# Mavericks Over .500 All-Time



## kbdullah (Jul 8, 2010)

> For the first time since they were 1-0 at the start of the franchise’s first season in 1980-81, the Mavericks are over .500
> 
> They are 1,226-1,225 in the 31st year of their existence, no small feat given that they were 310 games under .500 in an eight-season sampling during the ‘90s.
> 
> ...


http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/basketball/mavs/stories/121310dnsposefkobriefs.a9deb44.html

Say what you want about Mark Cuban, but when you get 10+ straight years of 50+ win seasons, you can erase a 300 game deficit. He's a bit of a distraction, but I'd rather given that there's only a handful of winning owners that aren't, I'm willing to put up with him.


----------



## edabomb (Feb 12, 2005)

Great stuff Mavs. Cuban is a legend for voting against Seattle's move to Oklahoma in my books.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

Props for getting the Mavs to relevance, but Cuban has some real denial issues when it comes to recognizing when his team just isn't title material. They've started well this season but I'm not yet sold that this isn't the same old Mavs.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Floods said:


> Props for getting the Mavs to relevance, but Cuban has some real denial issues when it comes to recognizing when his team just isn't title material. They've started well this season but I'm not yet sold that this isn't the same old Mavs.


Well, what's he supposed to say? Sorry guys, impressive start to the season, but you will come up short anyway?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Rip Hamilton/Tayshaun Prince for Butler/Stevenson would make Dallas odds on favorites in my mind (with the way Dirk is playing). 


S: Kidd, Hamilton, Prince, Dirk, Chandler
B: Barea, Beaubois, Terry, Jones, Marion, Cardinal, Mahinmi, Haywood


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Irregardless, this is a huge accomplishment. The Mavs were irrelevant for a decade (and they aren't some team that goes way back anyway), and Cuban made us such a winner we made up pretty much a decade's worth of mediocrity. That's amazing. 

And per us being hollow contenders, the way we've contended through just about 3 eras of basketball leads me to believe Cuban knows what he's doing on the fly, so there's no reason to blow things up just because we aren't odds on favorites.

Once Dirk starts to falter it'll be a difficult situation, but until then ride it until the wheels fall off.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

croco said:


> Well, what's he supposed to say? Sorry guys, impressive start to the season, but you will come up short anyway?


Umm what?

Cuban won't let the Mavs rebuild. With how long they've been stuck in 50-55 win, 1st-2nd round playoff exit purgatory, without any real superstar or solid trade pieces, you'd think they'd have gotten the message by now.


----------



## edabomb (Feb 12, 2005)

Floods said:


> Umm what?
> 
> Cuban won't let the Mavs rebuild. With how long they've been stuck in 50-55 win, 1st-2nd round playoff exit purgatory, without any real superstar or solid trade pieces, you'd think they'd have gotten the message by now.


Agreed. But still gotta feel for them with that whole 2006 Finals debacle, that changed the course of the franchise. I wanted to see Payton win a ring, not on phantom fouls though.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Floods said:


> Umm what?
> 
> Cuban won't let the Mavs rebuild. With how long they've been stuck in 50-55 win, 1st-2nd round playoff exit purgatory, without any real superstar or solid trade pieces, you'd think they'd have gotten the message by now.


How many rebuilding projects have been successful in recent memory?


----------



## kbdullah (Jul 8, 2010)

Yeah, I don't want to see the Mavericks be one of those teams that tries to stink up the place so they can place all their hopes on a high draft pick. I'd rather be a team that's good enough and maybe clears enough cap space to add more pieces. My biggest complaint w/ Cuban is that he overpays for players (Kidd, Marion) which makes it hard to trade them or add more pieces in free agency. But overall he's one of the better owners in the league.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

croco said:


> How many rebuilding projects have been successful in recent memory?


