Devin Harris 5 yr. extension w/Mavs [Archive]

ducks

09-12-2007, 02:37 PM

The Dallas Mavericks and point guard Devin Harris agreed to a five-year contract extension today. Harris, the fifth pick of the 2004 NBA Draft, has spent his entire three-year career with the Mavericks after being acquired from Washington in draft-day trade.

“I feel good about the commitment for another five years,” Harris said after a morning workout American Airlines Center practice court. “Hopefully now we can run with it.”

Harris averaged career highs last season in points (10.2), assists (3.7), rebounds (2.5), steals (1.2) and minutes (26.0). He also played in 80 games, with 61 starts, shot 49.2 percent from the field and 82.4 percent from the line – all career bests.

The five-year extension, which begins after this season, locks Harris up through 2012-13. Harris has played in a key role in the Mavericks reaching the 2005 NBA Finals and finishing with the NBA’s best record last season.

“Devin is a vital part of our core and has played a key role in our success,” Mavericks president of basketball operations Donnie Nelson said. “We are excited about his future in a Mavericks uniform.”

Harris looks to take his game to the next level going into his fourth season.

“I’m feeling refocused and refreshed,” he said. “I’ve been working on fine-tuning a lot of things. Of course you’re going to shoot 1,000 jumpers a day and I’ve also been working on going left. More than that I’m learning how to control the game better by watching a lot of film.”

Mavericks coach Avery Johnson has referred to Harris as his starting point guard and Harris is approaching the season with the same expectation. That doesn’t mean Harris is taking starting for granted.

“Nothing is given,” Harris said. “You have to come into camp ready to work hard. I don’t want anything to be given to me. I have that mindset and hopefully this will be the year for me.”

Harris is no stranger to the first team, having started 61 times last year. “I want that full 82,” he said.

is it the max?

monosylab1k

09-12-2007, 02:38 PM

Clark_Kent

09-12-2007, 02:44 PM

I thought i read somewhere that Jamison didn't like being the 6th man. It was either that or that he didn't want to be here.

monosylab1k

09-12-2007, 02:48 PM

I thought i read somewhere that Jamison didn't like being the 6th man. It was either that or that he didn't want to be here.
I think he wanted to go back to being a starter, but he never made a stink about being 6th man.

Either way, we could have made Terry 6th man and move Howard to SG.

mavsfan1000

09-12-2007, 04:25 PM

I think he wanted to go back to being a starter, but he never made a stink about being 6th man.

Either way, we could have made Terry 6th man and move Howard to SG.
Howard doesn't have good enough handles to be a SG full time. I think we stick with the Harris, Terry, Howard, Nowitzki, Diop lineup. Maybe Damp if he is in shape.

Mr.ChugDynasty

09-12-2007, 06:07 PM

I do like Harris and I think he's going to be solid, but to think back...

We don't keep Nash and wind up getting Dampier with that money, Then we trade Jamison to get the pick for Harris, and get Stackhouse as well.

Would you rather have Damp, Harris, & Stack or would you rather we still had Nash & Jamison?

Nash, Terry, Howard, Dirk, Diop with Jamison as 6th man would be a pretty salty lineup.

Either way, the Mavs are still in good shape currenty.
You also have to remember that Diop was a bit of a surprise, and that he wasnt picked up untill 2005-2006, so at the time the only 5 we would have had was Bradley

ducks

09-12-2007, 07:11 PM

how much did he sign for?

Dirk Nowitzki

09-12-2007, 07:16 PM

mavsfan1000

09-12-2007, 07:38 PM

Resigning Jet last summer might come back to really bite this team in the ass. We will get raped with that backourt of Jet and Harris. But then if we move Jet to the bench, he might get pissed off plus we are paying a guy that much cash to be a backup pg. Eh. Decisions decisions.
We need them both. Harris and Terry make it so we have a good point guard for 48 minutes and save the wear and tear one of them would have to endure.

Dirk Nowitzki

09-12-2007, 07:43 PM

We need them both. Harris and Terry make it so we have a good point guard for 48 minutes and save the wear and tear one of them would have to endure.

Thing is we cant afford to use them both night in and night out. Bigger and stronger backcourts are going to destroy it.

mavsfan1000

09-12-2007, 07:54 PM

Thing is we cant afford to use them both night in and night out. Bigger and stronger backcourts are going to destroy it.
Nah man. They hardly do that. If they did than we just throw Eddie Jones or Devean George out there. It is usually a problem for the other team to deal with a quicker lineup like that. We can change lineup depending on the matchup.

monosylab1k

09-12-2007, 08:20 PM

Jet would make the perfect 6th man/Bobby Jackson type.

I really wish they'd give Ager more of a shot.

sribb43

09-12-2007, 08:30 PM

I do like Harris and I think he's going to be solid, but to think back...

We don't keep Nash and wind up getting Dampier with that money, Then we trade Jamison to get the pick for Harris, and get Stackhouse as well.

Would you rather have Damp, Harris, & Stack or would you rather we still had Nash & Jamison?

Nash, Terry, Howard, Dirk, Diop with Jamison as 6th man would be a pretty salty lineup.

Either way, the Mavs are still in good shape currenty.

Please stop with the if we had Nash.... first off we wouldnt have traded for Terry, and Jamison didnt want to keep playing 6th man, and we probably wouldnt have signed Diop. I think the Mavs have done just fine w/o his services

sribb43

09-12-2007, 08:57 PM

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/basketball/mavs/stories/091307dnspomavslede.ca055365.html

Mavs sign Harris to five-year extension

08:22 PM CDT on Wednesday, September 12, 2007
By EDDIE SEFKO / The Dallas Morning News [email protected]

The Mavericks consider Devin Harris one of the cornerstones for their future. They proved that Wednesday by agreeing to a lucrative five-year contract extension with the 6-3 point guard.

