Dallas Mavericks Offseason Thread - Page 13 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

LSMF · 05-17-2009, 02:39 PM

If we did Jackson and Azubuike we would be the winner of that trade. Azubuike this season averaged 14 pts and he would be our starting SG. Jackson averaged 20pts, 5 rbs and 6 assists. Who were the people who don't want this trade btw?!

Our Lineup would look like this:
Pg Kidd- 9ppg,8assts, 6 rebs
Sg Azubuike- 14pts, 5 rebs
SF Sjax- 20pts, 5 rebs and 6 asts
Pf Dirk 25ppg, 9.5 rebs, 2asts
C-? Hopefully at least 10ppg and 10 rpg

Are you telling me that wouldn't be a good team? And you would still have guys like Jet, Bass, JJb, Wright, our MLE guy and whoever we draft coming off the bench. Say yes to Azubuike and Jax for J-Ho.

alby · 05-17-2009, 02:46 PM

for once, I'm going to agree with the guy

BGMaverick9 · 05-17-2009, 02:55 PM

I think the concern is that Jackson can have the same kind of faults as Howard has and Azubuike isn't that flashy of a guy for our SG, and we'd be taking a chance that we might not be able to make a big splash for a Center with the remaining pieces. This might be the opposite route to take: Use Josh for the C and use the rest for the swing players and see if that's the better player value direction.

Who really knows for sure, I know this route isn't that bad...may not be the home-run, but its an improvement.

LonghornDub · 05-17-2009, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by longsufferingmavsfan

If we did Jackson and Azubuike we would be the winner of that trade. Azubuike this season averaged 14 pts and he would be our starting SG. Jackson averaged 20pts, 5 rbs and 6 assists. Who were the people who don't want this trade btw?!

Our Lineup would look like this:
Pg Kidd- 9ppg,8assts, 6 rebs
Sg Azubuike- 14pts, 5 rebs
SF Sjax- 20pts, 5 rebs and 6 asts
Pf Dirk 25ppg, 9.5 rebs, 2asts
C-? Hopefully at least 10ppg and 10 rpg

I don't like the trade. You can't just transplant S-jax's stats onto the Mavs. He was probably the best player on the Warriors, especially during all the games Ellis missed. He's not going to handle the ball nearly as much here. He also won't be playing in a system that maximizes possessions per game. Twenty ppg on the Warriors is closer to 17 or 18 on most other teams.

Like I told BG, Howard is a better player than either of those guys. Toss Howard on this year's Warriors team and he probably averages 23+.

And nobody said it "wouldn't be a good team." I said I don't consider it an upgrade. I consider it a lateral move.

LSMF · 05-17-2009, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BGMaverick9

I think the concern is that Jackson can have the same kind of faults as Howard has and Azubuike isn't that flashy of a guy for our SG, and we'd be taking a chance that we might not be able to make a big splash for a Center with the remaining pieces. This might be the opposite route to take: Use Josh for the C and use the rest for the swing players and see if that's the better player value direction.

Who really knows for sure, I know this route isn't that bad...may not be the home-run, but its an improvement.

Jackson is much more mature than in years past, dude is a warrior. He's someone in the playoffs you can count on. He's a good perimeter defender and he can shoot the 3 very well. And as an athletic people seem to underrate him. Dude does have some spring in his legs.

And Azubuike doesn't have to be flashy imo. When was the last time we had a SG that was 6'6 could play defense, was athletic, could shoot, could drive and was tough? It's been a while, right? I would do this trade in a heartbeat.
And we could still use Stack, Damp and others if we want to make another trade.

LonghornDub · 05-17-2009, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by longsufferingmavsfan

He's someone in the playoffs you can count on. He's a good perimeter defender and he can shoot the 3 very well.

Jackson shot 41% from the field this year and 33% from 3. Howard shot 45% from the field and 35% from 3.

MaVs 41 BaLler · 05-17-2009, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Jackson shot 41% from the field this year and 33% from 3. Howard shot 45% from the field and 35% from 3.

Atleast Jackson could score in any given time of the game.

Thespiralgoeson · 05-17-2009, 03:15 PM

Jackson would be an upgrade for us at 2, for sure, but if we're talking about swapping howard for him, then that's a lateral move at best, maybe even a slight downgrade.

