Waiving Finley....addition by subtraction

[echo]

The draft came and went with no deals. The only real news is that Finley is almost certain to be waived. Why does this have to be viewed so negatively?

My logic. After the season Cuban met with AJ and AJ said he didn't want Finley to start. He obviously prefers Stackhouse or Daniels (or maybe both) over Finley. If he prefers Stackhouse (I think he does) then it comes down to Finley or Daniels as the backup. From what I've heard, Finley doesn't think he should be a backup here. The Mavs also have invested heavily in Daniels who is entering his third year. Like Finley, he was injured most of the year, but unlike Finley he never recieved many minutes. Obviously he has some talent as many teams in the NBA are interested in him (along with Howard & Harris) so burying him behind Stackhouse and Finley makes no sense. Basically the decision comes down to Stackhouse or Finley. Stackhouse is two years younger than Finley, is an aggressive slasher who gets to the free throw line and therefore puts more pressure on a defense which creates more opportunities offensively. Finley, even before his injury, was pretty much just a guy who hangs around and shoots outside jumpers. Yes he's a better 3P shooter than Stack or Daniels, but he's become a one-dimensional player. With his unwillingness to accept a greatly reduced role, and a massive salary (I think Cuban learned his lesson) that makes him untradeable, I think it's reasonable to let him go. I'm not saying he is done, but he's certainly a below average starting SG in this league today. If the Mavs don't think he's the player he once was and want to move on without him then why so much anger here? He's getting his money no matter what. Although the luxury tax is obviously the major reason for waiving Finley, I won't dismiss the idea that he doesn't prominently fit into AJ's plans. If so the Mavs probably don't want to risk potential problems that might arise if Finley is only getting 15-20 minutes a game.

I honestly don't think losing Finley will negatively impact this team even if we don't add another 2/3. I was all on board trading him two years ago when he still had value knowing his salary would become a hindrance by the time he reached 32 or 33. He was an excellent SG for many years, even making the All Star team twice, but never a major star type player. He was never as good as say Mitch Richmond who's skill level dropped signficantly around the same age. Most SG's/SF's lose a couple of steps and atheleticism around age 31/32 and very few are All Star caliber players after that. Guys like Richmond, Rice, Finley, Rolando Blackmon, A. Houston, etc decline. Guys like MJ are the exception because they did everything well. It's much more common for big guys (C/PF) to remain productive into their mid thirties because they are relying more on strength than quickness. Most 2/3's become specialists. That's what Finley is today. Can he help Phoenix, Miami or Detroit? Sure he can. If by chance he starts in Phoenix he's the 5th option. He's playing 25 minutes off the bench in Detroit. He may or may not start in Miami depending on what they do with Eddie Jones (who is a better player than Fin now because he's still a defensive force). The Spurs have no use for him (he plays 15 minutes a game at most there) nor does Indiana (Artest, S. Jacskon, Granger, F. Jones). I don't think anywhere else he goes to has a shot at a title next season. Don't think he puts Houston or Denver over the top.

Anyway I think those of you who are crying should just move on and look forward which I think is what the Mavs are doing. I mean a few of you are acting like babies! Someone said the Mavs will trade Dirk for an expiring contract for goodness sakes! I think they have a plan, it just doesn't include Finley. They still have assets. I think they will target a few marquee players in trades as well as looking for a key piece with their MLE. They may very well get a better "fit" than Finley that is released by another team. The more players released, the better the pool becomes. Since only a few teams are below the salary cap that means some good players may have to settle for the MLE.

What's out there?

First lets look at players that could be potentially waived under the new CBA. I think about half the teams will use this, even those under the luxury tax now. Why? Most will be looking to resign their own players or explore FA in the next year or two so what doesn't hurt them now may hurt them next season.

