OT: Mavs Set To Hire New HC
by ivysafety39 on May 3, 2008 9:45 AM CDT
65 comments
http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/8100596?MSNHPHMA
Looks like the Cubans not waiting long, set to announce the hiring of Rick Carlisle as the new head coach of the Mavs...
I think until there is some major work done to the roster, there is very little that Carlisle can do that Avery couldn't. Besides Dirk and JET, no one on this team can shoot. I'd keep Dirk, JET, and Brandon Bass and see what I could get for the rest of the spare over priced parts we got, take a year to clear cap space and let Cubes open up his check book...
0 recs |
65 comments
Email
Print
Comments
This is
Exactly who I wanted.
I love it.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 10:00 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Also
I really, really hope we can find a way to get Belinelli and Wright from GS. Those are guys to build around. Unfortunately, they know that too.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 10:03 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
yay, Jim Carey is the new Mavs coach!!
just got ownaged
by Longhorn on May 3, 2008 11:08 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
by the way
they just hired Avery 2.0.
just got ownaged
by Longhorn on May 3, 2008 11:10 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Sigh
Here come the calls that Carlisle is “controlling”, which is apparently the worst thing a coach can be. God forbid he actually fulfill his duties as a coach instead of just tossing the ball on the court, pulling out a La-Z-Boy and occasionally picking up the pompoms.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Get used to it
Their similar personalities is all anyone will talk about.
Nevermind that Carlisle is regarded as a really, really good tactitian. They are NOT similar coaches.
by jthig32 on May 3, 2008 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
WTH?
What happened to this?:
“Nelson told The Dallas Morning News in Friday’s editions that the Mavs were planning to “show some patience in our search because, after the first round, there could be some very good candidates available.”
So instead they are thinking about hiring the first guy that they interview?
by Topgun22 on May 3, 2008 11:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Because
Nobody wants Eddie Jordan, Mike D’Antoni, or Scott Skiles.
The best candidates available were Carlisle, Van Gundy and Nelson.
2 of those 3 said they didn’t want the job.
Pretty easy decision, and no reason to wait. They have a lot of work to do, so they might as well get started.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
van gundy
really doubt he’ll be coaching anywhere
Rare Gnats Sex
by ab03 on May 3, 2008 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
At least
For this next season.
I don’t think he’s out of it for good.
Just as a note, though, the DMN is reporting that a deal has NOT been struck yet.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's smart
I think Carlisle will be the guy eventually. No need to rush this decision…
by sprite on May 3, 2008 1:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Carlisle is twice the game coach Avery ever was.
by robert_d_wilfong on May 3, 2008 12:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Who
I wanted as well.
good news
Say your sorry to Ron Washington
by miles on May 3, 2008 12:45 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Mavs
are also interested in bringing back Eduardo Najara this offseason.
Good news.
Say your sorry to Ron Washington
by miles on May 3, 2008 2:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
He is
the type of defender we need, we don’t really have a defensive specialist…
I’d give him a little more than minimum.
Say your sorry to Ron Washington
by miles on May 3, 2008 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thing is
We can’t really afford to.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
correct
they do need to find another scorign threat from somewhere too to replace stackhouse. maybe it is wright but they need to find out. najera is just a better version of malik allen, and najera isnt’ as much a good defender as he is just a good hustle player
Rare Gnats Sex
by ab03 on May 3, 2008 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually
That’s a pretty good assessment. Najera hustles and can make some decent off-ball defensive plays, but he’s not a good one-on-one defender.
As you said, a scoring threat is what we need in the worst way. I don’t think that’s going to come from free agency, though, unless we get Childress for all or most of the MLE. He’s not even that much of a threat, but he’d instantly be a legit SG with size and skills.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No way
Atlanta is giving up Childress…
Say your sorry to Ron Washington
by miles on May 3, 2008 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
I doubt they find a way to keep Childress AND Smith, and I don’t see either as a viable sign-and-trade candidate.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 5:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So you think
we can sign him with the MLE?
Say your sorry to Ron Washington
by miles on May 3, 2008 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
He’s not such a difference-maker that a team under the cap is going to sign him to a big deal, and he’s certainly not a max-player, so my best guess is he’s going to take the MLE somewhere, here or not.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 5:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And
Not necessarily the whole thing.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 5:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why?
I don’t see either as a viable sign-and-trade candidate.
Why?
by Adam J. Morris on May 3, 2008 6:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
Childress because teams know they can afford him through the MLE and he’s not good enough to justify giving up very much.
Smith because he’s too talented and versatile for Atlanta to give away, even for a PG, because they have so many other chips/picks.
If anybody’s getting traded from Atlanta, it’s Marvin Williams and/or Joe Johnson.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 6:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
I am not convinced that Childress can’t get more than the MLE.
by Adam J. Morris on May 3, 2008 6:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's
A good defender, a bad jump-shooter, and a good slasher.
Basically, he’s a smarter version of Howard, with less range and better moves to the basket.
Howard comparisons aside, I really don’t see any way a team gives more than the MLE for him. Who would? Toronto, Portland, Memphis, LAC, Charlotte, Chicago and Seattle all have no use for him, or at least he’d just be a luxury in those places.
Anybody else has to use the MLE.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 7:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
x
Anybody else has to use the MLE.
Or do a sign-and-trade.
by Adam J. Morris on May 3, 2008 7:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again
There’s just no reason to.
Why would they invest more years and dollars if they didn’t have to?
Sign-and-trades are typically only done by teams needing one big piece. Josh Childress is not that guy. Not for the Mavs. Not for anybody.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 7:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
Sign-and-trades are typically only done by teams needing one big piece.
