Reply With Quote
Rofl 33-6
No - The team is now weaker in crucial areas
Yes - Kidd is what is needed to get them that championship
diop was barely getting any time this season.
Rofl 33-6
Last edited by Mr.Bottomtooth; 04-07-2008 at 05:15 PM.
Don't get caught up in the numbers, a lot of times, the people that know are often in the minority.
When the dust settles and the Mavs are still championship less, and 2 more years have passed on Dirk's career.....
People will look back and go...dang....DD was right.
They always do....
DD
That is one great response. With that said, I'm fully convinced the trade is a failure.
Make that 41-6.
a little too early to tell.
harris is fast but can't start a break with any consistency.
kidd is not fast but finds open people, gets steals that lead to quick baskets.
harris can speed to the basket, kidd can on occasion.
kidd is stronger than harris but can't hit many jumpers.
dirk is a better player with kidd.
too early to tell.
DaDakota = Joumana?
She's obsessed with the Kidd trade.
Unstoppable force DeSagana Diop just had two DNP-CDs over the weekend.
Clearely it doesn't look good right now. Unfortunately the team had a balance with Harris that they seemingly can't find with Kidd.
Also, how Diop went into the doghouse this year is a huge mystery for me. He and Damp at C were one of the main things that made up the iden y of the Mavs.
Well, if they go deep, I think the trade will look like a good trade. Give them another year, and see how it goes. I hope it goes bad, since you know, I'm a Rockets fan.
no
The record since the trade says it all. Harris still has a higher plus/minus ratio and we got no center to backup Dampier now so I think it was bad.
you don't think dirk has played better since kidd's arrival?
Yes but the defense and rebounding has been worse. Also one less scoring threat on the offense to worry about. In the half court, this team is much worse but in a running game Dallas is definitely better. Overall I think this team is better with Harris and Diop. Kidd hurts us the most in close games because of his lack of slashing ability and midrange game.
Fail.
You mean Oscar Robertson and Bill Russell?Overall I think this team is better with Harris and Diop.
29-13 with Harris and Diop playing
13-11 with Kidd. If that's not enough, Harris has a plus/minus ratio of 6.3 in Dallas. Diop has a plus/minus ratio of -.1. Kidd has a plus/minus ratio of 3.5 and Bass has a plus/minus ratio of -11. So now it is pretty obvious why we are not doing as well now. Bass replacing Diop is a much worse subsitution and Harris is a slightly better starter than Kidd.
Yeah, and they're 13-8 when Dirk and Kidd play together. It is pretty obvious to me that our defense is better. Bass is a PF, not a C. To expect him to duplicate Diop's shotblocking is unrealistic. It's on Avery to play Dampier more minutes and not go undersized at C. He did that yesterday against Phoenix. You can't make a big trade at the trading deadline and expect this team to fire on all cylinders. They're playing better and improving, just like Phoenix has done with Shaq. It's way to premature to call this trade a failure after six weeks. Let's wait another year and a half to two years.
Dampier has never been able to play heavy minutes. That is what is wrong with this trade. Bass is a horrible backup. Diop held his ground but you can't expect that from Bass. We went from an average backup center to a horrible backup center even if Kidd matches Harris's plus/minus ratio.
damp plays 30 minutes a game.
You mean 24.3mpg which is slightly below his career average of 25.4 mpg
In fact he has averaged 30mpg only ONCE in his entire 12 year NBA career and that was in 2003-4 as the starting center for the Golden State Warriors
Or maybe you meant since the Kidd trade, where he actually has increased his MPG....but only to a little over 26mpg
Damp is hardly the answer, especially if he gets in foul trouble.
DD
25 minutes a game it is. I'd play him 30-35 if I were the coach. Mavs do better when they have a true C on the floor. You want to solve the Diop problem? Give 8 of his minutes to Damp and 4 to Malik Allen.
So if I get this correctly we're past Mavs fans crying and moaning their team. Welcome aboard
http://www.mavsmoneyball.com/story/2008/4/7/14441/37168
As Jason Kidd said recently, "Winning is a good deodorant." With the win over the Suns, we have a team that has turned around at least some doubting Thomases, especially with the nature of the win: A huge come-from-behind fourth quarter domination, featuring stop after stop and Dirk Nowitzki putting the team on his back (Nowitzki outscored the ENTIRE Suns team in the fourth quarter). Also, as I've mentioned almost ad nauseam against a steady stream of negatives aimed at the Mavericks, the team isn't as bad as its win-loss record looks.