Harris, entering his fourth season, will earn 3.99 million this season. According to a source, the extension will kick in for the 2008-09 season and is worth more than the five-year, $42.6 million deal Milwaukee point guard Mo Williams signed recently.
That would put Harris' salary around $8 million in the first year of the extension, presuming 10.5 percent raises through the life of the contract.

atxrocker

09-12-2007, 09:18 PM

the kid is the only guy on the mavs crew who i don't despise. if he wants a ring, he shoulda went to a team that has a leader with heart though.

dirk4mvp

09-12-2007, 09:25 PM

I hear the kings are gonna be awesome this year.

atxrocker

09-12-2007, 09:51 PM

monosylab1k

09-12-2007, 10:03 PM

Please stop with the if we had Nash....
why? until this team does what it was built & expected to do - win a championship - then every move made should be under scrutiny.

mavs>spurs2

09-12-2007, 10:19 PM

guess i hit a nerve stating the facts about your heart of a champion leader dirk, ay? it's all good.. i hear the mavs are destined for yet another fruitless season filled with choking and general heartbreak for mav fans. what's new though, right?

Are you always this retarded or is it a Wednesday thing?

Dirk Nowitzki

09-12-2007, 10:25 PM

the kid is the only guy on the mavs crew who i don't despise. if he wants a ring, he shoulda went to a team that has a leader with heart though.

spursreport? :lol

Trainwreck2100

09-13-2007, 02:35 AM

Terry blows

Dalhoop

09-13-2007, 07:59 AM

Terry, Stackhouse, Dirk, Howard and now Harris locked through '10-'12 (Dampier as well, but whos count him :) )

Add to that around 23M coming off the books after this season (Finley and Bradley) .... I like what this team is doing.

da_suns_fan__

09-13-2007, 10:07 AM

They overpaid.

Devin Harris just wants to be Barbosa when he grows up, yet he will be making more than Barbs.

monosylab1k

09-13-2007, 10:14 AM

They overpaid.

Devin Harris just wants to be Barbosa when he grows up, yet he will be making more than Barbs.
Harris has higher aspirations than being a fast guy with no court vision or passing instincts.

da_suns_fan__

09-13-2007, 10:22 AM

Harris has higher aspirations than being a fast guy with no court vision or passing instincts.

Thats great....but he's still not nearly as good as Barbosa yet, and they just gave him a bigger extention than Barbs got last year.

Cuban will overpay guys like Dampier, Harris etc., but won't pay 10 mill for Steve Nash :lol

thispego

09-13-2007, 10:22 AM

lolololol, poor poor poor delusional mavs fans. Devin Harris has already hit his wall. last year was the best its gonna get with that little chode and now that he's got his bucks, it's back to complete and utter mediocracy for lil' devin.

"you're version of tony parker"!!!! LOLOLOL :lmao :lmao :lmao

thispego

09-13-2007, 10:23 AM

Thats great....but he's still not nearly as good as Barbosa yet, and they just gave him a bigger extention than Barbs got last year.

Cuban will overpay guys like Dampier, Harris etc., but won't pay 10 mill for Steve Nash :lol
whoa! i agree with da-suns-fan

da_suns_fan__

09-13-2007, 10:28 AM

whoa! i agree with da-suns-fan

Well who wouldn't on this issue?

Take all the bad contracts that have been givin out in NBA history (Kenyan Martin, Raef LaFrentz etc)....take the WORST one and yourself this:

Which was a worse GM move, that terrible contract or the Mavs NOT signing Steve Nash for just over 10 million?

Findog

09-13-2007, 10:29 AM

guess i hit a nerve stating the facts about your heart of a champion leader dirk, ay? it's all good.. i hear the mavs are destined for yet another fruitless season filled with choking and general heartbreak for mav fans. what's new though, right?

Next year the Kings are destined for another lottery finish with Head Coach Soul-Glow. What's new though, right?

Findog

09-13-2007, 10:31 AM

Well who wouldn't on this issue?

Take all the bad contracts that have been givin out in NBA history (Kenyan Martin, Raef LaFrentz etc)....take the WORST one and yourself this:

Which was a worse GM move, that terrible contract or the Mavs NOT signing Steve Nash for just over 10 million?

Considering the Mavs got better without Nash, considering we've gone further without him than we ever did with him, how exactly was it a mistake? He gets pwned every spring by Tony Parker.

da_suns_fan__

09-13-2007, 10:36 AM

Considering the Mavs got better without Nash, considering we've gone further without him than we ever did with him, how exactly was it a mistake? He gets pwned every spring by Tony Parker.

:lol

Drive you nuts doesn't it?

Its fun to try and come up with ANY GM move (trade, contract, etc.) in the history of the NBA that was a worse decision than Cuban snubbing Steve Nash.

Portland picking Bowie over Jordan would probably be a worse move..but thats the only one I can think of.

I don't think any trade could have been worse, cuz you always get SOMETHING in return, and no one has ever just let an MVP walk away for nothing.

monosylab1k

09-13-2007, 10:38 AM

:lol

Drive you nuts doesn't it?

Its fun to try and come up with ANY GM move (trade, contract, etc.) in the history of the NBA that was a worse decision than Cuban snubbing Steve Nash.

Portland picking Bowie over Jordan would probably be a worse move..but thats the only one I can think of.

I don't think any trade could have been worse, cuz you always get SOMETHING in return, and no one has ever just let an MVP walk away for nothing.

we dump Nash and go to the Finals. we dump Nash and beat the Spurs (something Nash still can't do).

I'd say the Suns paid a shitload of money to haul away Maverick trash :fro

FromWayDowntown

09-13-2007, 10:38 AM

Harris, entering his fourth season, will earn 3.99 million this season. According to a source, the extension will kick in for the 2008-09 season and is worth more than the five-year, $42.6 million deal Milwaukee point guard Mo Williams signed recently.

