Bosh in and a coach who can win

I don't want Bosh. Think he is overrated

need to coach Roddy into the full time PG.

I'll take Mavs fans who don't understand the salary cap for $10,000, Alex. [/jeopardy]



(here's a hint: you guys are $30 million over the salary cap. Unless Toronto does a sign & trade, you ain't getting Bosh)

actually, the Mavs have a huge negotiating tool with Damp's expiring contract ... maybe, you should read up on NBA contracts.

quote:

---

I'll take Mavs fans who don't understand the salary cap for $10,000, Alex. [/jeopardy]

---

I'll take smarmy a-holes who don't understand how trades work for $10,000, Alex (I won't add /jeopardy because you already did, even though it's not obvious at all that that is what you were referencing).

1) Shuffle roster/coaches in the offseason
2) Play well in the regular season
3) Choke in the playoffs
4) Repeat

quote:

---

actually, the Mavs have a huge negotiating tool with Damp's expiring contract ... maybe, you should read up on NBA contracts.

---

I know all about NBA contracts. Try explaining to me why a team over the cap like Toronto would take back Damp's deal for next year for the privilege of losing Bosh.

Here's a hint.. if anything they will let him walk, but Miami's got the space to give him a max deal without sending them a player. If Toronto doesn't take back a crap contract (like Damp's) then they are suddenly 10-12 mil under the cap and have room to go FA shopping on their own.

So tell me again why they would take Damp and be capped out this summer?

And let's not even get into the fact that the NBA salary cap will probably be changing after next summer when the collective bargaining agreement expires... with that uncertainly why would they sign up for even paying next year of Damp's deal when they could just let Bosh walk and be in good position to see how the new CBA plays out (i.e., worst case they get nothing and next year are suddenly $25 mil under the cap).

And (taking a breathe) that's not even getting into the 10 or so teams that have cleared space this summer to offer Bosh a max deal without even having to send garbage to Toronto.

Or, for that matter, the issue of Bosh leaving $17 million on the table this summer if he doesn't exercise his player option.

But really, you guys keep hoping that you will be able to trade Erica Dampier for a first team Eastern Conference All-Star. LOL.

Money talk aside, I've read that Bosh isn't a fan of heading back to his home town because of the real possibility of distractions. It might have been Bill Simmons, I can't remember where I read it.

quote:

---

I know all about NBA contracts. Try explaining to me why a team over the cap like Toronto would take back Damp's deal for next year for the privilege of losing Bosh.

Here's a hint.. if anything they will let him walk, but Miami's got the space to give him a max deal without sending them a player. If Toronto doesn't take back a crap contract (like Damp's) then they are suddenly 10-12 mil under the cap and have room to go FA shopping on their own.

So tell me again why they would take Damp and be capped out this summer?

---

Damp's contract is not guaranteed, so they can cut him the moment they get him and get no cap hit at all. Also, if Dallas wants him, they can force Dallas to give RoddyB and still be about where they were in the cap, only they will have Roddy B to show for it.

That's why they do it.

And Bosh wants to be signed and traded, because he makes significantly more money by doing that.

quote:

---

And Bosh wants to be signed and traded, because he makes significantly more money by doing that.

---

I don't disagree with you there. But there's teams with a lot more to offer than Erica Dampier.

Gee, what would Toronto rather do:

Dampier + ??? (like Dallas would give up Beaubois)

OR

Beasley + Chalmers + draft pick, etc.

quote:

---

I don't disagree with you there. But there's teams with a lot more to offer than Erica Dampier.

---

And then why would Bosh go to a team that has to gut their roster to satisfy Toronto's S&T demands?

Dallas offers Bosh the best situation to come to an established winning team without gutting the roster in an S&T, and only Dallas can give Toronto young talent (Beaubois) plus a giant instant expiring (plus Caron Butler's 2011 expiring if they want a borderline all-star).

You should follow the NBA a little more closely if you're going to flame other posters.

You think they would drool over taking Beasley?

[This message has been edited by InternetFan02 (edited 4/29/2010 11:34p).]

RoddyB > Beasley+Chalmers

A team of
Bosh/Haywood
Dirk/Najera
Marion
Butler/Terry
Kidd/JJ

is a lot more attractive than
???
Bosh
James Jones
Daequan Cook
Wade

With no one else.

