Chris Kaman to the Mavs

[|_Jeff_|]

Originally Posted by ribosoma

And the reason why the Mavs wouldn't be able to move Haywood's contract is...

wait for it...

because he absolutely sucked last year and was replaced by a completely inexperienced, undersized project player.

If the Mavs and the rest of the league thought that Haywood was equal to or better than Kaman (which, I am fairly certain, was your original point), wouldn't they have held onto him?

No.

Kaman like Haywood wouldn't be able to be moved on a multi-year deal. His value to the Mavs is as an expiring contract and trade piece.

[ribosoma]

Originally Posted by |_Jeff_|

No.

Kaman like Haywood wouldn't be able to be moved on a multi-year deal. His value to the Mavs is as an expiring contract and trade piece.

So how many points and rebounds do you think that expiring contract and trade piece will get this season?

[grndmstr_c]

Originally Posted by |_Jeff_|

Consider the trade deadline next season. Mavs wouldn't be able to move Haywood with two seasons and $15M left. But an expiring $8M is attractive to potential trade partners. Kaman's contract will become a trade chip and that is why he's here.

While I do think Kaman could turn out to be a very nice player for Dallas, I think you're exactly right here to point to his contract as not merely a non-negative factor, but as an asset. I think the Mavs saw an opportunity to get a player with a very intriguing ceiling who'd be seen by the fan base as a breath of fresh air at the very least, and an $8M expiring contract for the trade deadline to boot, and they jumped on it. I doubt Kaman's talent wasn't an afterthought in the decision-making process, but it's naive to think it was the only factor in the decision.

[roadrunner]

Originally Posted by |_Jeff_|

No.

Kaman like Haywood wouldn't be able to be moved on a multi-year deal. His value to the Mavs is as an expiring contract and trade piece.

And where's your proof that Kaman couldnt be moved on a multi-year deal? So, I guess in addition to being rediculous you are psychic too. We do know Mavs couldnt move Haywood on a multi-year because they wouldnt had to amnesty if so...and thats because he wasn't worth his 8 mil a year contract.

[ribosoma]

So we go from Haywood>Kaman, to it doesn't really matter, to Kaman's only value is his contract.

roadrunner pegged the point I was attempting to make. Haywood's contract wasn't deemed as movable because he freaking sucked and was stealing money. If he was worth a damn, his contract would certainly be tradable.

[SMC0007]

IS it true that Kaman was on BaD radio??

[GhostFace]

LOL @ Kaman debunked

These thread tags are getting better every day.

[sike]

"Internet Posting: Where Unbridled Certainty Always Makes You A Winner."

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by SMC0007

IS it true that Kaman was on BaD radio??

I never listen to BaD Radio.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

I never listen to BaD Radio.

Yeah, I also never listen to Bob and Dan on the Ticket.

[quietsavant]

Found this on Kaman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...wjbFfr0#t=334s

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by quietsavant

Found this on Kaman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...wjbFfr0#t=334s

Good watch. Interesting.

[SMC0007]

Originally Posted by quietsavant

Found this on Kaman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...wjbFfr0#t=334s

awesome

[sike]

Originally Posted by quietsavant

Found this on Kaman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...wjbFfr0#t=334s

wow. very interesting. +rep

[Skywalker]

Kaman's twitter profile pic:



lol

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Skywalker

Kaman's twitter profile pic:



lol

HA!!

That guy has a great sense of humor...

[rabbitproof]

Poor Vince. He's still on the team!

[grndmstr_c]

Originally Posted by Skywalker

Kaman's twitter profile pic:



lol

Poor Vince.

[grndmstr_c]

Originally Posted by rabbitproof

Poor Vince. He's still on the team!

Haha, beat me to it.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by rabbitproof

Poor Vince. He's still on the team!

Unless he knows something we don't!

What a giggle.

[mavErika]

Originally Posted by SMC0007

IS it true that Kaman was on BaD radio??

