PDA

View Full Version : 3 What ifs regarding Mark Cuban



Chronz
07-30-2016, 02:13 AM
Hes been a great owner IMO but Mark Cuban is OBSESSED with star power and big name talent. Its plagued him throughout his tenure and these are the most extreme examples of his lust....



#1
What if Cuban hadn't punted a season of Dirk's prime
Its ironic, back when the Lakers won the first of their 3peat chips, Cuban criticized the Lakers for not "rewarding" Glen Rice with a fat contract even though he was clearly on his last legs.
Fast forward to 2011, the Mavs, fresh off a championship, forfeit any chance at a repeat by letting Tyson Chandler walk. All because Cubes had hopes of Dwight Howard and Deron Williams in his thoughts. If he brings the crew back, how far do they go?



#2
What if Cuban hadn't traded for Antoine Walker
This is an underrated debacle that most people disregard because few at the time saw Dirk as the kind of guy who could will your team to a championship. It sounds insane today but it was a different time and we had yet to see his many failures to come so it gets lost in the shuffle.

Cubes was onto something tho, his team had one of the best Big 3's in the league with Nash-Finley-Dirk. It was a fun team to watch evolve as Dirk/Nash rose to prominence. It had the best offense in the league and was improving every year, with the high mark coming in 2003. They won 60 games for the first time, if not for an injury to Dirk, could have landed them in the Finals.

So how does Cuban decide to improve the team? By taking the ball out of Nash's hands and into the hands of the notoriously overrated Antoine Walker. Not only did the move stunt Nash's production, but it forced the Mavs to play either Dirk or Antoine at center. The Mavs became the worst defensive team in the league and the soft reputation just grew. Had Cuban never traded Antoine, maybe he sees the value in Nash and keeps them in.



#3
What if Cuban hadn't traded for Rondo
The Mavs had the leagues best offense at the time of the trade, albeit with a weak early schedule. They were off to one of their better starts but there was always the fear that any decent PG would tear up Jameer and true to his talent, Rondo did improve their defense. But their offense went to hell, Rondo clashed with Carlisle and the rest is history. If they dont trade for Rondo, they also get to keep Crowder.

HandsOnTheWheel
07-30-2016, 03:06 AM
..stop. He's a idiot. Guess Durant's not going to Dallas.

HandsOnTheWheel
07-30-2016, 03:17 AM
Seriously though there's bigger what if's for many other teams. I mean I honestly don't see much changing besides the obvious (if they kept Nash). They weren't much better with or without Rondo. Coming off the lockout year, OKC was young and evolving. I don't see an older Mavs team getting past them.

McAllen Tx
07-30-2016, 07:42 AM
Cuban is too impulsive and impatient. Lakers fans should love him cause sounds like Im describing the majority of us lol

He also really isnt smart (basketball wise). He let Nash walk cause he was trying to match up against the Lakers and thought Dampier could guard Shaq lol

He also has ne foresight of the future. Like the OP says, hes star player hungry. Every year he shoots for the stars and every year he misses and its very obvious he didnt have a back up plan in place. He then has made franchise affecting decisions on a whim.

I will give him credit though cause all his moves have been made with winning in mind. IMO its more likely they wouldnt have any championships then them having won 2 or more under a different ownership.

Shammyguy3
07-30-2016, 05:20 PM
Not really sure any of the moves cost the Mavs a ring, but if you're to question one it would be letting Nash go

JasonJohnHorn
07-30-2016, 08:43 PM
I think that Mavs titles was a one-and-done deal. They would have been good had them kept everybody today, but they wouldn't have been good enough. The Heat were simply better the next year, and the Thunder were hitting on all cylinders. Frankly, the Mavs and the Spurs would have been competing for second best in the West that year.

As for the Rondo move.... there was nothing there for that team in terms of competing with the Clippers, and Warriors, and Spurs and Thunder. It was a gamble worth taking.

The best one you mentioned was the Walker issue. I think more than Walker, it was buying out Finley and letting Nash go.

