Stack on his way out of Dallas? (DMN)

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by ghazi

Howard at SG, Wallace at SF... the outside shooting of that unit seems like it would suck.

Frankly, I'm sick of our outside shooting. This team needs to get to the line first and foremost these days. Terry and Dirk are plenty enough to supply the outside shots. Howard and Green will get theirs too. A small price to pay for what Wallace can bring to the table.

[jthig32]

From the FWST today:

Link

In fact, Stackhouse won’t play tonight in Charlotte or perhaps for some time. He’s removing himself from the active roster indefinitely to rest his heel and allow time for a resolution.

Interesting.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Frankly, I'm sick of our outside shooting. This team needs to get to the line first and foremost these days. Terry and Dirk are plenty enough to supply the outside shots. Howard and Green will get theirs too. A small price to pay for what Wallace can bring to the table.

We don't have enough shooters. You wouldn't be so sick of our outside shooting if we actually could hit a shot.

Contrary to mythical message board belief, teams don't consistently win games by going to the line 30-40 times. A good team HAS to be able to hit open shots. The Mavs don't.

[basketballgirl25]

Originally Posted by bobatundi

So basically just paying what he would have lost anyway? That seems like a slap on the wrist. I figured they'd Martha Stewart his ass...

Wonder if Stern will try to suspend him over this, or take some kind of action. He's had it in for Cubes for a while.

Didn't Cuban do almost the same or same thing Martha Stewart did? if he did he deserves the same thing to happen to him

I don't think Stern can suspend him over this I'd laugh if he did though

[bernardos70]

Why won't rep work anymore? But I digress....

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

We don't have enough shooters. You wouldn't be so sick of our outside shooting if we actually could hit a shot.

Contrary to mythical message board belief, teams don't consistently win games by going to the line 30-40 times. A good team HAS to be able to hit open shots. The Mavs don't.

Well luckily we wouldn't be losing any outside shooters in that trade anyway. (Stack's 29% doesn't count)

And the fact that the Mavs suck at getting to the line is far from mythical.

[erdubya]

Originally Posted by craggmac

How many years do we have to sit back and pretend that our problems are at the point guard position. It has been obvious for years that we lack an offensive presence at the center position. What have we seen?... pieces moving around in every position EXCEPT the center position. I personally am exhausted with the so-called "We-Love-Our Team" BS. We have pieces that we could trade to get what we need. It's time to get real. NO EXCUSES! From now on our moto should be, "If he has to go, he has to go."

Thats what I've been saying all along. Very well put.

[fluid.forty.one]

Originally Posted by jthig32

From the FWST today:

Link


Interesting.

who knew that Stackhouse could make me so happy?

[Sportstudi]

Originally Posted by jthig32

From the FWST today:

Link


Interesting.

Probably the best decision Stack made this season so far... didn't expect he would make me happy that soon...

[erdubya]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Contrary to mythical message board belief, teams don't consistently win games by going to the line 30-40 times.

Umm... THIS team would.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Well luckily we wouldn't be losing any outside shooters in that trade anyway. (Stack's 29% doesn't count)

And the fact that the Mavs suck at getting to the line is far from mythical.

The Mavs shoot less FT's than a lot of teams because we don't have a low post offensive threat. It has much more to do with than than it does with "needing to slash more."

The myth comes in the notion that a team's problems can be solved simply by aggressively running at the basket. It's a lot harder than it sounds. We tried it during Game 6 against SA back in 2006 (when Jet was suspended) and it didn't work. We tried it in the NBA Finals and it didn't work. Both times, all that happened was a bunch of blocked shots and missed layups (mostly by Devin) with no calls.

Driving to the basket and getting to the line are essential to being a top-flight team, but a necessary condition of those two things is the ability to hit open shots. Bottom line, if your team can't hit open shots then you're not going to have good opportunities to drive to the basket. If you try to do it anyway, you're bound to be unsuccessful.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by erdubya

Umm... THIS team would.

I think you missed the point. Any team would win most of its games if it could shoot 40 FT's a game. The problem is that no team can do that consistently. It's not a realistic goal.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

The Mavs shoot less FT's than a lot of teams because we don't have an offensive low post threat. It has much more to do with than than it does with "needing to slash more."

The myth comes in the notion that a team's problems can be solved simply by aggressively running at the basket. It's a lot harder than it sounds. We tried it during Game 6 against SA back in 2006 and it didn't work. We tried it in the NBA Finals and it didn't work. Both times, all that happened was a bunch of blocked shots and missed layups (mostly by Devin) with no calls.

Bottom line, if your team can't hit open shots then you're not going to have good opportunities to drive to the basket. If you try to do it anyway, you're bound to be unsuccessful.

