The Nets have a good team now. Not as good as Miami or Chicago, but if they get lucky they could make a run. Williams thought so anyway. The Nets won't have any flexibility in the future though. A lot of good players and some bad contracts. Kind of like the Mavs during the Finley era.

Kidd signed with the Knicks due to their "Win now" frame of mind. Cuban and Donnie seem to be confused as to whether win now or rebuild. Sounds like Dirk is getting frustrated with them by his comments that he is too old to rebuild. If the Mavs want to win now, it looks like they just wasted '12-13.

I'm starting to think it may be best for everyone if the Mavs could make some sort of Hersel Walker trade for Dirk. He has a no trade clause so he would have to agree to it of course. I'm not sure who the taker would be though.

I think you guys are arguing from different perspectives, and I don't mean as Mavs fans versus Spurs fans (or whatever Preppy is).

On the one hand, the Nets roster post Joe Johnson move with Deron coming back was better than the current Mavs roster with Deron being added. And by "current", I mean the roster without any FA signings and a bunch of question marks about what Dallas was going to do on Page 2 once Page 1 (signing Deron) was flipped.

However, because the Nets didn't have to clear max space to offer Deron and could improve the team before re-signing him, it should be no surprise that their roster was better because they were able to make moves before he re-upped. Dallas had to wait to land Deron and then go to work using their exceptions and whatnot to improve the roster.

Now, either Deron didn't feel like Dallas was going to be able to improve, or he didn't have the vision to see what Dallas had planned, etc etc, so he decided to go for the better "current" team and not hang his hat on possibilities. A family comfortable in NY and an extra $25MM made that an easier decision for him. Personally, I think he wanted to come to Dallas, and had we been able to put him on the court with TC and Dirk, he probably would have made the jump. But that couldn't have worked out, so here we are.

As to which team is better situated moving forward, the Nets clearly have the better team; however, it's a team that's as good as it's ever going to get. By adding those contract before signing Deron, they have no room to do anything save swing at the D12 sign and trade. Otherwise, the Nets as currently composed are going to be a team that's good enough to lose to Heat every year for the length of Deron's new deal.

Dallas is in a world of hurt. We have no PG, we have no 2nd scoring option, and our best players are over the hill in Marion and Dirk. What we have is the cap space to money whip someone. Now that the other teams are full up cap-wise, there won't be an option of going to a contender to pair up with your best buddy from NBA summer camp in hopes of chasing a ring. It won't matter to a guy like Chris Paul that will re-sign with LA, but it might matter to a guy like Stephen Curry or Tyreke Evans or Ty Lawson.

quote:

---

IF said

---

Why would I need to defend an argument I didn't make

quote:

---

That's all you have been doing including in this whole thread.

---

Except the direct questions I've answered, which you have yet to do.

quote:

---

You MFFLs are the only people angry. My team didn't just strike out on everyone they contacted and isn't sitting in shambles. There is no anger here. The anger is in the one that has to resort to relying on editing time stamp smack.

---

The guy throwing out insults and making cheap digs at his most hated franchise is now whining about timestamp smack? Yep, definitely angry.

Sorry I refuse to engage in discussion on arguments you fabricated and then attributed to me. Also doesn't change the fact that on the one topic we were actually talking about before you tried to smoke screen in 10 different directions, you got nailed down. It's your MO to get pissed off when that happens and start swinging wildly. And calling you on it and watching you get even more pissy is kind of funny.

Great post, MW03. Completely agree.

quote:

---

What we have is the cap space to money whip someone

---

I thought the concensus on this board was that this isn't possible unless you're resigning your own player? Is that not why the Nets were able to offer 25m more than Dalla could? While the mavs may have cap space, they can't outbid any team for there player because the CBA is designed to allow the "home" team offer more money to stay. Dallas isn't an attractive place, the city or the team as currently constituted, for a prime, superstar player to take less money to come play ala Lebron and Bosh in Miami.

quote:

---

A family comfortable in NY and an extra $25MM made that an easier decision for him. Personally, I think he wanted to come to Dallas, and had we been able to put him on the court with TC and Dirk, he probably would have made the jump. But that couldn't have worked out, so here we are.

---

Agree. I have to imagine the weaker eastern conference factored in somewhere as well.

quote:

---

but it might matter to a guy like Stephen Curry or Tyreke Evans or Ty Lawson.

---

I'd be okay with any of those guys.

