Dallas re-commits to Winning

warren weel im · Post #1 » by **warren weel im** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 4:46 pm

The usual Dallas proposal involves Dallas rebuilding. I say otherwise. Cuban with all the "insider" trading does the actual trading and re-commits (is there a word?) to this team.

Jason Kidd needs to go. He does not fit the team from Day 1. You can blame Avery Johnson all you want but this won't end well. Might as well get value...

DAL sends: Jason Kidd, Jerry Stackhouse and DeSagana Diop to Indiana.
IND sends: Jamal Tinsley, Mike Dunleavy, Marquis Daniels and Rasho Nesterovic to Dallas.

Why? Indiana doesn't need Kidd to be Kidd (he can be bought out ASAP). But what Indy wants to do is to shed some salary and Jamal Tinsley out means this happens immediately. Diop as a bonus for losing 2 baggages? I think so.

Dallas does this why? Commitment to WINNING, taking on huge salaries to fit the 4-year window better (since they won't be able to do anything significant until 2011 anyway). Most of all, Tins and Dunn are 2 prolific players whose reputations are preceded by their ugly contracts. Plus, Tins and Carlisle go a long way (both good and bad). Dallas gets some familiar faces back too in Quis.

MAVERICKS DEPTH CHART:

PG: Tinsley / Terry / Barea
SG: Dunleavy** / Daniels* / Green
SF: Josh Howard / Devean George / Wright / Williams
PF: Dirk Nowitzki / Brandon Bass /
C: Eric Dampier / Nesterovic /

* Option is to buy out Stack.
** Dunleavy could be asked to come off the bench in favor of Terry.

Darren · Post #2 » by **Darren** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 4:49 pm

Jason Kidd's the most consistent guys on court. You'd better take a closed look at it.

warren weel im · Post #3 » by **warren weel im** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 4:52 pm

Darren wrote:Jason Kidd's the most consistent guys on court. You'd better take a closed look at it.

Consistent yes, but the numbers aren't translating into wins. Something's wrong.

Post #4 » by **gswhoops** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 5:09 pm

That team looks worse, now and for the future, then the current Mavs roster.

italy_23 · Post #5 » by **italy_23** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 5:29 pm

no way!
how should that help dallas?

JES12 · Post #6 » by **JES12** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 5:38 pm

HELL NO!

Neither Dunleavy nor Tinsley is coming to Dallas without Terry leaving. And certainly not at the expense of Kidd. If Dallas wants Tinsley that bad, we will wait for the buyout.

ecuhus1981 · Post #7 » by **ecuhus1981** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 5:56 pm

warren weel im wrote:
Darren wrote:Jason Kidd's the most consistent guys on court. You'd better take a closed look at it.

Consistent yes, but the numbers aren't translating into wins. Something's wrong.

It's not Kidd.

I can tell that you have no authority whatsoever to speak about the Dallas Mavericks.

Post #8 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 6:21 pm

I'd gladly take a trade where Indy can dump Tinsley's deal, but in all honesty, this is just too large.

Indy really has no need for Kidd with both Ford and Jack on the roster, as well as Diener as the emergency PG. Kidd and Ford CANNOT play next to each other. Plus, this just seems like too much for Dallas.

If Dallas would be relatively amenable to a deal worked out around Tinsley for Stackhouse, then I'm all in. Taking on Diop is actually a large negative for Indy, as we already have Foster and Hibbert locked up long-term in Indy at center.

I know I'm asking for too much in all likelihood, but I don't see how Dallas would have any interest in this at all, let alone adding in Kidd and Diop for Dunleavy, Rasho, and Daniels. Seems like we could cut out all the superfluous pieces and start building from there.

However, if you start putting Jason Terry out there in offers to Indy, keep in mind that I wouldn't be surprised if Indy would only take on Terry if you took on both Murphy and Tinsley, and we somehow got a serviceable PF in the deal as well. That 4 year deal is just that bad with Terry. He might be relatively close to earning that deal this year, but by next year and the year after, that's going to be a very hard one to stomach. The money isn't the issue as much as the contract length (and the 4th year is still $5 million guaranteed, and likely to be completely guaranteed so long as he doesn't suffer a catastrophic injury between now and then).

JES12 · Post #9 » by **JES12** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 6:59 pm

Scoot McGroot wrote:If Dallas would be relatively amenable to a deal worked out around Tinsley for Stackhouse, then I'm all in.

Sure! We buy out Stack. You buy out Tinsley and we can each sign the other player for the vet min.

If you actually mean "trade" you have to add incentive for taking on the 3rd year and the additional $12.6 mil. Till then, keep in mind that Cuban is keeping his eye on Marbury (either Terry-Stack-small filler on Dec 15th or vet min pickup after buyout before then).

Post #10 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 7:30 pm

I realize that's not nearly enough value for Dallas, but you're likely not going to get Indy to swap players they need for guys they don't and put themselves in a worse position long-term just to move Tinsley. You're more likely to start a deal with Tinsley for Stackhouse, and find the value Indy needs to include than you are to start with a 10 player deal and then try and unwind it.