Atlanta. No one. Way under the salary cap with a very young roster.
Boston. Mark Blount (C) 5 yrs. Lafrentz (PF/C) 4 years. Both have bloated contracts, one will likely go. Lafrentz probably has better skills and his versatility makes him more likely to stay IMO. They have young guys waiting in the wings so I think Blount is a goner.
Charlotte. No one. Expansion team, no bad salaries.
Chicago. No one. A. Davis makes a bundle but is in his last year.
Cleveland. Eric Snow (PG) 4 yrs. Ira Newble (SG/SF) 3 years. Resigning Z or a big name FA so expect one of these guys to go. Snow is a good backup PG.
Dallas. Finley.
Denver. Najera (F) 3 yrs. Probably gone
Detroit. Carlos Arroyo (PG) 3 yrs. If they don't think they can trade him, he could be gone.
Golden State. Derek Fisher (PG/SG) 5 yrs. Adonal Foyle (C) 5 yrs. Both have bloated contracts and with B. Davis/J. Rich/Pietrus I don't see them keeping Fisher. He can hit the three.
Houston. Juwan Howard (PF) 4 yrs. Moochie Norris (PG) 2 yrs. Howard has the bigger and longer contract, but Norris is useless.
Indiana. Croshere (F) 2 yrs. Bender (F) 2 yrs. Croshere I would bet on.
LA Clippers. No one.
LA Lakers. B. Grant (PF) 2 yrs.
Memphis. J. Williams (PG) 3 yrs. B. Wells (SG) 1 yr. B. Cardinal (SF) 5 yrs. J. Posey (SG/SF) 2 yrs. J. Tsalakidis (C) 2 yrs. I don't think it will be Wells since he has the shortest contract. Nor Tsalakidis since his is the smallest. The other three guys would generate interest.
Miami. E. Jones (SG/SF) 2 yrs. Miami may do this if they think they can get an adequate replacement. 50/50?
Milwaukee. C. Booth (C/PF) 2 yrs.
Minnesota. W. Szczerbiak (SG/SF) 4 yrs. S. Cassell (PG) 1 yr. T. Hudson (PG) 5 yrs. Wally's salary is almost as bad as Finley's although he's younger. He can shoot, but not much else. Cassell's in his last year so I don't think they waive him. Hudson or Wally will probably get waived.
New Jersey. J. Collins (C/PF) 4 yrs.
New Orleans. Probably no one. PJ Brown has trade value.
NY Knicks. A. Houston (SG) 2 yrs.
Orlando. G. Hill (SF) 2 yrs. D. Christie (SG) 1 yr. I would be shocked if they cut Hill since he played so well last year. They have a lot of guys (Christie, Cato, Battie) in their last year so they can cut one and trade the others. I think Christie is a goner.
Philadpelphia. Webber (PF) 3 yrs. McKie (SG/SF) 3 yrs. Don't think they cut Webber and Mashburn is in his last year so I bet it's McKie.
Phoenix. No one.
Portland. Ratliff (C/PF) 3 yrs. D. Anderson (SG) 2 yrs. D. Miles (F) 5 yrs. R. Patterson (SF) 2 yrs. Ratliff makes the most money and isn't in their future. But they've wanted to get rid of Patterson for years. Their cut will be interesting.
Sacremento. C. Williamson (SF) 2 yrs.
San Antonio. Nestoveric (C) 4 yrs. He's been a huge disappointment and has a big contract. Would they cut him?
Seattle. D. Fortson (PF) 2 yrs.
Toronto. J. Rose (SG/SF) 2 yrs. A. Williams (PG) 3 yrs. J. Rose makes the max. I think the last year of Williams contract is a team option. Rose would offer them more savings and is hard to trade (like Fin) because of his contract.
Utah. No one.
Washington. E. Thomas (C/PF) 5 yrs. Only if they resign K. Brown and then probably unlikely.

Interesting Free Agents probably available around the MLE (* restricted)

* Gadzuric (C) With Bogut in town, how much will Milwaukee pay him? Will they match a MLE offer?
B. Simmons (SF) Probably gets a bit more than the MLE.
* E. Griffin (PF) Big guy that can shoot 3's and rebound. Shady history, but talented.
* K. Korver (SF) This guy can shoot. Philly has to pay Dalembert (who will get way more than the MLE). Can you get Korver for $4 mil?
D. Marshall (F) A power forward who shot over 40% from 3P range. He's an awesome rebounder. He's 32 but has a unique game so if you can sign him for 3 years at the MLE I would do it.
* K. Brown (PF) Lots of potential but I wouldn't give him more than the MLE nor more than 3 years. Like Marshall and Gadzuric better.
* M. Jaric (PG/SG) I like this guy a lot. A big PG that you could move around. Signing him means you could easily move Terry. Harris/Jaric sounds good to me.

S&T Free Agents. They will get more than the MLE. Possible trades?

R. Allen (SG). Don't think he wants to stay in Seattle. Pure shooter and still playing at an All Star level. At 30 he doesn't deserve the max though. A 4 year/40 million dollar deal & a S&T?
L. Hughes (SG). I know the Mavs would love to get him. An excellent defensive player/rebounder but not a great 3P shooter. I'm sure the Wizards will make every effort to resign him. If they can't we should get involved.
S. Swift (C/PF). He wants to start which is our biggest problem. He will also get way more than the MLE. I'm in no hurry to get rid of Damp, but would consider a S&T of Swift for Damp if Memphis was interested.

Trades.

If you can get Paul Pierce without giving up Howard or Harris you have to do it.
PJ Brown for KVH? We get tougher, and get a guy who can play center in a pinch.


