Will the Lakers finish off the Timberwolves tonight?
- Thread starter bignick
- Start date
magilacudy
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 16 (100%)
[quote name='anth0ny']shaq gets grabbed and held on every time he goes in the f'ing lane to post up you ignorant mofo; i'm off to sleep, enough of this[/quote]
The league has to have some stance on how to call Shaq fouls, because some range from just anticipatory to waiting for him to get grabbed. If there's one call I didn't agree with was one non-call when Shaq was boxing out Madsen's face that would've been his 6th.
As for Shaq being grabbed and held onto, that's nothing compared to the NBA in Wilt's day. Chamberlain was practically tackled and knocked over and nothing was called. I wouldn't mind seeing a return to more physical play because the refs are deciding more and more of the games than they should.
The league has to have some stance on how to call Shaq fouls, because some range from just anticipatory to waiting for him to get grabbed. If there's one call I didn't agree with was one non-call when Shaq was boxing out Madsen's face that would've been his 6th.
As for Shaq being grabbed and held onto, that's nothing compared to the NBA in Wilt's day. Chamberlain was practically tackled and knocked over and nothing was called. I wouldn't mind seeing a return to more physical play because the refs are deciding more and more of the games than they should.
oNeWiNgEdAnGeL
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (89%)
[quote name='anth0ny']shaq gets grabbed and held on every time he goes in the f'ing lane to post up you ignorant mofo; i'm off to sleep, enough of this[/quote]
He gets held? Well duh. How else are you suppose to stop 300+ pounds coming at you.
There is no way I'm going into deatil how the Lakers are favored to win. This is the most obvious reason: Money. When the Spurs and Knicks played in the finals, the NBA ratings were at it's lowest. When Lakers are in it, there high as ever. Lakers are more popular around America. They sell more items, such as jersey. The population in LA is a lot compared to a small town such as Sacramento.
I've been to a Sacramento home game. It was a great experience. People are nice, they sit politely and clap at the appropriate times. If they lose, it's no big deal. Here, in LA, when you lose, it's like end up the world. Even when Lakers win, riots everywhere. Lakers are the Eagles of the NFL; they'll eat you alive.
This is just a part of way Lakers are favored to win. I'm sick of dicussing this, and I won't post in this topic until tomorrow. Laker fans have egos, and it's all win for them, whether it's fair or not.
He gets held? Well duh. How else are you suppose to stop 300+ pounds coming at you.
There is no way I'm going into deatil how the Lakers are favored to win. This is the most obvious reason: Money. When the Spurs and Knicks played in the finals, the NBA ratings were at it's lowest. When Lakers are in it, there high as ever. Lakers are more popular around America. They sell more items, such as jersey. The population in LA is a lot compared to a small town such as Sacramento.
I've been to a Sacramento home game. It was a great experience. People are nice, they sit politely and clap at the appropriate times. If they lose, it's no big deal. Here, in LA, when you lose, it's like end up the world. Even when Lakers win, riots everywhere. Lakers are the Eagles of the NFL; they'll eat you alive.
This is just a part of way Lakers are favored to win. I'm sick of dicussing this, and I won't post in this topic until tomorrow. Laker fans have egos, and it's all win for them, whether it's fair or not.
rjblazed
CAGiversary!
[quote name='oNeWiNgEdAnGeL'][quote name='anth0ny']shaq gets grabbed and held on every time he goes in the f'ing lane to post up you ignorant mofo; i'm off to sleep, enough of this[/quote]
He gets held? Well duh. How else are you suppose to stop 300+ pounds coming at you.
There is no way I'm going into deatil how the Lakers are favored to win. This is the most obvious reason: Money. When the Spurs and Knicks played in the finals, the NBA ratings were at it's lowest. When Lakers are in it, there high as ever. Lakers are more popular around America. They sell more items, such as jersey. The population in LA is a lot compared to a small town such as Sacramento.
I've been to a Sacramento home game. It was a great experience. People are nice, they sit politely and clap at the appropriate times. If they lose, it's no big deal. Here, in LA, when you lose, it's like end up the world. Even when Lakers win, riots everywhere. Lakers are the Eagles of the NFL; they'll eat you alive.
This is just a part of way Lakers are favored to win. I'm sick of dicussing this, and I won't post in this topic until tomorrow. Laker fans have egos, and it's all win for them, whether it's fair or not.[/quote]
So according to you because Shaq is bigger than everyone else he should be put at a disadvantage. He was born a big guy he can't help it and you can't have a set of rules for him and then another set for the rest of the league.
He gets held? Well duh. How else are you suppose to stop 300+ pounds coming at you.
There is no way I'm going into deatil how the Lakers are favored to win. This is the most obvious reason: Money. When the Spurs and Knicks played in the finals, the NBA ratings were at it's lowest. When Lakers are in it, there high as ever. Lakers are more popular around America. They sell more items, such as jersey. The population in LA is a lot compared to a small town such as Sacramento.
I've been to a Sacramento home game. It was a great experience. People are nice, they sit politely and clap at the appropriate times. If they lose, it's no big deal. Here, in LA, when you lose, it's like end up the world. Even when Lakers win, riots everywhere. Lakers are the Eagles of the NFL; they'll eat you alive.
This is just a part of way Lakers are favored to win. I'm sick of dicussing this, and I won't post in this topic until tomorrow. Laker fans have egos, and it's all win for them, whether it's fair or not.[/quote]
So according to you because Shaq is bigger than everyone else he should be put at a disadvantage. He was born a big guy he can't help it and you can't have a set of rules for him and then another set for the rest of the league.
Lootr2Core
CAGiversary!
[quote name='"oNeWiNgEdAnGeL"'][quote name='anth0ny']
I've been to a Sacramento home game. It was a great experience. People are nice, they sit politely and clap at the appropriate times. If they lose, it's no big deal. Here, in LA, when you lose, it's like end up the world. Even when Lakers win, riots everywhere. Lakers are the Eagles of the NFL; they'll eat you alive.
[/quote]
This wasn't that last home game against Minnesota was it? When these polite fans were launch garbage onto the court?
I've been to a Sacramento home game. It was a great experience. People are nice, they sit politely and clap at the appropriate times. If they lose, it's no big deal. Here, in LA, when you lose, it's like end up the world. Even when Lakers win, riots everywhere. Lakers are the Eagles of the NFL; they'll eat you alive.
[/quote]
This wasn't that last home game against Minnesota was it? When these polite fans were launch garbage onto the court?
Mustang O-Line 75
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 6 (100%)
[quote name='oNeWiNgEdAnGeL'] He gets held? Well duh. How else are you suppose to stop 300+ pounds coming at you.
There is no way I'm going into deatil how the Lakers are favored to win. This is the most obvious reason: Money. When the Spurs and Knicks played in the finals, the NBA ratings were at it's lowest. When Lakers are in it, there high as ever. Lakers are more popular around America. They sell more items, such as jersey. The population in LA is a lot compared to a small town such as Sacramento.[/quote]
So what are you trying to say? That because the Lakers have a lot of money, they are evil? Because they have a very big fanbase, they ar e favored to win the series? With the way the refereeing was tonight, there is no way you can say that the Lakers are favored to win it all. (you are implying favored by the league, right? If not, disregard that.)
And sacramento doesnt cheer at the right time. Nobody
ing cheers at the right time. Thats what HOME COURT advantage is
There is no way I'm going into deatil how the Lakers are favored to win. This is the most obvious reason: Money. When the Spurs and Knicks played in the finals, the NBA ratings were at it's lowest. When Lakers are in it, there high as ever. Lakers are more popular around America. They sell more items, such as jersey. The population in LA is a lot compared to a small town such as Sacramento.[/quote]
So what are you trying to say? That because the Lakers have a lot of money, they are evil? Because they have a very big fanbase, they ar e favored to win the series? With the way the refereeing was tonight, there is no way you can say that the Lakers are favored to win it all. (you are implying favored by the league, right? If not, disregard that.)
And sacramento doesnt cheer at the right time. Nobody
ing cheers at the right time. Thats what HOME COURT advantage is
[quote name='oNeWiNgEdAnGeL'][quote name='anth0ny']shaq gets grabbed and held on every time he goes in the f'ing lane to post up you ignorant mofo; i'm off to sleep, enough of this[/quote]
He gets held? Well duh. How else are you suppose to stop 300+ pounds coming at you.
There is no way I'm going into deatil how the Lakers are favored to win. This is the most obvious reason: Money. When the Spurs and Knicks played in the finals, the NBA ratings were at it's lowest. When Lakers are in it, there high as ever. Lakers are more popular around America. They sell more items, such as jersey. The population in LA is a lot compared to a small town such as Sacramento.
I've been to a Sacramento home game. It was a great experience. People are nice, they sit politely and clap at the appropriate times. If they lose, it's no big deal. Here, in LA, when you lose, it's like end up the world. Even when Lakers win, riots everywhere. Lakers are the Eagles of the NFL; they'll eat you alive.
This is just a part of way Lakers are favored to win. I'm sick of dicussing this, and I won't post in this topic until tomorrow. Laker fans have egos, and it's all win for them, whether it's fair or not.[/quote]
Perhaps you won't go into detail about how the Lakers are favored to win because you are wrong. You say money is the most obvious reason that the Lakers are favored to win, and back that up with ratings. If that's the case, then you believe there is a conspiracy to make the Lakers go to the finals and win in order to generate more money for the NBA. While the Lakers will draw the higher ratings and more money, that is not why they are favored. The reason is very simple. They have the best players. Kobe and Shaq alone give the Lakers a great chance to win it every year, but the addition of Malone has really helped them out.
Sacramento and their great fans, huh?
They clap at the right times? I guess that also means they boo at the right times too, right? Like when Webber was coming back from injury and trying to work his way back into the team, and the fans booed him? It's no big deal for them when they lose because they're used to it. When your team is used to winning, of course its harder on the fans when they lose. I love it when the Lakers win, but don't make idiotic statements like saying the fans want to win, fair or not. I don't think anybody would appreciate winning by cheating, even the Lakers themselves.
