# Are the Mavs now legitimate contenders?



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Just a simple poll...


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

Which gets a simple "no." I can't imagine any scenario in which adding Dampier to a team would make them a contender if they weren't one already.


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

Gets a simple yes


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

yes always were


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

Legitimate contenders _for what?_

Playoffs? Yes.

Championship? No.


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

No.  They can do some damage in the playoffs, possibly knockoff one of the true contenders, but they aren't a contender themselves. Step in the right direction, though.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

why can't they do it if they make the playofss. They just gotta take it a game at a time. They were almost there 2 years ago.


----------



## Sánchez AF (Aug 10, 2003)

Of course they are they finally get the big man they really need and they a have a deph team


----------



## Scinos (Jun 10, 2003)

No, I don't think they are championship contenders. They add a bunch of new players every year, so I don't know how they are going to develop chemistry. It didn't work last year with Jamison and Walker, so i'm predicting it won't work with Terry, Stackhouse and Dampier this year. Plus they lost one of their key guys in Steve Nash.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

Maybe, but probably not. They've loaded up on big names, but when you shake up your roster that much, it usually takes at least a season or two (if ever) before they play together well enough to be a contender.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Scinos</b>!
> No, I don't think they are championship contenders. They add a bunch of new players every year, so I don't know how they are going to develop chemistry. It didn't work last year with Jamison and Walker, so i'm predicting it won't work with Terry, Stackhouse and Dampier this year. Plus they lost one of their key guys in Steve Nash.


But this is different from last year. Last year, they were missing a key element, a center that could anchor the team's defense and man the paint. They got 2 scoring PFs who play no defense. Ok, thats hte last thing they needed, because they had Dirk Nowtizki already, who is a scoring PF that plays no defense, except for the fact that he is better than Walker and Jamison. This year, they removed that logjam at PF, they have given up some offense with Steve Nash, but have gained the much needed defense they have sought for. When Daniels and Howard played a lot of minutes, the perimeter D was very good, if you watch the Mavs-Kings playoff series. They can stick to their man and contest shots, but during htat series, they got torn up because there was no defense inside the paint. Dampier fixes that, and even if he does underachieve, its better than sticking a guy like Bradley there.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Get Jason Kidd on that team and they are legit contenders. The only real "contenders" for the title right now I'd say are the Pistons, Spurs, Timberwolves and Pacers.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

If I were Cuban, I would wait to get Kidd, who knows how that knee surgery turns out. Hopefully, it turns out well though and the Mavs land him somehow.

anyway, I don't think the MAvs are quite contenders yet. One more good move and then they could be there. They aren't at the Spurs nor T'Wolves level yet, but are closer to maybe the Kings or Houston. They aren't favorites but could upset a good team in the playoffs. Last year, Dirk really stepped it up and showed why he is one of the best in the NBA, too bad the rest of hte team choked.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> Get Jason Kidd on that team and they are legit contenders. The only real "contenders" for the title right now I'd say are the Pistons, Spurs, Timberwolves and Pacers.


That is by far, the funniest avatar on this board... Better than Ghimans by FAR!


----------



## Jordan4life_2004 (Jul 24, 2004)

If Dampier proves last season wasn't a fluke I think they are a legit contender.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

They were contenders before and moreso now.

I don't know if people realize the cumulative talent they have on this team. G*d forbid they should trade for Kidd later in the year. This team could be scary good. "Could" being the key word.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Is Nellie still the head coach    


I figure it will take about 20 games until Damp is averaging less than 20 minutes a game because he slows down the offense.

The Mavs will have 6 centers on the roster if they keep them all, Damp, Bradley, Esch, Booth, DJ & Pavel, and I bet they don't even average 35 minutes per game combined.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Thats a big Hell no. How come everyone thinks he will actually put up the same #'s next year? I mean come on, he only plays for the contracts, and knowing Cuban this one will be big.

BFreak.


----------



## speedythief (Jul 16, 2003)

When the Mavs shed Don Nelson for a great coach, a coach that can utilize their talents without maximizing their weaknesses, they will be contenders. So long as Nelson remains in the coaching chair, they are going to overachieve in the regular season and underachieve in the playoffs.


----------



## KTLuvsMikeBibby (Jul 28, 2003)

This is the kinda step they should have done 2 years ago after losing to the Kings in the semis. I kept saying that all they need to put themselves over the top then was defense, but Cubey had to trade some of the little defense they had for even more offense. They still have a relatively young core though, so they still have a bit of time to get better. I'd put them in the middle of the pack of playoff squads..I expect they'll get the 4th-5th seed again, but as an improved team. The Spurs, Kings, T-Wolves will have better records probably and I can see the Nuggs or Grizz sneaking ahead of Dallas. They'll be a slightly better team in the POs if anything, but I don't think it would be enough to win a series w/o HCA.

