Cuban acknowledges what everybody but Marcus Bryant knew

link

Its not just business, its personal

In the NBA when a player is signed to a contract, the business side is downplayed. Everyone is happy. Everyone knows there is an incredible amount of risk taken, but its a time to celebrate and ignore what could go wrong. All is right in the world.

When teams have to release a player, the NBA becomes a business and all involved say just that. Its just a business and we all understand that these things happen. But its not true. The NBA is never just a business. Its always business. Its always personal. All good businesses are personal. The best businesses are very personal.

Creating a close connection to those you do business with has its many risks, rewards and consequences. There are few things in business i have encountered that are more difficult than firing someone, particularly if that someone has always been, or has become a friend. On the flipside, I have been rewarded with many friends

Michael Finley is one of those people I am proud to call my friend. Releasing Fin last night was one of the hardest things I have had to do as owner of the Mavs. (Trading Erik Strickland was probably the hardest. Strick did more to help me my first year than anyone.). Even more difficult than releasing Mike was having the conversations with him about what our options were

The model for success in the NBA has changed over the past 6 years I have been in the league. When I first got to the Mavs, there was no luxury tax, revenues from TV and the league went up every year, as did the salary cap. That changed dramatically with the leagues new TV deal and it changed even further with this years new collective bargaining agreement. Rather than an environment where salaries could go up because the cap and revenues were going up, we entered an environment where trades were made almost exclusively for financial reasons and rarely for basketball skill reasons.

The Mavs tried to take advantage of the situation. When the annual league revenue increases stopped and a luxury tax loomed, teams adjusted their financial profiles. To get under the tax threshold, they offered good players packaged with horrible contracts. We took them. We hoped the talent would get us a championship before the number of bad contracts we took on in trades caught up with us.

It didnt happen

Over the past year we have done our best to try to “rebuild” and still be in a position to win a championship. We have always been good at developing young players. We work hard to give them personal attention and skills development. We are working to improve it even further and have completely upgraded our development programs this summer.

We are also significantly changing how we scout NBA players. It has become more organized, structured and planned rather than “gut feel ”. We have a coach who is far more systematic in his approach to both

More importantly we have gone from just trying to acquire talent to have assets that in turn might be traded for better talent, to making sure we have players that fill a role for Coach Johnson’s vision of the team. Today, and for the future with young players that we can develop to fill those roles on future Mavs teams.

Which brings us back to Mike. Under the new CBA, the amount of money we would be able to save by waiving Mike, and invoking the amnesty provision, when combined with some financial clauses in the way his contract was structured and the money that could be returned as part of the NBA set off contract provisions, could put our cash savings in the next 3 years at more than 90mm dollars. Thats a lot of money.

Now I would be shocked if we are able to realize all of that and stay under the tax amount, but even saving that much money in essence gives us a “do over” in terms of financial flexibility when it comes to signing new players. It gives me a chance to recover from the mistakes I made.

Are we going to get back in the business of taking on bad contracts to get a single player. No. Will we consider trading short term contracts for longer, more expensive players, yes. If it makes basketball sense and doesnt inhibit our future. The difference going forward today vs the past is that Avery and Donnie are putting in programs and structure that will allow us to better evaluate players and choose those that put our team in the best position to succeed. We never did that in the past.

We made trades because we thought we knew players. Im embarrased to admit, but this summer was the first time we actually brought in non rookie Free Agents that we were interested in to work out. Before, we just called the agents of guys we liked and tried to work out deals.

Avery and Donnie and Joe P have watched more tape in a week of players that we have talked about in trades or Free Agency then we have watched in any summer since I bought the team and maybe in all combined.

Its my fault that we got to this point.

I never should have authorized deals without asking for far more details. I was guilty of being overly optomistic. I wanted to believe that the next deal was the one that was the difference maker. I found ways to rationalize the business side and how i would only be losing a few more dollars and that if it made the difference it was worth it. I enabled a culture where we always thought that if we had assets to trade we could fix a mistake.

I was wrong.

We should have done several years ago what the organization is doing now to improve our player evaluation and development.

The template for success in the NBA changed from the Portland model of 1999-2000 when I got to the league, to the Detroit, San Antonio, Miami model. The finances and rules of the league evolved. The winning teams were ahead of the curve or evolved as the business of the NBA changed. Today, success seems to come from being a smart organization that can identify and develop young talent and have the financial and or cap flexability to be opportunistic and improve your team in season or during the offseason.

