Mavs at the Trade Deadline ... Ideas, Rumors, Thoughts ....Where do they fit? - Page 3 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Tokey41 · 02-11-2009, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

So your health is contingent on the quality of your team?

Seems like the quality of teams is contingent on the health of their players.

Your going to seriously suggest that players give it their all on losing teams... when Vince Carter, a player some people want here, has publicly admitted to slacking because "the team was going nowhere". Davis is the same way, when you see enough of these players you can start to pick them out. Tracy Mcgrady, Larry Hughes, Boozer (even when his team is winning), Kenyon Martin, etc, they all slack when they know they are playing for something less than contending.

If you don't think they would make us contenders thats fine... but to me, the starting five of Davis/Wright/Howard/Dirk/Kaman (with a Jet, Damp bench) seems pretty damn lethal in contrast to what we have now. And if your concerned about defense, need I remind you that we won 67 games and made a finals appearance with a backcourt of Harris/Jet? It's ugly, but you can't argue with the results.

I'd do the Shaq trade or the Clippers trade simply because we need something (anything!) to happen. If you can get two quality starters for one then why wouldn't you? The beauty of it is we'd still have Stack's contract to trade is someone else was looking to deal.

MX425 · 02-11-2009, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kidd Karma

Salmons for Stack....I like Salmons, he's a glue type of player, can play the point, 2 or 3....but more of a 6th man type, not a starter.

paying stack for salmons is not cheap. His contract in this economy is worth so much. that would be a dumb move

Kidd Karma · 02-11-2009, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MX425

paying stack for salmons is not cheap. His contract in this economy is worth so much. that would be a dumb move

...yea but it's not my money and we should be out of this thing by the time Salmon's contract is up in 2011. Yea, the only thing I hate about that is it's stuck on the books for our Bosh-run.

LonghornDub · 02-11-2009, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tokey41

Your going to seriously suggest that players give it their all on losing teams... when Vince Carter, a player some people want here, has publicly admitted to slacking because "the team was going nowhere".

Except he didn't suggest that at all. He suggested (correctly) that a player's health is not contingent on the quality of his team. Baron missing 14 games this year has nothing to do with him "slacking."

Tokey41 · 02-11-2009, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Except he didn't suggest that at all. He suggested (correctly) that a player's health is not contingent on the quality of his team. Baron missing 14 games this year has nothing to do with him "slacking."

And I'm suggesting a player's health IS contingent on the quality of his team. I've seen too many examples in Toronto of Carter going down when the team is trailing by double digits to believe that players don't take extended periods off when they simply aren't motivated to play (you know, despite the ridiculous amounts of money they are paid to perform).

Sometimes players could just tough out an injury and there are plenty of examples of them doing so (Kobe's finger, Dirks ankle, etc.), but these players make a conscious choice to sit out because they feel they aren't playing for anything. Would a contender make them want to rush back into action a little faster? If it doesn't then I don't know what else will.

Tokey41 · 02-11-2009, 06:43 PM

double post

sike · 02-11-2009, 06:48 PM

great thread. (except for the "players on bad teams health" discussion)

Yall really have my trade juices flowing now....don't let me down (again), Cuban!!!

LonghornDub · 02-11-2009, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tokey41

And I'm suggesting a player's health IS contingent on the quality of his team. I've seen too many examples in Toronto of Carter going down when the team is trailing by double digits to believe that players don't take extended periods off when they simply aren't motivated to play (you know, despite the ridiculous amounts of money they are paid to perform).

Sometimes players could just tough out an injury and there are plenty of examples of them doing so (Kobe's finger, Dirks ankle, etc.), but these players make a conscious choice to sit out because they feel they aren't playing for anything. Would a contender make them want to rush back into action a little faster? If it doesn't then I don't know what else will.

The notion that the quality of a player's team affects his health more than the other way around is laughable.

Kidd Karma · 02-11-2009, 06:49 PM

...well and some just can't even get on the floor:

http://www.click2houston.com/sports/...62/detail.html

same surgery as Kidd had on his left knee, holes are punctured in the knee to create bleeding and that becomes new cartilage. 6 month thing from table to full bore court time.

