Screw Next Year's Free Agent Class... Bring Back Tyson. Win Now!

[G-Man]

One thing I have learned after 28 years as a Mavs Fan. The best laid plans always screw up. Whenever the Mavs have planned and schemed to bring in an All-Star caliber player, we either never get him, or if we do, he doesn't work out.

Some of the worst moments in Mavs history came when we let free agents walk. I'm talking Sam Perkins and Steve Nash. (Although to be fair, I was always ok with letting Nash go.) The ones we got, Dampier, Antoine Walker, for example, didn't work so well either.

What we have now is something that does work. The current team is competitive in today's NBA. The West they compete in doesn't look to be much better this year than it was last season. We dismantled the Lakers, so that leaves OKC, Memphis and Portland. With Chandler, we have a good chance to beat any of them. Without him we have no chance.

I just don't see how you drop the bird in the hand, a championship quality team, in hopes that D Will or Howard will pass up New York or LA and come to Big D. It ain't gonna happen. Even if it does, its with an older Dirk. I like my chances better with today's Dirk, and today's Kidd, mainly because we have them now, and, with Chandler, we know they can win.

I'm tired of watching the Mavs begging free agents to come here, then getting stiffed by another stiff. Alonzo Mourining comes to mind here. I don't want to be doing it again next year, thinking we should have kept the old team together. I say we pay Chandler. Nobody's gonna give him 20 million, but we could match 15. Pay JJ, and maybe even Stevenson. If we stink in 3 years, great. Lets stink real bad and get a great draft pick. The Mavs have a better chance of getting Dirk's replacement through the draft than from free agency anyway.

And what about Dirk? Look at the excuses for centers he's had by his side all those years... Diop, and Dampier, and Laettner, Bradley, Najara and LaFrentz. Finally, he gets a center who compliments his game, and he only gets him for one year? That's a disgrace. If I was Dirk I'd be pissed if they let Chandler walk.

Championship teams are very hard to build. It took the Mavs 30 years to catch lightning in a bottle. But right now, we have it. Shouldn't we give it a chance to shock the world again?

[dirt_dobber]

well said

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by G-Man

Championship teams are very hard to build. It took the Mavs 30 years to catch lightning in a bottle. But right now, we have it. Shouldn't we give it a chance to shock the world again?

I think you need to reexamine the term, "lightening in a bottle" - it's a fleeting thing, a strong reason to expect different results with the next go around... Honestly, I think this team played out of their minds and I don't expect some of them (Barea, Matrix, Terry, Stevenson) to EVER sustain that level of play for an entire playoff run again.

Not that you have to bring back the whole team to justify re-signing Chandler, but giving him a near-max contract doesn't necessarily guarantee that we ever sniff the Finals again. Hell, I think we'd get there a lot faster if we aimed for Deron or Howard in 2012 - Dirk would lose one year of his prime for a chance to compete for a title EVERY season for the rest of his career (and if the mounting injuries in the post-lockout NFL are any indication of how the NBA will fare without conditioning or a full training camp, then this might be a lost season for an older team like the Mavs anyway...)

[G-Man]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Honestly, I think this team played out of their minds and I don't expect some of them (Barea, Matrix, Terry, Stevenson) to EVER sustain that level of play for an entire playoff run again.

... Hell, I think we'd get there a lot faster if we aimed for Deron or Howard in 2012 -

While I have to agree with both of these statements, there is also the possibilty that with more time together, and the confidence that comes from winning, the current squad could get better. That's the formula Pop uses in SA.

As for aiming for Howard or Deron, I'd love to have them. But I'll bet dollars to donuts that one, if not both of them ends up in LA. We are in a strike shortened season, with many teams making moves to prepare for next years free agency. If we can start with a strong nucleus, we have a good chance to repeat. We'd have Dirk and Chandler together for as long as Dirk lasts. I just like the odds of that happening much more than hanging around hoping the plum falls in our laps. Its never happened before, and I just don't like putting all of our eggs in that basket.

