Inside the Mavericks

[Max Power]

The Dallas Morning News' Mavericks beat writer Eddie Sefko and NBA beat writer Chuck Carlton answer your questions about the team and league each Thursday in this column exclusively for DallasNews.com.
E-mail your questions to Eddie and Chuck, and check out more coverage at our Mavericks/NBA area.

Mavericks' development gets assist from schedule
01:32 AM CST on Thursday, November 6, 2003

The biggest ally for the Mavericks and their growing pains might be the current stretch of the NBA schedule.

The one-sided opening loss to the Los Angeles Lakers showed the Mavericks how far they have to go — not a bad thing for a star-laden team.

Then came the procession of teams perfect for building that confidence:

•Golden State, minus Nick Van Exel (knee), Jason Richardson (suspension) and Troy Murphy (foot)

•The rebuilding Jazz, which not only had a diminished talent level but also was minus starting point guard Carlos Arroyo.

•Miami, which came to town minus five players and winless under first-year coach Stan Van Gundy and left the same way.

“The timing for this season is perfect,” Mavericks coach Don Nelson said. “We opened up with the Lakers, but other than that, we have a period in which we need to not play the best teams in basketball. We’re struggling right now and we need to get some confidence to understand who we are. It’s just perfect the way the season has started.”

Nelson’s words proved to be prophetic as the Mavericks started a three-game road trip with a lackluster 100-90 loss Wednesday night in Washington. At least the Mavericks have an opportunity to field test their new lineup without having to face a genuine contender. As bad as the Mavericks were against the Wizards, imagine what the final score could have been against one of the top teams in the West.

Even the anticipated showdown with San Antonio now looks like less of a test with Tim Duncan sidelined by a sprained ankle.

The road trip also gives the team an opportunity to bond, not only away from the court but also in games and practice.

“There has to be more talking and more communicating from each and every guy,” impressive newcomer Tony Delk said. “It will be a good idea for us to go out as a team and build some cohesiveness. I think we really need that. It starts with communicating on defense.”


MAVERICKS/NBA Q&A

Q: I have to wonder about Nellie’s strategy to start Antoine Walker over Antawn Jamison. While it makes sense to utilize all of Walker’s skills in the form of a “point forward,” doesn’t it make more sense to allow Steve Nash to run the show completely from the tip-off with Jamison on the court with Dirk Nowitzki, Michael Finley and Danny Fortson? This would give them ample firepower, passing and decent rebounding from the start. Also, Walker could come in and face the other team’s winded starters and bench players and get more shots than if he were a starter. Is this an ego issue with Walker where Jamison is being the bigger man or another one of Nellie’s wacky game plans of mismatches that might backfire?

CARLTON: Egos might be playing a part. Certainly, Antawn Jamison has accepted the sixth-man role as well as could be imagined for a 20-point-a-game scorer. Don Nelson’s decision also goes beyond who is happy and who isn’t. He really is intrigued by Walker’s passing skills and his ability to take the pressure off Steve Nash. By bringing Jamison off the bench, the Mavericks hoped to have instant offense and create more matchup problems. So far, the results are mixed. Walker has probably been better than anybody expected. Jamison struggled with limited minutes in his return to Golden State but seems to be fitting better in the Mavericks’ offense.

•••

Q: Detroit’s Ben Wallace is an amazing defensive player who seems to be someone who could slow down Shaq and Tim Duncan. With Michael Finley not being the iron man he used to be, would there be any way the Mavs could lure the Pistons into a combination of Finley and something else for Wallace? The Pistons have lacked offense, and the Mavs have almost too much, so wouldn’t it make sense?

CARLTON: It’s interesting that you mention Ben Wallace. Although he’s only 6-9 (not counting the throwback ‘fro), he’s twice been the NBA’s defensive player of the year. Although no one stops Tim Duncan and Shaquille O’Neal on a regular basis, Wallace has the ability to block shots, rebound like a maniac (16.3 rpg last season) and run the floor. Because he doesn’t care if he touches the ball offensively, he would be perfect for the Mavs. One Web site this summer floated the notion that Detroit might move him because of its surplus of young, big men.

But too many obstacles stand in the way. Second-pick overall Darko Milicic clearly isn’t ready for prime time in Detroit, and Wallace is too valuable a commodity to discard. Plus, at $5.5 million this season, he’s one of the great bargains in the league. Any trade for Michael Finley ($13.2 million this season) would have to include enough salary from the Pistons to make up for the difference in salary because both teams are over the cap.

•••

Q: What will be the rotation for the Mavericks? What lineups we will see with certain players on the floor?

David Beford, Oklahoma City, Okla.

CARLTON: Yours is a good question and one that coach Don Nelson is weighing early this season. The original plan called for Danny Fortson to start at center. By Game 4, Fortson was already on the bench, struggling to learn Nelson’s system. There was the possibility of the Big Five as a unit, something that we’ve seen in games here and there. But did anyone think Tony Delk would be playing as big a role and so well as he has recently? Expect to see multiple lineups and rotations because the Mavericks can go 10 players deep (Eduardo Najera, Travis Best and Shawn Bradley are among those who can contribute) and because the competition for minutes is strong.