Lesser Free Agents that might help.

Jason Kapono (SF) 3P specialist.
Kareem Rush (SG) Young SG with some potential.
Jeff McInnis (PG)
Raja Bell (SG) Defensive specialist.
Cliff Robinson (PF/C) If we fail to bring in another center. Would allow both DJ and PPOD to go to NBDL.
B. Scalabrine (PF) Servicable backup.
Dale Davis (C) Likely back in Indy.
Mutombo (C) Only at the minimum.
Bostjan Nachbar (SG) 3P specialist.
Casey Jacobsen (SF/SG) 3P specialist.
* Devin Brown (SG)
* Reggie Evans (PF)

Throw in potential CBA waivees that will sweeten the pot and I'm certain we get a guy with the MLE that helps this team more than Finley. Maybe we hit a home run and make a big trade. Even if we sign a big guy with the MLE there will be plenty of 3P specialists (Finley's role on this team if he stays) available for the league minimum.

I say we will be fine without Finley.

Edited to add: I don't hate Finley, I just think he's on the downside of his career. When Nash left, so did the "Big 3". It's Dirk's team now....and the young guys are his supporting cast not equals.

[aexchange]

we are going to be absolutely dreadful without finley if we have crackhouse in the lineup. the guy is a walking black hole on the offensive end, and putting him out there for 30-35 minutes a game is only going to reduce our offensive efficiency.

crackhouse is absolutely abysmal and we're going to see that once he starts. the same people who tell me that crackhouse is great were the same ones touting the virtues of antoine walker. i'm sorry, but maybe i prefer players who enjoy sharing the ball and who are positive examples for the young players we have on this team. people have always complained about the things that finley hasn't been able to do in his career while never recognizing the positive impact he's had during his tenure in dallas. the facts are the mavs won an extremely high percentage of the time that he and dirk scored over 20 pts each. he's a great leader and a person we will sorely miss once he's waived. the statement that he's not even an average starting 2 guard is absolutely ridiculous. the fact that houston, denver, phoenix, chicago, and detroit have all expressed serious interest in obtaining him should be enough to prove that he still has it.

about your potential cuts: i'd be interested in seeing if we could get grant hill from orlando if we really had to waive finley. he would be the perfect compliment to howard/daniels/stackhouse and would be a guy you could plug in at 3 positions and be relatively effective for 25 minutes a game. his father still lives in dallas, so it may be a positive situation for him. don't really know if pierce or allen are obtainable as 2 guard replacements for the mavs, but i think hill probably is.

i'm tired of this rent a mav philosophy that cuban seems to have adopted here. finley deserves to stay here the length of his contract. we've had the pleasure of watching him play for 7+ years and its been a great ride. how does cuban expect fans to develop any loyalty by trading players every opportunity he gets?

[echo]

Originally posted by: aexchange
we are going to be absolutely dreadful without finley if we have crackhouse in the lineup. the guy is a walking black hole on the offensive end, and putting him out there for 30-35 minutes a game is only going to reduce our offensive efficiency.

crackhouse is absolutely abysmal and we're going to see that once he starts. the same people who tell me that crackhouse is great were the same ones touting the virtues of antoine walker. i'm sorry, but maybe i prefer players who enjoy sharing the ball and who are positive examples for the young players we have on this team. people have always complained about the things that finley hasn't been able to do in his career while never recognizing the positive impact he's had during his tenure in dallas. the facts are the mavs won an extremely high percentage of the time that he and dirk scored over 20 pts each. he's a great leader and a person we will sorely miss once he's waived. the statement that he's not even an average starting 2 guard is absolutely ridiculous. the fact that houston, denver, phoenix, chicago, and detroit have all expressed serious interest in obtaining him should be enough to prove that he still has it.

about your potential cuts: i'd be interested in seeing if we could get grant hill from orlando if we really had to waive finley. he would be the perfect compliment to howard/daniels/stackhouse and would be a guy you could plug in at 3 positions and be relatively effective for 25 minutes a game. his father still lives in dallas, so it may be a positive situation for him. don't really know if pierce or allen are obtainable as 2 guard replacements for the mavs, but i think hill probably is.

i'm tired of this rent a mav philosophy that cuban seems to have adopted here. finley deserves to stay here the length of his contract. we've had the pleasure of watching him play for 7+ years and its been a great ride. how does cuban expect fans to develop any loyalty by trading players every opportunity he gets?