[dude1394]

Well said goes double for me. Overthinking it comes to mind.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by G-Man

While I have to agree with both of these statements, there is also the possibilty that with more time together, and the confidence that comes from winning, the current squad could get better. That's the formula Pop uses in SA.

As for aiming for Howard or Deron, I'd love to have them. But I'll bet dollars to donuts that one, if not both of them ends up in LA. We are in a strike shortened season, with many teams making moves to prepare for next years free agency. If we can start with a strong nucleus, we have a good chance to repeat. We'd have Dirk and Chandler together for as long as Dirk lasts. I just like the odds of that happening much more than hanging around hoping the plum falls in our laps. Its never happened before, and I just don't like putting all of our eggs in that basket.

So we'd have Dirk, Tyson, a bunch of mid-rate swingmen and no cap space, just to keep a 9/9 center who looks good with THIS team, but if you don't bring back THIS team (like if Barea, Butler and Stevenson walk), then how much value does Chandler retain? What about in 2 years when Kidd's tank is completely empty and guys like Terry and Matrix can't get it done anymore (for any price) - how smart does it look to put all your eggs in the Tyson Chandler basket? Not to mention that if he doesn't live up to that $15m/year contract (very likely, considering he hasn't done anything to warrant THAT much money anyway), then it's Erick Dampier 2.0... Let that sink in.

It's not just about the 2012 FA class - it's also about 2013, 2014 and 2015. That's what you're risking by re-signing Chandler to a near-max contract under the new CBA.

[Rick41]

So if Deron Williams decides to stay in Brooklyn and Dwight ends up going to LA, then what?

[markus1234]

Originally Posted by G-Man

Championship teams are very hard to build. It took the Mavs 30 years to catch lightning in a bottle. But right now, we have it.

No, we do not have a championship team anymore. (look at Detroit, look at Boston , look at MIA 2007)

Kidd, Jet, Marion are one year older.

Dirk will not play like MJ in the next playoffs (which he actually did this year).

We have NO CAHNCE (OK maybe 10%) to repeat with this team. And that's why it makes no sense to keep Chandler (and pay him franchise player money).

What makes sense is, trying to build an other championship caliber team...next season.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Rick41

So if Deron Williams decides to stay in Brooklyn and Dwight ends up going to LA, then what?

What if Tyson Chandler blows out his knee in the first game of the season?

What if we wanted to sign John Wall (or one of the other intriguing 2013 FA's), but couldn't because we're STILL dedicated to paying Tyson Chandler the same kind of money that Dwight Howard is making?

We can play "what if" all day (I remember this game fondly when everyone was freaking out about how we HAD to sign Al Jefferson last season, even though it didn't make a lick of sense financially or otherwise...)

[jthig32]

So in your first post, you mentioned that the West was not any better, and that we dismantled the Lakers.

Then in your second post you "bet dollars to donuts" that at least one superstar, and maybe two, would end up in LA before next season starts.

Which is it? Because it makes a big difference.

What if you give Tyson a 5 year, 75Mil deal, and then LA and NYK both form super teams, and Miami keeps getting better by bringing in low dollar veterans? And we're stuck re-signing Jet and Kidd and trying like hell to stay competitive for a few more years. And in two years, suddenly Cuban is paying a luxury tax penalty three times higher than it was in years past.

I'm sorry, it's just not as simple as "keep the championship team together". It's just not.

[G-Man]

Originally Posted by Underdog

So we'd have Dirk, Tyson, a bunch of mid-rate swingmen and no cap space, just to keep a 9/9 center who looks good with THIS team, but if you don't bring back THIS team (like if Barea, Butler and Stevenson walk), then how much value does Chandler retain? What about in 2 years when Kidd's tank is completely empty and guys like Terry and Matrix can't get it done anymore (for any price) - how smart does it look to put all your eggs in the Tyson Chandler basket? Not to mention that if he doesn't live up to that $15m/year contract (very likely, considering he hasn't done anything to warrant THAT much money anyway), then it's Erick Dampier 2.0... Let that sink in.

