| 05 February 2010
Mike Fisher from DallasBasketball.com is an excellent blogger, with a lot of sources inside the Mavs team.
Also, I will always be thankful to him because my old blog had one of its all tim peaks in traffic after being linked by him, running a well know and respected site (as if it someone cares...anyway...).
Therefore, if he reports that Mavs are weighing a Iguodala-AND-Brand to Dallas trade, you have to take the rumor into serious consideration. I received this story in my mailbox this morning and it shocked me a little bit. Definitely worth some thoughs.
Yes, because it's the first time that a possible trade centered on Iguodala has Elton (and not Dalembert, or others) involved.
You know what? If I was Cuban, I'd do that trade. With either Brand OR Dalembert.
Dallas is already a legit contender and obviously in "win now" mode. They didn't sign a 36 y/o Kidd to a three year/25 mill extention last summer thinking mid/long term.
Mavs are an excellent team but lack low post presence: Brand (and Dalembert) would provide that. Are our two guys' contracts bad? Yes, no question. But remember Mavs are already giving Dampier 10 million to have a Dalembert-like production and Sam is basically a younger, more athletic, overall better Dampier.
Sam would be a decent fit in Texas for a run to the title this year, especially to face Lakers' strong, tall frontcourt in the WCF. Worst case-scenario, next year he would be an expiring contract.
Iguodala would be excellent in Mavs' system in my opinion: they have all the shooters that Sixers lack, they have great passers and two leaders in Kidd and Dirk: he would be a perfect "third banana".
But Brand would give Dallas another dimension: a surely-overpaid-but-still-effective low post scorer, a veteran that "plays the right way", that can create his own shot, command some double teams, play good defense, block shots. And is a good team mate (Ok I'm sounding like Brand's agent now... but you know I like the guy).
Of course it would be a very risky and expensive bet for Mark Cuban (a 108 million bet, exactly...), but I wouldn't be surprised if he pulled the trigger on that one (more after the jump).And on Sixers' side? Stefanski was crystal clear in saying that Sixers are very active in trade talks but added that he wouldn't make a trade only for salary dump purposes. Therefore Mavs (or any other team) would have to offer something more than expiring contracts.
I don't see any asset in the Mavs roster that I would like to see landing in Philly, honestly. This Beaubois kid that is rumored to be part of the package plays PG, and we drafted a talented 19 y/o PG few months ago.
Josh Howard? He will turn 30 in April and is on his way to a Chuck Person-type of decline: today he's just a contract coming off the books (he is owed 11 mill this season + a team option for another year, at the same salary).
To sum it up, the "trade" would make more sense on Mavs's side, while to judge it on our part, I'd have to see what would exactly be the package offered. After Dallas' "due diligence" is completed, I guess.
