Mavs at the Trade Deadline ... Ideas, Rumors, Thoughts ....Where do they fit? - Page 2 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Dtownsfinest · 02-11-2009, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

That doesn't change the fact that Shaq waltzed into town and won them a ring - Wade wouldn't have been as effective if we didn't have to pick our poison between him and Shaq (unfortunately the refs made that decision for us...)

And that's exactly the point - you don't need a Dwayne Wade to pair with Shaq when you have Kidd and Dirk (pick your poison, you'll still get beat...)

Shaq played a part but seriously you replace Wade with anyone in this league not named Kobe or Lebron do they still win that championship? It had a lot more to do than just Shaq. He played his part but he wasn't the one given the ball when the game was on the line. Big shots were hit and rarely if any where they made by Shaq. Alonzo Mourning was another guy huge in that series.

Quote:

We are not the Suns. They are a team that is un-happy, and is trying to take a bunch of square cut players and shove them in a round hole. Dirks game is mid-range with the ocassional 3 and ever more rare post -up. Amare is a pick and roll dunker. Drik next to shaq would be very hard to defend. Kidd is a PG that would be more apt to getting Shaq the ball where he needs it.

Amare is more than a pick and roll dunker. He's on the mid range looking for that jumper as well. Shaq does not command double teams like he did when he was 27. With the way some of you guys are talking I think you guys think Shaq is 27 years old again. In a offense where Kidd dominates the ball I still don't see the Shaq move having more upside than a Baron and Kaman trade.

Underdog · 02-11-2009, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

Shaq played a part but seriously you replace Wade with anyone in this league not named Kobe or Lebron do they still win that championship? It had a lot more to do than just Shaq. He played his part but he wasn't the one given the ball when the game was on the line. Big shots were hit and rarely if any where they made by Shaq. Alonzo Mourning was another guy huge in that series.

Who shut down the paint and forced us into jump-shooting?

(I don't know if you've noticed, but basketball is played on two ends of the court...)

Underdog · 02-11-2009, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

Big shots were hit and rarely if any where they made by Shaq. Alonzo Mourning was another guy huge in that series.

Mourning only scored 15 total points in the 4 games that the Heat won (22 for the entire series...)

Shaq scored 16 in Game 3 alone (60 in the 4 games they won, 82 total...)

Just because you SAY something happened doesn't mean it really did...

Willstar · 02-11-2009, 04:32 PM

shaq would have such a huge impact on the mavs that donnie wont do it prolly.

Flacolaco · 02-11-2009, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Players who play for bad teams usually miss a lot of action

So your health is contingent on the quality of your team?

Seems like the quality of teams is contingent on the health of their players.

Dtownsfinest · 02-11-2009, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

So your health is contingent on the quality of your team?

Apparently. Guys injury prone on bad teams coming to a solid team and all of a sudden becoming healthy? Last I saw of Mcdyess he was in a wheel chair never to play again. Now he can crank out 82 games in his 30's? Something's not right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kidd Karma

It's the build of the personnel. The Suns went from a Ferrari to a Hummer in their style of play. You have 2 styles pulling at each other and it isn't working. Nowitzki is a different type of 4, where he doesn't need to be on the block to be effective, unlike Amare. If you plant Dirk 20 feet out, entering to Shaq, that allows Shaq to go one on one or at the least kick it back out to Dirk for the J.

Amare and Shaq aren't struggling. Their playing great. The only reason there not better defensively is because Amare leaves much to be desired on the defensive end just like Dirk does. Regardless of how Amare scores he still does it at a very high effecient rate and Shaq's having his best season in a long time. Yet, they're the 8th seed.

Underdog · 02-11-2009, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

Apparently. Guys injury prone on bad teams coming to a solid team and all of a sudden becoming healthy? Last I saw of Mcdyess he was in a wheel chair never to play again. Now he can crank out 82 games in his 30's? Something's not right.

Apparently????

Name another example of an injury-prone guy who went from a bad team to a good one and suddenly became less injury-prone (you should be able to crank out quite a list if you're accepting a half-witted idea like "guys are more injury prone on bad squads" as a fact...)

Flacolaco · 02-11-2009, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Apparently????

Name another example of an injury-prone guy who went from a bad team to a good one and suddenly became less injury-prone (you should be able to crank out quite a list if you're accepting a half-witted idea like "guys being more injury prone on bad squads" as a fact...)

Save it. He's firmly entrenched and grasping at straws now.

Dtownsfinest · 02-11-2009, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Apparently????

Name another example of an injury-prone guy who went from a bad team to a good one and suddenly became less injury-prone (you should be able to crank out quite a list if you're accepting a half-witted idea like "guys are more injury prone on bad squads" as a fact...)