The Nash, Dirk, Finley combo was amazing. I think Finley is one of the most underrated SGs in the history of the league. I think he could have put up Kobe/Drexler kind of number in the right situation (not Kobe's 35ppg season, but his Gaso/Shaq days numbers). I think Finley was likely a better defender than any All-Star shooting guard the league has seen since Jordan.

Cuban seemed obsessed with getting a centre and was willing to let Nash go so he could sign Eric Dampier? Dampier? I mean... I like Dampier as much as the next guy, but he was a vet coming up to 30 who'd already plateaued, and sure, he had a great contract year (who doesn't), but Nash was Nash. Though he wasn't yet the MVP Nash, everybody, even at the time, thought this move was dumb as all hell.

The Mavs did poorly in free-agent signings and the draft with respect to big men, and they could never get the defensive anchor who could compensate for Nash and Dirk (I don't mean to say that Dirk was a bad defender, but it wasn't a highlight to his game). Had Cuban kept Finley/Nash/Dirk together, I feel like that core could have done something, especially with how good Josh Howard and Devon Harris were playing. They had trade bait and good role players. They should have been able to do something to land a decent centre. But Cuban failed to see what Nash had to offer, and the same can be said of Finley. That set the build back about 4 or 5 years.


I still wonder what if the Warriors had drafted Mutumbo instead of Billy Owens, or at the very least had not trade Richmond for Owens.

Saddletramp
07-31-2016, 01:56 AM
1. The Mavs got lucky with the title. Not saying it was a fluke or that they didn't deserve it but they definitely lucked out.

2. Cuban knew this, so he broke up that team. Don't blame him.

3. Overpaying Parsons, Matthews and now Harry Barnes.....he just likes to overpay. I don't think they'll be back to being a legit contender until they draft another Top 20-30 all time like they did with Dirk*. And they forgot how to draft.

4. If were a Mavs fan, I'd hope that they would make the playoffs every year but I wouldn't expect much more than that.

*And yes, I know Dirk was a draft day acquisition, not actually drafted by them , but they saw his potential and got him.

ewing
07-31-2016, 02:32 AM
he is a great owner

JasonJohnHorn
07-31-2016, 07:11 AM
And they forgot how to draft.



I'm not sure they ever knew how to draft. I feel like they got lucky with Dirk. If you look at their draft history, they have really only drafted and kept one rotation player since Jason Kidd in 1994, and that was Josh Howard. S other than acquiring Dirk on the day of the draft (which is essentially the same as drafting him), they really have't gotten anything out of the draft.

That is the team's biggest problem. I don't expect them to pull a Jerry West and draft All-Stars out of the late first round every other year, or for them to draft as well as the Spurs. But not drafting one All-Star in twenty years outside of Dirk? Is any other team that bad on draft day?

Here's a link to their draft history:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DAL/draft.html

That team needs better scouting. I realize Dallas is a big city, but in an NBA context, it is more of a small market, and small markets can't rely exclusively on free-agent signings. They have to draft well. It is a miracle that they won a title considering how poorly they have drafted.

Every other championship team since I've started watching has relied heavily on the draft. Magic's Lakers. Bird Celtics. Bad Boy pistons 1.0. The Bulls. The Spurs. The Cavs. The Warriors.

Kobe's Lakers and Wade's Heat teams are an exception. Both teams did have a centerpiece that they acquired on draft day, but had a lot of free agent signings and guys they traded for. But those are 'big markets' in an NBA context, so they simply prove the rule that you can't be a mid/small market and hope to compete via free agency.

The only small market teams that has pulled that off since 1980 are likely the 76ers (Moses + Dr. J), and they got very lucky with the ABA merger and the signing of Moses; and the 04 Pistons, who Dumars shrewdly put together through a combination of draft picks (Tayhsuan, Okur), trades (Ben Wallace, Sheed, Rip), and free agent signings (Billups). And even the trades were largely based on drafted players (Ben was brought in when Hill was going out).

The Mave have to stop viewing draft picks as trade pieces, and start looking at them as a way to bring in talent.

