Dallas already tried that experiment with Nash and failed. Why would it be any different this time than beforez? Dallas doesn't have a Marion type of player which Dirk would love to have. Dallas has been trying a long time to get a big man and all of a sudden they have 2. It was lucky they got Diop since everyone thought he was a bum. Dampier though along with most quality centers you had to overpay for.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Dallas already tried that experiment with Nash and failed. Why would it be any different this time than beforez? Dallas doesn't have a Marion type of player which Dirk would love to have. Dallas has been trying a long time to get a big man and all of a sudden they have 2. It was lucky they got Diop since everyone thought he was a bum. Dampier though along with most quality centers you had to overpay for.</div>What experiment, he was with us with Dirk, and Dirk is still here. Why couldn't Nash be here as well? Cubes looked at it as a money issue, I think he invested the money in the wrong player. Wouldn't you rather have Nash and say Przybilla then Terry and Damp? Why couldn't we keep Nash and then get a center? That's the better end imo. But it's not the way we went, oh well but I'm not going to sit here and sugarcoat the move like you are doing. And is it not funny of all years Dallas gets their big man, it's during the era where centers are on the downhill. It's just funny to me.
Pryzbilla? Dallas would have Bradley, Walker, and Mbenga. Terry isn't a great defender but definitely better than Nash. I know you love the run and gun days but Dallas is better with the normal rotation of Dampier at center rather than Walker or Bradley. Offense is not a problem without Nash so Nash isn't needed.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Pryzbilla? Dallas would have Bradley, Walker, and Mbenga. Terry isn't a great defender but definitely better than Nash. I know you love the run and gun days but Dallas is better with the normal rotation of Dampier at center rather than Walker or Bradley. Offense is not a problem without Nash so Nash isn't needed.</div>What is wrong with you . Honestly if we kept Nash, do you think that would be our center rotation. Start thinking, I said Przybilla because he was available and an example of a center we could have signed for cheap. There is no way Cubes would have kep Walker, he was a goner and no way would he have kept that center rotation. All your doing is thinking of what our lineup is with Nash minus the Walker trade, when you should realize their would have been moves after Nash.
Cuban said he wouldn't have enough money to pick up a center if we signed Nash. Pryzbilla was cheap because no one knew much about him. How would we be that lucky to know he was the center to get? He still is no Dampier or Diop so Dallas would be worse defensively at PG and Center. Dallas is going nowhere without defense. Can you figure that out?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Apr 26 2006, 07:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Two totally different positions. No debate here.</div>Exactly, make the debate atleast debatable.
I dont like this debate, as CB said, theyre too different and its not a good debate topic..Id have to say Dirk easily, though if I had to pick one..With his size and array of offensive moves, I dont think you can really argue choosing him..I think he is a better player, not to mention he is alot younger..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Cuban said he wouldn't have enough money to pick up a center if we signed Nash. Pryzbilla was cheap because no one knew much about him. How would we be that lucky to know he was the center to get? He still is no Dampier or Diop so Dallas would be worse defensively at PG and Center. Dallas is going nowhere without defense. Can you figure that out?</div>No Cubes said we didn't have enough money for Damp and Nash. Damp was a commodity that offseason and I said Przybilla because he was a cheap center in the market. He's just an example. And don't bring up Diop because he came a year later, who says he wouldn't be here with Nash a year later. Bradley was our backup center to Damp when we got him. I know were not going anywhere without defense, but you fail to realize Terry is not much of a better defender then Nash is. As good as Damp is downlow, Cubes could have swung a deal to get that center along with Nash. We only traded Walker for Terry because we lost Nash, don't you think he would have got a center if we kept Nash?
Maybe but Terry so far this playoffs has been good on defense so when he wants to he is a good defender. Nash can't defend if he wanted to because he is too soft. Anyways Dirk is better with the ball in his hands and using his mid post moves. Terry shoots just as well as Nash and is slighlty better on defense. Dallas didn't know at the time they would eventually get 2 good centers (Diop and Mbenga) so last year it made sense.
His defense isn't really needed in this series since Atkins and Jackson rarely drive, they settle for long jumpers. He is active with hands though.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Dallas didn't know at the time they would eventually get 2 good centers (Diop and Mbenga) so last year it made sense.</div>They also didn't know they would be letting a 2 time MVP walk away for nothing. I look at this way, Mavs had Bradley/Benga/Pavel at center, swing a Walker deal for a center(Cubes has stated he had no plans to keep Walker in the offseason). That's four centers under the roster, not great but enough. A year later replace Diop with Bradley(they've had ties with Diop long before this year) and with Nash over Terry, I see us in the same spot but better imo. Just because we would have two MVP performers, rather then one. And with Nash, who knows how much he would open up players like Howard/Daniels/Harris, even Powell. As for guys that we could have swung a deal for, just off the top of my head, maybe Lorenzen Wright or Theo Ratliff(with fillers of course). Not Damp, but not bad.But neither of us are budging on our stance, and it's going nowhere. So moving on.