Off the top Marcus Camby and Antonio Mcdyess are the only ones that come to mind. I'm sure if given time I can find more examples.

Kidd Karma · 02-11-2009, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

Apparently. Guys injury prone on bad teams coming to a solid team and all of a sudden becoming healthy? Last I saw of Mcdyess he was in a wheel chair never to play again. Now he can crank out 82 games in his 30's? Something's not right.

Amare and Shaq aren't struggling. Their playing great. The only reason there not better defensively is because Amare leaves much to be desired on the defensive end just like Dirk does. Regardless of how Amare scores he still does it at a very high effecient rate and Shaq's having his best season in a long time. Yet, they're the 8th seed.

...individual numbers are up, but chemistry is shot. This is a team without a solid offensive sense. You look at the C's and KG's numbers, its probably the worst of his career, but they are a well oiled machine, taking advantage of each other's strengths. I think if you have your stars on the same page, Dirk and Shaq, it will be huge. I don't think Amare and Shaq are on the same page with Stevie and that is what is hurting them.

Dtownsfinest · 02-11-2009, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kidd Karma

...individual numbers are up, but chemistry is shot. This is a team without a solid offensive sense. You look at the C's and KG's numbers, its probably the worst of his career, but they are a well oiled machine, taking advantage of each other's strengths. I think if you have your stars on the same page, Dirk and Shaq, it will be huge. I don't think Amare and Shaq are on the same page with Stevie and that is what is hurting them.

So when Shaq comes here we're going to automatically have chemistry? See with the Shaq deal I just don't understand why people are under the assumption that we can just make a trade and win a championship. When has that ever happened? I remember when the Rockets traded for Drexler and got a ring that year. But aside from that I can't recall a team making a trade during the season and winning a championship that same year.

Underdog · 02-11-2009, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

So when Shaq comes here we're going to automatically have chemistry? See with the Shaq deal I just don't understand why people are under the assumption that we can just make a trade and win a championship. When has that ever happened? I remember when the Rockets traded for Drexler and got a ring that year. But aside from that I can't recall a team making a trade during the season and winning a championship that same year.

Who said anything about this year?

Seems to me like ANY big trade this team makes would be about next season - that's why Cuban wants to re-sign Kidd...

also: (in addition to Clyde the Glide's title in Houston, Rasheed Wallace won a title with the Pistons after being traded at the deadline...)

Kidd Karma · 02-11-2009, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

So when Shaq comes here we're going to automatically have chemistry? See with the Shaq deal I just don't understand why people are under the assumption that we can just make a trade and win a championship. When has that ever happened? I remember when the Rockets traded for Drexler and got a ring that year. But aside from that I can't recall a team making a trade during the season and winning a championship that same year.

True, can't beat around the bush about that stat. Difficult to get practice time focusing on getting sets and with Shaq being a good part of the offense...probably 25%, I can see problems when it comes down to playing the Celtics or Cavs in the finals.....hey Gasol got the Lake Show a sniff of it.

LonghornDub · 02-11-2009, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

So your health is contingent on the quality of your team?

Seems like the quality of teams is contingent on the health of their players.

Game, set, match. Logic for the win.

Tokey41 · 02-11-2009, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

So your health is contingent on the quality of your team?

Seems like the quality of teams is contingent on the health of their players.

Your going to seriously suggest that players give it their all on losing teams... when Vince Carter, a player some people want here, has publicly admitted to slacking because "the team was going nowhere". Davis is the same way, when you see enough of these players you can start to pick them out. Tracy Mcgrady, Larry Hughes, Boozer (even when his team is winning), Kenyon Martin, etc, they all slack when they know they are playing for something less than contending.

If you don't think they would make us contenders thats fine... but to me, the starting five of Davis/Wright/Howard/Dirk/Kaman (with a Jet, Damp bench) seems pretty damn lethal in contrast to what we have now. And if your concerned about defense, need I remind you that we won 67 games and made a finals appearance with a backcourt of Harris/Jet? It's ugly, but you can't argue with the results.

I'd do the Shaq trade or the Clippers trade simply because we need something (anything!) to happen. If you can get two quality starters for one then why wouldn't you? The beauty of it is we'd still have Stack's contract to trade is someone else was looking to deal.

LonghornDub · 02-11-2009, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tokey41

Your going to seriously suggest that players give it their all on losing teams... when Vince Carter, a player some people want here, has publicly admitted to slacking because "the team was going nowhere".

Except he didn't suggest that at all. He suggested (correctly) that a player's health is not contingent on the quality of his team. Baron missing 14 games this year has nothing to do with him "slacking."