Although we have succeeded on the court to the point of 5 straight 50 plus win seasons, we certainly didnt do it “the best way” . We did it the most expensive way. It cost us flexibility and created lots of bad habits. That was my mistake and it ended up costing us Mike.

Waiving Mike gave us the opportunity to reclaim financial flexibility. It never should have gotten to this point. My mistakes let it. Which makes it all the more painful. Its business, but it really is personal.

Im learning. Our organization is learning. The bright side is that I like the team we have going into the year. Our guys have been working hard to get better this summer. I think having AJ for a full training camp along with 11 returning players will allow us to compensate for losing Mike and hopefully be a better team.

You left out the "Goodbye, Cruel World" part...

I admire Mark Cuban for owning his mistakes. That`s character.

Marcus Bryant enjoys the fact that he's gotten under picnroll's skin so.

Anyways, life was harder for Mark Cuban since he didn't have a Tim Duncan fall into his lap. He had some money to burn and tried to make the franchise competitive any way he could.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant

Marcus Bryant enjoys the fact that he's gotten under picnroll's skin so.

---

Hate to disappoint you but you haven't "gotten under picnroll's skin", in fact I enjoy most of your posts. There are very few that annoy me, an example would be IceColdBrewski.

Quote:

---

The template for success in the NBA changed from the Portland model of 1999-2000 when I got to the league

---

I guess I missed those championship parades in Portland.

Let's be honest here, the Spurs' success is about 80% due to drafting Tim Duncan. Ginobili, despite all of the Spurs' due diligence, was a total lucky draw (not that I am complaining). For me, the talent acquisition that commands the most respect was Parker. No less than 5 teams in dire need of a point guard passed on him in the 1st round back in 2001.

The front office has done a great job in building a team around him. But it's hard to dog Cuban too much when he never really had a franchise player fall into his lap in the first place. Not that he would probably mind a young athletic man falling into his lap, but that's for another thread...

Cuban's biggest mistake was letting Don Nelson stick around for so long.

Yeah, Nelson apparently suckered Cuban into believing that offense wins championships.

Do you think Avery will change the Mavs to be more defensive minded instead of run and gun?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sa_butta

Do you think Avery will change the Mavs to be more defensive minded instead of run and gun?

---

Absolutely. As long as Cuban will give AJ the freedom to structure the team in that mold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant

Absolutely. As long as Cuban will give AJ the freedom to structure the team in that mold.

---

If he has any brains at all he know DEFENSE wins championships. And Im sure Avery learned alot from Pop.

Well apparently Mavs have offered Diop a three year $6 million deal. Not sure they're off to such a great start on their new plan of action.

For the past few years, it became obvious that these guys were simply "making trades just to make trades". Every summer was like a revolving door in that organization. Trying to hit the home run in 1 year. This blog confirms it.

Big ups to Cuban for owning up to the mistakes. However, Nelson should also be blamed for his "over zealous, talent-hoarding tactics" that helped get them in this position.

Big Nellie was famous for talking up the talent and potential of a specific player on another team, acquiring him, quickly becoming disenchanted with him and then wanting to ship him out.

This is the same guy who became so enamored with Shawn Bradley, at a time when no one wanted him, that he hailed him "a cornerstone piece of our future". This is after Bradley had already failed miserably in both Philadelphia and New Jersey. And at the end of his contract, what did the Mavs do? They signed him to a new 6-yr, 36mil contract! Unbelievable!

As a Dallas resident (and Spurs fan of course), I've laughed at the way these guys have repeatedly jumped in front of the cameras and microphones every year trying the justify deals that brought in players like Raef LaFrentz, Antoine Walker, Calvin Booth, Shawn Bradley, Keith Van Horn, Alan Henderson, Erick Dampier among others. Now all of a sudden, they get fiscally responible and let Nash and Finley walk - without compensation! The cardinal sin in player transactions.

With Big Nellie calling a lot of the shots, and with Cuban's backing, it's no wonder they are in the financial position they are in. And if they think they're gonna win a championship during the Duncan era - THINK AGAIN!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by picnroll

Well apparently Mavs have offered Diop a three year $6 million deal. Not sure they're off to such a great start on their new plan of action.