We will be dreadful without Finley? I don't think so. And obviously you are showing your bias when you call Stackhouse "crackhouse" and say he's abysmal. In fact he's averaged more ppg than Finley has in his career. Other than 3P shooting, their numbers are remarkably close. The difference is that Stack gets to the line more. And he's a couple of years younger, and has a shorter, less expensive contract. I don't consider Stack a top tier SG anymore either, but he's slightly ahead of Finley IMO. Stack's numbers (in 9 minutes less a game) matched Fin's. If all three remain, I would prefer to see Daniels start. He's the only one of the three that may be starting here two years from now, so unless we get a bonafide star, let's see what he can do. I think the problem with Fin is that he flat out doesn't want to come off of the bench, which he should at this point in his career. You can't bury Daniels again, nor can you trade Fin. I'm not opposed to moving Stackhouse, and if they get someone like Pierce I'm sure he'll be included in the deal, but I think it's time for Finley to relinquish his starting position. He's simply NOT an above average SG anymore. Average would be stretching it. Vince Carter, TMAC, J. Richardson, Joe Johnson, M. Redd, R. Hamilton, L. Hughes, Iverson, Wade, R. Allen, Ginobili, Pierce, B. Gordon, K. Bryant, Magette, S. Francis. J. Crawford, M. Miller, R. Davis, & S. Jackson are twenty guys who are better than Finley now. And a few more will pass him this year. He's not getting better with age.

As for loyalty? Not a football fan, but didn't Emmitt Smith finish up in Phoenix? Was he not a far greater player in his sport than Finley? Did they not win a few Super Bowls with him? And even the Mavs. Remember Blackmon? Harper? Did they not finish their careers elsewhere? They were as good in their day as Finley. Their teams made it just as far. Both were good guys. And who is loyal today? Ever been laid off? I have, and I spent more time than Finley did with my company. And I got no severance pay, much less $51 million dollars.

As or potential cuts? I think Grant Hill is a longshot to be cut, but I'm interested if he is. More realistic possibilities to be waived are Jalen Rose, Theo Ratliff, Derek Fisher, and a SG/SF from Memphis. Except for Ratliff, all are good 3P shooters, which is essentially all we need to replace Finley. We have enough veterans to provide leadership.

[The Miles]

We replaced the MVP with a SG that plays PG and a rookie and won 6 more games and 5 more playoff games. I just don't see how losing a declining Finley when you have two built in guys ready to take the 48 minute load is going to make us "dreadful" That is hyperbole at it's finest.

[aexchange]

Originally posted by: The Miles
We replaced the MVP with a SG that plays PG and a rookie and won 6 more games and 5 more playoff games. I just don't see how losing a declining Finley when you have two built in guys ready to take the 48 minute load is going to make us "dreadful" That is hyperbole at it's finest.

Let me clarify by saying, I think we'll be ok if we can find someone willing to share the ball and who can hit an outside jumper. I think Rose or Grant Hill would fit that kind of role reasonably well. If we have to play Stackhouse 30-35 minutes a game, the team won't be that efficient. The team is at its best when he plays 20-25 minutes and isnt out there to bog down every possession. If Daniels ends up playing 30 minutes and Stackhouse plays 20, I think we'll be o.k. But we definately will miss Finley's leadership and outside shooting.

[echo]

I think losing Nash last year was a much bigger obstacle to overcome. In fact I think Cuban/AJ probably realize much of Fin's success here could be directly attributed to Nash. Nash created opportunities for Finley much like he did for Joe Johnson (and especially Q) in Phoenix. Terry isn't that type of PG. And it's too early to tell what we have in Harris. Stackhouse/Daniels probably fit this system better because they can create their own shots. Assuming we don't make a trade for someone like Pierce or Allen, I think we bring in a specialist 3P shooter to come off the bench. I don't think Finley wants that role here.

[birdsanctuary]

Aex? I have a lot of respect for your posts, but to claim that Stack is nothing more than a black hole is totally off base and unfair. A black hole in comparision to what? Finley? I'd argue that Stack came a long way this year, he began the year not giving up the ball and gradually learned to look for the pass first, and getting Dirk involved the offense. He arguably had one of his career best years this last season. If anybody's a black hole on this team it's Fin. Virtually every game he plays, he tries to be the #1 option... fires again and again and again.

Stackhouse is a quality 2, a bit on the old side, but a championship piece coming off the bench. If your argument is that we need a better starting 2, than I have no argument with you, but to call Stack a black hole, that's just plain wrong, and unfair. If anyone should receive that criticism it should be Fin.

[Hitman]

Stackhouse is a black hole. No two ways about it.