That would put Harris' salary around $8 million in the first year of the extension, presuming 10.5 percent raises through the life of the contract.

What is that, something like $50 million for 5 years?

Hmmmm. Not that it was ever really a question, but Tony Parker at $66 for 6 years or Devin Harris at $50 for 5 years? I think I'll take the premium of about $1 million per year for the All-Star.

da_suns_fan__

09-13-2007, 10:42 AM

we dump Nash and go to the Finals. we dump Nash and beat the Spurs (something Nash still can't do).

I'd say the Suns paid a shitload of money to haul away Maverick trash :fro

YOU seemed pretty upset about losing this "trash" on page one of this thread.

I get it, though. You guys can say it was a stupid move, but don't like to hear anyone else say it. :lol

Findog

09-13-2007, 10:43 AM

Drive you nuts doesn't it?

What drives me nuts? Exchanging a very good All-Star caliber point guard for a mediocre big man needed to guard the Duncans and Yaos of the League?

Its fun to try and come up with ANY GM move (trade, contract, etc.) in the history of the NBA that was a worse decision than Cuban snubbing Steve Nash.

Portland picking Bowie over Jordan would probably be a worse move..but thats the only one I can think of.

Try harder. Rashard Lewis to Orlando, Barkley to Phoenix for spares, and that's just off the top of my head. Phoenix isn't going to get any better because of the salary commitments to their top three players.

I don't think any trade could have been worse, cuz you always get SOMETHING in return, and no one has ever just let an MVP walk away for nothing

We got his salary slot to spend elsewhere. Do you know what the salary cap is? Funny, just goes to show you valuable bigs are, even spares like Dampier. Not that anybody can really guard Duncan, but without Dampier, we don't beat San Antonio. Nash isn't an MVP, btw. Neither is Dirk or anybody else not named Tim Duncan or Kobe Bryant. Funny, the Lakers lose Shaq, got 60 cents on the dollar for him, and went from Elite to missing the playoffs. Mavs let Nash walk, got a mediocre big to replace him, and just got better and better. Nash is very good, but he's got to be the most overrated player in the League right now. If he was really an MVP, the Mavs losing him would've been a huge blow. It hasn't been.

Findog

09-13-2007, 10:43 AM

YOU seemed pretty upset about losing this "trash" on page one of this thread.

I get it, though. You guys can say it was a stupid move, but don't like to hear anyone else say it. :lol

I was upset at the time it happened because Nash was and is one of my all-time favorite players, but history has shown it was hardly an error, if anything, it benefited both Phoenix and Dallas.

monosylab1k

09-13-2007, 10:45 AM

YOU seemed pretty upset about losing this "trash" on page one of this thread.
Nope, I was just curious if people would rather have Nash/Jamison or Damp/Harris/Stack. That's all. But it's understandable that you'd confuse "curious" with "upset" since ppl in Phoenix can't even comprehend a simple thing like "stay on the bench"

Findog

09-13-2007, 10:48 AM

Nope, I was just curious if people would rather have Nash/Jamison or Damp/Harris/Stack. That's all. But it's understandable that you'd confuse "curious" with "upset" since ppl in Phoenix can't even comprehend a simple thing like "stay on the bench"

It must be the heat. I've been to Phoenix, it's lovely scenery, but the median IQ must be around 70, if da_suns_fan is any indication.

da_suns_fan__

09-13-2007, 10:50 AM

What drives me nuts? Exchanging a very good All-Star caliber point guard for a mediocre big man needed to guard the Duncans and Yaos of the League?

Try harder. Rashard Lewis to Orlando, Barkley to Phoenix for spares, and that's just off the top of my head. Phoenix isn't going to get any better because of the salary commitments to their top three players.

I don't think any trade could have been worse, cuz you always get SOMETHING in return, and no one has ever just let an MVP walk away for nothing

We got his salary slot to spend elsewhere. Do you know what the salary cap is? Funny, just goes to show you valuable bigs are, even spares like Dampier. Not that anybody can really guard Duncan, but without Dampier, we don't beat San Antonio. Nash isn't an MVP, btw. Neither is Dirk or anybody else not named Tim Duncan or Kobe Bryant. Funny, the Lakers lose Shaq, got 60 cents on the dollar for him, and went from Elite to missing the playoffs. Mavs let Nash walk, got a mediocre big to replace him, and just got better and better. Nash is very good, but he's got to be the most overrated player in the League right now. If he was really an MVP, the Mavs losing him would've been a huge blow. It hasn't been.

Here's a poster who is constantly praising his own basketball IQ, but isn't willing to admit that letting Steve Nash Walk away so his team could sign Erica Dampier was one of the worst decisions in NBA history.

How did Erica do against the Warriors? Bet Cuban thought "we could use a Steve Nash right about, NOW!" :lol :lol

monosylab1k

09-13-2007, 10:50 AM

What is that, something like $50 million for 5 years?

Hmmmm. Not that it was ever really a question, but Tony Parker at $66 for 6 years or Devin Harris at $50 for 5 years? I think I'll take the premium of about $1 million per year for the All-Star.
They're definitely paying Harris more on his potential than his production (which is always a dangerous thing).

Findog

09-13-2007, 11:02 AM

Here's a poster who is constantly praising his own basketball IQ, but isn't willing to admit that letting Steve Nash Walk away so his team could sign Erica Dampier was one of the worst decisions in NBA history.

I'm not willing to admit it was one of the worst decisions in basketball history because it wasn't. We let him walk, we got better, Damp guards Duncan as well as anybody, we beat the Spurs and made the Finals, farther than we went with Nash. Case closed.

How did Erica do against the Warriors? Bet Cuban thought "we could use a Steve Nash right about, NOW!"