---

They do need a big man help with two aging centers one of which I think is pretty useless intitials SB, at least they will have a young body and who knows, it could work out well for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sa_butta

They do need a big man help with two aging centers one of which I think is pretty useless intitials SB, at least they will have a young body and who knows, it could work out well for them.

---

Rule of thumb, whenever you see the Knicks and Mavs the only ones vying for a player, particularly a big man, bet large amounts of money that that player sucks.

Quote:

---

As a Dallas resident (and Spurs fan of course), I've laughed at the way these guys have repeatedly jumped in front of the cameras and microphones every year trying the justify deals that brought in players like Raef LaFrentz, Antoine Walker, Calvin Booth, Shawn Bradley, Keith Van Horn, Alan Henderson, Erick Dampier among others.

---

I just shook my head when I used to work in Ft. Worth. And the people up there buy it, hook, line & sinker.

The Mavs are nothing but a playtoy for Cuban.

Quote:

---

But it's hard to dog Cuban too much when he never really had a franchise player fall into his lap in the first place

---

Dirk?

My only response to reading the above is "duh". I don't see what's so courageous about Cuban admitting his mistakes when everybody outside of his organization and fanbase knew they were mistakes. Cuban received credit for success achieved by players that were there before he arrived and achieved what they did in spite of him, not because of him. And I would consider Dirk Nowitzki a franchise player that fell into his lap, as would most of the other teams that passed on him in the draft, including the Celtics.

Not that Nellie deserves much more credit. He drafted fifteen foreign white big men. Probability states that eventually one's gonna hit. Finley was a throw in on the Kidd trade IIRC, and Nash looked like he was going to be a huge waste of money for a while, then he got good, and, whoops, they let him go back to Phoenix.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant

Let's be honest here, the Spurs' success is about 80% due to drafting Tim Duncan. Ginobili, despite all of the Spurs' due diligence, was a total lucky draw (not that I am complaining). For me, the talent acquisition that commands the most respect was Parker. No less than 5 teams in dire need of a point guard passed on him in the 1st round back in 2001.

The front office has done a great job in building a team around him. But it's hard to dog Cuban too much when he never really had a franchise player fall into his lap in the first place. Not that he would probably mind a young athletic man falling into his lap, but that's for another thread...

---

Using your "80%" theory, every team who has ever drafted a "franchise" player, or picked up a significant free agent also fits the same category (i.e. Jordan, Jabbar, O'Neal, Russell, etc). The ratio is actually closer to 50-50 IMO--Duncan being half, and management being half. Not only was drafting Parker a great move, but finding Ginobili was even greater. Getting Bowen, trading for Nazr, etc., are other examples of superb management. Unlike the Mavs, the Spurs were very smart with their money and it has paid off with 3 championships. I think Cuban did what he thought was right...buying a championship ala Georgie Boy of the Yankees, but it simply hasn't worked out. Don't tell me Nowitzki is not a franchise player, because he clearly is...you have to put the right players around him. Bottom line: the Spurs are a successful franchise with or without Duncan. Championships without Tim--not likely, but successful nevertheless.

Nowitzki is not in the class of a Duncan or Shaq. Actually, I should have been more descriptive and pointed out that Cuban did not end up with one of the two greatest bigmen in NBA history playing today. I don't subscribe to the theory that Duncan is on par with Nowitzki, Garnett, KBryant, McGrady, Nash, etc...Duncan and Shaq are in a class by themselves.

Comparing the Mavs with the Spurs is a bit unfair. Now, if we are talking about a team like the Pistons, sure, flame Cuban away.

And getting Ginobili was pure luck. Yes, it came as a result of the Spurs' strategy to invest in international scouting, but it's not like the Spurs knew he would star one day.

I don't ever remember an owner of any team admit to so many mistakes. I gotta give Cuban credit for his mea culpa. He didn't spare himself and didn't try to lay off the blame on Don Nelson as most owners would have done.

It'll be interesting if he lives up to his pledge to listen to AJ and copy the Spurs player management practices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant

Nowitzki is not in the class of a Duncan or Shaq. Actually, I should have been more descriptive and pointed out that Cuban did not end up with one of the two greatest bigmen in NBA history playing today. I don't subscribe to the theory that Duncan is on par with Nowitzki, Garnett, KBryant, McGrady, Nash, etc...Duncan and Shaq are in a class by themselves.

Comparing the Mavs with the Spurs is a bit unfair. Now, if we are talking about a team like the Pistons, sure, flame Cuban away.

