ESPN Insider: Chad Ford's take on the Mavs

[Evilmav2]

This is Chad Ford's 'Mavs Preview', taken from today's ESPN Insider...



DALLAS MAVERICKS

Starting Five: Jason Terry, Marquis Daniels, Michael Finley,Dirk Nowitzki, Erick Dampier.

Key Subs: Jerry Stackhouse, Josh Howard, Devin Harris, Calvin Booth.

Outlook: Mark Cuban made two bold predictions this summer. First, he claimed his new reality series, The Benefactor, would be a big hit. Second, he claimed the new version of the Mavericks he pieced together is the "best team we've ever had."

The first prediction was completely off the mark. The Benefactor stunk and ended up being canceled prematurely by ABC.

Jason Terry
Jason Terry averaged 5.4 apg last season; Steve Nash, now with the Suns, averaged 8.8.
Let's hope his fortune-telling skills are a little better when it comes to basketball. Cuban likes to gamble, and this summer was no different. He let the heart and soul of the Mavericks, Steve Nash, walk away.

He traded away the reigning Sixth Man of the Year, Antawn Jamison, for a guy, Jerry Stackhouse, that has been labeled a cancer on the last two teams he's played for and a rookie point guard (Devin Harris) with big upside, but without the physical strength to contribute right away.

He swapped Antoine Walker for a point guard that most league coaches believe is much closer to a shooting guard than a playmaker. Then Cuban capped his offseason by paying more than $70 million to Erick Dampier – an inconsistent, injury-prone center coming off a stellar 2003-04 campaign.

On paper, Cuban's prediction doesn't seem farfetched. The Mavericks got much better defensively – their Achilles' heel in the playoffs the past two years. Terry is a much better defender than Nash at the point; Stackhouse can be a physical perimeter defender when he wants to be; and Dampier gives the Mavs a legitimate bruiser – a dominant rebounder and shotblocker – in the paint.

The Mavs added all of that without sacrificing offensive firepower. Terry and Stackhouse can score at will. Harris has the potential to be a big-time playmaker and also can fill it up when called upon. Dampier isn't a dominant scorer in the paint, but he's a bigger threat offensively than anyone the Mavs have put in that position the past decade.

Scoring and defense. Athleticism and basketball savvy. Youth and experience. So why are some NBA folks predicting a Benefactor-esque apocalypse for the Mavericks this season?

One rival GM breaks it down:

"The team is talented and deep. They'll be able to score the same clip that they did last year, and they are much better equipped to defend. But two things really bother me about this team. First, I think they are going to miss Nash more than (they) think. He was a perfect fit in Nellie's offense. I don't think Terry pushes it or creates as many opportunities for his teammates as Nash did.

"Second, when you're adding missing pieces to the puzzle, you really want to add veteran guys who know what it takes to win. They added three guys who've been stuck on losing teams for most, if not all, of their careers. Guys like Terry, Dampier and even Stack don't have a clue what it takes to win. Just because all of the guys on your team can fill up a stat sheet doesn't necessarily translate into wins in the NBA."

So far the reviews out of the preseason have been justifiably mixed. It's going to take a team like this a while to jell together. Will Terry pass the ball? Will Damp bog down their uptempo game? Will Jerry blow his stack coming off the bench?

When I talked to Dirk Nowitzki last week on the road in Orlando, he didn't sound like a man confident that this version of the Mavs was the best ever.

"We still have a long way to go to be a good team," Nowitzki told Insider just hours before the winless Magic ran them out of the gym. "We miss him [Nash] a lot. To me he was always our motor. He got us going every night. I thought he was a top-three or four point guard in the league. The two guards we got are solid. They have to get used to Nellie. It takes a while to get used to, I hope."

If Cuban's right, the Mavericks couldn't have picked a better time to make their move. The top of the Western Conference isn't a strong as it used to be. The Spurs, Timberwolves and Kings are still good, but they're all beatable.

If he's wrong and the Mavs actually sink deeper into the Western Conference quicksand, it's probably time to cancel this version of the Mavericks and start from scratch again next season.

