3 way - Bring back Quick!

[kingpin]

[kingpin]

Read today that GS and Portland may be talking about a NVE+Dampier for Rasheed deal. Maybe we could jump in if Portland is still interested in Jamison. How about:

Dallas trades: Jamison & Delk
Dallas receives: NVE & Dampier

Portland trades: Rasheed
Portland receives: Jamison & Delk

GS trades: NVE & Dampier
GS receives: Rasheed

This trade was accepted. I would love to get the Quick back and get the inside presence that we lack..

[ddh33]

It might be nice to have Nick back, but not at that cost. Sorry...

Besides, there is no way that happens.

[EricaLubarsky]

Kaboom!!!

this was also posted here

[akaarod03]

Interesting. Dampier and NVE would be terrific here in Dallas. Dampier being our center and NVE being our back-up PG. The question is will NVE be willing to come back to Dallas? I say yes...judging by our standing ovation when he came back for a game last month...the fans still love him and more importantly i think he really enjoyed his time here. Looking at it from Portland's perspective...I think they would take Jamison but not Abdul-Wahad...thats why the deal didnt fall through. However, the originial deal, Jamison, Najera, and Delk for Wallace...they were probably willing to do that deal. GS apparently wants Wallace and the salary cap space. So why not? Dallas gets NVE and Dampier. Portland gets Jamison, Najera, and Delk. Golden State gets Wallace. I'd do that.

[LRB]

I would love having NVE back as insurance for Steve getting hurt, but only if we trade Walker. We can't afford to have 2 volume shooter like Walker and NVE, especially if we give up our most efficient scorer of the big 5. Switch Walker for Jamison and I'd do it to get Dampier.

[akaarod03]

btw LRB...i would switch walker for jamison as well. actually portland probably would take walker since his contract is up next year (~14 million or so off the books). with that said...if they asked for jamison...it wouldnt be a deal breaker with me. i just think the possibility of adding nve and dampier would be way too appealing to turn down.

[dalmations202]

Let's see. You get a 6th man - who can bring Nellies instant offense, no defense, and give Nash some down time w/o stopping the offense. (ie...see Travis Best for the 1/2 court only game)
You get a Big man that can bang, rebound, and play a little defense. And also has a little O.

You lose a GREAT player in Jamison 6th man or if you want to use Walker either way - instant offense, and 6'9".
You lose a role player that does not really fit a role here in Delk.

And this was nuked? ? ?

(insert Jamison for Walker if it were Walker to go)
C Bradley, Dampier, Fortson
PF Nowitzki, Walker, Nahera
SF Walker, Howard
SG Finley, Van Exel, Daniels
PG Nash, Van Exel, Best

And in the off season, sign TAG and keep this going for the next few years.

Right now, we are strong at the Forward spot, and weak at C and backup PG. Wouldn't this trade make lots of sense, if we want to win it all.

[LRB]

akaarod03 the reason that giving up Jamison would be a deal breaker is because our lineup to close games would be:

Nash
NVE
Fin
Walker
Dirk

Neither NVE and Walker are both very bad shooters who aren't spectacular on defense. With this lineup we would struggle to defend and struggle to score with NVE and Walker dominating the shots.

Now with

Nash
NVE
Fin
Jamison
Dirk

to close out games at least we have only 1 really bad shooter on the court at once. And NVE would be the only player whose tendancy is to monopolize the ball. We still suck at D and could possibly be worse, but what we gain on offense is well worth it IMO. At least we have a chance to outscore the opponents. With NVE and Walker in the game our offense would absolutely suck most nights.

[LRB]

I would also add that Jamison would be more likely to accept being taken out for Bradley or Dampier for defensive reasons than Walker.

[akaarod03]

LRB...the more I think about it...you're right...Walker and NVE would take a lot of ill-advised shots. I would prefer to keep Jamison. However, one thing I disagree with is your lineup to close games. I would prefer this lineup:

Nowitski
Howard
Dampier
Finley
Nash

In fact that would be my starting lineup as well...with Jamison and NVE coming off the bench. Wow what firepower.

