Nets talk with Mavs about Kidd trade? - Page 12 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

DirkFTW · 02-03-2008, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr.Zoidberg

Opening Briefcases: 26 'No's' To Kidd
By Mike Fisher -- DB.com

Because there is a chemistry with this team, and it is rare and it is special.

Today and against Boston, the chemistry looked special ed. We need some Chem 501.

chumdawg · 02-03-2008, 06:24 PM

Rare and special? I may be blind, but I don't see any rare and special chemistry from the Mavs. Hell, I'd be hard pressed to define how they have any chemistry, much less a "rare and special" kind.

Fisher and Lord are such cheerleaders.

chumdawg · 02-03-2008, 08:45 PM

I think one thing we are not giving enough consideration to is how Kidd would negatively impact Dirk. We saw how Dirk grew as a player and came into his own when we got rid of Nash. What Dirk needed was to be the man, so to speak.

So I think we should factor in the realization that adding a PG like Kidd would diminish what Dirk brings to this team. It's not worth it to add to one position if it takes away from another one.

Dirkadirkastan · 02-03-2008, 10:23 PM

Chum, that shtick would be funny, but you've said stuff like that many times before so that joke is pretty worn out now.

chumdawg · 02-03-2008, 10:37 PM

It's not that it's worn out, it's that you are finally starting to realize what it means.

Of course I knew it from the get-go, but it doesn't hurt for you to put two and two together eventually.

dude1394 · 02-03-2008, 10:46 PM

No it's worn out allright, you are just very energetic about repeating it.

chumdawg · 02-03-2008, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

No it's worn out allright, you are just very energetic about repeating it.

It was a move that handicapped our team for at least four years, and probably more. Why should we just forget it? We should hold management responsible for their piss-poor judgment, just as you or I would be on our jobs.

dude1394 · 02-03-2008, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

It was a move that handicapped our team for at least four years, and probably more. Why should we just forget it? We should hold management responsible for their piss-poor judgment, just as you or I would be on our jobs.

Because it's counter-productive, just like it would be in your's or my jobs. What's the point of dwelling on errors made four years ago.

If you are saying you want them all fired, then fine, say it and be done with it. But continually dragging up a 4-year old mistake is just being a bitch.

chumdawg · 02-03-2008, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

Because it's counter-productive, just like it would be in your's or my jobs. What's the point of dwelling on errors made four years ago.

If you are saying you want them all fired, then fine, say it and be done with it. But continually dragging up a 4-year old mistake is just being a bitch.

Until management acknowledges it was a mistake, nothing was learned from it.

Dirkadirkastan · 02-03-2008, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Until management acknowledges it was a mistake, nothing was learned from it.

But you're not taking it up with them, you're taking it up with us. And guess what? We ain't responsible, and we can't do squat.

dude1394 · 02-03-2008, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Until management acknowledges it was a mistake, nothing was learned from it.

I think I've actually heard that, it wasn't "oh I'm sorry chum that I let nash go". But I've heard quite a bit of how they never thought nash would play nearly this well, etc.

Of course if nash had gone to detroit it wouldn't have been nearly as big of a mistake.

but you are being silly. A mea culpa 4 years later doesn't mean squat.

chumdawg · 02-03-2008, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

but you are being silly. A mea culpa 4 years later doesn't mean squat.

We are talking about four years in which we haven't won sqaut, and in which by all accounts we should have. I'm not one to give Cuban a free pass. For whatever it is worth, his idiocy is getting called out by me.

dude1394 · 02-03-2008, 11:19 PM

We haven't won squat. Are you a CEO? A president of a large corporation, a gazillionaire? You haven't acheieved squat.

How silly to measure everything by only winning a championship. Championship or bust I guess.

You really ARE wasting your time watching regular season games.

chumdawg · 02-03-2008, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

How silly to measure everything by only winning a championship. Championship or bust I guess.

Wow, by this measure Nellie was actually a good coach.

dude1394 · 02-03-2008, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Wow, by this measure Nellie was actually a good coach.

He was a good coach, still is. But he quit on the team and had to go.

chumdawg · 02-03-2008, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

He was a good coach, still is. But he quit on the team and had to go.

Let's be sure we get the history straight. His team (Cuban) quit on him.

dude1394 · 02-03-2008, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Let's be sure we get the history straight. His team (Cuban) quit on him.

Nope disagree, nellie quit on the team, I saw it happen in front of my eyes. Unless you are saying that Nellies son also quit on him.