He gets held? Well duh. How else are you suppose to stop 300+ pounds coming at you.
There is no way I'm going into deatil how the Lakers are favored to win. This is the most obvious reason: Money. When the Spurs and Knicks played in the finals, the NBA ratings were at it's lowest. When Lakers are in it, there high as ever. Lakers are more popular around America. They sell more items, such as jersey. The population in LA is a lot compared to a small town such as Sacramento.
I've been to a Sacramento home game. It was a great experience. People are nice, they sit politely and clap at the appropriate times. If they lose, it's no big deal. Here, in LA, when you lose, it's like end up the world. Even when Lakers win, riots everywhere. Lakers are the Eagles of the NFL; they'll eat you alive.
This is just a part of way Lakers are favored to win. I'm sick of dicussing this, and I won't post in this topic until tomorrow. Laker fans have egos, and it's all win for them, whether it's fair or not.[/quote]
Perhaps you won't go into detail about how the Lakers are favored to win because you are wrong. You say money is the most obvious reason that the Lakers are favored to win, and back that up with ratings. If that's the case, then you believe there is a conspiracy to make the Lakers go to the finals and win in order to generate more money for the NBA. While the Lakers will draw the higher ratings and more money, that is not why they are favored. The reason is very simple. They have the best players. Kobe and Shaq alone give the Lakers a great chance to win it every year, but the addition of Malone has really helped them out.
Sacramento and their great fans, huh?
They clap at the right times? I guess that also means they boo at the right times too, right? Like when Webber was coming back from injury and trying to work his way back into the team, and the fans booed him? It's no big deal for them when they lose because they're used to it. When your team is used to winning, of course its harder on the fans when they lose. I love it when the Lakers win, but don't make idiotic statements like saying the fans want to win, fair or not. I don't think anybody would appreciate winning by cheating, even the Lakers themselves.
starman9000
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 85 (100%)
This thread is great
ONewingedangel:
Sacremento fans suck. Probably the worst in the league (well Lakers fans are lame, but in their own special way) Twice during the Wolves series they threw crap on the court and at players. And those cowbells behind the bench? Just shows that you have no faith in your team so you have to resort to unscrupulous methods to try to win.
Mustang-0-line:
"I liked the Lakers back when they sucked, which I am almost sure you can't say about the Kings, because no one like the kings until the galoof brothers actually did something up there."
Yeah, you are a great fan for liking the lakers through a couple of "bad" seasons, unless by suck you mean no titles. If you were a Clippers fan for life, and they finally one, well then youd have something to say.
anth0ny:
"shaq gets grabbed and held on every time he goes in the f'ing lane to post up you ignorant mofo; i'm off to sleep, enough of this"
Yes and he gets the calls almost all of the time. Shaq should foul out almost every game (except for the ones when he doesnt try). He would still dominate the game, even for the short time he is in, but he does foul a lot without getting called.
And its not just Shaq thats the problem. All of the announcers seem very happy with the fact that Stars get calls, and thats just the way it is. Why does no one seem to have a problem with that. Travelling should be travelling, a foul is a foul, a flop is a flop, just makes it really hard for someone to take the NBA seriously when the refs obviously base calls on star power.
ONewingedangel:
Sacremento fans suck. Probably the worst in the league (well Lakers fans are lame, but in their own special way) Twice during the Wolves series they threw crap on the court and at players. And those cowbells behind the bench? Just shows that you have no faith in your team so you have to resort to unscrupulous methods to try to win.
Mustang-0-line:
"I liked the Lakers back when they sucked, which I am almost sure you can't say about the Kings, because no one like the kings until the galoof brothers actually did something up there."
Yeah, you are a great fan for liking the lakers through a couple of "bad" seasons, unless by suck you mean no titles. If you were a Clippers fan for life, and they finally one, well then youd have something to say.
anth0ny:
"shaq gets grabbed and held on every time he goes in the f'ing lane to post up you ignorant mofo; i'm off to sleep, enough of this"
Yes and he gets the calls almost all of the time. Shaq should foul out almost every game (except for the ones when he doesnt try). He would still dominate the game, even for the short time he is in, but he does foul a lot without getting called.
And its not just Shaq thats the problem. All of the announcers seem very happy with the fact that Stars get calls, and thats just the way it is. Why does no one seem to have a problem with that. Travelling should be travelling, a foul is a foul, a flop is a flop, just makes it really hard for someone to take the NBA seriously when the refs obviously base calls on star power.
JSweeney
CAGiversary!
Come on Pistons!
I'm actually worried about how they'll do because Rasid and Ben are probably the biggest stars (and not many people can doubt the lack of calls against star players and the high number of calls in favor of them), and after watching the Pacers games, you know some of the Lakers are going to be gunning for Rip right off the bat.
I'm actually worried about how they'll do because Rasid and Ben are probably the biggest stars (and not many people can doubt the lack of calls against star players and the high number of calls in favor of them), and after watching the Pacers games, you know some of the Lakers are going to be gunning for Rip right off the bat.
greendj27
CAGiversary!
[quote name='starman9000']This thread is great
Mustang-0-line:
"I liked the Lakers back when they sucked, which I am almost sure you can't say about the Kings, because no one like the kings until the galoof brothers actually did something up there."
[/quote]
Umm...the Lakers really never sucked. They might have had an off year or two, but they have won championships since the early 80's.
Mustang-0-line:
"I liked the Lakers back when they sucked, which I am almost sure you can't say about the Kings, because no one like the kings until the galoof brothers actually did something up there."
[/quote]
Umm...the Lakers really never sucked. They might have had an off year or two, but they have won championships since the early 80's.
[quote name='starman9000']And its not just Shaq thats the problem. All of the announcers seem very happy with the fact that Stars get calls, and thats just the way it is. Why does no one seem to have a problem with that. Travelling should be travelling, a foul is a foul, a flop is a flop, just makes it really hard for someone to take the NBA seriously when the refs obviously base calls on star power.[/quote]
Exactly. Is a Superstar really a superstar due to their talent or is it the fact that they get away with travelling, fouling, etc where "non superstar" players get called for those things. Is it fair that they get an added advantage over everyone else?
Exactly. Is a Superstar really a superstar due to their talent or is it the fact that they get away with travelling, fouling, etc where "non superstar" players get called for those things. Is it fair that they get an added advantage over everyone else?
magilacudy
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 16 (100%)
magilacudy
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 16 (100%)
[quote name='JSweeney']Come on Pistons!
I'm actually worried about how they'll do because Rasid and Ben are probably the biggest stars (and not many people can doubt the lack of calls against star players and the high number of calls in favor of them), and after watching the Pacers games, you know some of the Lakers are going to be gunning for Rip right off the bat.[/quote]
Rasheed's been quiet the past few games, but he's made some big shots. If the Pistons are going to win at all, it's going to come down to him, Ben Wallace, and Tayshaun as well as the bench contributing.
The Lakers are going to clamp down on Rip like they did on Parker during the Spurs series, so the others have to step up. They haven't really in the other series, so I'm really anxious to see what's going to happen. Regardless I'm rooting for Pistons too.
I'm actually worried about how they'll do because Rasid and Ben are probably the biggest stars (and not many people can doubt the lack of calls against star players and the high number of calls in favor of them), and after watching the Pacers games, you know some of the Lakers are going to be gunning for Rip right off the bat.[/quote]
Rasheed's been quiet the past few games, but he's made some big shots. If the Pistons are going to win at all, it's going to come down to him, Ben Wallace, and Tayshaun as well as the bench contributing.
The Lakers are going to clamp down on Rip like they did on Parker during the Spurs series, so the others have to step up. They haven't really in the other series, so I'm really anxious to see what's going to happen. Regardless I'm rooting for Pistons too.
[quote name='magilacudy']http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/sports/articles/0602p2main0602.html
Interesting.[/quote]
It's true. Superstars get calls, or get protected from them rather. Kobe can get hit with a T for mouthing off, but it would take a full on punch for him to get a 2nd T in a game. No ref wants to be the guy who ejected the superstar so they let them "get away with murder".
Interesting.[/quote]
It's true. Superstars get calls, or get protected from them rather. Kobe can get hit with a T for mouthing off, but it would take a full on punch for him to get a 2nd T in a game. No ref wants to be the guy who ejected the superstar so they let them "get away with murder".
Grave_Addiction
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 35 (100%)
The Mavs will be in the Finals next year!
Well, maybe not, but they were a pretty good team. Ostertag wants to come to Dallas, so I think that would be a pretty good addition. I know he's far from an All-Star center at this point in his career, but he is definitely better than all of our current centers.
Also, there was an article today on dallasnews.com about the Mavs either putting Walker deep on the bench or hoping he opts out of his contract. Antoine Walker is the most overpaid chump in the NBA.
I hope we resign Steve Nash and Marquis Daniels. Daniels and Josh Howard were some of the best rookies in the NBA last year. And Danies went undrafted from Auburn!!!
It would also be nice if Van Exel opts out of his Golden State contract and signs with us again. Hopefully, he'll be rested and ready to go.
A Dallas team with Steve Nash, Michael Finley, Dirk Nowitski, Greg Ostertag, Nick Van Exel, Antwan Jamison, Marquis Daniels, Josh Howard, Eddy Najera and Tony Delk would be very competitive.
We don't need Ostertag to score at all, he even said as much. We just need him to rebound, defend and stay outta foul trouble.
Our rookies can defend well, as can Najera. We just need the Big Three to step up defensively. And they don't even have to play great defense, just semi-good defense to win. They've proven teams can't stop them when they are shooting well.
I think Dallas will rebound next year with a great, great postseason. At least to the Conference Finals!
Well, maybe not, but they were a pretty good team. Ostertag wants to come to Dallas, so I think that would be a pretty good addition. I know he's far from an All-Star center at this point in his career, but he is definitely better than all of our current centers.
Also, there was an article today on dallasnews.com about the Mavs either putting Walker deep on the bench or hoping he opts out of his contract. Antoine Walker is the most overpaid chump in the NBA.