[This message has been edited by Judge (edited 7/6/2012 10:09a).]

quote:

---

I thought the concensus on this board was that this isn't possible unless you're resigning your own player?

---

You can't do it for a max player, but you can do it for a non-max player. Like Houston moneywhipped Chicago for Omar Asik. Toronto moneywhipped NYK for Landry Fields.

quote:

---

prepyag03 8:15a posted

---

facepalm

quote:

---

Ok, first off you won 1 championship...that doesn't make you a championship organization.

---

It does. Small group of front offices that can say they know how to build a champion. Only one current front office/coaching combo that can say with authority they know how to beat Lebron's Heat.

quote:

---

The mavs couldn't even entice their own players to stay put...I don't care how much cap space you have when no one wants to play for you. How are you able to "BUILD INSTANTLY" when you can't get players to sign

---

Everything hinged on Deron signing first. I've always said that I didn't like this gamble and preferred to grow through trades, starting with keeping Tyson. Its tok much of a risk if it fails an the odds are stacked against them by the cba. First Cp3 and Dwight didn't opt out, then Odom blew up and didn't extend his deadline. So it all came down to a weakened pitch (but still a better "win-now" pitch than Bkn) Then deron chose the Nets and the Mavs were stuck with nothing. Not worth the risk.

quote:

---

Please explain how that puts Dallas in a better position than BKN...Next you'll say that Dallas is in a better position than Miami because they have more "financial flexibility"...

---

Miami had a core of Lebron+Wade. BKN has Deron+Johnson. See a difference? It's all bout getting the core together as te toughest move.

quote:

---

Now, either Deron didn't feel like Dallas was going to be able to improve, or he didn't have the vision to see what Dallas had planned, etc etc, so he decided to go for the better "current" team and not hang his hat on possibilities. A family comfortable in NY and an extra $25MM made that an easier decision for him. Personally, I think he wanted to come to Dallas, and had we been able to put him on the court with TC and Dirk, he probably would have made the jump. But that couldn't have worked out, so here we are.

As to which team is better situated moving forward, the Nets clearly have the better team; however, it's a team that's as good as it's ever going to get. By adding those contract before signing Deron, they have no room to do anything save swing at the D12 sign and trade. Otherwise, the Nets as currently composed are going to be a team that's good enough to lose to Heat every year for the length of Deron's new deal.

---

Good summary

quote:

---

It does. Small group of front offices that can say they know how to build a champion. Only one current front office/coaching combo that can say with authority they know how to beat Lebron's Heat.

---

So beating the heat one year makes the mavs a championship organization? Then what does getting swept out of the playoffs by the Thunder make them? I'm pretty sure that Detroit isn't a championship organization despite winning the 2004 title...but I guess my expectations exceed yours in that regard.

quote:

---

Miami had a core of Lebron+Wade. BKN has Deron+Johnson. See a difference? It's all bout getting the core together as te toughest move.

---

The core is irrelevant. I was referring to the Flexibility arugment being thrown around as a benefit for Dallas over the Nets. It was said that Dallas is more flexible than Brooklyn so that's a better situation...well Dallas is more flexible than Miami too, so does that argument not apply there?

Brand is being amnestied. He could probably be picked up on the cheap.

Pistons lost credibility after 2009, and the Mavs are quickly killing their credibility. But it was there.

Flexibility only matters to teams that need to still add major pieces to win the title. Prepyag, do you think the current Nets roster is positioned to instantly be an elite contender for the title, or do thy need to make more moves? Once the core of 2-3 superstars is in place, then flexibility is not as vital. The nets have superstar level contracts but not superstar players.

[This message has been edited by Internetfan02 (edited 7/6/2012 10:26a).]

quote:

---

Pistons lost credibility after 2009

---

They have 3 titles. Their franchise has more credibility than the mavs

quote:

---

I thought the concensus on this board was that this isn't possible unless you're resigning your own player? Is that not why the Nets were able to offer 25m more than Dalla could? While the mavs may have cap space, they can't outbid any team for there player because the CBA is designed to allow the "home" team offer more money to stay.

---

You may not like Dallas the city and you may hate Dallas the team, but for a guy like Stephen Curry who is probably going to get a big contract, his options are going to be going for the home team in Golden State (gag) or jumping to a less monied offer on a better team. Dallas will have the cap room to make a play for him, and Cuban's Mavs will always have a better shot at getting better than what's left in a place like Golden State (or Denver or Sacramento, etc).

