It's Itoldyousoism. I was against the trade right before it happened, but am glad for the sake of my team that I was wrong. How many other people are going to admit that it worked out well for both teams?
That year was what it was. If Duncan doesn't have planar fasciitis, then we could have had a different series also. But he did have it, so be it.
But even then, I'm not necessarily ignoring that. A lot of things changed from then till now. The underlying point is the same though: If that trade didn't substantially improve their team and chances, then it only made them older and wasted two first round picks. The only saving grace right now is that Harris has been injured a lot.
I'm not holding that against Kidd either. But you can't say that Dallas didn't try to improve their roster and coaching since Kidd came around too. One thing that happened after Harris left was Terry elevated his game considerably (just this season he has regressed). As far as Smokey goes, he has been up and down. He had great games against us. Then he disappears.
Only reason why Mavs fans keep bringing the Kidd trade is 'cause they know it was a bad one and still can't get over it.
Yeah, that's it. We'd keep bringing it up instead of quietly hoping people would stop talking about it if that were the case.
I think the coaching change should be brought into discussion. Harris was coached by Avery Johnson, who was a point guard. You would bet that he would put more pressure on Harris which probably limited Devin Harris's abilities to some extent. When he went to New Jersey it seemed like he was more free to do what he wanted, after all New Jersey wanted him to be the star and the leader of the team.
Another point is that when the trade went down, I dont think they were even debating on which player was better but rather who would fit their system better. Jason Kidd is a pass first guard and thats exactly what the Mavs needed. The Mavs had alot of talent so there was no need for an attack first point guard when you already had enough offense.
The Jason Kidd trade seemed like an unnecessary one thats a lateral move at best. Grabbing Kidd didn't address the Mav's biggest problems and usually when you pick up an expensive vet like Kidd its supposed to help you become a contender ala Chauncey Billups last season. The Mavs don't have the defense that other ballclubs with ancient PG's have like LA/Denver and thats where opposing teams can do the most damage by exploiting the Jason Kidd matchup (similar to exploiting Nash on the Suns).
Harris provided youth, speed, and the ability to score which is more in line with this era of PG's. Kidd has advantages such as teams daring him to be a spot up shooter which he's performed well at in addition to having more vision on the court however his age and defense makes it a questionable trade-off.
Last edited by Cane; 01-06-2010 at 01:11 PM.
You are like that girl that can't get over her ex-boyfriend so she talks about him every chance she gets but deep inside she knows that she was better off with him.
Hey, that's a great rebuttal addressing a basketball argument. You can't argue on the merits, so you'll employ an analogy instead.
I enjoy bringing it up because it's clear now the Mavs are better off with Kidd instead of Harris for the tail end of Dirk's prime. I could care less about 2016 when Dirk is back in Germany, Kidd is beating his next wife and Harris is on his third or fourth team. I also bring it up because Spurs fans crowed about the Mavs destroying their team. You don't hear that so much now, do you?
Why don't you try attacking the trade instead of dumb metaphors?
The Mavs are no less contenders than the Nuggets are.
This year they do. They rank eighth in defensive efficiency, and if you actually watch them play, you'll see why. They were fifth, but I think the LA debacle on Sunday night dropped them down.The Mavs don't have the defense that other ballclubs with ancient PG's have like LA/Denver and thats where opposing teams can do the most damage by exploiting the Jason Kidd matchup.
He's shooting worse from the floor than Kidd.Harris provided youth, speed, and the ability to score which is more in line with this era of PG's.
Kidd has advantages such as teams daring him to be a spot up shooter which he's performed well at in addition to having more vision on the court however his age and defense makes it a questionable trade-off.
Kidd is better for this team than Harris. It's not a coincidence that Dirk is playing the best ball of his career, even better than the 2005-07 period when he made a Finals and won an MVP award.
Last edited by Findog; 01-06-2010 at 01:23 PM.
I've explained a lot of times why I (and every reasonable person) think that the Kidd trade was a bad one, I don't feel like saying it again.Hey, that's a great rebuttal addressing a basketball argument. You can't argue on the merits, so you'll employ an analogy instead.
I enjoy bringing it up because it's clear now the Mavs are better off with Kidd instead of Harris for the tail end of Dirk's prime. I could care less about 2016 when Dirk is back in Germany, Kidd is beating his next wife and Harris is on his third or fourth team. I also bring it up because Spurs fans crowed about the Mavs destroying their team. You don't hear that so much now, do you?
Why don't you try attacking the trade instead of dumb metaphors?
All I'm going to say is that if you have kept Harris in 2008 the WCF would have been Mavs-Lakers and IMO the NBA finals would have been Mavs-Celtics.
Before that trade you were elite, after it you became mediocre.
Wow. Uh, ok
Yeah, every reasonable person had the Mavs with Harris making the Finals in 08.
You're the same guy who thinks Manu > Dirk, so that makes a ton of sense. The Mavs were getting diminishing returns with that core and wouldn't be better off now having kept that team intact. I can understand why you don't want to rehash it now.Before that trade you were elite, after it you became mediocre.
I dont understand how this was a good move for Dallas, the trade for them was at best a lateral move. I mean if youre going to give up a young promising player in exchange for an expensive established vet youre expecting it to put you over the top...it hasnt done that. If anything its kept them as the same old Mavs team that wins 50+ games, makes the playoffs, but has no real chance at a le.
Also bringing up the FG% as if both teams are equal is re ed, of course Harris is going to take tougher shots since defenses are focusing on him while Kidd is playing off of Dirk. If I remember correctly though when Harris was with the Mavs and had good players to play off of he was similar to Parker and his FG% was always in the high 40s, like 48-49%. The Mavs currently rely on Dirk too much offensively, Harris wouldve been capable of helping him shoulder that load. Kidd cant any more, Id prefer Harris right now over Kidd personally.