[Filth]

1. cant resign waived player under the salary cap waiver exception rule.
2. Stack is a good player - better than finley at this point. He plays better D. He is aggressive on offense, putting pressure on the opposing team by attacking the rim. He rebounds. He has an inner fire to win. Hes no black hole, thats Finley. Stacks role with the mavs last year as a sixth man was to come in and SCORE points. Thats what the coaches asked him to do and thats what he did. If they ask him to pass more, he'll pass. Hes a very coachable player for his age.
3. [img]i/expressions/beer.gif[/img] Id down a guinness and do a jig if the mavs could get Grant Hill. Hed be a perfect fit for the team and would not likely cost much in return.
4. If Najera is waived, Cuban better go get that guy!!!!

If Marquis is playing well, he may be the starter at the 2 next year which is ok with me. He has the skills - just had a hell of a time with the ankle / nerve injury which screwed the first half of the season for him and then the appendectomy which killed the second half of the season. I think he'll be ready to go this year. Needs to work on his outside shot.
Seems I keep reading articles about some team trying to get Josh Howard from us. They can all go suck it cuz Josh aint goin nowhere. He's somethin special and all those teams know it, despite the lack of respect he gets from the media. It was a load of crap that he didnt make the all defensive teams.
If Finley cant handle coming off the bench, then let him go. I like fin but he doesnt have the skillset necessary to play 35 min a game for the mavs anymore. all hes got is the jumpshot - which he only had sometimes. If he could be like reggie....

[jacktruth]

I pretty much agree with Echo here.

Every year we go through this . ."how is Finley going to feel about this. . ." and talk about his contribution, etc. These are all true things, but come on, how many chances has Finley had with this team to win a title? Cuban has served Finley well. He also signed him to a monster contract. That was a pretty nice gesture.

People say that Cuban should show some loyalty. Well, shouldn't Finley show some loyalty to the mavs by renegotiating his contract to market value, which is about half of what he makes? Of course, let's not overlook the fact that he plays a game for a living and makes a crapload of money doing it. People talk about his lockerroom leadership, and how he is a credit to the organization. Well, what kind of leader refuses to take a lesser role for the benefit of the team. That sounds like a selfish quality to me.

Now, I love Finley. I do believe he is a great guy, has done a lot for this organization, but let's get off of the emotional hangups for a minute. If we traded him to Pheonix, Miami, SA, Houston and he won a title and maybe leapfrogged us in the process, wouldn't we be doing him a favor? Wouldn't cutting him, allowing him to get a 5million a year raise and maintain or improve his chances of winning a championship be the most loyal thing to do for the guy?

I agree that starting Stackhouse is bad because he is a specialist--a guy that comes in and takes the team on his shoulders for 10-15 minutes when you need it. He's a good player. But, he plays like a superstar without actually being a superstar. I think he is a great guy to trade or keep as a 6th man. But, I also think he is the better #2 scoring option over Finley.

[Stressboy]

I don't want to get into the main argument too much, but I don't really think Stack is a black hole, that is just how he was utilized. He is the best 1 on 1 player on the team and AJ and Nellie both called his number that way. Since the guy was getting no doubles with Dirk on the floor, he took his shot. I saw many times when there was not a set play called for Stack where he moved the ball and made some pretty good passes.

If we do lose Fin, I think we have to get Josh into the offense on a more consistant basis. He shows some great skills, but hardly ever gets plays called for him. I really feel that if this team put in a lot of the princeton offense, it would allow Josh and Danials to make more cuts and improve the overall movement. We need to get away from so many iso's. I would run pick and roll and 4 man movement with Damp camped down low 60% of the time. If we are not going to knock down the 3, then by God, get in the lane and get to the line.

This happens to be strengths of Stack, Danials, Josh and in the regular season, Dirk.

[echo]

Originally posted by: Filth

2. Stack is a good player - better than finley at this point. He plays better D. He is aggressive on offense, putting pressure on the opposing team by attacking the rim. He rebounds. He has an inner fire to win. Hes no black hole, thats Finley. Stacks role with the mavs last year as a sixth man was to come in and SCORE points. Thats what the coaches asked him to do and thats what he did. If they ask him to pass more, he'll pass. Hes a very coachable player for his age.
3. [img]i/expressions/beer.gif[/img] Id down a guinness and do a jig if the mavs could get Grant Hill. Hed be a perfect fit for the team and would not likely cost much in return.
4. If Najera is waived, Cuban better go get that guy!!!!

Seems I keep reading articles about some team trying to get Josh Howard from us. They can all go suck it cuz Josh aint goin nowhere. He's somethin special and all those teams know it, despite the lack of respect he gets from the media. It was a load of crap that he didnt make the all defensive teams.

I agree on #2. At this point of his career I don't think he's a great player, but I prefer him over Finley. Assuming all is well he's a stopgap guy until Daniels is ready. And he's obviously shown a willingness to come off the bench, unlike Finley. Plus he's tradeable.

