Mark Cuban "We will not trade for AI period:. - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Drbio · 12-09-2006, 11:30 PM

Per David Moore.

TheBlueVan · 12-09-2006, 11:34 PM

AI will stay in the East and rot

sike · 12-09-2006, 11:41 PM

I'm a little sad....but in the long run it might be the best thing for the Mavs...that and keeping AJ2 on the bench.

ddh33 · 12-09-2006, 11:46 PM

Whether you agree with or not, surely everyone can understand it.

I don't blame Dallas for not being willing to pay the price.

sike · 12-09-2006, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ddh33

Whether you agree with or not, surely everyone can understand it.

I don't blame Dallas for not being willing to pay the price.

which was?

TheBlueVan · 12-09-2006, 11:49 PM

future + financial flexibility = old ballhog

edit: thats the price

jleefilled · 12-09-2006, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

which was?

From what I gather, Devin Harris.

ddh33 · 12-09-2006, 11:55 PM

In trading for Allen Iverson you are likely giving up a lot of financial flexibility. You are also likely giving up two to three key players from your team. At least one of those players, if not more, are young players you are hoping will continue to help your team improve. You jeapordize your chemistry. You may also be losing your point guard, which is argubaly the hardest position to fill.

Sure, you are getting back a great player (and he really is great), but it might be a terrible fit.

In the end, I'm just not sure the risk is worth the reward. That's why i don't blame Dallas for not making a move. If they were clearly a second-tier team, I would encourage the deal. But the Mavs are clearly one of the best in the league. I would hate to jeapordize all of that...

Simon2 · 12-10-2006, 12:00 AM

We chose Devin Harris over Allen Iverson? This has got to be a mistake. Devin Harris will never be as good as Iverson. Not in this world or any other. Last year, the guy averaged 33 pts and almost 8 assists. On a crappy Philly team.

Flacolaco · 12-10-2006, 12:02 AM

am I the only one who likes this?

sike · 12-10-2006, 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

am I the only one who likes this?

I like love this team as is...its the coaching I'm not crazy about...

ddh33 · 12-10-2006, 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

am I the only one who likes this?

No, you aren't the only one who likes this. I am more than fine with this decision. It's the same conclusion I came to.

As far as comparing Devin Harris to Allen Iverson, I don't think that's fair. Allen Iverson is a star. He's a legit superstar, in fact. Devin Harris will likely never be Allen Iverson because guys like Allen Iverson just don't come along very often. But it's not just about Player A being better or worse than Player B. There are chemistry concerns, concerns about how well a guy is going to fit, and all kinds of other things that go into the decision. At the end of all of the conversation, I can understand why the Mavs would conclude that they are better off as they are...

chumdawg · 12-10-2006, 12:10 AM

I hope he's just negotating, or Moore got it wrong.

If it's the stance, Cuban is an effing moran. It's an upgrade business. Why would you rule it out of hand?

Effing moran.

sike · 12-10-2006, 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I hope he's just negotating, or Moore got it wrong.

If it's the stance, Cuban is an effing moran. It's an upgrade business. Why would you rule it out of hand?

Effing moran.

chemistry has to be taken into account and AJ's opinion as well....AI does not seem like an AJ guy to me...

chumdawg · 12-10-2006, 12:20 AM

I'm glad you brought that up, because it raises two points I have been considering tonight:

1) AJ's liking it or not liking it - Who gives a fat rat's ass? AJ is the coach. He is paid to coach the team. He is not the GM. Donnie is the GM. AJ will coach the guys Donnie gives him to coach. Period.

2) Chemistry - Has there ever been any greater evidence that chemistry is, in some situations, extremely overrated than the Mavericks of the last three or so years? They have basically changed out everybody--and I mean everybody, from the players to the coach to the GM--over the last several years, and they haven't lost much of a step. Because Dirk is the constant.

This team doesn't get by on chemistry, or on Avery freakin' Johnson. It gets by on Dirk.

