Richard Jefferson traded to Spurs! - Page 4 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Dtownsfinest · 06-24-2009, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalger

If Josh and Jefferson are interchangeable, then you'd still have the benefit of having Kaman instead of Dampier, so it is a better lineup. You'd switch two comparable players in Josh and RJ and then add Kaman for Stack. That sounds alright. Again, do we really have better options?

No. I don't think we come out of this offseason with players the caliber of Jefferson and Kaman. Especially if all we have to do is give up Dampier and Josh. Then we still have the mid-level to play with.

dalger · 06-24-2009, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Even with RJ, I seriously doubt Cubes would've done Kaman/Howard. Howard's contract is such that he's not going to be traded unless it's for a perennial all-star. Kaman doesn't qualify.

Sure, that's why you'd have to look at the whole thing differently. Only technically it's Josh for Kaman. Talent wise it's more like Stack for Kaman and Josh for Jefferson. The former deal is a significant improvement and something probably anyone would do, while the latter is a lateral move to make perfect sense of the first trade.

Thespiralgoeson · 06-24-2009, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

Maybe I misunderstood you but you said that Jefferson wouldn't have been a fit here. Who's shot isn't inconsistent in the NBA? No one shoots over 50% from mid range or 3 point land lol. And I do agree that Jefferson isn't much of an upgrade over Josh however the Spurs didn't give up a Josh Howard to obtain Jefferson. They gave up Oberto. Not to mention Jefferson actually shows up in the 4th quarter. And let me say I have no problem with Josh. I just think his time here is done. If we could get another guy in here that's just as good as Josh I think that alone would be an upgrade. Not to mention Jefferson gets to the line 6.3 times a game compared to Dirk's 6.7 and to Josh's 4.2.

For umpteenth time, I'm saying that RJ is a 3, and we need a 2. You touted RJ's 3pt shooting as a selling point. He is NOT a good 3pt shooter. He's about average.

Let me put it this way. I'll take VC and Damp over RJ and Kaman.

Thespiralgoeson · 06-24-2009, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalger

Sure, that's why you'd have to look at the whole thing differently. It's not Josh for Kaman. It's Stack for Kaman and Josh for Jefferson. The former deal is a significant improvement and something probably anyone would do, while the latter is a lateral move to make perfect sense of the first trade.

Dude, it was never gonna happen anyway.

dalger · 06-24-2009, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Dude, it was never gonna happen anyway.

...because there was no chance for it to happen or because we just didn't make it happen?

I hope we have something better in store. If not, Jefferson would have been perfect to land us a quality center in Kaman without giving up anything more than Stack's contract which would have to be considered a best-case scenario.

Thespiralgoeson · 06-24-2009, 09:48 AM

I'm just not buying this notion that by missing out on RJ we miss out on Kaman by proxy.

Dtownsfinest · 06-24-2009, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

For umpteenth time, I'm saying that RJ is a 3, and we need a 2. You touted RJ's 3pt shooting as a selling point. He is NOT a good 3pt shooter. He's about average.

Let me put it this way. I'll take VC and Damp over RJ and Kaman.

Is Carter not a good 3 point shooter either since he shoots a inconsistent 38%? I like Carter as well. But I find it odd Jefferson "wouldn't fit" yet Carter who demands the ball offensively in order to be effective is. And you keep talking about a 3 and 2 but what exactly is the difference in the position? You want a solid rebounder and defender at the 3 spot so I understand why you wouldn't want a 2 playing the 3 and at the 2 you want someone who can attack the basket as well shoot well from the field. In 2009 playing the 2 or 3 spot isn't some stretch. Especially since most players in this league play both the 2 and 3 spot.

Thespiralgoeson · 06-24-2009, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

Is Carter not a good 3 point shooter either since he shoots a inconsistent 38%? I like Carter as well. But I find it odd Jefferson "wouldn't fit" yet Carter who demands the ball offensively in order to be effective is. And you keep talking about a 3 and 2 but what exactly is the difference in the position? You want a solid rebounder and defender at the 3 spot so I understand why you wouldn't want a 2 playing the 3 and at the 2 you want someone who can attack the basket as well shoot well from the field. In 2009 playing the 2 or 3 spot isn't some stretch. Especially since most players in this league play both the 2 and 3 spot.

Carter is a MUCH better shooter than RJ, which is one of the main reasons I favor him of the two. Really, they're even not close.

It's not so much the difference between the two positions, it's what we're missing that the RJ DOES NOT give you. Ball handling and shooting.

