# Think the Mavericks are headed downhill? Think again



## t1no (Jul 10, 2005)

http://www.star-telegram.com/287/story/753982.html

*Think the Mavericks are headed downhill? Think again*
*By JAN HUBBARD
[email protected]*

The big free-agent blitz began Wednesday, and the Dallas Mavericks watched quietly as teams with salary cap flexibility chased the big names.

The Mavericks signed DeSagana Diop, but that was not something that excited the masses. Not one Internet site took credit for being the first to report the Diop deal. Western Conference competitors yawned. The radio talk shows were more interested in Tony Romo’s backup.

In many corners, the Mavericks have been buried. Their window of opportunity has been sealed. One of the criticisms has been that the addition of Diop makes them not much different than they were two years ago.

And that’s true — with the notable exception of Jason Kidd for Devin Harris. But Dirk Nowitzki, Josh Howard and much of the primary supporting cast is the same, so how are they in better position to survive the rigors of the West?

The answer, actually, is quite easy. They are in position to succeed in the West precisely because they are similar to the team of two years ago — and actually, at this point, even better because Harris is still developing as a point guard and Kidd is a finished product.

For some weird reason, the tone is negative when the discussion is about the team that tied for the sixth-best record in NBA history by winning 67 games. It lost in the first round because of perhaps one the most one-sided coaching mismatches in NBA history. As time continues to pass, the more amazing that Warriors series becomes. Can anyone imagine Phil Jackson, Pat Riley or Red Auerbach winning 67 games and then changing the starting lineup in order to match up with the eighth-seeded team in the first round?

The 2006-07 Mavericks team was excellent. It won one more game in a tougher conference than the NBA champion Celtics won last season. You think Rick Carlisle minds his first Mavericks team being compared to that team of two years ago? You think he would take 67 wins and a No. 1 seed?

"Yeah, of course," Carlisle said Wednesday. "I’d be happy with that."

Much has changed in Dallas in the past year. Even after the first-round defeat in 2007, the Mavericks were regarded as one of the top three teams in the West, along with the Spurs and Suns.

Now, however, the Suns and Mavericks are widely dismissed. Phoenix would seem to face more uncertainty than Dallas because the coaching change from Mike D’Antoni to Terry Porter is not seen as an upgrade. Still, any team with Steve Nash, Amare Stoudemire and a somewhat-in-shape Shaquille O’Neal will not be a pushover. And, by the way, the Suns finished two games behind the Lakers last season.

The change from Avery Johnson to Carlisle is nothing but positive. And let’s think about what Carlisle is inheriting. Last season, the Mavericks finished only six games behind the Lakers. That was despite the huge trade for Kidd, which would have disrupted any team in a midseason playoff race.

Johnson could not adapt to Kidd and by the end of the season, the Mavericks were in complete disarray, yet — let me repeat this — they were only six games behind the best team in the conference.

The off-season is young and no doubt there will be more maneuvering. But with the draft complete and the big names in free agency already committed to teams, who in the West has improved? Yes, the Lakers are the best on paper, but how many other teams have legitimate superstars better than Dirk and Kidd?

And if Howard is on track, the Mavericks have a genuine third wheel that is at least close to All-Star quality.

Carlisle said that Mavericks players have been attracting interest around the league and he wouldn’t be surprised if there was a trade before training camp in October. But even if there isn’t, the Mavericks have assets that few people in the league have.

"I don’t know that you can say that the people having doubts are necessarily 100 percent wrong," Carlisle said. "But as a person that took the job, I choose to think that we’ve got a chance to improve on last year and get better. I’m going to feel like we can beat anybody. Are we going to be favored to win the West? No, that’s pretty clear. The majority of people don’t think we’re going to make the playoffs. I think that’s good motivation for the guys."

The Mavericks still have work to do on their roster, but they have a strong core group. I don’t think they are going to be a champion next season because there is only one of those each year, but — and I guess I’m a minority of one on this one — I think they have a chance to go deep into the playoffs.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

> And if Howard is on track, the Mavericks have a genuine third wheel that is at least close to All-Star quality.





> Yes, the Lakers are the best on paper, but how many other teams have legitimate *superstar*s better than Dirk and *Kidd*?





