nellie doesn't know what he is talking about" theory and consider the "maybe we are a little harsh sometimes and don't realize it" thoery. We all have different opinions but we are supposed to be on the same side here too. I think that fact seems to get lost in all the "I have to one up you because my opinion is better" games that are played often around here. That is where I am coming from.

I am here to talk basketball and disagree if need be. I am not here to tolerate disrespect.

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 01:55 PM

Nellie, that is fine. However, you must also know that you have done the same thing that David did..probably worse.

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 01:55 PM

Of course I'd like for you to stay. I think you have potential
[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

Hoopsmeister · 06-13-2002, 02:00 PM

<< i dont' think nve is a good option as the backup pg.
his abilities don't match his mentality and his mentality doesn't match what the mavs need.. >>

I agree that NVE is not the best possible back-up. I also agree he has trade value. The Mavs should definitely shop him and see what they can get. However, while NVE is not the best match, he is better than a whole lot of other options (Eisley anyone?). The Mavs shouldn't trade him unless they have an adequate replacement for him coming back.

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 02:31 PM

part of the problem is the discrepancy in what actually is best for the team and what nellie perceives as being best for the team.

Bayliss · 06-13-2002, 02:50 PM

This offseason I seem to be spinning in circles. Here's a list of Maverick Catch 22s

Problem 1: We need interior defense, a banger, someone that soesn't steal away shots, etc and is unselfish doing all the dirty work.

Solution 1: We have that center. His name was Esch. Nellie wouldn't get him off the bench even though he is clearly the type of player we need. We might could trade for a banger like Rose, Grant or Zo.

Problem 2: We need an athletic swingman who can defend, rebound and has range (whether it be passing, shooting, or dribbling).

Solution 2: We may have that player. His name is Griffin. Too bad he's either hurt or never plays consistently enough when healthy because of Nellie's weird substitution patterns. We also can possibly sign Asrabic, and if so he may answer the problem **if** he is as advertised and **if** Nellie plays him consistently.

Problem 3: Our perimeter defense needs to improve.

Solution 3: Get Nash more rest, play a bigger lineup more consistently, etc.

All of our problems can be solved by Nellie. The question remains will he? With the way he coaches, he won't.

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 02:54 PM

i didn't see anything out of esch that would make me think he's the answer to #1.
yes, he can bang but that's about it. the mavs need a bit more than just a banger...they need someone that can play a little defense as well

Drbio · 06-13-2002, 02:55 PM

Hoops- I think for th most part everyone is agreeing with that sentiment.

Nellie · 06-13-2002, 02:57 PM

Can we assume that the Bayliss theory would require a coaching change in order to succeed?

Bayliss · 06-13-2002, 03:02 PM

<< Can we assume that the Bayliss theory would require a coaching change in order to succeed? >>

Yes. You heard it hear first. The Mavs will not make it out of the second round as long as Nellie is the coach. I hate to say it. But I'm an optimistic realist.

Drbio · 06-13-2002, 03:05 PM

Bayliss- I cannot agree with that. Horrible icon choice.

Nellie- good icon choice. And yes...Bayliss' theory will require that.

Nellie · 06-13-2002, 03:07 PM

What is Murph's icon about? I can't even tell what it is realy.

Drbio · 06-13-2002, 03:08 PM

It's a nun.

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 03:10 PM

you couldn't tell that it's a nun?
hmm, ok

Nellie · 06-13-2002, 03:11 PM

<< Bayliss- I cannot agree with that. Horrible icon choice. >>

I'm not ready to say Nellie isn't the man yet but patience is wearing thinner each year. Next season will be big for him.

Nellie · 06-13-2002, 03:12 PM

<< you couldn't tell that it's a nun?
hmm, ok >>

Don't nuns were black?

Drbio · 06-13-2002, 03:17 PM

don't nuns wear black?

Only the straight ones. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

PeterVecseyisdumb · 06-13-2002, 05:21 PM

It is important that the mavs improve their defense, especially their interior defense. The mavs should try to get an interior defender/rebounder, this summer. Also, the mavs should try to get a perimeter defender, this summer. The perimeter defense might be easier to address, since the mavs have griffin, buckner, and wahad on the roster. I think the mavs should try to trade nick van exel this summer, for an interior defender/rebounder, if a good offer comes up.