•••

Q: If the Mavericks knew they could trade Raef LaFrentz for Antoine Walker, do you feel they would have also completed the trade with Nick Van Exel going to Golden State for Antawn Jamison?

CARLTON: Probably. The oft-stated philosophy of team president Donnie Nelson is that it’s impossible to have too many shooters. The Mavericks essentially turned Nick Van Exel and Raef LaFrentz into Antawn Jamison, Danny Fortson, Antoine Walker and Tony Delk. That’s an upgrade, no matter how you look at it. Plus, Jiri Welsch was a player that Boston coveted greatly. The Celtics probably don’t make the deal unless he’s involved, which brings us back to the Golden State deal.

•••

Q: What happed to Walt Williams?

CARLTON: The 12-year veteran who filled a reserve role for the Mavericks last season remains on the market as an unsigned free agent. Earlier in the summer, New Jersey expressed some interest and lately Williams’ name has been floated in connection with injury-plagued Miami. Even though he’s 34 and coming off a career-low 5.5 points per game average, he could still help some teams. He started three games against San Antonio in the Western Conference finals and averaged 8.5 ppg. He and Tracy Murray are probably the two top perimeter players still unsigned.

•••

Q: Are there realistic moves the Mavs can make during the season that improve offensive and defensive presence in the lane? Are there players out there that might be dealt if their teams are largely out of the playoff picture or who might be available for a trade for some of the Mavs’ new young firepower?

M. Brett Johnson

CARLTON: Remember a lot of those names that you heard during the summer? And last season at the trade deadline? Get ready to hear many of those usual suspects again. If Toronto stumbles in the East or if his grumbling gets too loud, Antonio Davis could be available. If Portland implodes, nearly everybody might be on the block, including Rasheed Wallace and Dale Davis. Atlanta’s Theo Ratliff is always good for a couple of blocks, some impressive rebounds and 30 games on the injured list. As long as he’s in Miami, Brian Grant will be a factor in any Mavs’ trade rumors. Every time Donnie Nelson ventures to Europe, you will hear talk that Arvydas Sabonis might be ending his retirement.

•••

Q: Do you see Shawn Bradley contributing anything substantial to the team this year?

CARLTON: Given the relatively low bar you set with the question, yes. Admittedly, Bradley has come from being a potential franchise center like Yao Ming to a 7-6 backup. He is what he is.

When you take the height and failed expectations out of the mix, he’s not bad. Yes, he looks awkward and gets dunked on. But his presence alters shots and he’s got a decent touch out to 18 feet. Plus, he seems to be progressing well from summer knee surgery. He’ll never hold his own against the top centers in the league, but he can effective against lesser teams in short stints.

Maybe Don Nelson summed it up well when he talked about how Danny Fortson was struggling to be in the right place. “With Bradley, he knows,” Nelson said. “He may not always do the right thing, but he’s in the right spot to do the wrong things.”

•••

Q: I think trading Nick Van Exel was a mistake. Not to discount the contributions of the rest of the team, but in last season’s playoffs, Nick took them as far as they got. He was the spark, and none of the teams the Mavs played had an answer. I don’t see anybody they got in a trade matching his impact.

Michael Galloway

CARLTON: Take the emotion out of the trade and think of Nick Van Exel as a stock. The Mavericks followed the age-old market advice of buying low and selling high. Remember that Raef LaFrentz, and not Van Exel, was the centerpiece of the trade with Denver. Many wondered how long he would last in Dallas and how effective he would be. Van Exel exceeded expectations as the emotional leader of the Mavericks in the playoffs who provided instant offense. But the odds of a repeat performance weren’t good with a point guard on the back-nine of his career. The Mavericks had the option of trading small for big and old for younger and got Jiri Welsch and Danny Fortson thrown in. Van Exel will be missed, but the deal was too good to decline.

•••

Q: With all of the moves the Mavs have made and the number of forwards that we now have, will Eduardo Najera get much playing time? He brings so much energy to the team and hustles so much on defense, his teammates feed off that to start our fast break.

Lance Price, Dallas

CARLTON: Eduardo Najera could be a prominent victim of the Mavericks’ added depth at forward. In the first four games, he’s averaging 16 minutes a game, down seven from last season. With Antawn Jamison coming off the bench, the Mavericks are deep. That said, Najera provides rebounding and defense, two qualities in short supply on the Mavericks. He’s not going to score much, but the Mavericks have other people to do that. In big Western Conference games and especially in the tough going of the playoffs, the Mavericks are going to need Najera doing what he does best.

•••

Q: So with the Los Angeles Lakers fielding a “Dream Team,” is everybody else playing for second place?

Paul VanArsdale

CARLTON: The Lakers’ biggest opponents might be themselves this year. If they hang together, stay focused and remain injury-free, they probably win. The key may be the chemistry in the dressing room. Just because they weathered one training camp storm doesn’t mean they’ll be able to overcome the problems to come. No matter what they say now, Shaq and Kobe are players on the same roster, but not teammates, not by a long shot. They don’t like each other and one (likely Bryant) may be gone after this season. Karl Malone and — to a lesser extent — Gary Payton are going to have continue to be peacemakers. Are the Lakers unbeatable? No, but they could post 60-plus victories and have one of the all-time great regular seasons. But if they don’t win a title, they’ll go down as failures.