> The answer, actually, is quite easy. They are in position to succeed in the West precisely because they are similar to the team of two years ago — and actually, at this point, even better because Harris is still developing as a point guard and Kidd is a finished product.


What the heck is this guy talking about. Does he follow any other teams than Dallas ? Calling Jason Kidd a superstar is flat-out ridiculous. As bad as Josh was in the playoffs he is still by far a better player. 

Horrible article.


----------



## VeN (May 10, 2005)

croco said:


> What the heck is this guy talking about. Does he follow any other teams than Dallas ? Calling Jason Kidd a superstar is flat-out ridiculous. As bad as Josh was in the playoffs he is still by far a better player.
> 
> Horrible article.


lol hes right about kidd being a *finished* product though, if you know what i mean


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

VeN said:


> lol hes right about kidd being a *finished* product though, if you know what i mean


:laugh:


----------



## sasaint (Jun 28, 2005)

Okay, the article is a little hyperbolic and skewed, but the essence of the remarks isn't that far off. Kidd, though not a personal favorite, is still very good. Nowitzki hasn't shown any signs of slowing down. In a new offense, he might be even better. No doubt that Kidd will be. Howard can only improve under Carlisle over last season's performance. It will be good to welcome Diop back. I personally like JT better than most Mavs fans, and I don't know why he doesn't get a little more love. Stackhouse will show some age sooner or later, but this year? Who knows. Dampier, though much maligned, is really somewhere in the middle of the NBA pack of 5's. This team will be tough. And they likely will be much tougher mentally for their experiences the last two years. Will they win a championship? Probably not, but they look better to me than the NY Giants looked last preseason. (Comparing the NBA and the NFL is kinda apples and oranges, but you get my drift.)


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

sasaint said:


> Stackhouse will show some age sooner or later, but this year? Who knows.


I saw some rust with Stackhouse especially when he started playing more minutes later in the season. He was playing well for a stretch when starting with Jason Kidd but it seemed reality crashed down and his 30 year old legs just didn't hold. It was probably more from having to guard better players but either way he showed me he's on a slow decline last year soon to be only valuable as an expiring contract next season. :nonono:


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Jason. Kidd. Is. Not. Good. Anymore.

He put up 8/6/7 in 36 mpg in the playoffs, that's horrible.


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

croco said:


> Jason. Kidd. Is. Not. Good. Anymore.
> 
> He put up 8/6/7 in 36 mpg in the playoffs, that's horrible.


For almost 80% of the salary cap. 


That's like paying for a Bentley and getting a Ford. Time to trade the Bentley in before everyone finds out it's just a Ford.


----------



## sasaint (Jun 28, 2005)

> *croco:*Jason. Kidd. Is. Not. Good. Anymore.
> 
> He put up 8/6/7 in 36 mpg in the playoffs, that's horrible.


There are a handful of really superior PGs in the league today. The rest range from okay to bad to out-of-positin SGs. I've never been one of Kidd's fans, but I take those stats with a little grain of salt because of the circumstances. They will undoubtedly improve for being with the team a whole preseason, and for playing under Carlisle rather than Avery. How much? That's the big question. Besides, some might look at Kidd's stats as only 2/4/3 from a triple double. I wouldn't but, I give him a little benefit of the doubt for now. 



stevemc said:


> For almost 80% of the salary cap.
> 
> 
> That's like paying for a Bentley and getting a Ford. Time to trade the Bentley in before everyone finds out it's just a Ford.


If you could find somebody to take the Ford... er, Bentley! I don't see that happening before the trade deadline. Then, if the Mavs really have cratered, they might find a contender willing to rent him for a title chase.

The fact is unalterable that the Mavs screwed the pooch by trading Harris for Kidd. But I don't see Cuban and Carlisle bailing on him; nor do I see Kidd doing a total nosedive. He'll be a good player - not great, but good.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Kidd is not better for us than Harris because he was our lone advantage against the Spurs and Suns. I see what Chris Paul is doing, and Devin Harris could be doing the same thing for us.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

sasaint said:


> There are a handful of really superior PGs in the league today. The rest range from okay to bad to out-of-positin SGs. I've never been one of Kidd's fans, but I take those stats with a little grain of salt because of the circumstances. They will undoubtedly improve for being with the team a whole preseason, and for playing under Carlisle rather than Avery. How much? That's the big question. Besides, some might look at Kidd's stats as only 2/4/3 from a triple double. I wouldn't but, I give him a little benefit of the doubt for now.