It's not just about the 2012 FA class - it's also about 2013, 2014 and 2015. That's what you're risking by re-signing Chandler to a near-max contract under the new CBA.

First off, if Tyson was Damp, we'd have been out in the 1st round, so we wouldn't be having this discussion.

If we keep Tyson, next year we can trade Haywood, and amnesty Marion. Kidd and Terry are both off the books, so we'd have a bad year and a good draft pick, and cap space. Marion and Haywood today make equal to what we're talking about paying Tyson. He's worth 10 million, and we'd be overpaying by 5. thats not a bad way to waste 5 million. If it gets us back to the finals, its a great investment.

The alternative without Tyson is a return to mediocrity right now. If we don't get one of the key free agents, we'd be mediocre next year as well, but with cap space to add some more slightly above average players. We'd be just good enough to get bounced early in the playoffs while we waste all of Dirk's remaining career.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by G-Man

First off, if Tyson was Damp, we'd have been out in the 1st round, so we wouldn't be having this discussion.

If we keep Tyson, next year we can trade Haywood, and amnesty Marion. Kidd and Terry are both off the books, so we'd have a bad year and a good draft pick, and cap space. Marion and Haywood today make equal to what we're talking about paying Tyson. He's worth 10 million, and we'd be overpaying by 5. thats not a bad way to waste 5 million. If it gets us back to the finals, its a great investment.

The alternative without Tyson is a return to mediocrity right now. If we don't get one of the key free agents, we'd be mediocre next year as well, but with cap space to add some more slightly above average players. We'd be just good enough to get bounced early in the playoffs while we waste all of Dirk's remaining career.

So you're advocating signing Tyson and making a run this season, and THEN being bad next season in order to get a pick. But Tyson is still locked in as your second highest paid player for five total years.

Makes no sense.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by G-Man

First off, if Tyson was Damp, we'd have been out in the 1st round, so we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I meant financially, I should have clarified.

Don't forget that Damp's contract was a HUGE reason why we struck-out on so many FA's for so long - we were dependent on another team being interested in a sign-and-trade instead of having the cap space to sign guys outright (like we would with Deron or Dwight).

If we keep Tyson, next year we can trade Haywood, and amnesty Marion. Kidd and Terry are both off the books, so we'd have a bad year and a good draft pick, and cap space. Marion and Haywood today make equal to what we're talking about paying Tyson. He's worth 10 million, and we'd be overpaying by 5. thats not a bad way to waste 5 million. If it gets us back to the finals, its a great investment.

Marion/Haywood > Chandler (unless Chandler can play 2 positions at once?)

The alternative without Tyson is a return to mediocrity right now. If we don't get one of the key free agents, we'd be mediocre next year as well, but with cap space to add some more slightly above average players. We'd be just good enough to get bounced early in the playoffs while we waste all of Dirk's remaining career.

I think you're overrating Tyson Chandler's role in our championship run - if Barea or Stevenson walk, then we're just as likely return to mediocrity... It took ALL of those guys to win a ring (which is probably more of a testament to Rick Carlisle's abilities as a coach than anything else...)

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Underdog

What if Tyson Chandler blows out his knee in the first game of the season?

What if we wanted to sign John Wall (or one of the other intriguing 2013 FA's), but couldn't because we're STILL dedicated to paying Tyson Chandler the same kind of money that Dwight Howard is making?

We can play "what if" all day (I remember this game fondly when everyone was freaking out about how we HAD to sign Al Jefferson last season, even though it didn't make a lick of sense financially or otherwise...)

Not resigning chandler in the hopes that something better will come along is the biggest what if in this entire scenario.

Saying that we have no chance to compete with this team also makes absolutely no sense to me. We just did, therefore we can. Not to mention Haywood healthy, dojo, Rudy, brewer and even roddy should be better.

I still claim over thinking it.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by jthig32

So in your first post, you mentioned that the West was not any better, and that we dismantled the Lakers.

Then in your second post you "bet dollars to donuts" that at least one superstar, and maybe two, would end up in LA before next season starts.