Jesus, I'm really tired of this discussion because we're going in circles. I've said about a thousand times now that RJ wouldn't fit here because he's basically the same player as Howard. And then you come right back and say "then we can trade Howard for Kaman!!!"

It wasn't gonna happen. It just wasn't. Even if we had traded for RJ, Howard wouldn't be going anywhere. Not for Kaman. So bottom line, a move for RJ doesn't solve our problems as well as VC does.

dalger · 06-24-2009, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

I'm just not buying this notion that by missing out on RJ we miss out on Kaman by proxy.

The best we could offer for Kaman without hurting the team would be Stack/Williams. That most probably won't get it done. I guess even Stack/Wright or Stack/Barea wouldn't be enough, and in that case we'd already have given up a rotation player.

The Clippers were apparently interested in trading Kaman for Miller. Why would they be satisfied with players like Williams, Wright, or Barea when they could get much more?

That "much more" would be Howard. I think they would take him in a heartbeat. A good player with a potentially expiring contract. It doesn't get much better than that. We, on the other hand, would compensate the loss of Josh by adding Jefferson. We'd have the full benefit of having Kaman without giving up anything, since Jefferson and Josh are on the same level. It's the combination of both trades.

It's all meaningless now, I know. But that scenario would still have been pretty nice to realize.

Thespiralgoeson · 06-24-2009, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalger

The best we could offer for Kaman without hurting the team would be Stack/Williams. That most probably won't get it done. I guess even Stack/Wright or Stack/Barea wouldn't be enough, and in that case we'd already have given up a rotation player.

The Clippers were apparently interested in trading Kaman for Miller. Why would they be satisfied with players like Williams, Wright, or Barea when they could get much more?

That "much more" would be Howard. I think they would take him in a heartbeat. A good player with a potentially expiring contract. It doesn't get much better than that. We, on the other hand, would compensate the loss of Josh by adding Jefferson. We'd have the full benefit of having Kaman without giving up anything, since Jefferson and Josh are on the same level.

It's all meaningless now, I know. But that scenario would still have been pretty nice to realize.

And we still lose in that deal, because not only are we losing the best player in the deal, we've still got that huge gaping hole in the starting lineup, that I am nowhere near as confident as you are that we could fill so easily with the MLE. And then our bench is terrible because we have nothing to work with since we used the MLE on a starting 2.

On top of the fact that it wouldn't have happened anywway, because Cuban would be A LOT happier going to war adding RJ and leaving everyone alone than trading J-Ho for Kaman. Kaman is nowhere near enough of an upgrade at the center spot for Cuban to lose both J-Ho's on-court production and his valuable contract. Seriously, the idea is a bit ridiculous.

Underdog · 06-24-2009, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalger

The Clippers were apparently interested in trading Kaman for Miller. Why would they be satisfied with players like Williams, Wright, or Barea when they could get much more?

But Kaman-for-Miller was shot down - the Clips might want a certain price for Kaman, but apparently he isn't being perceived as worth it (which makes me a tad wary about his health all of a sudden...)

On another note, what would it take to get Camby? He still makes a lot of sense here - he's a double-double machine and can still lock down the paint better than Dampier ever could...

BGMaverick9 · 06-24-2009, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Honestly, I'll be a bit surprised if we don't get VC this summer. It's just too obvious not to get done. NJ is eager to move him, he clearly fits all of the Mavs' needs, and I don't think there are any other teams willing to take his contract. It just makes sense. Way more than RJ.

They are eager to move him, I'll bite on that...but from the reading I've done, they feel if they keep their pieces together from last year and add whatever they do with the draft and the MLE and etc...they can compete for the playoffs. If they can do that, then they'll hold tight.

Add this to the equation:

Quote:

Tuesday’s deal came to fruition only after talks with New Jersey regarding one of Jefferson’s former Nets teammates — eight-time All-Star Vince Carter — came to a halt.

According to an Eastern Conference executive, Bowen, Oberto, Thomas and Roger Mason Jr. had been offered to the Nets in exchange for Carter and the Nets’ first-round pick in Thursday’s draft. The Spurs balked when the Nets asked for additional considerations, then turned their focus to Jefferson.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs

Thespiralgoeson · 06-24-2009, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BGMaverick9

They are eager to move him, I'll bite on that...but from the reading I've done, they feel if they keep their pieces together from last year and add whatever they do with the draft and the MLE and etc...they can compete for the playoffs. If they can do that, then they'll hold tight.