And getting Ginobili was pure luck. Yes, it came as a result of the Spurs' strategy to invest in international scouting, but it's not like the Spurs knew he would star one day.

---

Nowitzki is an MVP candidate when healthy, he's two years younger than Duncan, he's been surrounded by all-star and now MVP caliber talent. There are people in Dallas that say the only reason the Spurs beat the Mavs in the playoffs in '03(?) is because Nowitzki got hurt. I agree that Duncan is better, and is built for the playoffs. And maybe I'm not clear on what you meant, but comparing the Mavs to the Spurs is whole lot closer comparison IMO than comparing them to the Pistons, because the Pistons weren't building a team around a superstar.

And I thought Ginobili was going to be a star the day the Spurs drafted him. Why wouldn't the Spurs? The reason Ginobili wasn't a higher pick is because he wasn't going to be immediately available, and the Spurs' SYSTEM allowed them the luxury of not having to spend a pick on someone who could contribute right away.

I never heard anyone during the Bulls era say

"The bulls aren't a great franchise cause they got lucky in drafting jordan"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by samikeyp

I guess I missed those championship parades in Portland.

---

And you may have missed his point. Portland, before they emploded against the Lakers in the 2000 WCF were on thier way to success in the spend now, ask why later model of team building, that Cuban and Dallas "Bought" into. While this model did not work in Portland, the Yankees made a living at it for many years in MLB.

Quote:

---

There are people in Dallas that say the only reason the Spurs beat the Mavs in the playoffs in '03(?) is because Nowitzki got hurt

---

Those people are idiots.

The Spurs beat the Mavericks easier when Nowitzki was healthy than when he was hurt.

No salary cap in MLB makes it a bad model to follow in the NBA, especially when team chemistry is so critical to success or failure of a team, even with a top-shelf superstar. Just ask the T-pups.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

Nowitzki is an MVP candidate when healthy, he's two years younger than Duncan, he's been surrounded by all-star and now MVP caliber talent. There are people in Dallas that say the only reason the Spurs beat the Mavs in the playoffs in '03(?) is because Nowitzki got hurt. I agree that Duncan is better, and is built for the playoffs. And maybe I'm not clear on what you meant, but comparing the Mavs to the Spurs is whole lot closer comparison IMO than comparing them to the Pistons, because the Pistons weren't building a team around a superstar.

---

Nowitzki is nowhere near TD or Shaq in terms of talent and skill. The Mavs never really built their team around Nowitzki as much as they built it around their Big 3.

Quote:

---

And I thought Ginobili was going to be a star the day the Spurs drafted him. Why wouldn't the Spurs? The reason Ginobili wasn't a higher pick is because he wasn't going to be immediately available, and the Spurs' SYSTEM allowed them the luxury of not having to spend a pick on someone who could contribute right away.

---

Fans think every player drafted will be a star. There's no way anyone realistically knew that a 21 year old Manu Ginobili would star in the NBA.

And getting Ginobili was pure luck. Yes, it came as a result of the Spurs' strategy to invest in international scouting, but it's not like the Spurs knew he would star one day.[/QUOTE]

Marcus, that doesn't make sense. Unless you draft a Duncan, Shaq, Jordan, you don't know how good anybody will be. Do you think the Pistons drafting Darko instead of Wade was pure UN-luck, or poor scouting? I don't think the Heat knew that Wade was going to be THIS GOOD, but I'm sure they saw the potential. I think the Spurs realized that Manu had the "chance" to be a star, as much as Detroit thought Darko would be one, and as much as Miami thought Wade could be one.

Again, the Spurs drafted a prospect. They didn't know if he would blow up like he did. Damn. The front office is not clairvoyant, Spurs fans. And neither are you.

I don't think you can come close to calling getting Ginobili "pure lucky" as there were probably 10,000 other basketball players that could have been drafted. When you look at the Spurs draft decision from Parker to Manu to Scola to getting Dallas to draft Giricek to giving up the picks to get guys like Claxton and Nazr, pieces of a title, to the fact they never draft first round busts that take up cap space, it ain't luck. They have done far and away the best job of any NBA club of using the draft choices they've had over the last eight or so years. That's not luck.

Yeah, I heard that one too - repeatedly.

I seem remember Steve Kerr and SJax bustin' their ass in the 4th quarter of that 6th game.

