1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Overrating the Mavs

Discussion in 'NBA Dish' started by The Cat, Aug 4, 2001.

  1. LiLStevie3

    LiLStevie3 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2000
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    3
    The Cat wouldn't, I understand though with his Wake Forest connection and all.
     
  2. TexasG

    TexasG Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2001
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    0
    Smith is WAY past his prime, and I don't see him doing no where near what Anderson did for them last year. Anderson provided more than just scoring. Some of those windmill dunks demoralized teams so much that it was hard for teams to get back in it. Remember the one against Bradley?

    As for Parks, I didn't see any of his games with the Clips but I hope he's gotten better since his days with Dallas. I guess even Parks has to an upgrade from Samaki Walker.
     
  3. Shandon Anversen

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    389
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mr. Spur,

    you hypocrit!

    you tell Texas G that your comment wasn't directed at him, yet you felt the need to intercede in a convo between me and The Cat.

    in fact, i started off the post with "The Cat"s name.

    anyway, i'm not sure where the "lil Anversen being pissed off" stuff is coming from. i'm actually getting a pretty good chuckle out of you. that's what comedians are good for, ya know!

    and i'm sure you felt the need to comment when reminded how your spurs had their asses handed to them by the lakers last season.

    wanna know how what i wrote relates to the mavs? easy. first read my post again. then read TexasG's post again. then read this:

    the spurs didn't exactly obliterate the mavs like The Cat made it out to be. in fact, that series was much, much closer than the spurs and laker's series. yet, the spurs and lakers are supposed to be comparable teams...even after the spurs got their guts stomped out by the lakers. well, if that's your line of reasoning, go ahead and toss dallas into the fracas, as well. again, dallas, la, and san antonio.

    dallas got better, albeit marginally.
    la got better.
    san antonio got worse.

    is that easy enough for you to follow? i hope so.

    before you try and piss me off, you'll need a lot more knowledge and wit. you don't possess that. in fact, despite me being a rocket's fan, i'm convinced i know more about the spurs and mavs than you do, too. clouded judgement? yes. clouded by basketball knowledge. i don't like the spurs, this is true. however, i can still dissect their positives and negatives. you refuese to even ADDRESS their negatives.

    go back to worky jerky....
     
  4. LiLStevie3

    LiLStevie3 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2000
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    3
    TexasG, I understand that you're a Mavericks fan and are sticking up for your team, but the Spurs are a lot better than the Mavericks, as witnessed by the second round playoff series between the two teams last year.

    From your posts, you are thinking pretty highly of Shawn Bradley, even saying that he is close to the Admiral's level. David Robinson is the 4th best center in the league behind Shaq, Zo, and Mutombo. Bradley? Not even top 10. All Bradley has going for him pretty much is height, which allows him to block shots- his man to man defense can't touch David's.

    What does the Lakers' domination of the Spurs in the WCF last year have to do with the Spurs' domination of your Mavericks? That just proves that the Mavericks have a long way to go to be able to contend against the Lakers. The Spurs team that dominated your Mavericks just added Tony Parker, Bruce Bowen, and Steve Smith, while losing only Avery Johnson, Samaki Walker, and probably Sean Elliot. The Spurs team that dominated your Mavs have gotten even better. True, the Mavs are probably going to be a little better next year, maybe 55 wins, but adding the often injured Tim Hardaway and Danny Manning isn't going to put the Mavericks above the Spurs. Just like adding Bowen and Smith while losing Derek Anderson probably isn't going to put the Spurs over the top against the Lakers. The Mavericks are an up and coming team, but unless Michael Finley all of a sudden becomes another Vince Carter and Dirk Nowitzki becomes one of the top 10 players in the league, the Mavs are 1-2 years away from contending.
     
  5. TexasG

    TexasG Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2001
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    0
    WHAT???? How do yo figure that? Dallas will be one of the teams that benefit the most from the new rules. Besides the Bucks Dallas has the biggest collection of shooters in the NBA. The new rules will seriously effect players like Duncan, and Shaq as oppsose to players like Ray Allen, and Dirk Nowitzki.
     
  6. LiLStevie3

    LiLStevie3 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2000
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    3
    Verse, the Spurs team that beat the Mavs got better. They were without Derek Anderson already remember? They added Steve Smith and several decent role players. I'd take DA over Steve Smith in a heartbeat but the Spurs dominated the Mavs without Derek Anderson. Although the Spurs domination of the Mavs was nowhere near the Lakers domination of the Spurs, the Spurs still are better than the Mavs.