[grndmstr_c]

"The team is talented and deep. They'll be able to score the same clip that they did last year, and they are much better equipped to defend. But two things really bother me about this team. First, I think they are going to miss Nash more than (they) think. He was a perfect fit in Nellie's offense. I don't think Terry pushes it or creates as many opportunities for his teammates as Nash did.

How can an intelligent person say something like this with a straight face. How is it possible to both score at the same clip as last year yet at the same time miss Nash more than we think. It's really not possible for the two to coexist. If we miss Nash it'll be because we aren't scoring at the same clip, and if we are scoring at the same clip we certainly won't be missing Nash for his impact on the defensive end.

"Second, when you're adding missing pieces to the puzzle, you really want to add veteran guys who know what it takes to win. They added three guys who've been stuck on losing teams for most, if not all, of their careers. Guys like Terry, Dampier and even Stack don't have a clue what it takes to win. Just because all of the guys on your team can fill up a stat sheet doesn't necessarily translate into wins in the NBA."

As someone on db.com said: TMac anyone? Beyond that, it's an oversimplified argument. Look at our two big acquisitions of last year: the Antwins. One, AJ, came from a perpetual loser. The other, Toine, came from a team that had gone deep into the playoffs in the East. Yet the former was a winning player for us and the latter was a horrible drag on the team's success.

[EricaLubarsky]

First, I think they are going to miss Nash more than (they) think. He was a perfect fit in Nellie's offense

Of course Nash was a perfect fit for us. He did nothing until he came to Dallas and was put under Nelson's wing. I dont disagree that we will miss Nash. I just think that it is the chronology of that statement that is wrong. Terry will learn. Our offense will change, and Terry will be the guy we will miss.

[PepperTheMavsFan41]

Originally posted by: Evilmav2
This is Chad Ford's 'Mavs Preview', taken from today's ESPN Insider...





If Cuban's right, the Mavericks couldn't have picked a better time to make their move. The top of the Western Conference isn't a strong as it used to be. The Spurs, Timberwolves and Kings are still good, but they're all beatable.

.

Defintly the way I feel.

[4cwebb]

A rare submission by Ford with some coherent thoughts, but as usual, he throws in opinions and statements that don't really fit with the data he provides...if the Mavs don't succeed this year, can they really blow up the team and start over? Or, is he just referring to dumping Nellie?

In truth, this is the most complete Mavs' roster from 1-9 since Derek Harper and Ro Blackman were on the team. Sure, PG is a question mark, but Terry and Harris are certainly better PGs than any C on the Mavs' roster of late (when compared to other players at those positions throughout the league).

[Phil Helmuth]

When will dirk and nellie end their perpetual man-crush with that sweetheart stevie nash. It seems like they are moaning back and forth about who will miss him more, the coach or his best friend. How come other teams lose good players, even one of their leaders to free agency and are able to recover? Yet 1 week before the season starts we're still moaning over our prodigal son. I said good riddance in July to Steve Nash, and I stick by that statement. Nellie and Dirk, buck up and act like professionals. Nellie- coach this all-star team. Dirk- shoot your shot, and lead by example.

[dirno2000]

"Second, when you're adding missing pieces to the puzzle, you really want to add veteran guys who know what it takes to win. They added three guys who've been stuck on losing teams for most, if not all, of their careers. Guys like Terry, Dampier and even Stack don't have a clue what it takes to win. Just because all of the guys on your team can fill up a stat sheet doesn't necessarily translate into wins in the NBA."

I actually think this is a valid concern. In fact, I brought it up this summer. Guys that come from losing franchises are used to blowing close games. Losing wears on you and after a while you have to accept it to keep your sanity. T-Mac said as much last week.

Walker shot the ball horribly last year, even for him. That being said, I'd have rather had Walker playing well than Jamison. Just seems like those rare occasion when Walker had it going, we were in good shape. Jamison scored a lot of points, but didn't seem to affect the game when it mattered. That's why despite his gaudy fg%, there was hardly a peep when he was traded.

I’m sure somebody will mention Nick, but he wasn’t in Denver long and was very successful in L.A.