Underdog · 02-11-2009, 07:05 PM

I find it interesting which folks around here support trading Kidd for Davis/Kaman - it almost seems like this discussion has more to do with Devin Harris than Baron Davis...

Obviously these folks haven't been paying attention to the effectiveness of Kidd since he took over the offense - they're still mentally stuck in the offseason/early season trying to build further consensus about the Kidd trade being a bust...

Kidd Karma · 02-11-2009, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

I find it interesting which folks around here support trading Kidd for Davis/Kaman - it almost seems like this discussion has more to do with Devin Harris than Baron Davis...

Obviously these folks haven't been paying attention to the effectiveness of Kidd since he took over the offense - they're still mentally stuck in the offseason/early season trying to build further consensus about the Kidd trade being a bust...

Kidd needs 3 guys who can score 20 a night....that's the problem with his contract, you can't add that 3rd legit 20 point guy to the roster without opening up the pocket book.

rabbitproof · 02-11-2009, 07:12 PM

I think the first priority (and from what we've heard from Cuban via DB.com) is that 2010 is tops. The long-term healthy of the franchise and maximizing Dirk's 4-5 years left as an All-Star is more important than becoming a legit contender in the next two postseasons.

With that as a condition, let's try to do what we can via trade and in 2009 to utilize Dirk's next 2 post seasons/1st banana for a Finals run.

For this, I believe Kidd for Baron/Camby, while nice on paper, will not last. It does not meet the first condition.

The Mavs can still be legit title contenders with Dirk, as a 2nd banana type in 2011-2012, if we do right in 2010. Whereas, if we go for it all now, we may be done for in a couple years and have to blow up.

Tokey41 · 02-11-2009, 07:41 PM

If Dirk doesn't have a ring by next season... the trade was a bust. The reality is Kidd's contract is our largest asset and if we're going to make a major move I think a lot of teams will be asking for it. Howard and Stack? Maybe, but we didn't hear much interest for Howard earlier in the season now did we?

Flacolaco · 02-11-2009, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

I find it interesting which folks around here support trading Kidd for Davis/Kaman - it almost seems like this discussion has more to do with Devin Harris than Baron Davis...

To be fair, I didn't want Kidd, but definitely take him over Baron's knees any day.

BGMaverick9 · 02-11-2009, 07:56 PM

The Shaq idea makes total sense for me as a Maverick fan who can see what is going on, it makes financial sense for Phoenix.

It doesn't make ANY sense at all for them to try to ship out Amare instead of Shaq. Who really trades a guy that young and that talented and decides to keep someone who might not even be there in two years? Now Shaq might not be there in two years either, but wouldn't you want to try to put a building block in place? Shaq is NOT a building block.

He makes sense here for the short term and to build on 2010 and beyond. I'm not sure Dallas necessarily MISSED out on him last go-round. They were a top choice and made sense but LA wasn't going to keep him in the West, that was suicide on their part. So if all things were equal, I feel like his chances of coming her last time were pretty high. I don't think Phoenix necessarily cares about that right now because they're pinching pennies and know they aren't going anywhere right now. They're just a mess.

If you can get Shaq/Barnes or Hill for Josh and Stack...you gotta take it and RUN!

sike · 02-11-2009, 07:58 PM

The Big Aristotle in Big D would have me watching every second of every game once again...

Flacolaco · 02-11-2009, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tokey41

And I'm suggesting a player's health IS contingent on the quality of his team. I've seen too many examples in Toronto of Carter going down when the team is trailing by double digits to believe that players don't take extended periods off when they simply aren't motivated to play (you know, despite the ridiculous amounts of money they are paid to perform).

You're also suggesting that this is the kind of human you want in a mavericks uniform. No thanks, none for me.

Underdog · 02-11-2009, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

The Big Aristotle in Big D would have me watching every second of every game once again...

I mentioned something along those lines in a rep comment earlier today...