No one guaranteed nellie a team that would be over the salary cap every year.

chumdawg · 02-03-2008, 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

Nope disagree, nellie quit on the team, I saw it happen in front of my eyes. Unless you are saying that Nellies son also quit on him.

No one guaranteed nellie a team that would be over the salary cap every year.

Don't be naive. The Mavs are still over the salary cap. Cuban balked on Nash, and in doing so he undercut everyone in the organization.

dude1394 · 02-03-2008, 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Don't be naive. The Mavs are still over the salary cap. Cuban balked on Nash, and in doing so he undercut everyone in the organization.

Don't be stupid. Cubes made a decision to get fiscally responsible after giving nellie any and everything he wanted. Seeing his team get the crap kicked out of them by sacremento and nothing but salary cap hell in the future.

Nash was the first step to get fiscally responsible. I didn't agree with it, but it was never to "hurt poor iddy biddy newwie". That's ridiculous.

chumdawg · 02-04-2008, 12:09 AM

Look, it's not my fault that Cuban acted irrationally. (And like a teenager jilted by a prom date, I might add.)

I'm just here to remind him how infantile he was.

LonghornDub · 02-04-2008, 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I'm just here to remind him how infantile he was.

Which poster is he?

rmacomic · 02-04-2008, 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProdigyDub

Which poster is he?

I dunno was he a Baylor student?

AxdemxO · 02-04-2008, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

We haven't won squat. Are you a CEO? A president of a large corporation, a gazillionaire? You haven't acheieved squat.

How silly to measure everything by only winning a championship. Championship or bust I guess.

You really ARE wasting your time watching regular season games.

Thts how you measure other peoples success on here thou..including Nash and the Suns, including every player Dirk is compared to such as KG and I can go on...

LonghornDub · 02-04-2008, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AxdemxO

Thts how you measure other peoples success on here thou..including Nash and the Suns, including every player Dirk is compared to such as KG and I can go on...

Championships are the paramount measure of success, but not the only measure. I enjoy watching the Mavs win games period, so even a season where they only win 45 or 50 is a relative "success" in at least some sense from my perspective.

Don't get me wrong, though--if they don't get this thing done while Dirk is still here I'll be very, very disappointed.

AxdemxO · 02-04-2008, 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProdigyDub

Championships are the paramount measure of success, but not the only measure. I enjoy watching the Mavs win games period, so even a season where they only win 45 or 50 is a relative "success" in at least some sense from my perspective.

Don't get me wrong, though--if they don't get this thing done while Dirk is still here I'll be very, very disappointed.

I am just saying that people on here use that to put down other players. How many times have you heard people say " Ohh wht has Nash won th elast 4 years" then you come bak and say "wht has Dirk won" and the same people go on this but you cant measure success by tht.

LonghornDub · 02-04-2008, 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AxdemxO

I am just saying that people on here use that to put down other players. How many times have you heard people say " Ohh wht has Nash won th elast 4 years" then you come bak and say "wht has Dirk won" and the same people go on this but you cant measure success by tht.

It's really not fair to players to measure success solely by championships, for sure. Plenty of good players will never win one. In fact, the vast majority.

bernardos70 · 02-04-2008, 01:56 AM

WWTTAA?

Seriously, What Was This Thread About Again?

DevinHarriswillstart · 02-04-2008, 02:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bernardos70

WWTTAA?

Seriously, What Was This Thread About Again?

Haha getting J-Kidd which we still should try and do. If the Mavs don't take a gamble like this then when will they? I don't think Harris is required to get this deal done. The West is way too tough to stand pat as I see it. Can this team survive til Harris gets back? Portland has 4 more losses than we do and aren't even in the playoffs if they started today. Would anyone be surprised if we lost 4 or more games before Devin gets back? If we continue to lose to crappy teams on the road then a change HAS to be made. If you can't beat a team like Milwauke on the road, then you won't win road games in the playoffs, book it.

Dirkadirkastan · 02-04-2008, 04:51 AM

Boston and Detroit aren't crappy teams.

Robillion · 02-04-2008, 08:02 AM

If I make a thread with a poll in it that says, " If Chum even mumbles the name Nash again will you put him on Ignore" yes or no. .. would others join in and say yes?. Three yes's and Ill make the thread, heh.

seelenjaeger · 02-04-2008, 09:36 AM

Well, not sure how "news" the cuban News on realgm really is, but if the Mavs are really "not likely doing anything" at the trade deadline (or - as history of the last years showed - at all) I´m close to placing a bet that Dirk will be another ringless Hall of Famer when he´s getting the call.

