Mavs have shopped Dampier??

[dalmations202]

Who did live up to expecations and salary in the playoffs for the Mavs?

Howard ? - I think so
Stackhouse ? - maybe
Terry ? - maybe

[LRB]

Originally posted by: dirno2000

How about Dirk...would you not say he underperformed based on his contract and expectations? Granted his expectations were much higher.

I would say that Dirk underpeformed on expectations, but it's questionable if he underperformed on contract. Still I don't think any underperformance by Dirk could equate to the eggs Damp laid in the playoffs. Being in foul trouble is evidence of underperformance, not an excuse for it.

[LRB]

Seems it's now being reported by Fish that Sefko is claiming to have misquoted hisself and didn't mean to say that the Mavs were shopping Damp and only that they were recieving offers to trade him which they turned down. (See Dallas-Mavs.com thread)

I won't believe anything that comes out of Sefko's mouth or pen unless it's verified by a <u>RELIABLE</u> source.

[EricaLubarsky]

so that time when I was 6 years old and told my mom that it wasn't me that broke her Pyrex casserole dish, but my dog, Moses (when I actually broke the dish climbing up onto the kitchen counter to acquire some goodies she had hid), I can now confidently tell her

"I wasnt lying! I misquoted myself!"

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally posted by: sike

blaming a guy who barely played is foolish indeed.

There was a reason Harris barely played... He barely played because every time he did play, he turned the ball over. AJ was scared to put him on the floor, with good reason. I wasn't surprised, and I wasn't angry. I know that's to be expected from a rookie, but let's face it, he ain't exactly rookie of the year here. I'm not denying that he's going to be a great player someday, but he's got quite a ways to go.

[freestyle]

Damp is an OK center but I'm not sure he is such a great fit for the Mavs. With Dirk at the 4, we are not going to be a shutdown down defensive team--but we can be an excellent up tempo team with our that plays really solid defensive with our current players. Dampier, however, is not an up tempo player. He's not particularly quick up and down the court and has trouble catching all but the most basic passes at times. An agressive, althletic shot-blocker/defender would be a better fit. Maybe DJ can develop into that player (but I won't hold my breath) and then Damp could be a nice change-up.

[dude1394]

If damp can stay in the game and the mavs have another backup who is serviceable I think damp is pretty okay. Hopefully the pg's will figure out a little better how to get him the ball and he can stay healthy.
But I'm okay with damp in there, but we do need someone as well a little more mobile as a change up. KVH? I'm kind of surprised that Hendu wasn't a better matchup for amare to be honest. He should have been quick enough it seems.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally posted by: dude1394 I'm kind of surprised that Hendu wasn't a better matchup for amare to be honest. He should have been quick enough it seems.

Hendu isn't much quicker than Bradley, let alone quick enough to stay with Amare.

[GP]

Originally posted by: LRB
Seems it's now being reported by Fish that Sefko is claiming to have misquoted hisself and didn't mean to say that the Mavs were shopping Damp and only that they were recieving offers to trade him which they turned down. (See Dallas-Mavs.com thread)

I won't believe anything that comes out of Sefko's mouth or pen unless it's verified by a <u>RELIABLE</u> source.

Actually, everybody should think twice about believing what ANY reporter says. Everyone has an agenda and Sefko, Fish & DLord are no different. However, if you want objective and accurate reporting you are much better off reading something in the paper as opposed to reading something put out on Fish's website. He has lost all objectiveness and credibility concerning the Mavs. His glasses are way to rose colored for my taste. However, he certainly serves a purpose just like Sefko. We just need to understand these guys agendas before reading their articles. Fish is good when I want to read a positive spin concerning the Mavs. Especially when I am worried about the direction of the franchise, players or management. The newspaper guys are usually good for a negative spin. Usually, the truth is somewhere in the middle. Everybody has their own spin and it (unfortunately) is up to us to determine what it is. Unfortunately, this is true for all media.