Tokey41 · 02-11-2009, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Except he didn't suggest that at all. He suggested (correctly) that a player's health is not contingent on the quality of his team. Baron missing 14 games this year has nothing to do with him "slacking."

And I'm suggesting a player's health IS contingent on the quality of his team. I've seen too many examples in Toronto of Carter going down when the team is trailing by double digits to believe that players don't take extended periods off when they simply aren't motivated to play (you know, despite the ridiculous amounts of money they are paid to perform).

Sometimes players could just tough out an injury and there are plenty of examples of them doing so (Kobe's finger, Dirks ankle, etc.), but these players make a conscious choice to sit out because they feel they aren't playing for anything. Would a contender make them want to rush back into action a little faster? If it doesn't then I don't know what else will.

LonghornDub · 02-11-2009, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tokey41

And I'm suggesting a player's health IS contingent on the quality of his team. I've seen too many examples in Toronto of Carter going down when the team is trailing by double digits to believe that players don't take extended periods off when they simply aren't motivated to play (you know, despite the ridiculous amounts of money they are paid to perform).

Sometimes players could just tough out an injury and there are plenty of examples of them doing so (Kobe's finger, Dirks ankle, etc.), but these players make a conscious choice to sit out because they feel they aren't playing for anything. Would a contender make them want to rush back into action a little faster? If it doesn't then I don't know what else will.

The notion that the quality of a player's team affects his health more than the other way around is laughable.

Flacolaco · 02-11-2009, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tokey41

And I'm suggesting a player's health IS contingent on the quality of his team. I've seen too many examples in Toronto of Carter going down when the team is trailing by double digits to believe that players don't take extended periods off when they simply aren't motivated to play (you know, despite the ridiculous amounts of money they are paid to perform).

You're also suggesting that this is the kind of human you want in a mavericks uniform. No thanks, none for me.

Tokey41 · 02-11-2009, 06:43 PM

double post

MX425 · 02-11-2009, 04:35 PM

We are not the Suns. They are a team that is un-happy, and is trying to take a bunch of square cut players and shove them in a round hole. Dirks game is mid-range with the ocassional 3 and ever more rare post -up. Amare is a pick and roll dunker. Drik next to shaq would be very hard to defend. Kidd is a PG that would be more apt to getting Shaq the ball where he needs it.

I don't think Shaq hands us a ring, but he def puts us in the conversation.

grndmstr_c · 02-11-2009, 04:38 PM

Screw BD. I don't want that waste on the Mavs.

That said, good read, and I agree with most everything that was said. Only things to add are that I'm greedy so I want Grant Hill along with Shaq in a Suns trade, and I think a Josh/VC swap would be a better-than-lateral move for the Mavs, but I still listen real closely to everything Kidd has to say about Vince before I trade for him, regardless of how attractive the deal is from a talent standpoint.

Oh, and if we're going to trade with the Wizards I say we just go all out, offer them mad savings and try to get both Caron and Antawn (pipe dream).

Underdog · 02-11-2009, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

Screw BD. I don't want that waste on the Mavs.

Mark Cuban agrees...

EDIT: I just noticed Sportstudi said the same thing...

MX425 · 02-11-2009, 04:49 PM

I think Hill would be a nice addition to if he could be had. Maybe Cubes needs ot be a little underhanded and call Saver himself. Get the owner to agree to a deal the FO would not make. See how much he wants to keep that money in his pockets.

jthig32 · 02-11-2009, 04:54 PM

Saying something like "What does money have to do with anything?" invalidates any opinions you have on possible trades.

Financial flexibility is huge. Always has been, always will be.

TripleDipping · 02-11-2009, 05:19 PM

Can some post the Shaq in Mavs' uniform picture?

craggmac · 02-11-2009, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TripleDipping

Can some post the Shaq in Mavs' uniform picture?

No Problem!

darkwitzki · 02-11-2009, 05:31 PM

Got a call from Cuban, he said he's going to get Shaq as requested.

craggmac · 02-11-2009, 05:32 PM

Screw Baron Davis man! Bring in the Diesel!!

tcat075 · 02-11-2009, 05:52 PM

The guy that interests me is Salmons, if we could get him cheap.

Kidd Karma · 02-11-2009, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tcat075

The guy that interests me is Salmons, if we could get him cheap.

Salmons for Stack....I like Salmons, he's a glue type of player, can play the point, 2 or 3....but more of a 6th man type, not a starter.