You can find it here. Enjoy!

[roadrunner]

What a great interview, funny dude, had me LOL several times. On Bill Simmons, "To be honest, if you ever met the guy he is kinda a douche". LOL, he got into a twitter spar with him after Simmons dissed he and EB.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

This block alone was worth getting Kaman...rejection!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH_63EPN9wk

[SMC0007]

I think we are gonna have great chemistry this year! Also, I would hang out with Chris Kaman.

[markus1234]

Chris Kaman won gold for Germany





good job. !

[Zaknaf3in]

[dude1394]

I'm stating to like this dufus. We have matching dork bookends.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Not much to talk about, but I liked one of Fish's donuts this morning about how many Mavericks last season had 20+ point games. Dirk had 39, Jet 11, Vince four, Marion and Delonte three, and Roddy two. He then mentioned that Kaman went for 20+ ten times in thirty games on the Hornets last season. Kinda exciting...for August.

[dirt_dobber]

Mark Cuban pipes up for Chris Kaman
By Henry Abbott
ESPN.com http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/pos...or-chris-kaman

It's not news that stat-geeky owner Mark Cuban has spent a lot of money on Chris Kaman, a center who is generally abhorred by advanced stats.

What's new is that Cuban's taunting and generally mixing it up with stat geeks who would dare to challenge his decision.

The conversation (which is served with a spicy side dish of "how dare you question Dirk Nowitzki?") is playing out now in the comments of the Wages of Wins blog.

The whole thing began innocently enough, with Ari Caroline sharing a tidy chart of NBA centers who are really effective but don't get a lot of minutes (Omer Asik, Kosta Koufos, Anderson Varejao, Chris Andersen, etc.) with a note about centers who are very ineffective but play quite a few minutes. The star of this second list was the default star of what was once supposed to be a big free-agent offseason for the Mavericks: Kaman.

So it should come as no surprise that Cuban arrived guns a-blazin'. He announces his arrival by trashing Wins Produced, the core of Wages of Wins' work: "Im not a huge fan of WP for the NBA, but its still fun to read the craziness you guys post."

This is kind of a cheap shot. No, Wins Produced isn't perfect. But, as several commenters make clear, at this stage of the game no system is without flaws, including whatever it is Cuban might be using.

The default position of Wages of Wins, however, is that the most important thing in basketball is getting good players on your team. All the other stuff -- coaching, putting players in different combinations, etc. -- per Wages of Wins ... is secondary.

That gets under the skin of coaches and other basketball people who make their careers from that "other stuff." It also evidently chaps Cuban, who has a long-term relationship with the high priest of lineup analysis and ends his first comment with: "Maybe you should start looking at WP for lineups ? Coaching matters. Who you play with matters. Who you play against matters."

(It's worth worrying whether or not this is really Mark Cuban. I'll bet it is. Notice the space before the end-of-sentence punctuation, in this case a question mark. That habit has been a fixture on his blog, Blog Maverick, for years.)

Andres Alvarez, of Wages of Wins, responds: "I believe there is value in lineups and systems, etc. However, you can’t get around the basic problems: You need good players to compete and you can’t give bad players major minutes. We’re trying to help with that, and I believe Ari does a great job showing some of the problems. And yes, you should be worried about Kaman."

Then it starts to get really interesting. First Neil Paine, of Basketball-Reference fame, make a great point that Wins Produced simply loves centers who attempt to do almost nothing on offense.

Then Cuban goes all in on the idea that the Mavericks know how to use some players better than other teams do. The implication is that Kaman may have been horrible elsewhere, but he'll be good in Dallas. He also goes heavy on the idea that Nowitzki is vastly undervalued by metrics like Wins Produced, because a huge part of his value is drawing double-teams and making great decisions out of them, creating easy looks for his teammates all over the floor. During the Mavericks' title run, the team offense was amazing, even though Nowitzki was not a standout statistically. Cuban points out that almost no Maverick played well without logging long minutes with Nowitzki.