I hope we resign Steve Nash and Marquis Daniels. Daniels and Josh Howard were some of the best rookies in the NBA last year. And Danies went undrafted from Auburn!!!
It would also be nice if Van Exel opts out of his Golden State contract and signs with us again. Hopefully, he'll be rested and ready to go.
A Dallas team with Steve Nash, Michael Finley, Dirk Nowitski, Greg Ostertag, Nick Van Exel, Antwan Jamison, Marquis Daniels, Josh Howard, Eddy Najera and Tony Delk would be very competitive.
We don't need Ostertag to score at all, he even said as much. We just need him to rebound, defend and stay outta foul trouble.
Our rookies can defend well, as can Najera. We just need the Big Three to step up defensively. And they don't even have to play great defense, just semi-good defense to win. They've proven teams can't stop them when they are shooting well.
I think Dallas will rebound next year with a great, great postseason. At least to the Conference Finals!
[quote name='magilacudy']The Lakers are going to clamp down on Rip like they did on Parker during the Spurs series, so the others have to step up. They haven't really in the other series, so I'm really anxious to see what's going to happen. Regardless I'm rooting for Pistons too.[/quote]
Tony Parker is young and got used to the penetration in the lane. Once they took that away and double teamed Duncan, the Spurs shooters needed to step up and cause some damage from the arc, but they didn't. Turk and Bowen were too busy building houses. If they would have given the Laker defense a reason to come out and guard them Parker and Duncan would have been able to do damage inside, but it didn't happen that way.
Hamilton can shoot from anywhere and he can turn a pick like lightning and he creates shots for himself. The Lakers can try to clamp down on him all they want but it will result in an open Prince, Billups, or a pair of Wallaces and that is not a good thing for the Lakers. All 5 of those guys are deadly from different ranges and it will take a very strong Laker defense to stop them all at 1 time and I don't think they can do it.
The Lakers are also going to struggle on offense since the Piston defense is rock solid right now.
Tony Parker is young and got used to the penetration in the lane. Once they took that away and double teamed Duncan, the Spurs shooters needed to step up and cause some damage from the arc, but they didn't. Turk and Bowen were too busy building houses. If they would have given the Laker defense a reason to come out and guard them Parker and Duncan would have been able to do damage inside, but it didn't happen that way.
Hamilton can shoot from anywhere and he can turn a pick like lightning and he creates shots for himself. The Lakers can try to clamp down on him all they want but it will result in an open Prince, Billups, or a pair of Wallaces and that is not a good thing for the Lakers. All 5 of those guys are deadly from different ranges and it will take a very strong Laker defense to stop them all at 1 time and I don't think they can do it.
The Lakers are also going to struggle on offense since the Piston defense is rock solid right now.
magilacudy
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 16 (100%)
[quote name='Snowcone']It's true. Superstars get calls, or get protected from them rather. Kobe can get hit with a T for mouthing off, but it would take a full on punch for him to get a 2nd T in a game. No ref wants to be the guy who ejected the superstar so they let them "get away with murder".[/quote]
Yeah, but a side effect of this particular incident cost the Wolves the game.
Funny that you mention Kobe and full on punching someone to get a T. Watching the Spike TV 52 Moments in NBA history show brought back memories of him knocking the crap out of Bibby's face and giving him a bloody nose - with no call - when the Kings played Lakers at the Western Conference finals a few years back.
I'm sure onewingedangel would remember that too.
EDIT: [quote name='Grave_Addiction']The Mavs will be in the Finals next year!
[/quote]
I don't know about that... but they are and will be a dangerous team. I don't know if Ostertag will make much difference. I don't think he was even starting in Utah, and was complaining about playing time. The Mavs had a bunch of 7 footers who Nellie rarely played. It comes down to Don Nelson's coaching.
I think it would be better for the Mavs if he isn't brought back next year. Cuban should hire Mike Fratello (!) because of his defensive philosophy. The Mavs need to learn to play some D first, either way their scorers are going to score. It's same with the Kings; I think if they brought in a new coach they might be able to change things for the better.
Yeah, but a side effect of this particular incident cost the Wolves the game.
Funny that you mention Kobe and full on punching someone to get a T. Watching the Spike TV 52 Moments in NBA history show brought back memories of him knocking the crap out of Bibby's face and giving him a bloody nose - with no call - when the Kings played Lakers at the Western Conference finals a few years back.
I'm sure onewingedangel would remember that too.
EDIT: [quote name='Grave_Addiction']The Mavs will be in the Finals next year!
[/quote]
I don't know about that... but they are and will be a dangerous team. I don't know if Ostertag will make much difference. I don't think he was even starting in Utah, and was complaining about playing time. The Mavs had a bunch of 7 footers who Nellie rarely played. It comes down to Don Nelson's coaching.
I think it would be better for the Mavs if he isn't brought back next year. Cuban should hire Mike Fratello (!) because of his defensive philosophy. The Mavs need to learn to play some D first, either way their scorers are going to score. It's same with the Kings; I think if they brought in a new coach they might be able to change things for the better.
[quote name='Grave_Addiction']The Mavs will be in the Finals next year!
Well, maybe not, but they were a pretty good team. Ostertag wants to come to Dallas, so I think that would be a pretty good addition. I know he's far from an All-Star center at this point in his career, but he is definitely better than all of our current centers.
Also, there was an article today on dallasnews.com about the Mavs either putting Walker deep on the bench or hoping he opts out of his contract. Antoine Walker is the most overpaid chump in the NBA.
I hope we resign Steve Nash and Marquis Daniels. Daniels and Josh Howard were some of the best rookies in the NBA last year. And Danies went undrafted from Auburn!!!
It would also be nice if Van Exel opts out of his Golden State contract and signs with us again. Hopefully, he'll be rested and ready to go.
A Dallas team with Steve Nash, Michael Finley, Dirk Nowitski, Greg Ostertag, Nick Van Exel, Antwan Jamison, Marquis Daniels, Josh Howard, Eddy Najera and Tony Delk would be very competitive.
We don't need Ostertag to score at all, he even said as much. We just need him to rebound, defend and stay outta foul trouble.
Our rookies can defend well, as can Najera. We just need the Big Three to step up defensively. And they don't even have to play great defense, just semi-good defense to win. They've proven teams can't stop them when they are shooting well.
I think Dallas will rebound next year with a great, great postseason. At least to the Conference Finals![/quote]
They will have to get by the Spurs first. I think the Spurs learned a lot this year about the fact that they need to adapt their game to different styles of defense. I also think Rasho needs to get more aggressive or we need a bigman like Ben Wallace to come in and get crazy on the posts since Duncan seems very reserved as of late.
Well, maybe not, but they were a pretty good team. Ostertag wants to come to Dallas, so I think that would be a pretty good addition. I know he's far from an All-Star center at this point in his career, but he is definitely better than all of our current centers.
Also, there was an article today on dallasnews.com about the Mavs either putting Walker deep on the bench or hoping he opts out of his contract. Antoine Walker is the most overpaid chump in the NBA.
I hope we resign Steve Nash and Marquis Daniels. Daniels and Josh Howard were some of the best rookies in the NBA last year. And Danies went undrafted from Auburn!!!
It would also be nice if Van Exel opts out of his Golden State contract and signs with us again. Hopefully, he'll be rested and ready to go.
A Dallas team with Steve Nash, Michael Finley, Dirk Nowitski, Greg Ostertag, Nick Van Exel, Antwan Jamison, Marquis Daniels, Josh Howard, Eddy Najera and Tony Delk would be very competitive.
We don't need Ostertag to score at all, he even said as much. We just need him to rebound, defend and stay outta foul trouble.
Our rookies can defend well, as can Najera. We just need the Big Three to step up defensively. And they don't even have to play great defense, just semi-good defense to win. They've proven teams can't stop them when they are shooting well.
I think Dallas will rebound next year with a great, great postseason. At least to the Conference Finals![/quote]
They will have to get by the Spurs first. I think the Spurs learned a lot this year about the fact that they need to adapt their game to different styles of defense. I also think Rasho needs to get more aggressive or we need a bigman like Ben Wallace to come in and get crazy on the posts since Duncan seems very reserved as of late.
[quote name='magilacudy'][quote name='Snowcone']It's true. Superstars get calls, or get protected from them rather. Kobe can get hit with a T for mouthing off, but it would take a full on punch for him to get a 2nd T in a game. No ref wants to be the guy who ejected the superstar so they let them "get away with murder".[/quote]
Yeah, but a side effect of this particular incident cost the Wolves the game.
Funny that you mention Kobe and full on punching someone to get a T. Watching the Spike TV 52 Moments in NBA history show brought back memories of him knocking the crap out of Bibby's face and giving him a bloody nose - with no call - when the Kings played Lakers at the Western Conference finals a few years back.
I'm sure onewingedangel would remember that too.[/quote]
I don't think I caught that game. Kobe is a little more mature and I doubt he would do something like that now. I loathe Kobe and most of the Lakers if that isn't obvious yet. It frustrates me to no end that they get away with so much because they are a big market team that brings money into the NBA.
Yeah, but a side effect of this particular incident cost the Wolves the game.
Funny that you mention Kobe and full on punching someone to get a T. Watching the Spike TV 52 Moments in NBA history show brought back memories of him knocking the crap out of Bibby's face and giving him a bloody nose - with no call - when the Kings played Lakers at the Western Conference finals a few years back.
I'm sure onewingedangel would remember that too.[/quote]
I don't think I caught that game. Kobe is a little more mature and I doubt he would do something like that now. I loathe Kobe and most of the Lakers if that isn't obvious yet. It frustrates me to no end that they get away with so much because they are a big market team that brings money into the NBA.
Grave_Addiction
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 35 (100%)
[quote name='Snowcone'][quote name='Grave_Addiction']The Mavs will be in the Finals next year!
Well, maybe not, but they were a pretty good team. Ostertag wants to come to Dallas, so I think that would be a pretty good addition. I know he's far from an All-Star center at this point in his career, but he is definitely better than all of our current centers.
