George Officially signs with Mavs

[dav4463]

I'm calling the entire run the Mavericks made last season a fluke. The stars were aligned right. Rules were changed to benefit teams that don't play a lot of defense. Dirk had a career year. Stackhouse was solid (he's been known to blow up you know). By fluke, I don't mean that they are not a good team. I just mean that they played better this year than they really are...that is my opinion. I do not believe the team has as much overall talent as they think they have. Jason Terry played very well, but is he the point guard that can lead you all the way? Devin Harris had about 2 weeks of really hot play, but is he really that good? Dampier and Diop !....c'mon ! They aren't any better than Nazr and Rasho. At least the Spurs had the sense to make changes at that position.

[mabber]

I'm calling the entire run the Mavericks made last season a fluke. The stars were aligned right. Rules were changed to benefit teams that don't play a lot of defense. Dirk had a career year. Stackhouse was solid (he's been known to blow up you know). By fluke, I don't mean that they are not a good team. I just mean that they played better this year than they really are...that is my opinion. I do not believe the team has as much overall talent as they think they have. Jason Terry played very well, but is he the point guard that can lead you all the way? Devin Harris had about 2 weeks of really hot play, but is he really that good? Dampier and Diop !....c'mon ! They aren't any better than Nazr and Rasho. At least the Spurs had the sense to make changes at that position.

Dirk has improved every year he's been in the league so if you want to call it a "career year", technically you're right. With that logic, he's had a "career year" every year he's been in the league I have no doubt he'll have another "career year" this year as there's no reason to think he won't improve again as he always does. Stackhouse was solid??? Stackhouse was his normal inconsistent self. Plays well one game, poorly the next. I suppose you remember him lighting up Barry in the series vs. the Spurs (anyone could do that ) so you assumed he was like that the entire year. Did you see the finals? Stack barely showed up. You can call the Mav's year a fluke (your opinion) but at least get some accurate facts to back it up. And by the way, are the rules that "benefited teams that don't play alot of defense" changing back to the way they were? I must have missed that league memo

[monosylab1k]

I'm not a moron for the record. I have a college degree.

I think Scott Peterson has one of those college degrees you speak of. Oh, so does Dexter Manley. You're in good company with that college degree of yours.

[George Gervin's Afro]

It bores you that the Mavs' 12th man is better than the Spurs 8th?

so if he is the 12th man on the bench WHY IN THE WOULD WE BE CONCERNED ABOUT IT?.

[dav4463]

You are a moron, the mavericks didnt overachieve, they underachieved. They were the best team in the league this past year and didnt win the championship. By choking away a 2-0 lead against an outmatched miami heat team, the mavericks succeeded in underachieving.

If I am a moron then I am at the top of the mentally challenged field. You are an imbecile. If you dont know what that means I will explain... It means you are at the bottom of the re zone. You can cry all you want but I can sit and admire my Three Championship Trophies. The only ring the mavericks have is around their collars. GO SPURS......

Heat wins, Heat wins.

[monosylab1k]

If I am a moron then I am at the top of the mentally challenged field. You are an imbecile. If you dont know what that means I will explain... It means you are at the bottom of the re zone. You can cry all you want but I can sit and admire my Three Championship Trophies. The only ring the mavericks have is around their collars. GO SPURS......

Heat wins, Heat wins.

three rings and an asterisk!

[Obstructed_View]

Clutchest guy on the Mavs, which is to say, least un-clutch guy on the Mavs.

[Ozzman]

D. George officially came to terms with the Mavericks today.

The deal is worth around 4.2 mil over two years with the second year being a player option so the george can potentially test the market again next season.

I think that this is a good signing for the mavs, but he will not really pay any dividends until the post season.

Do you Spurs fans find this signifigant at all or do you see him being stuck on the bench with no minutes available?

ok. Hey, Big3, do u know why they shut down the Star telegram forums??

[big3bigD]

ok. Hey, Big3, do u know why they shut down the Star telegram forums??

Hey Ozzman, good to see you over here. I'm not sure why it is down, but I do not think that it will be back up anytime soon. Your username and password will still work on any Knightridder board though. Since the FWST went down, I have been posting at/reading this board and the one on dallasbasketball.com.

Island, Stretch, PTP, MavJuntha, and a few others have been over at dallasbasketball.com also. It's a good board as well, you should stop by....

[Mavs_man_41]

If I am a moron then I am at the top of the mentally challenged field. You are an imbecile. If you dont know what that means I will explain... It means you are at the bottom of the re zone. You can cry all you want but I can sit and admire my Three Championship Trophies. The only ring the mavericks have is around their collars. GO SPURS......

Heat wins, Heat wins.

Lmao I try to explain to you how the mavs underachieved, and all you have is "you are an imbecile." Stfu and come up with a real reply, tell me how the mavs so called overachieved. Either that or just STFU.