He had a torn rotator cuff and hardly played. We could've used him against Golden State, we had nobody back to protect the rim from dribble penetration. Steve Nash wouldn't have guarded Baron Davis any better than Jet or Devin. You've been owned again, just like your team.

da_suns_fan__

09-13-2007, 11:16 AM

I'm not willing to admit it was one of the worst decisions in basketball history because it wasn't. We let him walk, we got better, Damp guards Duncan as well as anybody, we beat the Spurs and made the Finals, farther than we went with Nash. Case closed.

Actually, he doesn't. Desagna Diop does a nice job on Duncan (his length bother Duncan) but not Dampier.

Need Proof? Avery gives more minutes to Diop than Dampier against the Spurs:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/splits?statsId=3518

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/splits?statsId=3117

btw - you keep bring up that they made it to the finals, but they also LOST to the Heat, LOST to the Suns the year before and LOST in the first round to the Warriors this year!!!

The achilles heel for all three exists has been leadership.

Maybe the asset Steve Nash is praised for most of all.

So you let a player walk away so he could win 2 MVPs, eliminate your team from the playoffs, show the exact type of leadership your team desperately needs all so you can have a Eric Dampier who your coach chooses to not even play against the team that he was brought in to defend!!!

It was a collosal error, and probably cost the Mavericks MULTIPLE championsips!! Would the Mavs have a three-peat on their hands if they would have just kept Nash?

K-State Spur

09-13-2007, 11:19 AM

I do like Harris and I think he's going to be solid, but to think back...

We don't keep Nash and wind up getting Dampier with that money, Then we trade Jamison to get the pick for Harris, and get Stackhouse as well.

Would you rather have Damp, Harris, & Stack or would you rather we still had Nash & Jamison?

Nash, Terry, Howard, Dirk, Diop with Jamison as 6th man would be a pretty salty lineup.

Either way, the Mavs are still in good shape currenty.

Except that you probably don't go after Terry if Nash is still in the fold.

mavsfan1000

09-13-2007, 11:28 AM

Harris>Barbosa
Outside shooting Barbosa
Slashing Harris
Passing Harris
Defense Harris

Findog

09-13-2007, 11:29 AM

Actually, he doesn't. Desagna Diop does a nice job on Duncan (his length bother Duncan) but not Dampier.

You're an idiot, but that's nothing new. Diop is a nice young player, but he's foul-prone and doesn't have the stamina to play starter's minutes. You can't rely on him to play 40 minutes a game against Duncan. And what would you know or your team know about defense in general, specifically about how to defend a player like Duncan? Nobody guards Duncan well, but Dampier does as nice a job as possible.

Need Proof? Avery gives more minutes to Diop than Dampier against the Spurs:

Really?

G1 - Diop 16 minutes, Dampier 28
G2 - Diop 20, Damp 15 (blowout win for Dallas)
G3 - Diop 19, Damp 24
G4 - Diop 13, Damp 36
G5 - Diop 24, Damp 17 (foul trouble for Damp)
G6 - Diop 6, Damp 26
G7 - Diop 10, Damp 26

btw - you keep bring up that they made it to the finals, but they also LOST to the Heat, LOST to the Suns the year before and LOST in the first round to the Warriors this year!!!

I keep bringing up the fact that the Mavs let Nash walk and got better without him. I keep bringing up the fact that the Mavs went further (Finals appearance, victory over championship-caliber team) than they ever did with Nash (conference finals and a loss to a championship-caliber team). By any objective measure, the Mavs are a better team now without Nash than they were with him. That's not a mark against Nash, he's a very good player, and he's helped turn Phoenix around from a crap team to a very good regular season team, but it's just the facts.

The achilles heel for all three exists has been leadership.

"Leadership" isn't going to stop Dwyane Wade or Baron Davis.

Maybe the asset Steve Nash is praised for most of all.

It sure isn't his defense or his stamina and ability to play at a high level deep into the playoffs.

So you let a player walk away so he could win 2 MVPs,

Tim Duncan and Kobe Bryant are MVPs. White sportswriters who never played the game doling out that award, be it to Nash or Dirk, that means nothing.

eliminate your team from the playoffs,

As well as eliminating Nash and his new team from the playoffs.

show the exact type of leadership your team desperately needs all so you can have a Eric Dampier who your coach chooses to not even play against the team that he was brought in to defend!!!

Hmm, he played heavy minutes against the Spurs and without him we don't beat San Antonio. Whatever you say, da_suns_dumbass.

It was a collosal error, and probably cost the Mavericks MULTIPLE championsips

God, I feel sorry for you at this point. This is just getting too easy. Nash is a very good player, but he's not Jesus, okay?

2003-04 Mavs: 52 wins, first-round exit.

Post-Nash:

2004-05 Mavs: 58 wins, second-round exit

2005-06 Mavs: 60 wins, Finals loss.

2006-07 Mavs: 67 wins, first-round exit.

Losing Nash has cost us a playmaking point guard adept at creating for himself and others, no more, no less. Steve Nash is too one-dimensional a player to ever lead a team to a title.

monosylab1k

09-13-2007, 11:31 AM

Except that you probably don't go after Terry if Nash is still in the fold.
Maybe not. Then again, there was no way Antoine Walker was gonna play in Dallas another year. If that was the best deal available, I bet they'd still do it even if they had Nash, if only to replace Van Exel with Terry.

da_suns_fan__

09-13-2007, 11:58 AM

You're an idiot, but that's nothing new. Diop is a nice young player, but he's foul-prone and doesn't have the stamina to play starter's minutes. You can't rely on him to play 40 minutes a game against Duncan. And what would you know or your team know about defense in general, specifically about how to defend a player like Duncan? Nobody guards Duncan well, but Dampier does as nice a job as possible.

Really?