As for trading Damp I am sure that Cuban entertained offers as he should. In my opinion he really needs to learn to say NO more often. Even though I have been highly disappointed in Damps play I applaud Cuban for not trading him. As a fan I really don't like seeing human beings treated like used cars or old toys. If they would have traded Dampier it would have been akin to wooing some woman away from her husband and then dumping her 2 weeks into the romance. This relationship just needs more time to develop.

[LRB]

Fish spins like crazy. He sometimes makes honest mistatkes with facts such as Damp's blocks per game. Fish can be annoying at times and unintentionally comical at others. However I've never know him to make crap up out of whole cloth nor to stretch the truth to the point where he had to admit that he "misquoted himself". I may not often appreciate him, often disagree with him, but I don't doubt that he's honestly trying to put correct facts out there, although at times he may error.

With Sefko, I have the feeling that he'll say anything that he thinks that he can get away with and which will sell papers. Adherence to the facts occurs only when it sells papers or he feels he can't get away with it. And while Fish's writing can be amateurish at times, Sefko would be lucky if his ever was as good as amateurish.

Sure all media spins by giving and/or emphasizing the facts that support what they won't to say. All media makes honest mistakes and mistates facts. However not all media represents things as facts which they know are not facts, only the worst do that. Sefko falls into the category that knowingly misrepresents nonfacts as facts, while IMO Fish doesn't.

So, sure I'll double check Fish. But with Sefko, it's more like why even bother. If it's not being reported all over and I've already heard it else where, then he's most likely making it up. I will rarely bother to check on Sefko's "facts" that I haven't already had verification on, because he carries zero credibility with me. With Fish, I'll at least check. There's the big difference.

[fish]

thanks, lrb.
i think. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

fish

[DRsock33]

Originally posted by: freestyle
Damp is an OK center but I'm not sure he is such a great fit for the Mavs. With Dirk at the 4, we are not going to be a shutdown down defensive team--but we can be an excellent up tempo team with our that plays really solid defensive with our current players. Dampier, however, is not an up tempo player. He's not particularly quick up and down the court and has trouble catching all but the most basic passes at times. An agressive, althletic shot-blocker/defender would be a better fit. Maybe DJ can develop into that player (but I won't hold my breath) and then Damp could be a nice change-up.

This Mavs team is never going to be like the Pistons or Spurs. They have too many offensive players, but that doesn't mean that we should totally give up on defense. The Mavs don't need a center who can catch, they have no problem at scoring. They need a center with length, and versatility. A couple years back everyone was concerned about having a big center for the Mavs, but what they need is a center that is versatile. A center who has the length to keep Duncan in check, but has the ability to hold Amare, R. Wallace, Garnett, and other big men who like to stretch the defense. Dampier was acquired to give the Mavs a more defensive presence, but in the playoffs it became clear that Damp was the Mavs biggest defensive liability. The Mavs need to be hunting for a team that will take big Damp. Anything is better then nothing; and in my mind, Dampier is nothing.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally posted by: DRsock33 Dampier was acquired to give the Mavs a more defensive presence, but in the playoffs it became clear that Damp was the Mavs biggest defensive liability. The Mavs need to be hunting for a team that will take big Damp. Anything is better then nothing; and in my mind, Dampier is nothing.

Absolute nonsense. Dampier is one of the better post-up defenders in the NBA. He had trouble staying on the floor, but he's by no means a defensive liability when he is on the floor. In fact, I'd say he's more reliable on defense than Terry, Finley, and Dirk for that matter. Our best defender is supposedly Howard, but even he makes his mistakes and couldn't keep up with T-Mac, or Nash. Dampier is nothing? Do you honestly think he hasn't been the biggest reason for our defensive improvement this year? If so, then you are totally mistaken. The only other reason really, is the replacement of Nash with Terry and Devin (oh, and getting rid of Walker helps too.)

A center who has the length to keep Duncan in check, but has the ability to hold Amare, R. Wallace, Garnett, and other big men who like to stretch the defense.

Does such a player exist? If so is that player even remotely attainable? The only name I can think of that even remotely fits that profile is Marcus Camby, who is absolutely unattainable. Show me a trade in which we get Camby without giving up all of our youth and depth, and you got my attention. Otherwise, don't be a Madape.

[dalmations202]

Absolute nonsense.