Having a solid interior defense and a solid rebounding team is very important in the playoffs. It's not just about trying to slow down shaq. If you have a solid interior defense and have solid rebounders at the pf, center, and sf position, it will help the mavs, alot. These players aren't just trying to stop the center, pf, and sf on the other team, they are also trying to stop the pg and sg from the other team. It is important in trying to stop layups, short jumpers, etc. from the pg and sg of the other team. When you have a solid defender at the pf,center, and sf position, they are a presence. The other teams need to respect their presence. You can easily see this in the lakers/kings playoff series. Bibby would get by fisher, but couldn't get those layups vs the lakers, like he did vs the mavs, in the playoffs. You can say kobe is a better defender than finley, and fisher is a better defender than nash. I agree. However, bibby was going by fisher, at will. However, bibby couldn't get a lot of layups, because of shaq's presence in the middle. When you have players who can guard the basket, those layups, turn into 18 foot jumpshots.

Having a solid rebounding team will give the mavs more opportunities on offense, and it will give the other teams less opportunities to score, when the other team is on offense. The mavs use a run and gun style of offense. When the mavs rebound, then it makes it easier for the mavs to start the fast break.

It is important that the mavs improve their interior defense, rebounding, and perimeter defense, this summer.

Nellie, I don't think David was trying to be mean to you. Nellie, hopefully you will stick around, and not leave because of a misunderstanding.

David · 06-13-2002, 05:50 PM

<< david, we all agree that there aren't any shaq stoppers around. however, the mavs don't do a good job of even slowing guys down like divac.
surely you must agree that the mavs can upgrade their defense enough to at least make it more difficult for shaq...and much more difficult on your spare to fair centers and PF's >>

It gets down to who is ACTUALLY available to bring in and who the Mavs have to give up to get that player. NVE, yes, several of the others I would rather not deal. The guys I would trade are probably players the other teams don't want.

David · 06-13-2002, 06:22 PM

<<

<< Option 4 is, more than likely, the only option. Option 3 is a dream that will, more than likely, not take place. I think you made a nice try, in trying to lay it all out, but pretty much missed the boat all the way up and down your post. Of course that is just my opinion. I didn't see much based in the reality of what is going on. >>

Excuse me? Who the hell are you to tell me I missed the boat?

First of all, these trades are not of my own design as I stated.

The trades mentioned have all been scenarios tossed around on everything from the Insider to this board. I was doing nothing more than gathering that info and attempting to analyze it. I never said that some weren't ridiculous. What I did say is that I seperated as best I could what "could" happen into catagories and displayed what I thought were the pros and cons.

Now if you want to knock me on my minimal opinion that was supplied, go ahead but most of this was objective and I realy don't appreciate you posting that it was a "nice try" but I "missed the boat" on my entire post.

If I had posted the possibility of acquiring LaFrentz and Van Exel for Howard last offseason, you probably would have said the same thing huh?

The truth is you don't know any more or less than any of us what will happen and to be so sure that you do know could make you look like a true idiot if something happens. Don't act like you know everything cause you don't.

I apologize to most of you who had to read that but I had to soap box this guy. I spent a lot of time on this thread and he did a good job of pissing me off. >>

You obviously spent a lot of time on it. That's where the "nice try" part came in. I have no idea where you got any of it. There is a BIG difference in an idea and something that will actually happen. I don't believe any of it will happen except the last option. That is my opinion. That's why I stated that it was my opinion. Like someone once said, "it's better to be pissed off, than pissed on."

I was just expressing my opinion. You don't have to get hateful about it.

Drbio · 06-13-2002, 06:40 PM

He'll stay.

Murphy3 · 06-13-2002, 07:11 PM

NVE or "Nellie" will stay. well, one of them will go.. hopefully it'll be ....
hmm, well, .....NVE.

Drbio · 06-13-2002, 07:12 PM

Was it that tough a call murph? [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

Bayliss · 06-13-2002, 07:20 PM

Murph, I'd rather have NVE (am I really saying that?)....

Donn would not use NVE and Nash together a lot therefore Nash getting the rest he needs for the playoffs and NVE wouldn't kill us...

I feel confident in Donn Nelson. I have none in Nellie.