KnicksorBust
07-31-2016, 09:49 AM
The only what if that really bothers me is the Tyson Chandler situation. I shouldn't complain because he came to NY and played very well for two seasons but I always get frustrated when teams that win championships or are incredibly close to winning championships break apart their teams. I think there is a lot to be said for championship confident. Chandler was a leader and defensive anchor.

Saddletramp
07-31-2016, 01:38 PM
I'm not sure they ever knew how to draft. I feel like they got lucky with Dirk. If you look at their draft history, they have really only drafted and kept one rotation player since Jason Kidd in 1994, and that was Josh Howard. S other than acquiring Dirk on the day of the draft (which is essentially the same as drafting him), they really have't gotten anything out of the draft.

That is the team's biggest problem. I don't expect them to pull a Jerry West and draft All-Stars out of the late first round every other year, or for them to draft as well as the Spurs. But not drafting one All-Star in twenty years outside of Dirk? Is any other team that bad on draft day?

Here's a link to their draft history:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DAL/draft.html

That team needs better scouting. I realize Dallas is a big city, but in an NBA context, it is more of a small market, and small markets can't rely exclusively on free-agent signings. They have to draft well. It is a miracle that they won a title considering how poorly they have drafted.

Every other championship team since I've started watching has relied heavily on the draft. Magic's Lakers. Bird Celtics. Bad Boy pistons 1.0. The Bulls. The Spurs. The Cavs. The Warriors.

Kobe's Lakers and Wade's Heat teams are an exception. Both teams did have a centerpiece that they acquired on draft day, but had a lot of free agent signings and guys they traded for. But those are 'big markets' in an NBA context, so they simply prove the rule that you can't be a mid/small market and hope to compete via free agency.

The only small market teams that has pulled that off since 1980 are likely the 76ers (Moses + Dr. J), and they got very lucky with the ABA merger and the signing of Moses; and the 04 Pistons, who Dumars shrewdly put together through a combination of draft picks (Tayhsuan, Okur), trades (Ben Wallace, Sheed, Rip), and free agent signings (Billups). And even the trades were largely based on drafted players (Ben was brought in when Hill was going out).

The Mave have to stop viewing draft picks as trade pieces, and start looking at them as a way to bring in talent.

Great post. I forgot how bad they had been since before Cuban came in. I remember being a youngster up in the Dallas suburbs and thinking that Kidd/Mashburn/Jackson team was going to do well but Kidd was the only one who turned out great and even he was always a piece of **** from a personality//character/being a man standpoint.

Saddletramp
07-31-2016, 01:40 PM
The only what if that really bothers me is the Tyson Chandler situation. I shouldn't complain because he came to NY and played very well for two seasons but I always get frustrated when teams that win championships or are incredibly close to winning championships break apart their teams. I think there is a lot to be said for championship confident. Chandler was a leader and defensive anchor.

I can't blame Cuban for that, he probably felt about Chandler the way I do: Contract Year Player. I highly doubt TC would've been as effective going forward after he helped them win a title. He just seems like that.

YAALREADYKNO
07-31-2016, 02:07 PM
The 11-12 mavs even with Tyson Chandler probably don't make it out of the 2nd round.

I don't know what the **** he was thinking trading for Antoine walker. The Jamison move was a nice move even if it cost the mavs Nick Van Exel who was big for the mavs in the playoffs the year before.

Brandan Wright and Jae Crowder were solid contributors to the mavs before the rondo trade and I still don't see how he didn't see monta and rondo weren't gonna work playing together because of the fact both need the ball in there hands to be effective. I was cool with the PG by committee thing letting monta be the primary ball handler.

WHY THE **** DID HE NOT KEEP STEVE NASH????!!!!???? And instead gave that money to Erik Dampier Who was in a contract year with the Warriors and finally had one decent season with them.

The mavs had so much potential man smh I'm damn near about to throw my phone through the wall just thinking about it lmao

YAALREADYKNO
07-31-2016, 02:08 PM
I can't blame Cuban for that, he probably felt about Chandler the way I do: Contract Year Player. I highly doubt TC would've been as effective going forward after he helped them win a title. He just seems like that.