Give the man the complement he needs!!

sike · 12-10-2006, 12:23 AM

I like your passion, and agree about Dirk being the key... but chemistry is important...I think the Walker/Jamison fiasco was recent evidence of that....just thinking of all those ill fitting parts brings back headaches...

and AJ's opinion does matter...not that I agree with it, but the coach needs to like his team...needs to feel that it is "his" team....we all know what can happen when a coach loses connection with the team...ala Nellie....

shaw-xx · 12-10-2006, 12:27 AM

Maybe Cubes just used Devin as a reason to refuse, maybe he just didn't think AI was the man. For me, it's not about who you trade, it's about who you trade for. I'm happy with that. At least Dallas won't need another ball.

chumdawg · 12-10-2006, 12:27 AM

If you can't coach extraordinary talent (and I guess a case could be made that AJ hasn't proven a lot in this regard, vis a vis Dirk), then are you really that good a coach in this league?

You know, I have heard for years and years that Nellie was all about Nellie, as a coach. Truth is, AJ may be just the same. It's human nature, isn't it? There aren't a lot of guys like Tom Kelly, who will sit placidly in the dugout while the guys who earned it get all the glory.

I should hope that AJ would relish the opportunity to coach a talent such as AI. If he shies from it, he is insecure...and it is as simple as that.

sike · 12-10-2006, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

If you can't coach extraordinary talent (and I guess a case could be made that AJ hasn't proven a lot in this regard, vis a vis Dirk), then are you really that good a coach in this league?

you won't get an argument outta me on this one...I think AJ still has miles to go before he lives up to the hype he has received...as we have all mentioned, I do not like how he seems to allow Dirk to get ignored til the fourth...

Quote:

You know, I have heard for years and years that Nellie was all about Nellie, as a coach. Truth is, AJ may be just the same. It's human nature, isn't it? There aren't a lot of guys like Tom Kelly, who will sit placidly in the dugout while the guys who earned it get all the glory.

I should hope that AJ would relish the opportunity to coach a talent such as AI. If he shies from it, he is insecure...and it is as simple as that.

I agree its human nature to want the guys you want...its also reality...and Donnie and Cuban would be foolish to make such a huge movie if AJ was against it...or they'd need to be ready to find a new coach.

chumdawg · 12-10-2006, 12:34 AM

Nobody checked with Nellie when they didn't match on Nash, and I should hope that nobody is checking with AJ on no-brainer talent-upgrade trades. If AJ can't coach a more talented team than he has now, then AJ has a problem.

FINtastic · 12-10-2006, 12:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

2) Chemistry - Has there ever been any greater evidence that chemistry is, in some situations, extremely overrated than the Mavericks of the last three or so years? They have basically changed out everybody--and I mean everybody, from the players to the coach to the GM--over the last several years, and they haven't lost much of a step. Because Dirk is the constant.

What do you think caused the Mavericks to drastically underachieve in 2003-04? It surely wasn't talent because that team had talent (at least offensively) in spades. And I know that you certainly don't think the point guard and coach were at fault.

Dirk is the constant because we haven't surrounded him with with any players as of late that undermine his star status. For evidence of what happens when we do that, look no further that that pesky 03-04 season that he spent with Antoine Walker.

Chemistry can hardly ever be overrated in my opinion.

FINtastic · 12-10-2006, 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

If you can't coach extraordinary talent (and I guess a case could be made that AJ hasn't proven a lot in this regard, vis a vis Dirk), then are you really that good a coach in this league?

You know, I have heard for years and years that Nellie was all about Nellie, as a coach. Truth is, AJ may be just the same. It's human nature, isn't it? There aren't a lot of guys like Tom Kelly, who will sit placidly in the dugout while the guys who earned it get all the glory.

I should hope that AJ would relish the opportunity to coach a talent such as AI. If he shies from it, he is insecure...and it is as simple as that.

