Trade: Najera back in Dallas for Humphries/Shawne - Page 4 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

horse900703 · 01-19-2010, 02:38 PM

I don't see why we need Najera?

EricaLubarsky · 01-19-2010, 02:42 PM

I think everyone here is aware of the NBA adage: never trust a player's abilities when they play well on a bad team. Well there aren't any worse teams out there than the Nets who have won THREE of their first FOURTY games, and have gone 0-3 since acquiring Hump.

xrobx · 01-27-2010, 10:41 PM

every time i see stats like tonight where hump had 25 pts on 10-14 8 rebs 1 blk/stl/ast and i see najera.... well, i haven't seen najera. i just have to ask myself WHY?????

sefant77 · 01-27-2010, 10:54 PM

Nets...Clippers

Thomas86 · 01-27-2010, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by horse900703

I don't see why we need Najera?

It was a "Energy Trade".....since the AAC has no energy anymore I guess Cuban thought this trade might work.

I wouldn't put to much stock in Hump because it's easy to put up good numbers on a bad team when he's getting most of the minutes.

CadBane · 01-28-2010, 12:35 AM

I know it's the Nets...but 25 points on a great fg%...I'm not saying Hump is a stud or anything...but dumping him for a scrub to save, what, a couple million? When our front court depth is thin? I don't like that.

LonghornDub · 01-28-2010, 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CadBane

I know it's the Nets...but 25 points on a great fg%...I'm not saying Hump is a stud or anything...but dumping him for a scrub to save, what, a couple million? When our front court depth is thin? I don't like that.

Seems strange to me too. Maybe if they make good use of that TE it will all make sense.

Dirkadirkastan · 01-28-2010, 12:37 AM

I miss the Ladder.

DevinHarriswillstart · 01-28-2010, 10:49 AM

Hump didn't have a role here.

Anyone on the Mavs not named Ross, Carrol, and Damp could score 25 if they played on the Nets. Big deal.

SMC0007 · 01-28-2010, 11:42 AM

Cuban basically said that he wanted to do Hump a solid by letting him go to a team where he could play some minutes. I think that gains a little respect and favor from agents of players when you can afford to do something like that.

Dirkenstien · 01-28-2010, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SMC0007

Cuban basically said that he wanted to do Hump a solid by letting him go to a team where he could play some minutes. I think that gains a little respect and favor from agents of players when you can afford to do something like that.

Yep, it's pretty much the complete opposite from how Orlando's front office is screwing over some of their players, especially Gortat. Agents take notice to those things. Now not only are they struggling but they have issues with playing time as well which can make people very fussy.

LSMF · 01-28-2010, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SMC0007

Cuban basically said that he wanted to do Hump a solid by letting him go to a team where he could play some minutes. I think that gains a little respect and favor from agents of players when you can afford to do something like that.

The issue was that Hump should have been able to get minutes here, dude got buried on the bench for no apparent reason. Now he's averaging 14/7 for the nets. I know he wouldn't have averaged that here but he most likely would have given us more than what Najera will give us. Very questionable trade so far...

iella · 01-28-2010, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirkadirkastan

I miss the Ladder.

If only we could get Nets fans to pick up on the nickname. I'm guessing it wouldn't work...

dirno2000 · 01-28-2010, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SMC0007

Cuban basically said that he wanted to do Hump a solid by letting him go to a team where he could play some minutes. I think that gains a little respect and favor from agents of players when you can afford to do something like that.

I think the money came first and everything else was secondary. Look at it this way, if he weren't saving $5M would Cuban have weakend our bench to just to do Hump a solid? I don't think so. In fact I hope not.

Underdog · 01-28-2010, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iella

If only we could get Nets fans to pick up on the nickname. I'm guessing it wouldn't work...

Wait, what?

When did the Nets get a fanbase???

iella · 01-28-2010, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Wait, what?

When did the Nets get a fanbase???

Well, I figured the one thing that we had going in our favor was that there would only be 10 or so to convert...

Dirkenstien · 01-28-2010, 02:23 PM

There's no question we gave up more talent in this move, hopefully it proves to be nothing more than a money saving precursor to a larger and more significant deal by the trade deadline.