To be fair, Dwight ****ed it up when he chose to opt into his contract with the magic for one more year. The thought was that DWill and Dwight both become FA and both sign with the mavs but Dwight just had to **** **** up

HOLD_THIS_L
07-31-2016, 02:47 PM
#4

What did Harrison Barnes do to get a max contract?

Sent from my SM-G530T using Tapatalk

Saddletramp
07-31-2016, 07:02 PM
#4

What did Harrison Barnes do to get a max contract?

Sent from my SM-G530T using Tapatalk

Got drafted by the Warriors

Chronz
08-01-2016, 09:11 AM
I think you guys underrate the Mavs chances abit. Tyson was no joke for 2 more years I think

I think he and Nash could have done some serious damage but Dirk does admit that losing Nash made him grow as a player.

McAllen Tx
08-01-2016, 10:12 AM
#4

What did Harrison Barnes do to get a max contract?

Sent from my SM-G530T using Tapatalk

Declare for the draft after his sophomore season which in turn made him a FA this summer.

Mr.B
08-01-2016, 08:11 PM
Hes been a great owner IMO but Mark Cuban is OBSESSED with star power and big name talent. Its plagued him throughout his tenure and these are the most extreme examples of his lust....



#1
What if Cuban hadn't punted a season of Dirk's prime
Its ironic, back when the Lakers won the first of their 3peat chips, Cuban criticized the Lakers for not "rewarding" Glen Rice with a fat contract even though he was clearly on his last legs.
Fast forward to 2011, the Mavs, fresh off a championship, forfeit any chance at a repeat by letting Tyson Chandler walk. All because Cubes had hopes of Dwight Howard and Deron Williams in his thoughts. If he brings the crew back, how far do they go?



#2
What if Cuban hadn't traded for Antoine Walker
This is an underrated debacle that most people disregard because few at the time saw Dirk as the kind of guy who could will your team to a championship. It sounds insane today but it was a different time and we had yet to see his many failures to come so it gets lost in the shuffle.

Cubes was onto something tho, his team had one of the best Big 3's in the league with Nash-Finley-Dirk. It was a fun team to watch evolve as Dirk/Nash rose to prominence. It had the best offense in the league and was improving every year, with the high mark coming in 2003. They won 60 games for the first time, if not for an injury to Dirk, could have landed them in the Finals.

So how does Cuban decide to improve the team? By taking the ball out of Nash's hands and into the hands of the notoriously overrated Antoine Walker. Not only did the move stunt Nash's production, but it forced the Mavs to play either Dirk or Antoine at center. The Mavs became the worst defensive team in the league and the soft reputation just grew. Had Cuban never traded Antoine, maybe he sees the value in Nash and keeps them in.



#3
What if Cuban hadn't traded for Rondo
The Mavs had the leagues best offense at the time of the trade, albeit with a weak early schedule. They were off to one of their better starts but there was always the fear that any decent PG would tear up Jameer and true to his talent, Rondo did improve their defense. But their offense went to hell, Rondo clashed with Carlisle and the rest is history. If they dont trade for Rondo, they also get to keep Crowder.

1. The only FA the Mavs should have kept from that 2011 Championship team was Tyson. He was the perfect compliment to Dirk and was a leader in the locker room. If they had kept Tyson they likely would have been able to convince DWill to leave Brooklyn. As a whole that team wasn't good enough to win back/back titles. For what it's worth they did offer Tyson a 1 year $20 mil contract but he wanted a long term deal.

2. The Antoine Walker addition was more of a Nellie move than a Cuban deal. Nellie has been obsessed with having a point forward his whole coaching career and envisioned Walker in that role. It was obviously a huge fail and personally I believe was the start of the end for Nellie in Dallas.

