How do you build around Dirk and Nash with hindsight?

[ceiling raiser]

Suppose you are owner/GM of the Mavs going into the 99 shortened season. You know how Dirk’s and Nash’s careers turned out in hindsight, as well as of league trends (SSOL/Warriors 3ball explosion included), and you get to start over from ground zero.

Some key questions:

• Which coach do you hire?
• What kind of offense do you run?
• How do you develop Dirk and Nash?
• Which pieces do you surround them with?

To keep this realistic let’s not include hypotheticals involving drafting perfectly or poaching undervalued stars who would bounce back.

I think it worked out properly, this core could’ve won multiple titles.

[Blazers-1977]

Well I would say the first thing is to not let Nash go to begin with

[An Unbiased Fan]

Do what the 2011 team did and give them a Tyson Chandler type defensive anchor to start.

[capfan33]

Just defensive pieces around them like the 2011 team, don't need to get fancy.

[sp6r=underrated]

Honestly the 2003 model team would have resulted in multiple titles once Dirk hit his prime. Basically do the exact opposite of what they going into the 04 season when they shifted Dirk to center and added a bunch of offensive minded players. You have Dirk/Nash. YOu don't need iso scorers or playmakers.

The 2003 Dallas off-season should be regarded as similar to the OKC Thunder 2012 Off-season: catasthrophic

[Texas Chuck]

the 03 off-season was bad, but it wasn't a plan. Oh the NVE for Jamison trade was planned and I think on its own probably a good plan. Jamison was like 5 years younger and locked up long-term while NVE was aging and going into the final year of his contract.

The Walker deal was made days before the start of the regular season and 100% motivated by getting off Rafe's $70M deal because they realized his knees were never going to last--and they were basically immediately proven right on this. It was the only way off the Rafe contract and they immediately flipped Walker after the season for JET. I think they would have kept Jamison but he quietly asked out because he wanted to start and Dallas wasn't sure they could promise that.

So don't think Dallas thought you know what would be great is to add two more offensive minded PF's when our best player is a PF. It was about getting off a horrible contract.

And the funny thing is all Dallas had to do was keep Nash and probably draft someone other than Devin Harris and not trade for Stackhouse and everything is fine. Remember that right after that horrible 03 off-season followed by an off-season where you let the MVP walk for nothing, that Dallas averaged over 60 wins a year, went to a Finals, and won 67 games.

The team was built okay.

[Dr Positivity]

You'd want 3 and D players on the wing and then a roller at center, although it'd be kind of an unfair advantage for them to know the value of this more than the rest of the league.

[falcolombardi]

if they went with

nash/terry/howard/dirk/dampier in 2005 and tried to have nash and terry not share so many minutes, brought a defensive guard to compliment the rotation

how would that work out?

[Texas Chuck]

if they went with

nash/terry/howard/dirk/dampier in 2005 and tried to have nash and terry not share so many minutes, brought a defensive guard to compliment the rotation

how would that work out?

Are you talking about 04/05 or the summer of 05? Because Finley was still on the team one more year after Nash left and I think he starts over JET which helps reduce the Nash/Terry minutes. Adrian Griffin could still be the defensive guard.

And the team would have Stack and Daniels as offensive-minded wings to use to flip for another defensive guard/wing. Or Alan Henderson's contract instead of flipping him for KVH.

[Doctor MJ]

the 03 off-season was bad, but it wasn't a plan. Oh the NVE for Jamison trade was planned and I think on its own probably a good plan. Jamison was like 5 years younger and locked up long-term while NVE was aging and going into the final year of his contract.

The Walker deal was made days before the start of the regular season and 100% motivated by getting off Rafe's $70M deal because they realized his knees were never going to last--and they were basically immediately proven right on this. It was the only way off the Rafe contract and they immediately flipped Walker after the season for JET. I think they would have kept Jamison but he quietly asked out because he wanted to start and Dallas wasn't sure they could promise that.

So don't think Dallas thought you know what would be great is to add two more offensive minded PF's when our best player is a PF. It was about getting off a horrible contract.

And the funny thing is all Dallas had to do was keep Nash and probably draft someone other than Devin Harris and not trade for Stackhouse and everything is fine. Remember that right after that horrible 03 off-season followed by an off-season where you let the MVP walk for nothing, that Dallas averaged over 60 wins a year, went to a Finals, and won 67 games.

The team was built okay.

Agree with your points generally but my quibble about what it takes for something to qualify as a "plan".

The reality is that in addition to trading for Walker, the Mavs played Walker, let him shoot, and then let what they saw from the chuck of scorers on the team that season convince them that Nash wasn't that important. They kept making decisions in the same direction repeatedly, and while they may not have decided ahead of time that this was exactly what they wanted to do, I do think it speaks to their default thought process at the very least.