Add this to the equation:

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs

If that's true, then we're probably boned. Although, I'm still crossing my fingers that they'll go for a Stack and a S&T with Bass.

BGMaverick9 · 06-24-2009, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

If that's true, then we're probably boned. Although, I'm still crossing my fingers that they'll go for a Stack and a S&T with Bass.

I don't really see the Spurs throwing out that kind of information even when they got a great guy out of the process anyways.

That's why I think we're in trouble if we get heavy in VC talks. Are we willing to throw ALL the mentioned assets to make it happen? Will it even matter b/c they might not bite anyways.

dalger · 06-24-2009, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

And we still lose in that deal, because not only are we losing the best player in the deal, we've still got that huge gaping hole in the starting lineup, that I am nowhere near as confident as you are that we could fill so easily with the MLE. And then our bench is terrible because we have nothing to work with since we used the MLE on a starting 2.

On top of the fact that it wouldn't have happened anywway, because Cuban would be A LOT happier going to war adding RJ and leaving everyone alone than trading J-Ho for Kaman. Kaman is nowhere near enough of an upgrade at the center spot for Cuban to lose both J-Ho's on-court production and his valuable contract. Seriously, the idea is a bit ridiculous.

Has Josh really been better than Jefferson recently? I think it's debatable that Josh would have been the best player in that whole scenario. Plus, having Kaman/Jefferson is clearly better than having Josh/Stack and pretty much solves one of our biggest problems.

Do you really believe that we can land a center AND a shooting guard with Josh and Stack and thus close both gaping holes in our starting lineup? If so, what would be your realistic suggestion?

We could use Damp's contract for a starting SG and the MLE for a contributor off the bench. So there would actually be one piece to improve our bench. It wouldn't be any better if we traded Josh/Stack for Carter. Then we'd actually have two gaping holes in our starting lineup to fill instead of one.

So with all due respect, I think your criticism might be more ridiculous than my trade idea, especially when your only suggestion is to trade for Carter who would create more holes than the proposed Kaman/Jefferson deal could have ever done. Even Cuban should find out that Kaman and Jefferson are more productive than Damp and Josh.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

But Kaman-for-Miller was shot down - the Clips might want a certain price for Kaman, but apparently he isn't being perceived as worth it (which makes me a tad wary about his health all of a sudden...)

On another note, what would it take to get Camby? He still makes a lot of sense here - he's a double-double machine and can still lock down the paint better than Dampier ever could...

I wouldn't trade Kaman for Josh either, only as part of that one-two punch. It only makes sense when you don't lose the production at the 3. Jefferson would have taken care of that, so we basically would have gotten Kaman for nothing (Stack's contract).

Camby should probably come much cheaper. I'm under the impression that the Clippers would prefer to trade Kaman in order to get more in return as he's clearly more valuable than Camby all things considered.

Thespiralgoeson · 06-24-2009, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalger

So with all due respect, I think your criticism might be more ridiculous than my trade idea, especially when your only suggestion is to trade for Carter who would create more holes than the proposed Kaman/Jefferson deal could have ever done.

That doesn't make sense.

Quote:

I wouldn't trade Kaman for Josh either, only as part of that one-two punch. It only makes sense when you don't lose the production at the 3. Jefferson would have taken care of that, so we basically would have gotten Kaman for nothing (Stack's contract).

Camby should probably come much cheaper. I'm under the impression that the Clippers would prefer to trade Kaman in order to get more in return as he's clearly more valuable than Camby all things considered.

It's not about what you or I would do. It's about what Cuban would do. Cuban would not do that deal.

dalger · 06-24-2009, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

That doesn't make sense.

...not Carter himself, the trade to get him, as mentioned many times before. We'd have no 3 and Damp would still be our center. These problems would have to be solved with Damp himself and the MLE. Our bench, which is already terrible according to your assessment, would be the same. It's not that we couldn't be better at the end of this offseason if we went that route, it just doesn't seem to be the best and most productive way.

Cuban makes the decisions, sure, but should we honestly base our ideas on what might be good for the Mavs on the perceived decision-making process of the owner? How do we know what Cuban would or would not do? And even if he wasn't in favor of certain deals, does it mean that we can't discuss them or even make the bold claim that Cuban is wrong for once in his life?

