How about this for Ben Wallace?

[Simon2]

Jamison for Wallace and Sura

Detroit trades: PF Ben Wallace (6.9 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 1.6 apg in 39.3 minutes)
SG Bob Sura (7.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.2 apg in 20.6 minutes)
Detroit receives: SF Antawn Jamison (22.2 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 1.9 apg in 39.3 minutes)
Change in team outlook: +8.0 ppg, -11.4 rpg, and -2.9 apg.

Dallas trades: SF Antawn Jamison (22.2 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 1.9 apg in 39.3 minutes)
Dallas receives: PF Ben Wallace (6.9 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 1.6 apg in 73 games)
SG Bob Sura (7.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.2 apg in 55 games)
Change in team outlook: -8.0 ppg, +11.4 rpg, and +2.9 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED

I read that Sura will get a limited role now in Detroit. Trade makes Detroit a stronger offensive team and Dallas a stronger rebounding team. Dallas gets a starting lineup of:

Nash, Fin, Walker, Dirk and Ben Wallace.

[Shaq Attack2]

Will never, ever happen. Maybe if the Mavs traded Jamison and Walker and only got Wallace in return it could happen. But otherwise, not Jamison for Wallace straight up.

And yes, Mavs would be scary with Wallace even without Walker and Jamison. He brings so many rebounds, blocks and generally good defense it's just great. KG and Duncan won't have it totally easy, and certainly no guard will penetrate with Wallace in the lane.

[Lvubun1]

Here we go again. Why was Jamison along with a couple of solid players traded away for NVE and scrubs? Because their isn't a lot of trade value for Jamison because of his contract, 6 years at the max. Now if Ben Wallace was available for Jamison why didn't the Warriors just trade Jamison for Wallace? Why do you think Jamison came so cheap? The Warriors were drugged? Cuban had pictures of Gary St. Jean and Chris Mullin playing naked twister? Their is some conspiacy around the league to give the Mavs good players? We have to realize the reason why Jamison came so damn cheap is because their wasn't alot of demand for him. We have to stop looking at these trades soley talent wise, I'm not sure in the current state of the NBA if their is another owner save Cuban who is willing to pay Jamison a max contract in'till the year 2010, nobody, and if another team is willing to take on Jamison, their going to be willing to send much talent back, kinda like how the W's didn't get much back besides NVE.

[LRB]

We already have dozens of trades for Ben Wallace threads. Almost everyone if not everyone would require Detroit's GM to be smoking crack to make the trade. Wallace is a very good defender on western conference sized power forwards or eastern conference centers which IMO is about the same thing. He does not have the size to be near as effective against western conference sized centers. Furthermore he's almost as bad an offensive liability as the potato. Forget about driving to the basket when Wallace is in the game because his man will always be there. Wallace isn't a threat from outside 2 feet and he doesn't even have a decent postup game. He will not make us that much better defensively though he would definitely improve us. So even though we'd be raping the Pistons I don't see this helping us that much. The added defense by Wallace won't make up for the lost offense by Jamison coming off the bench.

Now I don't see how this helps Detroit? They can certainly get a much better deal IMO if they feel a burning need to dump Big Ben.

[Simon2]

Originally posted by: Lvubun1
Here we go again. Why was Jamison along with a couple of solid players traded away for NVE and scrubs? Because their isn't a lot of trade value for Jamison because of his contract, 6 years at the max. Now if Ben Wallace was available for Jamison why didn't the Warriors just trade Jamison for Wallace? Why do you think Jamison came so cheap? The Warriors were drugged? Cuban had pictures of Gary St. Jean and Chris Mullin playing naked twister? Their is some conspiacy around the league to give the Mavs good players? We have to realize the reason why Jamison came so damn cheap is because their wasn't alot of demand for him. We have to stop looking at these trades soley talent wise, I'm not sure in the current state of the NBA if their is another owner save Cuban who is willing to pay Jamison a max contract in'till the year 2010, nobody, and if another team is willing to take on Jamison, their going to be willing to send much talent back, kinda like how the W's didn't get much back besides NVE.