And yeah, substitute that with a smarter basketball thought process - pretty much any that doesn't mistake Antoine Walker for an asset - and that team likely wins championships.

[Doctor MJ]

Do what the 2011 team did and give them a Tyson Chandler type defensive anchor to start.

Yeah, I don't see any way around this. I don't think you're winning a title with Dirk unless you find the right 5 next to him.

And then beyond that, get a couple 3 & D guys and boom, you're winning titles.

And funny thing, in '02-03 - when they came close to winning - they had Raja Bell (who they then didn't think was worth the pittance it would have taken to bring him back).

2003 Mavs has to be a candidate for the worst off-season among contender-level teams we've ever seen - considerably worse to me than 2004 when they actually let Nash go. Given the information they had at the time, their valuation of Nash in the years to come wasn't necessarily an unreasonable assessment. It's the 2003 off-season that I just can't help but marvel at how analytically naïve their thought process was given that at the time they were arguably the most analytically invested NBA franchise.

[Texas Chuck]

[

Agree with your points generally but my quibble about what it takes for something to qualify as a "plan".

The reality is that in addition to trading for Walker, the Mavs played Walker, let him shoot, and then let what they saw from the chuck of scorers on the team that season convince them that Nash wasn't that important. They kept making decisions in the same direction repeatedly, and while they may not have decided ahead of time that this was exactly what they wanted to do, I do think it speaks to their default thought process at the very least.

And yeah, substitute that with a smarter basketball thought process - pretty much any that doesn't mistake Antoine Walker for an asset - and that team likely wins championships.

Nellie the GM made a smart trade. I stand by that.

Nellie the head coach giving Walker too much responsibility made a bad decision. 100% agree with that.

And again they didn't make decisions in that same direction repeatedly. Immediately after that season they made a hard pivot. They took the money they didn't give to Nash and gave it to Dampier about as opposite a player as you could possibly find. They traded Jamison for Devin Harris, another major shift in philosophy. They hired a defensive minded coach to replace an offensive minded one.

Literally the only season Dallas made fantasy basketball moves was 03 and again the latter one was to get off a bad contract.

And they did not let Nash go because they thought that Walker and Jamison were the answers. They didn't even keep either guy.

[Owly]

the 03 off-season was bad, but it wasn't a plan. Oh the NVE for Jamison trade was planned and I think on its own probably a good plan. Jamison was like 5 years younger and locked up long-term while NVE was aging and going into the final year of his contract.

The Walker deal was made days before the start of the regular season and 100% motivated by getting off Rafe's $70M deal because they realized his knees were never going to last--and they were basically immediately proven right on this. It was the only way off the Rafe contract and they immediately flipped Walker after the season for JET. I think they would have kept Jamison but he quietly asked out because he wanted to start and Dallas wasn't sure they could promise that.

So don't think Dallas thought you know what would be great is to add two more offensive minded PF's when our best player is a PF. It was about getting off a horrible contract.

And the funny thing is all Dallas had to do was keep Nash and probably draft someone other than Devin Harris and not trade for Stackhouse and everything is fine. Remember that right after that horrible 03 off-season followed by an off-season where you let the MVP walk for nothing, that Dallas averaged over 60 wins a year, went to a Finals, and won 67 games.

The team was built okay.

If they don't trade for Stackhouse they don't have an opportunity to draft someone other than Devin Harris, because they don't have that pick (no 5) from the Wizards (well, technically I suppose they get to pick a player other than Harris using a pick which they acquire on the day but of course here they would be obliged to pick someone other than Harris, who would not have been on the board at 21).

if they went with

nash/terry/howard/dirk/dampier in 2005 and tried to have nash and terry not share so many minutes, brought a defensive guard to compliment the rotation

how would that work out?

I wouldn't have thought they could get to keep Nash and add Dampier, though I could be wrong.

[Doctor MJ]

[

Agree with your points generally but my quibble about what it takes for something to qualify as a "plan".

The reality is that in addition to trading for Walker, the Mavs played Walker, let him shoot, and then let what they saw from the chuck of scorers on the team that season convince them that Nash wasn't that important. They kept making decisions in the same direction repeatedly, and while they may not have decided ahead of time that this was exactly what they wanted to do, I do think it speaks to their default thought process at the very least.

And yeah, substitute that with a smarter basketball thought process - pretty much any that doesn't mistake Antoine Walker for an asset - and that team likely wins championships.

Nellie the GM made a smart trade. I stand by that.

Nellie the head coach giving Walker too much responsibility made a bad decision. 100% agree with that.

And again they didn't make decisions in that same direction repeatedly. Immediately after that season they made a hard pivot. They took the money they didn't give to Nash and gave it to Dampier about as opposite a player as you could possibly find. They traded Jamison for Devin Harris, another major shift in philosophy. They hired a defensive minded coach to replace an offensive minded one.