LSMF · 05-17-2009, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Jackson shot 41% from the field this year and 33% from 3. Howard shot 45% from the field and 35% from 3.

No disrespect but You bring up these stats but you just said that he was the best player on the warriors. Don't you think that the defenses were focused on stopping him? J-Ho on the other hand is NOT the best player on our team. My argument with you is that that S-Jax would get better looks here then he would on that warriors team because he would be playing off Kidd and Dirk, which would probably raise his Fg and 3pt%.

And btw, How is it lateral if we would be getting a starting Caliber SG in
Azubuike in return also?

LonghornDub · 05-17-2009, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by longsufferingmavsfan

No disrespect but You bring up these stats but you just said that he was the best player on the warriors. Don't you think that the defenses were focused on stopping him? J-Ho on the other hand is NOT the best player on our team. My argument with you is that that S-Jax would get better looks here then he would on that warriors team because he would be playing off Kidd and Dirk, which would probably raise his Fg and 3pt%.

And btw, How is it lateral if we would be getting a starting Caliber SG in
Azubuike in return also?

No, I do not think that "defenses were focused on stopping" Stephen Jackson. He's Stephen Jackson--he's not Dirk, or Kobe, or Wade, or Dwight Howard. Defenses don't extensively gameplan around decent-to-good players with mediocre shooting and ball-handling abilities.

And no, that wasn't your argument. Your argument was that he "shoots the 3 ball very well." He doesn't. 33% is awful.

LonghornDub · 05-17-2009, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Jackson would be an upgrade for us at 2, for sure, but if we're talking about swapping howard for him, then that's a lateral move at best, maybe even a slight downgrade.

Exactly.

LSMF · 05-17-2009, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

No, I do not think that "defenses were focused on stopping" Stephen Jackson. He's Stephen Jackson--he's not Dirk, or Kobe, or Wade, or Dwight Howard. Defenses don't gameplan around decent-to-good players with mediocre shooting and ball-handling abilities.

And no, that wasn't your argument. Your argument was that he "shoots the 3 ball very well." He doesn't. 33% is awful.

So basically you're saying that even though Stephen Jackson was the best player most of the time last season on that warriors team other teams defenses weren't focused on stopping him because of who he was? Seriously? What I think is that no matter who you are if you're the best player on a team Nba defenses will try to limit you. Why wouldn't they? They would say "Oh, just let Stephen Jackson kill us"?

And like I said before his 3pt% would increase by playing off Kidd and Dirk? And once again, how is the trade "Lateral" if we are getting a starting caliber shooting guard in Azubuike also?

LonghornDub · 05-17-2009, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by longsufferingmavsfan

So basically you're saying that even though Stephen Jackson was the best player most of the time last season on that warriors team other teams defenses weren't focused on stopping him because of who he was? Seriously? What I think is that no matter who you are if you're the best player on a team Nba defenses will try to limit you. Why wouldn't they? They would say "Oh, just let Stephen Jackson kill us"?

There's a (fairly extensive) gray area between gameplanning to shut a player down and "letting a player kill you." Of COURSE opposing teams tried to defend him. The point is that there is absolutely no excuse for him shooting a horrendous 41% from the field and 33% from three. Whatever defensive attention he was getting as the team's best player, it wasn't enough to justify those awful percentages. I guarantee you Stephen Jackson wasn't facing double teams every time down the court.

The fact of the matter is, the guy is not that great of a shooter. In fact, he's a worse shooter than Josh Howard (who is also not a very good shooter). He's decent, but Mavs fans perceptions of him are horribly tainted by the fact that he had an aberrational, fantastic shooting performance in that playoff series two years ago.

LSMF · 05-17-2009, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

There's a (fairly extensive) gray area between gameplanning to shut a player down and "letting a player kill you." Of COURSE opposing teams tried to defend him. The point is that there is absolutely no excuse for him shooting a horrendous 41% from the field and 33% from three. Whatever defensive attention he was getting as the team's best player, it wasn't enough to justify those awful percentages. I guarantee you Stephen Jackson wasn't facing double teams every time down the court.