That is revisionism of the highest order. The Spurs had like 2 or 3 international players they liked at #57 and they went with Ginobili. That is, of players who could possibly play in the NBA someday. Not be stars.

You can be a good Spurs fan and not think that the front office is flawless.

Then again, some of you get erections over Holt Cat saving $.

Was it totally unexpected that Ginobili turned out as good as he did? Yes. Did the Spurs identify a player that looked like he had potential? Yes. Did any other NBA team even have Ginobili on their radar? Never that I've heard of.

Now we'll see about Ian. Maybe the Spurs have been "totally lucky" again.

Outside of a handful of players you cannot say that it was known that a player drafted would turn into a star. Yes, teams draft on potential. Yes, the Spurs benefitted from the reluctance of NBA teams to invest in international scouting. But let's simmer down on the Spurs' great moves. They've made their fair share of mistakes and, yes, have been lucky on occasion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant

They've made their fair share of mistakes and, yes, have been lucky on occasion.

---

Actaully they haven't made their fair share of mistakes. They've made few and relative small ones and when they make a mistake, like overpaying Malik, overpaying Rasho, they quickly try to remedy it.

They passed on drafting Josh Howard even though he was on their radar, for example.

They signed Ginobili to a 2 year deal without giving themselves the option to make it a 3 year deal which would've given them his full Bird rights. Last summer would've been entirely different if they didn't have to clear up cap flexibility to be able to keep Manu.

And ask Holt Cat if he thinks Rasho's deal is a "small mistake".

As for Rose, that cost 2 1st round picks to "remedy", if you think that was a mistake.

Howard was a peripaheral casualty of the Kidd fiasco. In the bigger picture though the Spurs didn't end up with Kidd so yes sometimes the Spurs are very lucky.

I didn't say they don't make mistakes. They also didn't draft Redd, Arenas, Varejao, Boozer. Nobodies perfect. They did what they needed to rid themselves of the albatross of Malik's contract and they did pick up Nazr.

Well, there you go, another "mistake" for you.

Also, losing Jack the first time and then passing on him in favor of Barry the second time.

They would have been screwed trying to sign Manu in all likelihood if they signed Jack for what he wanted.

Even before Manu signed his contract last year, most people did not know he was going to be a star. I remember knowledgeable guys such as Brodels arguing hard against a big contract for Manu. Here’s what he said:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brodels

6 years, $42-46 million. He's played well in the playoffs, but he still is what he is. Sign him up. I hope the Spurs can get away with paying him something close to Rasho money. He might command more, though.

Pay him more and you risk having a bad contract in three or four years.

---

Even you, picnroll argued for $45 million.

I tend to believe the FO got lucky with Manu. But I still believe the Spurs FO is the best in the business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smeagol

Even before Manu signed his contract last year, most people did not know he was going to be a star. I remember knowledgeable guys such as Brodels arguing hard against a big contract for Manu. Here’s what he said:



Even you, picnroll argued for $45 million.

---

Starting point. :lol

Actually Spurs are lucky Manu wasn't a FA this year or he would have easily gotten a max deal. Lucky it took awhile for Manu to adjust to the Spurs' style and Pop to adjust to Manu or he would have been more important and expensive when the Spurs did sign him. If you remember Manu coming into the league many experts pegged him as likely ROY, before the injury. Spurs get lucky again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by picnroll

Starting point. :lol

Actually Spurs are lucky Manu wasn't a FA this year or he would have easily gotten a max deal. Lucky it took awhile for Manu to adjust to the Spurs' style and Pop to adjust to Manu or he would have been more important and expensive when the Spurs did sign him. If you remember Manu coming into the league many experts pegged him as likely ROY, before the injury. Spurs get lucky again.

---

Sure, but the flip side is that they could've lost him last year if they weren't able to free up the cap flexibility needed to have kept him. They are very lucky he didn't end up being like the Warriors did with Arenas. They were very fortunate to have Horry amenable to take a pay cut for a year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smeagol

Even before Manu signed his contract last year, most people did not know he was going to be a star. I remember knowledgeable guys such as Brodels arguing hard against a big contract for Manu. Here’s what he said:



Even you, picnroll argued for $45 million.

---

True.

Quote:

---

I tend to believe the FO got lucky with Manu. But I still believe the Spurs FO is the best in the business.

---

They were lucky with his individual selection in the draft. Yes, they had embraced the general strategy of scouting overseas and selecting international players to play elsewhere and develop.