    BTW, Sorry if it seems like I'm interfering, but I disagree if you think the Mavs are better or even with the Spurs. I agree that the Lakers are better, but if your hatred of the Spurs leads you to believe that the Spurs are a worse team than the Mavs, I'll have to say your wrong. :)
     
  7. Desert Scar

    Desert Scar Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2000
    Messages:
    8,764
    Likes Received:
    11
    Cat I completely agree with you that the Mav are a trendy pick beyond what they should be. Nice call on this topic!

    But you are carzy to place the Spurs ahead of the Lakers by any criteria. You credit the Lakers chemistry (instead of Shaq and Kobe just waking up out of their regular season slumber), but the Spurs will have a new starting 1, 2, & 3 plus many new back-ups. I say the Lakers have more talent than the Spurs, and have a far more cohesive unit (at least on the court where it matters). As it stands now, and barring injury, no way the Spurs over take the Lakers.

    If you factor chemistry and continuity from last season--you have to go with the Lakers or Kings or Mavs in the West, the Spurs ave more changes than any playoff team plus will have to adjust to new rules. Further, I believe their net talent loss is greater than their gain.

    Based on talent and chemistry-which I think are both important, I size up the West this way.

    1ST TIER
    #1 Lakers (no contest)

    2ND TIER
    #2 Kings (TD and DR are better than CW and VD. However, the Kings 2 guys make a nice pair as well, and the Kings are better pretty much elsewhere and are deeper. They can also perform at a much higher level than the Spurs can with a major injury. Further, they also have continuity, with the only major change adding a solid heady PG in replace of an unpredictable and less consistent one)

    #3 Spurs (TD and solid D is enough to get them here. TD IMO is the 2nd best player in the league, after Shaq. KG still isn't dominant enough offensively to overtake TD)

    #4 Portland (This is a team with zero cohesion last year. Had they even had middle of the road chemistry (like 2 years ago) they would be near the top of the league. Even with the most horrendous chemistry and self-destruction problems I can remember for a team with a winning record, they were only 3 games from the 4th best record in the west--shared by Utah and With a new coach and some new all around players, I would not at all be suprised to see them fighting for the 2 seed in the west.


    3RD TIER

    #5 Mavs (There 4 and 5 positions are two weak to threaten for the title and their defense is pretty average. Those are not marks of championship contending teams. Howard alone wouldn't be that bad, if he were playing along side of Shaq. But you put him next to Bradly and that is one of the worst inside starting pairs in the league. I also think they caught the right team in the playoffs, the Jazz have struggled in the first round the last few years. What the Spurs did to them w/o DA showed how far away they still are. Don't get me wrong, I think the Mavs are a solid playoff team, just not near the elite level. Also, Notwiski is no Bird, Bird could do it all and was clutch from day 1. He might be a Kiki or Tom Chambers though.)

    #6 T-Woves (Smith is a nice player when he is next KG--especially compared to their other forwards, and his return will help. Brandon is still good, KG and Wally should keep getting better. The also have a team that is growing together (chemistry). They have 2 key advantages over the Mavs, a much better D and a 1st team all-NBA player. I predict the Mavs over them by a nod, but it will be real close.)

    #7 Jazz (Aemechi is an upgrade for them. Marshall was a good move last year. These moves help delay the enevitable, but are enough to keep them wining around 60% and get them ready for a 1st round playoff exit as long as Stockton and Malone can walk.)

    #8 Open (this slot looks wide open for us to take, but we need another functional or spot playing center before I pencil us in. The other 2 recent western powers out there are clearly going to be worse, Seattle is freefalling out of the picture for sure. The Suns will also be worse, but it is a question of how much worse. Of the crappy teams, the Clippers will be much better--maybe in 03 they will make the playoffs, Denver looks flat, GS will be a little better and Vancouver will easily achieve the 14th seed in the west. As of today, my brain says the Suns won't quite have slipped out of the playoffs just yet, but just a minor move on our part puts us in here)
     
  8. tacoma park legend

    tacoma park legend Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    2,224
    Likes Received:
    1
    Scar,

    I have to disagree with you on the Wolves. They're a team that needed an 11 game winning streak just to limp into the playoffs.