The fact of the matter is, the guy is not that great of a shooter. In fact, he's a worse shooter than Josh Howard (who is also not a very good shooter). He's decent, but Mavs fans perceptions of him are horribly tainted by the fact that he had an aberrational, fantastic shooting performance in that playoff series two years ago.

You probably are right that some of our perceptions of him are tainted. But I think he's clutch. Josh Howard is NOT clutch. Jackson consistently can come up huge for his team in the 4th, Josh does once in a while but I can almost guarantee that not more than S-Jax. And I think if he was fighting through some injuries last season as well which may have hurt his shooting.

And even though he may not be a very good shooter, I think he's good enough to knock down the looks he's gunna get off playing with Dirk and great passes from Kidd. And on top of that we would be getting Azubuike. Why wouldn't you do a trade that improves your perimeter defense, athleticism and toughness?

Thespiralgoeson · 05-17-2009, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by longsufferingmavsfan

And once again, how is the trade "Lateral" if we are getting a starting caliber shooting guard in Azubuike also?

This is just me, but I'd rather get Azubuike and let them keep Jackson. Probably not possible, but as long as we're throwing ideas around, how about Stack+filler, for Azubuike+filler. It's got to be worked out so that GS benefits financially, but if we could land Azubuike and an upgrade at 5, that's a good offseason.

LonghornDub · 05-17-2009, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by longsufferingmavsfan

And even though he may not be a very good shooter, I think he's good enough to knock down the looks he's gunna get off playing with Dirk and great passes from Kidd. And on top of that we would be getting Azubuike. Why wouldn't you do a trade that improves your perimeter defense, athleticism and toughness?

I'm on board with what spiral says....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

This is just me, but I'd rather get Azubuike and let them keep Jackson. Probably not possible, but as long as we're throwing ideas around, how about Stack+filler, for Azubuike+filler. It's got to be worked out so that GS benefits financially, but if we could land Azubuike and an upgrade at 5, that's a good offseason.

I like Azubuike. If we can get him for Stack's contract and some filler, that would be fan-freaking-tastic.

I don't like the Howard for S-jax+Azubuike trade because I believe we're giving up the best player in that deal, which is very frequently a losing proposition (even when you're getting more players back).

ghazi · 05-17-2009, 03:53 PM

Azabuike?

Stephen Jackson?

Like these guys are big time difference makers in the league?

What are we talking about here? 50-55 wins and 0-1 playoff series wins? WCF at best?

Jackson and Azabuike ain't gonna help against the Lakers Cavs and celtics of this world!

LSMF · 05-17-2009, 03:53 PM

Ok here's what I think. I'm going to be using alot of these: >

Josh Howard> Stephen Jackson
Stephen Jackson in the clutch(4th quarter)> Josh Howard in the clutch
Josh Howard> Kelenna Azubuike
Kelenna Azubuike>> Antoine wright

So I also will agree with Spiral and just say we should do Stack and filler for Azubuike and filler. Azubuike solves our SG issues. I gotta project I have to work on so good night everyone, fun talking to ya. Be back 2morrow.

Thespiralgoeson · 05-17-2009, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ghazi

Azabuike?

Stephen Jackson?

Like these guys are big time difference makers in the league?

What are we talking about here? 50-55 wins and 0-1 playoff series wins? WCF at best?

Jackson and Azabuike ain't gonna help against the Lakers Cavs and celtics of this world!

I agree in principle, but really, what are our options here? I wish to god we could go after a D-Wade or a Dwight Howard, but those guys just can't be had. I know Bosh's name has been thrown around, but I really don't see the point. Unfortunately it looks like all we can realistically hope for are the almost all-star kind of players. And given this organization's track record in the offseason, I'd say that's even a lot to hope for.

chumdawg · 05-17-2009, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ghazi

Stephen Jackson?

Like these guys are big time difference makers in the league?

What are we talking about here? 50-55 wins and 0-1 playoff series wins? WCF at best?

Jackson singlehandedly beat us in Game Six of the conference finals in '03. Steve Kerr may have been the one to hammer the nails in the coffin, but Jackson was the one who did the dirty work.

And of course, there's that whole '07 thing. The dude is a very, very, very good playoff performer.