G1 - Diop 16 minutes, Dampier 28
G2 - Diop 20, Damp 15 (blowout win for Dallas)
G3 - Diop 19, Damp 24
G4 - Diop 13, Damp 36
G5 - Diop 24, Damp 17 (foul trouble for Damp)
G6 - Diop 6, Damp 26
G7 - Diop 10, Damp 26

I keep bringing up the fact that the Mavs let Nash walk and got better without him. I keep bringing up the fact that the Mavs went further (Finals appearance, victory over championship-caliber team) than they ever did with Nash (conference finals and a loss to a championship-caliber team). By any objective measure, the Mavs are a better team now without Nash than they were with him. That's not a mark against Nash, he's a very good player, and he's helped turn Phoenix around from a crap team to a very good regular season team, but it's just the facts.

"Leadership" isn't going to stop Dwyane Wade or Baron Davis.

It sure isn't his defense or his stamina and ability to play at a high level deep into the playoffs.

Tim Duncan and Kobe Bryant are MVPs. White sportswriters who never played the game doling out that award, be it to Nash or Dirk, that means nothing.

As well as eliminating Nash and his new team from the playoffs.

Hmm, he played heavy minutes against the Spurs and without him we don't beat San Antonio. Whatever you say, da_suns_dumbass.

God, I feel sorry for you at this point. This is just getting too easy. Nash is a very good player, but he's not Jesus, okay?

2003-04 Mavs: 52 wins, first-round exit.

Post-Nash:

2004-05 Mavs: 58 wins, second-round exit

2005-06 Mavs: 60 wins, Finals loss.

2006-07 Mavs: 67 wins, first-round exit.

Losing Nash has cost us a playmaking point guard adept at creating for himself and others, no more, no less. Steve Nash is too one-dimensional a player to ever lead a team to a title.

FinDog:

Just because Dirk showed his true colors in the playoffs, doesn't mean Steve Nash is undeserving of his MVP awards. Nash isn't the best player in the league, but he IS the MVP.

Its a defense mechanism on your part. Youre trying to pull Steve Nash into the same boat as Dirk. Sorry buddy, Nash didn't choke like Dirk did.

Also, Nash doesn't stop Dwayne Wade or Baron Davis, but it wouldn't have mattered. Nash would have EASILY beaten the Miami Heat (do you have ANY idea of the BLOWOUTS the Suns have against Miami every years since Nash has arrived). That would have been AT LEAST one championship for the Mavs.

And youre "Cherry picking data" again with your history. You say that the Mavs won 52 games with Nash the year before he left, but didn't they win 60 games with Nash in 2003? Not to mention that the Mavs from 2006 have how many hold overs from 2004? They're very different teams.

Also, when a players plays 30 minutes or more in ONE game in a seven game series, you can't say that he played "heavy minutes" :lol :lol

Also, what happened THIS year (remember the links I provided that you COMPLETELY ignored)? Is Diop better than Dampier NOW?

Lastly, you think you know Steve Nash better than Suns fans, but what you don't realize is that Nash elevated his game when he left Dallas. He's a MUCH better player now that he ever was in Dallas. Amazingly, he seems to get better every year he plays.

Mavs fans are left to wonder "what could have been".

Findog

09-13-2007, 12:07 PM

Just because Dirk showed his true colors in the playoffs, doesn't mean Steve Nash is undeserving of his MVP awards. Nash isn't the best player in the league, but he IS the MVP.

Uh, no, he's not. He plays no defense and he's overrated. Is he more valuable than Duncan? No. He is more valuable than Kobe? No.

Its a defense mechanism on your part. Youre trying to pull Steve Nash into the same boat as Dirk. Sorry buddy, Nash didn't choke like Dirk did.

Nash didn't lead his team to the Finals or beat San Antonio like Dirk did either. Nash has shown his true colors in the playoffs: he's great for SportsCenter highlights, he's great for leading the Suns to 55+ wins, but he always physically breaks down the deeper into the playoffs his teams go. Face it, Dirk has a better playoff resume than Nash, Golden State and Miami included.

Also, Nash doesn't stop Dwayne Wade or Baron Davis, but those players can't stop Nash either. And Nash would have EASILY beaten the Miami (do you have ANY idea of the BLOWOUTS the Suns have against Miami every years since Nash has arrived).

The Mavs beat the Shaq-Wade Heat four straight times and rather easily before the Finals. Of course a Suns fan would have a hard time understanding that regular season results don't necessarily repeat in the playoffs. A Miami-Phoenix matchup is certainly intringuing, but of course it will always be a hypothetical one since the Suns can't beat San Antonio. Is it automatic the Suns beat Miami when they have nobody to guard Shaq? If Raja Bell can't guard Kobe, can he guard Wade? I'm not arguing Miami would definitely beat Phoenix, but I have no more confidence Phoenix could beat Miami when the games are called tighter and when they are inevitably played at a half-court pace in the Finals.

would have been AT LEAST one championship for the Mavs.

I shudder to think of what kind of numbers Shaq would've put up if we had Nash instead of Dampier. Of course, it's a moot point, since we never would've even gotten that far.

And youre "Cherry picking data" again with your history. You say that the Mavs won 52 games with Nash the year before he left, but didn't they win 60 games with Nash in 2003?

They also lost to the Spurs in the conference finals without a decent big to guard Duncan.

Not to mention that the Mavs from 2006 have how many hold overs from 2004? They're very different teams.

Exactly, we're a much better team now than we were with Nash.

Also, when a players plays 30 minutes or more in ONE game in a seven game series, you can't say that he played "heavy minutes"

This from a guy who argued Diop plays more than Damp against San Antonio.

Also, what happened THIS year (remember the links I provided that you COMPLETELY ignored)? Is Diop better than Dampier NOW?