Shaq + Dirk + Kidd = basketball worth paying to see in these economic times

Dirkadirkastan · 02-11-2009, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

I find it interesting which folks around here support trading Kidd for Davis/Kaman - it almost seems like this discussion has more to do with Devin Harris than Baron Davis...

Obviously these folks haven't been paying attention to the effectiveness of Kidd since he took over the offense - they're still mentally stuck in the offseason/early season trying to build further consensus about the Kidd trade being a bust...

And it's almost just as much fun watching Kidd play defense.

I don't know how this team was mysteriously better with Harris than with Kidd, but it was...

DevinHarriswillstart · 02-11-2009, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhylan

I'm just not on the Baron Davis bandwagon, so I have to disagree w/ longsuffering. This is a guy who's been around for quite awhile, been the same guy for quite awhile, except for playing out of his mind under Nellie. Otherwise, very overpaid and lots of years left on his deal. And lots of teeth and beard.

A Shaq deal is right for Kidd/Dirk short term success.. right for completely retooling around Dirk after the run is over. Sign me up. This is my 7th year w/ season tickets and this year I've been seriously thinking about getting rid of them after next year and the All-Star game opportunities. That's the kind of energizing move that gets my interest level back up because it shows a real decision as far as long-term direction. I was in favor of the Kidd trade (and still am), but ever since then I've felt that this team's personnel has been straddled somewhere between win-now-at-all-costs and multi-year-plan.. you need to be in one camp or the other if you want to win it all.

You hit on a note I was going to mention. I've been a season ticket holder for nine years and am thinking to give them up as well. I'm glad I'm not the only one feeling this way....

Shaq should be on the top of the list of big men to get followed, imo, by Kaman, J'Oneal, and Sheed.

Underdog · 02-11-2009, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

You hit on a note I was going to mention. I've been a season ticket holder for nine years and am thinking to give them up as well. I'm glad I'm not the only one feeling this way....

Funny - Rhylan's comment was the one I repped earlier...

Kidd/JJB
Terry/Wright
Barnes/Green (maybe Grant Hill)
Dirk/Bass
Shaq/Dampier

I'd pay my hard-earned cash to see that lineup any day - that would be a quite a show!

(especially if there's a happy ending featuring the Larry O'Brien Trophy...)

BGMaverick9 · 02-11-2009, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Funny - Rhylan's comment was the one I repped earlier...

Kidd/JJB
Terry/Wright
Barnes/Green (maybe Grant Hill)
Dirk/Bass
Shaq/Dampier

I'd pay my hard-earned cash to see that lineup any day - that would be a quite a show!

(especially if there's a happy ending featuring the Larry O'Brien Trophy...)

Why wouldn't you? It's got a mix of high speed offense and push you down to the ground power offense! I honestly don't care either way if it was Barnes or Hill, I'd prefer Hill...but it's not going to rain on my parade if it's Barnes.

A defense wouldn't have a lot of hope...you just have to hope Dallas sucks in every facet of offense if you're playing them. Man I hope Shaq is off tonight, I hope Dirk and Jet aren't hitting their jumpers. It's very unlikely that BOTH cases would happen. One can kill you just as much as the other one.

Bring him here!!

BGMaverick9 · 02-11-2009, 10:11 PM

Another point just hit me:

If Dallas has been preaching that Josh is valuable over X and over Y in rumored deals...can they seriously say he is more valuable than Shaq?

ddh33 · 02-11-2009, 10:18 PM

I really, really want Shaq.

I would hate to trade Josh to get him though. I don't know if that makes you good enough.

MaVs 41 BaLler · 02-11-2009, 10:24 PM

I say vs the celtics tomorrow and then decide.

grndmstr_c · 02-11-2009, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ddh33

I really, really want Shaq.

I would hate to trade Josh to get him though. I don't know if that makes you good enough.

I think it does if you get Grant Hill back with him. If Barnes is all that's coming back with Shaq I'm a little uneasy about the rotation at the 2/3.

BGMaverick9 · 02-11-2009, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ddh33

I really, really want Shaq.