Well, obviously any team with a good low-post threat could feasibly get to the line more but the Mavs don't. I don't think the focus has to be on "slash", it just has to be more where shots are taken. Shooting 19ft jump shots right in an opponent's face is what the Mavs have been doing for the most part lately. It's just lazy.

If you look at any player who drives to the basket versus a player that doesn't, I guarantee you they will shoot more fts. That isn't just some conicidence. You can't use that example against SA since they actually had centers who could block shots, like um, Tim Duncan. You saying that driving to the basket will just get your shot block is a ludicrous point with that example. The more teams attack the basket, the more fts they will attempt, I guarantee it.

[MavsX]

woo hoo!, but once he's gone, you a-holes can't keep blaming him for everything!

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Well, obviously any team with a good low-post threat could feasibly get to the line more but the Mavs don't. I don't think the focus has to be on "slash", it just has to be more where shots are taken. Shooting 19ft jump shots right in an opponent's face is what the Mavs have been doing for the most part lately. It's just lazy.

If you look at any player who drives to the basket versus a player that doesn't, I guarantee you they will shoot more fts. That isn't just some conicidence. You can't use that example against SA since they actually had centers who could block shots, like um, Tim Duncan. You saying that driving to the basket will just get your shot block is a ludicrous point with that example. The more teams attack the basket, the more fts they will attempt, I guarantee it.

You're not addressing the issue. I never said that driving to the basket doesn't give you more FTA's. I said it's not going to translate into consistent success and victories if a team doesn't have enough shooters to spread the floor to give them good opportunities to drive to the basket successfully. Sure, you can just force your way in there and you may get more FTA's, but you'll also have more turnovers, more fouls that aren't called, and generally lower percentage shots.

In the NBA, an open jumper within 20 feet is a much higher percentage shot than most drives into the lane. There is a reason that almost every end-game play you see drawn up is a jump shot, rather than a drive. There are several risks inherent with taking the ball to the hoop that teams aren't willing to risk with 5 seconds left in a game. An open jumper is a much safer bet. Problem is, the Mavs only have 2-3 players who consistently hit open jumpers.

There are plenty of times where this team certainly needs to be more aggressive. Every time Howard steps back to take a contested, fadeaway jumper, I cringe. But the Mavs need shooting and a low post threat way more than they need a guy who can't shoot but can run into the lane and draw fouls.

[Dirkenstien]

Slashers and offensive big men put pressure on the opposition's big men and force them to make fouls. Currently we have neither.

If basketball were a chess match the big men would be the Queen. Generally, the team that takes out the Queen first has a clear advantage for the remainder of the match. We pose no legitimate threat against our opposition's strength and in turn create a weakness of our own.

We need to get a slasher our an offensive big man.

[Murphy3]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

We don't have enough shooters. You wouldn't be so sick of our outside shooting if we actually could hit a shot.

Contrary to mythical message board belief, teams don't consistently win games by going to the line 30-40 times. A good team HAS to be able to hit open shots. The Mavs don't.

Which...stackhouse has never really done...

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

You're not addressing the issue. I never said that driving to the basket doesn't give you more FTA's. I said it's not going to translate into consistent success and victories if a team doesn't have enough shooters to spread the floor to give them good opportunities to drive to the basket successfully. Sure, you can just force your way in there and you may get more FTA's, but you'll also have more turnovers, more fouls that aren't called, and generally lower percentage shots.

Yeah but forcing your way in there gets you two free shots with noone defending you. We are one of the best ft shooting teams in the league so I like our chances at the line. I didn't say it would definitely translate into instant success but it woudl vary things up from the constant poor shot attempts the team is currently taking.

In the NBA, an open jumper within 20 feet is a much higher percentage shot than most drives into the lane. There is a reason that almost every end-game play you see drawn up is a jump shot, rather than a drive. There are several risks inherent with taking the ball to the hoop that teams aren't willing to risk with 5 seconds left in a game. An open jumper is a much safer bet. Problem is, the Mavs only have 2-3 players who consistently hit open jumpers.

That isn't always true. Luke Ridnour on Milwauke sent the game into overtime against Boston with a drive lay-up to the basket. It really just depends how much time is on the clock and who has the ball.

There are plenty of times where this team certainly needs to be more aggressive. Every time Howard steps back to take a contested, fadeaway jumper, I cringe. But the Mavs need shooting and a low post threat way more than they need a guy who can't shoot but can run into the lane and draw fouls.