Also, there was an article today on dallasnews.com about the Mavs either putting Walker deep on the bench or hoping he opts out of his contract. Antoine Walker is the most overpaid chump in the NBA.
I hope we resign Steve Nash and Marquis Daniels. Daniels and Josh Howard were some of the best rookies in the NBA last year. And Danies went undrafted from Auburn!!!
It would also be nice if Van Exel opts out of his Golden State contract and signs with us again. Hopefully, he'll be rested and ready to go.
A Dallas team with Steve Nash, Michael Finley, Dirk Nowitski, Greg Ostertag, Nick Van Exel, Antwan Jamison, Marquis Daniels, Josh Howard, Eddy Najera and Tony Delk would be very competitive.
We don't need Ostertag to score at all, he even said as much. We just need him to rebound, defend and stay outta foul trouble.
Our rookies can defend well, as can Najera. We just need the Big Three to step up defensively. And they don't even have to play great defense, just semi-good defense to win. They've proven teams can't stop them when they are shooting well.
I think Dallas will rebound next year with a great, great postseason. At least to the Conference Finals![/quote]
They will have to get by the Spurs first. I think the Spurs learned a lot this year about the fact that they need to adapt their game to different styles of defense. I also think Rasho needs to get more aggressive or we need a bigman like Ben Wallace to come in and get crazy on the posts since Duncan seems very reserved as of late.[/quote]
Good luck at getting Wallace. There's no way Detroit's letting that dude get away. There is a huge lack on big men in the NBA. Usually, you can hope for one good center on a team and not much after that.
Dallas has always played San Antonio tough. The team I'm always afraid for them to play is L.A. For some reason, Dallas has a mental barrier when playing the Lakers. Last season, we made a HUGE deal over finally beating them on their court. First time in 10 years. That's pretty sad. I would love to see Dallas play L.A. in the playoffs next year.
I think you should never try to duck any team in the playoffs, because if you win, it will taint your championship.
Well, maybe not, but they were a pretty good team. Ostertag wants to come to Dallas, so I think that would be a pretty good addition. I know he's far from an All-Star center at this point in his career, but he is definitely better than all of our current centers.
Also, there was an article today on dallasnews.com about the Mavs either putting Walker deep on the bench or hoping he opts out of his contract. Antoine Walker is the most overpaid chump in the NBA.
I hope we resign Steve Nash and Marquis Daniels. Daniels and Josh Howard were some of the best rookies in the NBA last year. And Danies went undrafted from Auburn!!!
It would also be nice if Van Exel opts out of his Golden State contract and signs with us again. Hopefully, he'll be rested and ready to go.
A Dallas team with Steve Nash, Michael Finley, Dirk Nowitski, Greg Ostertag, Nick Van Exel, Antwan Jamison, Marquis Daniels, Josh Howard, Eddy Najera and Tony Delk would be very competitive.
We don't need Ostertag to score at all, he even said as much. We just need him to rebound, defend and stay outta foul trouble.
Our rookies can defend well, as can Najera. We just need the Big Three to step up defensively. And they don't even have to play great defense, just semi-good defense to win. They've proven teams can't stop them when they are shooting well.
I think Dallas will rebound next year with a great, great postseason. At least to the Conference Finals![/quote]
They will have to get by the Spurs first. I think the Spurs learned a lot this year about the fact that they need to adapt their game to different styles of defense. I also think Rasho needs to get more aggressive or we need a bigman like Ben Wallace to come in and get crazy on the posts since Duncan seems very reserved as of late.[/quote]
Good luck at getting Wallace. There's no way Detroit's letting that dude get away. There is a huge lack on big men in the NBA. Usually, you can hope for one good center on a team and not much after that.
Dallas has always played San Antonio tough. The team I'm always afraid for them to play is L.A. For some reason, Dallas has a mental barrier when playing the Lakers. Last season, we made a HUGE deal over finally beating them on their court. First time in 10 years. That's pretty sad. I would love to see Dallas play L.A. in the playoffs next year.
I think you should never try to duck any team in the playoffs, because if you win, it will taint your championship.
starman9000
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 85 (100%)
[quote name='greendj27'][quote name='starman9000']This thread is great
Mustang-0-line:
"I liked the Lakers back when they sucked, which I am almost sure you can't say about the Kings, because no one like the kings until the galoof brothers actually did something up there."
[/quote]
Umm...the Lakers really never sucked. They might have had an off year or two, but they have won championships since the early 80's.[/quote]
Yeah that was my point.
Mustang-0-line:
"I liked the Lakers back when they sucked, which I am almost sure you can't say about the Kings, because no one like the kings until the galoof brothers actually did something up there."
[/quote]
Umm...the Lakers really never sucked. They might have had an off year or two, but they have won championships since the early 80's.[/quote]
Yeah that was my point.
greendj27
CAGiversary!
[quote name='starman9000'][quote name='greendj27'][quote name='starman9000']This thread is great
Mustang-0-line:
"I liked the Lakers back when they sucked, which I am almost sure you can't say about the Kings, because no one like the kings until the galoof brothers actually did something up there."
[/quote]
Umm...the Lakers really never sucked. They might have had an off year or two, but they have won championships since the early 80's.[/quote]
Yeah that was my point.[/quote]
Ooops. Too many quotes in there. I didn't realize that mustang had said that.
Mustang-0-line:
"I liked the Lakers back when they sucked, which I am almost sure you can't say about the Kings, because no one like the kings until the galoof brothers actually did something up there."
[/quote]
Umm...the Lakers really never sucked. They might have had an off year or two, but they have won championships since the early 80's.[/quote]
Yeah that was my point.[/quote]
Ooops. Too many quotes in there. I didn't realize that mustang had said that.
[quote name='Grave_Addiction'][quote name='Snowcone']They will have to get by the Spurs first. I think the Spurs learned a lot this year about the fact that they need to adapt their game to different styles of defense. I also think Rasho needs to get more aggressive or we need a bigman like Ben Wallace to come in and get crazy on the posts since Duncan seems very reserved as of late.[/quote]
Good luck at getting Wallace. There's no way Detroit's letting that dude get away. There is a huge lack on big men in the NBA. Usually, you can hope for one good center on a team and not much after that.
Dallas has always played San Antonio tough. The team I'm always afraid for them to play is L.A. For some reason, Dallas has a mental barrier when playing the Lakers. Last season, we made a HUGE deal over finally beating them on their court. First time in 10 years. That's pretty sad. I would love to see Dallas play L.A. in the playoffs next year.
I think you should never try to duck any team in the playoffs, because if you win, it will taint your championship.[/quote]
I agree. The Mavs always play tough and they are a good team. I also think Wallace is staying in Detroit, but I can dream can't I?
Good luck at getting Wallace. There's no way Detroit's letting that dude get away. There is a huge lack on big men in the NBA. Usually, you can hope for one good center on a team and not much after that.
Dallas has always played San Antonio tough. The team I'm always afraid for them to play is L.A. For some reason, Dallas has a mental barrier when playing the Lakers. Last season, we made a HUGE deal over finally beating them on their court. First time in 10 years. That's pretty sad. I would love to see Dallas play L.A. in the playoffs next year.
I think you should never try to duck any team in the playoffs, because if you win, it will taint your championship.[/quote]
I agree. The Mavs always play tough and they are a good team. I also think Wallace is staying in Detroit, but I can dream can't I?
chickenhawk
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 162 (100%)
Wow, I am coming into this thread late. But here are my 2 cents about the various issues.
I used to have great respect for SAC fans (BTW they always had a good fan base, even when they sucked ass!), but I lost most of that respect for them after the Wolves series because of all the crap they felt needed to be on the court.
The Lakers are obviously going to the Finals and Phil said it best when he said they were fortunate to play a Wolves team without their full complement of players. If Cassell was healthy, let alone Troy Hudson, the outcome probably would have been very different. Evidence of that is that it was a tough 6 games series with virtually no contribution from Cassell.
Dallas is going nowhere unless they make some changes. They still can't play a lick of defense and that will equal early playoff exits every year even if they add more scorers. I found it interesting (but not suprising) that they got worse with all ther "additions". You've heard of addition by subtraction...well, Dallas showed us that it's possible to have subtraction by addition.
The Spurs will likely not make any major changes this offseason. Baring injury, they will be a contender again next year, but I don't see a Finals trip in their immediate future unless they get another reliable scorer or Ginobili has a breakout season. Ginobili has gotten way too much hype so far. I've even heard some NBA people call him :an unstoppable slasher". What? Granted, he has great potential, but he has not even approached that status yet.
Finally, I see the most potential from the Wolves for a Finals trip next season. You may say I'm biased, but look at the facts. KG is the man and has become to some extent the go-to guy people have been asking that he be for the last 3 years. Cassell and Spree can obviously still play and they have a great complelemt of role players. They had the #1 seed in the West and went 6 games with the "mighty" Lakers in the conference finals in a season while they arguably had the most banged up roster in the league. Granted, keeping Hudson is a priority and Kandiman must improve over the offseason, but they have the pieces in place.
There you have it....my 2 cents. To add one more cent maybe...can the Bulls PLEASE live up to their potential next season!?!?!
I used to have great respect for SAC fans (BTW they always had a good fan base, even when they sucked ass!), but I lost most of that respect for them after the Wolves series because of all the crap they felt needed to be on the court.
The Lakers are obviously going to the Finals and Phil said it best when he said they were fortunate to play a Wolves team without their full complement of players. If Cassell was healthy, let alone Troy Hudson, the outcome probably would have been very different. Evidence of that is that it was a tough 6 games series with virtually no contribution from Cassell.
Dallas is going nowhere unless they make some changes. They still can't play a lick of defense and that will equal early playoff exits every year even if they add more scorers. I found it interesting (but not suprising) that they got worse with all ther "additions". You've heard of addition by subtraction...well, Dallas showed us that it's possible to have subtraction by addition.