My hope is that the culture of winning that we’ve built around here will spread to the newcomers…. especially Terry and Damp who haven’t won anything since college.

Like the guy said, all things being equal, you’d prefer to bring in guys from winning teams, but since we didn’t really have that option we’ll just have to hope for the best.

[grndmstr_c]

I imagine we keep hearing quotes from Nellie and Dirk about Steve because reporters keep asking questions about Steve. On balance, (ie., not going on isolated quotes hand-picked by reporters with angles they're trying to support) I don't think either is bellyaching but are simply honestly answering the questions posed to them. Too many fans are all too eager to eat up the implicit media slant of the moment as if the players/coaches are telling the reporters what questions to ask and what kinds of stories to write.

[EricaLubarsky]

Walker shot the ball horribly last year, even for him

Career 41.4%Fg, the two seasons before he got to Dallas he was shooting 39.1%. He shot 42.8% here. Only in 99-00 did he shoot better than that, so I dont know how you can say he shot the ball horribly for him last year. Bad in general, yeah. bad for him? No.

[Phil Helmuth]

I think Stack won a ring in college at UNC and I'm pretty sure Terry did as well. Both were leaders on their teams and will do great here. Go Mavs!!!

[dirno2000]

Originally posted by: EricaLubarsky

Career 41.4%Fg, the two seasons before he got to Dallas he was shooting 39.1%. He shot 42.8% here. Only in 99-00 did he shoot better than that, so I dont know how you can say he shot the ball horribly for him last year. Bad in general, yeah. bad for him? No.

Not overall, but his ft and 3-point shooting was low by his standards.

[EricaLubarsky]

Guys that come from losing franchises are used to blowing close games.

For every player that comes from a crappy team and sucks (you have not provided any evidence of this phenomenon), there are players like Ben Wallace, Latrell Sprewell, Gary Payton, Antawn Jamison....

[dirno2000]

Originally posted by: EricaLubarsky

For every player that comes from a crappy team and sucks (you have not provided any evidence of this phenomenon), there are players like Ben Wallace, Latrell Sprewell, Gary Payton, Antawn Jamison....

I'm not saying they suck...Jamison didn't suck, he just didn't do much to help us win.

Ben Wallace came from an undertalented but scrappy Orlando team that made the playoffs when they shouldn't have.

Latrell was a big part of the Knicks going to the finals

I'm not sure where Payton fits in. He let Seattle to the Finals.

Terry and Damp have never had any success in the NBA team wise. You don't think that effects you? Loot at those GS teams...they weren't without talent yet they never won.

[grndmstr_c]

Jamison scored a lot of points, but didn't seem to affect the game when it mattered. That's why despite his gaudy fg%, there was hardly a peep when he was traded.

The lack of peeping was due to two things: 1) we got a very nice return all things considered, 2) too many people made the mistake of lumping him in with Walker under the "too many scorers ruined our season" tab rather than doing the research necessary to differentiate the impact made by the two. By every measure AJ was a real positive for the team, far moreso than Walker, and played agressively and well in the playoffs before his injuries. It's only because of the hopes I have for Devin, Stack, and Damp (via Laettner) that I don't spend time lamenting his departure.

As for the general critique of players from losing teams, while you certainly have to look beyond a players standard stats when evaluating what they'll bring to the table, to simply say that because a player doesn't have a rich playoff pedigree they're not worth acquiring is irresponsible and muddle-headed. If the player from a losing team brings the level of talent (I feel very confident all our acquisitions have high talent levels), and the types of skills to the table that fit well with his teammates (I'm cautiously optimistic in this regard) and comes with a good work ethic (nothing has yet indicated otherwise), that's really all that matters.

[grndmstr_c]

Terry and Damp have never had any success in the NBA team wise. You don't think that effects you?

Undoubtedly it does, but saying that it affects you, and saying that it dooms you to be a career loser are two very different things.

[EricaLubarsky]

Terry and Damp have never had any success in the NBA team wise. You don't think that effects you? Loot at those GS teams...they weren't without talent yet they never won.

Finley hadnt had a single winning season before he came to Dallas, heck, he didnt win until 2000-2001. 6 years of failure in the NBA. I guess he was scarred by loss.