MX425 · 02-11-2009, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kidd Karma

Salmons for Stack....I like Salmons, he's a glue type of player, can play the point, 2 or 3....but more of a 6th man type, not a starter.

paying stack for salmons is not cheap. His contract in this economy is worth so much. that would be a dumb move

Kidd Karma · 02-11-2009, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MX425

paying stack for salmons is not cheap. His contract in this economy is worth so much. that would be a dumb move

...yea but it's not my money and we should be out of this thing by the time Salmon's contract is up in 2011. Yea, the only thing I hate about that is it's stuck on the books for our Bosh-run.

grndmstr_c · 02-11-2009, 06:01 PM

Something I was just thinking about, in light of the comments about needing a guy like Wade to play off of Shaq. The obvious first counter is that having a guy like Dirk to play off of him might be even better. The less obvious second one concerns JET. I would not at all be surprised to see him find an even higher gear as a scoring threat with a low post threat like Shaq on the team. I swear, JET's fg% on those little pull-up 10-12 footers has got to be somewhere north of 65%. With Shaq on the floor you almost wouldn't be able to stop him from getting open looks on those.

AxdemxO · 02-11-2009, 06:02 PM

I disagree with a couple of those trades being "lateral".

Josh for Vince ....VC would bring alot more fire power then Josh and also 5 reb and 5 assists ans is another guy that played with Kidd, although not as well as RJ.

and

Josh for Jefferson ...Kidd and RJ got along well and know each others game well, soo there wont me much problem getting him into the flow, IMO he better then Josh, but if we can get Villenueva then IMO that would be a steal.

DLord · 02-11-2009, 06:03 PM

1. Regarding the Shaq idea ...

a. If you didn't see it, we wrote a long detailed explanation of this trade idea two weeks ago, that gave all the thinking behind it. None of that has changed (other than the Suns are even more desperate than before to save money.) It was linked in this article but didn't get copied on putting it here. Here's the link: http://www.dallasbasketball.com/full...mn.php?id=1281

b. If they get Shaq and the Mavs don't win a title this season, have they lost an opportunity they otherwise had? I think he makes them better - whether or not he gets them all the way there, who knows.
... Also, adding Shaq wouldn't bring nearly as many struggles to fit him in, as trading for Kidd to run the team.

c. What are you giving up? Besides the money angle, you give up Josh Howard. I like Josh, but I just think Dallas-with-Shaq is much more of a title threat than Dallas-with-Josh.
...Also, if the Mavs are truly serious about grabbing a free agent in 2010, they will have to decline Josh's option - so he's gone in the summer of 2010. That erases the "Josh is younger and will be here longer" issue from being a factor.

2. To me, the window they need to work in is 2009 playoffs and 2010 playoffs. Then they hit the 2010 free agent chase with a chance to try to get a big talent on build a different way. That makes this a short-term trade - and Shaq would be ideal.

3. So I keep coming back to one issue: what if anything is out there that can make this team a contender for 2009 and 2010 before they go for a new core? There are many ideas that add a role player, but is that enough to put them on the same tier as the LA's and SA's in the West? There are certainly no guarantees, but I think Shaq could do that.

4. Why would Phoenix trade Shaq? Well, besides the fact that they ARE shopping him making moot the need to prove they would, the pure reality is that Shaq+Amare hasn't worked. Shaq takes up all the space that Nash and Amare need left open to thrive. And now Sarver has ramped up the prioritizing of his money issues (one national report this week went to far as to say Sarver has expressed in trade talks that he doesn't really prioritize at this point the talent balance of a trade, just so long as he ends up with huge money savings and a team that draws fans.)

5. I don't trust Davis, so I'm rolling with Kidd for that 2-year window (assuming I can). I think this has become Kidd's team anyhow.

6. But if the Clipps offered Davis-Kaman for Kidd, do we really think they did that expecting to keep Kidd? The fact that Kidd is playing great is pointless to a lottery-bound team, so it's obvious that offer was made as a pure salary dump.
...Therefore isn't the thing to do to go back to them after saying "we don't want to eat ALL of that" and offer them HALF of that salary dump? I'll take Camby off their hands for expiring stuff, any day. I'd take Kaman instead if they insisted, but like it less. And they can keep Davis.

grndmstr_c · 02-11-2009, 06:07 PM

I like Jefferson, but I think he's a (small) step down from Josh. Factor in the contract, and I lose interest unless Sessions and perhaps Villenueva are also coming the Mavs' way.

AxdemxO · 02-11-2009, 06:18 PM

Lets just ask the Clipps to release Kidd after the trade so we can sign him back

Kidd / Davis/ JJ
Wright/ Jet/ Davis
Josh/Wright
Dirk/Bass/Kamen
Kamen/Damp

Hhaha I wonder if it would work : )

Dirkadirkastan · 02-11-2009, 06:29 PM

Anything that puts us in the second round is fine with me.

sike · 02-11-2009, 06:48 PM

great thread. (except for the "players on bad teams health" discussion)

Yall really have my trade juices flowing now....don't let me down (again), Cuban!!!