Your Opinion - but not everyone's

Dampier is one of the better post-up defenders in the NBA.

Your Opinion - but not everyone's -- although I will admit, in my opinion, he is a good post-defender for slow power banger type post players, just not quick face-up guys.

He had trouble staying on the floor,

I think most would agree with this one.

but he's by no means a defensive liability when he is on the floor.

Your Opinion - but not everyone's -- it depends on who he is trying to defend. He can't defend the quick PF's and is a liability when he does try.

In fact, I'd say he's more reliable on defense than Terry, Finley, and Dirk for that matter.

Your Opinion - but not everyone's, and not a fact by any means.

Our best defender is supposedly Howard,

Agreed, he is suppose to be according to most media/fans -- not sure it is true though.

but even he makes his mistakes and couldn't keep up with T-Mac, or Nash.

too true in the playoffs -- he has a ways to go to get to Bruce Bowen/Ron Artest level for sure.

Dampier is nothing? Do you honestly think he hasn't been the biggest reason for our defensive improvement this year? If so, then you are totally mistaken.

Your Opinion - but not everyone's --- it is no where near a fact though, just your perception - IMO, the biggest reason was Avery, and the attention to defense.

The only other reason really, is the replacement of Nash with Terry and Devin (oh, and getting rid of Walker helps too.)

Add to that Jamison who was a bullfighter on defense --- 'ole.....
Add to that the coaches emphasized defense throughout the year.
Add to that that Dirk worked on it in the offseason.
Add to that Avery Johnson.
Add to that the defensive schemes, and coaching the scheme instead of worrying with mismatches.
Add to that the further development of Howard.
Add to that Stack who is a much better perimeter defender
Add to that KVH who is quicker both inside and out.
Add to that less zone defense.
Add to that Finley worked on D instead of O this year.
Add to that Darrell Armstrong, and Henderson.
Add to that Shaq moved East, and Miller/Vlade were hurt most of the year.
There were many, many things that made Dallas's defense better this year, including having a Center (Dampier) in the game, most of the time.

[Thespiralgoeson]

------------ rubber crutch, could you repeat yourself a little more? "Your opinion, not everyone's... your opinion, not everyone's.... your opinion... not everyone's..." Did I ever say that those things were NOT my opinion? Of course they are. Could you please show me where I said "These are the unquestionable, undeniable facts, and they are absolutely infallible, and immune to scrutiny or criticism." Except for simple statements of undeniable facts like "The mavericks won 58 games last season and lost to Phoenix in the second round" just about EVERYTHING is debateable. Yes, those are my opinions, and no, not everyone shares them. But those are the way I see things, and I think there are quite a few people here who agree with me. And I also never said that Dampier was the only reason for our defensive improvement, merely the biggest. IN MY OPINION, Dampier was the biggest reason for the improvement. "Your opinion, not everyone's... your opinion, not everyone's.... your opinion... not everyone's..." I'm perfectly ok with people disagreeing, but that comes off as a bit condescending, and I don't particularly appreciate it. All the things you just said are your OPINION as well, and as I and many others have clearly demonstrated, they are not everyone else's.

Edit: I took out the blasphemy. I apologize in advance to anyone who might've been offended.

[Pirate]

I agree with SPIRAL. I think dalmations' views about Dampier are only his opinions, and are very poorly based opinions at that.

[TheBlameGame]

Someone told me a long time ago that Sefko is pretty much Mark Cubans mouth piece. He tells him things that he wants known to the public so he will print them so this could be posturing or it could be something that was in fact true.

[ddh33]

Originally posted by: TheBlameGame
Someone told me a long time ago that Sefko is pretty much Mark Cubans mouth piece. He tells him things that he wants known to the public so he will print them so this could be posturing or it could be something that was in fact true.

I've never heard anything like that, although I guess it could be true. Usually, when someone wants to talk about being the mouthpiece of Cuban, they are talking about Mike Fisher since the site is supposedly owned by Mark. However, I think it's a stretch to say anyone is the "mouthpiece" for Mark Cuban simply because Mark has no problem saying what he wants to say to whoever he wants [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]