The ESPN Draft Special in minutes after the Cubs/Cards game - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Murphy3 · 06-23-2004, 09:18 PM

stay tuned for more.

Just211 · 06-23-2004, 09:22 PM

i really hope they know some additional info. and i hope Stephen A. Smith isn't the one i have to here say it.

Just211 · 06-23-2004, 09:26 PM

shit, the dreaded triple post...

but really, i don't want to listen to Smith

mavs413 · 06-23-2004, 09:37 PM

Aldridge is making it sound as if Stackhouse and the #5 would be traded seperately.

ocelot_ark · 06-23-2004, 09:38 PM

Wizards made the trade to rid contracts and get a veteran...didn't want to get younger.

Beginning of a scenario that gets us Shaq without giving up Dirk...

All per David Aldridge.

Steven A. Smith - Has to include Dirk...Nash has one year left...moron

Jim Gray - Complicated, could take a month to pull off trade. Might just bring back Shaq. Shaq doesn't want to go to the midwest. Going to take a long time...(I don't buy it for a SECOND)

Rhylan · 06-23-2004, 09:55 PM

Stephen A. Smith also said on ESPN Radio this morning that "Shaq could go to the Knicks for the MLE." Ummm.. Shaq's not a free agent you MORON!

Seriously, get this guy off my TV. So far this show has been an empty bag.

mavsfanforever · 06-23-2004, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Rhylan
Stephen A. Smith also said on ESPN Radio this morning that "Shaq could go to the Knicks for the MLE." Ummm.. Shaq's not a free agent you MORON!

Seriously, get this guy off my TV. So far this show has been an empty bag.

Was he serious? I was watching the rangers game and did not follow this.

ocelot_ark · 06-23-2004, 10:11 PM

Might move Stackhouse to NY for Kurt Thomas according to DA...but we were content with having stackhouse on the roster.

Of course, DA also says that the Mavs haven't brought anyone in for workouts yet and we're scrambling to get the young studs in here for a thursday morning workout.

DNNF · 06-23-2004, 10:50 PM

Stack for Thomsas is a sweet deal. But I don't know why would the Knicks want this. Stack is definitely not a PG. What are they going to do with Houston and Stack in the backcourt?

EricaLubarsky · 06-23-2004, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: DNNF
Stack for Thomsas is a sweet deal. But I don't know why would the Knicks want this. Stack is definitely not a PG. What are they going to do with Houston and Stack in the backcourt?

FilthyFinMavs · 06-23-2004, 10:56 PM

I thought Kurt was on that 4.5 mill contract he has? Wouldn't the Mavs have to take more then just Kurt? I'm starting to think the Mavs aren't even going to pursue a Shaq trade.

EricaLubarsky · 06-23-2004, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: FilthyFinMavs
I thought Kurt was on that 4.5 mill contract he has? Wouldn't the Mavs have to take more then just Kurt? I'm starting to think the Mavs aren't even going to pursue a Shaq trade.

Nellie: "We are going to war with what we have. We are still looking to upgrade the center position but with the new defensive mentality and the deeper bench, I think our chances are good of making it far in the playoffs. Stack (house) is a very talented player that I've admired for years. He can backup players at the SG, SF and PF positions."

[img]i/expressions/moon.gif[/img]

FilthyFinMavs · 06-23-2004, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: EricaLubarsky

Quote:

Originally posted by: FilthyFinMavs
I thought Kurt was on that 4.5 mill contract he has? Wouldn't the Mavs have to take more then just Kurt? I'm starting to think the Mavs aren't even going to pursue a Shaq trade.

Nellie: "We are going to war with what we have. We are still looking to upgrade the center position but with the new defensive mentality and the deeper bench, I think our chances are good of making it far in the playoffs. Stack (house) is a very talented player that I've admired for years. He can backup players at the SG, SF and PF positions."

I guess we plan on sitting Finley on the bench because Stack isn't backing anyone up and he sure as hell better not start over Josh.

DNNF · 06-23-2004, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: FilthyFinMavs
I thought Kurt was on that 4.5 mill contract he has? Wouldn't the Mavs have to take more then just Kurt? I'm starting to think the Mavs aren't even going to pursue a Shaq trade.

Yes, the Mavs have to take back another contract if Thomas for Stack deal is going down. Personally, I feel that Cuban and the Lakers have some secret agreement for Shaq before the Wiz Mavs trade.

Dirk and Walker and Stack for Shaq and Scrub

or

Nash, Walker, Howard and number 5 for Shaq and Scrub

FilthyFinMavs · 06-23-2004, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: DNNF

Quote:

Originally posted by: FilthyFinMavs
I thought Kurt was on that 4.5 mill contract he has? Wouldn't the Mavs have to take more then just Kurt? I'm starting to think the Mavs aren't even going to pursue a Shaq trade.

Yes, the Mavs have to take back another contract if Thomas for Stack deal is going down. Personally, I feel that Cuban and the Lakers have some secret agreement for Shaq before the Wiz Mavs trade.