I'm not arguing that the Spurs don't have an excellent front office, but you take away Tim Duncan from this team and maybe in a few years it could taste the postseason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant

They were very fortunate to have Horry amenable to take a pay cut for a year.

---

You meant Bowen . . .?

How much was Horry's salary last season versus the season prior?

And yeah, Bowen helped out a little too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by picnroll

Howard was a peripaheral casualty of the Kidd fiasco. In the bigger picture though the Spurs didn't end up with Kidd so yes sometimes the Spurs are very lucky.

---

Two points.

For the record, had the Spurs not passed on Josh Howard, they would not be in this perpetual search for Bowen's understudy.

Second point, had the FO made the mistake and signed JKidd, their salary cap situation would have been shot to "holy hell". Is there anyone out there that thinks that would have been a good move today? I didn't think so.

So yes, the FO has made some errors along the way.

Spurs were lucky to get Duncan, Spurs were lucky that several teams passed on Parker, Spurs did not know Manu was going to be a star, Holt Cat is a cheapskate. With all this gross mismanagement and luck, we should go ahead and send the trophies back to the league office...the Spurs certainly didn't earn them. Marcus, I normally don't have a problem with your posts, in fact, you provide lots of good information and facts. However, the only thing you didn't cover was how lucky the City of San Antonio was for getting an NBA franchise. While we're at it, how lucky was it that volunteers defended the Alamo...never mind, we lost that game. For God's sake man, eject while you are still a Spurs fan and while you still have some dignity left!

Quote:

---

While we're at it, how lucky was it that volunteers defended the Alamo...never mind, we lost that game.

---

But we won the title that year! :lol

Quote:

---

And you may have missed his point. Portland, before they emploded against the Lakers in the 2000 WCF were on thier way to success in the spend now, ask why later model of team building, that Cuban and Dallas "Bought" into. While this model did not work in Portland, the Yankees made a living at it for many years in MLB.

---

I didn't miss a damn thing. True success in sport is measured one way...championships. The Yankees have done that, Portland (save 1977) has not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWC Bonfire

But we won the title that year! :lol

---

Thanks to an All-State Power Forward named Sam Houston :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

And I thought Ginobili was going to be a star the day the Spurs drafted him. Why wouldn't the Spurs? The reason Ginobili wasn't a higher pick is because he wasn't going to be immediately available, and the Spurs' SYSTEM allowed them the luxury of not having to spend a pick on someone who could contribute right away.

---

This is just insane. I remember reading the only reason they picked Manu was because it was the second to last pick in the draft and he hit something like 10 straight three-pointers in a game in Argentina when RC was out there to scout some other guy on his team. I remember the coaching staff said he was the worst defensive player they'd ever seen. Drafting Manu was a low-risk gamble and the Spurs got dealt a royal flush to make them rich off their $5 bet.

Followup by Dan Rosenbaum in his blog on Cuban's confessions

link

An important excerpt

"The problem with the idea of "acquiring talent to have assets" is that too often these "assets" have large contracts. But if a player produces less than his contract is worth, he is not an asset to the Mavs or any other team that he might be traded to. This reality becomes more important in a league with a luxury tax that doubles (or more than doubles) the costs of adding a player. In essence, we get back to the principle that a player is an "asset" only if his marginal productivity exceeds the marginal cost he adds to the team.

And players who don't fit into a role on a team, i.e. don't have high match quality, to use an economics term, run the risk of seeing their asset value fall over time. Players who are poor matches often are not going to be happy in their roles. This leads to reduced productivity for the team and the perceived value of that "asset" starts to fall. Putting players into roles where they can succeed probably is THE most important task of coaches and front offices. It leads to more wins and increased asset values for player contracts."

Duncan, Ginobili, Bowen, Horry are "assests". Parker I think is borderline. Nazr, Oberto to be determined. Devin depends on health and contract if he stays. Rasho, Barry have negative asset value. Malik had negative asset value obviously. It also underlines the problem with stacking a team with overly expensive talent in postions 9 - 12 that won't get a chance to play a meaningful role.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant

Also, losing Jack the first time and then passing on him in favor of Barry the second time.

---

And that only led to a... THIRD fucking title. Big mistake there, huh?

Quote:

---

For me, the talent acquisition that commands the most respect was Parker. No less than 5 teams in dire need of a point guard passed on him in the 1st round back in 2001.