Justin Credible · 05-17-2009, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

I agree in principle, but really, what are our options here? I wish to god we could go after a D-Wade or a Dwight Howard, but those guys just can't be had. I know Bosh's name has been thrown around, but I really don't see the point. Unfortunately it looks like all we can realistically hope for are the almost all-star kind of players. And given this organization's track record in the offseason, I'd say that's even a lot to hope for.

I keep hearing this, but I have yet to understand why so many people feel this way. He's from Dallas, he loves Dallas to the point that he has a charity set up here, and if Toronto thinks that he's going to leave then they'd be all over trading him out so they don't lose him and gain nothing at all.

I think that if Bosh is up for it then there's a very good chance of landing him. We have other players to offer and it might be an expensive trade, but I think that it would be a very worthwhile trade in the end.

I think the chances of getting Bosh are a lot higher than a lot of people think. The only taxing part about it (if he's up for it) would be the amount of players + cash we'd have to throw at Toronto. I could see Damp/Stack/Josh Howard + cash being damn near a minimum for that acquisition. That being said I personally think it would be worth it and we would almost be a Cavs/Celtics/Lakers caliber team instantly. All that would be missing at that time would be an athletic and scoring center, which if Hollins can beef up and focus then he'd be a great center.

I don't know, I'm still not on the Capt. Jack bandwagon just yet.. and I sure as hell am not on the Ron Artest bandwagon. Shaq would be a double-edged blade given the fact that he's slow and the Mavericks play best at a quicker pace.

I just think that the Mavericks have a lot better chance to land a Bosh-esque player this offseason than we will in the famed 2010 free agent offseason. This offseason teams are trying to get ready for 2010 by freeing up cap space, so if they think that they're going to lose someone they're going to be eager to trade them.

The only other option (if you want to make a huge move) is to clear off all the big contracts and rebuild from the ground up in 2010.. That's a good guarantee of not having a chance to win the ring for Dirk for another.. idk.. 2 years? At that point I'd rather see Dirk traded off than to crush his chances here.

This offseason is the best chance, imo, that the Mavs have to make a huge acquisition like that and I think that they need to do whatever it takes to make it happen.

Thespiralgoeson · 05-17-2009, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin Credible

I keep hearing this, but I have yet to understand why so many people feel this way. He's from Dallas, he loves Dallas to the point that he has a charity set up here, and if Toronto thinks that he's going to leave then they'd be all over trading him out so they don't lose him and gain nothing at all.

I think that if Bosh is up for it then there's a very good chance of landing him. We have other players to offer and it might be an expensive trade, but I think that it would be a very worthwhile trade in the end.

I think the chances of getting Bosh are a lot higher than a lot of people think. The only taxing part about it (if he's up for it) would be the amount of players + cash we'd have to throw at Toronto. I could see Damp/Stack/Josh Howard + cash being damn near a minimum for that acquisition. That being said I personally think it would be worth it and we would almost be a Cavs/Celtics/Lakers caliber team instantly. All that would be missing at that time would be an athletic and scoring center, which if Hollins can beef up and focus then he'd be a great center.

I don't know, I'm still not on the Capt. Jack bandwagon just yet.. and I sure as hell am not on the Ron Artest bandwagon. Shaq would be a double-edged blade given the fact that he's slow and the Mavericks play best at a quicker pace.

I just think that the Mavericks have a lot better chance to land a Bosh-esque player this offseason than we will in the famed 2010 free agent offseason. This offseason teams are trying to get ready for 2010 by freeing up cap space, so if they think that they're going to lose someone they're going to be eager to trade them.

The only other option (if you want to make a huge move) is to clear off all the big contracts and rebuild from the ground up in 2010.. That's a good guarantee of not having a chance to win the ring for Dirk for another.. idk.. 2 years? At that point I'd rather see Dirk traded off than to crush his chances here.

This offseason is the best chance, imo, that the Mavs have to make a huge acquisition like that and I think that they need to do whatever it takes to make it happen.

You addressed none of my concerns. I don't think he'd solve any of our problems because he plays the same position as Dirk. Plain and simple.

grndmstr_c · 05-17-2009, 04:40 PM

SJax is a quality player who can contribute in virtually every phase of the game, and has no real holes in his skill set with the exception of being TO-prone. In that respect I think he's the kind of guy the Mavs have really tended to be a bit short on, and he'd be a worthy acquisition.