Diop lost 80 lbs after sitting on the bench for Cleveland. He doesn't have the conditioning or stamina to play starter's minutes like Damp. If it's a sprint, I take Diop. If it's a marathon, I take Damp.

Lastly, you think you know Steve Nash better than Suns fans, but what you don't realize is that Nash elevated his game when he left Dallas. He's a MUCH better player now that he ever was in Dallas. Amazingly, he seems to get better every year he plays.

True, I don't watch the Suns club Milwaukee or Charlotte in February, but nothing has changed with him. He's on a team that is a better fit for his skillset, nothing more, nothing less.

Mavs fans are left to wonder "what could have been".

That's easy. 50+ wins and never getting past San Antonio. Something you're now very familiar with.

da_suns_fan__

09-13-2007, 12:24 PM

Uh, no, he's not. He plays no defense and he's overrated. Is he more valuable than Duncan? No. He is more valuable than Kobe? No.

Nash didn't lead his team to the Finals or beat San Antonio like Dirk did either. Nash has shown his true colors in the playoffs: he's great for SportsCenter highlights, he's great for leading the Suns to 55+ wins, but he always physically breaks down the deeper into the playoffs his teams go. Face it, Dirk has a better playoff resume than Nash, Golden State and Miami included.

The Mavs beat the Shaq-Wade Heat four straight times and rather easily before the Finals. Of course a Suns fan would have a hard time understanding that regular season results don't necessarily repeat in the playoffs. A Miami-Phoenix matchup is certainly intringuing, but of course it will always be a hypothetical one since the Suns can't beat San Antonio. Is it automatic the Suns beat Miami when they have nobody to guard Shaq? If Raja Bell can't guard Kobe, can he guard Wade? I'm not arguing Miami would definitely beat Phoenix, but I have no more confidence Phoenix could beat Miami when the games are called tighter and when they are inevitably played at a half-court pace in the Finals.

I shudder to think of what kind of numbers Shaq would've put up if we had Nash instead of Dampier. Of course, it's a moot point, since we never would've even gotten that far.

They also lost to the Spurs in the conference finals without a decent big to guard Duncan.

Exactly, we're a much better team now than we were with Nash.

This from a guy who argued Diop plays more than Damp against San Antonio.

Diop lost 80 lbs after sitting on the bench for Cleveland. He doesn't have the conditioning or stamina to play starter's minutes like Damp. If it's a sprint, I take Diop. If it's a marathon, I take Damp.

True, I don't watch the Suns club Milwaukee or Charlotte in February, but nothing has changed with him. He's on a team that is a better fit for his skillset, nothing more, nothing less.

That's easy. 50+ wins and never getting past San Antonio. Something you're now very familiar with.

Dumbass...he does play more than Damp against the Spurs.

It the words of Ronald Reagan:

There you go again. :lol

Cherry picking data. You LOVE to do that, don't you? Just IGNORE stats from last year since they don't support your argument, right? Diop played more against the Spurs than Damp last year buddy, get OVER IT! He was a wasted signing.

btw - Another example is when you claim the Mavs are a better team in 2006 than they were in 2004 cuz they lost Nash?

Im not a Mavs fan, but Im trying to think of all the players that didn't appear on those two teams besides Nash:

Michael Finley
Antawn Jamison
Antoione Walker
Tony Delk
Shawn Bradley :lol
Desagna Diop
Devin Harris
Jerry Stackhouse

Not to mention they went from Don Nelson to Avery Johnson.

So the Mavs completely overhaul their lineup, change coaches, get farther than they ever had and you want to attribute it all to getting rid of Steve Nash, who has won 2 MVPs, won more playoff victories than the Mavericks since he left Dallas, and demonstrated the leadership that kept the Mavericks from their ultimate goal?

Do you know how easy it is to consistently own your ass on a daily basis? :lol

Findog

09-13-2007, 12:38 PM

Why use stats from last year when they don't support your argument, right? Diop played more against the Spurs than Damp last year buddy, get OVER IT! He was a wasted signing.

We didn't play San Antonio in the playoffs last year. I was using the most recent example of when we did. Again, since all you have as a Suns fan is regular season success and nothing more, I know you're clearly not familiar with the concept of how a rotation changes and the distribution of minutes changes once you're in a seven-game series as opposed to a random regular season meeting, but you'll just have to defer to me on this.

Another example is when you claim the Mavs are a better team in 2006 than they were in 2004 cuz they lost Nash?

We used his salary slot to get a big that could be counted upon to guard Duncan. Does he shut Duncan down? Of course not. Does he allow us to get away without double-teaming him all the time? Yes. We can't do that with Nash. We didn't have the money to sign a big that could start.

I'm just going on facts. We're a better team now than we were with Nash. We're a better defensive team than we were with Nash. I know you're a Suns fan, and you and your team have a hard time with this concept, but defense matters in the playoffs.

So the Mavs completely overhaul their lineup, change coaches, get farther than they ever had and you want to attribute it all to getting rid of Steve Nash, who has won 2 MVPs, won more playoff victories than the Mavericks since he left Dallas, and demonstrated the leadership that kept the Mavericks from their ultimate goal?

I attribute our success to the fact that I'd rather have Devin Harris defend Tony Parker than Steve Nash, and I'd rather have Erick Dampier guard Tim Duncan than Alan Henderson, Shawn Bradley or any of the other spares we trotted out there. You don't seem to understand the concept of a salary cap: We couldn't have both Nash and a big man. Nash's team has also been eliminated by the Mavericks, hasn't gotten as far as the Mavericks, and Phoenix's three-year body of work isn't nearly as impressive as ours.

And keep consoling yourself with Stevie's two MVP awards. You already conceded he isn't as good as Duncan or Kobe, so you admit it's a meaningless award. Why do you keep bringing it up? It's not impressive at all. Steve Nash can't guard Dwyane Wade, Tony Parker or Baron Davis. He wouldn't have helped us.