Which is it? Because it makes a big difference.

What if you give Tyson a 5 year, 75Mil deal, and then LA and NYK both form super teams, and Miami keeps getting better by bringing in low dollar veterans? And we're stuck re-signing Jet and Kidd and trying like hell to stay competitive for a few more years. And in two years, suddenly Cuban is paying a luxury tax penalty three times higher than it was in years past.

I'm sorry, it's just not as simple as "keep the championship team together". It's just not.

If supermteams are created then cubes may have to blow it up anyway. Because he's not building one here.

[jthig32]

The bottom line for me is that Tyson Chandler is not good enough to be the second best player on a typical title contending team. We caught a bit of lightning last season because we had a five man unit that played so well together that we didn't need that true second start. That's highly unlikely to continue given the ages of all of the players involved (and the injury history of Tyson).

I'm just not willing to sign myself over to five years of Tyson being our second highest paid player for a run at it this season. We need a second star.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by G-Man

First off, if Tyson was Damp, we'd have been out in the 1st round, so we wouldn't be having this discussion.

If we keep Tyson, next year we can trade Haywood, and amnesty Marion. Kidd and Terry are both off the books, so we'd have a bad year and a good draft pick, and cap space. Marion and Haywood today make equal to what we're talking about paying Tyson. He's worth 10 million, and we'd be overpaying by 5. thats not a bad way to waste 5 million. If it gets us back to the finals, its a great investment.

The alternative without Tyson is a return to mediocrity right now. If we don't get one of the key free agents, we'd be mediocre next year as well, but with cap space to add some more slightly above average players. We'd be just good enough to get bounced early in the playoffs while we waste all of Dirk's remaining career.

Preach on brotha'

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by dude1394

If supermteams are created then cubes may have to blow it up anyway. Because he's not building one here.

Says you. Who's to say that max cap room and the ability to play next to Dirk won't bring in a free agent?

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by jthig32

The bottom line for me is that Tyson Chandler is not good enough to be the second best player on a typical title contending team. We caught a bit of lightning last season because we had a five man unit that played so well together that we didn't need that true second start. That's highly unlikely to continue given the ages of all of the players involved (and the injury history of Tyson).

I'm just not willing to sign myself over to five years of Tyson being our second highest paid player for a run at it this season. We need a second star.

We've been looking for one for over a decade, how has it worked out?

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by Underdog

(which is probably more of a testament to Rick Carlisle's abilities as a coach than anything else...)

Bingo.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by jthig32

Says you. Who's to say that max cap room and the ability to play next to Dirk won't bring in a free agent?

Says me... We had max damp chip last year didn't we? Or are you saying we need to be able to offer a max offer under the cap? I don't see how not signing Tyson gets us that's...need to check the math.


IMO...if you want to build a super team you strip it to nothing and get enough to have two offers,then you can talk it seems.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Or are you saying we need to be able to offer a max offer under the cap?

Yes

IMO...if you want to build a super team you strip it to nothing and get enough to have two offers,then you can talk it seems.

Or strip it to a top 5 player in the NBA and pay people to come play with him.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Not resigning chandler in the hopes that something better will come along is the biggest what if in this entire scenario.

Saying that we have no chance to compete with this team also makes absolutely no sense to me. We just did, therefore we can. Not to mention Haywood healthy, dojo, Rudy, brewer and even roddy should be better.

I still claim over thinking it.

I claim you're under-thinking it....

You're basically saying: Dirk + Chandler = rings

If that's not true, then the guy isn't worth $15m/year...

[G-Man]

Originally Posted by jthig32

S
What if you give Tyson a 5 year, 75Mil deal, and then LA and NYK both form super teams, and Miami keeps getting better by bringing in low dollar veterans? And we're stuck re-signing Jet and Kidd and trying like hell to stay competitive for a few more years.