The Spurs will likely not make any major changes this offseason. Baring injury, they will be a contender again next year, but I don't see a Finals trip in their immediate future unless they get another reliable scorer or Ginobili has a breakout season. Ginobili has gotten way too much hype so far. I've even heard some NBA people call him :an unstoppable slasher". What? Granted, he has great potential, but he has not even approached that status yet.
Finally, I see the most potential from the Wolves for a Finals trip next season. You may say I'm biased, but look at the facts. KG is the man and has become to some extent the go-to guy people have been asking that he be for the last 3 years. Cassell and Spree can obviously still play and they have a great complelemt of role players. They had the #1 seed in the West and went 6 games with the "mighty" Lakers in the conference finals in a season while they arguably had the most banged up roster in the league. Granted, keeping Hudson is a priority and Kandiman must improve over the offseason, but they have the pieces in place.
There you have it....my 2 cents. To add one more cent maybe...can the Bulls PLEASE live up to their potential next season!?!?!
magilacudy
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 16 (100%)
[quote name='chickenhawk']There you have it....my 2 cents. To add one more cent maybe...can the Bulls PLEASE live up to their potential next season!?!?![/quote]
Thought you might like that chickenhawk.
[quote name='Ben Maller']
Orlando's No. 1 pick and Juwan Howard to Chicago for center Tyson Chandler and point guard Kirk Hinrich. Why it makes sense: Chicago has grown tired of dealing with the Baby Bulls -- a.k.a. Eddy Curry and Chandler -- and would like to move one of them this summer. Howard would give the Bulls the professionalism that they lacked much of last season and Okafor could improve their shoddy defense.[/quote]
Imagine the Bulls with Okafor? Nah they'd be stuck in the same boat as before. They can't have either a competent point guard and a reliable forward/center, they need both. I don't see them fixing the situation any time soon.
And another note, Kandi is trash. Every time he touches the ball he turns it over or does something stupid with it. One of the commentators said it best, that he's not ready to play at playoff level yet. The Wolves are pretty much stuck with him though. Unfortunately.
Thought you might like that chickenhawk.
[quote name='Ben Maller']
Orlando's No. 1 pick and Juwan Howard to Chicago for center Tyson Chandler and point guard Kirk Hinrich. Why it makes sense: Chicago has grown tired of dealing with the Baby Bulls -- a.k.a. Eddy Curry and Chandler -- and would like to move one of them this summer. Howard would give the Bulls the professionalism that they lacked much of last season and Okafor could improve their shoddy defense.[/quote]
Imagine the Bulls with Okafor? Nah they'd be stuck in the same boat as before. They can't have either a competent point guard and a reliable forward/center, they need both. I don't see them fixing the situation any time soon.
And another note, Kandi is trash. Every time he touches the ball he turns it over or does something stupid with it. One of the commentators said it best, that he's not ready to play at playoff level yet. The Wolves are pretty much stuck with him though. Unfortunately.
chickenhawk
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 162 (100%)
[quote name='magilacudy'][quote name='chickenhawk']There you have it....my 2 cents. To add one more cent maybe...can the Bulls PLEASE live up to their potential next season!?!?![/quote]
Thought you might like that chickenhawk.
[quote name='Ben Maller']
Orlando's No. 1 pick and Juwan Howard to Chicago for center Tyson Chandler and point guard Kirk Hinrich. Why it makes sense: Chicago has grown tired of dealing with the Baby Bulls -- a.k.a. Eddy Curry and Chandler -- and would like to move one of them this summer. Howard would give the Bulls the professionalism that they lacked much of last season and Okafor could improve their shoddy defense.[/quote]
Imagine the Bulls with Okafor? Nah they'd be stuck in the same boat as before. They can't have either a competent point guard and a reliable forward/center, they need both. I don't see them fixing the situation any time soon.
And another note, Kandi is trash. Every time he touches the ball he turns it over or does something stupid with it. One of the commentators said it best, that he's not ready to play at playoff level yet. The Wolves are pretty much stuck with him though. Unfortunately.[/quote]
Agreed. Kandi was trash in the playoffs, but towards the end opf the regular season, he showed some promise. His playoff performance however was one of the worst I have seen in a long time. He has potential, but he needs to utlize who has in MN. McHale was one of the best post players ever and Kandi doesn't seem to care about that. If he doesn't want to develop his post game through McHale he needs to stop thinking of himself as a scorer and just focus on rebounding and defense. Maybe Charlotte will pick him in the expansion draft.
Re: Ben Mallers suggestion to trade away Hinrich...if there is one player the Bulls need to keep it's him. He gives them energy, defense (do the Bulls even know what that is anymore), and some toughness.
Thought you might like that chickenhawk.
[quote name='Ben Maller']
Orlando's No. 1 pick and Juwan Howard to Chicago for center Tyson Chandler and point guard Kirk Hinrich. Why it makes sense: Chicago has grown tired of dealing with the Baby Bulls -- a.k.a. Eddy Curry and Chandler -- and would like to move one of them this summer. Howard would give the Bulls the professionalism that they lacked much of last season and Okafor could improve their shoddy defense.[/quote]
Imagine the Bulls with Okafor? Nah they'd be stuck in the same boat as before. They can't have either a competent point guard and a reliable forward/center, they need both. I don't see them fixing the situation any time soon.
And another note, Kandi is trash. Every time he touches the ball he turns it over or does something stupid with it. One of the commentators said it best, that he's not ready to play at playoff level yet. The Wolves are pretty much stuck with him though. Unfortunately.[/quote]
Agreed. Kandi was trash in the playoffs, but towards the end opf the regular season, he showed some promise. His playoff performance however was one of the worst I have seen in a long time. He has potential, but he needs to utlize who has in MN. McHale was one of the best post players ever and Kandi doesn't seem to care about that. If he doesn't want to develop his post game through McHale he needs to stop thinking of himself as a scorer and just focus on rebounding and defense. Maybe Charlotte will pick him in the expansion draft.
Re: Ben Mallers suggestion to trade away Hinrich...if there is one player the Bulls need to keep it's him. He gives them energy, defense (do the Bulls even know what that is anymore), and some toughness.
Grave_Addiction
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 35 (100%)
[quote name='chickenhawk']Wow, I am coming into this thread late. But here are my 2 cents about the various issues.
Dallas is going nowhere unless they make some changes. They still can't play a lick of defense and that will equal early playoff exits every year even if they add more scorers. I found it interesting (but not suprising) that they got worse with all ther "additions". You've heard of addition by subtraction...well, Dallas showed us that it's possible to have subtraction by addition.
There you have it....my 2 cents. To add one more cent maybe...can the Bulls PLEASE live up to their potential next season!?!?![/quote]
Dallas made it to one game of the NBA Finals the year before last by not playing "a lick of defense." All they have to do, is play average defense and they are fine.
What hurt them this year was they fooled around with so much of their chemistry that they were never able to recover from it. Actually, Van Exel and La Frentz were hurt a lot of the year last year, and those injuries were lingering, so I still think Dallas made good moves by adding the players they did. With the exception being Walker. I hate him.
Adding Jamison was a brilliant trade.
Here's all Dallas has to do to become an instant and legitimate contender for the champs next season.
Add:
Greg Ostertag
Nick Van Exel
One or two other decent defenders
Subtract:
Antoine Walker
Travis Best
Dallas is going nowhere unless they make some changes. They still can't play a lick of defense and that will equal early playoff exits every year even if they add more scorers. I found it interesting (but not suprising) that they got worse with all ther "additions". You've heard of addition by subtraction...well, Dallas showed us that it's possible to have subtraction by addition.
There you have it....my 2 cents. To add one more cent maybe...can the Bulls PLEASE live up to their potential next season!?!?![/quote]
Dallas made it to one game of the NBA Finals the year before last by not playing "a lick of defense." All they have to do, is play average defense and they are fine.
What hurt them this year was they fooled around with so much of their chemistry that they were never able to recover from it. Actually, Van Exel and La Frentz were hurt a lot of the year last year, and those injuries were lingering, so I still think Dallas made good moves by adding the players they did. With the exception being Walker. I hate him.
Adding Jamison was a brilliant trade.
Here's all Dallas has to do to become an instant and legitimate contender for the champs next season.
Add:
Greg Ostertag
Nick Van Exel
One or two other decent defenders
Subtract:
Antoine Walker
Travis Best
[quote name='Grave_Addiction']Dallas made it to one game of the NBA Finals the year before last by not playing "a lick of defense." All they have to do, is play average defense and they are fine.[/b][/quote]
Chris Webber going down with injury also helped them. Unlikely that Dallas will go to the Finals next year. If Kobe stays with the Lakers, I don't think Dallas can beat them in a 7 game series. Same with the Kings if they don't make drastic changes. The Spurs have enough cap room to add a good free agent next year, and this year they were one of the best teams. The Wolves are only going to get better when they all get healthy. Basically, if the 4 teams I mentioned don't do too much to change their rosters, Dallas will only be 5th best.
As far as this years Finals, Kobe is a great defender, and will probably guard Hamilton. While he won't hold him scoreless and totally shut him down, the Lakers won't have to double team him. I don't think the Lakers have to double team anybody on the Pistons. They just need to make sure they keep the Pistons from getting into the lane.
Chris Webber going down with injury also helped them. Unlikely that Dallas will go to the Finals next year. If Kobe stays with the Lakers, I don't think Dallas can beat them in a 7 game series. Same with the Kings if they don't make drastic changes. The Spurs have enough cap room to add a good free agent next year, and this year they were one of the best teams. The Wolves are only going to get better when they all get healthy. Basically, if the 4 teams I mentioned don't do too much to change their rosters, Dallas will only be 5th best.
As far as this years Finals, Kobe is a great defender, and will probably guard Hamilton. While he won't hold him scoreless and totally shut him down, the Lakers won't have to double team him. I don't think the Lakers have to double team anybody on the Pistons. They just need to make sure they keep the Pistons from getting into the lane.
Lstorm34
CAGiversary!