Phoenix has beaten the following teams since Nash arrived: Memphis, Dallas, LA Lakers, LA Clippers, LA Lakers. One impressive series win, and that was against a Dallas team that had a new coach in midseason and hadn't had a full year with Avery yet. Compare that to Dallas: Houston, Memphis, San Antonio, Phoenix. Three impressive series wins.

Do you know how easy it is to consistently own your ass on a daily basis?

:lol :lol :lol

da_suns_fan__

09-13-2007, 01:03 PM

We didn't play San Antonio in the playoffs last year. I was using the most recent example of when we did. Again, since all you have as a Suns fan is regular season success and nothing more, I know you're clearly not familiar with the concept of how a rotation changes and the distribution of minutes changes once you're in a seven-game series as opposed to a random regular season meeting, but you'll just have to defer to me on this.

We used his salary slot to get a big that could be counted upon to guard Duncan. Does he shut Duncan down? Of course not. Does he allow us to get away without double-teaming him all the time? Yes. We can't do that with Nash. We didn't have the money to sign a big that could start.

I'm just going on facts. We're a better team now than we were with Nash. We're a better defensive team than we were with Nash. I know you're a Suns fan, and you and your team have a hard time with this concept, but defense matters in the playoffs.

I attribute our success to the fact that I'd rather have Devin Harris defend Tony Parker than Steve Nash, and I'd rather have Erick Dampier guard Tim Duncan than Alan Henderson, Shawn Bradley or any of the other spares we trotted out there. You don't seem to understand the concept of a salary cap: We couldn't have both Nash and a big man. Nash's team has also been eliminated by the Mavericks, hasn't gotten as far as the Mavericks, and Phoenix's three-year body of work isn't nearly as impressive as ours.

And keep consoling yourself with Stevie's two MVP awards. You already conceded he isn't as good as Duncan or Kobe, so you admit it's a meaningless award. Why do you keep bringing it up? It's not impressive at all. Steve Nash can't guard Dwyane Wade, Tony Parker or Baron Davis. He wouldn't have helped us.

Phoenix has beaten the following teams since Nash arrived: Memphis, Dallas, LA Lakers, LA Clippers, LA Lakers. One impressive series win, and that was against a Dallas team that had a new coach in midseason and hadn't had a full year with Avery yet. Compare that to Dallas: Houston, Memphis, San Antonio, Phoenix. Three impressive series wins.

:lol :lol :lol

:lol :lol :lol
You just don't learn with the "cherry picking" do you?

Nash has made it farther in the playoffs than the Mavericks 2 out of 3 times since he left Dallas. But you only want to talk about that one season he didn't.

You claim that the Suns have one decent playoff victor and point out that Dallas was handicapped for various reasons for THAT one, and then you claim that the Mavs have THREE decent playoff victories against the Rockets, the Spurs and against the Suns.

For some reason, you forgot to mention the Suns were missing 3 of their "seven starters" due to injury in that series and the Rockets were a five seed who were average at best.

:clap :clap :clap

Also, the fact that Mavs beat the Spurs is moot....They still LOST to the Heat becuase they lacked the talents of a Steve Nash!

And MVP doesn't stand for "best player". Nash IS the MVP. Its not a worthless award. You want to pretend it is because Dirk disgraced it by losing in the first round to an eigth seed. Steve Nash would NEVER let that happen.

Don't hate on Steve Nash's post-Dallas accomplishments just because your Mavs continue to embarrass you.

mavs>spurs2

09-13-2007, 01:12 PM

mavsfan1000

09-13-2007, 01:16 PM

Mavs are better without Nash bottom line

He might be the MVP in Phoenix with their style of play, but thats as far as it goes

Us fans in Dallas know that gimmick style of play will never win you a championship and it's not coincidence that we are a much better team post Nash.
I don't quite agree with this. Nash was playing year round when he was with Dallas. For that he was wearing down by playoff time. Similar to Dirk has been experiencing still. Nash quit the Canada team once he came to Phoenix. Not surprisingly Nash had much more energy by playoff time. Also Amare is a better fit imo with Nash's game than Dirk was. Amare is a beast when going to the hole but needs someone to dish him the ball. Dirk was better at the one on one game but his shots were mainly jump shots. Therefore Nash really didn't make Dirk that much better if at all. Dirk was still shooting the same percentage and isn't really a slasher.

Findog

09-13-2007, 01:20 PM

Nash has made it farther in the playoffs than the Mavericks 2 out of 3 times since he left Dallas. But you only want to talk about that one season he didn't.

The Mavericks have done something the Suns haven't: beat a championship-caliber team and make a Finals. Even with Golden State, the Mavericks have to be accorded more respect and taken more seriously as a championship contender because they've gone further and demonstrated a capability Phoenix hasn't. As for Phoenix beating a shit Laker team last year, congratulations. I'm very impressed.

For some reason, you forgot to mention the Suns were missing 3 of their "seven starters" due to injury in that series and the Rockets were a five seed who were average at best.

Nash and Amare together are 7-5 against Dallas. I'll take my chances against them in a playoff series. As for Raja Bell, he didn't miss the entire series, and if you want to posit that Raja Bell is the difference maker between winning and losing, be my guest. The Rockets team we faced won 53 games, had Yao and TMac. How you call them average, I don't know, but then again, you're da_suns_dumbass.

Also, the fact that Mavs beat the Spurs is moot....They still LOST to the Heat becuase they lacked the talents of a Steve Nash!

We lost to Miami because our perimeter defense sucked and we had nobody to guard Wade. Fail to see how Nash would've helped with that.