Of course, Nellie would probably go with Nash, NVE, Finley, Howard, and Nowitski to close out games [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

[Dirkenstien]

Why would Portland do this?? Its absurd. They basically get the same thing they would get if they made a trade with us straight up except in this case they help us out a lot more. Please.. this proposal was nuked and deservedly so

[LRB]

Originally posted by: akaarod03
LRB...the more I think about it...you're right...Walker and NVE would take a lot of ill-advised shots. I would prefer to keep Jamison. However, one thing I disagree with is your lineup to close games. I would prefer this lineup:

Nowitski
Howard
Dampier
Finley
Nash

In fact that would be my starting lineup as well...with Jamison and NVE coming off the bench. Wow what firepower.

Of course, Nellie would probably go with Nash, NVE, Finley, Howard, and Nowitski to close out games [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

akaarod03 I would prefer your proposed lineup as well, possibly substituting Bradley for Dampier if we needed FT shooting to hold a lead. What I was referring to is what Nellie would most likely play. Howard very rarely might beat Jamison out to close games, but I highly doubt Nellie would do that very often.

[Lvubun1]

As I posted in the other thread, the trade i'm hearing is NVE/Dampier/Murphy and protected #1 for Wallace and Patterson, I'm not sure how the numbers work but I'd do it for Walker/Delk. I know the last thing the Mavs need is yet another SF/PF but atleat he is a 'different' type of SF/PF, he can rebound and defend.

Dampier
Dirk
Troy
Finley
Nash

Nick/Jams/Howard off the bench, that's sick.

[kingpin]

Originally posted by: Dirkenstien
Why would Portland do this?? Its absurd. They basically get the same thing they would get if they made a trade with us straight up except in this case they help us out a lot more. Please.. this proposal was nuked and deservedly so

Obviously the Trailblazers had a strong interest in Jamison, but it is my understanding they were reluctant to make a deal due to the inclusion of TAW and contract in the deal. By replacing him with a servicable player with a lower contract number, they may once again be interested in a package for AJ.

Highest of all highly unlikely? Absolutely... (when has a deal mentioned on a message board ever happened? I would say never)

Absurd? No

[Dirkenstien]

Originally posted by: kingpin

Obviously the Trailblazers had a strong interest in Jamison, but it is my understanding they were reluctant to make a deal due to the inclusion of TAW and contract in the deal. By replacing him with a servicable player with a lower contract number, they may once again be interested in a package for AJ.

Highest of all highly unlikely? Absolutely... (when has a deal mentioned on a message board ever happened? I would say never)

Absurd? No

Even with dodging TAW's contract they still bring in another hell of a contract in Jamison. They dont want to be locked down with another bigtime contract having made that clear. By pulling the trigger on the Blazers/Warriors trade, the Blazers would reduce their payroll by almost $25 million next season and should still be roughly $18 million under the cap in 2005, once Dale Davis, Damon Stoudamire and Van Exel come off the books; making them extremely competitive in the offseason. They also claim a good center in Dampier which is something they have been trying to acquire desparately since the departure of Sabonis; not to mention something the rest of the NBA is in dire need of.

With the trade you proposed the Blazers are tied down financially with Jamisons contract, they now have a controversy with Miles/Jamison, they lose out on a very good center while allowing him to go to their competitors, they acquire Delk instead of Van Exel, and they are not in a position to be as competitive as they'd like to be in the offseason.

Absurd? Yes

Blazers management would be completely insane to bring Dallas into this.

[MightyToine]

Walker isn't going anywhere. Let's just end this silliness.

[jayC]

Dampier has had one good half a season and suddenly we want him. As for Nick the quick from Nellie we can't afford a 17.5 million dollar backup.

[LRB]

As for Nick the quick from Nellie we can't afford a 17.5 million dollar backup.

I guess that means Jamison has to go?

[dalmations202]

Golden State trades: PG Nick Van Exel (13.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 5.9 apg in 34.1 minutes)
PF Troy Murphy (7.5 ppg, 6.1 rpg, 0.6 apg in 20.6 minutes)
C Erick Dampier (11.9 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 0.7 apg in 32.0 minutes)
Golden State receives: SF Rasheed Wallace (17.5 ppg, 6.8 rpg, 2.5 apg in 38.0 minutes)
SG Ruben Patterson (8.0 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 2.0 apg in 24.5 minutes)
Change in team outlook: -7.3 ppg, -9.3 rpg, and -2.7 apg.

Portland trades: SF Rasheed Wallace (17.5 ppg, 6.8 rpg, 2.5 apg in 38.0 minutes)
SG Ruben Patterson (8.0 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 2.0 apg in 24.5 minutes)
Portland receives: PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 29 games)
PF Antoine Walker (15.9 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 5.4 apg in 47 games)
PF Danny Fortson (3.7 ppg, 4.9 rpg, 0.1 apg in 35 games)
Change in team outlook: +0.7 ppg, +5.1 rpg, and +1.8 apg.