So what would Toronto do?
Get out of the luxury tax, have enough room for a mid-FA and have a young, exciting player that can be a small 2 to go with JC/Hedo/Bargnani or get the colossal bust that is Chalmers plus a backup point guard and a draft pick in the 20s.
Gee.

Dallas is going to have to get in line for Bosh.

http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/66273/20100429/rockets_target_bosh_raptors_interested_in_jordan_hill/#

quote:

---

Rockets Target Bosh, Raptors Interested In Jordan Hill

Sources say the Rockets' primary free-agent target is still Chris Bosh.

Houston would have to arrange a sign-and-trade deal with Toronto.

The Raptors are reportedly intrigued by Jordan Hill, whom the Rockets acquired from New York on trade deadline day in February. The Knicks made the deal to clear their second maximum-salary contract slot, which could be offered to Bosh.

---

I would say a package built around Hill & The NY Picks & maybe Budinger would trump anything Dallas has to offer, regardless of Dampier's unguaranteed contract.

I thought the latest rumor was that Bosh wanted to play in OKC?

OKC would be scary with him. But who would OKC trade to get him? They only have ~12mm in cap space (assuming 52mm cap figure)

Interesting from Marc Stein on ESPN ...

quote:

---

The Mavericks' hope, according to team sources, has always been signing Nowitzki to an extension before the start of free agency and then making a sign-and-trade run at top free agents. Sources say that list, improbable as it seems, starts with Cleveland's LeBron James, based on the idea that a locked-up Nowitzki would be among the major selling points to lure a big name, along with Cuban's free-spending history and -- in James' case -- the promise of playing a few regular-season games to the Dallas Cowboys' palatial new stadium that hosted the NBA's All-Star Game in February.

---

Pipe dream ? Maybe - maybe not.

Again, Damp is an attractive trade chip because he has a massive deal with one year left that's not guaranteed. He will NEVER see the floor on the team that ends up taking him in the trade. If anything, he'll be cut and probably resign with Dallas for the MLE or something.

quote:

---

resign with Dallas for the MLE or something.

---

I'm laughing b/c that would be a horrible deal ala Diop.

quote:

---

and a coach who can win

---

Yeah, I know. Why didn't they just do this in the first place? Just curious...which one would you recommend?

Cuban's biggest problem, and it seems as though it trickles down to all the MFFL's, is that he wants to win RIGHT NOW, ALL THE TIME. Look at the roster consistency the Mavs have had since he took over. Top 5 PG in the league? Release him and sign Erick Dampier. Top shooter in the confernce? Release him to save on the luxury tax. One of the most promising scoring guards in the league? Trade him for one of the oldest, slowest guards in the league.

It seems stupid to say, but slow and steady wins the race. The Mavs would be stupid to reshuffle AGAIN this offseason, because all of their new players have basically had 1/2 of a season to gel. It seems like his formula is "acquire as much talent as I can and trot them out on the floor". It would be worthwhile to invest in some consistency. Does wonders for team chemistry.


[This message has been edited by MassAggie97 (edited 4/30/2010 8:55a).]

I agree about roster consistency.

Important players (starters/main rotation guys) that they have put around Dirk in his 50-win streak (starters for at least 1 season and 6th men have an *):

C: Bradley, Raef LaFrenz*, Dampier*, Diop, Brenden Haywood
PF: Juwan Howard*, Antawn Jamison*, Antoine Walker*, Brandon Bass, Drew Gooden
SF: Finley*, Josh Howard*, Stackhouse*, Van Horn, Caron Butler*, Marion*
SG: Adrian Giffin*, Jason Terry*, Marquis Daniels, Devean George, Antoine Wright*
PG: Nash*, Howard Eisley, Devin Harris*, Jason Kidd*, Nick Van Exel*, JJ Barea, Roddy B


That's a lot of turnover. 17 different starters/6th men and another 11 rotational players. It is hard to get cohesive when that kind of turnover.

Look at the Spurs rotation over the last 10 seasons:
Duncan is the only constant, so like Dirk, I will leave him out.

