Reply With Quote
It can help or hurt depending on what kind of team you're playing on. Do you have any clue what the you're talking about.
And if you're talking about an adjusted per 48 +/-, Jamaal Magloire has the best +/- on the Mavericks. Hooray.
No - The team is now weaker in crucial areas
Yes - Kidd is what is needed to get them that championship
WHAT
THE
Dirk is one of the most well-conditioned players in the game. The guy works harder than anybody to keep his wind up. He spent years running the same system he had to play against that series. Dirk does not "get tired" from playing ing anything. The fact that you'd say that shows just how little you know about Dirk and this team.
It can help or hurt depending on what kind of team you're playing on. Do you have any clue what the you're talking about.
And if you're talking about an adjusted per 48 +/-, Jamaal Magloire has the best +/- on the Mavericks. Hooray.
Yeah list all the quicker athletic players who have consistently neutralized Dirk. Haslem did it for 2 games, and the Warriors had to run a constant double team on him.
So name your list of players who always neutralize Dirk.
Tmac did it when Houston played them in the playoffs......you just have to put a tall athletic player on him, and his lack of post game to counter it makes him manageable.
DD
3 years ago forum.
Evidently not well enough. And how many times since then has TMac shut down Dirk?
Yeah, that's what I thought.
and manageable does not equal "neutralized".
No, not neutrilized, but managed....where his impact is far less than normal.
Forcing other players to beat you....
DD
I don't know who knows less about the team - DD or Mavsfan1000.
I go by the whole season +/-. 1 game is not enough information to decide who is the better player. You need enough data and Harris through 77 games has been the better player than Kidd in +/-. Dirk is not used to guarding athletic SF's so that is what took so much out of him. Stephen Jackson is a matchup nightmare for Dirk.
You're in denial if you think we got any better or even stayed the same with this trade.
they have better movement in the halfcourt with kidd. i'm also impressed with kidd on D.
I love talking Basketball with people who resort to cursing to cover up their lack of knowledge.
"What, you disagree with my opinion....&%*^ you !!"
DD
If a Mavs team with Harris/Diop could play the current Mavs with Kidd, the current team would destroy them. The "new" Dirk is better, the "new" Damp is better, the "new" Josh and Jet are getting better, better option at backup PG with Lue, better/smarter defensively, better fast-break game, smarter and more mentally tough team overall.
They have one less slasher and shotblocker. Like said before, I took everything in account and Harris has the slight edge to Kidd through 77 games.
Yes Lue is a good backup option. He would've made Dallas even more tough to beat with Harris and Diop. We had it all and could start Terry at 2 guard full time and be a matchup nightmare for other teams. Starting Terry at 2 now is not a matchup nightmare as 2 guards can guard Kidd with ease.
actually they broke out even.
Howard is starting to slash again instead of shooting jumpers as he had been all season, and Damp is blocking shots much better after the departure of Diop, and both of them are better basketball players than Harris and Diop. so in essence, they broke even in 2 spots, with more versatile players in those positions, and now got an elite ball distributor.
Dampier is not the problem or a slight problem. He doesn't play a lot of minutes so whatever is backing him up is where Dallas gets hurt. Cuban should know by now not to trade away defensive centers but I guess he never learns.
Why would Terry have started full-time at the 2 with Harris at PG? If that was even a viable option for Avery, then why did Terry start the season coming off the bench? Certainly he must have known the sheer basketball weaponry he possessed. I don't think many teams fear the starting 1-2 combination of Harris/Terry.
You're going about this all wrong and your refusal to accept the new team has clouded your judgment. You still didn't answer what I wrote before - would this new version of the Mavs beat the old one if they were able to match up? The answer is an easy 'yes'.
The answer to Damp's backup is Avery going with the small lineup in his absence. They've had nice results so far.
The mavs of old won 67 games and were 29-12 this year. The reason the mavs didn't go small is because they didn't have a good backup at the time because of lack of depth. Barea was a liability. Now they have Lue so starting Harris and Terry was definitely a good option. Yes teams would fear that combo. That combo is what got us over the hump against the spurs.
Again, you neglected to answer my question.
Terry is also not an option to start at the 2. If I had my way I'd groom Wright for that spot, but Stackhouse is the best option when he returns. When the playoffs roll around, you don't want Terry starting in that position.
As far as "getting over the hump against the Spurs" - yes, it was a great series, but you need to let it go. That was then. Who's to say it automatically works again against a Spurs team that would know it's coming? It damn near didn't work, come the end of Game 7.
No they haven't. It is a layup fest once they go small. No one to guard the rim. It will definitely be exposed in the playoffs.
Lol at you thinking Stackhouse is the best option. The reason Dallas is winning more now is because Terry got the starting spot. Stackhouse can't guard anyone and he is a poor shooter on most nights. Harris is a much better player now also. Harris has established himself as a threat from outside. The spurs are better able to handle the strengths of Kidd's game.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