Dallas trades: PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 16.3 minutes)
PF Antoine Walker (15.9 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 5.4 apg in 37.9 minutes)
PF Danny Fortson (3.7 ppg, 4.9 rpg, 0.1 apg in 11.8 minutes)
Dallas receives: PG Nick Van Exel (13.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 5.9 apg in 30 games)
PF Troy Murphy (7.5 ppg, 6.1 rpg, 0.6 apg in 11 games)
C Erick Dampier (11.9 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 0.7 apg in 45 games)
Change in team outlook: +6.6 ppg, +4.2 rpg, and +0.9 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED

--------------------------------------------------------

Golden State trades: C Erick Dampier (11.9 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 0.7 apg in 32.0 minutes)
PG Nick Van Exel (13.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 5.9 apg in 34.1 minutes)
PF Troy Murphy (7.5 ppg, 6.1 rpg, 0.6 apg in 20.6 minutes)
Golden State receives: SG Ruben Patterson (8.0 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 2.0 apg in 24.5 minutes)
SF Rasheed Wallace (17.5 ppg, 6.8 rpg, 2.5 apg in 38.0 minutes)
Change in team outlook: -7.3 ppg, -9.3 rpg, and -2.7 apg.

Portland trades: SG Ruben Patterson (8.0 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 2.0 apg in 24.5 minutes)
SF Rasheed Wallace (17.5 ppg, 6.8 rpg, 2.5 apg in 38.0 minutes)
Portland receives: PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 29 games)
SF Eduardo Najera (3.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 0.4 apg in 28 games)
PF Danny Fortson (3.7 ppg, 4.9 rpg, 0.1 apg in 35 games)
SF Antawn Jamison (15.4 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 1.0 apg in 47 games)
Change in team outlook: +3.5 ppg, +5.3 rpg, and -2.2 apg.

Dallas trades: PG Tony Delk (6.6 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 16.3 minutes)
SF Eduardo Najera (3.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 0.4 apg in 13.7 minutes)
PF Danny Fortson (3.7 ppg, 4.9 rpg, 0.1 apg in 11.8 minutes)
SF Antawn Jamison (15.4 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 1.0 apg in 29.7 minutes)
Dallas receives: C Erick Dampier (11.9 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 0.7 apg in 45 games)
PG Nick Van Exel (13.4 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 5.9 apg in 30 games)
PF Troy Murphy (7.5 ppg, 6.1 rpg, 0.6 apg in 11 games)
Change in team outlook: +3.8 ppg, +4.0 rpg, and +4.9 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED



Either of these trades work basically for all involved. It would strengthen the Mavs for sure either way.
The addition of Troy Murphy and Patterson had to be made to make the $$$ work for the teams.

[MightyToine]

Originally posted by: LRB

I guess that means Jamison has to go?

Was NVE the 6th man of the mavs? Just curious....

[Mavs Rule]

Which is why the next 12 days could be interesting. The trading deadline is Feb. 19, and the Mavericks are going to be linked to speculation 24/7 until then.

They already have been mentioned in connection with Golden State for center Erick Dampier and Van Exel.

That trade is laughable because the Mavericks cannot re-acquire Van Exel or any player during the same season that they have traded him away, per NBA rules.

Dallas News Article

[Poindexter Einstein]

MT .... "Was NVE the 6th man of the mavs?" ...in essence, yes

JAY-C and LRB ... "As for Nick the quick from Nellie we can't afford a 17.5 million dollar backup. " ...actually what Nellie said was that we couldnt afford to pay that much to a BACKUP PG - I think he had concluded that the Mavs couldnt afford to retain NVE as the 6th man cause the size problems were killing the Mavs, and he couldnt justify the big money to do what Best is doing only better .... LRB, re Jamison, the concept of "6th man" really involves using a starter off the bench. I think the difference is the inside presence and rebounding of Jamison opposed to the size of NVE as a backup. Size matters in the NBA.

[Poindexter Einstein]

"That trade is laughable because the Mavericks cannot re-acquire Van Exel or any player during the same season that they have traded him away, per NBA rules. "

I saw that item, but I sure cant find any such thing in the rules. I wonder if it is accurate.