Nash13 · 06-24-2009, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

I'm so sick of hearing about 2010. The only teams worried about 2010 are teams who suck. And no big name free agent is leaving millions on the table to join another team. None. Maybe Chris Bosh and you're even seeing stories about him resigning with the Raptors. This is the perfect time for the Mavs to become buyers because as you can see teams are giving away solid contributors for next to nothing.

I'm pretty sure Bosh is willing to bolt, maybe Wade. If Lebron does leave, it won't be to us. Amare is all but gone even if they trade him somewhere he wants to go. Yao could take off as well as long as it's a big market city. Even with that said, it's not necessarily just about 2010. This team has been in salary cap hell for the past 9-10yrs. We've basically tried to buy a championship in the past. And if this team doesn't get a game-changer like a VC, then i don't see why taking on salary in a seller's market is a good idea.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

Wasn't Jefferson the only offensive option for the Bucks? Maybe Sessions? Doesn't that mean with 3 or 4 other options that would make him even BETTER? And i'm not really sure what you mean about a Rockets trade. They traded for Drexler years ago and got a championship. They grabbed Artest for Bobby Jackson and had it not been for a T-Mac and Yao Ming injury who knows what the limit was for that team. I sure as hell give their front office a lot more credit than I give the Mavs.

As far as the Walker and Jamison trades it didn't make us look better on paper when we were starting Dirk and Antoine Walker at the 5 spot. Jamison filled a need. Walker? He added some. I don't see how the Jefferson trade compares.

When Jefferson was on a contender team, it was when he 1st came in the league with Jersey. Grant it he was just starting out, but he was only a 16ppg type of player. It was when Kidd/Carter were consistently out with injury when he started to get better. I'm just not sold on this trade just yet. For example, when Shane Battier was traded to Houston, people around here started to get really nervous about them. And since he's got there, he's pretty much been there to play defense and chuck 3's. And he may not be at Jefferson's level, but he was brought there for the same reasons people think Jefferson was traded to the Spurs.

And as far as what you said about the Rockets, they could add another all star player and i still think it wouldn't make a difference. Ever since we beat them in the playoffs, they haven't been able to stay healthy. This is the 2nd consecutive year Yao's missed the end of the season. And TMac's never going to be healthy. And if he ever does come back for good, he won't be the player he once was.

SMC0007 · 06-24-2009, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMaverick

you hit the nail on the coffin. I don't think anyone is going to mistake Cuban to be in their class. I guess the city of Dallas and the Mavericks' fans around the world are getting hit in the mouth with this fact the last couple of years.

lol awesome.

Thespiralgoeson · 06-24-2009, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalger

...not Carter himself, the trade to get him, as mentioned many times before. We'd have no 3 and Damp would still be our center. These problems would have to be solved with Damp himself and the MLE. Our bench, which is already terrible according to your assessment, would be the same. It's not that we couldn't be better at the end of this offseason if we went that route, it just doesn't seem to be the best and most productive way.

What are you talking about "no 3?" The idea is to get VC without giving up any of our core...

Quote:

Cuban makes the decisions, sure, but should we honestly base our ideas on what might be good for the Mavs on the perceived decision-making process of the owner? How do we know what Cuban would or would not do? And even if he wasn't in favor of certain deals, does it mean that we can't discuss them or even make the bold claim that Cuban is wrong for once in his life?

No, it means it's not worth discussing because it was never going to happen and was a bad idea anyway. Trading for RJ and then turning around and trading Howard for Kaman? Kaman isn't worth losing Howard, even with RJ. And please for god's sake don't explain it me again. "We're not really losing Howard, because we have RJ." I GET IT. I still wouldn't do it.

mac222b · 06-24-2009, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Good god, what a bunch of whiny knee-jerkers we have on this board. RJ would not have been a great fit here. Yeah, it really sucks that the Spurs got him, but please people, please stop bitching about how our whole offseason just went out the window.

We've both been on the "we need VC bandwagon" for a long time now. He's an underrated passer,rebounder and would be a great compliment to Dirk. I just don't think we get it done w/out giving up Josh. If they'll do it for Stack and garbage--great! But do any of us really believe they'd do that? If we do Stack and Damp they get no talent back and we have no Center. They'll be making a run at Lebron and want talent and flexibility. Maybe they'll do it for Josh&junk? Probably not.
People are bitching because each move or non-move effects the next. We've lost 3 potential trade partners which could hurt our leverage and the free agency period looms. It would be nice to know which positions we needed to fill. Or are we going with best player available? The angst on this board may in part be that the best player available "for nothing" (i.e. salary dump) just got snapped up by our rivals. Is our roster so talented that we can afford to pass up guys like Jefferson? He's not Gaso, no one said he is, but the deal is vaguely Gasol-like. They gave up less than LA did for Gasol. If we can get Shaq,Kaman or VC it will probably require more than one trade chip. Hurting our depth and flexibilty.

mac222b · 06-24-2009, 01:51 PM

How do we get VC w/out giving up any of our core?

dalger · 06-24-2009, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

What are you talking about "no 3?" The idea is to get VC without giving up any of our core...