---

Could not have been put better.

I also think Beno will follow the same format, albeit a bit less tallented on the whole.

Here is another pointguard who NOBODY (other than Orlando) saw comming. They completely pulled Beno out of Solvenia's ass. And now he is a very solid backup pointguard, and while not being able to start for probably any team in the league, would be a greatly valued comodity if he was put on the trade block.

If Mahinmi turns out, he will fall under the Ginobili Category. Yeah, the Spurs used a first round pick on him. Yeah, he has a guarenteed contract sometime in his future. But you CANNOT tell me this guy was some up-and-comming tallent the Spurs had tracked and highly sought after, ala Parker.

The Spurs are doing it right, though. They were lightyears ahead of everyone as far as foreign scouting and general team management goes. This much was evident when the Spurs did draft Ian Mahinmi, who was proclaimed an instantaneous draft steal by the national media simply because RC and Pop had a hand in his acquisition. The Spurs have built three championship teams while staying, up until recently, comfortably below the salary cap.

They have the scouting to find prospects, the patience to allow them to improve, and the coaching to effectively impliment them in filling the gaps.

Cuban, as well as the rest of the league (as is evident by the necessity of the Amnesty Clause), have realized that you cannot simply throw money at something and expect it to be good. You cannot sign a big name- Vin Baker, Alonzo Mourning, Van Horn, Kenyon Martin to name a few- and expect your team to improve. They forget that the TEAM has to work together. They forget that three Devin Browns or Kevin Willis's or Jarren Jacksons are worth their contractual weight in Michael Finleys.

Thank God I'm a Spurs fan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheWriter

And that only led to a... THIRD fucking title. Big mistake there, huh?

---

...in spite of Barry.

The teams with the best players always win.

Contracts, foreigners, summer recruiting, etc. etc is straight bullshit.

The Spurs won because of Duncan.

The Lakers won because of Shaq.

The Bulls won because Jordan.

The Rockets won because of Akeem.

Detroit won because of .4.

the Mavs will never win because of Duncan and Shaq.

Coaching, managing, owning is fucking overrated.

The Timberwolves made the playoffs because of...wait, hang on...

The Cavaliers made the playoffs because of...

Talent in a single position doesn't do it, or you've got Duncan in the '02 playoffs. The Lakers had two great players to the Spurs' one.

Damn...

He could have condensed that long ass post to one sentence.

"Don Nelson sucked and I was one stupid ass owner."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SequSpur

The Spurs won because of Duncan.

---

No.

The Spurs won because they are a team where each part of the machine contributed to the title in a number of ways.

Manu was clearly the man in the first two series and without him, the Spurs would've been fishing in early May.

It wasn't Duncan who took game five of the DET series by the balls and had the most amazing overtime in recent playoff history. It was Horry.

And Bruce's defense on some of the key players of DEN, DET, PHO and DET was as important as Horry's game winning shot in game five against the Pistons.

So, no, Duncan is not the reason the Spurs won it all this year, the team as a whole is.

And your post is as stupid as always. Keep it up, shorty.

What is this thread even here for? Obviously, Cuban sucks (and probably eats babies) and should be destroyed, the Spurs win because they are blessed by God (who hates every other team with a passion, because they are not WORTHY), and Tim Duncan probably will never miss a shot again in his career. Didn't you people know all this?

Quote:

---

What is this thread even here for? Obviously, Cuban sucks (and probably eats babies) and should be destroyed, the Spurs win because they are blessed by God (who hates every other team with a passion, because they are not WORTHY), and Tim Duncan probably will never miss a shot again in his career. Didn't you people know all this?

---

Cuban does suck, God only hates the Lakers and Tim Duncan is Island Jesus.
:lol

By the way, that wasn't in mocking of everyone...just a few certain people who can't yank those silver and black glasses off even in the middle of the offseason.

Carry on.:)

Its all good! :) This is what the off-season is for...goofy shit like this!


But TD is Island Jesus! :smokin

Cuban has made a lot of mistakes. He also turned around a franchise, got people in Dallas excited about basketball again, and has made every game experience great for every fan. He's at least here admitting to his mistakes which haven't allowed the team to get over the hump, but I'll take this over where they were 6 or 7 years ago. There is a difference between his recklessness (which has broken many hearts and caused many lost games) and completely sucking. He's done too much for the Mavericks organization to "suck". That's my opinion as a fan who deals with his antics more directly...so maybe I'm just more forgiving?