There are a lot of coaches who can't seem to coach the talent in this league. Look to the success of our most recent "Dream Teams" if you need any evidence of that. Are you saying that there aren't any good coaches out there? Perhaps certain players might just be uncoachable and should just be avoided unless in a perfect situation.

sike · 12-10-2006, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Nobody checked with Nellie when they didn't match on Nash, and I should hope that nobody is checking with AJ on no-brainer talent-upgrade trades. If AJ can't coach a more talented team than he has now, then AJ has a problem.

except there's this old saying about "two wrongs...."

chumdawg · 12-10-2006, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FINtastic

What do you think caused the Mavericks to drastically underachieve in 2003-04? It surely wasn't talent because that team had talent (at least offensively) in spades. And I know that you certainly don't think the point guard and coach were at fault.

Dirk is the constant because we haven't surrounded with with any players as of late that undermine his star status. For evidence of what happens when we do that, look no further that that pesky 03-04 season that he spent with Antoine Walker.

Chemistry can hardly ever be overrated in my opinion.

It was on-court stuff, FIN. It was X's and O's. Those players didn't mesh...on the court. Off-court, that team actually had pretty good chemistry. The "Big Three" welcomed Walker and Jamison. They actually had some big wins along the way, including the first win against the Lakers since Bush 41 and a game in Seattle in which Walker hit a baseline turnaround gamewinner and was mobbed by his teammates. That team got along and never had any problems with personalities.

And still and all, that team was not as bad as some would make it out. I believe they actually outscored the Kings in that series. The bounces just didn't fall their way at the buzzers. It was a highly contested series, as you would expect a 4-5 series to be.

That team had decent chemistry. No Mavs team in recent memory has had bad chemistry. If they were ever going to have bad chemistry, it was going to be when Nash was spurned by the ownership. But they didn't. They carried on.

Don't worry about chemistry, as far as Dirk's Mavs go.

FINtastic · 12-10-2006, 12:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Nobody checked with Nellie when they didn't match on Nash, and I should hope that nobody is checking with AJ on no-brainer talent-upgrade trades. If AJ can't coach a more talented team than he has now, then AJ has a problem.

Phil Jackson couldn't win a title with FOUR hall of famers on his team. Sometimes there is more to it than just talent.

Dirkadirkastan · 12-10-2006, 12:40 AM

It's ok, Fin. Remember, Chum thinks this team as it is will win only 45 games this year, so from his standpoint we don't really have much to lose.

rmacomic · 12-10-2006, 12:40 AM

So if we don't want him, and the Twolves don't want him.
Who Does? I figure alot of teams will pass on him because of his rep and the price tag.
My prediction. This trade will ruin two teams. Philly and whoever ends up with AI.

chumdawg · 12-10-2006, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FINtastic

There are a lot of coaches who can't seem to coach the talent in this league. Look to the success of our most recent "Dream Teams" if you need any evidence of that. Are you saying that there aren't any good coaches out there? Perhaps certain players might just be uncoachable and should just be avoided unless in a perfect situation.

Yes, I'm certain there are players who are uncoachable. But I don't think Iverson is one. Maybe we should ask John Thompson?

sike · 12-10-2006, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Yes, I'm certain there are players who are uncoachable. But I don't think Iverson is one. Maybe we should ask John Thompson?

you mean for two years?...thats a bit and you know it

Stranger · 12-10-2006, 12:42 AM

This sucks. I really hope he doesn't end up with a west rival.

chumdawg · 12-10-2006, 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FINtastic

Phil Jackson couldn't win a title with FOUR hall of famers on his team. Sometimes there is more to it than just talent.

You mean with Malone and Payton as shadows of their former selves, yet still contributing enough to wreak their way through the Western Conference and on to the NBA Finals?

Let's not make them out like a lottery team. Let's try to stay realistic.

FINtastic · 12-10-2006, 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

It was on-court stuff, FIN. It was X's and O's. Those players didn't mesh...on the court. Off-court, that team actually had pretty good chemistry. The "Big Three" welcomed Walker and Jamison. They actually had some big wins along the way, including the first win against the Lakers since Bush 41 and a game in Seattle in which Walker hit a baseline turnaround gamewinner and was mobbed by his teammates. That team got along and never had any problems with personalities.