•••

Q: Two of my favorite NBA centers were near Danny Fortson’s size, and they both won championships: Wes Unseld and Lloyd Neal. Neal was the backup for Bill Walton and Mo Lucas on the Trail Blazers championship team. I doubt there has been a tougher competitor. How do their size and skills compare to Fortson’s?

CARLTON: Lloyd Neal? My hat is off to you for invoking the 6-7 forward/center from Tennessee State, who played eight seasons with Portland. His career numbers are pretty respectable, too (11.1 points and 7.7 rebounds in 435 games). Neal was a better leaper (before knee problems) than Fortson and was more mobile. But Fortson might better in the paint. Unseld was in a different class, although he and Fortson share body types. The former Bullets great was the MVP as a rookie. At 6-7, he, too, was undersized but remarkably effective. He averaged 14 rebounds a game, and few were better at the two-hand, over-the-head outlet pass. He wasn’t great offensively but had a passable medium-range jump shot from the key. Fortson has potential, but he has to prove he can be consistent before he can be mentioned with either of the two.

•••

Q: The past few years, the Mavericks have been one of the best free throw shooting teams in the NBA. How are the new guys at shooting free throws? Are the Mavs going to lose some points — and maybe some games — in this category?

CARLTON: Through four games, the Mavericks were shooting .832 from the free throw line, so the newcomers haven’t ruined the curve too much. Of course, Danny Fortson has yet to shoot a free throw. One constant is free throw guru Gary Boren, who has helped make the Mavericks one of the league’s best in past seasons.

Antawn Jamison was close to 80 percent last season and Antoine Walker, although inconsistent, should be OK at the line. Tony Delk is a good free throw shooter, and Travis Best is even better. When the Mavericks do lose games, it probably won’ t be at the free throw line.

[Max Power]

The Dallas Morning News' Mavericks beat writer Eddie Sefko and NBA beat writer Chuck Carlton answer your questions about the team and league each Thursday in this column exclusively for DallasNews.com.
E-mail your questions to Eddie and Chuck, and check out more coverage at our Mavericks/NBA area.

Count on Finley to settle into a role
03:26 PM CST on Wednesday, November 12, 2003

Michael Finley -- love him or hate him?

There is no question that it’s either one or the other. Fans either believe Finley has done more for the Mavericks’ organization and remains the heart and soul of the team or they think he is a step below the anti-Christ and root of all things wrong with the Mavericks.

Either thank him for his unbelievable work ethic and solid citizenship, not to mention his leadership and willingness to sacrifice.

Or boot him out the door because he’s a used-up shooter who no longer can shoot consistently.

As usual, both arguments have some merit. Every week, we get more e-mails about Finley than any other Maverick. Either he is evolving into a role player or his talents are underappreciated by the organization and media.

But the bottom line is the organization has made a commitment to keep Finley, who proved as recently as Tuesday against New Orleans that he can still make plays and be a difference-maker on what has the chance to be a very good team.

This doesn’t mean he’s a 20-point scorer every night. Those days are gone forever, unless he gets traded to Chicago, which would need his scoring. No, the Mavericks need Finley to do different things.

Some nights, he must do what he did on Tuesday -- hit outside shots, be aggressive and work the glass and passing lanes.

Other nights, he must step aside and let others do what he once had to do every night.

This is what could make the Mavericks great. Finley no longer has to do everything for this to be great. In fact, there’s a strong argument to be made that he could be the perfect sixth man. At the very least, he must pick his spots when they come to be a force on the court. Sometimes, he must blend into the game and disappear. Other times, he must take the game by the throat and be the man.

The guess here is that Finley is smart enough to know when to do what.

-- Eddie Sefko

MAVERICKS/NBA Q&A

Q: The past few years, the Mavericks have been one of the best free-throw shooting teams. How are the new guys at shooting free throws? Are the Mavs going to lose points -- and maybe games -- in this category?

Dave Tarrant, Arlington, Texas

SEFKO: Antoine Walker is a career 66.5 percent shooter. But the good news is that he generally doesn’t shoot a lot of free throws. Antawn Jamison shoots 71.7 percent for his career, acceptable for a big man, and has improved every year to nearly 79 percent last season. He will not be a liability. Travis Best (87 percent) is terrific, Danny Fortson is good (76 percent) for a big man and Tony Delk has been 78 percent or better the past four seasons.

This is one thing you have to take to the bank: Don Nelson is never going to have a team of bad shooters. By the end of the season, the Mavericks will again be the best free throw team in the league, or close to it.

•••

Q: Like the Rangers, the Mavericks focus on offense. In the years with the Mavs, why has Don Nelson not done his dead-level best to get a better defensive team, especially one that would address the Shaquille O’Neal problem? And is there any relation to the two teams? Is it something in the water in D-FW?