You speak of Jamison as if he was some scrub. This was the guy who was the man in Golden State. He obviously will give Detroit a solid SF. That's unless they want to hitch their wagon to Tayshaun Prince or Corliss Williamson. I don't understand why the long contract is such a bad idea for Jamison. He's young, not injury prone and he's a pretty good player. It wouldn't be bad for a team to tie this guy up for a long time. Another thing is that the Pistons already have a lot of Big men. Darco, Mehmet, Rebraca and Campbell. I don't know why Detroit didn't trade for Jamison in the off-season. Maybe the Mavs can pull this off. They seem to be stealing from other teams already. This doesn't look too much of a lopsided trade.

[Shaq Attack2]

Sorry LRB, you've got to be on something if you don't think Wallace doesn't help the Mavs out "all that much" defensively. Bradley and Fortson are a joke compared to Wallace, an absolute joke. Wallace protects the lane and pulls down more rebounds than Fortson and Bradley combined. He's the best blocker in the NBA, and has gotten much better offensively this year.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Shaq Attack2
Sorry LRB, you've got to be on something if you don't think Wallace doesn't help the Mavs out "all that much" defensively. Bradley and Fortson are a joke compared to Wallace, an absolute joke. Wallace protects the lane and pulls down more rebounds than Fortson and Bradley combined. He's the best blocker in the NBA, and has gotten much better offensively this year.

SA2 he doesn't help the Mavs that much because it only address 1 of 5 players defensively. The Mavs need to lear to play better team D. One player isn't going to change that. And Wallace plays in the East, he'll still be good in the West but not as good.

As for Ben's offense, it may have gotten better, but it still SUCKS. Shaq shoots FT's better than Ben. Basically Ben is a garbage bucket scorer.

[Murphy3]

Wallace isn't a threat from outside 2 feet and he doesn't even have a decent postup game. He will not make us that much better defensively though he would definitely improve us. So even though we'd be raping the Pistons I don't see this helping us that much. The added defense by Wallace won't make up for the lost offense by Jamison coming off the bench.

Ben Wallace does get eaten up from time to time by some of the better inside players...that happens. However, I can't say I really agree with any of this. Why wouldn't Ben Wallace help out that much defensively? That is absurd. Ben Wallace may not be the best defender in the game but he definitely is an impact defender down low.

And who cares if he doesn't score offensively. The Mavs could sacrifice a scorer for a top notch defender/rebounder.. there offense would barely notice.

And for the record, bench scoring can be very highly overrated. The Mavs could easily still have at least two top notch scoring options on the court at virtually all times even without Jamison. Besides, Wallace's additional offensive rebounds would just mean more looks for players such as dirk, aw, fin, and nash...

Wallace would instantly turn the mavs into one of the better rebounding teams in the NBA. Being a top notch defensive rebounding team instantly helps the Mavs defense. Yes, it's only one position..one player. However, a player such as wallace can change a game defensively with his presence.

[Shaq Attack2]

Originally posted by: LRB

SA2 he doesn't help the Mavs that much because it only address 1 of 5 players defensively. The Mavs need to lear to play better team D.

The Mavs' deficiencies are by no means limited to team defense, especially this year with the Mavs smaller lineup. Case in point; Derek Fisher driving for a layup with ease on the Mavs premiere night with absolutely no one even remotely able to block him, let alone even in position to do so. With Wallace there, Fisher gets his butt packed, every time. In addition, Kobe takes more wide open jumpers and less slashing with Big Ben in the lane. Wallace effectively stops all easy guard penetration, something the Mavs cannot do if their life depended on it.

One player isn't going to change that.

This is the DPY, one position is enough to improve the Mavs widely known defensive deficiencies. We'll have to agree to disagree I guess.

And Wallace plays in the East, he'll still be good in the West but not as good.

He does similarly well against Western conference teams, check his stats.

As for Ben's offense, it may have gotten better, but it still SUCKS. Shaq shoots FT's better than Ben. Basically Ben is a garbage bucket scorer.