I disagree with this. S-A-Ts are typically done by teams over the cap, wanting to add a f.a. who will get more than midlevel money.
It also has some appeal because if you add someone via a S-A-T, you are still going to have your full mid-level exception available to add other f.a.s.
Now, I could be wrong, and Childress might get nothing more than mid-level money. But I wouldn’t be real surprised if he did better than that.
by Adam J. Morris on May 3, 2008 7:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
Yes, the whole point of a sign-and-trade is to go over the cap. There’s no reason to do it otherwise.
Yes, if you did it, you could use the full MLE for another player(s).
Look at all the sign-and-trades last offseason…
Rashard Lewis to Orlando for a future conditional 2nd round pick.
That’s it. It was made because Orlando thought they were close enough to compete and threw the panicking Sonics a bone in the pick.
He’s a guy who wouldn’t take the MLE. I don’t think anybody really thinks Childress is in the same category as Lewis.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 7:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure why...
...you characterize the Sonics as “panicking.”
But you also have Eddy Curry and Joe Johnson who have moved in sign and trades in recent years. And Peja Stojakovic, who, I don’t think, was considered the final piece when he was moved. Kwame Brown was a sign and trade. I don’t think any of those guys were considered final pieces.
by Adam J. Morris on May 3, 2008 8:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
First
Sonics were panicking because Lewis was walking and they wanted something in return.
Eddy Curry and Kwame were just dumb decisions at the time by any standard.
Joe Johnson was a franchise savior.
Peja is exactly the kind of guy I’m talking about. He’s not a finisher or an All-Star anymore, but he’s definitely what I meant by final piece, even if they actually add one or two later. I think the Hornets were absolutely expecting to compete when they made the trade.
I spoke generally, and of course there are exceptions, but it seems that they fit into 2 categories:
1. Dumb deals for big men
2. Franchise saviors
As Childress is neither of those, I don’t think he qualifies.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 8:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sonics panicking
Again…I don’t understand why you are saying that they panicked.
If they weren’t panicking - if they were calm - what would they have done?
by Adam J. Morris on May 3, 2008 8:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sigh
OK, not “panicking”, just trying desperately to get something-anything-for a big-time player who was determined to leave.
Which explains the conditional future 2nd.
If they had planned it out better, they would have realized that they weren’t contenders after their huge season a few years back and traded Lewis when he had more value.
That’s calm.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 8:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay
That may be so. They also got a huge trade exception, though, that they used to ultimately net themselves 3 first rounders.
That was the point of doing a sign and trade from Seattle’s perspective, not getting the 2nd rounder.
by Adam J. Morris on May 3, 2008 8:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
While
It’s true that Seattle got one of the sweetest trade exceptions in history, that does not disprove my assertion that sign-and-trades are rare, and generally not used on wing role players.
by brettgardner on May 4, 2008 12:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't care to interject in the S-A-T discussion
Just wanted to comment that I think Childress would be an excellent target.
He really stood out to me with his general activity and level of impact on both ends of the floor. His career 3 pt FG% is 36, which is respectable, not “bad” as you assert earlier. I acknowledge his outside shooting certainly has room to improve, though.
He’s a leaner Julian Wright with better skills.
"I hope it's a special dumb person hell so that I don’t have to meet up with you after I die."
- The D-tron
by Chase Irwin on May 6, 2008 1:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Najera
Basically, an under-sized PF.
The Mavs already have two PFs.
by Adam J. Morris on May 3, 2008 5:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We could
easily put him at SF. Obviously he would come off the bench, but that would be defensive energy that this team is lacking…
What we need is a scoring SG and a dominant defensive force.
I hope we can get both of those things in one player.
Say your sorry to Ron Washington
by miles on May 3, 2008 5:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where are the Mavs going to get...
...a scoring SG who is also a dominant defensive force?
by Adam J. Morris on May 3, 2008 6:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We aren't
that is my point.
I want a player just like Joe Johnson…. lol
Say your sorry to Ron Washington
by miles on May 3, 2008 6:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
You said:
What we need is a scoring SG and a dominant defensive force.I hope we can get both of those things in one player.
If your point is that we aren’t going to get both those things in one player, you didn’t make it clear at all. Your point seemed to be that you were hoping that we could.
by Adam J. Morris on May 3, 2008 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
Truthfully we already have the player.
Antione Wright will be back with the team next year I read somewhere on like hoopshype or something like that.
Antione is our future, and a damn good one with that.
Say your sorry to Ron Washington
by miles on May 3, 2008 6:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Antoine Wright
It is your contention that he’s a scoring SG and a dominant defensive force?
by Adam J. Morris on May 3, 2008 7:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't
see why you don’t see anything in him. He is Richard Jefferson’s understudy, he does have defensive ability’s. He is one of our best defenders if not the best. He is a hustle player, and is athletic.
I am not saying he is dominant, he he was a steal in the Harris trade. It will show, the Mavs already decided they want him to stay.
I think he could become a really good starting shooting guard in this league.
Why are you so down on him?
Say your sorry to Ron Washington
by miles on May 3, 2008 7:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
not just a beast, he’s an uberbeast.
just got ownaged
by Longhorn on May 3, 2008 7:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nope
He’s talented, but his incredible need for ball domination really makes me want to pass.
He’s the worst kind of ball-hog: one who HAS to ballhog to be good at all.
Also, his defensive skills are overrated.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 7:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A ball-hog
Maybe, but not one who has to chuck it up at least 25-30 times to get his.
I mean, we still have Dirk here.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 7:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't agree
He’s not an undersized PF. He’s a slow-footed SF, which makes the comparison logical, but Najera’s game really doesn’t resemble a PF.
by brettgardner on May 3, 2008 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