My only concern with jumping the gun and shipping off Josh for Jackson and Azubuike is that, as was previously mentioned by BG, you've then spent your best trade asset (and make no mistake, between his contract and his talent and the fact that he redeemed himself by gutting it out through the injuries in these most recent playoffs, that's exactly what Josh is), but you haven't improved your ability to score from the center position, and Dirk is still your best player by a mile. As nice as it would be to have a legit and seemingly complementary set of starters at the pg through pf positions for the first time in forever, you're taking a pretty big chance if that's how you start things off.

As long as we're on the subject of current SG/SF duos, though, I'll just throw it out there that my favorite pairing is Hamilton/Prince. Those two would look real nice playing next to Kidd and Dirk.

Justin Credible · 05-17-2009, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

You addressed none of my concerns. I don't think he'd solve any of our problems because he plays the same position as Dirk. Plain and simple.

I was only replying to the line that was bolded, hence why I bolded it.

Also, I don't see why he couldn't play SF. He has the athleticism to play that position and he has shown the ability to effectively drive to the paint. It most definitely would not be the first time that Bosh played small forward rather than power forward, and he's done a good job in that small forward position when put there.

grndmstr_c · 05-17-2009, 05:01 PM

I'd absolutely be in favor of going after Bosh if he were available, but playing him at SF just seems silly. Dirk and Bosh at the 4/5, Kidd at point, and slashers/defenders at the 2/3 would be the way to take maximal advantage of what Bosh would bring to the roster.

Thespiralgoeson · 05-17-2009, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin Credible

I was only replying to the line that was bolded, hence why I bolded it.

You misunderstood me then. I said "I don't see the point" because I don't think he's the answer to any of our problems.

Quote:

Also, I don't see why he couldn't play SF. He has the athleticism to play that position and he has shown the ability to effectively drive to the paint. It most definitely would not be the first time that Bosh played small forward rather than power forward, and he's done a good job in that small forward position when put there.

Bosh at 3? Yuck, no thank you. He'd be about as effective there as Dirk. We already have problems with the high-caliber wingmen of the league. Playing a big man at the 3 would only make the problem much worse. You could play them at 4 and 5 respectively, but I just don't see it. They're both primarily high-post players. From the center spot we need shot blocking, help-side defense, and low-post scoring. Bosh doesn't excel at any of these areas.

Janett_Reno · 05-17-2009, 05:39 PM

I must say the Howard/Jackson/Azubuike trade is interesting. Dirk said he was staying and has 3 or 4 good years left. Dirk is smart and said what we needed. Defense and athletic guys that drive to the basket. He mentioned Denver had this. He is right. Let me start with Azubuike. He was a Gerald Green in high school and him and Green in high school was already a star in the nba. No one could stop Azubuike. He went to KY where if you do not play defense, you don't play. He had some huge games, strong, very good scorrer and strong in the painted area. Good on defense. The problem was, like Green, not consistent. I actually thought when he was turned lose in the nba he would be a better nba player than college. So i thought highly of him and even more so than Rondo in which i knew Rondo was under rated at Ky and the nba. Rondo is blessed being on a good team also.

Azubuike has talent and the size and skills. Wil he ever be the star that said he would be in the nba that people said he would be in high school? He needs to take advantage and shine and be more consistent. He would be a good player for us(i think). He is athletic and can play defense. He can bump around also with physical. Some guys that play and hate to lose that are very talented and has a huge heart and fights to win. That is Artest, Jackson, Bowen, Duncan, Gino, Lebron, Kobe, Wade, Billups. Jackson can beat you with points, defense, rebounds, ast and getting under the other teams skin and yes he is very talented with length. He gets better in the 4th where Josh gets worse. The sad thing is Josh is a young Artest and Jackson, or could be and was a couple years ago untill he wanted to be Dirk and Terry. A shooter.

Yes Jackson, Shaq, Iverson, Rasheed are all risk because we must win now. In the next 3 to 4 years, the party is all over. I am not sure what Shaq has left and he is slowing but a force in half court slow ball. Iverson, will he play team ball and he is hard to stop but it can't be Antoine Walker ball.