Dirk and Walker and Stack for Shaq and Scrub

or

Nash, Walker, Howard and number 5 for Shaq and Scrub

I don't like either deals to be honest. I was for a Shaq for Dirk trade because at the end of the deal we still have Jamison, Nash, Finley and hopefully the rookies will return. Now that we've traded Jamison the trade including Dirk looks horrible now.

EricaLubarsky · 06-23-2004, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: ocelot_ark
Might move Stackhouse to NY for Kurt Thomas according to DA...but we were content with having stackhouse on the roster.

Of course, DA also says that the Mavs haven't brought anyone in for workouts yet and we're scrambling to get the young studs in here for a thursday morning workout.

1) DA is a moron
2) Stackhouse won't fetch crap
3) I've had the same feeling about scouting this year. Dallas has either been very secretive or very slow with that.

FilthyFinMavs · 06-23-2004, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: EricaLubarsky

Quote:

Originally posted by: ocelot_ark
Might move Stackhouse to NY for Kurt Thomas according to DA...but we were content with having stackhouse on the roster.

Of course, DA also says that the Mavs haven't brought anyone in for workouts yet and we're scrambling to get the young studs in here for a thursday morning workout.

1) DA is a moron
2) Stackhouse won't fetch crap
3) I've had the same feeling about scouting this year. Dallas has either been very secretive or very slow with that.

I'm listening to the radio and not everyone thinks Stackhouse is crap. Some are blaiming this season on him not wanting to play for the Wiz. I can't fault him for that but that's the difference between Jamison and Stack. Jamison may hate the Wiz but this guy is going to play his heart out every night.

EricaLubarsky · 06-23-2004, 11:07 PM

I'm not hoping for Stack to fail. Im just hoping he is part of a bigger deal. He very well could be a player like NVE who flourishes in the speed, attention and freedom of our winning MAvs squad.

ocelot_ark · 06-23-2004, 11:16 PM

I'm betting something is going to happen that NO ONE even expected. We'll end up with Vince Carter and Elton Brand while only giving up Jamison and Walker :-)

But seriously, I just don't understand how all of this is going to fall into place.

ocelot_ark · 06-23-2004, 11:31 PM

And I, like Tom Tolbert, don't sacrifice the next 10 years of prosperity within my franchise for the possibility of a 'ship with Shaq. Let's not forget, Shaq and company just got POUNDED by Detroit. That was a team of stars. You take out Dirk and we're Shaq with a bunch of lesser-thans. No way we win a championship without Dirk. If we can't keep Dirk, say screw you to LA and tell them to 'f themselves. They AREN'T getting a better deal than what we're offering. I'd rather grab a Tyson Chandler or Al Harrington and put them with Dirk than trade him away.

EricaLubarsky · 06-23-2004, 11:33 PM

a team isnt one player and even that one player was limited by his team. That "one" player did dominate when he got the ball.

FilthyFinMavs · 06-23-2004, 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: EricaLubarsky
a team isnt one player and even that one player was limited by his team. That "one" player did dominate when he got the ball.

Shaq stats were pretty good in that series but they could've been even better. Feed this guy when he is that dominant. I hope if he comes to the Mavs this isn't a problem.

FilthyFinMavs · 06-23-2004, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: ocelot_ark
And I, like Tom Tolbert, don't sacrifice the next 10 years of prosperity within my franchise for the possibility of a 'ship with Shaq. Let's not forget, Shaq and company just got POUNDED by Detroit. That was a team of stars. You take out Dirk and we're Shaq with a bunch of lesser-thans. No way we win a championship without Dirk. If we can't keep Dirk, say screw you to LA and tell them to 'f themselves. They AREN'T getting a better deal than what we're offering. I'd rather grab a Tyson Chandler or Al Harrington and put them with Dirk than trade him away.

Jamison, Finley and Nash would've been more than lesser thans IMO. If Shaq had that cast the Laker's would've been champs. None of these guys would've went 7/26 and deny Shaq the ball. The deal for Dirk is thrown out of the window now. You go from having Jamison, Finley and Nash to having just Finley and Nash here.

sike · 06-24-2004, 02:43 AM

a good player/tradeable commodity is Stack

we must be thinking of different guys Chaff....the guy i think of is an overpaid bag of crap who is all O, and is not a great teammate....introduce me to the Stack you know....

Dooby · 06-24-2004, 08:47 AM

The best thing said last night was from my dad's neighbor and current Clippers' coach Dunleavy with Jim Gray. I wish moron Junior Miller was listening. to paraphrase:

Quote:

The media thinks LA is going to get 100 cents on the dollar for Shaq or they will keep him. But right now Shaq is driving the bus. No one will trade for shaq unless they know they can keep him and that is a very limited number of teams. And contrary to what some think, they can't keep him. I am sure that the Lakers are asking for 100 cents on the dollar for Shaq, but they aren't going to get it. But will it be 80 cents? 75 cents? 70 cents? That remains to be seen.