Sure do. I think we need more consistent shooters, sure, but the team has turned into "live by and die by" the jump shot. Yeah that does have a lot to do with low-post scoring but we don't have that right now obviously. The next best thing is gettin to the line. I really don't think there is a good enough low-post threat available to acquire right now. I just want to see some more easy baskets around the rim, low-post or not.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

That isn't always true. Luke Ridnour on Milwauke sent the game into overtime against Boston with a drive lay-up to the basket. It really just depends how much time is on the clock and who has the ball.

It's true the vast majority of the time, which is why I said "almost every end-game play." The fact that you pointed out one example to the contrary doesn't negate much. Of all the famous shots in NBA history, how many of them are jumpers? Probably 80% or more. There's a reason for that.

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Sure do. I think we need more consistent shooters, sure, but the team has turned into "live by and die by" the jump shot. Yeah that does have a lot to do with low-post scoring but we don't have that right now obviously. The next best thing is gettin to the line. I really don't think there is a good enough low-post threat available to acquire right now. I just want to see some more easy baskets around the rim, low-post or not.

Frankly, I don't see any particularly good options out there for a guy who can get to the line but also shoot consistently. If something comes up, I'm all on board with it, but I'm not seeing it right now.

If we could get Mike Miller here, that'd be great. I prefer him to Maggette because he's a better shooter, but I would have taken either last offseason.

What I don't want to see, and what a lot of people don't seem to address, is the Mavs making a move that makes us a worse shooting team than we already are in favor of "getting to the line more" via an aggressive guard. If we could make that move WITHOUT losing any of our current shooting (limited as it is), I'm for it. Otherwise, I'll pass.

[jthig32]

I'm not really sure the statistics bear out that the Mavs take significantly more jump shots than the better teams in the NBA. Just looking through the stats on 82games.com for this season, 70% of the Mavs' shots are jumpers. Compare that to 65% for Boston, 73% for the Spurs, 67% for the Cavs, etc. etc.

Obviously some teams are lower than others. The Jazz shoot less than 60% jumpers so far. But the notion that the Mavs are some aberration in their reliance on jumpers seems false to me. I'll have to take some time to look at historical data.

Edit:

I did a quick look at the Mavs and Spurs % the past few seasons, and they're very comparable. Both teams are around 70% every season. I just used the Spurs because they have an elite post player, and of course they've been really good.

This would seem to drive home Dub's point that the Mavs simply need better shooters (or perhaps need to get better looks).

Oh, and the Suns this season, with Shaq and Amare, are taking jumpers 65% of the time....

[Rick41]

Jerry Marbury? or Stephon Stackhouse?

[BGMaverick9]

It's a case of Big man/low post vs SG/legit scoring option to go with Dirk and Kidd.
I forgot that was the 3rd option I'd want from a SG if we get one via trade. The SG has to do 2 out of the 3 qualities I want from our SG: Shoot with range with great consistency, be able to attack the basket, defend.

I think I could get on board if it were possible to trade for Kaman and have to give up Josh. How often is it you can get legit big men with a low-post game? It's definitely a lot harder than to find a swingman. Kaman isn't the "sexy" name or anything, but the guy things that we're looking for from the Center position.

Now I can see LonghornDub's point about a deal that makes us weaker in terms of shooting. I think a deal for Kaman would probably be that kind of move. I do see a trade-off though by getting a legit big.
I'm getting less enthused about a deal with Wallace if Howard is involved, it seems too lateral to me.

Either way, we seriously need one of those two holes filled, the SG or C. I can see a deal for Kaman potentially being good but actual Centers are a dying breed and SG are more plentiful, but the elite ones are the tougher ones to grab. But if you have one, with what've we got with Dirk and Kidd...I really want that most.

[jthig32]

A Josh for Wallace move is not a lateral move, it's a step backwards.

[Murphy3]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I'm not really sure the statistics bear out that the Mavs take significantly more jump shots than the better teams in the NBA. Just looking through the stats on 82games.com for this season, 70% of the Mavs' shots are jumpers. Compare that to 65% for Boston, 73% for the Spurs, 67% for the Cavs, etc. etc.

Obviously some teams are lower than others. The Jazz shoot less than 60% jumpers so far. But the notion that the Mavs are some aberration in their reliance on jumpers seems false to me. I'll have to take some time to look at historical data.

Edit:

I did a quick look at the Mavs and Spurs % the past few seasons, and they're very comparable. Both teams are around 70% every season. I just used the Spurs because they have an elite post player, and of course they've been really good.

This would seem to drive home Dub's point that the Mavs simply need better shooters (or perhaps need to get better looks).

Oh, and the Suns this season, with Shaq and Amare, are taking jumpers 65% of the time....