It would be a luxury to get a player like Dwight Howard, Bosh, etc but it won't happen. Cuban won't go young and throw 3 seasons away to rebuild because Dirk is staying and wants to win and they will try to make him a winner. So the Dallas Mavs will go for these needs we need old or older with the exception of an added type younger Azubuike type player. It's a risk just like Harris was a risk and Howard could become an Artest and Jackson but it doesn't look like it will happen in Dallas. Teams will line up wanting Josh Howard still because of what can be. If Josh stays, in which he is probably our piece to try to better ourself they will probably move him to sg and us be big, more driving and defense. It will be big shake ups in Detroit, so some of those players will be available also. I am not crazy about the Jackson/Azubuike trade but yes i realize, Jackson and Artest are the type players you need to win. I know we are going this route but with whom?

bobatundi · 05-17-2009, 05:39 PM

I had been under the impression that the Wizards were looking to dump salary, but a recent article I read in the Post made it sound like they think they're one player away from being competitive, and they want to build around Arenas, Butler, Jamison. It went on to say that, unless they get the #1 pick and draft Griffin, they're more than likely willing to part with that pick, as they don't need Rubio or Thabeet given they have entrenched starters at both positions.

So here's a thought: would the Wiz, looking to add some veteran talent and an offensive player (given it's Flip Saunders at the helm) offer up the #2 or #3 pick and maybe Etan Thomas for Jason Terry? Do it? If so, who do you draft--Rubio or Thabeet? Or someone else?

Janett_Reno · 05-17-2009, 05:43 PM

When i say i am not crazy about the trade, i am meaning i will miss Josh and what could have been. With Azubuike/Jackson, yes i admit we will be better.

ghazi · 05-17-2009, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

I agree in principle, but really, what are our options here? I wish to god we could go after a D-Wade or a Dwight Howard, but those guys just can't be had. I know Bosh's name has been thrown around, but I really don't see the point. Unfortunately it looks like all we can realistically hope for are the almost all-star kind of players. And given this organization's track record in the offseason, I'd say that's even a lot to hope for.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMa...tradeId=rdtu32

Har har har

But really, something along those lines, acquire some good players in salary dumps. I still insist that is a balanced trade that favors all 3 parties, but alas, I'm holding out hope

Bosh would be good IMO. he's a top 20 player, that's a difference maker as opposed to guys like Azabuike and Jackson. But like Dirk he's best served playing next to a traditional big man, and neither are that so you wonder how it would actually work out.

Howard needs to be off the team IMO. He finished the season strong but at the end of the day the guy just doesn't have f'n pedigree. Handles suspect, shot selection suspect, durability issues, overrated defense. Not a piece of a championship puzzle.

Terry needs a reduced role, accomplished by bringing in better players. If a guy is undersized, rarely gets to the line, and 40% of his shots are 3 pointers, he is not a #2 option. The league is different now than it was in 2006, which in hindsight appears to be have been a watered down year, and Terry himself isn't as lethal from the arc as he was in 2006.

But to conclude, I don't think it's to the point where ONLY D-Whistle or Dwight Howard would restore this team to what it once was.

Dirkadirkastan · 05-17-2009, 05:48 PM

Try again:

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMa...tradeId=rdtu32

Janett_Reno · 05-17-2009, 05:50 PM

Terry won't bring that. He is undersized. Teams want Howard and Dirk. They will take Terry at a good deal. I am afraid the ticket will be Josh Howard. Now will we sink or swim? Will we get another Kidd or will we get lucky and pick up an Artest or Rondo? Beacuse if we screw up again with Howard, we are sunk meaning if we do not make a good trade like when we had Harris. We got Dirk in a good one, Lakers stole Gasol, so good trades can happen.

Janett_Reno · 05-17-2009, 05:53 PM

Even Denver got Billups and without Billups and possibly Birdman, they would not be left in the playoffs now. Now Anthony will shine for Denver. It was no chance with them against the Lakers, none but with Billups it is a chance. I doubt they beat them but it could happen. Sometimes one or two players, a star and role player makes a team from ok to really good like Denver. It can happen to us, i hope.

LonghornDub · 05-17-2009, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

And of course, there's that whole '07 thing. The dude is a very, very, very good playoff performer.