[Ozzman]

Hey Ozzman, good to see you over here. I'm not sure why it is down, but I do not think that it will be back up anytime soon. Your username and password will still work on any Knightridder board though. Since the FWST went down, I have been posting at/reading this board and the one on dallasbasketball.com.

Island, Stretch, PTP, MavJuntha, and a few others have been over at dallasbasketball.com also. It's a good board as well, you should stop by....

I just may. Is the One on Dallas bball.com a knightridder too?

It think they just...deleted it or something. Strange, Eh?

[big3bigD]

I just may. Is the One on Dallas bball.com a knightridder too?

It think they just...deleted it or something. Strange, Eh?

DBBall.com isn't Knightridder, but alot of the country's newspaper boards are. I believe that several of those Cowboys posters are on the Philly Inquirer board now, returning the invasion favor I suppose. lol

It does seem strange to me also. That was a pretty well used board that had alot of traffic.

[FromWayDowntown]

Devean George... An actual NBA player with quality eperience... You should probably go back to discussing which one of the Argentenian team's bench players the Spurs are looking at... or go discuss Jackie Butler's hidden potential... You know, those huge blockbuster names the Spurs are working.

Because all of the "names" that the Lakers lured in the summer of 2003 proved that "names" win les.

On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that with Devean George in the fold, the Mavericks are on pace to win 83-85 regular season games in 2006-07 and at least 18-20 playoff games.

[big3bigD]

Because all of the "names" that the Lakers lured in the summer of 2003 proved that "names" win les.

On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that with Devean George in the fold, the Mavericks are on pace to win 83-85 regular season games in 2006-07 and at least 18-20 playoff games.

I guess that you are almost making sense.

Nobody ever said anything about big names winning rings. Quite the opposite in fact, if you would have taken the time to actually read the thread or the posts in it instead of posting a knee jerk response to a single post.... I actually have been posting the exact same thing that you just said, genuis.

Also, I'm not quite sure how Devean George became a "big name" either...

He is a solid role player who knows his place, he is just alot more relevant than all of your Luis Scola speculation.

Oh, yeah, how is Oberto working out for the Spurs? My point exactly.

Even if the Mavs win all those games, they will surely be outshined by the brilliance of Elson, Butler, Oberto, and Williams! Nice moves in the off season. Spurs are looking tough! LMFAO!!!!

[FromWayDowntown]

Nobody ever said anything about big names winning rings. Quite the opposite in fact, if you would have taken the time to actually read the thread or the posts in it instead of posting a knee jerk response to a single post....

I re-read the thread. You've pointed out repeatedly that the Mavericks are signing names like Devean George while the Spurs are seeking out no-names like Jackie Butler, Francisco Elson, and company. It seems to me that your point is that signing guys like George rather than the guys the Spurs have signed will make the Mavericks better than the Spurs. Since the Spurs seasons are utter failures if they don't play for rings in June, and since you're presumably arguing that the Mavericks are better than the Spurs because of who they've signed, I've deduced that your point must be that signing name players instead of no-name role players must be a route to rings.

Unless, of course, you're some wizard with rhetoric but have chosen to demonstrate that wizardry in some subtle way.

Also, I'm not quite sure how Devean George became a "big name" either...

I never said he was a "big name." I just accepted your premise that he's a "name."

He is a solid role player who knows his place, he is just alot more relevant than all of your Luis Scola speculation.

How true, particularly since Scola won't play a minute in the NBA in 2006-07. Wow -- you really made quite a powerful point there. A guy who will actually play in the NBA in 2006-07 is more relevant to the championship quest than a guy who won't play in the NBA next season. I hadn't really thought of it that way.

Oh, yeah, how is Oberto working out for the Spurs? My point exactly.

See, there you go with "names" vs. "no-names" again. Did the Spurs fail to win the le last year because Fabricio Oberto was on their roster instead of a guy like Devean George? I suppose that you must think so.

Even if the Mavs win all those games, they will surely be outshined by the brilliance of Elson, Butler, Oberto, and Williams! Nice moves in the off season. Spurs are looking tough! LMFAO!!!!

We'll see. There are two very different philosophies at play here, each keyed in part on the depth of the pockets sitting in the owner's chair. The Spurs have a history of adding "no-names" and winning les. The Mavericks have a history of adding "names" and still haven't done squat. Hmmm, which of those approaches will I take? Hmmm. Hmmm. What a difficult question you've posed. I'll have to really ponder on that one.

[big3bigD]

Your deductions are both oversimplified and ignorant, so I will correct your mistakes:

1. Every player has a name that I am aware of. It isn't their name that makes the Mavs better. It is the signing of quality NBA guys who know how to win. Scola, Butler, Williams, nor anyome else that the Spurs have signed have any quality experience or signifigant history of contribution on any level.