Bill Maxwell

SEFKO: As far as we have uncovered, water quality is fine in the area and the only infatuation with offense is that it wins fans. Unfortunately, it doesn’t win championships in any sport. Nelson has an affinity for offense, but he is not blind. He knows players must put up a defensive front or there is no chance of success. Whether he can get the Mavericks to that level on defense remains to be seen.

•••

Q: Josh Howard had what appeared to be a productive training camp. He looks like he may be able to contribute this year. What do you think?

Michael, Indianapolis

SEFKO: The coaching staff loves Howard and fellow rookie Marquis Daniels. But Nelson is fighting a 30-year-old phobia against rookies. They help you lose games, not win them, is his mantra. And he’s right, for the most part. There’s a reason why LeBron James’ Cavaliers started the season 0-5. But Howard and Daniels have places on this team for the rest of the season. And they probably are guaranteed spots next season. Their time will come. And by the time next season rolls around, they could make certain other Mavericks expendable.

•••

Q: Do you think Antoine Walker is going to be part of the future here or will he be used to acquire a big man in the future? I read where Indiana liked him. Is there any chance we could package him with someone else to get Jermaine O’Neal?

James Morgan, Allen, Texas

SEFKO: This is nirvana for the Mavericks. They are hoping one of the big-time superstars gets disgruntled enough to demand a trade before February. Whether it’s Jermaine O’Neal, Tracy McGrady or Kobe Bryant doesn’t matter. The Mavericks have positioned themselves well to make a deal if one of the big-timers becomes available. One superstar is worth more than two really good players.

•••

Q: Last year, Nick Van Exel was coming off the bench and Steve Nash still looked kind of run down at the end of the year. Will Tony Delk provide enough backup minutes and be effective enough so Nash can go into April and May without being as tired? Or will we miss Nick more than we think?

Mike Armon, Excelsior Springs, Mo.

SEFKO: There is no doubt Van Exel (and Avery Johnson, too) brought things to the team that nobody on the current roster can. They had leadership skills and, shall we say, guts. That said, Tony Delk and Travis Best are very good guards, although both are more suited at backing up than starting. This is like having Steve Martin and Andrew “Dice’’ Clay backing up Richard Pryor. It’s a very good situation. If Nash gets burned out this season, there will only be a couple of explanations. One would be if injuries strike Delk and/or Best. The other would be shortsightedness on Don Nelson’s part.

•••

Q: Losing to the Wizards? How embarrassing is that? Once again, this team plays no defense and the offense sputters at critical times. I’m a great supporter of Dirk Nowitzki, but for goodness sakes will he ever step up and be the man? Right now, he’s turning into a great “second guy.’’

Bobby Moore

SEFKO: This is one of the debates that is toughest to settle. Which players are worthy of superstar status. And which ones are truly legendary. Larry Bird, Hakeem Olajuwon, Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan? Sure, they were all legends. But what about Nowitzki or Kevin Garnett or Tracy McGrady or any other superstar who has yet to really win anything? This is where franchises come to grips with their philosophies. Are these their anchors for a championship? Or are they just great players who will never lead them to the promised land? If you really want to step out there and make a call on these, then you better be prepared to have your legs cut out from underneath you if you’re wrong. Right now, Nowitzki is only a great player. He’s certainly not a one-name hero yet. But then again, he’s only 25.

•••

Q: Who do you feel will be the most improved player on the team?

Ryan Kahn

SEFKO: Eduardo Najera. Last season, he was no better than he was the year before and possibly worse. This year, he’ll show he’s still on the upward trend.

•••

Q: In past articles, you mentioned that when Dirk is at center, Finley will be forced to play small forward more. Why couldn’t he stay at shooting guard and let Jamison and Walker play the forward spots?

Jake, Corsicana, Texas

SEFKO: Don Nelson is committed to bringing Jamison off the bench and going with either Fortson at center -- which does allow for Finley to play in the backcourt -- or go small with Tony Delk at the shooting guard when he’s healthy. This is an inexact science, especially for a Nelson-coached team. The main thing is that Nelson would rather go small and take his chances with a bigger lineup that has scoring liabilities. But keep an eye on this. If Danny Fortson continues to rebound like a fiend, don’t be surprised if he’s a big contributor, and perhaps a consistent starter.

•••

Q: Since Kobe Bryant is expected to opt out of his contract, what do you think of a Kobe-for-Dirk trade? In my opinion, it would be the stupidest thing to do.

Velvet Bomar

SEFKO: Sorry to be a killjoy, but it certainly would not be the stupidest thing to do. In fact, if you can give up 25-year-old Nowitzki for 25-year-old Bryant, I think Mark Cuban would do it in a heartbeat. Bryant’s a better player. That doesn’t mean Nowitzki is chopped liver. It just means he’s not one of the two best players on the planet right now. The risk, obviously, is Bryant’s legal future.

•••

Q: A generic question: Where is this team now in comparison to other Western Conference powers and where do you see it in April?