C: Bonner*; McDyess*, Kurt Thomas; Oberto*, Robinson*; Nazr; Rasho*;
PF:Blair; Gooden; Horry, Malik my Nuts Rose;
SF:Jefferson*, Finley*, Bowen*
SG: Ginobili*, Mason*, Barry, Turkeyglue; Stephen Jackson, Steve Smith*, Derek Anderson*
PG: Parker*, Hill; Vaughn; Speedy Claxton, Avery Johnson*, Antonio Daniels, Terry Porter

Spurs have had 5 starters/6th men at center, 3 at SF, 4 at SG, 2 at PG. 14 players. Another 14 role players for a season or more.

And if you look at the Spurs turnover, most of it was early on, when they transitioned from Elie/Elliott through to Steve Smith/Derek Anderson/Stephen Jackson before they settled in with Manu/Bowen for an extended period of time. They they had the rotating replacement for Robinson/backup point guard. But throughout Duncan's career, he has only really had 2 point guards in Avery and Tony. He had a few different swingmen, but had Manu and Bowen for most of his career.

Dirk has never had that.

My wife actually came up with this thought on the Mavs which is kind of impressive:

The Mavs are a team that is composed entirely of role players that is why they win so many ball games during the regular season. They don't have a go-to player that they can rely on during the playoffs that will take over the game when they need it.

Throw in Coach Carlisle and this team was doomed before the playoffs started. I'm not a Mavs fan, but I was getting frustrated at his rotation throughout the series.

quote:

---

The Mavs are a team that is composed entirely of role players that is why they win so many ball games during the regular season. They don't have a go-to player that they can rely on during the playoffs that will take over the game when they need it.

---

Yeah, except for that guy with one of the best shots in the NBA.

NOt buying the roster consistency argument.

If anything Cuban has been too loyal to his players.

4 of the top 5 in the crunch time line-up was unchanged for 4.5 seasons - Dirk, Howard, Jet, Dampier. Find me another team ever that kept 4 out of 5 starters together for 4.5 years without winning a title. It was closer to 5.5 seasons if you count Howard being better than Finley in 2004-05.

All the roster turnover was for bench players.

quote:

---

Cuban's biggest problem, and it seems as though it trickles down to all the MFFL's, is that he wants to win RIGHT NOW, ALL THE TIME. Look at the roster consistency the Mavs have had since he took over. Top 5 PG in the league? Release him and sign Erick Dampier. Top shooter in the confernce? Release him to save on the luxury tax. One of the most promising scoring guards in the league? Trade him for one of the oldest, slowest guards in the league.

---

Bad examples. 2 out of 3 of those were money moves (Nash, Finley), where Cuban actually was thinking about long term flexibility. Everyone thought Nash would be worthless by year 4 of his contract, and that Dampier would be a solid consistent player (and the first ever decent center of the era)

[This message has been edited by InternetFan02 (edited 4/30/2010 9:31a).]

I really think the Mavs problem is they have yet to find the correct compliment in the post to Dirk. With Dirk being such a finnesse player, they really have never had anybody who can even halfway wear down the other team's post player. Duncan might not have had a tremendous series, but he did have a good one... and was able to play 37 pretty effective minutes a game at the age of 34. That's a problem. Could have Duncan done that if he was forced to guard a bruiser down low like Al Jefferson, Zach Randolph, or somebody like that? I really don't think he could. That'd open up the basket a ton more for the Mavs to attack.

Money moves or not, it hurts your consistency to have 4 different starting point guards, with 4 entirely different games, in a 7-year span. The Harris trade was a perfect example. You don't like Nash? Fine. Go in the Devin Harris direction, and STAY in that direction (they actually didn't START in that direction, wasn't Jason Terry their PG for a season?). Harris started for, what, 3 years? Then they traded for Jason Kidd, because Kidd was more of a facilitator?

Why not just keep Steve Nash if a facilitator is what you want?

You can make any number of excuses for why a team doesn't hold onto their best players. In the long run, building a core group and some roster consistency is the key to winning championships, IMO. People place virtually NO stock into team chemistry these days. If your front office has not developed that kind of vision, then they are as much to blame for failure as anyone.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Mavs are a team that is composed entirely of role players that is why they win so many ball games during the regular season. They don't have a go-to player that they can rely on during the playoffs that will take over the game when they need it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Yeah, except for that guy with one of the best shots in the NBA.