2. Devean George is a "name" just as much as any role player or 12th-15th man can be, I guess.

3. Again, read the thread. My meaning by bringing up your useless Scola speculation was that the signing of quality players to a team that just lost in the Finals is FAR more relevent than most of the BS that is discussed on the Spurs side of the forum.

4. This isn't names V no names at all. Here is more oversimplification. These guys that you call "names", are "names" because of their experience and contributions in the NBA, which therefore makes them MUCH more discussion worthy than speculation about overseas players that have no league minutes but are still the Spurs savior, i.e. Oberto, Scola, blah, blah, blah.

I do think that the Spurs lost due to lack of depth and versatility, which they have not addressed at all. I also believe that the Mavs loss in the Finals was largely due to lack of experience, which they addressed completely.

5. Here is where you are the most incorrect. These are not two different approaches at all. The Mavs payroll is largely under control and is just a couple million more than your Spurs. If you REALLY had been reading the thread, you would have read that I said that the mavs have been very "Spur-esque" in their moves this season. They are not adding big contracts and big names at all, but have instead focused on value and role players to fit into AJ's system.

You are regurgutating old stereotypes about the Mavs. Basically, your Spurs have already had their day, and the Mavs are just entering theirs.

You need to actually follow the league and have some facts ready before your next post.

[FromWayDowntown]

1. Every player has a name that I am aware of. It isn't their name that makes the Mavs better. It is the signing of quality NBA guys who know how to win. Scola, Butler, Williams, nor anyome else that the Spurs have signed have any quality experience or signifigant history of contribution on any level.

Well, perhaps that's because they've never had the opportunity to play alongside dominant players.

Anthony Johnson wasn't a reason the Nets reached the Finals in 2002 and 2003; he contributed on that team, but they went deep because Kidd and Martin and Jefferson carried them that far and Johnson had the good fortune of being on that roster.

Austin Croshere wasn't a reason the Pacers reached the Finals in 2000; he contributed on that team, but they went deep because Miller and Rose and Smits were good enough to take them there and Croshere had the good fortune of being on that roster.

We got plenty of opportunity in San Antonio to see Devean George and the fairly minor role he played for LA during the playoff battles that the Spurs and Lakers fought from 2001-2004. Devean George has three rings and 4 Finals appearances because Shaq and Kobe carried him to 3 rings and 4 Finals appearances.

So, who knows -- given the opportunity to finally play with dominant players who get it done at playoff time, maybe we'll see contributions from Butler, Bonner, Elson, and company. In the end, the Spurs need about as much from them as the Nets, Pacers, and Lakers respectively got from Johnson, Croshere, and George.

2. Devean George is a "name" just as much as any role player or 12th-15th man can be, I guess.

You're the one comparing his name to Butler, Bonner, and Elson. I'm just playing off your cue.

3. Again, read the thread. My meaning by bringing up your useless Scola speculation was that the signing of quality players to a team that just lost in the Finals is FAR more relevent than most of the BS that is discussed on the Spurs side of the forum.

So, a team with limited needs addressing its needs is somehow irrelevant? I have to say that you lose me here because most knowledgeable Spurs fans would never make an argument -- and certainly wouldn't make such an argument in the last 2 months -- that Scola would have any real significance to the Spurs' le push in 2007. I'm not sure why you continue to harp on the Scola idea, because it's been clear since late June or early July that Scola wasn't going to be part of what the Spurs did in 2006-07.

I'm also not sure what standard of relevance you're using. Like I say, of course Devean George going to Dallas is more relevant to the 2006-07 NBA than Luis Scola staying in Europe. In the same sense, Fabricio Oberto is more relevant to that question than Pavel Podkolzin. So what?

4. This isn't names V no names at all. Here is more oversimplification. These guys that you call "names", are "names" because of their experience and contributions in the NBA, which therefore makes them MUCH more discussion worthy than speculation about overseas players that have no league minutes but are still the Spurs savior, i.e. Oberto, Scola, blah, blah, blah.

I don't know that anyone with any real knowledge has ever characterized either Oberto or Scola as "the Spurs savior." It would be asinine to make that argument. This summer has never been about finding a single player who can put the Spurs over the top. Frankly, while you dismiss them, the Spurs weren't terribly far from being over the top last season and I think they didn't have to find more talent as much as they had to find different talent. That's not about finding names with NBA experience to fill out a roster; it's about finding players with particular skill sets who compliment the core that's already in San Antonio and has already won multiple les. I understand that you think that core is insufficient to beat down the mighty Mavericks, but I don't see it that way. And, given my view of things, I think it's been far more important that the Spurs to address their needs for athletic big men, longer wing-type players, and a credible back-up point guard. They didn't need grizzled NBA veterans who bring experience but don't fill those needs; they needed guys who bring those skills. When the Spurs face winning time in a playoff situation, Bonner, Butler, and Elson are terribly unlikely to be on the floor. The guys who've gotten it done -- Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Bowen, Horry -- are much, much more likely to be there. Despite what happened in the 2006 playoffs, that's still an awfully formidable group at closing time.