So basically, no.


----------



## KTLuvsMikeBibby (Jul 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>speedythief</b>!
> When the Mavs shed Don Nelson for a great coach, a coach that can utilize their talents without maximizing their weaknesses, they will be contenders. So long as Nelson remains in the coaching chair, they are going to overachieve in the regular season and underachieve in the playoffs.


I definitely agree with that, Nellie is the biggest thing holding them back.


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

Any team who can make the playoffs in the West are Legitimate Contenders IMO. The Mavs will make some noise this year but inexperence will probably be their downfall. For example a game 7 against a healthy Spurs team in San Antonio would be an amazing task for any team let alone one with very little playoff experience. Now if Cuban keeps this team together untill next year I could see them easily being heavly favored to win it all.

On trading for Kidd:

I doubt we'll be trading for Kidd later in the year. Thus far all the moves made haven't been typical Cuban moves where we take on more salary or further handicap ourselves for the future. This offseason we've managed to shape this team into something very balanced compared to the past two years of defensivly challenged teams. Most of us Mav fans would like Stackhouse traded before the start of the season for a number of different things. 

Personally I'd love to see Henderson and Stackhouse goto Portland for SAR. Thats just wishful thinking tho.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>cpawfan</b>!
> Is Nellie still the head coach
> 
> 
> ...


I hope Nelly devises a more stategic half court offense, other than bring hte ball upcourt and pull up for a shot early in the shot clock, and unless they get Jason Kidd their fast break's effectiveness is going to diminish. The Mavs fast break was too dependent on Nash, and there is no one in the league other than J Kidd at running the break than Steve Nash. Anyway, I don't think Nelson is that bad a coach. His stategies are a bit... sketchy rather than innovative, but they do work at times. Who would think that Eduardo Najera could shut down Yao Ming better than Shaq could lol.


----------



## JustinSane (May 26, 2003)

In my biased opinion, they are one of several teams with a slim but legitimate chance of winning the championship. IMHO, the only clear favorite is the Pistons. They won the last one, convincingly, and they should be better this season. San Antonio and Indiana come next, then the Kings, Rockets and Mavs.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>JustinSane</b>!
> In my biased opinion, they are one of several teams with a slim but legitimate chance of winning the championship. IMHO, the only clear favorite is the Pistons. They won the last one, convincingly, and they should be better this season. San Antonio and Indiana come next, then the Kings, Rockets and Mavs.


That's just insane

RIMSHOT!


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>JustinSane</b>!
> In my biased opinion, they are one of several teams with a slim but legitimate chance of winning the championship. IMHO, the only clear favorite is the Pistons. They won the last one, convincingly, and they should be better this season. San Antonio and Indiana come next, then the Kings, Rockets and Mavs.


Im not sure about that. But a biased opinion as you acknowledged. Last season I think the Spurs could have given the Pistons a run for their money. Both play a slow methodical based game centered on defense. And the Spurs have gotten better without losing much, and unless Darko breaks through or soemthing, the Pistons have stayed pretty much the same. The Spurs are my favorites....

The Spurs and Pistons are pretty favored for next season. I would love to see that in the finals, it would go 7 games.

After them its the T'Wolves, Kings and Pacers who are also contenders.

Then its the Rockets, Mavericks, Lakers, Grizzlies, Heat group. I do not count them as contenders, simply because I have yet to see how they fare in the regular season. I just note them as very good teams that could do damage in the playoffs. I threw the Grizzlies in there as sort of a wild card.


----------



## quick (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> 
> Personally I'd love to see Henderson and Stackhouse goto Portland for SAR. Thats just wishful thinking tho.


 Boy would john nash say no to that.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> 
> Personally I'd love to see Henderson and Stackhouse goto Portland for SAR. Thats just wishful thinking tho.


You must be kidding...


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>speedythief</b>!
> When the Mavs shed Don Nelson for a great coach, a coach that can utilize their talents without maximizing their weaknesses, they will be contenders. So long as Nelson remains in the coaching chair, they are going to overachieve in the regular season and underachieve in the playoffs.



  

How can you over achieve in the reg season then under achieve in the playoffs?

By definition overachieving would mean you shouldnt have been there in the 1st place. So getting knocked out in 4 in the 1st round would still be an over achievement.

Stay in School


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Well Iguess it would mean like... your not supposed to be there, but you put in the extra effort to make it there. And if you overachieve in the playoffs, your not supposed to be there, but you put in the extra effort to stayt here.