This folks, is the essence of the deal. And everybody listening to Coop and D&M saying you have to give up both Dirk and Nash for Shaq need to write this on the blackboard 100 times.

And is there anything more intolerable than Stephen A. Smith? He says everything so definitively. "You have to ...."

SaltwaterChaffy · 06-24-2004, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: sike
a good player/tradeable commodity is Stack

we must be thinking of different guys Chaff....the guy i think of is an overpaid bag of crap who is all O, and is not a great teammate....introduce me to the Stack you know....

I never said great. But a guy who can average 20 points per game is a good player and a tradeable commodity. His contract isn't as bloated as Jamison's either. Something like 7 mil? That's not horrendous.

FilthyFinMavs · 06-24-2004, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: SaltwaterChaffy

Quote:

Originally posted by: sike
a good player/tradeable commodity is Stack

we must be thinking of different guys Chaff....the guy i think of is an overpaid bag of crap who is all O, and is not a great teammate....introduce me to the Stack you know....

I never said great. But a guy who can average 20 points per game is a good player and a tradeable commodity. His contract isn't as bloated as Jamison's either. Something like 7 mil? That's not horrendous.

You do know that Stackhouse set the record for the lowest field goal percentage for a guy averaging 20 points a game. It seems like if he does average 20 a game he is going to be forced to do so. I can't see a team wanting this guy as their center piece or expecting him to average 20 a game for them but his contract isn't bad at all.

grndmstr_c · 06-24-2004, 01:02 PM

Stack isn't as inefficient as his fg% would indicate because the guy is just a machine at getting to the free throw line and is a reasonably accurate when he gets there. In fact, his career true shooting percentage is actually higher than AJ's.

FilthyFinMavs · 06-24-2004, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: grndmstr_c
Stack isn't as inefficient as his fg% would indicate because the guy is just a machine at getting to the free throw line and is a reasonably accurate when he gets there. In fact, his career true shooting percentage is actually higher than AJ's.

What do you base this on? Stackhouse is a career 40% shooter. I know Jamison can't be that low. Only thing they both have in common is that they both got the same amount of minutes last year but one managed to shoot 39% from the field and the other shot 53% from the field. They don't compare at all.

grndmstr_c · 06-24-2004, 01:50 PM

Quote:

What do you base this on? Stackhouse is a career 40% shooter. I know Jamison can't be that low. Only thing they both have in common is that they both got the same amount of minutes last year but one managed to shoot 39% from the field and the other shot 53% from the field. They don't compare at all.

I based it on the stats from NBA.com; perhaps you've heard of it. True shooting percentage is computed by the following formula:
Points / (fga + (fta*.44))
It's a better index of offensive efficiency than fg% because it takes 3 point shooting and productivity at the free throw line into account. For their careers, Stack's true shooting percentage is higher than AJ's. Stack's numbers don't match what AJ accomplished in a Mavs uni, but then again, AJ in a GS uni couldn't match AJ in a Mavs uni.

FilthyFinMavs · 06-24-2004, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: grndmstr_c

Quote:

What do you base this on? Stackhouse is a career 40% shooter. I know Jamison can't be that low. Only thing they both have in common is that they both got the same amount of minutes last year but one managed to shoot 39% from the field and the other shot 53% from the field. They don't compare at all.

I based it on the stats from NBA.com; perhaps you've heard of it. True shooting percentage is computed by the following formula:
Points / (fga + (fta*.44))
It's a better index of offensive efficiency than fg% because it takes 3 point shooting and productivity at the free throw line into account. For their careers, Stack's true shooting percentage is higher than AJ's. Stack's numbers don't match what AJ accomplished in a Mavs uni, but then again, AJ in a GS uni couldn't match AJ in a Mavs uni.

The stats at NBA.com shows Stack is a career 40% shooter while Jamison is a career 45% shooter. I never said that Jamison was a better free throw shooter than Jamison. I'm going by how they shoot from the field and Jamison is more effecient than Stack. I hope every other GM in the league thinks like you maybe we can dump Stack on someone and it'll bring Shaq in here.

grndmstr_c · 06-24-2004, 02:12 PM

Quote:

The stats at NBA.com shows Stack is a career 40% shooter while Jamison is a career 45% shooter.

Again, when you're discussing someone's offensive efficiency true shooting percentage is a better index than fg%. I gave you the formula to compute it from the stats at NBA.com and you come back to me with...fg%, which I've already told you is an inferior index of offensive efficiency when compared to true shooting percentage. (why do i feel like I'm repeating myself here)

Quote:

I never said that Jamison was a better free throw shooter than Jamison.

I know you never said AJ was a better free throw shooter. My point, in fact, was exactly the opposite; namely that the stats you were quoting were ignoring free throw shooting.

Quote:

I'm going by how they shoot from the field and Jamison is more effecient than Stack.

If you're interested in evaluating a player's offensive efficiency true shooting percentage...oh, never mind. I give up.

Quote:

I hope every other GM in the league thinks like you maybe we can dump Stack on someone and it'll bring Shaq in here.

Me too.