Grant, Austin, Texas

SEFKO: Right now, they aren’t very good. That much is obvious. Oh, they’re better than your basic riff-raff, but they aren’t as good as the Lakers or Kings. Come spring, who knows? The guess here is that the Lakers, Spurs, Wolves, Kings and Mavericks are going to rise to the top, with perhaps Phoenix in the mix. But this has a chance to be one of the most entertaining seasons in NBA history because of the diverse talents in the Western Conference.

•••

Q: How do you see playing time being divided between Travis Best and Tony Delk?

Jeff Carithers

SEFKO: Best is going to have to earn his time as Delk, Steve Nash and Michael Finley eat up most of the backcourt minutes. But there is no doubt that Best is a quality player. He’s a shooter who can play defense. And while those two concepts rarely collide with any Maverick, he’ll earn his time on the court this year.

[ReDIRKulous]

Q: Since Kobe Bryant is expected to opt out of his contract, what do you think of a Kobe-for-Dirk trade? In my opinion, it would be the stupidest thing to do.

Velvet Bomar

SEFKO: Sorry to be a killjoy, but it certainly would not be the stupidest thing to do. In fact, if you can give up 25-year-old Nowitzki for 25-year-old Bryant, I think Mark Cuban would do it in a heartbeat. Bryant’s a better player. That doesn’t mean Nowitzki is chopped liver. It just means he’s not one of the two best players on the planet right now. The risk, obviously, is Bryant’s legal future.

This really bugs me. Why is Kobe considered better than Dirk? Their stats are almost identical other than FGA's. And because of Kobe's FGA's he is considered a selfish ballplayer and his teammates hate him. Yet Dirk is all about the team, totally unselfish has the same stats... probably even much better in the playoffs and yet guys like this think Kobe is worth trading Dirk? Really annoying. It is amazing what a difeference being flashy does to people's evaluation of players abilities. Even a lot of Mavs fans thought Van Exel was more important than Dirk in the playoffs for the same reason.

Boggles the mind.

[sike]

Originally posted by: ReDIRKulous

This really bugs me. Why is Kobe considered better than Dirk? Their stats are almost identical other than FGA's. And because of Kobe's FGA's he is considered a selfish ballplayer and his teammates hate him. Yet Dirk is all about the team, totally unselfish has the same stats... probably even much better in the playoffs and yet guys like this think Kobe is worth trading Dirk? Really annoying. It is amazing what a difeference being flashy does to people's evaluation of players abilities. Even a lot of Mavs fans thought Van Exel was more important than Dirk in the playoffs for the same reason.

Boggles the mind.

I just want to congratulate ReDirk for using the word "Boggles"....

and, Kobe is a more complete player than Dirk...not as good a teammate, but a more complete total game....plus killer instinct....that is what I love about Kobe...there is some stuff that I hate about him, but honestly, he's a more complete player...

[Shaq Attack2]

Kobe is a better player than Dirk, stats never tell the whole story. I'm not sure he'd fit on the Mavs, but he's a better player than Dirk for sure. A better scorer, defender, clutch shooter, and has much more playoff experience than Dirk. Dirk shoots and rebounds better, but that's it.

[Dirkenstien]

Originally posted by Simon

I just want to congratulate ReDirk for using the word "Boggles"....

and, Kobe is a more complete player than Dirk...not as good a teammate, but a more complete total game....plus killer instinct....that is what I love about Kobe...there is some stuff that I hate about him, but honestly, he's a more complete player...
I just want to congratulate ReDirk for using the word "Boggles"....

This can be a very debated comparison when considering how great these players individually are, however I dont believe either player can be proven to be significantly more complete than the other due to the fact they have different style games and are expected to contribute in different ways.

This cannot be indicated or backed up by stats because surely stats will not indicate overall completeness any more than it shall be defined by the current situation that player was in and how he was asked to contribute to the team under those specific circumstances.

It all basically comes down to opinionated preference in which no victor shall emerge; leaving only ventilated notions

[FreshJive]

I don't think Cuban would trade Dirk for Shaq. Duncan mabye.

[DwD]

Q: Losing to the Wizards? How embarrassing is that? Once again, this team plays no defense and the offense sputters at critical times. I’m a great supporter of Dirk Nowitzki, but for goodness sakes will he ever step up and be the man? Right now, he’s turning into a great “second guy.’’

I cannot believe that people discount Dirk's play in the playoffs so soon as to say he never steps up to be the man - it is irritating to see the "what have you done for me lately" attitude and the selective amnesia people seem to have about players.

[MavsFanFinley]

I cannot believe that people discount Dirk's play in the playoffs so soon as to say he never steps up to be the man - it is irritating to see the "what have you done for me lately" attitude and the selective amnesia people seem to have about players.

I think the same thing can be said for all the 'trade Finley' talk.

[DwD]

I agree, MFF - Finley stepped up to the plate a lot more than NVE did, when Dirk went down in the San Antonio series.

[Murphy3]

Ya know, I'd love to see what Dirk could do on a team where he's allowed to shoot the ball as often as Kobe Bryant has done in the past. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Dirk averaged between 2-4 more points a game more than Bryant. We'd also see quite a bit more assists out of Dirk if he were allowed to have more touches. No, he wouldn't average Bryant numbers, but he'd be up in the 4-4.5 range. Plus, if the team wasn't absolutely loaded with rebounders, he'd be in double figures there as well.