No, it means it's not worth discussing because it was never going to happen and was a bad idea anyway. Trading for RJ and then turning around and trading Howard for Kaman? Kaman isn't worth losing Howard, even with RJ. And please for god's sake don't explain it me again. "We're not really losing Howard, because we have RJ." I GET IT. I still wouldn't do it.

That's perfectly fine, but I asked you to please come up with a good idea on your own which you didn't do. We would have been a better team, if we had gone for realistic trades involving Kaman/RJ for Josh/Stack. You can certainly call that suggestion a bad idea, but to do so you should better have an idea of your own. If that very idea is to get Vince Carter without giving up any important player like Josh or JET, it's just very unrealistic.

Underdog · 06-24-2009, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalger

If that very idea is to get Vince Carter without giving up any important player like Josh or JET, it's just very unrealistic.

That's the key - JET vs Josh... Which would you give up?

I'd do JET for VC in a heartbeat, but I'm not not so quick to pull the trigger on Josh...

Kidd/Carter/Josh/Dirk/Upgrade with MLE as 6th man looks a lot better than Kidd/Carter/MLE/Dirk/Upgrade with JET as 6th man...

SMC0007 · 06-24-2009, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac222b

How do we get VC w/out giving up any of our core?

Improbable.

Jet
Stack
Bass

-

Dooling
Carter
R Anderson

SMC0007 · 06-24-2009, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

That's the key - JET vs Josh... Which would you give up?

I'd do JET for VC in a heartbeat, but I'm not not so quick to pull the trigger on Josh...

Kidd/Carter/Josh/Dirk/Upgrade with MLE as 6th man looks a lot better than Kidd/Carter/MLE/Dirk/Upgrade with JET as 6th man...

Yes.

You have to sweeten the pot tho on a JET for VC. There's no way they take that.

Underdog · 06-24-2009, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SMC0007

Yes.

You have to sweeten the pot tho on a JET for VC. There's no way they take that.

Agreed - I was just referring to the centerpiece of a deal...

dalger · 06-24-2009, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

That's the key - JET vs Josh... Which would you give up?

I'd do JET for VC in a heartbeat, but I'm not not so quick to pull the trigger on Josh...

Kidd/Carter/Josh/Dirk/Upgrade with MLE as 6th man looks a lot better than Kidd/Carter/MLE/Dirk/Upgrade with JET as 6th man...

Absolutely. JET/Stack for Carter wouldn't create much of a hole compared to a trade for Josh/Stack as we're talking about the same position. It wouldn't be an incredible upgrade and less effective than what the Spurs pulled off yesterday, but we'd still be a better team.

To further improve the team we'd have to pray that New Orleans or Charlotte are willing to trade with us. They'd never do Chandler for Dampier or Okafor for Dampier straight up, though possible, so I guess we'd have to take additional salary and offer something like Damp/Wright for Okafor/Mohammed or Damp/S&T Bass for Chandler/Posey. We'd then still have the MLE to get us another contributor.

So it would be something like:

Okafor/Dirk/Josh/Carter/Kidd + another SG/SF with the MLE
or
Chandler/Dirk/Josh/Carter/Kidd + e.g. Sessions with the MLE

With that said, I have no idea how likely any of those deals are.

Underdog · 06-24-2009, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalger

Absolutely. JET/Stack for Carter wouldn't create much of a hole compared to a trade for Josh/Stack as we're talking about the same position. It wouldn't be an incredible upgrade and less effective than what the Spurs pulled off yesterday, but we'd still be a better team.

To further improve the team we'd have to pray that New Orleans or Charlotte are willing to trade with us. They'd never do Chandler for Dampier or Okafor for Dampier straight up, though possible, so I guess we'd have to take additional salary and offer something like Damp/Wright for Okafor/Mohammed or Damp/S&T Bass for Chandler/Posey. We'd then still have the MLE to get us another contributor.