Nope. You don't keep Kidd and Jet. The chances of beating LA and NY super teams is pretty much nil anyway. You agree to go down so you can come back up. Try to win this year. If that fails, dump Kidd, Jet stays for the minimum or dump him too. Dump Marion by trading his expiring and amnesty Haywood. That leaves you with only Dirk and Tyson making big bucks and you are way under the cap in just 2 years. And bad enough to get a decent pick.

2 years from now, NY will have CP, Amare and Melo. Miami will be better. So will Chicago and OKC. LA will probably have D Will, Kobe and Bynum. We will have 2 year older Dirk and Jet and an Ancient Kidd. Except for Kobe, all those other teams have young talent. This year is the last chance for an old team to win. I say go for it now, then get young and start over.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

We've been looking for one for over a decade, how has it worked out?

You mean when we were slogging around Erick Dampier's contract?

Sure, let's set Chandler up to be the next overpaid Mavs center that keeps us from landing any big-name free agents for the rest of Dirk's prime...

[dude1394]

No I'm saying dirk plus crappy center equals first round exits. There are no guarantees, not signing Tyson doesn't get you one, signing him doesn't either. Right now we have the best basketball team on the planet. Tyson is a huge ( possibly the biggest outside of dirk ) difference in this team versus last.

But hey, he's not even as god as Haywood and shawn I'm hearing.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Underdog

You mean when we were slogging around Erick Dampier's contract?

Sure, let's set Chandler up to be the next overpaid Mavs center that keeps us from landing any big-name free agents for the rest of Dirk's prime...

I would be ashamed comparing chandler to damp.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

No I'm saying dirk plus crappy center equals first round exits. There are no guarantees, not signing Tyson doesn't get you one, signing him doesn't either. Right now we have the best basketball team on the planet. Tyson is a huge ( possibly the biggest outside of dirk ) difference in this team versus last.

But hey, he's not even as god as Haywood and shawn I'm hearing.

Haywood is not a "crappy" center and Shawn Marion was just as vital as Tyson Chandler in our playoff run.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Underdog

You mean when we were slogging around Erick Dampier's contract?

Sure, let's set Chandler up to be the next overpaid Mavs center that keeps us from landing any big-name free agents for the rest of Dirk's prime...

So you are saying that dampers contract kept us from getting who?

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by G-Man

Nope. You don't keep Kidd and Jet. The chances of beating LA and NY super teams is pretty much nil anyway. You agree to go down so you can come back up. Try to win this year. If that fails, dump Kidd, Jet stays for the minimum or dump him too. Dump Marion by trading his expiring and amnesty Haywood. That leaves you with only Dirk and Tyson making big bucks and you are way under the cap in just 2 years. And bad enough to get a decent pick.

Way under the cap??? Dirk and Tyson would be making almost 37Million between the two of them. That leaves about 20 million to fill out the rest of the roster.

You are basically saying that you think the Mavs can re-build another contender with Tyson as their second best player and Dirk two years older.

If you want to "go down so you can come back up", you can't do with Tyson making 15Mil plus 7.5% raises every year. It just won't work.

If you want to say you're willing to trade five years to contend this year, fine, just say it. But don't act like you can have your cake and eat it to. If we re-sign Tyson to a 15Mil a year five year deal, we contend as long as this core stays together. There is no rebuilding another contender.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Haywood is not a "crappy" center and Shawn Marion was just as vital as Tyson Chandler in our playoff run.

If you think so then we will never agree. Shawn was good, Haywood isn't crappy, but none of them DID change the culture of this team.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

I would be ashamed comparing chandler to damp.

He would be 100% the same, contract-wise (it would be even more restrictive than Damp's under the new CBA).

But go ahead and keep missing my point - you're obviously not going to be swayed by concept of fiscal responsibility (you know, the kind that allowed us to stockpile our bench and win a ring...)

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by dude1394

No I'm saying dirk plus crappy center equals first round exits. There are no guarantees, not signing Tyson doesn't get you one, signing him doesn't either. Right now we have the best basketball team on the planet. Tyson is a huge ( possibly the biggest outside of dirk ) difference in this team versus last.