Both are killers in the clutch. Dirk's gotta be a much better team player than Kobe. I just don't see any rhyme or reason as to why the Mavs would trade Dirk for Kobe.

Perhaps Kobe's a slightly better SG than Dirk is a PF. But the small discrepancy isn't nearly enough to pull the trigger on that trade. Even with Kobe being a slightly better player, the discrepancy isn't enough to offset the fact that an elite PF is simply more valuable than an elite SG.

Plus, I think Dirk's career is still on the rise. I believe that he has the ability to be the third best player in the league. Perhaps that'll be stifled a bit statistically this season, but we'll see more and more of Dirk in the post. It'll just show how versatile and absolutely un-guardable the guy has become.

[sike]

It all basically comes down to opinionated preference in which no victor shall emerge; leaving only ventilated notions[/quote]

would you say that this statement: "Kobe is a more complete player than Dirk" is debatable?


and there is no way you trade Dirk for Kobe...you don't trade a great big for a great small....

Murph, I totally agree about the shot attempts....if Dirk was in an offense that relied on him his individual numbers would be staggering!

[kg_veteran]

Without entering the debate of Dirk vs. Kobe (which I frankly find humorous), such a trade would never happen. Dirk is a 7-footer, he's 25 years old, and he's a guaranteed first or second team All-NBA selection for the next 5-6 years. He's not going to be traded for a 6'6" shooting guard, no matter how good that guard is.

[LRB]

and there is no way you trade Dirk for Kobe...you don't trade a great big for a great small....

The best argument of all. Kobe and Dirk are both great talents. Depending on your perspective you could argue the relative value of either. But in the end, I wouldn't consider losing major size for the posibility of getting nominal talent increase. And it's a helll of a lot easier to find a decent SG than it is to find a decent PF/C in this league. SG has got to be the easiest position to fill on the court.

[kg_veteran]

[quote]
Originally posted by: LRB

SG has got to be the easiest position to fill on the court.

This is the bottom line. It's MUCH easier to find really good 6'6" players than it is to find really good 7 foot players.

Look at the current squad. We have a really nice 6'6" or 6'7" shooting guard in Michael Finley. He's not as good as the "top" shooting guards in the West like Bryant and Allen, but he's pretty darn good. And we have two young athletes behind Fin in Howard and Daniels that will eventually be, at the least, nice roleplayers in this league.

[FilthyFinMavs]

Kobe is one of the best players in the game right now. As of rihgt now, he is the better play between him and Dirk but I just can't stand for trading a 7 footer who can put up 20+ and 10+ boards a night for a shooting guard. It would just be stupid. We have 1 center on this roster and 2 power fowards. You go from 1 center and 2 power fowards to having 1 center and 1 power foward. There are just some trades you don't do. Yea, Kobe is the better player but Dirk is the better player for the Mavs. With Dirk you know what you get in him. No one that is going to disrupt chemistry. The only thing stopping the Lakers from winning it all last season was if chemistry failed. Out of the 2nd round of the playoffs last season.

[Max Power]

Cuban has positive effect on officiating
12:02 PM CST on Thursday, November 20, 2003


The Mavericks drop an overtime road game in Memphis that features more than a few iffy calls and owner Mark Cuban is unhappy with the officiating.

Haven’t we all seen it before? Yes.

And won’t we see it again? Probably.

But to view Cuban’s complaints as the aftereffect of a difficult loss is to shortchange his impact on the NBA and what he wants to accomplish.

The Mavericks routinely track calls made by officials and, just as importantly, those not made. No one else did that until Cuban came into the league Jan. 4, 2000.

Although the NBA has bristled at Cuban’s criticism, many of his views were manifested in a restructuring of the officiating department this summer.

Former officiating czar Ed Rush became the head of training and recruitment for officials. Ronnie Nunn, a respected former ref, oversees the officiating staff while Paul Brazeau is in charge of performance and evaluation.

“Now it’s a question of implementation,” Cuban said. “Is it cosmetic or is it relevant?”

Specifically, Cuban would like to see the league officiating information be shared with individual teams, just like financial information is.

“Are they evaluating so they are as efficient as they can possibly be?” Cuban said. “It’s tough to do that when everything is behind closed doors. Unless you bring it to the forefront, nobody knows.”

What people too often forget is that Cuban’s concern goes far beyond the Mavericks.

His history shows an intolerance for inefficiency and hypocrisy. He wants to improve things, even though most people are willing to settle for the status quo.

As Cuban says regarding his specific NBA criticism, no one has come to him and said he’s wrong.

MAVERICKS/NBA Q&A


Q: How much should we read into the results of Thursday’s game with San Antonio? After all, the Mavericks beat the Spurs in San Antonio.