BTW the only significant player with better +/- ratings than Jamison were Dirk and Howard.

[4cwebb]

Originally posted by: Phil Helmuth
I think Stack won a ring in college at UNC and I'm pretty sure Terry did as well. Both were leaders on their teams and will do great here. Go Mavs!!!

Stack and Rasheed never brought a banner to Chapel Hill. Terry was part of the miracle AZ team with Bibby and Miles Simon, if I recall, but played a supporting role.

[dirno2000]

Originally posted by: EricaLubarsky

Finley hadnt had a single winning season before he came to Dallas, heck, he didnt win until 2000-2001. 6 years of failure in the NBA. I guess he was scarred by loss.

BTW the only significant player with better +/- ratings than Jamison were Dirk and Howard.

and it took him and team a while to get to the point where they expected to win. There as a time when the rap on Fin was that he couldn't hit the big shot...it's something he had to grow into.

Look, I'm not saying that these guys are forever losers, but you can't overlook the fact that in the last five minutes of a game aginas SA they'll have 5 guys on the floor who are used to winning and we'll have two.

The good teams weren't trying to make us better so we did what we could. It's not a death sentence, just another question mark.

[FineCubanCigar]

ROFL, players that didn't know what it took to win on becoming a MAV: Steve Nash, Finley, and Dirk. I rest my case.

[dirno2000]

Originally posted by: grndmstr_c

The lack of peeping was due to two things: 1) we got a very nice return all things considered, 2) too many people made the mistake of lumping him in with Walker under the "too many scorers ruined our season" tab rather than doing the research necessary to differentiate the impact made by the two. By every measure AJ was a real positive for the team, far moreso than Walker, and played agressively and well in the playoffs before his injuries. It's only because of the hopes I have for Devin, Stack, and Damp (via Laettner) that I don't spend time lamenting his departure.

As for the general critique of players from losing teams, while you certainly have to look beyond a players standard stats when evaluating what they'll bring to the table, to simply say that because a player doesn't have a rich playoff pedigree they're not worth acquiring is irresponsible and muddle-headed. If the player from a losing team brings the level of talent (I feel very confident all our acquisitions have high talent levels), and the types of skills to the table that fit well with his teammates (I'm cautiously optimistic in this regard) and comes with a good work ethic (nothing has yet indicated otherwise), that's really all that matters.

I agree with your last point. I was in favor of ever deal we made. I'm not saying we're doomed and I don't thin the GM was saying that either. Good teams generally don't help teams in their own conference so sometimes the only to add talent is from losing teams. Like I said, hopefully we've established a culture of winning.

[dirno2000]

Originally posted by: Phil Helmuth
I think Stack won a ring in college at UNC and I'm pretty sure Terry did as well. Both were leaders on their teams and will do great here. Go Mavs!!!

Terry was bench player on the championship team. His senior year they weren't good by AZ standards.

Stack was also a bench player when NC beat Michigan.

[FineCubanCigar]

Speaking of which, when did Nash become the "HEART AND SOUL" of the Dallas Mavs??????? when he wasn't resigned.....? Cuz I could have sworn that was Findawg, and he has been for years.

[FineCubanCigar]

didn't Stack take the Pistons to the playoffs single handedly?

[dirno2000]

Originally posted by: FineCubanCigar
ROFL, players that didn't know what it took to win on becoming a MAV: Steve Nash, Finley, and Dirk. I rest my case.

And it didn't happen overnight...we kind of need that to happen here, but the situations aren't the same.

[dirno2000]

Originally posted by: FineCubanCigar
didn't Stack take the Pistons to the playoffs single handedly?

Grant Hill might have something to say about that.

[EricaLubarsky]

Stackhouse-
played for the UNC team that went 34-4 overall.

The Tar Heels won the NCAA East Regional and advanced to the Final Four where they lost to Utah in the national semifinals.

Carolina was second in the ACC regular-season standings, but swept three games in the ACC Tournament to win the title for the second straight year and 15th time in history. The Tar Heels defeated Duke, 83-68, in the ACC Tournament final.

