# Mavs Chemistry



## ahonui2006 (Jan 21, 2004)

i think with the addition of antoine walker and antawn jamison the mavs are getting worse. nash, nowitzki, and finley worked will together when they had lafrentz and van exel. raja bell would play defense and they went 60-22 last year. this year they already have 18 losses and only 30 wins. i think they should get van exel back in the offseason and trade jamison and walker somehow.


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

I only have one question for ya... How long did that previous team play together? Longer than you've gave the current Mavs to gain team chemistry with the current roster. Everyone likes to bring up the bad and forget all the good things about the new Mavs roster. Its the other way when talking about the old roster. They forget the weaknesses the old roster had and only bring up how many games they won.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

Interesting statistic:

According to Roland Ratings (who do NBA +/- ratings), the player w/ the lowest net +/- score (as of their latest update) is...

Antoine Walker!

I was surprised too.


----------



## mavsman (Jun 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>RebelSun</b>!
> Interesting statistic:
> 
> According to Roland Ratings (who do NBA +/- ratings), the player w/ the lowest net +/- score (as of their latest update) is...
> ...


Does not suprise me. I watch every minute of every Mavs game
and you can see it. Yet Nellie will still give more minutes to
Walker than Jamison.

At some point they will have to see the writing on the wall.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

Interestingly, Antoine was 33rd in the entire league in +/- last year, so it may not be him. Perhaps he's just not the best player for that team.


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

Nelly has wanted a point forward for a while and I'm sure he's going to want to make changes on the team to further experiment with a 7' SG and a 6'9 PG....


----------



## compsciguy78 (Dec 16, 2002)

Nellie is a moron. Let me take that back, he is probably highly intelligent but he is not a good fit for this team. They need a defensive minded coach because with the lineup they have scoring points will not be a problem.


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

actually don nelson was always known as a defensive minded coach
if you look at his playbook
there isnt really much there
its all iso plays

but he isnt a very defensive minded GM and obviously he hasnt been able to teach all these offensive minded PLAYERS any defense


----------



## MavsPoke (Jan 21, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>RebelSun</b>!
> Interesting statistic:
> 
> According to Roland Ratings (who do NBA +/- ratings), the player w/ the lowest net +/- score (as of their latest update) is...
> ...


That suprised me. Here's an another interesting Walker stat.

Efficiency 18.9 good for 26th in the league.

2nd most efficient on the Mavs behind Dirk at #7.

All the Mavs +/- numbers are down this year. If your not winning and winning by big margins, you don't put up guady +/- numbers. 

Case in point. Here is the top10
1 Miller SAC +332
2 Garnett MIN +316
3 Christie SAC +281
4 Cassell MIN +280
5 Stojakovic SAC +273
6 Divac SAC +271
7 Duncan SAS +270
8 O'Neal IND +266
9 Sprewell MIN+261
10 Ginobili SAS +243

However, I'm am still surprised that Walkers +/- numbers are sooooo atrocious.


----------



## mavsman (Jun 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MavsPoke</b>!
> 
> 
> That suprised me. Here's an another interesting Walker stat.
> ...


Its a very odd thing because after a game you look at Walker's
box score line and you say "Wow, the guy had 18 pts 11 rbs 6 assists"

But if you watched the game you see that as soon as he went out
the Mavs went on a little run. This has happened often enough
that you start to wonder if they are better off without him on
the floor. Logic tells you that a guy with those sort of stats has
got to be a huge help to your team but there is something to that
over/under.

I still can not really put my finger on why he puts up great looking
numbers but has such a poor over/under. Anyway the efficiency
ratings are based strickly upon what type of numbers you put up
and there is no argueing that Walker has put up some pretty good
numbers.

Anyone got any ideas about this seemingly contradictary stats?

Anyway during the whole Jamison for Wallace rumor I kept 
thinking why not make it Walker instead.


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mavsman</b>!
> 
> Anyway during the whole Jamison for Wallace rumor I kept
> thinking why not make it Walker instead.


Both are expiering contracts which would make it easier for the Blazers' Nash to swallow compared to Jamison's contract


----------



## merc_cuban (Jan 18, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>ahonui2006</b>!
> i think with the addition of antoine walker and antawn jamison the mavs are getting worse. nash, nowitzki, and finley worked will together when they had lafrentz and van exel. raja bell would play defense and they went 60-22 last year. this year they already have 18 losses and only 30 wins. i think they should get van exel back in the offseason and trade jamison and walker somehow.


dog what the heck are you battling about? The mavs have 31 wins. They started out slow cause, howard, dirk, nash, and fin all missed time. THey've won 12 outta their last 15 games. They've been the hottest team in the nba. Their road woes are gone. They were once 4 and 13 on the road. They are now 10 and 14. They played one of the hardest first half schedules of ANY TEAM IN THE ENTIRE LEAGUE. now it's getting easier. The wins will come. 

The mavs are seeded fourth in the west. The spurs have 18 losses. why aint peeps talking about "their chemistry probs?" The mavs are 8 and 3 against the top four teams in the west. So what is the big deal? The spurs are 0 and 4 against hte mavs and lakers. The kings are 0 and 2 against the mavs. They are beating up on all those teams. Peeps just need to stop HATING


----------



## mavsman (Jun 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> 
> 
> Both are expiering contracts


Thats true but there is nothing to stop you from trading one
expiring contract for another. Portland does not want to take
on a really bad contract in exchange for Wallace.

They would rather let him walk and try to sign a free agent
rather than take on a bad contract. So they would probably
be willing to take on another expiring contract then try to
resign Walker for less money. If Walker did not resign with
them then they are in the exact same position as if they let
Wallace walk.

The Mavs would be getting a better player (IMO) and would
also be in a similar position except they would have to try and
sign Wallace this summer instead of having to try and sign
Walker.

Unless I am missing something that is how I see it.


----------