And MVP doesn't stand for "best player". Nash IS the MVP. Its not a worthless award. You want to pretend it is because Dirk disgraced it by losing in the first round to an eigth seed. Steve Nash would NEVER let that happen

I just don't care about regular season results and regular season awards. No GM would take Nash over Duncan or Kobe. He isn't more valuable to his team than they are to theirs. I hope my team gets better and wins a title, I don't blather on about MVP awards and tv ratings. Warriors beat the Suns last year and play the same kind of up-tempo game. Suns would probably have beaten Golden State, but it's not a sure thing.

Don't hate on Steve Nash's post-Dallas accomplishments just because your Mavs continue to embarrass you

I love Steve Nash, but I'd rather be truthful than be a blind homer. The embarassment in this thread is all yours.

Dalhoop

09-13-2007, 01:43 PM

Nash with the Mavs was a differnt player because of his skill set and the players around him.

He has the big assist numbers on the Suns because of one play, the lob to the rim. When he was with the Mavs, they didn't have the players that could take advantage of that play. Finley and Dirk are not "high fliers", they are shooters.

What Nash has in the Suns team is a team of leapers. Nash is very good at passing the ball and the alley-oop is a play that the Suns run 5-6 times a game. With the Mavs we saw that play around once every couple of games (Most of the time Jamison)

The Suns are made for his skill set, the Mavs were not. He is the same player he was with the Mavs but with a supporting cast more in line with what he does best.

I wish him the best, but at the same time, the mavs are doing just fine without him.

Findog

09-13-2007, 01:46 PM

The Suns are made for his skill set, the Mavs were not. He is the same player he was with the Mavs but with a supporting cast more in line with what he does best.

I wish him the best, but at the same time, the mavs are doing just fine without him.

Which goes to the heart of my argument: how can a team lose an "MVP" and get better? The Lakers got Caron Butler and Lamar Odom in exchange for Shaq, and went from the Finals to out of the playoffs. The Mavs lost an All-Star PG and got a mediocre big in return, and got better.

I love Nash, as a player and as a person, but he's overrated.

FromWayDowntown

09-13-2007, 01:49 PM

They're definitely paying Harris more on his potential than his production (which is always a dangerous thing).

Comparing Parker and Harris from a salary standpoint might also demonstrate that the Spurs got a substantial bargain in re-signing Parker when they did. It's hard to believe that the deal with Parker almost didn't happen because of a total $2 million difference over the life of a 6 year contract (not $2M per, but $64 instead of $66).

Dirk Nowitzki

09-13-2007, 04:59 PM

I love Nash, as a player and as a person, but he's overrated.

In ways you can kinda say that about Dirk. I love my boys but Dirk really let me down this year. Not only am I dissapointed in him...I am also really concerned about his heart. I know I am reading too much into this but it really pissed me the fuck off when he told the press game 4 was win or go home or that the warriors were getting to him. He cant play defense any better than Nash. Dirks other stength other than scoring is rebounding while Nash's is assists. Of course they play different positions but I wont argue that letting Nash was not a mistake. A big reason we managed to beat the Spurs was because Shawn Bradley was replaced by Diop which IMO was A HUGE UPGRADE. Having extra bigs really put us in that position.

K-State Spur

09-13-2007, 05:06 PM

duncan228

09-13-2007, 05:08 PM

A big reason we managed to beat the Spurs was because Shawn Bradley was replaced by Diop which IMO was A HUGE UPGRADE. Having extra bigs really put us in that position.

It was huge in overtime in game 7.
Duncan depleted, Diop fresh.

I believe it would have ended differently if Duncan had anything left in the tank after a season playing through planter faciitis.

Extra bigs did the Mavs a world of good that series.

Dirk Nowitzki

09-13-2007, 05:10 PM

It was huge in overtime in game 7.
Duncan depleted, Diop fresh.

I believe it would have ended differently if Duncan had anything left in the tank after a season playing through planter faciitis.

Extra bigs did the Mavs a world of good that series.

Yes it was but the Spurs have had a much better team since while the Mavs made history in a negative way. However we did get to FINALLY have our southwest division banner ceremony and 67 win parade! :clap :clap :clap

duncan228

09-13-2007, 05:11 PM

Yes it was but the Spurs have had a much better team since while the Mavs made history in a negative way. However we did get to FINALLY have our southwest division banner ceremony and 67 win parade! :clap :clap :clap

You do make me laugh.
Thanks! :lol

Cry Havoc

09-13-2007, 08:52 PM

Is Harris actually planning to play defense this year or just rely on his flop every time the player with the ball touches him?

Findog

09-13-2007, 10:23 PM

In ways you can kinda say that about Dirk. I love my boys but Dirk really let me down this year. Not only am I dissapointed in him...I am also really concerned about his heart. I know I am reading too much into this but it really pissed me the fuck off when he told the press game 4 was win or go home or that the warriors were getting to him.

Oh, I totally agree that there is something to the strain of thought that Dirk is not as mentally tough as he needs to be. There is a validity to that analysis. There seem to be two camps concerning the last two playoff exits: "Dirk isn't a leader and is a soft choker, it's all on him" and "The Mavs as a team were at the mercy of matchups and lost as a team due to X's and O's." I think the truth is somewhere in between. My main argument with dah_suns_dumbass is that results don't lie: The Mavs are better now than they were when Nash played for us. We've accomplished more without him than with him. Part of that is correlation and part of it is causation.

While it wasn't great for us that he went to a conference competitor and strengthened them in the process, it's not "the worst move in NBA history." You could argue it was a mistake, you could argue it was a pragmatic decision to take the team in another direction that has mostly paid dividends, but his argument is indefensible hyperbole.

Nor can da_suns_dumbass credibly argue that letting Nash walk to Phoenix has cost us "multiple titles." If Nash were still here, so too would Nellie, and Nellie just doesn't care about defense. The further you advance into the playoffs, sooner or later you're going to run into the Spurs, and Parker owns Nash.