    Kevin Garnett has proven that he is too passive to ever carry a team in the playoffs, despite having all the talent in the world, which doesn't bode well for the Wolves.

    The Wolves franchise epitomizes complacency. Due to location, and this is not a knock on the state, just reality, they will NEVER be able to land a marquee free agent.

    Here's a list of places that 1st tier/star to superstar free agents typically consider relocating to come free agency time...
    • Phoenix
    • Miami
    • Orlando
    • LA
    • Chicago
    • Houston

    I may have left some off, but I think you get the gist of what I'm trying to say.

    Joe Smith certainly won't make that team better, and imo, Ellis' offense could have been of equal value to them. It can only go downhill in terms of production for Brandon, and Szcerbiak will not improve significantly.

    They compare to the 90's Hawks. A perennial playoff team that could never get past the 1st or 2nd round, with the latter being the Wolves impassable obstacle.

    I don't expect them to make the playoffs. Other teams got better during the offseason, they didn't, and Loren Woods is not going to solve their center problems.

    As far as the Lakers vs Spurs argument goes, it ends with Shaq and Kobe. You can point out how the Spurs are a better team 1-10, as could the Kings, but when it comes down to crunchtime, you can count on Kobe and Shaq to come through. I'll put my money on the 2 superstars over the lone superstar every time.
     
  9. Shandon Anversen

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    389
    Likes Received:
    0
    LilStevie,

    actually, i'm not saying that the spurs are worse than the mavs. what i was pointing out was:

    1. the spurs didn't dominate the mavs the way many think they did.
    2. the spurs got worse than last year.
    3. the mavs got better
    4. the rules help the mavs as much as anybody (TexasG pointed that out)
    5. the spurs aren't at the same level as the lakers.
    6. the spurs are on the same level as the mavs.

    lemme put it this way...the spurs and mavs are much closer than many (Mr. Spur, ahem...) want to admit.

    oh yea,

    #7. the rules will hurt the spurs just as much, if not more, than it will help them.
     
  10. TexasG

    TexasG Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2001
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    0
    Isn't that what everyone was saying last year? Well except for the ones that were saying the MAVS wouldn't even make it to the playoffs. It's also funny that people still think the Kings are better than the MAVS considering the way the MAVS dominated all but one game they played against each other last year. The only real pick up for the Kings is Bibby, and the knock on him is he's not a good floor leader. That's not saying that he's not better than Williams because he's worlds better but just adding Bibby won't make them better than the MAVS.
     
  11. LiLStevie3

    LiLStevie3 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2000
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    3
    Verse,

    My point was that the Spurs team that beat the Mavs got better. It's debatable whether the entire Spurs team got better or worse, you think worse, Cat and Mr Spur think better, I think that it doesn't matter, the Lakers are just too good. But the Mavs aren't on the same level as the Spurs. The Spurs are on the contender level along with the Blazers and the Kings, below the level of the Lakers. I still think that the Blazers and the Spurs have the best chance of competing with the Lakers. The Blazers, if they ever manage to get their heads straight, have what it takes personel wise to compete with the Lakers: a plethora of big guys to throw at Shaq in Sabonis, Davis, Wallace, and Kemp, a quick point guard in Stoudamire, a player that knows the triangle offense in Quitten, an elite power forward in Wallace, and players that can make Kobe work on defense in Wells and Derek Anderson. But that's beside the point. The point is that the Mavs still need experience, better post presence, and a whole lot better defense to even compete with the Spurs, which was witnessed in the playoff series between the two teams last year.
     
  12. LiLStevie3

    LiLStevie3 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2000
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    3
    Umm....the Kings are on a different level than the Mavericks. The Kings are contenders, the Mavs are an up and coming team.
     
  13. Shandon Anversen

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    389
    Likes Received:
    0
    LilStevie:

    re: the lakers.


    ab...so...lute...lee ...co..rrect.


    the spurs don't have the equipment to beat la. the lost a key piece of it in DA. nevermind what Mr. Spur said. he's in denial :)

    the kings are closer but will need bibby to have a damn good season, not just running the team, but shooting the 18-23 footer. if he can do that, the kings have a "chance" to beat LA.

    portland. well, if they can pull off a harry houdini on bob whitsett, they might have a chance. or maybe scottie pippen will return to his old form. then again, maybe monkeys will jump out of my ass...

    the rockets are "assembling" the correct machine to beat the lakers. i already see it. unfortunately, they are one piece away. the irony is that the one piece is on the team already - kelvin cato. but hey...if my aunt had balls, she be me uncle. and she'd be more of a man than cato.
     