It's actually a lot better. He's shooting more and his stroke is much better, as Larry Brown was insistent that he improve that part of his game. His first game back to the NBA was a 16 point game, not to mention the 5 steals, 6 blocks, and 17 rebounds of course. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-shocked.gif[/img]

[LRB]

Murphy Wallace is an impact player down low. Yes is is one of the better defenders in the NBA. I just don't think that just 1 defender will make that much of a difference. Since he sucks on offense Nellie will be less likely to play another defensive player with him.

But does Wallace help us against SA and LA. I don't think the helps that much. He doesn't have the height or size to be that effective guarding Duncan or Shaq. Sure most everyone has trouble with these two. But right now we feel we can get by anybody but them. I think that the offensive capabilities of Jamison gives us a better shot against these two than the added defensive abilities of Big Ben.

[Murphy3]

that's absurd

It's like saying that Kobe Bryant or Dirk Nowtizki wouldn't significantly help the Nuggets of last year just because there weren't any other great scorers around them. I'm sorry, but you add a guy that's capable of scoring 30 points a game, it'll definitely help your offense.

the reverse is true for Wallace.

[MavsFanFinley]

Nelson will never want a guy like Wallace here. He doen't score enough.

[Murphy3]

Originally posted by: MavsFanFinley
Nelson will never want a guy like Wallace here. He doen't score enough.

I have to believe that Nellie would make an exception with a player such as Wallace

[MavsFanFinley]

I have to believe that Nellie would make an exception with a player such as Wallace.

I know. We'd all like to think he would.

I don't see him doing it at the expense of Walker, Finley, Nash, or Jamison.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Murphy3
that's absurd

It's like saying that Kobe Bryant or Dirk Nowtizki wouldn't significantly help the Nuggets of last year just because there weren't any other great scorers around them. I'm sorry, but you add a guy that's capable of scoring 30 points a game, it'll definitely help your offense.

the reverse is true for Wallace.

Big difference Murphy. Only one guy can shoot the ball at one time. So it's easier for a single player to make an impact on offense than on defense where one player can shut down his man but can't guard all 5 players at the same time. All it takes is for one man to be open. One great player on defense will make a difference, but not near as much as 1 great player on offense.

So you analogy is apples and oranges IMO.

[Murphy3]

sure..only one guy can shoot, but if there's only one legit scoring option, the defense can concetnrate their efforts on one man.

to think that wallace wouldn't make a big difference definsively..well, I'd put that argument right up there with the "najera for MVP" train of thought...just doesn't make alot of sense.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Murphy3
sure..only one guy can shoot, but if there's only one legit scoring option, the defense can concetnrate their efforts on one man.

to think that wallace wouldn't make a big difference definsively..well, I'd put that argument right up there with the "najera for MVP" train of thought...just doesn't make alot of sense.

Murphy you know that you're a closet Najera fan. Some day you'll come out.

And Both the Lakers and SA have a lot more that one offensive option. As I've said those are the 2 teams that we need to get by.

[veruca salt]

Originally posted by: MavsFanFinley

I know. We'd all like to think he would.

I don't see him doing it at the expense of Walker, Finley, Nash, or Jamison.

And I don't see Detriot giving up Wallace for anything on that table...unless it was 2-3 of them.

[Murphy3]

"Murphy you know that you're a closet Najera fan. Some day you'll come out.

And Both the Lakers and SA have a lot more that one offensive option. As I've said those are the 2 teams that we need to get by. "

Yes, they have more than one scoring option..and your point is....?
I still don't see how you could possibly say that wallace wouldnt' make much of a diference..still waiting for that part to be explained

[Nash13]

The reason why Wallace's defensive looks real good is because he's on a real good defensive team.

Although i can't see Wallace making that much of a difference, he would fill in the last piece of the puzzle. He would be a real liability in crunch time when teams need to foul.

If we were to give up Walker and Jamison, the trade wouldn't be worth it. We'd actually be worse off than last year. Our focus will be on getting a small forward, AGAIN.

[Shaq Attack2]

Originally posted by: Nash13
If we were to give up Walker and Jamison, the trade wouldn't be worth it. We'd actually be worse off than last year. Our focus will be on getting a small forward, AGAIN.