SMC0007 · 01-28-2010, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirno2000

I think the money came first and everything else was secondary. Look at it this way, if he weren't saving $5M would Cuban have weakend our bench to just to do Hump a solid? I don't think so. In fact I hope not.

I'm just recalling what he said in an interview about doing Hump a solid given the situation. If I recall correctly Humps agent came to Cuban.

EricaLubarsky · 01-28-2010, 04:17 PM

Letting Hump go somewhere he can play (but lose a ton of games) was nice but we didn't do this trade out of altruism.

We shaved some salary, cleared a roster spot AND got a reasonably sized trade exception which will help our trade flexibility if we end up finding a suitor in the next few weeks. If we do pull off a trade, the exception will be invariably used and will be the biggest reward for this trade. If we dont...well we saved money, and got a crowd favorite in exchange for a guy that really wasnt playing here.

bobatundi · 01-28-2010, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Wait, what?

When did the Nets get a fanbase???

I went to a Nets game earlier this season (because they were actually giving away FREE tickets). There were entire sections of the arena covered with tarps. Even more pathetic was when these cheerleader types came up to where we were and attempted to herd about six sections of people into a single section...so they could point the camera at a "full" crowd.

Kidd Karma · 01-28-2010, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobatundi

I went to a Nets game earlier this season (because they were actually giving away FREE tickets). There were entire sections of the arena covered with tarps. Even more pathetic was when these cheerleader types came up to where we were and attempted to herd about six sections of people into a single section...so they could point the camera at a "full" crowd.

Haha, sad. Before Kidd got there, there were rumors of piping in crowd noise through the sound system.

tcat075 · 01-30-2010, 11:01 PM

Najera is shooting 100% for the Mavs this year, much better than what Humphries shot. Thus, Najera > Hump. Great trade, FO.

Usually Lurkin · 01-30-2010, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tcat075

Najera is shooting 100% for the Mavs this year, much better than what Humphries shot. Thus, Najera > Hump. Great trade, FO.

they really lost the game tonight against Portland when they took Najera out.

sefant77 · 04-10-2010, 11:24 PM

I wasnt really high in that trade, thought Najera was done and that we traded the better and younger player.

But Najera is awesome and exactly what we need.

Smart, hustler and he knows 100% his role. Humphries is just too dumb to play a significant role.

And guess he worked pretty hard to knock down that open threes, like Kidd started to do in Dallas.

Kidd Karma · 04-12-2010, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sefant77

I wasnt really high in that trade, thought Najera was done and that we traded the better and younger player.

But Najera is awesome and exactly what we need.

Smart, hustler and he knows 100% his role. Humphries is just too dumb to play a significant role.

And guess he worked pretty hard to knock down that open threes, like Kidd started to do in Dallas.

Surprising pickup, but definitely what we need off the bench.

SMC0007 · 04-12-2010, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sefant77

I wasnt really high in that trade, thought Najera was done and that we traded the better and younger player.

But Najera is awesome and exactly what we need.

Smart, hustler and he knows 100% his role. Humphries is just too dumb to play a significant role.

And guess he worked pretty hard to knock down that open threes, like Kidd started to do in Dallas.

Could have done without that. Najera currently fits better, period. No need to bash on Humphries.

twistaeffect2004 · 04-12-2010, 03:17 PM

I loved the trade from the time I heard it. Good hustle guy, but I think he believes he's more than that. He's probably a little more talented than Najera, but Eddie knows his role here, and he knows his limitations. He's been a solid addition.

dude1394 · 04-12-2010, 03:22 PM

I wouldn't call humphries dumb, but I wouldn't call him an extemely intelligent player either.

sefant77 · 04-12-2010, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SMC0007

Could have done without that. Najera currently fits better, period. No need to bash on Humphries.

Humphries problem was always a horrible shot selection. A little black hole and a terrible passer. That i meant.

Rick41 · 04-12-2010, 03:36 PM

I regret ever saying anything bad about this trade.

Najera > Humphries

dude1394 · 04-12-2010, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sefant77

Humphries problem was always a horrible shot selection. A little black hole and a terrible passer. That i meant.

I brought a friend to one game and he'd never seen humphries play before. His comment. "does that guy shoot everytime he gets it?".

SMC0007 · 04-12-2010, 04:18 PM

Always factor who else is on the floor first and foremost, the score and time of the game.