He's had some very nice moments, but I would certainly not call him a "very, very, very" good playoff performer. In 2007, after he beat up on the Mavs, he proceeded to perform thusly against the Jazz:

Game 1: 5-14 shooting
Game 2: 4-18 shooting
Game 3: 2-4 shooting, 3 TO's
Game 4: 5-15 shooting, 6 TO's
Game 5: 3-17 shooting, 3 TO's

That's a combined 19/68 (27%) over the course of the series. His three point percentages were even worse. And this is on a Warriors team that gave him considerably more support than what he has now, with Baron et al.

chumdawg · 05-17-2009, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

He's had some very nice moments, but I would certainly not call him a "very, very, very" good playoff performer. In 2007, after he beat up on the Mavs, he proceeded to perform thusly against the Jazz:

Game 1: 5-14 shooting
Game 2: 4-18 shooting
Game 3: 2-4 shooting, 3 TO's
Game 4: 5-15 shooting, 6 TO's
Game 5: 3-17 shooting, 3 TO's

That's a combined 19/68 (27%) over the course of the series. His three point percentages were even worse. And this is on a Warriors team that gave him considerably more support than what he has now, with Baron et al.

I blame poor coaching. Obviously he was put into a position where he was ill fit to succeed.

Thespiralgoeson · 05-17-2009, 06:51 PM

I like Jackson quite a bit, but I don't think he's the answer to our problems. If we can get him without losing Josh, great. But otherwise, again, lateral move at best. He's always been a pretty inefficient scorer.

BGMaverick9 · 05-17-2009, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobatundi

I had been under the impression that the Wizards were looking to dump salary, but a recent article I read in the Post made it sound like they think they're one player away from being competitive, and they want to build around Arenas, Butler, Jamison. It went on to say that, unless they get the #1 pick and draft Griffin, they're more than likely willing to part with that pick, as they don't need Rubio or Thabeet given they have entrenched starters at both positions.

So here's a thought: would the Wiz, looking to add some veteran talent and an offensive player (given it's Flip Saunders at the helm) offer up the #2 or #3 pick and maybe Etan Thomas for Jason Terry? Do it? If so, who do you draft--Rubio or Thabeet? Or someone else?

I'm sorry to rain on Washington's parade but they're not 1 player away, they're at least 3-4, their guys can't stay healthy together, just like the Rockets. Eventually they have to come to the realization and stop being stubborn with the fact of the matter.

I've taken a 2nd look at my list of wing players (via trade) and it's a pretty short list...this is how I would prioritize my efforts in getting these guys from highest to lowest:
Caron Butler
Gerald Wallace
Stephen Jackson
Richard Jefferson

If Washington realized they're being really stubborn and are crippled with Arenas' deal, then Butler or Jamison would need to be put on the block. You hit them hard with a Stack-led deal and push for Butler. You might run into the same injury issues he has or miss games like Josh...but if they're both missing time, I'll take Butler, no doubt.

Wallace is a player that Kidd really needs to have on the wing. He's going to attack the paint and finish at the rim with authority. He's a versatile defender and can run in the open court. Injuries are a concern as well, but he's got some great upside.

I've already talked about Jackson.

RJ can run with Kidd obviously, there is just something about him that doesn't click all the way as an automatic choice. He has the intangibles but it still seems off. It's really hard to explain. He'll clearly be available though.

Probably out of the 4, RJ is the most available then Wallace, Jackson and then Butler.

LonghornDub · 05-17-2009, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I blame poor coaching. Obviously he was put into a position where he was ill fit to succeed.

Like we're supposed to believe that you'd ever call out Nellie for poor coaching.

stoble · 05-17-2009, 07:21 PM

How do you guys know which teams are looking to dump salaries? Or which teams are going to be more open to trading?

Is it the teams with the highest salaries?

LonghornDub · 05-17-2009, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

He's always been a pretty inefficient scorer.

Yes, and this is exactly my issue as well. I love S-jax's toughness, his defense, and his general mentality. I also like the fact that he's not scared to take a big shot. Frankly, the Mavs could use a guy like that more than just about anything else. But his propensity to have horrendously inefficient games really concerns me, especially given the current roster, which has one exceedingly efficient player (Dirk), and that's it.