No Howard, no problem

06:48 PM CST on Tuesday, December 6, 2005
By DAVID MOORE / The Dallas Morning News


This is a key stretch for the Mavericks without Josh Howard.

So far, they’re holding up well.

The Mavericks were 3-2 heading into Tuesday night’s game against Indiana without Howard. Two of those victories – over Toronto and Chicago – have come on the road.

It’s clear this team isn’t as good without Howard. The longer he’s gone, the stronger the argument becomes that he’s the team’s second-most important player behind Dirk Nowitzki.

But any team with championship aspirations must find ways to win with a key player or two out for an extended stretch. It’s not about gaining ground. It’s about losing as little ground as possible until the player returns. This sets the genuine contenders apart from the championship wannabes.

Coach Avery Johnson’s insistence on defense and effort has served the Mavericks well since Howard went down.

“I like what we’re doing,’’ Nowitzki said. “Avery has us prepared the right way every game. Almost every day we’re working on something we need to improve defensively.

“I think we’re on the right track.’’

That makes the loss of Howard less likely to derail this team.


MAVERICKS Q&A
Q: If the Mavericks had signed Steve Nash last year, do you think they could have won a championship since they would not have had the money to sign Erick Dampier, and Phoenix would not have been much compe ion? Also, if the NBA dress code had to be adopted by basketball sports writers, which one of the two of you would have the most work complying?

Jordan Roseman, Dallas

MOORE: Count me among those who believes it was a mistake to let Steve Nash walk and get nothing in return. Mark Cuban argues he wouldn’t have had the money to sign Dampier if he didn’t let Nash walk, so he argues it was a Nash-for-Dampier trade-off. You be the judge if that was a good deal. That being said, even if the Mavericks had Nash last season, I don’t think they would have won the championship. Phoenix wouldn’t have been a factor, but San Antonio would have, and I don’t see how the Mavericks would have gotten past them.

As for the dress code, there’s no debate. I have much better taste and a much more expansive wardrobe than Big Ed. You might as well ask if Dirk Nowitzki can beat Pavel Podkolzin one-on-one.

• • •

Q: When did Dirk catch Michael Finley disease? In other words, he now seems satisfied with taking fallaway jumpers instead of going to the basket. I am certain an astute sports writer (you guys can argue about to whom I am referring) such as yourself could tell me how many free throws Dirk averaged per game last year versus this year. I bet it is down considerably. Dirk has been around long enough to know that when your jumper is not falling, you need to attack the rack.

Randy Whitehead

MOORE: When you used the word astute I assumed you meant me since I’m not sure Big Ed knows what it means. You bring up a very good point about Nowitzki, something he talked about the other day. He is settling too quickly for his jumper. When asked why, he said he wasn’t sure then offered this: “I’m soft.’’ He’s kidding. Nowitzki isn’t soft. But he is more comfortable shooting the jumper than banging in the post. When he’s in a slump, like he was last week, the inclination is to go with what you do best to break out of it. And you’re right on target with your observation about free throws averaged. Nowitzki is averaging 6.3 free throws through the first 17 games, down from a 9.1 average last season.

• • •

Q: I’m a big Mavs fans, especially of Dirk. But watching him call out Devin Harris on the court after a stoppage in play during the Toronto game where he had a horrible shooting night seemed to rub me the wrong way as a fan. When are his teammates going to call out Dirk for what seems to me to be a lack of willingness to play defense? How much can Dirk get away with calling out his teammates before some of his teammates start to get disgruntled and have it affect the chemistry on this team? I’ll take Kevin Garnett over Nowitzki any day. At least Garnett plays with passion on offense as well as defense.

Michael, Jacksonville, Texas

MOORE: I didn’t see the episode you mentioned, but I can tell you that Nowitzki and Harris have a good relationship and were joking with each other after the game. I can also tell you Nowitkzi was praising Harris for reading defenses and knowing when to go to the basket on the give-and-go and pick-and-roll. To your bigger point, if Nowitzki continued to call teammates out in public, the way he did in the playoffs last season, there would be a problem. Under their breath, some took subtle jabs at Nowitzki last spring for calling out Dampier when he was playing so poorly. But occasional outbursts aren’t a problem because Nowitzki’s teammates like him and know he’s not looking to show anyone up. He just gets frustrated at times. But I do disagree when you say he lacks a willingness to play defense. He may not be the best defender on the court, but Nowitzki has bought into Avery Johnson’s system. When he’s not playing defense in extended stretches the way he should, Johnson will pull him. He’s not the defender that Garnett is, but Garnett isn’t the offensive force Nowitzki is.

• • •

Q: I am a hockey fan from way back. I am new to basketball and the Mavericks. I understand that Michael Finley was the captain of the Mavericks. Since he is gone, who is the new captain of the team? Everyone talks about Dirk as the leader of the team. Has he been named captain?

Melanie Cottle-Gregory

MOORE: Good question because it underscores the importance each sport places on this le. Nowitzki is the Mavericks’ captain. But not much value is placed on a team captain in the NBA. One of the top players on the team usually gets it by default, which is the case here. Nowitzki understands and accepts his responsibilities and obligations to the team, but he’s not a vocal leader or a strong captain figure. From what I can tell, being a captain in hockey is more meaningful than being a captain in any of the other professional team sports.

