I think that the trade must be done. It is in the interest of both teams.
Trading Kidd, an old player with a big salary, isn't an easy thing to do. Nets had a quite good deal for him,it's a great opportunity for them.
This trade has damaged Mavs' chemistry. If the trade isn't made, Mavs will be a worse team than before even if the roster is the same.
And even if Dampier was able to play the whole game and guard Shaq, who would guard Amare? The more I think about it, the more I'm liking this trade, if just for the simple fact that Dampier would be your only center, and he would have to guard BOTH Shaq AND Amare (who usually gets him into foul trouble, and whom he can't guard very well usually). Sounds good to me.
I don't know why Cuban even considered this trade. It seems the Mavs chemistry is going to be hurt a bit either way-if there is no trade, it's not like Devin Harris is going to be all happy-go-lucky. The Mavs are fine the way they are-if anything, they need a low post presence. Kidd doesn't give them that and I don't know why they would trade for an aging point guard, hoping he'll carry them to a le.
How much did Cuban save by not matching Steve Nash's deal with Phoenix back before the 2004 series?
I wonder how it compares to what he's going to have to s out for this deal.
He certainly seems to nickel-and-dime it at exactly the wrong time.
And who would guard Dirk ? Amare ?And even if Dampier was able to play the whole game and guard Shaq, who would guard Amare? The more I think about it, the more I'm liking this trade, if just for the simple fact that Dampier would be your only center, and he would have to guard BOTH Shaq AND Amare (who usually gets him into foul trouble, and whom he can't guard very well usually). Sounds good to me.
You have two sides on a court and I think Dirk will be able to score more on Stoudamire than the opposite.
Not so sure...Amare scores INSIDE with DUNKS...Dirk has to work for his and hope his jumper is on
The question isn't who will guard Amare and Shaq. The question is who will Amare and Shaq guard? Neither of them play defense.And even if Dampier was able to play the whole game and guard Shaq, who would guard Amare? The more I think about it, the more I'm liking this trade, if just for the simple fact that Dampier would be your only center, and he would have to guard BOTH Shaq AND Amare (who usually gets him into foul trouble, and whom he can't guard very well usually). Sounds good to me.
His jumper is on most of the time...what hurts him is when that's the only shot he shoots during a game. He needs to mix it up and drive some, which is usually when he has his better games, no?Not so sure...Amare scores INSIDE with DUNKS...Dirk has to work for his and hope his jumper is on
Neither of them can guard Duncan or Dirk.
sun fan is also assuming shaq can stay healthy. if he's constantly hurt like he has been for the better part of the past 5 years, what makes you think he'll be at all effective in a fast paced offense? he'll never get into good enough playing shape for that.
If Dallas makes this deal, I think Phoenix and San Antonio beats. If not, I think we beat both. Yes Harris and Diop are that important to the matchups against those teams. Kidd is not the answer.
And what happens when we play Golden State? Or the Lakers? Or the Jazz? Or the Hornets? Or , the Celtics?
Designing a team to beat just one team wasn't smart, as it's left us vulnerable against alot of others. It makes alot more sense to design a team capable of beating the majority of other teams, and then if we play SA, we take our chances with what we have. There's no guarantee we play either SA or PHX in the playoffs anyways.
please make it happen.
We're all getting our wish:
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=87444
Phoenix and San Antonio not enough? Those are probably the 2 best teams in the West. The lakers have Pau Gasol as well. You need those big defenders to hide Dirk's vulnerabilities on defense. I don't think we beat Celtics no matter what lineup. They are stacked. So why waste the future on this if it's not going to get a le anyways?
Bass. He's not gonna shut down Amare but he'll hold his own. Amare abuses Diop and Dampier anyway--there's no way Bass can do worse.And even if Dampier was able to play the whole game and guard Shaq, who would guard Amare? The more I think about it, the more I'm liking this trade, if just for the simple fact that Dampier would be your only center, and he would have to guard BOTH Shaq AND Amare (who usually gets him into foul trouble, and whom he can't guard very well usually). Sounds good to me.
Well Bass will be guarding Shaq.
We traded him away when he was a 3rd-year player and now we're getting him back at the tail end of his career. Just like the Mavs to settle for the bun and not the patty.
Yep Kidd is done. Way to go Mark Cuban. Screwing this team over with your lack of understanding of Basketball.
And you guys had Nash...
There was a limit to what a team could achieve defensively with him and Dirk in the starting lineup together. People forget we got better without him.
I wouldn't go that far. It's universally acknowledged he's been dogging it in New Jersey and yet he's still damn near averaging a triple double. And he was arguably the best player for Team USA at the Olympic Qualifers last summer.
Yep Cuban lets Nash go at 29 since he is too old and pick up a 35 year old Kidd at a way higher price. Great job Cuban.
Hindsight is 20/20. Kidd comes off the books after next year. At the time, Nash was a guy with a history of not being very durable and he tended to break down in the playoffs and get outplayed by Mike Bibby and Tony Parker. Other than the injuries and durability, what has changed? How on earth did we ever get better without Nash?
We got better without Nash cause we were stacked offensively but didn't have any defense. What made us better is getting bigs that could shot block and rebound, Harris, and Howard developing.Hindsight is 20/20. Kidd comes off the books after next year. At the time, Nash was a guy with a history of not being very durable and he tended to break down in the playoffs and get outplayed by Mike Bibby and Tony Parker. Other than the injuries and durability, what has changed? How on earth did we ever get better without Nash?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