CARLTON: In the grand scheme of things, a game in mid-November probably has fewe implications for what might happen in six months. One, if not both, teams could be substantially different by the playoffs. True, the Mavericks did beat San Antonio to salvage a three-game road trip, although neither Tim Duncan nor Tony Parker played because of ankle sprains. A win at American Airlines Center would improve the Mavericks to 2-0 against the defending NBA champs. The Mavericks’ problem has been their inconsistency away from home. While 5-0 at the AAC, they’re 2-4 on the road, where their shooting has suffered and their defense has been suspect. As gratifying as another win over the Spurs will be, it will not instantly solve the other problems.

•••

Q: Please tell me that Mark Cuban and Don Nelson haven't completely lost their minds and would actually think about acquiring two miscreants like Rasheed Wallace and Bonzi Wells! Why would they want to destroy both a team and a community of fans by bringing these two losers to the Mavericks?

R. Barry Cook, Austin, Texas

CARLTON: The wild rumor about Rasheed Wallace and Bonzi Wells coming to Dallas for Michael Finley and Antawn Jamison was apparently just that. The genesis of the rumor was some informal talks during the summer that occurred even before the nine-player trade with Golden State. For the moment, the Mavericks seem willing to let the current roster gel. You saw the good, the bad and the ugly of Wallace and Wells on Monday, when the Mavericks beat the Trail Blazers, 105-98. Wallace was almost out of control at one point, drawing a technical, but also scored 31 points. He’s a … unique … talent. Wells added 14 but was benched and later suspended for cursing at coach Maurice Cheeks following a boneheaded turnover. Wallace and Wells are gifted players, and with Wallace’s sizable contract up at the end of this season, there’s a 50-50 chance he winds up someplace other than Portland. As tempting as he may be to the Mavericks, it would probably be best if he took his ‘tude to another team.

And bonus points on the question for the use of the word “miscreants.” Much like “lackeys” it’s a word that doesn’t get used enough anymore.

•••

Q: Mark McLemore was the "spiritual" leader of the Texas Rangers, and the team has not had a winning season since he left for Seattle. Will the Mavericks be affected in a similar way by the loss of Avery Johnson?

Bruce Largent, Waxahachie, Texas

CARLTON: Avery Johnson’s biggest contribution to the Mavericks last season came in the dressing room. He’s viewed as a lock to be a future NBA coach and with good reason. Johnson understood team chemistry, leadership and what it took to win in the playoffs. From that standpoint, he’ll be missed. But the Mavericks aren’t without potential leaders, starting with the Big Three of Michael Finley, Steve Nash and Dirk Nowitzki. Finley is 30 and Nash 29, so they have enough experience to impose their will on the team. Of course, the Rangers thought the same thing and have never able to match what McLemore brought.

•••

Q: Why is it that Antoine Walker starts over Antawn Jamison?

CARLTON: In obtaining Antoine Walker, coach Don Nelson hoped to obtain a forward who can take some of the ball-handling responsibilities from Steve Nash. That’s one of the reasons Nelson likes starting Walker with Nash. He also feels that Antawn Jamison’s game, complete with a unique assortment of shots around the basket, is best suited for providing instant offense as the sixth man. At times, Jamison has been very good. Other times, he’s struggled to get into the flow of the game, and he admits it’s still an adjustment. Could Nelson change his mind? Certainly, he’s still exploring combinations, but he seems to like the current rotation.

•••

Q: Since the Mavericks are in need of big bodies, would they consider picking up a player like Travis Knight or Stanley Roberts?

CARLTON: Well, Travis Knight and (especially) Stanley Roberts would provide big bodies. The trouble is they don’t bring a whole lot of anything else. Remember that Knight was waived by the New York Knicks, of all clubs, and went unclaimed by the other 28 NBA teams. Knight is a decent shooter but would do nothing to help the Mavericks’ rebounding or defense. He’s also making $4.4 million this season, a salary the Mavericks would have to assume. He’s not worth it. Stanley Roberts, once viewed as a poor man’s Bob Lanier, is attempting to get back into the NBA after failing a drug test in 1999. He signed a contract with Toronto in September but has yet to join the Raptors. Roberts is 33 now and was never the best-conditioned center in the league. The Mavericks will look elsewhere.

•••

Q: I know the season just started, but what are the chances of the Mavs landing Kenyon Martin this off-season to help beef up the frontcourt? Would Martin be interested in a homecoming?

CARLTON: Kenyon Martin is an intriguing name given his contract status, his Dallas ties (Bryan Adams High School) and his effectiveness on a team that has reached the finals for two consecutive seasons. The problem with Martin in Dallas is pretty much the same roadblock to Martin remaining in New Jersey – his salary demands. He wants a maximum contract, something that the Nets declined to offer this summer. As good as Martin is, the Mavericks already have max players in Dirk Nowitzki, Michael Finley and Antawn Jamison and face contract talks with Steve Nash. It’s hard to see how another max contract fits into the salary structure. Plus, Martin has been very good as a power forward who sometimes plays center in the Eastern Conference. The Mavericks have enough power forwards on the roster and Martin might not be as effective in the West.