Dallas Mavericks in the NBA FINALS? you know they are re-aligning the league next year do you? the new nba southwest divison consist of the
SPURS, ROCKETS,GRIZZLES, HORNETS , AND MAVERICKS. the mavs might finish 2nd to last in that DIVISION. they need to unload contracts on the mavs cuz they dont have enough to sign Steve Nash. the most they can offer nash is 4.5 mill a year. i doubt steve would do that. they need to move walker and jaimison to free up money but i doubt any team would like to take walkers 14 mill a year contract and same as jaimison unless they take a bad contract back which they would be in the same situation they are now needing the money to sign nash.
SPURS, ROCKETS,GRIZZLES, HORNETS , AND MAVERICKS. the mavs might finish 2nd to last in that DIVISION. they need to unload contracts on the mavs cuz they dont have enough to sign Steve Nash. the most they can offer nash is 4.5 mill a year. i doubt steve would do that. they need to move walker and jaimison to free up money but i doubt any team would like to take walkers 14 mill a year contract and same as jaimison unless they take a bad contract back which they would be in the same situation they are now needing the money to sign nash.
chickenhawk
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 162 (100%)
[quote name='Grave_Addiction'][quote name='chickenhawk']Wow, I am coming into this thread late. But here are my 2 cents about the various issues.
Dallas is going nowhere unless they make some changes. They still can't play a lick of defense and that will equal early playoff exits every year even if they add more scorers. I found it interesting (but not suprising) that they got worse with all ther "additions". You've heard of addition by subtraction...well, Dallas showed us that it's possible to have subtraction by addition.
There you have it....my 2 cents. To add one more cent maybe...can the Bulls PLEASE live up to their potential next season!?!?![/quote]
Dallas made it to one game of the NBA Finals the year before last by not playing "a lick of defense." All they have to do, is play average defense and they are fine.
What hurt them this year was they fooled around with so much of their chemistry that they were never able to recover from it. Actually, Van Exel and La Frentz were hurt a lot of the year last year, and those injuries were lingering, so I still think Dallas made good moves by adding the players they did. With the exception being Walker. I hate him.
Adding Jamison was a brilliant trade.
Here's all Dallas has to do to become an instant and legitimate contender for the champs next season.
Add:
Greg Ostertag
Nick Van Exel
One or two other decent defenders
Subtract:
Antoine Walker
Travis Best[/quote]
You may be right that all they have to do is play "average" defense, but you have to admit, they can't even do that for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series. With Nash, Dirk, and Finley, they should have been going to the Finals if they could only play defense. You admit in your post that they need Ostertag (decent defender) and one or two other defenders...don't be such a homer and admit your teams' flaws.
Dallas is going nowhere unless they make some changes. They still can't play a lick of defense and that will equal early playoff exits every year even if they add more scorers. I found it interesting (but not suprising) that they got worse with all ther "additions". You've heard of addition by subtraction...well, Dallas showed us that it's possible to have subtraction by addition.
There you have it....my 2 cents. To add one more cent maybe...can the Bulls PLEASE live up to their potential next season!?!?![/quote]
Dallas made it to one game of the NBA Finals the year before last by not playing "a lick of defense." All they have to do, is play average defense and they are fine.
What hurt them this year was they fooled around with so much of their chemistry that they were never able to recover from it. Actually, Van Exel and La Frentz were hurt a lot of the year last year, and those injuries were lingering, so I still think Dallas made good moves by adding the players they did. With the exception being Walker. I hate him.
Adding Jamison was a brilliant trade.
Here's all Dallas has to do to become an instant and legitimate contender for the champs next season.
Add:
Greg Ostertag
Nick Van Exel
One or two other decent defenders
Subtract:
Antoine Walker
Travis Best[/quote]
You may be right that all they have to do is play "average" defense, but you have to admit, they can't even do that for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series. With Nash, Dirk, and Finley, they should have been going to the Finals if they could only play defense. You admit in your post that they need Ostertag (decent defender) and one or two other defenders...don't be such a homer and admit your teams' flaws.
Grave_Addiction
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 35 (100%)
[quote name='Lstorm34']Dallas Mavericks in the NBA FINALS? you know they are re-aligning the league next year do you? the new nba southwest divison consist of the
SPURS, ROCKETS,GRIZZLES, HORNETS , AND MAVERICKS. the mavs might finish 2nd to last in that DIVISION. they need to unload contracts on the mavs cuz they dont have enough to sign Steve Nash. the most they can offer nash is 4.5 mill a year. i doubt steve would do that. they need to move walker and jaimison to free up money but i doubt any team would like to take walkers 14 mill a year contract and same as jaimison unless they take a bad contract back which they would be in the same situation they are now needing the money to sign nash.[/quote]
Okay, first off, the Mavs finished with a good record this year. They weren't great on the road, but still won 52 games. They were the best team at home in the entire NBA, and they finished with a better record than the Rockets, Grizzlies and Hornets. So, I really don't know how you figure they might finish second to last. Yes, those teams are getting better, but this was a bad year for the Mavericks.
The Mavericks will continue to change the supporting cast around the Big Three until they find people who will stick. They have found several of those players and can grab some more next year.
They have a $4.5 million mid-level exception next year that they will probably give to Marquis Daniels and Ostertag.
You are wrong about Nash, though. I really don't know where you're getting your information on the Mavs needing to get rid of Jamison or Walker just to be able to re-sign Nash. Jamison should be back in Dallas next year and Walker should be playing basketball in Cuba.
I'm assuming the $4.5 million a year you talked about is the MLE. Actually, they can offer him as much as a five-year extension with 12.5 percent annual raises after the 2004-05 season. Such as deal would total approximately $39 million, with the final season approaching $10 million.
That last bit was taken from the Star Telegram, so they can offer Nash a nice deal without even having to dip into their MLE, allowing them to use that on Ostertag and Daniels.
SPURS, ROCKETS,GRIZZLES, HORNETS , AND MAVERICKS. the mavs might finish 2nd to last in that DIVISION. they need to unload contracts on the mavs cuz they dont have enough to sign Steve Nash. the most they can offer nash is 4.5 mill a year. i doubt steve would do that. they need to move walker and jaimison to free up money but i doubt any team would like to take walkers 14 mill a year contract and same as jaimison unless they take a bad contract back which they would be in the same situation they are now needing the money to sign nash.[/quote]
Okay, first off, the Mavs finished with a good record this year. They weren't great on the road, but still won 52 games. They were the best team at home in the entire NBA, and they finished with a better record than the Rockets, Grizzlies and Hornets. So, I really don't know how you figure they might finish second to last. Yes, those teams are getting better, but this was a bad year for the Mavericks.
The Mavericks will continue to change the supporting cast around the Big Three until they find people who will stick. They have found several of those players and can grab some more next year.
They have a $4.5 million mid-level exception next year that they will probably give to Marquis Daniels and Ostertag.
You are wrong about Nash, though. I really don't know where you're getting your information on the Mavs needing to get rid of Jamison or Walker just to be able to re-sign Nash. Jamison should be back in Dallas next year and Walker should be playing basketball in Cuba.
I'm assuming the $4.5 million a year you talked about is the MLE. Actually, they can offer him as much as a five-year extension with 12.5 percent annual raises after the 2004-05 season. Such as deal would total approximately $39 million, with the final season approaching $10 million.
That last bit was taken from the Star Telegram, so they can offer Nash a nice deal without even having to dip into their MLE, allowing them to use that on Ostertag and Daniels.
Grave_Addiction
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 35 (100%)
[quote name='chickenhawk']You may be right that all they have to do is play "average" defense, but you have to admit, they can't even do that for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series. With Nash, Dirk, and Finley, they should have been going to the Finals if they could only play defense. You admit in your post that they need Ostertag (decent defender) and one or two other defenders...don't be such a homer and admit your teams' flaws.[/quote]
So you say I'm a homer because I said we need better defense and that I admitted my teams flaws, but you said in the same paragraph that "I have to admit, they can't even play average defense for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series." I dunno, but the last time I checked, that's pretty much the same thing you just accused me of, bro.
I really don't see the problem admitting flaws in my team. I can't stand the stupid people out there who argue endlessly that their teams have no flaws. If you can't be a realistic fan, that's ridiculous.
The Mavs have shown they can defend. In the 2002-2003 season, they played decent defense and played good defense throughout the playoffs. Like I said earlier, they took the Spurs to the limit in the Conference Finals and Dirk was out for that last game. But I'm not saying we lost solely because Dirk was out, though.
So you say I'm a homer because I said we need better defense and that I admitted my teams flaws, but you said in the same paragraph that "I have to admit, they can't even play average defense for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series." I dunno, but the last time I checked, that's pretty much the same thing you just accused me of, bro.
I really don't see the problem admitting flaws in my team. I can't stand the stupid people out there who argue endlessly that their teams have no flaws. If you can't be a realistic fan, that's ridiculous.
The Mavs have shown they can defend. In the 2002-2003 season, they played decent defense and played good defense throughout the playoffs. Like I said earlier, they took the Spurs to the limit in the Conference Finals and Dirk was out for that last game. But I'm not saying we lost solely because Dirk was out, though.
Lstorm34
CAGiversary!
i've been watching the nba playoffs. Right after they were eliminated. Steven A. Smith said "they will have to move either Walker or Jaimison to sign steve nash. this is the only way they can keep him unless for some reason Nash decides to take a HUGE paycut which i doubt. there will be other teams willing to pay him 7-10 mill a year to play ball. But looking at Walkers and Jamison's contract i doubt anybody is crazy enought to take one of these two players who doesnt play DEFENSE and make 14 mill a year." The mavs are over the cap and have plenty of players who are overpaid.
Lstorm34
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Grave_Addiction'][quote name='chickenhawk']You may be right that all they have to do is play "average" defense, but you have to admit, they can't even do that for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series. With Nash, Dirk, and Finley, they should have been going to the Finals if they could only play defense. You admit in your post that they need Ostertag (decent defender) and one or two other defenders...don't be such a homer and admit your teams' flaws.[/quote]
So you say I'm a homer because I said we need better defense and that I admitted my teams flaws, but you said in the same paragraph that "I have to admit, they can't even play average defense for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series." I dunno, but the last time I checked, that's pretty much the same thing you just accused me of, bro.