• • •

Q: I wanted to know if the Mavericks might trade Keith Van Horn and his contract for another point guard or small/power forward who can post up and score inside. By the way, doesn’t anybody ask why Mark Cuban doesn’t buy the Rangers from Tom Hicks? At least Cuban wants to win with his team.

Nathan Sassaman

MOORE: The Mavericks might trade Van Horn, but I doubt it. Johnson wants to keep this nucleus together for a playoff run. He’s also a quality insurance policy if Nowitzki goes down for an extended stretch. If a team offered a younger, athletic perimeter player for Van Horn, I’m sure the club would listen. But the player would have to be good enough to fit into their plans for the future, and I just don’t know if that offer would be forthcoming. As for your baseball question, while Cuban has expressed an interest in purchasing his hometown Pittsburgh Pirates, he hasn’t expressed much of a desire to take the Rangers off Hicks’ hands.

• • •

Q: I agree signing Doug Christie to a $3.1 million guaranteed contract for one year was not a huge financial risk, but wasn’t it an avoidable mistake and one that could have allowed us to sign another healthy player, such as Stephen Hunter, or a better player than DeSagana Diop, such as Jerome James? What kind of medical examination and communication was performed before taking such a ridiculous risk?

Mark Pokorny, Plano, Texas

MOORE: Signing Christie didn’t keep the Mavericks from pursuing another big body. Johnson wanted a perimeter player to defend the pick-and-roll, which destroyed the Mavericks in the playoffs. If that money hadn’t been used on Christie, it would have gone to another free agent, probably Derek Anderson, who wound up in Houston. The Mavericks knew there was a risk. They reviewed Christie’s medical records, and my understanding is they even viewed a tape of the surgery. All the information the Mavericks received was that surgically everything was fine. The question was whether Christie still had the drive to fight his way back at this stage of his career. The answer appeared to be no. The Mavericks viewed it as a risk but not a ridiculous one, especially in light of their need to improve defensively.

As for Diop, I’d argue he’s a better fit for the Mavericks. He’s not as good offensively as Hunter, but he’s a better rebounder and a much better shot blocker.

• • •

Q: Dallas seems to be missing a ton of important free throws down the stretch in tight games. This seems to be a departure from past years. I know losing skilled stripe-shooters in Steve Nash and Michael Finley would serve to abate our free throw percentage as a team, but what’s the deal here? Do the Mavs still employ a free throw shooting coach? Do they spend any time in practice shooting free throws?

Collin Hagood, Denison, Texas

MOORE: Losing Nash and Finley did hurt the Mavericks from the line. But they still do everything they have in the past. Gary Boren is in his ninth season as the team’s free throw shooting coach. The team has led the league in free throw percentage three times and finished second twice during that span. The team also made an NBA record 49 consecutive free throws during the playoffs several years ago. Of course, all of that only makes the shortcomings in that area more noticeable now. If it keeps up, you can bet they will spend even more time on free throws in practice.

• • •

Q: How come when the Mavs lose, the Morning News runs a two-columnist expose on the front of SportsDay, but when the Mavs win big games (most notably against the Spurs, Suns and Pistons), it gets relegated to page six below the fold? Please explain this to me.

This is a team that has been in the hunt for the past five years. No respect. I sense a purposeful vendetta to keep the Mavs a notch below your beloved Cowboys.

David Malphurs

MOORE: I have nothing to do with where stories are played, but I can tell you a Mavericks story has been on the front page of the sports section anywhere from four to seven times every week. There was a columnist writing off the game you mentioned, and the design called for that package out front regardless if the Mavericks won or lost. They didn’t get more coverage off that game because they lost.

I can also tell you there is no vendetta to keep the Mavericks below the Cowboys. If the Mavericks pulled the same number on TV games that the Cowboys pull, if they generated as much discussion on radio talk shows as the Cowboys, you would see a difference in the space devoted to the two teams. The key is to find more Mavericks fans as passionate as you.

• • •

Q: I noticed you two being almost chummy in your column recently. Holiday spirit already grabbing you, or is this the kinder, gentler Big Ed/D Moore we are seeing? My actual question is this: I have been following the Mavs since I moved to the area in 1982. Do you remember a team as solid as this one from one to 12? Is this the most complete team top to bottom that the Mavs have ever had? I know this may not translate into a championship, but it sure looks like this is the best ever.

Chris Karhu, The Colony

MOORE: Those Mavericks teams in the late 1980s that brought Roy Tarpley, Detlef Schrempf, Brad Davis and Bill Wennington off the bench were pretty good. When Jerry Stackhouse is healthy, I’d say the current group compares. But Stackhouse has to be healthy before I would consider giving the nod to this bench over the one I mentioned.

As for being kinder and gentler, my guess is Big Ed and myself have both been swept up in the holiday spirit. My New Year’s resolution will be that we’re meaner to each other in 2006.

E-mail [email protected]