He is 35, will be 36 when the playoffs start next year although I hope he will be traded by that time. How is he going to improve even if Carlisle allows him to have more freedom ? His physical decline is too much to overcome at this point.


----------



## sasaint (Jun 28, 2005)

croco said:


> He is 35, will be 36 when the playoffs start next year although I hope he will be traded by that time. How is he going to improve even if Carlisle allows him to have more freedom ? His physical decline is too much to overcome at this point.


Are you kidding? Tons of NBA players continue to be effective after the age of 35. The skill of some has diminished more than others. Kidd's physical decline at this point is undeniable, but it isn't huge. There's no reason to think it will be precipitous next season.

Look, I have never been a fan of Kidd's. But I don't think the Mavs are going to crater because he is their starting PG. He will be more effective than last year. That's my only point. He's not gonna be great, or even an all-star. But most Mavs fans are so bitter over trading Harris for Kidd that they can't even acknowledge what Kidd can do. He has become a lightning rod for their frustrations. It's understandable, but it isn't the objective reality.

This isn't a thread about Kidd. It's about whether the Mavs are headed downhill. The window is clearly closing on this core. But overall, I think there's a good chance they will be better than last year - certainly better than they were at the end of the season.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

You said Kidd was going to improve again, how can that happen ? I don't see it. The chances that he completely breaks down are a lot bigger than him having a good season or playoffs. He is still an NBA caliber player and a solid point guard, but not even close to a third option on a championship caliber team. We can't waste the opportunity to turn his expiring contract into a good player.


----------



## sasaint (Jun 28, 2005)

I answered your question before you posed it:



sasaint said:


> I've never been one of Kidd's fans, but I take those stats with a little grain of salt because of the circumstances. They will undoubtedly improve for being with the team a whole preseason, and for playing under Carlisle rather than Avery. How much? That's the big question. I don't see Cuban and Carlisle bailing on him; nor do I see Kidd doing a total nosedive. He'll be a good player - not great, but good.


If you disagree, fine. We have the season to see who was right. But that's the answer.

BTW 8/6/7 is NOT horrible. His CONTRACT is horrible, and his numbers are WAY below that kind of money. But there are PGs who don't average that kind of TOTAL contribution to a team. If he averages 12/6/8 next season, that would be VERY good. A PG doesn't need a high scoring average to be effective. A PG that averages 6-7 boards a game is better than most SFs! With his scoring average, you'd like to see his assists up. I think it is entirely likely they WILL go up because of the reasons I already stated. I also think he is likely to hit 1-2 more FGs per game and/or 2-3 more FTs per game and dish out one more assist. THAT would result in about 12/6/8, which would be VERY GOOD TOTAL production from a PG. Would that production justify his contract? No. But contract aside, it would be VERY GOOD. Would that kind of production contribute to the Mavs being a tough team? Yes. If the other parts are similarly productive, this team will be very tough. For his career, Kidd has averaged 14.2 ppg, 6.7 rpg and 9.3 apg., and he will be in the HOF!


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

It's only good if you exclude shooting percentages. If he did shoot a high percentage, I could live with him not being a scorer anymoe, but he doesn't even do that. The Hornets didn't even bother covering him for good parts in the playoffs.


----------



## sasaint (Jun 28, 2005)

croco said:


> It's only good if you exclude shooting percentages. If he did shoot a high percentage, I could live with him not being a scorer anymoe, but he doesn't even do that. The Hornets didn't even bother covering him for good parts in the playoffs.


He has NEVER been a scorer. His career average is 14 ppg. He has NEVER had a consistent shot, either. He has a career average of 40.1%. He has shot as low as 38.1% in 95-96 and 36.6% in 07-08. He shot 44.4% in 98-99. The rest of his career he has been from about 38.5%-41.4%. For just his time in Dallas last season he shot 42.6% - 2.5% better than his career.


----------



## thaKEAF (Mar 8, 2004)

Iverson was the answer.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

sasaint said:


> He has NEVER been a scorer. His career average is 14 ppg. He has NEVER had a consistent shot, either. He has a career average of 40.1%. He has shot as low as 38.1% in 95-96 and 36.6% in 07-08. He shot 44.4% in 98-99. The rest of his career he has been from about 38.5%-41.4%. For just his time in Dallas last season he shot 42.6% - 2.5% better than his career.