I 100% agree that the Mavs need better shooters. Yeah, I do think that they are a bit too reliant on the outside jumper at times.. especially when you have some guys taking the shot that don't hit them at a high enough clip.

[BGMaverick9]

Originally Posted by jthig32

A Josh for Wallace move is not a lateral move, it's a step backwards.

Ok, ok...lateral AT BEST.

better?

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by Murphy3

I 100% agree that the Mavs need better shooters. Yeah, I do think that they are a bit too reliant on the outside jumper at times.. especially when you have some guys taking the shot that don't hit them at a high enough clip.

Yes, I would say my biggest overall problem is WHO takes those jumpers. I understand you have consistent positioning where people have to be on a play or set, but there is just no reason that Wright should ever take a three point shot. Ever. Adjust your plays when he's in the game, or don't play him. Things like that frustrate me.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I'm not really sure the statistics bear out that the Mavs take significantly more jump shots than the better teams in the NBA. Just looking through the stats on 82games.com for this season, 70% of the Mavs' shots are jumpers. Compare that to 65% for Boston, 73% for the Spurs, 67% for the Cavs, etc. etc.

Obviously some teams are lower than others. The Jazz shoot less than 60% jumpers so far. But the notion that the Mavs are some aberration in their reliance on jumpers seems false to me. I'll have to take some time to look at historical data.

Edit:

I did a quick look at the Mavs and Spurs % the past few seasons, and they're very comparable. Both teams are around 70% every season. I just used the Spurs because they have an elite post player, and of course they've been really good.

This would seem to drive home Dub's point that the Mavs simply need better shooters (or perhaps need to get better looks).

Oh, and the Suns this season, with Shaq and Amare, are taking jumpers 65% of the time....

Thank you thiggy. This is exactly my point. The jump shot is the crux of the NBA offense. I can't recall the last team I saw win a championship that didn't hit open jumpers at a fairly high rate. It's absolutely critical.

Unfortunately, the Mavs only have a couple players that consistently hit open shots. But NBA players are told, "Shoot when you're open," and most NBA players have big enough egos to think that they can make the shot. So, opposing teams are able to focus on Dirk/Jet/Josh, leave our other guys open, and count on the fact that they won't be able to make the shot.

This team had all sorts of problems last year, but throughout the entire season I really thought one of the biggest issues was just that we missed so many shots that any average NBA shooter should be able to make.

[CanadianMavsFan]

Jerry Stackhouse for Jason Kapono works in the trade machine. Kapono is probably the most accurate 3 point shooter in the league, but unfortunately that moron Sam Mitchell doesn't know how to use him properly. I live in Toronto, and the Raptors could use a veteran like Stack, at the very least he gives an extremely soft team more of an edge. Since Stackhouse was doing very close to nothing for us shooting wise anyway, Kapono will be able to hit those open threes.

[dude1394]

The team has to hit jumpers...but they have to attack the offense to even get those open shots. If you don't take it to the rack when it's open...you can't get enough seperation to get open shots.

And you really need someone that will force their way "close" if you have to have a bucket when things are going bad with the jumpers. In other words bball is a game of runs and if the team starts to miss some...others start to miss and you need to play good D and attack the rim when you can.

Jason Terry for example tonight had quite a few shots in teh paint...good stuff...possibly a jumper..but an 8-foot one.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by CanadianMavsFan

Jerry Stackhouse for Jason Kapono works in the trade machine. Kapono is probably the most accurate 3 point shooter in the league, but unfortunately that moron Sam Mitchell doesn't know how to use him properly. I live in Toronto, and the Raptors could use a veteran like Stack, at the very least he gives an extremely soft team more of an edge. Since Stackhouse was doing very close to nothing for us shooting wise anyway, Kapono will be able to hit those open threes.

Damn...56% from 3pt land. I can't imagine anyone taking stack for that guy..he's still getting 25mpg.

[CanadianMavsFan]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Damn...56% from 3pt land. I can't imagine anyone taking stack for that guy..he's still getting 25mpg.

The Raptors are desperate, at this point they'll take anyone who at least tries to get to the rim on the perimeter.

[ty]

Later Stack.

I'll miss this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrkkDgh_zMo

...oh and this of course: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJz6Op1cBTQ

[blessednegr0]

stack is about the only TOUGH guy on this team...