Quote:

---

But TD is Island Jesus!

---

As I would surely christen him if I were a Spurs fan or if he put on a Mavs uni. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adrienne

Cuban has made a lot of mistakes. He also turned around a franchise, got people in Dallas excited about basketball again, and has made every game experience great for every fan. He's at least here admitting to his mistakes which haven't allowed the team to get over the hump, but I'll take this over where they were 6 or 7 years ago. There is a difference between his recklessness (which has broken many hearts and caused many lost games) and completely sucking. He's done too much for the Mavericks organization to "suck". That's my opinion as a fan who deals with his antics more directly...so maybe I'm just more forgiving?

---

The thing is that he didn't turn the franchise around. He didn't buy the team until they were starting to get better, and the first thing he did was to sign Dennis Rodman, which was the first of many failed experiments.

Being from Dallas, and having been a fan of the Mavericks until shortly after Cuban purchased the team, my opinion is that Mavericks fans seem to be forgiving of Cuban because most of them don't know anything more about basketball than he does. It's amazing that in a town where Jerry Jones is criticized for having any say in personnel decisions that Cuban is treated like a hero for treating the team like his own personal trading card collection.

Your view is, indeed, obstructed.

He did turn it around as far as MAKING PEOPLE CARE, which is what I said. He's no hero. But he created a fanbase. Do you not think that more and better fans help to create a better team, atmosphere, etc?

I understand what you're saying, there are fans of any team in the league that don't really know what's going on. But, reckless abandon or not, Cuban has been good for the team in many ways.

Will he sustained the fanbase now that the hype of the next big deal, the next big makeover to solve the problems appears to be over? Will the Mavs actually show they have managerial talent not just money? So far it's Diop and Mr and Mrs Christie.

And Dirk Nowitzki and Josh Howard and Marquis Daniels and Jason Terry...

I'm talking about the additions now that the new "austerity/sanity" program has been instituted. The model he's tried hasn't suceeded now with the restraint of fiscal responsibility, if Cuban actually tries to get to and be in the vicinity of the luxury tax threshold, will he have the front office talent to compete? Like I said the Christie couple and Diop are the Mavs first efforts under their new guidelines. How much patience will the Dallas fanbase have if things are a little rocky?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adrienne

What is this thread even here for? Obviously, Cuban sucks (and probably eats babies) and should be destroyed, the Spurs win because they are blessed by God (who hates every other team with a passion, because they are not WORTHY), and Tim Duncan probably will never miss a shot again in his career. Didn't you people know all this?

---

Good points. So are you now a Spurs fan? :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpursChampsIII

Thanks to an All-State Power Forward named Sam Houston :lol

---

Yeah, we had some great players with quirky nicknames: My all time fav was Big Foot Wallace at Center, but you don't hear about 'Deaf' Smith, the point guard/scout. :spin

Two significant flaws with this team.

One is, and maybe this will change under AJ, this organization placed much more emphasis on style, rather than substance. It's true that Cuban did help renew the spirit and excitement surrounding the team. From their "over the top" in-game presentations to the mics on the rims, their home games are really an overproduced show.

On the basketball side, they chose to focus on playing an exciting brand of basketball, as opposed to developing an all-around brand of basketball, which means doing more than making half-hearted attempts at rebounding and playing defense.

As Cuban indicated in his blog, they repeatedly chose to "stockpile" talent, without regard as to how those pieces would fit together. Case in point: the AWalk/AJamison experiment of 2004. That team had 5 guys playing the same position and no true center. No excuse for asking Dirk to play center. A collossal failure.

Maybe they're trying to change their ways under AJ. Cuban's admission is a bit surprising. Though, it won't happen overnight.

Nice to know they are envious of the Spurs blueprint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adrienne

Your view is, indeed, obstructed.

He did turn it around as far as MAKING PEOPLE CARE, which is what I said. He's no hero. But he created a fanbase. Do you not think that more and better fans help to create a better team, atmosphere, etc?

I understand what you're saying, there are fans of any team in the league that don't really know what's going on. But, reckless abandon or not, Cuban has been good for the team in many ways.

---

You also said he turned the franchise around. He didn't do that any more than he made the decisions to draft the good young players they got. Donn Nelson should get a large amount of the credit for that since their draft picks got drastically better since he was put in charge.