Powers keep shifting around us, and the Mavs will still be the team that was so close to win it all in the early years of the new millenium ...

dalmations202 · 02-04-2008, 12:24 PM

I sincerely hope that Cubes is sending out all this Kidd trade stuff because he is working on a Brand, JO, Magette, GWallace, AK47, or maybe even Shaq deal that he doesn't want everyone else talking about.

Provided they keep Dirk, JHo, DHarris and one of the two centers.

Brand and JO seem like the perfect fit to me. (please get one of these two to pair with Dirk while they are injured and their value is low)

Magette, GWallace, AK47 could push them way up.

Shaq is a shell, but one that could still be a dominating force at times. I think him and Damp would be a nasty C combo for Averys control the flow gameplans. He is not worth the 40M it would cost, IMO, but surround him with talent, and he still would demand double teams in the post freeing up others.

I really off the top of my head can't come up with any other names that I think would put the Mavs "over the top" that might be available.

seelenjaeger · 02-04-2008, 02:43 PM

I´m not sold that Kidd is the solution to all our problems, but if you have the chance to get a difference maker without parting with a key guy you just HAVE to really think about it.

And we´re no longer a developing team, which means trading for young talented guys (or keeping them) who are not there for another 2-3 years will not cut it, neither will adding a million of hobbled veterans (yes, I know, Kidd might soon be another one of those, but at this very moment, he isn´t yet).

I wonder which options we passed upon when we had all those expiring contracts of KvH and Stacky on the payroll... amazing to think that Memphis TURNED DOWN getting something like Odom back, makes you think that there´s people out there who wouldn´t even WANT some Devin Harris or whatever back in exchange for their disgruntled stars.

But right, we´re saving money and cutting down cost so we can throw it after another bunch of aged faces the next summer...

Eman · 02-04-2008, 05:16 PM

I Vince Carter is available for Terry and expiring, why not? Jersey would trade a 13.5 million contract for a 7mill and an expiring,
we would get a 6'6" 2 guard who's stats are 20/5.5/5!!!!! Just what we need.

2 guard is our weakest spot imho.

DAmp
Dirk/bass
Josh
Vince
Devin

Wow!!!!, and Jersey is about to start rebuilding so doesn't need him.

stewartj · 02-04-2008, 06:16 PM

What can we do with Keith Van Horn in a sign and trade? Is there a limit to how much we can sign him for? Could we simply give him 20mil for one year and then trade straight up for Shaq? It's not a feasible trade obviously, I'm just asking if its technically possible.

MFFL · 02-04-2008, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stewartj

What can we do with Keith Van Horn in a sign and trade? Is there a limit to how much we can sign him for? Could we simply give him 20mil for one year and then trade straight up for Shaq? It's not a feasible trade obviously, I'm just asking if its technically possible.

Keith Van Horn made $15.6M or so his last year here. He could get that much plus a raise in a sign and trade. With the 25% trade rule, Dallas could, in theory, trade for Shaq without giving up any other player.

But since that would cost Cubes $40M, it aint gonna happen.

DelNegro · 02-04-2008, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stewartj

What can we do with Keith Van Horn in a sign and trade? Is there a limit to how much we can sign him for? Could we simply give him 20mil for one year and then trade straight up for Shaq? It's not a feasible trade obviously, I'm just asking if its technically possible.

Not quite $20mil, but still a boatload. The most he could be signed for is $16,478,962 which is 105% of what he made in the last year of his contract.

MFFL · 02-04-2008, 07:39 PM

The Larry Coon FAQ says the raise could be up to 10.5% which would put KVH salary at $18M which is within the 25% needed for trades.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#19

AxdemxO · 02-04-2008, 08:21 PM

why do seemingly smart people on here think tht Shaq can do anything for us and tht we would be better with his. I would rather see Kidd here thn Shaq...Shaq is useless

dalmations202 · 02-04-2008, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AxdemxO

why do seemingly smart people on here think tht Shaq can do anything for us and tht we would be better with his. I would rather see Kidd here thn Shaq...Shaq is useless

Simple, we have a player in Harris, that can do basically what Kidd does today (not talking about his past), who has a big upside.

Shaq at his useless self, still scores 14 a game, and still demands double teams. He is also a very good passer, and still plays descent D. He may no longer be a 20M man (40 with the luxury tax), but since it isn't my money, I'd take a trio of Shaq, Damp, and Diop anytime.