I would hate to trade Josh to get him though. I don't know if that makes you good enough.

I CAN see why you wouldn't want to get rid of Josh. I just think over the wide scope of the past two years, we haven't seen enough of the good Josh over bad Josh.

Josh probably will be a FA in the summer of 2010, Shaq will be too. So the time issue really is the same...who would you want to have as a "rental" for a season and a half, Shaq or Josh? 10-12 million off the books, or 20 million off the books?

Shaq is playing very good basketball, and fills a major position of need we've had for a very long time. Hill or Barnes will be able to help fill the void of Josh.

I would say the margin greatly favors Dallas when you look at it this way:
Josh/Damp
Barnes (Hill)/Shaq...and Damp

You're really only trading Josh to get those two pieces because Stack COULD be a useful player but the biggest asset he brings for us is his contract.

dude1394 · 02-11-2009, 11:07 PM

Season tickets are quite a luxury in these...the aughts......very tough. I'm not sure I'll keep 'em either.

dirk2003 · 02-12-2009, 12:03 AM

shaq is fat and pretty much done. he has emerged over the last month but he is no answer. kidd for kaman/davis is a much better solution. gives us inside scoring

BGMaverick9 · 02-12-2009, 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirk2003

shaq is fat and pretty much done. he has emerged over the last month but he is no answer. kidd for kaman/davis is a much better solution. gives us inside scoring

this makes me go hmmmm....

Windmill360 · 02-12-2009, 12:21 AM

I can see it now:

Baron walks into the locker room on a crutch:

"Hi Dirk, yeaaa..... sorry about two years ago.. no hard feelings right? Oh and sorry about gettin rid of your pal Kidd. Let's play some ball!"

BGMaverick9 · 02-12-2009, 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Windmill360

I can see it now:

Baron walks into the locker room on a crutch:

"Hi Dirk, yeaaa..... sorry about two years ago.. no hard feelings right? Oh and sorry about gettin rid of your pal Kidd. Let's play some ball!"

"Hey yo Dirk...on our first off day, let's make the sequel!!!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7Od4H9uIJ8

ghazi · 02-12-2009, 01:21 AM

Kidd + Dirk + Shaq isn't as scary as it sounds.

Just like Nash + Amare + Shaq hasn't been scary.

eyedentifyme · 02-12-2009, 01:27 AM

Mavs payroll is around 28 million (Dirk opts out, not renewing Josh's contract) before the start of the 2010-11 season. We should be able to get 2 All-Stars in here to help Dirk and Kidd (Lebron at 27 million a year, Bosh at 23 million a year, resign Dirk for 5 million that one year, get rid of Dampier, resign Kidd to 10 mill). At about a 98 million dollar payroll we would have Kidd/Jet/Lebron/Dirk/Bosh/Barea/Green/Foster/Hollins/Williams/Wright. With Baron Davis's contract we won't get this done. After that season, Mav's payroll would jump again with Dirk getting more money as well. Out-bidding NY, NJ, Detroit, and Cleveland, is still an option without Baron's fat contract.

ghazi · 02-12-2009, 01:29 AM

^ that's just crazy talk.

mac222b · 02-12-2009, 01:32 AM

I'm all 4 the Shaq deal for a # of reasons, financial flexibility being one. But I watched the Clips tonight and Baron is still almost impossible to stay in front of when he's going to the hoop(when healthy). And he can post up smaller guards. He also had 10 dimes in the 1st half alone. Yes his game has its rough edges. But he is still an extremely gifted player. Add to that Kaman or Camby to team w/ Damp, Dirk, Bass and we suddenly have the best frontcourt in the league. We don't give up J-ho(unless a good deal presents itself)and we still have Stack to land something now or this offseason... I think i agree w/ most everybody here in preferring the Shaq deal because we remain financially flexible and aren't getting back injury prone players. But the deal w/the Clips, along w/a couple of ancillary moves, gets us back among the elite too. We get 2 excellent players and keep our Stack chip for one other move. Not exactly a disaster...