Nash SHOULD have left. The Suns are great, but they can never win a title because they have NO defense. I really thought that was false, that stuff would happen with Nash, but NO, he cannot play defense.The best defender on Phoenix is obviously Marion.Now, Phoenix was VERY underrated on perimeter defense last season, but then Phoenix just HAD to let their BEST perimeter-defense walk away.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Nash SHOULD have left. The Suns are great, but they can never win a title because they have NO defense.</div>Suns with Amare are pretty good and have a good shot at the title. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Now, Phoenix was VERY underrated on perimeter defense last season, but then Phoenix just HAD to let their BEST perimeter-defense walk away.</div>Isn't Bell on the Suns still or you talking about Joe Johnson? I think their better defensively this year as opposed to last year, just because of the players they added.
The thing is Cuban didn't want to pay for another contract. He could've traded Walker for another long contract along with keeping Nash but he is the one spending the money so he got cheap. It would still be 1 extra contract and Cuban is saving money lately by letting Finley go as well so money I guess Cuban wants to save.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The thing is Cuban didn't want to pay for another contract. He could've traded Walker for another long contract along with keeping Nash but he is the one spending the money so he got cheap. It would still be 1 extra contract and Cuban is saving money lately by letting Finley go as well so money I guess Cuban wants to save.</div>Um he did trade Walker for a contract, two of them in Henderson and Terry, so I don't know what your talking about. And Terry's wasn't cheap. Who says the center he'd trade for has to have a long contract? And he's not saving with Fin as he's still paying his contract, he just saves on the luxury tax and has the payments spread out. He still pays him the rest of his 50 mil.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>He pays Finley half the contract and Cuban didn't want add Nash along with that trade. Get it now?</div>No because he paid Damp still, and took on Hendu/Terry's deals as well. Unless you somehow think Walker got us Damp, I don't get what your saying. Damp + Terry/Hendu = Nash + whoever we trade via Walker. And he pays all of his contract, not half where did you hear that from?<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The NBA Mav's just cut Mike Finley & has to pay him the remainder of his $50 million Contract. He is a free agent, and is being hotly pursued by the Heat to sign a new multi-million dollar guaranteed contract.Now, let me get this straight. The NBA has an Amnesty program, that allows teams to cut luxury tax debts by cutting a player. The poor cut player continues to receive his guaranteed contract, & is free to sign & play for a new NBA team under a new guaranteed contract. Thus, getting 2 guaranteed checks at the same time, in the same mailbox. Unbelievable, ESPN and all the pundits, are clowning TO for asking for a meeting, to ask for more money on his unguaranteed NFL contract. Gene Upshaw, the Union chief, should be fired. The NFL players are getting joed.The NBA amnesty provision allows teams to remove a player's contract from its payment of the luxury tax, which is imposed on clubs whose payrolls exceed $61.7 million. Teams are taxed dollar- for-dollar on the amount they exceed the threshold. Finley, 32, has three years remaining on a $102.2 million contract that he signed in 2001. Finley's contract -- and those of the other amnesty players -- will still count toward the salary cap, or team spending limit, which is $49.5 million next season. Finley will still get paid by the Mavericks, and is free to sign with another team. Amnesty players can't re-sign with their teams for the length of their contracts.According to published reports in Dallas, Finley is negotiating a contract with the Miami Heat, who this offseason already added Antoine Walker and Jason Williams to play alongside Shaquille O'Neal and Dwyane Wade.</div>
Cuban wouldn't want to trade Walker for a long term contract if he got Nash. He would probably let the contract expire and Dallas would have another no center year.
Well Rok I'll have to disagree with you there, and not like Mavsfan either.I think Nash is the better player, and the Mavs were stupid for letting him walk, and not getting even a role player for him.But Damp, and since Nash is gone, Terry, fit THIS team more now than Nash would.Of course they'd still be a 55-60 win team with Nash...but they wouldn't be the threat in the playoffs they are now.I'm going to say it a different way, I don't think Dirk would have ever grown into a leader, and learned to take the team on his back if Nash was still here.But Nash was a little more than a role player, allthough his numbers weren't quite as good as they are now because he was surrounded by better scorers on the Mavs than he has on the Suns.