Better shot at producing a title with that than just hanging around when you only have one real star-caliber player, who would ideally be the second option on a serious title contender, and don't have the elite lockdown (albeit much improved) defense that the Pistons and Celtics had when they won. If the Mavs somehow land Melo, we'll talk, but as of now there's nothing to convince me that this team won't bow out again in early May after a pretty regular season.

But I guess if being constant 50 win material is good enough, and you don't want a title, perfectly fine.


----------



## kbdullah (Jul 8, 2010)

Floods said:


> Better shot at producing a title with that than just hanging around when you only have one real star-caliber player, who would ideally be the second option on a serious title contender, and don't have the elite lockdown (albeit much improved) defense that the Pistons and Celtics had when they won. If the Mavs somehow land Melo, we'll talk, but as of now there's nothing to convince me that this team won't bow out again in early May after a pretty regular season.
> 
> But I guess if being constant 50 win material is good enough, and you don't want a title, perfectly fine.


Really, it doesn't produce a better shot. Regardless of whether you're rebuilding or not, NBA titles this decade have pretty much been dominated by the Spurs and Lakers. I feel that by constantly having winning seasons, you change the perception of the franchise and make it more attractive to free agents and improve that way.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

kbdullah said:


> Really, it doesn't produce a better shot. Regardless of whether you're rebuilding or not, NBA titles this decade have pretty much been dominated by the Spurs and Lakers. I feel that by constantly having winning seasons, you change the perception of the franchise and make it more attractive to free agents and improve that way.


And the Mavs aren't built like the Spurs, Lakers, Celtics, Pistons, Heat, or any other team that's won a title recently. Never have been. Their franchise player is a #2 option, and various has-beens or fringe all-stars is all they've ever surrounded him with. Despite some good defensive showings over the years they haven't played the type of suffocating, top-notch defense the Pistons and Celtics used to win, which you definitely need if you don't have the multiple stars you need to lead you there.

The Mavericks have also had almost no roster or cap flexibility since god knows when, and when they do have it, they waste it on Antawn Jamison and Jason Kidd. That flexibility is something they would need in order for your 'make franchise attractive to free agents' theory to work.

If the team isn't title material as constructed, and you don't have the pieces on your roster (or the cap room) to turn into one, why keep that train rolling, assuming the title is your goal?


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Floods said:


> Better shot at producing a title with that than just hanging around when you only have one real star-caliber player, who would ideally be the second option on a serious title contender, and don't have the elite lockdown (albeit much improved) defense that the Pistons and Celtics had when they won. If the Mavs somehow land Melo, we'll talk, but as of now there's nothing to convince me that this team won't bow out again in early May after a pretty regular season.
> 
> But I guess if being constant 50 win material is good enough, and you don't want a title, perfectly fine.


There is absolutely nothing wrong with Dirk as the first option, there are only a handful of guys at best who are better first options on offense. Defense is another story and he isn't an anchor on that side you can build around.

Also, you pointed out that he has never played with a bonafide star in his prime, the closest was Nash, but he had his best years in Phoenix after he was being let go. You can't have it both ways.

Free agency is so overrated, you hardly ever get a franchise changing player via free agency. Expiring contracts can be much more valuable which has essentially the advanced version of sign and trades. Instead of rebuilding the Mavs are retooling as long as Dirk as here. The alternative would be to blow it up and get lucky in the draft or not. 

The reality is that building a title contender in the NBA is awfully difficult because typically there are only a few true contenders who happen to be there almost every year, to get into that elite group you also need some luck and be opportunistic at the right time. There are no guarantees if you blew it up and trust me, Mavs fans have been thinking about that possbility after every disappointing playoff exit since the Warriors debacle in 2007. There is no golden path to success in the NBA, even drafting well for multiple seasons will only get you so far if you don't have a superstar. This is why the NBA is unique, one player can make a huge difference, for competiive balance purposes one might say too big of a difference. Basketball is not comparable to any other pro sport because it's still a team game, yet so heavily dependent on stars.


----------