Nash was no doubt great but he had his flaws in Dallas. He had a bad back problem and played so hard that it looked like his career was near the end. Also factor in that it's extremely hard to win with your two best players being your worst defenders. Those were the main reasons they went after Dampier. Avery Johnson wanted more of a traditional team (like the Spurs) instead of the all offense/no defense team that Nellie ran. That started with the center. Damp was awful but did help them get Tyson which led to the title. As for Nash, he wouldn't have been the same player in Dallas that he was in Phoenix. D'Antoni's system is the main reason Nash won those MVP's. He was perfect for that system.

3. The Rondo trade also had to be made. That team before the trade wasn't going to win a title. By the time of the trade teams had already started to figure out how to stop the Mavs from dunking all over them. The league was in the process of figuring out how to slow them down. Also the Mavs NEEDED a PG that could compete with the Chris Paul's, Westbrook's, Harden's, and Curry's in the West. On paper Rondo was that guy. Cuban failed to factor in how much of a dipshit Rondo is and how he was nowhere near a fit for what Carlisle likes to do.

flea
08-02-2016, 11:55 AM
Well whoever is at fault for losing Nash, either Avery or Cuban, it was a bad move. You've got 2 of the best offensive players in the league. Nash is IMO the best offensive guard since Jordan and I still don't think any guards have surpassed him. Neither were defenders but that's why you have wings and a center. No team has ever won or lost an NBA championship because of the defense of the smallest guy on the court.

Relying on Josh Harrison so much as a scorer sunk a lot of those teams with Dirk's prime - though TBF there was steep competition. And while Dirk probably did grow as a scorer without Nash, I have trouble believing the team was better off without him. I also don't buy Nash being a product of D'Antoni. Sure I'll stipulate that he had inflated numbers, but that's true of any player that plays on a transition-oriented offense or a high-paced one (including Magic and MJ at various points). He was just as good as anyone's ever been at the P&R with his quickness, handling, decision-making, and scoring ability.

Cuban/whoever also kind punted too much on Dirk's decline in the hopes of something bigger. You're not always going to have the most talented team in the league, just play your guys and try to improve (or at least not regress). If you've got someone like Dirk, even when he was 34 and 35, you had a shot at a title.

Chronz
08-02-2016, 08:01 PM
Well whoever is at fault for losing Nash, either Avery or Cuban, it was a bad move. You've got 2 of the best offensive players in the league. Nash is IMO the best offensive guard since Jordan and I still don't think any guards have surpassed him. Neither were defenders but that's why you have wings and a center. No team has ever won or lost an NBA championship because of the defense of the smallest guy on the court.

Relying on Josh Harrison so much as a scorer sunk a lot of those teams with Dirk's prime - though TBF there was steep competition. And while Dirk probably did grow as a scorer without Nash, I have trouble believing the team was better off without him. I also don't buy Nash being a product of D'Antoni. Sure I'll stipulate that he had inflated numbers, but that's true of any player that plays on a transition-oriented offense or a high-paced one (including Magic and MJ at various points). He was just as good as anyone's ever been at the P&R with his quickness, handling, decision-making, and scoring ability.

Cuban/whoever also kind punted too much on Dirk's decline in the hopes of something bigger. You're not always going to have the most talented team in the league, just play your guys and try to improve (or at least not regress). If you've got someone like Dirk, even when he was 34 and 35, you had a shot at a title.

Agreed fully, I think people downplay the significance of having 2 MVP caliber teammates. Just because we didn't know it at the time doesn't diminish their talent, its sad that they had to split ways for us to truly appreciate what they brought to the table because playing apart forced them to open their horizons and take on greater responsibility. Its funny, imagine if Nash and Dirk played their MVP caliber ball apart from each other and then joined forces after we knew what each was capable of on their own, wouldn't we have considered it a super team union? Especially given the talent around them?

Mavs of the early 2k era were underrated because the West fielded at least 4 legit contenders at any given time back then.

If you look at Nash's stats, he actually had a better year in Dallas than he did his first MVP season, its just not as noticeable because it came in the pre-handcheck NBA before the run and gun era really spread, before the Mavs were the guys ahead of the field.