•••

Q: Why do people continually say the Mavericks have no defense? Did they not win more than 60 games last season and reach the Western Conference finals? I don’t think you end up having that kind of success with combining offense with enough defense to win games. Their defense is not the greatest, but they did have that success during the 2002-03 season.

Jared Parcell, Fort Wayne, Ind.

CARLTON: Stereotypes die hard in the NBA. Because the Mavericks are an offensively potent team that struggled with defense a few seasons ago, the notions linger. They currently rank 20th in points allowed, but the Los Angeles Lakers are 26th in the same category. They are 16th in field-goal percentage defense, between the Lakers and Phoenix. The numbers aren’t great but neither are they horrible. There are worse defensive teams than the Mavericks, and those teams don’t have offensive potency Dallas does. To fully shed the rap, the Mavericks probably will have to advance to an NBA Finals and erase any doubts on a big stage.

•••

Q: What Western Conference contender has the least amount of time in which to gel before the lack of success becomes a major problem?

CARLTON: The Mavericks certainly bought time by making two major moves late in the summer. The Los Angeles Lakers were forced to confront personnel problems in training camp because of the Kobe-Shaq rift. At the same time, anyone who believes the problems in Lakerland are solved probably leaves milk and cookies for Santa on Christmas Eve. Tim Duncan is a huge stabilizing influence in San Antonio. Sacramento has a natural excuse with the Chris Webber sidelined until December with a knee injury. Minnesota might be the team most susceptible to a slow start. The revamped lineup brought high expectations as well as combustible personalities. If things don’t improve soon, coach Flip Saunders could find himself in an awkward situation.

•••

Q: Why does the NBA not have farm teams like baseball? They could use them as player development and when a player is injured, they can bring someone in from the farm team.

CARLTON: With only 15 players on a roster and with college, high schools and foreign teams as a built-in feeder system, the NBA really doesn’t need the farm teams that baseball and hockey use. The National Basketball Development League, sponsored by the NBA, includes 12 teams that give unsigned players a chance to hone their skills. Even NBDL alumni from the past seasons are currently playing in the NBA, including Jason Hart of the San Antonio Spurs. If a team needs players, they can dip into the pool available in the NBDL.

•••

Q: How can you call Eduardo Najera “a liability on offense” when he had the highest shooting percentage on the team last year? To me, an offensive liability is a guy who can’t score when he has the chance, not a guy who’s not talented enough to put up 20 points a game. Someone like Eduardo, who plays tough defense and doesn’t need the ball a lot is the perfect fit for a team with lots of scorers. He may not be a good outside shooter, but he can definitely score around the basket. So what if he’s foul-prone? He would only need to play 30 minutes a night on a team with as much talent as the Mavericks have.

CARLTON: Eduardo Najera has many commendable aspects to his game, but offense isn’t one of them. He’s a hard-nosed rebounder and willing worker who is unafraid to draw charging fouls. On a team like the Mavericks, he’s a good fit because he does all the blue-collar work. But with all due respect, he’s not Dirk Nowitzki or Antawn Jamison and never will be. He’s a decent finisher going to the basket, but his effective range is about 15 feet. That’s not a knock, merely a statement of reality. He’s very useful and effective in his role.

•••

Q: Why is it that the Mavs always seem to let their defensive-minded players leave in free agency or trade them away? To illustrate my point, over the past several seasons, we have lost Erick Strickland, Greg Buckner, Raja Bell and Adrian Griffin. Please explain the rationale.

Ryan Kahn, Dallas

CARLTON: Each of the aforementioned players was an excellent defender with holes in his game or other liabilities. Eventually, the Mavericks came to believe that they could find players to perform the roles cheaper and more effectively. Of the four, the most recent case is Raja Bell, who developed into a defensive specialist last season. But he wanted more than the minimum salary this summer as a free agent and the Mavericks had rookie Josh Howard available to fill that role. Bell went to Utah, where he’s averaging 9.6 points off the bench and has quickly become a favorite of coach Jerry Sloan. He’s even making 45 percent of his three-pointers. Would he be doing the same thing in Dallas? And would that be a good thing for Howard’s development?

•••

Q: There was a lot of talk recently about Steve Nash possibly leaving the Mavericks for Toronto this summer. How much should we Mavs fans be worried about losing our point guard?

CARLTON: If the Mavericks want to keep Steve Nash -- and by all accounts they do -- then he’ll stay in Dallas. It was a natural but overblown story to focus on Nash’s future, since he can opt out of his contract after this season. But it’s really a non-story as owner Mark Cuban explained to The Toronto Sun during the Mavericks’ visit north of the border.

“(All the speculation about the Raptors pursuing Nash) doesn’t bother me,” Cuban said. “If (Raptors fans) are interested and excited about it, that’s a good thing. I mean, there are a lot of good reasons to be interested in Steve Nash. He’s a great guy, a great player. But all I can basically say is, dream on. Plus, if you look at the situation, the Raptors are not going to have salary-cap room, so the most they could offer is the mid-level exception. So, it’s really not even an issue.”

Although Nash is a native Canadian, he’s from British Columbia, more than half a continent away from Ontario. And he seems to have adjusted well to Dallas.