#3. I think Grant Hill being waived is a longshot. They could be an 8th seed next year with him. However they won't contend for a championship in the next two years so I'm sure they are tempted. Because of his salary and injury history, no one will offer much in trade for him.

#4. It makes sense for Najera to be waived as Denver has plenty of big men ahead of him. I like his hustle and would not be opposed to bringing him back for the vet minimum, but he won't make much of a difference here.

I think Josh and Harris stay. I would think hard about including Josh in a package for Pierce, but I think we have a chance without giving up Howard. Josh is an excellent fit in this system.

[cripple balls]

I'd start the last pope over Finley. At best he's a guy who can come off your bench in a pinch to hit some threes. He’s always been a one-dimensional player. When your best player is a jump shooter that can’t defend the rest of your starters better be able to ball.

[echo]

Originally posted by: jacktruth
I pretty much agree with Echo here.

Every year we go through this . ."how is Finley going to feel about this. . ." and talk about his contribution, etc. These are all true things, but come on, how many chances has Finley had with this team to win a title? Cuban has served Finley well. He also signed him to a monster contract. That was a pretty nice gesture.

People say that Cuban should show some loyalty. Well, shouldn't Finley show some loyalty to the mavs by renegotiating his contract to market value, which is about half of what he makes? Of course, let's not overlook the fact that he plays a game for a living and makes a crapload of money doing it. People talk about his lockerroom leadership, and how he is a credit to the organization. Well, what kind of leader refuses to take a lesser role for the benefit of the team. That sounds like a selfish quality to me.

Now, I love Finley. I do believe he is a great guy, has done a lot for this organization, but let's get off of the emotional hangups for a minute. If we traded him to Pheonix, Miami, SA, Houston and he won a title and maybe leapfrogged us in the process, wouldn't we be doing him a favor? Wouldn't cutting him, allowing him to get a 5million a year raise and maintain or improve his chances of winning a championship be the most loyal thing to do for the guy?

I agree that starting Stackhouse is bad because he is a specialist--a guy that comes in and takes the team on his shoulders for 10-15 minutes when you need it. He's a good player. But, he plays like a superstar without actually being a superstar. I think he is a great guy to trade or keep as a 6th man. But, I also think he is the better #2 scoring option over Finley.

Well said! I think Cuban gave Nellie and the Big Three (Dirk, Nash, Finley) ample opportunity to win a title. Their have been awesome players around them. He had to make a longterm financial decision on Nash that he didn't (at the time) make on Finley. Obviously Nash was well worth what he got last season, but what about 2-3 years from now? I'm sure he based his Nash decision partly on what he's seen from Finley. Now that Nash and Nellie are gone, it's time for a change of guard. It's Dirk's team. And AJ's. Dirk's new running buddies are going to be Josh and eventually Harris (and possibly someone else they trade for). Nash/Fin/Dirk/Nellie had their chance. They didn't win a championship here. Dirk and AJ have a shot though.

[chumdawg]

I'm going to stay out of the Fin-vs-StackAttack argument for now, but let me address another part of the original post. I am starting to believe that it's a major misconception that this team has assets to work with in trade. I think we've spent 'em all already.

Seriously, I do.

[MrCheerios]

Ummm...why not just keep him if he's going to affect your cap anyways? Waiving him only saves luxury tax, and the fans don't pay luxury tax. Don't tell me you sympathize with poor, poor billionaire Cuban so much that you'd be willing to part with Finley for nothing.

[dirno2000]

Chum, I have to disagree with that. We have productive players with short contracts (KVH, Stack and Terry) and young players with growth potential (Harris, Howard, Daniels). Daniels is the most questionable because of his contract, but according to Donny teams were trying to pry him away on draft night.

[razap]

San Antonio. Nestoveric (C) 4 yrs. He's been a huge disappointment and has a big contract. Would they cut him?



Rasho has not been a huge disppointment. Please refrain from responding with your analysis and trying to prove you are right. Rasho needed to fill a certain role and that was 10 or so points per game and 7-8 rebounds per game. That's it and if you compare his stats to David Robinson's final years they are very similar. No one in San Antonio expected him to be David Robinson. I like him and I hope we keep him but you never know what kind of trade value is for a decent center with a manageable long term contract..expecially in a center starved league..

[LRB]

We have productive players with short contracts (KVH, Stack and Terry) and young players with growth potential (Harris, Howard, Daniels).

Dirno if we trade KVH, Stack or Terry we'll have to take on some ugly contracts. I just can't see Cuban doing that after what's happened with Fin and Nash over the last year. I can't see us trading Harris or Howard and getting equal value because they're paid so cheaply. But I agree that Daniels could be trade bait. Only problem there is that by releasing Fin we've rid ourselve of any depth at the 2/3 position. So I see the Mavs in a very tight bind when it comes to making trades unless Cuban changes his penney pinching ways.