---

You mean the one that disappears when they need him the most? He has a good shot I'll give you that, but how great of a player can you be when you're 7' tall and shoot fadeaways when you're being guarded by a guy who's 6'4" 20 feet away from the basket?

Dirk was pretty much the guy that got Dallas back in the game yesterday.

Although he was also the guy that got him out of the game.

He comes up big sometimes, he doesn't sometimes. But he is still a go-to player and not a role player.

quote:

---

The Harris trade was a perfect example. You don't like Nash? Fine. Go in the Devin Harris direction, and STAY in that direction (they actually didn't START in that direction, wasn't Jason Terry their PG for a season?). Harris started for, what, 3 years? Then they traded for Jason Kidd, because Kidd was more of a facilitator?

Why not just keep Steve Nash if a facilitator is what you want?

You can make any number of excuses for why a team doesn't hold onto their best players. In the long run, building a core group and some roster consistency is the key to winning championships, IMO. People place virtually NO stock into team chemistry these days. If your front office has not developed that kind of vision, then they are as much to blame for failure as anyone.

---

Harris was the starting PG for 2.5 months, then he got injured (again). The offense grinded to a complete halt, and no one could get the ball to Dirk because teams had learned how to deny him the ball.

If you break it down further the Mavs kept a core of "Big 3" scorers together for 5.5 seasons. That's way too long. You don't *need* a great PG, you need a great perimeter player. We were begging for them to trade Howard for 2 years. When the chemistry between the big 3 soured in 2008, it was obvious they needed to blow it up but they waited another 2 years. Again, too much loyalty to Howard.

[This message has been edited by InternetFan02 (edited 4/30/2010 9:50a).]

IMO chemistry sours when it isn't being properly managed. The one thing I agree with on this thread is that Carlisle is not very good.

IMO the Mavs have made two major mistakes since the '06 finals that have hampered their ability to compete. They stupidly got rid of their 2nd best offensive weapon, and they hired a coach that has a track record of nothing. Problem is there aren't a lot of "great" coaches sitting around waiting for the Mavs to come calling.

If Cuban wants to throw his money at something, he ought to think about throwing some Larry Brown's direction.

I think Brown is pretty happy in Charlotte. His team started looking pretty decent this year.

Who is available other than Jeff Van Gundy - who I really couldn't see coaching this team?

quote:

---

You mean the one that disappears when they need him the most? He has a good shot I'll give you that, but how great of a player can you be when you're 7' tall and shoot fadeaways when you're being guarded by a guy who's 6'4" 20 feet away from the basket?

---

Offensively, there is NO QUESTION that Dirk is one of the best go-to guys in basketball. Nobody makes ALL of their shots in the 4th quarter, but the stats are available...Dirk makes more than most.
He was the only reason Dallas was in that game yesterday. He's a stud, he's a baller....and who cares WHERE he's shooting them from if he doesn't miss???

IMO Dirk showed up yesterday. Just too bad that Marion, Kidd, Terry et al. did not.

quote:

---

I think Brown is pretty happy in Charlotte. His team started looking pretty decent this year.

---

I agree. But throw a ridiculous wad of cash his way, and show him Dallas' roster, and you think he won't at least be tempted?
A great coach could turn Dallas' current roster into a playoff winner. No trades or free agents necessary.

Brown will not turn Charlotte's group of talent into anything more than a really good team that loses in the 1st or 2nd round every year like Brown's SA teams did.

[This message has been edited by MassAggie97 (edited 4/30/2010 10:00a).]

quote:

---

They stupidly got rid of their 2nd best offensive weapon, and they hired a coach that has a track record of nothing. Problem is there aren't a lot of "great" coaches sitting around waiting for the Mavs to come calling.

---

Also recall that Howard was the clear offensive number 2 in 2008. There was a contingent on this board that thought Avery was grooming Howard to take over as number 1 option for Dirk in 2008. We would have rioted if they had traded Howard for Kidd or someone else (how bad does that look now - imagine Harris playing starting 2 guard next to Kidd with Marion replacing Howard's old role)