The Tar Heels finished the season ranked No. 1 in the country in the final Associated Press poll and No. 3 in the final USA Today/ESPN poll.

Terry
Won a championship with Arizona in 1997
led the team in assists in the 1997 NCAA championship game. 8pts (2-3 from three), 5assists, 3steals, 2rebounds and came to be known for his defensive prowess.

[FineCubanCigar]

na, Hill was traded to the Magic and Stack scored over 40 points like 10 times.... right?

[dirno2000]

Originally posted by: EricaLubarsky

Finley hadnt had a single winning season before he came to Dallas, heck, he didnt win until 2000-2001. 6 years of failure in the NBA. I guess he was scarred by loss.

BTW the only significant player with better +/- ratings than Jamison were Dirk and Howard.

Jamison was very good for three quarters, but his game can be shut down if a team really tries. He's also too small to get the tough rebound unlike Walker. Jamison is the epitome of a good stats on a bad team guy. That why GS moved him and why we moved him.

Edit: That's also why it's fitting that he and Gill Arenas are back together.

[EricaLubarsky]

Terry was bench player on the championship team

Bullcrap! He started and played 33minutes in the championship game. He led the team in assists (out assisted Bibby...) and steals.

His senior year they weren't good by AZ standards.

While 4th isnt the best AZ ever did it certainly isnt laughable. Terry had very little support that year. Terry averaged 21.9ppg, 5.5apg, 3.3rpg, 2.8spg and was the only one doing anything on that team. He almost single-handedly got them fourth.

[dirno2000]

Originally posted by: FineCubanCigar
na, Hill was traded to the Magic and Stack scored over 40 points like 10 times.... right?

Yea, but they only won 32 games. When they went to the playoffs, Hill was the best player on the team.

[FineCubanCigar]

thats right in 2000-01 Hill was no longer with the team and Stack did it BY HIMSELF.

[FineCubanCigar]

the playoffs i mean, and rolled off an amazing 29.8 points per game that season in 76 games. So Stack knows what it takes to win without question.

[dirno2000]

Originally posted by: EricaLubarsky

Bullcrap! He started and played 33minutes in the championship game.

While 4th isnt the best AZ ever did it certainly isnt laughable. Terry had very little support that year.

I didn't look it up so you're probably right. Most players in the NBA won in college. I'm just wary of those who have been in the league a few years and have never won. You don't have to be concerned, I'm concerned enough for the both of us.

[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

[EricaLubarsky]

agreed. the real argument shouldn't be on if the NBA players were effective in college (most, if not all were that went to college).

[grndmstr_c]

Jamison was very good for three quarters, but his game can be shut down if a team really tries. He's also too small to get the tough rebound unlike Walker. Jamison is the epitome of a good stats on a bad team guy. That why GS moved him and why we moved him.

First, who, outside of perhaps Shaq, can't be shut down if a team really tries? AJ was an effective player for the Mavs, period. Second, if your aim is to talk down AJ comparing him to Walker isn't the best strategy. AJ's a fine rebounder at the SF position (which, for all his defensive shortcomings, is where I like him the most). It's hard for me to imagine how that's even debatable. Third, last year AJ was a good stats on a good team guy. His recent journeyman ways owe far more to his contract than to him being a good stats guy.

[dirno2000]

First, who, outside of perhaps Shaq, can't be shut down if a team really tries? AJ was an effective player for the Mavs, period. Second, if your aim is to talk down AJ comparing him to Walker isn't the best strategy. AJ's a fine rebounder at the SF position (which, for all his defensive shortcomings, is where I like him the most). It's hard for me to imagine how that's even debatable. Third, last year AJ was a good stats on a good team guy. His recent journeyman ways owe far more to his contract than to him being a good stats guy.

There are plenty of players how can't be shut down...Dirk for one. You can't just say "ok, tighten up on Dirk now"..he'll still kill you. Jamison isn't like that. He gets a lot of points by catching you off guard with his flip shots.

Understand my argument. I’m saying I’d rather have an on Walker than an on Jamison. Walker is only going to be on certain nights, but when he is he affects a game more because he can do more than Jamison. Jamison is a pure scorer and a good offensive rebounder because he’s a quick leaper. But even that’s negated when the game gets tight.