[echo]

Originally posted by: razap
San Antonio. Nestoveric (C) 4 yrs. He's been a huge disappointment and has a big contract. Would they cut him?



Rasho has not been a huge disppointment. Please refrain from responding with your analysis and trying to prove you are right. Rasho needed to fill a certain role and that was 10 or so points per game and 7-8 rebounds per game. That's it and if you compare his stats to David Robinson's final years they are very similar. No one in San Antonio expected him to be David Robinson. I like him and I hope we keep him but you never know what kind of trade value is for a decent center with a manageable long term contract..expecially in a center starved league..

Nazr moved ahead of him and is the better player.

[razap]

Originally posted by: echo

Nazr moved ahead of him and is the better player.

Rasho was hurt and Nazr stepped in. Things were going well so Pop stayed with the hot hand. Rasho is a superior offensive player to Nazr and that is why I think\hope we keep him.

[dirno2000]

Razap you have to admit that there are quite a few posters on The Spurs Report who disagree with you. The fact the he was bumped out of the playoff rotation by a midseason acquisition could be viewed as further proof..

[mary]

....plus Rasho gets "over-applause" from the crowd....a true signal of disappointment if there ever was one [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

[jacktruth]

Ummm...why not just keep him if he's going to affect your cap anyways? Waiving him only saves luxury tax, and the fans don't pay luxury tax. Don't tell me you sympathize with poor, poor billionaire Cuban so much that you'd be willing to part with Finley for nothing.

Nor do I sympathize with poor, poor Micheal Finley who stands to get a $5 million or more raise on an already bloated contract. That is more money than I'll probably see in my lifetime (present value considered).

[FilthyFinMavs]

If Stackhouse is our starter Dirk might as well say bye to his number 1 option spot. I'd take JET or Daniels starting the 2 spot but anybody but Stackhouse. That's why Finley is valuable to this team. He knows his boundaries. He doesn't go out on the court and jack up shots when he has others open. He doesn't shoot 3's then hit the front of the rim on every attempt. He never saw himself as the number 1 option. At times, I believe Stackhouse thinks he actually is. Replace Finley with a guy that knows his role. One that compliments Dirk not vice versa.

[chumdawg]

Originally posted by: LRB

Dirno if we trade KVH, Stack or Terry we'll have to take on some ugly contracts. I just can't see Cuban doing that after what's happened with Fin and Nash over the last year. I can't see us trading Harris or Howard and getting equal value because they're paid so cheaply. But I agree that Daniels could be trade bait. Only problem there is that by releasing Fin we've rid ourselve of any depth at the 2/3 position. So I see the Mavs in a very tight bind when it comes to making trades unless Cuban changes his penney pinching ways.

That's kinda what I was thinking. To expand on it a little bit...

I can't see Harris being traded in anything more than a lateral move. He is definitely not a luxury.

Same with Howard. That kid ain't going anywhere.

Daniels would be a possibility, yes. But as it stands now, assuming Fin is sent packing, again I can't imagine anything more than a lateral move. Things are going to look a little shaky if we get down to one shooting guard in the rotation. (Oh, and I take with a grain of salt Donnie's comments about draft night. Yeah, some team may have been willing to give their second-round pick for Daniels. That doesn't necessarily mean he's got significant trade value if we are talking about player-for-player.)

I'm not convinced Stack would garner a lot of interest on the open market. Last year it was him plus the number five plus spare parts for a max contract guy. He ain't getting any younger, either. Again, I kinda doubt that he could be moved in a deal that makes the team significantly better.

Terry...meh. Maybe.

The KVH is the interesting one. I've got this theory--I haven't given it a lot of thought just yet, but I'm tossing it around--that these expiring contracts are getting less and less valuable by the year. I expect that whatever player movement results from the waiver clause in the new CBA will have an impact here. Heck, the whole new CBA will, too. As I said, I haven't explored it in depth, but I don't know if there is going to be much of a market for guys like KVH, either this summer or at the deadline.

I just think the days are gone when the Mavs had a stack full of chips to deal with. These days we desperately need most of the ones we've got. And whatever we decide we can part with, probably other teams can offer better.

[dirno2000]

Dirno if we trade KVH, Stack or Terry we'll have to take on some ugly contracts.

That's always been the case hasn't it? I can’t think of a trade in the Cuban era that didn’t include a bad contract. Teams tend to hold on to their good contracts unless the player is an a-hole or there are other extenuating circumstances. Cuban may be less willing to take on bad contracts, but that doesn’t mean we don’t have the chips.