.. with that I am happy to see him go. His shooting slumps are horrible

[LonghornDub]

I'll miss this:

Start of 1st Overtime
5:00 Jump Ball Duncan vs Diop
4:42 Duncan Jump Shot: Missed Block: Diop (2 BLK)
4:39 Duncan Rebound (Off:5 Def:9)
4:39 Duncan Layup Shot: Missed
4:38 Diop Rebound (Off:2 Def:1)
4:20 Howard Layup Shot: Made (18 PTS) Assist: Nowitzki (3 AST) [DAL 106-104]
3:57 Parker Jump Shot: Made (24 PTS) [SAS 106-106]
3:32 Diop Dunk Shot: Made (6 PTS) Assist: Terry (1 AST) [DAL 108-106]
3:21 Duncan Turnover: Traveling (3 TO)
2:59 Stackhouse Jump Shot: Made (11 PTS) [DAL 110-106]
2:45 Howard Foul: Shooting (6 PF)
Ginobili Free Throw 1 of 2 (22 PTS) [SAS 107-110]
Ginobili Free Throw 2 of 2 (23 PTS) [SAS 108-110]
2:28 Ginobili Foul: Shooting (5 PF)
Terry Free Throw 1 of 2 (24 PTS) [DAL 111-108]
Terry Free Throw 2 of 2 (25 PTS)[DAL 112-108]
2:10 Duncan Jump Shot: Missed
2:08 Nowitzki Rebound (Off:2 Def:12)
1:48 Stackhouse Jump Shot: Made (13 PTS) [DAL 114-108]

. . .

0:09 Nowitzki Free Throw 2 of 2 (37 PTS) [DAL 119-111]
0:04 Finley Jump Shot: Missed
0:02 Griffin Rebound (Off: Def:1)

End of 1st Overtime

Final Score: DAL 119, SA 111.

[ty]

Originally Posted by blessednegr0

stack is about the only TOUGH guy on this team...

.. with that I am happy to see him go. His shooting slumps are horrible

I'd consider Bass a TOUGH guy on this team.

I'd consider Stack the only thug though...old thug.

[SMC0007]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I'm not really sure the statistics bear out that the Mavs take significantly more jump shots than the better teams in the NBA. Just looking through the stats on 82games.com for this season, 70% of the Mavs' shots are jumpers. Compare that to 65% for Boston, 73% for the Spurs, 67% for the Cavs, etc. etc.

Obviously some teams are lower than others. The Jazz shoot less than 60% jumpers so far. But the notion that the Mavs are some aberration in their reliance on jumpers seems false to me. I'll have to take some time to look at historical data.

Edit:

I did a quick look at the Mavs and Spurs % the past few seasons, and they're very comparable. Both teams are around 70% every season. I just used the Spurs because they have an elite post player, and of course they've been really good.

This would seem to drive home Dub's point that the Mavs simply need better shooters (or perhaps need to get better looks).

Oh, and the Suns this season, with Shaq and Amare, are taking jumpers 65% of the time....

Better looks seem to go hand in hand with having Duncan.

[spreedom]

Originally Posted by ty

Later Stack.

I'll miss this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrkkDgh_zMo

...oh and this of course: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJz6Op1cBTQ

God, I f'ing hate Ginobili...

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by dude1394

The team has to hit jumpers...but they have to attack the offense to even get those open shots. If you don't take it to the rack when it's open...you can't get enough seperation to get open shots.

And you really need someone that will force their way "close" if you have to have a bucket when things are going bad with the jumpers. In other words bball is a game of runs and if the team starts to miss some...others start to miss and you need to play good D and attack the rim when you can.

Jason Terry for example tonight had quite a few shots in teh paint...good stuff...possibly a jumper..but an 8-foot one.

Exactly.

[Dirkenstien]

Originally Posted by CanadianMavsFan

Jerry Stackhouse for Jason Kapono works in the trade machine. Kapono is probably the most accurate 3 point shooter in the league, but unfortunately that moron Sam Mitchell doesn't know how to use him properly. I live in Toronto, and the Raptors could use a veteran like Stack, at the very least he gives an extremely soft team more of an edge. Since Stackhouse was doing very close to nothing for us shooting wise anyway, Kapono will be able to hit those open threes.

Kopono is a bit one-dimensional but would be a nice return on Stackhouse and I think Stack would have a nice role on that Raptor's team. If we couldn't put Stackhouse in a package for a better player this wouldn't be a bad deal. Kopono is basically a poor man's Peja.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by dude1394

The team has to hit jumpers...but they have to attack the offense to even get those open shots. If you don't take it to the rack when it's open...you can't get enough seperation to get open shots.

That goes equally both ways, though. You won't often get to the rim with much success if you can't hit wide open shots.

Anybody watch the Spurs much last year? This was exactly their problem. They have 2 guys who are incredibly good at driving to the hole, and the best low post threat in the game. Yet, they lost games (and ultimately lost in the playoffs) because they had a ton of guys who chucked up nothing but bricks.