But hey, he's not even as god as Haywood and shawn I'm hearing.

You're overrating Tyson here. Tyson was no more important than Marion or Kidd.

Tyson is NOT some game changing superstar.

[jthig32]

Underdog is making a fantastic point here. What did everyone hate about Damp? It was his contract. You can cry all you want about comparing Tyson to Damp, but Damp in his prime was not THAT far below what Tyson gave us last year. There's a clear gap there, but let's not act like Damp was a sub-average player and Tyson is a superstar. That's just not the case.

So what was the problem with Damp, as it relates to Tyson and our current situation? Well, it was the contract. It was the fact that he was paid like the second or third best player on a team. And he wasn't. Luckily Cubes spent tons of money,and kept finding ways to spend to bring players to the team. So Damp's contract was not crippling for us as it would have been for other franchises.

But if you take a look back at the Mav contracts after Damp, you'll notice something. At no point after Damp did the Mavs pay someone at an all star level that wasn't that level of performer. They created a salary pecking order, and they followed it.
Now, today, Cuban is no longer going to spend like cray. The days of paying luxury tax for 5, 6 or 7 straight year are over. The next big contract you sign for your team is going to MEAN something. It's going to establish your salary structure for the rest of that contract.

You can NOT pay a borderline all star 15Mil+ a season for five years. I'm sorry you just can't.

[jthig32]

One more point: I feel like people are buying into the narrative at this point. Dude even mentioned that Tyson Chandler changed the culture. And certainly heard plenty of people say that. Even players. But...did he? What did we all expect from this team heading into the playoffs?

What if we'd lost Game 5 and 6 to Portland? Then who would be screaming to keep Tyson for five years?

Yes, the obvious counter point is that they didn't lose those games. And yes, they showed more mental fortitude in last year's playoffs than ever. But overall, we made the same run we made in 2006, except this time we finished it. What was the difference? Was it really all Tyson? Does anyone actually believe that?

The reality is that last year's roster was built around a veteran core that is not getting better. The best five players on this team are unquestionably on the downturn (yes even Dirk, check out his rebounding numbers). Combine the age of the roster with the new CBA system and everything gets very, very complicated.

I realize that it feels very dirty to break up a championship team, but there's a very real argument to be made that it's the correct thing to do looking to the future.

And for the record, I *love* Tyson Chandler. It will really, really hurt me when he sign with another team. But sometimes tough decisions have to be made.

[LonghornDub]

I was going to post something, and then I realized thig already made every single point I would have offered. Worded similarly, too.

Carry on, thig.

[Funkman]

Interesting food for thought from Bill Simmons yesterday. Sorry if it's been posted before.

1b. Tyson Chandler
You know what you're getting with the 29-year-old Chandler, the emotional leader and defensive anchor of the 2011 champs. Basically, it's a slightly poor man's version of 2008 KG without a low-post game. Because of his injury history, I wouldn't go higher than four years, $55 million for him (and even that would make me nervous). Of course, someone will creep closer to that $74.3 million limit … and at that point, you're crossing your fingers and hoping for four healthy years from Tyson Chandler.

You know what really fascinates me? Dallas, a team that normally throws money at centers like Pacman Jones making it rain at a strip club, doesn't seem that interested in overpaying Chandler. What do they know? Do they have inside info? Do they think he might break down soon? Note to potential Chandler suitors: If there was ever a time to "pretend" you're in Dallas for the night, invite Mark Cuban out for dinner, put a few drinks in him and eke out his inside Chandler info, it's this week.2

And yet … I still feel like the Mavericks are playing possum here. They wouldn't have beaten Miami without Chandler last year. They know this. They also know that they need to get by Miami THIS year, and if anyone knows how to protect the rim against Miami and get into LeBron's head, it's Tyson Chandler. I can't see them turning that specific responsibility/need/specialty over to Brendan Haywood when they already have that guy and he wants to stay. They just need to get creative; you can't overpay both, but you can overpay one. More on this in a second.