Jamison was fortunate to come to a winning team last year, but he didn’t really help us much. Hell, he shot 49% in games we lost.

He’s in the East now, do you think he’ll help Washington make the playoffs?

[EricaLubarsky]

If there is anything we learned from Jamison's play in Golden State and Dallas is that he is only a +3 guy (which is better than a -9.8 guy like Walker). He is certainly no +22.8 (Garnett), +18.0 (nowitzki), or +14.3 (Duncan). He ain't no superstar and Jamison aint gunna get the Wizards to the playoffs by himself.

[grndmstr_c]

There are plenty of players how can't be shut down...Dirk for one. You can't just say "ok, tighten up on Dirk now"..he'll still kill you. Jamison isn't like that. He gets a lot of points by catching you off guard with his flip shots.

Well, of course it's easier to stop AJ than Dirk. That's the essence of why Dirk's a franchise player and AJ isn't. But it's not as simple as just saying: okay, we're going to stop AJ now. If it was teams would do it all the time.

Understand my argument. I’m saying I’d rather have an on Walker than an on Jamison. Walker is only going to be on certain nights, but when he is he affects a game more because he can do more than Jamison. Jamison is a pure scorer and a good offensive rebounder because he’s a quick leaper. But even that’s negated when the game gets tight.

An on Walker is better than an on AJ not because Walker can do more. An on Walker is better than an on AJ because Walker TRIES to do more. Of course, none of that changes the fact that AJ had a +/- of +2.9 and Walker had a +/- of -7.6.

Jamison was fortunate to come to a winning team last year, but he didn’t really help us much. Hell, he shot 49% in games we lost.

I'll site the above noted +/- stats and the study I did last year of the AJ/Dirk on-court pairing. As for the 49% bit, that might mean something if AJ were a 49% shooter, but the fact of the matter is that he was a 53.5% shooter with us, meaning he almost certainly shot better than 54% in our wins. IMO it's quite easy to put together a case for him having been a winning player for us.

He’s in the East now, do you think he’ll help Washington make the playoffs?

Honestly, I haven't given the Wizards enough consideration to feel comfortable opining about their post-season chances and how AJ will fit, though it's obviously no secret that I think well of him as a player. I will say this: I doubt AJ will ever again be on a team that fits his gifts as well as the Mavs did last year, and if we'd had a healthy Raef instead of Walker I think the match would have been even better.

[4cwebb]

Originally posted by: dirno2000

Terry was bench player on the championship team. His senior year they weren't good by AZ standards.

Stack was also a bench player when NC beat Michigan.

Just for clarification:

North Carolina (77)
PLAYER MIN. FG-A FT-A REB. A. PF. PTS.
Brian Reese 27 2-7 4-4 5 3 1 8
George Lynch 28 6-12 0-0 10 1 3 12
Eric Montross 31 5-11 6-9 5 0 2 16
Derrick Phelps 36 4-6 1-2 3 6 0 9
Donald Williams 31 8-12 4-4 1 1 1 25
Pat Sullivan 14 1-2 1-2 1 1 2 3
Kevin Salvadori 18 0-0 2-2 4 1 1 2
Henrik Rodl 11 1-4 0-0 0 0 0 2
Dante Calabria 1 0-0 0-0 0 0 0 0
Matt Wenstrom 2 0-1 0-0 0 0 0 0
Scott Cherry 1 0-0 0-0 0 0 0 0
TOTALS 200 27-55 18-23 29 13 10 77

Stackhouse's first year with UNC was the season after they won the title (stats below):

93-94 N Carolina 35 734 138 296 2 20 150 205 176 55 69 87 17 42 428
94-95 N Carolina 34 1170 215 416 37 90 185 260 280 74 93 111 59 50 652

[dirno2000]

Stackhouse's first year with UNC was the season after they won the title (stats below)

I thought I remember Stack and Rasheed on the bench...then again, I've tried to block that year out of my memory since the Fab Five was my all time favorite college basketball team.