Literally the only season Dallas made fantasy basketball moves was 03 and again the latter one was to get off a bad contract.

And they did not let Nash go because they thought that Walker and Jamison were the answers. They didn't even keep either guy.

Ah, good distinction. I don't disagree with what you say.

Re: didn't make decisions in that same direction repeatedly. In the sense of a multi-year consistency you're certainly right. But when viewed from the perspective of "Well that didn't work, let's try this instead", where each off-season represents a new plan based on impatiently coming to conclusions too quickly.

Also, I tend to feel like this is what you get with a push, impatient owner who thinks he knows everything, so I'll at Cubie's name to the list of players.

[ronnymac2]

They were on the right track. I remember mid-2003 I was scared because I didn't think the Shaq-Kobe Lakers could deal with the offensive firepower and 3-point shooting of the Raef/Dirk/Finley/NVE/Nash Mavericks. Only thing that stopped them from winning in 2003 was Dirk's injury.

Then they IMPROVED by getting rid of non-all-star Raef and aging NVE and getting two all-stars in Jamison and Walker. You have to remember that Walker was one half of what was perceived to be the second-best offensive duo in the league a few years prior. Putting five offense-only, All-Star level, 20 PPG scorers sounds like a super fun way to try to win a championship.

Then they ruined it by letting go of Nash for nothing and signing Ericka Dampier for his boring defense. I don't even remember how or why they got rid of Jamison/Walker (who would be an NBA champion two seasons later). Thankfully, Dirk had a long enough prime where they could screw up once or twice and still find a way to win a title. Cuban should be thanking his lucky stars Dallas had such a great player like Nowitzki.

I'll say this. Maybe I'm misremembering, but there was talk of Dallas obtaining either Shaq or Kobe in the offseason after 2004. I don't recall how anything would have went down, but if Dallas could have somehow, someway kept Nash/Dirk and gotten one of O'Neal or Bryant, I have to think they win a title within two seasons.

[homecourtloss]

Honestly the 2003 model team would have resulted in multiple titles once Dirk hit his prime. Basically do the exact opposite of what they going into the 04 season when they shifted Dirk to center and added a bunch of offensive minded players. You have Dirk/Nash. YOu don't need iso scorers or playmakers.

The 2003 Dallas off-season should be regarded as similar to the OKC Thunder 2012 Off-season: catasthrophic

Basically this though of course everything in life is easier said than done but this is as close as you get to a sure thing. And the crazy thing is that in that era, teams didn’t go “bum hunting” on offense as much, so Nash’s defensive vulnerabilities would be masked more than they would be now AND you’d have two ATG offensive players to work with who could create offense.

[sp6r=underrated]

Honestly the 2003 model team would have resulted in multiple titles once Dirk hit his prime. Basically do the exact opposite of what they going into the 04 season when they shifted Dirk to center and added a bunch of offensive minded players. You have Dirk/Nash. YOu don't need iso scorers or playmakers.

The 2003 Dallas off-season should be regarded as similar to the OKC Thunder 2012 Off-season: catasthrophic

Basically this though of course everything in life is easier said than done but this is as close as you get to a sure thing. And the crazy thing is that in that era, teams didn’t go “bum hunting” on offense as much, so Nash’s defensive vulnerabilities would be masked more than they would be now AND you’d have two ATG offensive players to work with who could create offense.

Tx makes some good defenses for the 03 off season but in the end I come back to a central fact. The Mavs had 2 MVP level players on the roster, ages 24/28, entering their prime with great worth ethic, on-court chemistry and off-court whose games are heavily tilted towards. If you regress from a +8 SRS (clear championship level) to 5, you had a really bad off season.

If it was because you added offensive centric players that is a massive indictment. And I just don't buy the only way to get out of Raef's contract was hunting for offense. Management goofed up and it cost big time.

So again for me, all time bad off-season from an opportunity cost perspective this century:
2012 OKC
2003 DAL

We haven't had a real bad one this century. The Russ trade closed the door on LA but I was weigh less high on LA to begin with

[MartinToVaught]

I wanted to say get D'Antoni as the coach to maximize Nash as much as possible, but then I realized this would have just marginalized Dirk even more. Plus it wouldn't solve their playoff woes.

I'm not really sure there was a clear-cut way to build around Dirk and Nash together.

[sp6r=underrated]

I wanted to say get D'Antoni as the coach to maximize Nash as much as possible, but then I realized this would have just marginalized Dirk even more. Plus it wouldn't solve their playoff woes.

I'm not really sure there was a clear-cut way to build around Dirk and Nash together.

They were a +8 SRS and tied 1-1 in the WCF with Dirk-Nash. They weren't a bad fit.

[Matt15]

You need the right coach to maximize Nash and also defensive minded players.