No offense, but you're on crack. Dirk, Nash, Finley, Wallace, and Howard is a fine lineup, even if Howard is a rookie. Heck, put in a small forward vet if you want and have Howard back him up, it doesn't matter. There's no way that lineup is worse than last year, especially defensively, unless you think Raef's offensive skills are worth as much to the Mavs as Wallace's defensive skills.

[Dirkenstien]

The hard cold truth is that Ben Wallace would infact make a very dramatic impact defensively on our team. Just do this for me...imagine our best center....now compare that person to Ben Wallace ..two time defensive player of the year... a monster who belongs to an elite group of only four players in the history of the NBA to lead the league in both Rebounds and Blocks at the end of the season. How is this not an improvement??? it doesnt matter whether or not he is just one shut down defender among the 4 of our other players on the court... will that be your excuse everytime a good defender comes along?? "O ..well i think we'll pass because that's the one thing our team needs most so he couldnt possibly make that much of a difference" thats just rediculous and doesnt even make sense. You have to start somewhere..and yes, Nellie would definitely jump on this trade if it were proposed.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Murphy3
"Murphy you know that you're a closet Najera fan. Some day you'll come out.

And Both the Lakers and SA have a lot more that one offensive option. As I've said those are the 2 teams that we need to get by. "

Yes, they have more than one scoring option..and your point is....?

My point is that even if Ben shuts down one offensive option, the other can simply score the points. 1 player playing D, no matter how good they are, is not going to make huge improvements to a team that doesn't play D. I think our guys can play D, but it is not as highly focused as offense under this coaching system. But a offensive liability like Wallace on the floor and Nellie will be going small ball to get more offense. Meaning we'll get terrible defense at 4 positions and pretty good D at one postion. Still I believe the net would make us better, but not necessarily by that much. Our opponents still score more often than not when we need key stops.

[grndmstr_c]

If we were to give up Walker and Jamison, the trade wouldn't be worth it. We'd actually be worse off than last year. Our focus will be on getting a small forward, AGAIN.

Well said.

[Simon2]

Originally posted by: MavsFanFinley
Nelson will never want a guy like Wallace here. He doen't score enough.

How about a guy named Fortson?

[SeriousSummer]

The best I can do in a trade for Ben Wallace:

Dallas trades: SF Antawn Jamison (22.2 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 1.9 apg in 39.3 minutes)
SG Michael Finley (19.3 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 3.0 apg in 38.3 minutes)
PG Travis Best (8.4 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 3.5 apg in 25.1 minutes)
Dallas receives: SG Bob Sura (7.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.2 apg in 20.6 minutes)
PF Ben Wallace (6.9 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 1.6 apg in 39.3 minutes)
SF Corliss Williamson (12.0 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 1.3 apg in 25.1 minutes)
PG Chucky Atkins (7.1 ppg, 1.5 rpg, 2.7 apg in 21.5 minutes)
SG Hubert Davis (1.8 ppg, 0.8 rpg, 0.7 apg in 7.6 minutes)
Change in team outlook: -14.8 ppg, +10.3 rpg, and +1.1 apg.

Detroit trades: SG Bob Sura (7.3 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 3.2 apg in 20.6 minutes)
PF Ben Wallace (6.9 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 1.6 apg in 39.3 minutes)
SF Corliss Williamson (12.0 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 1.3 apg in 25.1 minutes)
PG Chucky Atkins (7.1 ppg, 1.5 rpg, 2.7 apg in 21.5 minutes)
SG Hubert Davis (1.8 ppg, 0.8 rpg, 0.7 apg in 7.6 minutes)
Detroit receives: SF Antawn Jamison (22.2 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 1.9 apg in 82 games)
SG Michael Finley (19.3 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 3.0 apg in 69 games)
PG Travis Best (8.4 ppg, 2.0 rpg, 3.5 apg in 72 games)
Change in team outlook: +14.8 ppg, -10.3 rpg, and -1.1 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED

Basically, you take everything Detroit doesn't want plus Wallace, and give up the best Dallas is willing to give up that Detroit needs (I'm assuming Dirk is untouchable & Nash stays with Dirk). It also works with Walker in the trade instead of Finley.