The idea is that the Mavericks know how to make players like Kaman effective.

"Damp, Tyson, haywood, bwright all got better. ... Are we that good with our centers or do we just use them differently. Or do we recognize that a good player is only as good as they contribute to a team game"

The Mavericks certainly have a lot of pride in their system, and now they have a title to back it up. Cuban gets to win a lot of these arguments. But the idea that the Mavericks can be really good with Kaman on the floor, and get markedly more production out of him than he has shown in recent years ... it's a bold call that flies directly in the face of most, if not all, of the publicly available evidence. If Cuban is right, then you'll simply have to tip your cap to Cuban, Rick Carlisle and the Mavericks.

It's a tall order, and who knows who'll be proved right: Cuban and his "we put them in a position to win" crew, or the Wages of Wins and the idea that bad players are bad players and that's that.

I can remember only one other time when Cuban made a big bet that flew in the face of most stat geekery: When he traded Devin Harris for Jason Kidd. Harris was not only younger and faster, but by far the more productive. Cuban took more than a little heat, including on this very blog, for sending Harris to the Nets for an aged Kidd.

But history has proved Cuban's argument was precisely correct. He said, essentially, that Kidd would make his teammates better while Harris -- since proven to be one of the most selfish point guards in the league -- would not. It was a great trade.

[chumdawg]

Damp got better? Really?

[mqywaaah]

Damp and Tyson mentioned again together but it doesn't seem right hmmm

[EricaLubarsky]

But history has proved Cuban's argument was precisely correct. He said, essentially, that Kidd would make his teammates better while Harris -- since proven to be one of the most selfish point guards in the league -- would not. It was a great trade.

I love this

And I love that Kaman is basically the lowest-risk decision we've ever made.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

I love this

And I love that Kaman is basically the lowest-risk decision we've ever made.

And yet the first line of the article says that Cuban paid Kaman a lot of money. Really? I'm not quite sure the writer knows the contract details.

[LonghornDub]

In defense of Harris, I think "selfish" is a bit unfair. To me, that implies that he purposefully doesn't distribute the ball. I don't think that's true. I think he's just not good enough (court vision, passing mechanics, etc.) to distribute the ball well.

[Dirkadirkastan]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Damp got better? Really?

Obviously. He couldn't stay on the court once he left...

[SMC0007]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

In defense of Harris, I think "selfish" is a bit unfair. To me, that implies that he purposefully doesn't distribute the ball. I don't think that's true. I think he's just not good enough (court vision, passing mechanics, etc.) to distribute the ball well.

You made good point

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

In defense of Harris, I think "selfish" is a bit unfair. To me, that implies that he purposefully doesn't distribute the ball. I don't think that's true. I think he's just not good enough (court vision, passing mechanics, etc.) to distribute the ball well.

I think selfish probably describes his play rather than his character, but I agree that its unfair. His play style and tool set (like 98% of guards in the league) is more combo-guard than play-maker. Just because a guy doesn't distribute well doesn't mean he's a selfish player. Selfish to me means that he not only has open or better options but is also aware of them and chooses to take the shot anyway.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

I think selfish probably describes his play rather than his character, but I agree that its unfair. His play style and tool set (like 98% of guards in the league) is more combo-guard than play-maker. Just because a guy doesn't distribute well doesn't mean he's a selfish player. Selfish to me means that he not only has open or better options but is also aware of them and chooses to take the shot anyway.

Exactly.

[Lor20]

wp is a lot about efficiency and being on winning teams and yes Kaman has stats that are quite bad there. but you have to see who he played with. the clippers and the hornets (after cp3 left). Those are bad teams so he probably took some bad shots that he will hopefully not take for the mavs. I dont expect his point numbers to stay where they were... they'll be lower. But his efficiency should be significantly up.

And that is what really matters at the end.

[The Ghost of Championship]

Move of the offseason. Brand a close 2nd.