  14. Desert Scar

    Desert Scar Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2000
    Messages:
    8,764
    Likes Received:
    11
    TG, you must be a tunnel visioned Mavs fan. I never said they wouldn't make the playoffs, I actually have them at 5. You have to be a good team to get the 5 seed in the west. Who cares if the Mavs had a nice run in a couple of head to head games against the Kings, the Kings were near the top of the league in record all last season--even with an injury to their best player. The also upgraded their starting line-up while the Mavs did not. The Kings were better than the Mavs last year, they probably have been better than the Mavs every year since Roy Tarpley got deported, and I don't see this changing any time soon.

    TPL, I'll have to just disagree about the Wolves. I agree KG is not the equal as TD (don't think KG has been the dominant player Webber has been over the last 2 years as well)--because he offensively doesn't dictate things as well. Still, KG is about the 5th best player in the league and the Wolves have some decent enough players around him. As much I I don't like to say it, I don't see the Rockets passing them or Dallas this year. Our fight will be a rung lower, for the 8th spot.
     
    #74 Desert Scar, Aug 6, 2001
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2001
  15. Shandon Anversen

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    389
    Likes Received:
    0
    i'm pressing the eject button now.


    see ya'll later....

    p.s.


    keep the faith, MrSpur. maybe your 3 backups turned SA starters will actually do something. and maybe pop will see the stupidity in having malik rose cover shaq instead of shawnelle scott or ANYBODY ELSE who just wanted to collect 6 fouls and slow that bohemoth down. and maybe david robinson will find some heart. and maybe pop will find a dermatologist. all these things are unlikely...but hey, stranger things have happened.


    ...out like the fat kid in dodgeball.

    ...out like the spurs in 4!

    bling bling :rolleyes:
     
  16. MrSpur

    MrSpur Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2000
    Messages:
    729
    Likes Received:
    1

    The new rules allow more contact by the defender and allow a
    defense to cut off most paths to the basket. We saw what the
    Mavs' jumpshot-based offense did versus a team with a solid
    interior D like SA. Now add perimeter defenders backed up by
    that defense who can be more aggressive. Plus, the Spurs will
    have more height at the 2.

    If Dallas had a legit low post threat, then perhaps they would be
    more dangerous.
     
  17. MrSpur

    MrSpur Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2000
    Messages:
    729
    Likes Received:
    1

    Ok kid, the Spurs are horrible and will always be horrible because you say so.
     
    #77 MrSpur, Aug 6, 2001
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2001
  18. The Cat

    The Cat Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2000
    Messages:
    20,796
    Likes Received:
    5,204
    and among these three teams, who got better and who got worse?

    LA: BETTER
    DAL: BETTER
    SA: WORSE.


    I think this is where we have to agree to disagree, or whatever. :) We've been through this about 100 times, but I still see it as the following:

    LA: WORSE
    DAL: WORSE
    SA: BETTER

    Spurs win series 4-1
    average margin of victory: 15.5 points.


    By the way, I love how you use cheap evidence like that to prove your point. If you even watched the games, you'd know the games were much bigger blowouts than the score ended. The Spurs were up 28 on the Mavs in the 3rd QUARTER of game 3, but essentially didn't even try in the 4th, because the game was wrapped up. The Spurs will have a more talented team than the one that lost to LA. The Lakers, imho, will have a less talented team, and will not have anywhere near the same chemistry as last season. Advantage Spurs.
     
  19. dc rock

    dc rock Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2001
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    11,897
    Who would of thought? cat thinks the spurs got better and the lakers got worse.... wow that was a shocker:rolleyes:
     
  20. DunkingDeutschman

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2001
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just gotta respond to one thing:

    <b><i> Also, Notwiski is no Bird, Bird could do it all and was clutch from day 1. He might be a Kiki or Tom Chambers though.</i></b>

    Wha wha what?!?! Kiki or Tom Chambers? I agree he's no Bird but come on. Were you watching the same Dirk that I was in Game 5? 47 min, 42 points, 18 rebs, 6 stls, 2 asts, 1 block. 42 and 18! That's pretty clutch to me. And he was only 22 at the time. That was only his 3rd season and his first year and a half were spent getting used to the NBA style of play. Give him some time and he will be one of the top 10 players in the league in no time.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now