If I'm Dallas, then I do it with Finley but not with Walker (sorry Fin Fans). If I'm Detroit than I do it with Walker, but not with Finley.

[4cwebb]

The strange thing about this thread is that the Mavs don't have a player, other than the Dirk or Nash, that the Pistons really need (or want). If the Pistons wanted a scoring SF, they could have drafted Carmelo. Instead they went with Darko, and will hang their hats on Prince and Williamson at SF. They have a SG in Hamilton that they must like since they just gave him $62 million. They like Billups (but Nash would clearly be an upgrade).

And, let's not forget that Boston was dying to get rid of Walker...so desperate that they were willing to take on Raef's ridiculous contract. Detroit is not, by any means, desperate to rid themselves of Wallace, so in my opinion it would require Dirk or Nash going to Detroit to pry Wallace from the Pistons, and I don't see either Nelson giving up Dirk or Nash. Even offering Walker and Jamison isn't enough. I think the Pistons say no right away.

Oh, and Wallace would help the Mavs D from the start. He would be the only defensive minded player on the floor, and that may make him a bit less effective than he has been in Detroit, but that is still better than anything on the Mavs' roster currently (as pointed out above).

[SeriousSummer]

Detroit could have taken Melo. But I think the reason they didn't was because Darko is a bigger talent. I think they still need a small forward. But they only trade Wallace if they think both Okur and Darko are the real thing. They probably are.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Simon2

How about a guy named Fortson?

Don't look for Fortson to keep getting big minutes for long.

[V]

Originally posted by: LRB
Murphy Wallace is an impact player down low. Yes is is one of the better defenders in the NBA. I just don't think that just 1 defender will make that much of a difference. Since he sucks on offense Nellie will be less likely to play another defensive player with him.

But does Wallace help us against SA and LA. I don't think the helps that much. He doesn't have the height or size to be that effective guarding Duncan or Shaq. Sure most everyone has trouble with these two. But right now we feel we can get by anybody but them. I think that the offensive capabilities of Jamison gives us a better shot against these two than the added defensive abilities of Big Ben.

I tired of hearing so much about stopping Duncan & Shaq. No one stops Duncan or Shaq. What we're talking about is improving interior defense overall. The Mavs need someone in the middle to discourange penetration & to occasionally throw some sh*t back.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: V

I tired of hearing so much about stopping Duncan & Shaq. No one stops Duncan or Shaq. What we're talking about is improving interior defense overall. The Mavs need someone in the middle to discourange penetration & to occasionally throw some sh*t back.

No no one does stop Duncan or Shaq. But LA and SA are the 2 teams that we're trying to move past this year. So any moves we make need to be looked at as how do they help us get better in playing these two teams. If they don't, then why make the trade? We're already ahead of the other teams.

So as to guarding Duncan or Shaq. Nellie won't play two really bad offensive players on the floor at once for any significant stretches. Wallace is a bad offensive player. So that means either Wallace guards Shaq and Duncan or Dirk does. While nobody stops these 2, dirk would be much worse than most in his D or risk getting into fould trouble. If Dirk gets into foul trouble we're sunk. So that means we put Wallace on these 2. Now can we really expect him to even try and slow them down and still close the lane down. If wallace comes over to close the lane down all the guy has to do is pass to Shaq or Duncan and LA or SA scores. Don't see how this helps us get past LA or SA.

[Murphy3]

lrb, you really don't have a leg to stand on
i understand the point you're trying to make..but it's simply not a very good one

[V]

Originally posted by: LRB

No no one does stop Duncan or Shaq. But LA and SA are the 2 teams that we're trying to move past this year. So any moves we make need to be looked at as how do they help us get better in playing these two teams. If they don't, then why make the trade? We're already ahead of the other teams.

So as to guarding Duncan or Shaq. Nellie won't play two really bad offensive players on the floor at once for any significant stretches. Wallace is a bad offensive player. So that means either Wallace guards Shaq and Duncan or Dirk does. While nobody stops these 2, dirk would be much worse than most in his D or risk getting into fould trouble. If Dirk gets into foul trouble we're sunk. So that means we put Wallace on these 2. Now can we really expect him to even try and slow them down and still close the lane down. If wallace comes over to close the lane down all the guy has to do is pass to Shaq or Duncan and LA or SA scores. Don't see how this helps us get past LA or SA.