And still and all, that team was not as bad as some would make it out. I believe they actually outscored the Kings in that series. The bounces just didn't fall their way at the buzzers. It was a highly contested series, as you would expect a 4-5 series to be.

That team had decent chemistry. No Mavs team in recent memory has had bad chemistry. If they were ever going to have bad chemistry, it was going to be when Nash was spurned by the ownership. But they didn't. They carried on.

Don't worry about chemistry, as far as Dirk's Mavs go.

I'm not arguing about off-court chemistry. Jamison is probably on of the nicest guys this franchise has seen, and I don't think Walker is an overly bad guy in general. I'm arguing about on-court chemistry here. Some players just can't make their games match with what a team is trying to accomplish. That's every bit as important to the "team chemistry" as whether the guy holds the door open for his teammates.

And if that stuff can make us worse when we had Jamison and Walker under such a fine coach such as Nellie, why can't it happen when we add Iverson?

chumdawg · 12-10-2006, 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sike

you mean for two years?...thats a bit and you know it

It's not a bit. What is the deal around here? I am not getting it.

Big Shot Rob · 12-10-2006, 12:45 AM

I think AI with Dirk would have assured the Mavs an NBA ring.

sike · 12-10-2006, 12:45 AM

the chemistry that messed up the Jamison/Walker mavs WAS dirk related...though they might have got along in the room....they took too much from Dirk on the floor. That is a basketball chemistry problem.

FIN beat me to the same point! good one FIN...and dang you

sike · 12-10-2006, 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Shot Rob

I think AI with Dirk would have assured the Mavs an NBA ring.

if the front office feels this they are fools for not doing anything they can to get the deal done.

chumdawg · 12-10-2006, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FINtastic

I'm not arguing about off-court chemistry. Jamison is probably on of the nicest guys this franchise has seen, and I don't think Walker is an overly bad guy in general. I'm arguing about on-court chemistry here. Some players just can't make their games match with what a team is trying to accomplish. That's every bit as important to the "team chemistry" as whether the guy holds the door open for his teammates.

And if that stuff can make us worse when we had Jamison and Walker under such a fine coach such as Nellie, why can't it happen when we add Iverson?

Okay, good. That's a very valid argument.

But I, for one, tend to think that a dynamic ballhandler and secondary scorer is EXACTLY what Dirk needs in terms of on-court chemistry. If you disagree with this, then we can happily agree to disagree.

I just keep thinking back to the NBA Finals, when Dirk seems emasculated in that context.

sike · 12-10-2006, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

ask John Thompson?

I think a guy might be a little different when he's 19 as compared to a full grown man.

that was my point.

FINtastic · 12-10-2006, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

You mean with Malone and Payton as shadows of their former selves, yet still contributing enough to wreak their way through the Western Conference and on to the NBA Finals?

Let's not make them out like a lottery team. Let's try to stay realistic.

Oh, I know they weren't anywhere what they once were, but let's not kid ourselves here. These were guys who had played their fair share of ball, and knew how to play the game. Also, Payton's addition to the Heat didn't seem too bad last year, did it?

And hey, I don't think you were all that pleased with being runner-up last year so why would you be pleased with it once we add Iverson?

sike · 12-10-2006, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

But I, for one, tend to think that a dynamic ballhandler and secondary scorer is EXACTLY what Dirk needs in terms of on-court chemistry. If you disagree with this, then we can happily agree to disagree.

I just keep thinking back to the NBA Finals, when Dirk seems emasculated in that context.

you think AI would be a "secondary" anything? Don't get me wrong....I am not the guy against the rumor...just wanting us to think it through.

and yes....the reason we lost the finals was because the Heat based their entire defensive game around stopping Dirk and Daring the rest of the team to do anything....which they did not.