Brendan Haywood: Totally, horrendously overpaid, and yet not overpaid at all. Haywood's 2009-10 numbers (a contract year, but still): 30.6 MPG, 9.1 PPG, 9.3 RPG, 2.1 BPG, 56.2% FG, 62% FT. Sure sounds like what I'm getting statistically from Perkins or Jordan, right?

If you're Houston, would you rather overpay Chandler, overpay Jordan … or pretend you want to overpay Chandler, get Dallas to overpay him, then trade for Haywood instead? Even something like "Patrick Patterson ($1.9 million this season) for Haywood ($7.4 million this season)" works under the cap. Hmmmmmmm. If you're Dallas, let's say you offer Chandler a four-year, $69 million deal starting at $15 million in Year 1, then save $5.7 million with a Patterson/Haywood swap. Are you better off? As long as Chandler doesn't break down over these next four years … actually, you are.


3. Tyson Chandler
Prediction: Re-signs with Dallas (four years, $69 million)
Verdict: OVERPAID

7. Brendan Haywood
Prediction: Traded to Houston (for Patrick Patterson and a future no. 1 pick)
Verdict: ONCE OVERPAID, NOW SLIGHTLY OVERPAID

I'll let you big basketball brains figure the numbers. But with this scenario, could you amnesty Marion and still make a play for Deron or Paul? And also get younger with Patterson and a future pick.

[Kidd Karma]

I compare the Chandler situation to the situation the Nets had when Kidd was there. Kenyon Martin became a free agent after the 2004 season. 2 Finals appearance a deep playoff run in 2004 (Kidd knee injury prevented a 3rd straight appearance). KMart supposedly got a max walk offer from Denver with a huge up front payment. The Nets didn't want to match that, so KMart said I'm going to Denver, NJ said lets do a sign and trade, got a trade exception and believe picks. Nevertheless NJ never rebounded from losing KMart, always seeking that PF throughout the last bit of the Kidd era. They did add Carter, but that more or less wrote off Kidd's effectiveness as the primary ball handler. What I'm saying is the point here is valid in that, saying no now, doesn't guarantee Howard nor Williams next year. Am I in favor of giving Tyson 15 million over 4 years, not really, much rather see him at 11 over 4 years. Right now it's economics, I think the Mavs had every intention of resiging Tyson, and winning the next 3 years. I mean you don't give up your draft to get a Rudy Fernandez, as a possible Jet replacement....now Jet's coming out with a loyalty reason for his next contract. I think if we can manage to get the cap space, Dallas is an attractive landing spot for Deron, Cuban's shown he's willing to make moves to win, Deron admitted Utah frustrated him because they never made moves to win while he was there....Cuban has a track record of making moves to win. I'd like another run, or 2 before Dirk's done, but I trust in Nelson and Cuban to make the right decisions, just like Jet feels he's earned a loyalty conract, I think we should give brass the benefit of the doubt.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by jthig32

You're overrating Tyson here. Tyson was no more important than Marion or Kidd.

Tyson is NOT some game changing superstar.

And imo..you are vastly under-rating him. He's certainly not a game-changing offensive superstar...but marion/jkiddo were there last year and the mavs came no where close to playing the defense they did last year. Jkiddo I'll give ya, shawn you have to be kidding...

BIGS ARE DIFFERENT imo, when you get one that is the backbone of your defense, you keep him if you can.

I understand all of the talk about financial flexibility, having to stay with jkiddo/jet/etc.. But I don't care.. I don't gut this team for the hope of 2-3 years from now. My horizons are not that long.

If I'm cubes/donnie..I can understand the thinking, same thinking as with little stevie (which was wrong).

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by jthig32

Underdog is making a fantastic point here. What did everyone hate about Damp? It was his contract.

Not me...I was quite frustrated that we couldn't throw the ball to him and have him catch and hit a free throw if fouled. I was frustrated that he wouldn't take the responsibility required of the center. He didn't step up when needed. Dampiers play was my problem with him. He did set good picks but he couldn't play the pnr worth a crap and we got killed by phoenix and every other team that had quickness.