I do think that the Spurs lost due to lack of depth and versatility, which they have not addressed at all. I also believe that the Mavs loss in the Finals was largely due to lack of experience, which they addressed completely.

Okay. We'll agree to disagree. I think the Spurs have addressed their depth by finding useful players who make the roster more versatile. They're not names in the sense that you're positing any value to guys who've been part of deep playoff runs, but the Spurs le teams have been littered with guys who hadn't been "names" in the sense that you're using that term. What on Earth had Malik Rose or Stephen Jackson or Speedy Claxton or even Brent Barry done before the 1999, 2003 and 2005 le runs?

5. Here is where you are the most incorrect. These are not two different approaches at all. The Mavs payroll is largely under control and is just a couple million more than your Spurs. If you REALLY had been reading the thread, you would have read that I said that the mavs have been very "Spur-esque" in their moves this season. They are not adding big contracts and big names at all, but have instead focused on value and role players to fit into AJ's system.

Cuban has curbed his spending a bit, but spending and acquisitions are two different things. I'm not entirely sure that I know what roles the Mavericks expect guys like Buckner and George to fill, and I'm guessing that they're hopeful that neither will rock the boat when his minutes are inconsistent. If that works out, great for the Mavericks. But I'd wonder about the wisdom of trying to get minutes for 11-12 guys most nights. That approach generally hasn't worked in the NBA.

The Spurs essentially tried it last summer by going out and choosing guys like Van Exel over players who would have better fit roles on that team. In fact, I think there's a perfectly legitimate argument that the Spurs might well have vanquished the Mavericks again had the Spurs chosen to acquire a Vaughn-like PG last summer instead of Van Exel.

Guys with names and experience aren't always great fits for any number of reasons, and I don't necessarily agree with you that the Mavericks have addressed their needs and distanced themselves from the league by picking up guys who have long resumes but might not address particular needs. I'll give you that the Johnson move is a good one; and I think that if Croshere can stay healthy, he'll prove to have some value. But I don't know that either player makes the Mavericks substantially better than the great team they had last year.

You are regurgutating old stereotypes about the Mavs. Basically, your Spurs have already had their day, and the Mavs are just entering theirs.

That, or analyzing what the Mavs have done but in a way that you disagree with.

In the end, we'll see about your final point. The Spurs fate in 2006 was in their own hands and they let it slip away. Assuming that they won't have that chance again and do a better job with it strikes me as more short-sighted than realistic and more fanciful than objective. Nobody in the West has an answer for Tim Duncan, still. Tony Parker proved in 2005-06 that he can carry the load. Ginobili proved in the Mavericks series that he's still as meaningful to the Spurs' successes as he ever was. None of those guys have gone anywhere.

[MarkCuban]

please shorten your posts. whether your right or wrong nobody will ever know because i guarantee you nobody is reading that

[ChumpDumper]

At least no Mavfan....

[FromWayDowntown]

please shorten your posts. whether your right or wrong nobody will ever know because i guarantee you nobody is reading that

When you shorten your blog entries, I'll shorten my posts. Deal?

[ducks]

what the now mav fans complain about length of post\
wtf?

[big3bigD]

WayDownTown (a.k.a. Fencepost), do you even watch the NBA at all or do you reside in a Spurs fantasy world???

I can't even begin to address all of that BS becasue it it almost entirely inacccurate. I wouldnt even know where to begin.

I can only repeat what I said before. Watch the league, gather some actual facts and knowledge of the game and its players, then post something.

You are just making alot this stuff up out of your own head, or you have been stuck in HomerLand for way too long.

You might know a little something about the Spurs, but your knowledge of the rest of the league is laughable.

I will offer no further response until you can obtain some accurate, factual data.

[ChumpDumper]

Until you admit Devean George is going to the Hall of Fame, I'm taking my ball and going home.

[FromWayDowntown]

I will offer no further response until you can obtain some accurate, factual data.

Show me any data that you've relied upon.

Your opinion is not data, nor is it factual.

[big3bigD]

Until you admit Devean George is going to the Hall of Fame, I'm taking my ball and going home.

It's not that Chump, it's that I am tired of correcting Spur fan's inaccuracies. I'm not going anywhere, I just will not debate something that is made up or inaccurate.

You are quite the smart ass, so I would ahve figured that at least you would have been reading enough of the thread to realize that nobody is claiming greatness for George. I was a simple question thread.

Your boy here is just making up facts as he goes along (none of which have had anything to do with george), and I will not continually point out his inaccuracies.

You also need to read the thread Chump.