As usual, you're posting re ed .
I love how you explained and went into detail for your reasoning behind your post.
The Mavs aren't contenders, period.
Harris > Kidd in terms of defense right now (well, no right 'cause in NJ he doesn't try but in Dallas he did)This year they do. They rank fifth in defensive efficiency, and if you actually watch them play, you'll see why.
In Dallas he would be shooting better 'cause he wouldn't have the freedom to chuck up any shot he wants.He's shooting worse from the floor than Kidd.
I'm sure the Mavs wouldn't appreciate a guy that can get into the lane almost at will.Kidd is better for this team than Harris. It's not a coincidence that Dirk is playing the best ball of his career, even better than the 2005-07 period when he made a Finals and won an MVP award.
It ensures that Dirk resigns this summer instead of going elsewhere. Dirk is also playing the best ball of his career with a PG that he trusts and can get him the ball where he wants. If you think Dirk is handling too much of the scoring load himself now, at least he can score. He was becoming too easy to defend.
What is so "promising" about Harris? He is what he is at that point, a nice fourth option on a le team. There's no guarantee that any move will work out, so I don't understand the logic of not doing something because it isn't a guaranteed home run. The Mavs don't have the insider connections to pull off a Pau Gasol type trade. Tell me about this magical fanciful NBA where teams can just pull the trigger on home run deals any time that they feel like it?I mean if youre going to give up a young promising player in exchange for an expensive established vet youre expecting it to put you over the top
The Mavs wouldn't be winning 50+ games right now with Harris in place of Kidd.it hasnt done that. If anything its kept them as the same old Mavs team that wins 50+ games, makes the playoffs, but has no real chance at a le.
Say what you want, with Harris you were a 60 wins team and a genuine contender in the league, with Kidd you are one more of the pack.
Then that means only the Lakers, Celtics and Cavs are.
Kidd can get beaten off the dribble by Paul just as well as Harris can.Harris > Kidd in terms of defense right now (well, no right 'cause in NJ he doesn't try but in Dallas he did)
And Dallas is sensible enough not to turn their entire offense over to a homeless man's Allen Iverson. You just owned yourself: Harris is a nice complementary piece and nothing more.In Dallas he would be shooting better 'cause he wouldn't have the freedom to chuck up any shot he wants.
And sprain his ankle, or strain his groan, or suffer a shoulder contusion, or dislocate his knee when he does.I'm sure the Mavs wouldn't appreciate a guy that can get into the lane almost at will.
Yeah, it makes so much sense to equate the NBA of 2009 with the NBA of 2006, when the Celtics, Lakers, Magic and Cavaliers didn't matter. And yeah, you're right, those 60 wins and genuine contention were the result of Devin Jesus Christ Harris, with his 14 points per game and Iron Man Streak of 55 games played per year. We should've traded Dirk to New Jersey so we could set up a Dream Backcourt of Kidd and Harris together!
Sure they would. They wouldn't with Avery, after they tuned him out, but they sure would with this same roster. What's next? Barea > Harris?
Right now, yes.
No, Kidd can get beaten off the dribble a lot more easily 'cause he's older and slower.Kidd can get beaten off the dribble by Paul just as well as Harris can
Own myself? When the did I say that Harris has to be a go to guy? he just needs to play the same role he always played in the Mavs.And Dallas is sensible enough not to turn their entire offense over to a homeless man's Allen Iverson. You just owned yourself: Harris is a nice complementary piece and nothing more.
As long as he's healthy for the playoffs is all good.And sprain his ankle, or strain his groan, or suffer a shoulder contusion, or dislocate his knee when he does.
When healthy I'm going to disagree. With Gooden, Kidd and JJ playing substantial minutes they're going to need a trade or two to help boost 'em over the Nuggets.
That I didn't know but I wouldn't say Kidd was really the catalyst or a main reason for that. Could that and more have been achieved with a young and receptive Harris on board? Likely, especially if they made other trades instead of replacing their starting PG.This year they do. They rank fifth in defensive efficiency, and if you actually watch them play, you'll see why.
He's also on a much worse team and organization where opposing teams know if they shut him down they shut out the team like Tony Parker in the last year's injured playoffs Spurs squad. Harris doesn't have as many open looks whereas Kidd has several moments where he's dared to take shots. If Harris was still on the Mavs he'd benefit from the superior motivation and tools they have to offer and he'd likely be a better player.He's shooting worse from the floor than Kidd.
Kidd definitely does help but the PG position wasn't really the Mavs biggest problem. Its also hard to say that its because of Kidd that Dirk is having a great season since Dirk is a guy that you build franchises around and a league MVP himself. Teammates do help but Duncan and Lebron James are also having great seasons and I would be pretty hesitant to credit their trade/draft acquisitions for that.Kidd is better for this team than Harris. It's not a coincidence that Dirk is playing the best ball of his career, even better than the 2005-07 period when he made a Finals and won an MVP award.
Kidd didn't have a Chauncey Billups level of impact and Kidd looks like much more of a potential liability than Harris on the defensive end and at times offensively as well. Offensively Kidd is able to cash in 3's and has superior vision but with Harris you don't have to rely on guys like JJ - if they didn't sign on Kidd the Mavs could've looked to upgrade guys like him.
There are some advantages to getting Kidd but imo does not or barely outweighs what Harris or other trades would've brought. The Mavs would likely have benefited more from seeking out other players so they wouldn't have JJ and Gooden now.
They wouldn't because Dirk would not be playing at the level that he is right now.
Sure he would be.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