The franchise in terms of history - yes. Dumars and whoever the owners are as a current championship org - no

There was a question a couple of pages back about where Dallas goes at center. I have a feeling we're going to be watching this dude in Mavs blue via exception with Nash leaving Pho.



I don't know if Poles and Germans get along, though.

[This message has been edited by MW03 (edited 7/6/2012 10:42a).]

Why would Phoenix get rid of Gortet? Great contract and they got a point guard that should fit in well with him?

quote:

---

Pistons lost credibility after 2009, and the Mavs are quickly killing their credibility. But it was there.

---

Please see Yankees post above.

quote:

---

Flexibility only matters to teams that need to still add major pieces to win the title. Prepyag, do you think the current Nets roster is positioned to instantly be an elite contender for the title, or do thy need to make more moves? Once the core of 2-3 superstars is in place, then flexibility is not as vital. The nets have superstar level contracts but not superstar players.

---

The nets have a better set of core player (Wallace, Williams, and Johnson) than the Mavs do (Dirk, Marion, and Carter I guess is the 3rd) and they have the ability to possibly get Dwight Howard. Do they have the ability to go sign 10 more players to max contracts? Absolutely not, but they have a better roster than they did at the end of the season, and could still sign there double double machine in Humphries and Lopez, assuming they're not traded for Howard.

Are the Nets a serious contender for a title? I'd have to watch them play, but on paper they have have 20 ppg player in Johnson (hate his contract all you want, but the guy can play), a lock down forward who averaged 16 and 7 last year, and one of the best PG's in the game today. This is a guard driven league, making them just as good or better than anyone in the East sans Miami.

quote:

---

You may not like Dallas the city and you may hate Dallas the team, but for a guy like Stephen Curry who is probably going to get a big contract, his options are going to be going for the home team in Golden State (gag) or jumping to a less monied offer on a better team. Dallas will have the cap room to make a play for him, and Cuban's Mavs will always have a better shot at getting better than what's left in a place like Golden State (or Denver or Sacramento, etc).

---

It has nothing to do with my preferences...the statment was made that Dallas could "money whip" a free agent to come to Dallas because of there flexibility; all I was saying was that isn't an accurate statement as the home team can money whip said player with alot more money if they choose to. I'm not sure why Stephen Curry was brought into the discussion, but case in point, Golden State can offer him more money than Dallas can, which merely proves my point.

quote:

---

The franchise in terms of history - yes. Dumars and whoever the owners are as a current championship org - no

---

Regarding history, the mavs have 1 championship over it's what, 20-30+ year existence...regarding current championship org, literally half if not more of the 2011 championship team is gone and they just got swept in the first round of the playoffs...not sure that Dallas qualifies as a championship organization at this time.

They are an organization that has won a championship so therefore that makes them a championship organization.

Gortat isn't going anywhere. Would love to have him.

quote:

---

It has nothing to do with my preferences...the statment was made that Dallas could "money whip" a free agent to come to Dallas because of there flexibility; all I was saying was that isn't an accurate statement as the home team can money whip said player with alot more money if they choose to. I'm not sure why Stephen Curry was brought into the discussion, but case in point, Golden State can offer him more money than Dallas can, which merely proves my point

---

Quit being obdurate. Everyone who follows the NBA knows that the home team can offer more. I suspect you know that when I was using the term "moneywhip" I was talking about keeping other suitors at bay with more room to make an offer when it comes to players that are almost a lock to leave their terrible teams. I used Stephen Curry as an example because he's a FA next year that the Mavs will likely be interested in, and they'll be bidding against Golden State (who could offer more, but might not with how ****ty that organization is) and a selection of probably more attractive locales that can't offer as much money due to cap restrictions. My point is that the Mavs will be in a position to offer considerably more than those more attractive positions.

If you didn't understand, than I should have been more clear. This is what I meant.

lol @ prepyag...you try so hard

quote:

---

Why would Phoenix get rid of Gortet? Great contract and they got a point guard that should fit in well with him?

---

I didn't realize they had signed Beasley to go with Drajic. I'm not that high on Drajic, but I didn't watch a lot of Rockets basketball so I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on him. I had hoped they would want to dump Gortat with Frye on the roster to try and go get a scorer to go with Drajic, but I guess Beasley took care of that. (I'm no Phoenix suns expert either, so huge grain of salt on thise 20,000 feet opinions.)