I really don't see the problem admitting flaws in my team. I can't stand the stupid people out there who argue endlessly that their teams have no flaws. If you can't be a realistic fan, that's ridiculous.
The Mavs have shown they can defend. In the 2002-2003 season, they played decent defense and played good defense throughout the playoffs. Like I said earlier, they took the Spurs to the limit in the Conference Finals and Dirk was out for that last game. But I'm not saying we lost solely because Dirk was out, though.[/quote]
first round:
(3) DALLAS vs. (6) PORTLAND
Gm 1: Dallas 96, Portland 86
Gm 2: Dallas 103, Portland 99
Gm 3: Dallas 115, Portland 103
Gm 4: Portland 98, Dallas 79
Gm 5: Portland 103, Dallas 99
Gm 6: Portland 125, Dallas 103
Gm 7: Dallas 107, Portland 95
second round:
Gm 1: Sacramento 124, Dallas 113
Gm 2: Dallas 132, Sacramento 110
Gm 3: Dallas 141, Sacramento 137 (2OT)
Gm 4: Sacramento 99, Dallas 83
Gm 5: Dallas 112, Sacramento 93
Gm 6: Sacramento 115, Dallas 109
Gm 7: Dallas 112, Sacramento 99
Conf Finals:
Gm 1: Dallas 113, San Antonio 110
Gm 2: San Antonio 119, Dallas 106
Gm 3: San Antonio 96, Dallas 83
Gm 4: San Antonio 102, Dallas 95
Gm 5: Dallas 103, San Antonio 91
Gm 6: San Antonio 90, Dallas 78
thats not decent defense. and they did not take the spurs to the limit.
So you say I'm a homer because I said we need better defense and that I admitted my teams flaws, but you said in the same paragraph that "I have to admit, they can't even play average defense for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series." I dunno, but the last time I checked, that's pretty much the same thing you just accused me of, bro.
I really don't see the problem admitting flaws in my team. I can't stand the stupid people out there who argue endlessly that their teams have no flaws. If you can't be a realistic fan, that's ridiculous.
The Mavs have shown they can defend. In the 2002-2003 season, they played decent defense and played good defense throughout the playoffs. Like I said earlier, they took the Spurs to the limit in the Conference Finals and Dirk was out for that last game. But I'm not saying we lost solely because Dirk was out, though.[/quote]
first round:
(3) DALLAS vs. (6) PORTLAND
Gm 1: Dallas 96, Portland 86
Gm 2: Dallas 103, Portland 99
Gm 3: Dallas 115, Portland 103
Gm 4: Portland 98, Dallas 79
Gm 5: Portland 103, Dallas 99
Gm 6: Portland 125, Dallas 103
Gm 7: Dallas 107, Portland 95
second round:
Gm 1: Sacramento 124, Dallas 113
Gm 2: Dallas 132, Sacramento 110
Gm 3: Dallas 141, Sacramento 137 (2OT)
Gm 4: Sacramento 99, Dallas 83
Gm 5: Dallas 112, Sacramento 93
Gm 6: Sacramento 115, Dallas 109
Gm 7: Dallas 112, Sacramento 99
Conf Finals:
Gm 1: Dallas 113, San Antonio 110
Gm 2: San Antonio 119, Dallas 106
Gm 3: San Antonio 96, Dallas 83
Gm 4: San Antonio 102, Dallas 95
Gm 5: Dallas 103, San Antonio 91
Gm 6: San Antonio 90, Dallas 78
thats not decent defense. and they did not take the spurs to the limit.
Grave_Addiction
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 35 (100%)
[quote name='Lstorm34'][quote name='Grave_Addiction'][quote name='chickenhawk']You may be right that all they have to do is play "average" defense, but you have to admit, they can't even do that for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series. With Nash, Dirk, and Finley, they should have been going to the Finals if they could only play defense. You admit in your post that they need Ostertag (decent defender) and one or two other defenders...don't be such a homer and admit your teams' flaws.[/quote]
So you say I'm a homer because I said we need better defense and that I admitted my teams flaws, but you said in the same paragraph that "I have to admit, they can't even play average defense for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series." I dunno, but the last time I checked, that's pretty much the same thing you just accused me of, bro.
I really don't see the problem admitting flaws in my team. I can't stand the stupid people out there who argue endlessly that their teams have no flaws. If you can't be a realistic fan, that's ridiculous.
The Mavs have shown they can defend. In the 2002-2003 season, they played decent defense and played good defense throughout the playoffs. Like I said earlier, they took the Spurs to the limit in the Conference Finals and Dirk was out for that last game. But I'm not saying we lost solely because Dirk was out, though.[/quote]
first round:
(3) DALLAS vs. (6) PORTLAND
Gm 1: Dallas 96, Portland 86
Gm 2: Dallas 103, Portland 99
Gm 3: Dallas 115, Portland 103
Gm 4: Portland 98, Dallas 79
Gm 5: Portland 103, Dallas 99
Gm 6: Portland 125, Dallas 103
Gm 7: Dallas 107, Portland 95
second round:
Gm 1: Sacramento 124, Dallas 113
Gm 2: Dallas 132, Sacramento 110
Gm 3: Dallas 141, Sacramento 137 (2OT)
Gm 4: Sacramento 99, Dallas 83
Gm 5: Dallas 112, Sacramento 93
Gm 6: Sacramento 115, Dallas 109
Gm 7: Dallas 112, Sacramento 99
Conf Finals:
Gm 1: Dallas 113, San Antonio 110
Gm 2: San Antonio 119, Dallas 106
Gm 3: San Antonio 96, Dallas 83
Gm 4: San Antonio 102, Dallas 95
Gm 5: Dallas 103, San Antonio 91
Gm 6: San Antonio 90, Dallas 78
thats not decent defense. and they did not take the spurs to the limit.[/quote]
Yes, I think that's decent defense for a team that plays like Dallas. You can't go by point totals to judge Dallas and Sacramento's defense. You have to look at their opponent's field goal percentage.
Those two teams shoot way too fast compared to teams like Detroit and SA, who play more of a half-court game. Of course when you run the shot clock down to three or four seconds before you shoot the ball, the score is going to be low.
So you say I'm a homer because I said we need better defense and that I admitted my teams flaws, but you said in the same paragraph that "I have to admit, they can't even play average defense for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series." I dunno, but the last time I checked, that's pretty much the same thing you just accused me of, bro.
I really don't see the problem admitting flaws in my team. I can't stand the stupid people out there who argue endlessly that their teams have no flaws. If you can't be a realistic fan, that's ridiculous.
The Mavs have shown they can defend. In the 2002-2003 season, they played decent defense and played good defense throughout the playoffs. Like I said earlier, they took the Spurs to the limit in the Conference Finals and Dirk was out for that last game. But I'm not saying we lost solely because Dirk was out, though.[/quote]
first round:
(3) DALLAS vs. (6) PORTLAND
Gm 1: Dallas 96, Portland 86
Gm 2: Dallas 103, Portland 99
Gm 3: Dallas 115, Portland 103
Gm 4: Portland 98, Dallas 79
Gm 5: Portland 103, Dallas 99
Gm 6: Portland 125, Dallas 103
Gm 7: Dallas 107, Portland 95
second round:
Gm 1: Sacramento 124, Dallas 113
Gm 2: Dallas 132, Sacramento 110
Gm 3: Dallas 141, Sacramento 137 (2OT)
Gm 4: Sacramento 99, Dallas 83
Gm 5: Dallas 112, Sacramento 93
Gm 6: Sacramento 115, Dallas 109
Gm 7: Dallas 112, Sacramento 99
Conf Finals:
Gm 1: Dallas 113, San Antonio 110
Gm 2: San Antonio 119, Dallas 106
Gm 3: San Antonio 96, Dallas 83
Gm 4: San Antonio 102, Dallas 95
Gm 5: Dallas 103, San Antonio 91
Gm 6: San Antonio 90, Dallas 78
thats not decent defense. and they did not take the spurs to the limit.[/quote]
Yes, I think that's decent defense for a team that plays like Dallas. You can't go by point totals to judge Dallas and Sacramento's defense. You have to look at their opponent's field goal percentage.
Those two teams shoot way too fast compared to teams like Detroit and SA, who play more of a half-court game. Of course when you run the shot clock down to three or four seconds before you shoot the ball, the score is going to be low.
Lstorm34
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Grave_Addiction'][quote name='Lstorm34'][quote name='Grave_Addiction'][quote name='chickenhawk']You may be right that all they have to do is play "average" defense, but you have to admit, they can't even do that for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series. With Nash, Dirk, and Finley, they should have been going to the Finals if they could only play defense. You admit in your post that they need Ostertag (decent defender) and one or two other defenders...don't be such a homer and admit your teams' flaws.[/quote]
So you say I'm a homer because I said we need better defense and that I admitted my teams flaws, but you said in the same paragraph that "I have to admit, they can't even play average defense for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series." I dunno, but the last time I checked, that's pretty much the same thing you just accused me of, bro.
I really don't see the problem admitting flaws in my team. I can't stand the stupid people out there who argue endlessly that their teams have no flaws. If you can't be a realistic fan, that's ridiculous.