So we have a bright spot or two (2-1 against winning teams in our last three games!), heading into the final stretch of the season. The question then is: How good are the Mavs?
Well, let's look at voodoo expert John Hollinger's rankings (which "predicted" the Spurs as the best team in the league last year), which have the Mavs at No. 8, sixth in the Western conference. However, his rankings change game-to-game, so it would be interesting to see how we compare to those around us. The Mavs increased .300 with the Suns win, so we can use that as a guidepoint: If we gained .300 again, where would we end up? What if we lost .300?
The answer is that, with a strong finish, the Mavs could conceivably finish at No. 6, with No. 5 being an outside shot. With a weak finish, we would end up No. 11. So, for what it's worth, Hollinger has the Mavs anywhere from No. 5 to No. 11. It should be noted that the Mavs have been trending UP recently, however, so that's a bright sign. It's also worth noting that, according to Hollinger, there are really only two real groups: Boston with a score of 111, and everyone else with a score of 107-105. In this sense, Boston will win the east, and just about anyone else he has ranked in the top ten could win the west, only to lose to Boston in the finals.
For what it's worth, Hollinger colleague Marc Stein has the Mavs ranked at No. 9 (up from a mediocre No. 15).
But enough with the Hollinger hoodoo and Stein's opinions. In pure performance terms, the Mavs, as I outlined last week, are one of the more complete teams in the league, being top ten in both offense and defense (currently ranked No. 5 on defense and No. 7 on offense). The team closest to that profile? Well, that would be New Orleans, with a No. 6 defense and a No. 4 offense. Or maybe the Los Angeles Lakers, No. 7 on defense and No. 3 on offense. Hmmm.
The good news is that the Mavs defense has been improving all season, and the Suns game gave at least a glimpse as to what the Mavs can do when they set their mind to it (even with a gimpy Nowitzki a few steps slow on the defensive end). Our offense is not as good as it was earlier in the year, but it is more versatile, an important consideration for the playoffs and people focusing on shutting down Nowitzki. Of course, the Nowitzki injury is the wild card, it is potentially exploitable, so we need to be realistic when he is on the floor. Fourth quarters like the one against the Suns are quite unlikely to be repeated.
But, the trend is good: Our offense hasn't fallen apart, even as it's become more versatile, and the defense is getting better and better.
Another trend that hasn't gotten much coverage is Dirk's improvement in the second half of the season. Stein mentions it today, discussing how the arrival of Kidd re-energized Dirk, and while that certainly helps, the reality is that Dirk has been getting better and better from even before then. Contrast this with last year, where Dirk's performance got worse and worse, only to bottom out in the playoffs. Maybe this quote from Dirk is telling, again courtesy Stein: "In some ways, I like this better," Nowitzki said. "We didn't play a meaningful game after March last year."
So where do we sit? An excited and engaged Dirk, albeit hobbled. A team with a top ten defense and offense, albeit not the win-loss record to show for it. A new point guard that creates a more varied attack and versatile offense, albeit one that doesn't score as efficiently as before.
The answer is probably right there in Hollinger's voodoo that he do: There is only one truly dominant team this year: The Boston Celtics. The rest of the teams all have as good a shot as any. In this scenario, the Mavs could exit the playoffs in the first round or make it to the finals. Either possibility is about as likely. The good news is one that you can't isolate in stats and previous game results: The Mavs seem to be improving as a team heading into the playoffs.
So how good are the mavs right now? As good as any team in the western conference playoff race. Or as bad as any team in the western conference playoff race. It makes for a fun April, that's for sure.
I don't think Harris is all that good of a player. I think the trade was bad because Kidd is on his last legs and he has regressed so much this year. Kidd has looked like an ageless wonder until now, but he's seriously gone downhill this season. It's like watching Olajuwon, Barkley, Robinson, Ewing, KJ, Mullin, etc. when their games fell off a cliff seemingly overnight. Kidd's just a name right now. He's a first ballot Hall of Famer and all, but the quickness and ability to score in traffic have left him.
Is it true that Harris has more double digit assist games with the nets so far, than he had in 3+ seasons with the mavs
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