As much as it pains me to say this I am ready to trade Dirk. He deserves the right to try for another ring and someone will pay hansomely for another 2-3 years of his services. The guy is a mismatch at the #4 position and might be enough to put some team into the NBA Finals. His legacy will be remembered as a Mav though.

The "We can put together a championship team, look at 2011!" argument is bull****.

The Spurs have won four titles in the last 15 years and still have their core together from their last thee titles. When comparing coaches, Pop will go down as one of the 5 best ever. Carlisle will barely be remembered for being around when Dirk went crazy in the playoffs and beat LeBron. And part of Carlisle's legacy is getting fired from Detroit and then watching the Pistons immediately win a championship with his replacement, then being the coach over the Brawling Pacers.

The "Championship Organization" argument is BS. I've got the last 15 years as a Spurs fan as proof. It will help you grab an older guy at the end of his career that is ring chasing but you aren't going to get a premium free agent on that pitch. Spurs have been spurned over and over. Texas is not a sexy destination in the NBA.

GSW has already said Steph Curry won't be getting an extension this year (ankle injuries). He'd be worth the gamble.

quote:

---

They are an organization that has won a championship so therefore that makes them a championship organization.

---

Really? So that's all it takes? Win 1 in the past 30 years and you're a championship organization? Tomato, to-ma-to I guess

quote:

---

If you didn't understand, than I should have been more clear. This is what I meant.

---

No I didn't understant what you mean...thank you for clarifying (honest statement).

quote:

---

lol @ prepyag...you try so hard

---

No, it's really easy for me to state the obvious. You should try it...I tried to tell you last week the mavs would suffer, but you called it me hating the mavs. What do you say now?

quote:

---

1 Championship does not make a team a Championship organization. The Mavs were a jumpshooting team that got hot at the right time and put together a hell of a run. They earned that Championship, but it doesn't make the Mavs a Championship organization.

I'm not even sure I would call the Heat a Championship organization although I guess you can make the point that Riley makes it so.

The Spurs and Lakers are really the only clear Championship organizations at this time. Those 2 teams have combined to represent the Western conference in 11 of the last 14 NBA Finals. They have won 9 of the last 14 Championships. They have played in 12 of the last 14 WCFs.

Those are championship organizations. The Heat and OKC will probably be the next to put together some sort of streak similar to that.

---

Agree 100%...The Heat aren't a championship organization...not yet.

So what's the minimum requirement for a "championship organization"? The Heat have 2 titles in 6 years, the Celts have 1 title, 2 Finals in the past 5 years and 17 overall, do they count?

No, no, just the Lakers and Spurs (who haven't been mentioned in this thread until now, which, of course, is another Mavs thread crapped on by Spurs and Lakers homers).

A championship = championship organization. Are there still varying degrees to how good an org is? Of course. Does that discredit a championship they won? Absolutely not.

Some people just hate when someone else joins their party.

We've reached that point in the thread where the Spurs Other homers must come in to the Mavs thread to remind us how great the Spurs are.

[This message has been edited by Judge (edited 7/6/2012 11:13a).]

quote:

---

A championship = championship organization. Are there still varying degrees to how good an org is? Of course. Does that discredit a championship they won? Absolutely not.

Some people just hate when someone else joins their party.

---

thank you for ending this discussion

quote:

---

So what's the minimum requirement for a "championship organization"? The Heat have 2 titles in 6 years, the Celts have 1 title, 2 Finals in the past 5 years and 17 overall, do they count?

No, no, just the Lakers and Spurs (who haven't been mentioned in this thread until now, which, of course, is another Mavs thread crapped on by Spurs and Lakers homers).

A championship = championship organization. Are there still varying degrees to how good an org is? Of course. Does that discredit a championship they won? Absolutely not.

Some people just hate when someone else joins their party.

---

So by your logic there's 17 championship organizations currently in the NBA? So yo consider the New York Knicks a championship organization? They've won 1...or the Washington Wizards? The Milwaukee Bucks? Really?

[This message has been edited by prepyag03 (edited 7/6/2012 11:22a).]

Another point of clarification: we're talking about the current management and organization. Yes, I agree, if you won a championship in 1976 (see: Brooklyn Nets), you do not qualify.

You have to have won a championship with the current organizational structure (generally) to be considered a current championship organization.

EDIT - consider this post Anti-prepyag spray
EDIT 2 - chuckled out loud in my office at the post above
[This message has been edited by rasher (edited 7/6/2012 11:24a).]

[This message has been edited by rasher (edited 7/6/2012 11:26a).]