Chum I think expiring contracts will always be valuable, especially at the deadline. There will always be 1) Owners looking to save money and 2) Teams looking to get under the cap to make a run at a big time FA.

[alby]

2004-2005 Regular Season
Finley - 2.6 assists per game
Stackhouse - 2.3 assists per game
Stackhouse played 8 less minutes

2005 Playoffs
Finley - 2.2 assists per game
Stackhouse - 2.3 assists per game
Stackhouse played 7 less minutes

Looks like Finley is the "blackhole"

[LRB]

That's always been the case hasn't it? I can’t think of a trade in the Cuban era that didn’t include a bad contract. Teams tend to hold on to their good contracts unless the player is an a-hole or there are other extenuating circumstances. Cuban may be less willing to take on bad contracts, but that doesn’t mean we don’t have the chips.

what's the pratical difference between not having chips and not having chips that you're willing to use?

[grndmstr_c]

Finley - 5.72 scoring attempts per assist; 4.7 assists per bad pass
Stackhouse - 6.25 scoring attempts per assist; 2.5 assists per bad pass

Kinda funny getting in an argument over whether Fin or Stack is a better distributor seeing as it's not really the strength in either one of their games. Still, Fin's pretty clearly the better passer, and Stack's pretty clearly more of a black hole when you take a closer look at the stats.

[alby]

Stack still averages more assists per 48 minutes.

[alby]

Although, it is a very slight increase, too insignificant to argue over really.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: alby
Stack still averages more assists per 48 minutes.

Stack averges proportionally more turnovers and shot attempts per 48 minutes than Fin compared to the slight increase that Stack has over Fin in Assists per 48 minutes.

It doesn't just matter how many assists you get, but how many assists per turnover and how many assists per shot attempt. Fact is that the ball moves better with Fin in the game versus Stack in the game. GMC has posted numerous times that the Mavs average more asssists and fewer turnovers when Fin is in versus when Statck is in.

[grndmstr_c]

Stack still averages more assists per 48 minutes.

Even that can be called into question, seeing as Stack averaged 3.4 assists per 48 as the team's shooting guard, and Finley averaged 4 assists per 48 as the team's shooting guard. It was Fin's lower assist rate as a SF, and the amount of time he spent playing SF (a fair bit of those minutes came with Stack at SG, btw) that lowered Fin's assist totals (2.9 per 48 as the team's SF).

[alby]

Finley better get rid of the ball quickly or he'll dribble off his foot or something lol [img]i/expressions/anim_laugh.gif[/img]

Stack of course will have more turnovers, he actually takes more than two dribbles because he attacks the rim, sometimes you lose the ball.

His ability to draw fouls and get to the line far outweighs the one or two more turnovers he committs compared to Finley.

Even the best midrange / post up - fadeaway player to ever play the game, Michael Jordan, understood he had to attack the basket and draw fouls.

[grndmstr_c]

Finley better get rid of the ball quickly or he'll dribble off his foot or something lol

Is that why Stack had twice as many ball-handling TO's (38) as Fin did last year (19)?

Look. Fin's aggressiveness was down last year, and his assist numbers reflect that fact, but there's simply no getting around the fact that he doesn't dominate the ball like Stack, is a better passer than Stack, and is significantly less turnover prone than Stack. Feel free to like Stack. I'm not saying he's chopped liver or anything. But if you're going to try to argue that he's better than Fin at least try to stay away from comparing aspects of their respective games in which Fin clearly has the edge.

[LRB]

His ability to draw fouls and get to the line far outweighs the one or two more turnovers he committs compared to Finley.

??? in what, style points??? Because it damn sure didn't show up on the score board. Fin was tops in +/- for the Mavs shooting guards.

[alby]

Sets a tone and gives an example to the younger players that Finley doesn't offer to them. Gets the other team in foul trouble. There's so many benefits when you attack the basket as opposed to settling for long range jumpshots after 1 or 2 dribbles.

[dirno2000]

Even that can be called into question, seeing as Stack averaged 3.4 assists per 48 as the team's shooting guard, and Finley averaged 4 assists per 48 as the team's shooting guard. It was Fin's lower assist rate as a SF, and the amount of time he spent playing SF (a fair bit of those minutes came with Stack at SG, btw) that lowered Fin's assist totals (2.9 per 48 as the team's SF).

Out of curiosity, who tracks stats by position and how reliable do you think they are? For instance, If Finley and Stack are playing together, who is the small forward and who is the SG...in a lot of offenses those positions are virtually interchangeable so it would seem that you need the teams playbook to differentiate the two.

[dirno2000]

Originally posted by: LRB

what's the pratical difference between not having chips and not having chips that you're willing to use?

From a basketball standpoint I think they're willing to use all of them...non of the guys that I mentioned are indispensable.