The Mavs always seem to be a great team in the regular season, but are never considered serious contenders. Mainly because during the playoffs, while Dirk Nowtizki turns his game up, the rest of the team periodically disappears. It was especially evident this past season. Sorry, Marquis Daniels is good, but he is a rookie and had to do too much because Finley, Walker and Nash choked. That is where they needed a guy like Nick Van Exel, who isn't phased by pressure situations and will step it up, because Dirk can't do it all by himself in the playoffs.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Drewbs</b>!
> Well Iguess it would mean like... your not supposed to be there, but you put in the extra effort to make it there. And if you overachieve in the playoffs, your not supposed to be there, but you put in the extra effort to stayt here.
> 
> The Mavs always seem to be a great team in the regular season, but are never considered serious contenders. Mainly because during the playoffs, while Dirk Nowtizki turns his game up, the rest of the team periodically disappears. It was especially evident this past season. Sorry, Marquis Daniels is good, but he is a rookie and had to do too much because Finley, Walker and Nash choked. That is where they needed a guy like Nick Van Exel, who isn't phased by pressure situations and will step it up, because Dirk can't do it all by himself in the playoffs.


Dirk is good for three quarters and he chockes in the 4th all the time. Nash and Finley really dont choke and Walker was riding pine. Daneils was or best player in the playoffs last year and what does it matter if he was a rookie? Anthony Wade and Labron were rookies last year. If youre good your good.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Dirk was good in the playoffs in general. He was at least the teams best player, scoring 26.6, and getting 11.8 boards. He even got 2.6 blocks per game. He is not terrible in the clutch, actually he is the teams best clutch player. Anyway, yes Wade, Melo and Lebron are rookies too. But in the playoffs, it was basically Dirk and Daniels. And no one else. Wade was impressive though. He really stepped it up in the playoffs, you really don't usually see that from rookies.


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Drewbs</b>!
> 
> 
> You must be kidding...


No.. You must be smokin....

SAR would give us 20 and 10 in the low post while Dirk did what he does best... stay out of the paint. SAR can play eitrher the 3 or 4. IMO he'd be the perfect player to pair up with Dirk.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

I'm thinking the Mavs could get more for Stackhouse and Henderson than SAR.


----------



## mavsman (Jun 11, 2003)

Of course the Mavs are legit contenders along with 5-8 other teams.

The biggest problem with this team is going to be that it will take some time before they figure out how to play together.

If you remember when the Mavs acquired Van Excel in the middle of a season. They actually got worse for a while. It took basically 1/2 season before those guys started playing well together. 

I think they have all the pieces to be a legit contender for a championship but when they start gelling will be the big question.


----------



## mavsman (Jun 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Drewbs</b>!
> I'm thinking the Mavs could get more for Stackhouse and Henderson than SAR.


I would be thrilled with SAR for Stack and Henderson. I agree with stevemc that he would be a perfect compliment to Dirk.

At some point the Mavs are actually going to have to make a trade where they give more players than they receive.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

I was really hoping that the MAvs would have gotten Van Exel back. Trading him was stupid in the first place, especially after such a great playoff run...

About SAR, I'm not sure what kind of contract he has, but I guess he would be ok as a backup 4 and giving Dirk some rest minutes during the first 3 quarters.

I think maybe the Mavs should see how things play out. I'm still hoping to see Stack in a package for Kidd somehow if his knee heals up.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

I voted no, but it all depends on how much Erick Dampier gets paid in Dallas. If he's getting more than he was getting paid last season, I see him tanking it and Mavs fans hating his guts.


----------



## mavsman (Jun 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PhillyPhanatic</b>!
> I voted no, but it all depends on how much Erick Dampier gets paid in Dallas. If he's getting more than he was getting paid last season, I see him tanking it and Mavs fans hating his guts.


So you think if the Mavs pay him like crap than he is going to play well but if he gets paid alot he is going to play poorly.

I am not sure I see the logic unless he was in another contract year which he would not be in either case.

The question is will he only perform in contract years. I don't know the answer to that. Worst case is that he reverts back to his old numbers of 9 ppg 7.5 rpg 1.6 bpg. 

Looking at his numbers for his career the best two years he had were the two years he played 30 minutes plus per game. So did he play more minutes because he was playing well or did he put up good number because he was playing more minutes. Those were the only two years where he played at least 1/2 the game.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>mavsman</b>!
> So you think if the Mavs pay him like crap than he is going to play well but if he gets paid alot he is going to play poorly.
> 
> I am not sure I see the logic unless he was in another contract year which he would not be in either case.


No my point is, if he's taking less than what Atlanta offered him, it shows he's serious about playing now. If he gets paid the same amount or more, it's about the money.

He's been saying the right things when it comes to playing for a winner, but what the deal looks like will go a long way in explaining his motives.