So it would be something like:

Okafor/Dirk/Josh/Carter/Kidd + another SG/SF with the MLE
or
Chandler/Dirk/Josh/Carter/Kidd + e.g. Sessions with the MLE

With that said, I have no idea how likely any of those deals are.

It's a wacky offseason, no?

So many options, yet the possibility of doing nothing (aside from Stack/#22/MLE) is just as equal...

dalger · 06-24-2009, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

It's a wacky offseason, no?

So many options, yet the possibility of doing nothing (aside from Stack/#22/MLE) is just as equal...

It is, as always. I just hope that we don't miss too many options. Yesterday was one of those days where one of our biggest rivals got significantly better and made you realize that something needs to happen.

New Jersey would probably like Josh/Stack for Carter. They'd save a lot of money and get a great player in Josh that they could let go before next year's big free agency. We should only offer JET/Stack for Carter though.

As far as the trade ideas with Charlotte and especially New Orleans are concerned, I assume that they want to get rid of salary. There's no better way for New Orleans than trading Chandler and Posey (well, Peja, but no one is going to take him). Charlotte, on the other hand, has been shopping Mohammed for quite a long time, so having him leave and getting someone like Wright in return, who is a solid rotation player and has an expiring contract as well, might be enough for them to be satisfied with our offer.

Still, it's just impossible to make any predictions whatsover. May the FO at least try to do something like this.

TheMaverick · 06-24-2009, 06:41 PM

Spiral, people who reacted to the RJ move by the Spurs are not basing it on the fact that Jefferson puts them "clearly over the top", this move does not make them a hands down favorite to win it all. So, I don't know where this Jefferson express to the Finals thing you are referring to came from. Most of us are upset because A) the Spurs gave up nothing, since 2/3 of the parts to the trade are rumored to return with them and B) the Spurs are without a doubt our biggest rival and seeing your biggest rival clearly improve while you stand pat is frustrating.

Also, it is quite humorous to me that you are calling everyone knee jerkers and whiners when you talk about the Kidd trade like it was the end of the world.

darkwitzki · 06-24-2009, 08:42 PM

We could still beat the Spurs in 7 given our current lineup against them with Jefferson, lol.. Believe me guys, JHo's gonna have a a break thru this season, so we might as well hold into him for now. Hate to see Terry go, let's get VC!

slowmo · 06-25-2009, 08:37 AM

josh for vc could happen. Remember that josh and Devin are best friends and the funk josh went into when Devin was traded. Bringing them back together would be invigorating for josh and give the nets a dynamic duo. Get er done!

Justin Credible · 06-25-2009, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowmo

josh for vc could happen. Remember that josh and Devin are best friends and the funk josh went into when Devin was traded. Bringing them back together would be invigorating for josh and give the nets a dynamic duo. Get er done!

I 110% support trading Jet/Stack (maybe s&t Bass) for VC, but I do not support Josh being involved in that trade at all.. I don't see trading Josh as a good thing in this scenario.. It's almost a lateral movement with the obvious upside going to us with VC. But is that slight upside really worth our #2 scorer and our best trade chip(s)?

I honestly don't think so.

TheMaverick · 06-25-2009, 11:20 AM

I'm okay with Josh for Vince if we pick up Marion w the MLE.

Underdog · 06-25-2009, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMaverick

I'm okay with Josh for Vince if we pick up Marion w the MLE.

That's the tricky part - if you trade Josh for Carter and DON'T land Marion, then you're boned...

(but I still like the idea of trying to pull off Kidd/Carter/Marion/Dirk/Upgrade a lot better than coming back with the same roster!)

TheMaverick · 06-25-2009, 11:52 AM

I think once Marion realizes he's not getting more than the MLE... Dallas will be on his short list of destinations.

Underdog · 06-25-2009, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMaverick

I think once Marion realizes he's not getting more than the MLE... Dallas will be on his short list of destinations.

I've said it the past 3 offseasons and I'll say it again - I'd LOVE to see Marion's ugly shooting style in Dallas...

(especially if Jason Kidd could find the Old Marion from Phoenix...)

TheMaverick · 06-25-2009, 11:58 AM

If Marion came to Dallas with our ultra talented offensive players, he wouldn't have to take a jumper. He should average 4 dunks and 6 free throw attempts a game. That'll be around his 14ppg average.

by ultra talented offensive players, I mean Dirk

horse900703 · 06-25-2009, 12:14 PM

this trade might help spurs alot.