The Mavs have shown they can defend. In the 2002-2003 season, they played decent defense and played good defense throughout the playoffs. Like I said earlier, they took the Spurs to the limit in the Conference Finals and Dirk was out for that last game. But I'm not saying we lost solely because Dirk was out, though.[/quote]
first round:
(3) DALLAS vs. (6) PORTLAND
Gm 1: Dallas 96, Portland 86
Gm 2: Dallas 103, Portland 99
Gm 3: Dallas 115, Portland 103
Gm 4: Portland 98, Dallas 79
Gm 5: Portland 103, Dallas 99
Gm 6: Portland 125, Dallas 103
Gm 7: Dallas 107, Portland 95
second round:
Gm 1: Sacramento 124, Dallas 113
Gm 2: Dallas 132, Sacramento 110
Gm 3: Dallas 141, Sacramento 137 (2OT)
Gm 4: Sacramento 99, Dallas 83
Gm 5: Dallas 112, Sacramento 93
Gm 6: Sacramento 115, Dallas 109
Gm 7: Dallas 112, Sacramento 99
Conf Finals:
Gm 1: Dallas 113, San Antonio 110
Gm 2: San Antonio 119, Dallas 106
Gm 3: San Antonio 96, Dallas 83
Gm 4: San Antonio 102, Dallas 95
Gm 5: Dallas 103, San Antonio 91
Gm 6: San Antonio 90, Dallas 78
thats not decent defense. and they did not take the spurs to the limit.[/quote]
Yes, I think that's decent defense for a team that plays like Dallas. You can't go by point totals to judge Dallas and Sacramento's defense. You have to look at their opponent's field goal percentage.
Those two teams shoot way too fast compared to teams like Detroit and SA, who play more of a half-court game. Of course when you run the shot clock down to three or four seconds before you shoot the ball, the score is going to be low.[/quote]
sacramento shot 48%+ 5 of the 7 games and 4 of the 5 sacramento shot over 51%. and 4 of the 6 games against the spurs the spurs shot over 54%.
So you say I'm a homer because I said we need better defense and that I admitted my teams flaws, but you said in the same paragraph that "I have to admit, they can't even play average defense for 2 or 3 games in a row, let alone a 7 game series." I dunno, but the last time I checked, that's pretty much the same thing you just accused me of, bro.
I really don't see the problem admitting flaws in my team. I can't stand the stupid people out there who argue endlessly that their teams have no flaws. If you can't be a realistic fan, that's ridiculous.
The Mavs have shown they can defend. In the 2002-2003 season, they played decent defense and played good defense throughout the playoffs. Like I said earlier, they took the Spurs to the limit in the Conference Finals and Dirk was out for that last game. But I'm not saying we lost solely because Dirk was out, though.[/quote]
first round:
(3) DALLAS vs. (6) PORTLAND
Gm 1: Dallas 96, Portland 86
Gm 2: Dallas 103, Portland 99
Gm 3: Dallas 115, Portland 103
Gm 4: Portland 98, Dallas 79
Gm 5: Portland 103, Dallas 99
Gm 6: Portland 125, Dallas 103
Gm 7: Dallas 107, Portland 95
second round:
Gm 1: Sacramento 124, Dallas 113
Gm 2: Dallas 132, Sacramento 110
Gm 3: Dallas 141, Sacramento 137 (2OT)
Gm 4: Sacramento 99, Dallas 83
Gm 5: Dallas 112, Sacramento 93
Gm 6: Sacramento 115, Dallas 109
Gm 7: Dallas 112, Sacramento 99
Conf Finals:
Gm 1: Dallas 113, San Antonio 110
Gm 2: San Antonio 119, Dallas 106
Gm 3: San Antonio 96, Dallas 83
Gm 4: San Antonio 102, Dallas 95
Gm 5: Dallas 103, San Antonio 91
Gm 6: San Antonio 90, Dallas 78
thats not decent defense. and they did not take the spurs to the limit.[/quote]
Yes, I think that's decent defense for a team that plays like Dallas. You can't go by point totals to judge Dallas and Sacramento's defense. You have to look at their opponent's field goal percentage.
Those two teams shoot way too fast compared to teams like Detroit and SA, who play more of a half-court game. Of course when you run the shot clock down to three or four seconds before you shoot the ball, the score is going to be low.[/quote]
sacramento shot 48%+ 5 of the 7 games and 4 of the 5 sacramento shot over 51%. and 4 of the 6 games against the spurs the spurs shot over 54%.
Grave_Addiction
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 35 (100%)
Do you care to back up you're info with a credible link?
chickenhawk
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 162 (100%)
Grave addiction.....
Won't quote....too long.....
I said you were a homer cause you seemed reluctant to admit to the flaws of the Mavs. You admitted they needed "one or two" decent defenders. That's hardly saying they need to get better defensively. They need a stopper!
BTW...you want to look at FG percentage. I looked it up.... 2001-2002 postseason, the Mavs opponents shot 46.1%. That ranked them 15th (out of 16). In 2002-2003 opponents shot 45.4%, putting them 11th. Mmmmmm.....great defense. That is not even average defense which you claim would put the Mavs over the top.
Won't quote....too long.....
I said you were a homer cause you seemed reluctant to admit to the flaws of the Mavs. You admitted they needed "one or two" decent defenders. That's hardly saying they need to get better defensively. They need a stopper!
BTW...you want to look at FG percentage. I looked it up.... 2001-2002 postseason, the Mavs opponents shot 46.1%. That ranked them 15th (out of 16). In 2002-2003 opponents shot 45.4%, putting them 11th. Mmmmmm.....great defense. That is not even average defense which you claim would put the Mavs over the top.
Lstorm34
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Lstorm34']i've been watching the nba playoffs. Right after they were eliminated. Steven A. Smith said "they will have to move either Walker or Jaimison to sign steve nash. this is the only way they can keep him unless for some reason Nash decides to take a HUGE paycut which i doubt. there will be other teams willing to pay him 7-10 mill a year to play ball. But looking at Walkers and Jamison's contract i doubt anybody is crazy enought to take one of these two players who doesnt play DEFENSE and make 14 mill a year." The mavs are over the cap and have plenty of players who are overpaid.[/quote]
Grave_Addiction
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 35 (100%)
[quote name='chickenhawk']Grave addiction.....
Won't quote....too long.....
I said you were a homer cause you seemed reluctant to admit to the flaws of the Mavs. You admitted they needed "one or two" decent defenders. That's hardly saying they need to get better defensively. They need a stopper!
BTW...you want to look at FG percentage. I looked it up.... 2001-2002 postseason, the Mavs opponents shot 46.1%. That ranked them 15th (out of 16). In 2002-2003 opponents shot 45.4%, putting them 11th. Mmmmmm.....great defense. That is not even average defense which you claim would put the Mavs over the top.[/quote]
I'm not reluctant to admit their flaws, they have plenty, and I'll openly admit to each and everyone I believe in. I still believe they need one or two more defensive minded players. They have several good defenders in Daniels, Howard and Najera. The Big Three will probably never be good defenders, but if they can play average defense, they will be able to make a good run in the playoffs.
Also, look at who they played in the Finals. They played seven games with Sacramento. A team that can shoot just as good, if not better at times, as the Mavericks. Of course their opponent's field-goal percentage would be high. I'm not making excuses, I just know the Mavs played good defense throughout the regular season and played good enough defense to get really far in the playoffs.
No, the Mavs didn't play great defense, they didn't even play average defense this year. My point was, they played good enough defense to get close to winning the Western Conference Finals the year before, so they can do it again if they get some quality supporting players.
Won't quote....too long.....
I said you were a homer cause you seemed reluctant to admit to the flaws of the Mavs. You admitted they needed "one or two" decent defenders. That's hardly saying they need to get better defensively. They need a stopper!
BTW...you want to look at FG percentage. I looked it up.... 2001-2002 postseason, the Mavs opponents shot 46.1%. That ranked them 15th (out of 16). In 2002-2003 opponents shot 45.4%, putting them 11th. Mmmmmm.....great defense. That is not even average defense which you claim would put the Mavs over the top.[/quote]
I'm not reluctant to admit their flaws, they have plenty, and I'll openly admit to each and everyone I believe in. I still believe they need one or two more defensive minded players. They have several good defenders in Daniels, Howard and Najera. The Big Three will probably never be good defenders, but if they can play average defense, they will be able to make a good run in the playoffs.
Also, look at who they played in the Finals. They played seven games with Sacramento. A team that can shoot just as good, if not better at times, as the Mavericks. Of course their opponent's field-goal percentage would be high. I'm not making excuses, I just know the Mavs played good defense throughout the regular season and played good enough defense to get really far in the playoffs.
No, the Mavs didn't play great defense, they didn't even play average defense this year. My point was, they played good enough defense to get close to winning the Western Conference Finals the year before, so they can do it again if they get some quality supporting players.
chickenhawk
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 162 (100%)
OK....thanks for the clarification. It seems I misjudged your ability to look at your teams flaws. They do have good defenders in the guys you mention, but they don't play them enough. Daniels was a rookie this year so maybe he can help them in this regard. I think you stated the problem without even knowing it though. "The Big Three will probably never be good defenders..." Their three best players, at 3 crucial spots do not play good defense. They have been in the league long enough that I can safely say they aren't going to start playing D now. IMHO, one of them needs to go (or come off the bench) so they can start a stopper who can play the opponents best perimeter player.
Re: the shooting %...you kinda changed your tune. Before you were saying that they played decent defense if you looked at the field goal percentage....then I quoted the actual numbers and now you admit that that wasn't the case.
Anyway, we could go all day on this, which is probably bad for both of our jobs.
Re: the shooting %...you kinda changed your tune. Before you were saying that they played decent defense if you looked at the field goal percentage....then I quoted the actual numbers and now you admit that that wasn't the case.
Anyway, we could go all day on this, which is probably bad for both of our jobs.
chickenhawk
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 162 (100%)
[quote name='6669']Will the Lakers finish off the Timberwolves? I'd have to say yes, because they just did 2 days ago.[/quote]
:lol:
Considering the heated discussion we're having in this thread now, this was a nice deviation!
:lol:
Considering the heated discussion we're having in this thread now, this was a nice deviation!
[quote name='chickenhawk'][quote name='6669']Will the Lakers finish off the Timberwolves? I'd have to say yes, because they just did 2 days ago.[/quote]
:lol:
Considering the heated discussion we're having in this thread now, this was a nice deviation![/quote]
Thanks, thats what I was going for.
:lol:
Considering the heated discussion we're having in this thread now, this was a nice deviation![/quote]
Thanks, thats what I was going for.
bread's done