Either way, based on his career merits he'll probably end up being overpaid.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Drewbs</b>!
> Dirk was good in the playoffs in general. He was at least the teams best player, scoring 26.6, and getting 11.8 boards. He even got 2.6 blocks per game. He is not terrible in the clutch, actually he is the teams best clutch player. Anyway, yes Wade, Melo and Lebron are rookies too. But in the playoffs, it was basically Dirk and Daniels. And no one else. Wade was impressive though. He really stepped it up in the playoffs, you really don't usually see that from rookies.


Youre quoting me stats to try to show clutch. I never said Dirk wasnt good. Hes a top 5 player for 3 quarters..4 if the Mavs have a big league. But when have you seen Dirk take a game winning shot (hit or miss) or grab a game winning rebound? Dirk is scared of being the goat. He ALWAYS passes in clutch situations.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

I just have this feeling Dallas is going to spend a bit on him, Cuban loves spending money. I hope that Dampier does play hard and hustles now that he is on a winning team. As long as he isn't a cancer, I think he will fit the Mavs fine. They don't need him to do a lot. After, compared to what they've had as centers previously, hes like a god.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> 
> 
> Youre quoting me stats to try to show clutch. I never said Dirk wasnt good. Hes a top 5 player for 3 quarters..4 if the Mavs have a big league. But when have you seen Dirk take a game winning shot (hit or miss) or grab a game winning rebound? Dirk is scared of being the goat. He ALWAYS passes in clutch situations.


In olympic exhibitions just weeks ago, he hit a clutch 3 pointer. Which would have won had it not been for Iverson's half court shot.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Drewbs</b>!
> 
> 
> In olympic exhibitions just weeks ago, he hit a clutch 3 pointer. Which would have won had it not been for Iverson's half court shot.


Well actually it would have sent it to OT.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Oh yeah, w/e. Well it was a clutch shot none the less.


----------



## Dragnsmke1 (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Drewbs</b>!
> 
> 
> In olympic exhibitions just weeks ago, he hit a clutch 3 pointer. Which would have won had it not been for Iverson's half court shot.


He was playing 5-1 he had to take that shot!!!!!

Nothing to lose playing with his German team where nothing is expected anyway. But with a Chip in the balance on a team with HUGE expectations he shrinks down and becomes the ultimate passer. Next you gonna tell me that on his jr high team he made a layup that got them in the playoffs?


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

No I'm not, but you said name a clutch shot, and I named one. You cannot say that it was not a clutch shot because it was.

It wasn't a clutch shot just because his team sucked and he had to take it?


----------



## mavsman (Jun 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> 
> 
> He was playing 5-1 he had to take that shot!!!!!
> ...


What's with the Dirk hate? I would hardly call him a choker. All you need to do is look at his playoff numbers to see that he is not a choker.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mavsman</b>!
> 
> 
> What's with the Dirk hate? I would hardly call him a choker. All you need to do is look at his playoff numbers to see that he is not a choker.


Agreed, Dirk performs well in the playoffs... He single-handedly kept the Mavs in games against the Kings last year


----------



## Linde (Jun 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> 
> 
> He was playing 5-1 he had to take that shot!!!!!
> ...


remember game 7 against portland or sacramento ?
game 5 against the spurs where he had 42/18/6 ?
in win or go home games he is 5:2 and had something like 30+ points and 12+ boards 

and i always hear contract year for dampier
you do know that he opted out of his contract with 2 years remaining because he was so good ?


----------



## droppinknowledge (Aug 4, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Drewbs</b>!
> Well Iguess it would mean like... your not supposed to be there, but you put in the extra effort to make it there. And if you overachieve in the playoffs, your not supposed to be there, but you put in the extra effort to stayt here.
> 
> The Mavs always seem to be a great team in the regular season, but are never considered serious contenders. Mainly because during the playoffs, while Dirk Nowtizki turns his game up, the rest of the team periodically disappears. It was especially evident this past season. Sorry, Marquis Daniels is good, but he is a rookie and had to do too much because Finley, Walker and Nash choked. That is where they needed a guy like Nick Van Exel, who isn't phased by pressure situations and will step it up, because Dirk can't do it all by himself in the playoffs.


exactly. people seem to forget that. It wasn't dirk's fault. As good as nash was he shot 39 percent from da field. So did fin and walker. But nash has sucked in the postseason 3 outta the past four years so I was open to a change


----------



## droppinknowledge (Aug 4, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Dragnsmke1</b>!
> 
> 
> He was playing 5-1 he had to take that shot!!!!!
> ...


man you're giving dirk way too much grief. He's been the most consistent member of the big three in the playoffs. It's been nash and fin that have always choked. Fin's is usually to getting injured late in the season and being rusty


----------