Wallace would defend Duncan / Shaq as well or better than anyone currently on the Mavs roster... which is to say he probably wouldn't slow either of them down significantly.

So what does Wallace do? Why trade for Walace? Because I would love to see Ginobilli, Rose, Fisher, Payton, Bowen, Turkoglu, Bryant, Mercer, George, Parker, Malone, and Horry get their SH*T packed from the help-side every time they drive to the lane or post up.

[4cwebb]

It appears that if there is an ideal player to fit into the Mavs at C, it would be Wallace. Sure, he's a huge offensive liability as far as touches, but he battles hard for rebounds, so it's not as if his man can just completely ignore him. But, I go back to my original thought that the only players the Pistons would consider in trading Wallace would be Dirk or Nash, and neither player is tradeable from the Mavs' point of view.

[dude1394]

I'm just not a fan of wallace. He looks like a lot more atheletic fortson to me. Probalby about the same height come to think about it.

I don't know who the center solution is, I've always thought that one of our biggest issues wasn't inside defense as much as perimeter defense. As far as pushing folks and throwing themselves around fortson does a pretty good job. Doesn't block a lot but will put someone down and surely make a difference rebounding-wise. He's just atrocious (as is wallace) offensively.

Mouring/Malone/Brad Miller were my solutions at center. Possibly one of the Atlanta players would be a fit. But the guy can't be a total zero offensively at the end of games. It just WON'T happen.

You can't name a CHAMPIONSHIP team that has a complete zero on the floor at the end of games. You have to take a longer view of him than just defensive numbers. If he was so durn great he could have carried his team last year, but it didn't/won't happen.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Murphy3
lrb, you really don't have a leg to stand on
i understand the point you're trying to make..but it's simply not a very good one

The last time I looked, about 15 seconds ago, I had 2 fully functional legs. Admittedly they're a little tired and sore from my new workout routine, but they both still function quite well. Oh wait, you mean figuratively.

Well Murphy as you are so fond of calling people out for making the above kind of statements, what evidence and/or arguments do you have to support your claim that my arguments are invalid? I can certainly see how someone could hold a different viewpoint, but it is difficult to debate when someone just says you're wrong because I said so.

[LRB]

Wallace would defend Duncan / Shaq as well or better than anyone currently on the Mavs roster... which is to say he probably wouldn't slow either of them down significantly.

So what does Wallace do? Why trade for Walace? Because I would love to see Ginobilli, Rose, Fisher, Payton, Bowen, Turkoglu, Bryant, Mercer, George, Parker, Malone, and Horry get their SH*T packed from the help-side every time they drive to the lane or post up.

V in man-to-man D I gladly will admit that Wallace would guard Duncan and Shaq as well or better than anyone we have on the roster currently. And I don't think that anyone defender can stop either of these 2 or slow them considerably down. It takes a coordinated team effort to have any chance of doing so.

Yes I would love a help side shot blocker to come over and close up the lane. But how do you keep Wallace's man from scoring when Big Ben leaves to shut down the lane? Ben can't be in 2 places at once. That's the point that I'm making. Until we improve our team D, all the opponents have to do is pass to the Ben's man to get a wide open layup when Ben comes to help on dribble drives or postups of other defenders.

[MavKikiNYC]

I'm just not a fan of wallace. He looks like a lot more atheletic fortson to me. Probalby about the same height come to think about it.

I didn't want to be the one to bring this up, but....

He's about 6.7

[LRB]

Originally posted by: MavKikiNYC

I didn't want to be the one to bring this up, but....

He's about 6.7

With or without the 'fro?

[dude1394]

Originally posted by: MavKikiNYC

I didn't want to be the one to bring this up, but....

He's about 6.7

Fortson or wallace or both? My buddie and I at the game have been going back and forth about how tall fortson really is. I'm thinking he's about the same height as finley.