And that is also why has never been as good as advertised. I think the two Finals appearances have overshadowed what his career was like most of the time. He is not a surefire Hall of Famer.


----------



## nets1fan102290 (Apr 16, 2007)

croco said:


> Jason. Kidd. Is. Not. Good. Anymore.
> 
> He put up 8/6/7 in 36 mpg in the playoffs, that's horrible.


i disagree 100% kidd is still a great player, right before the trade to the mavs he was probably the most consistent player as far as getting triple doubles almost every night it was amazing. when he got to dallas he had to change his game up entirely the ball wasnt even in his hands alot and terry would be handling the ball. you just wait till next season.....!!


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Getting a triple-double is only something for the history books, it doesn't make you a better player. It's not like he has had Lebron triple-doubles with huge scoring outbursts, it was basically 10/10/10 with bad shooting percentages. While his ability to rebound is remarkable and great it wasn't something the Mavs needed, they were a very good defensive rebounding team before and that isn't one of the most important criteria for a point guard. Triple-doubles aren't a good measure of efficiency.

Also, I'd take 20/2/8 with a good shooting percentage over 9/9/9 or 10/10/10 any day of the week.


----------



## t1no (Jul 10, 2005)

croco said:


> Getting a triple-double is only something for the history books, it doesn't make you a better player. It's not like he has had Lebron triple-doubles with huge scoring outbursts, it was basically 10/10/10 with bad shooting percentages. While his ability to rebound is remarkable and great it wasn't something the Mavs needed, they were a very good defensive rebounding team before and that isn't one of the most important criteria for a point guard. Triple-doubles aren't a good measure of efficiency.
> 
> Also, I'd take 20/2/8 with a good shooting percentage over 9/9/9 or 10/10/10 any day of the week.


Of course you would, who wouldn't? But how many PGs in the NBA average 20/2/8 with a good shooting percentage?
croco, you said that you didn't want to put all the blame on Avery and i agree but now it looks like you are putting all the blame on Kidd because of his age. He's not as effective as he once was but with a new system and coach, i expect him to do much better than last year with us. 

Also with Kidd, it's about the impact he has on the team and the offense, not stats. Avery never gave him a chance to succeed.

And yes, he will be a HOFer.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

I'm not blaming Kidd because I'm sure he was giving his best effort, but he was still overmatched on both ends. I'm just saying that he is not someone who we should hold on to looking at his expiring contract. We are not the charitable society for veteran NBA players to get their paycheck and maybe a ring.


----------



## t1no (Jul 10, 2005)

croco said:


> I'm not blaming Kidd because I'm sure he was giving his best effort, *but he was still overmatched on both ends.* I'm just saying that he is not someone who should hold on to looking at his expiring contract. We are not the charitable society for veteran NBA players to get their paycheck and maybe a ring.


Again, Avery never gave him a chance to have any kind of impact on the offensive side. Overmatched on the defensive side? Of course, he played against the best PG in the league. Let's not forget that Chris Paul went for 30+ against Devin Harris and played MVP ball against the Spurs.

I agree with you that we should trade Kidd before his contract expires, but for who? Ron Artest isn't going to bring us a championship, we need a PG back.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

I guess we just disagree with how much Kidd suffered under Avery's reign.


----------



## t1no (Jul 10, 2005)

croco said:


> I guess we just disagree with how much Kidd suffered under Avery's reign.


Yes, i still agree with you that the dude is getting old.


----------



## nets1fan102290 (Apr 16, 2007)

i think its tough for a guy to play on the same team for 8 years almost and feel comfortable right away coming in midseason in a playoff run. also i think kidd was nervous at times because he knew that the mavs made a gamble on trading for him. your saying kidd doesnt score 20 points but he makes all of his team mates better and thats what a point guard is suppost to do. look at mikki moore in 2006-2007 or nenad krstic when he was scoring 16 and 6. once kidd got traded sean williams got worse. jefferson also so maybe kidd isnt like devin harris but kidd is deffinantly a better point guard then harris. harris is a better scorer but not as good at passing. im telling you wait till next season your gonna be shocked.


----------

