Cuban: 'I'm Not Trading Josh'

   "You can quote me on this,'' Mavs owner Mark Cuban said on Wednesday. "I'm not trading Josh Howard.''

    Now, Tony Cubes didn’t add that anyone who disagrees with that position should “step away from their crack dealer.’’ But despite Dallas’ public position, there are certainly indications that as it regards a Howard acquisition, teams are kicking around the idea.

   And amid the franchise’s desire to establish its vote-of-confidence mentality regarding the player, and the NBA’s desire to whisper about Josh’s availability, my big issue isn’t about whether teams are kicking around the idea.

   My big issue is hoping Josh Howard cares enough to kick back.

   As I sift through the pages of the Josh-related notebook I’ve filled up in the last few days, I break down the notion of a J-Ho trade – for the sake of analysis, let's tackle the one involving Miami’s Shawn Marion – into three categories: “60-Cents on The Dollar’’; “Change For The Sake Of Change’’; and “Josh’s Willingness To Kick Back.’’

   The conclusions I come to are based in part on answers from others that I’ve collected in my notebook. The ultimate conclusion, though, comes from the arguments that are playing themselves out right there on the floor.

   We begin in Miami, where gossip insists there are Heat conversations with Dallas that center on Shawn Marion-for-Josh trade scenarios. Most of the NBA authorities I’m speaking to about this notion have the same basic problem with it that I have: Marion would be such a temporary fix – if he’s a fix at all – that such a swap would for Dallas represent little more than wheel-spinning.

   Cuban dismissed the concept in no uncertain terms.

   “We're not trading Josh for Shawn Marion,’’ he said. “And that's no disrespect to Shawn Marion. He's a great player.’’

   How much is Mark playing Poker here? Impossible to say.

   How much is Mark trying to have his guy’s back here? Easy to say. A lot. Completely.

   Still, let’s forge ahead. …

   Say you do a “rent-a-player’’ deal for a guy like Marion, and talent-wise, does he really give you more than Josh gives you? Marion is two years older, substantially more expensive, with a contractual commitment to you that says bye-bye this summer, and with a history of IWannaBeTheManitis.

   The same disease some suggest presently ails Josh.

   Marion is only scoring about 13 points per game, is still capable of shut-down defense, and represents the sort of versatile and athletic wing that would figure to thrive alongside Jason Kidd.

   But again, those are the same attributes that a right-headed Josh Howard theoretically brings. In fact, a healthy Howard has been nearer 20 points, demonstrated in the second half of the Philly game what he can do defensively (the staff salivated at his effort in controlling Andre Iguodala) and has everything it takes to be a supplemental player to KIDDIRK.

   In a similarly effective spurt on the other end of the floor in Wednesday’s crushing 133-99 loss at Milwaukee, J-Ho again flashed his brilliance. Josh scored 12 in the first quarter and how high would he go ... the braintrust had to be feeling awfully good about it voiced support. ...

   However, even his very best moments are, by the definition of the way this team is structured, supplemental. And does Josh Howard want to be “supplemental’’? File that question away. We’ll return to it in a moment.

   About the contracts here: While Marion is a rent-a-player, there is nothing in the rules that prevents Dallas from signing him to a new deal. Maybe a one-year deal that keeps open the Summer of 2010 options?

   And while we’re on the subject: Our man David Lord, reading (accurately, I think) the tea leaves of Mavs management's comments notes that the Summer of 2010 is about “talent acquisition’’ – but is not mutually exclusive to the idea of “talent acquisition’’ in any year. In other words, maybe the Mavs can make a big move in ’09 and thus not wait until ’10.

   All the while, of course, still hoping to pull off another big “get’’ in that ensuing summer.

   Anyway, it’s one thing to say that a trade involving Josh can only net you 60 cents on the dollar. But what if 60 cents is all you can get? What if 60 cents is all you’ll ever get? What if the reason Josh is valued as “60 cents’’ is because Josh IS “60 cents’’?

   Stated another way: If Dallas trades “faded Josh’’ for Marion, who is the equivalent of “faded Josh,’’ what’s been gained?

   That’s why management’s constant consideration here has been for Josh to restore himself to being Josh.

   CATEGORY 2: “Change For The Sake of Change’’

   From what I can gather, Miami would rather swap Marion in order to acquire a center, with Jermaine O’Neal the top target. Though logically, LAC’s Chris Kaman and Marcus Camby, Philly’s Samuel Dalembert and Sacto’s Brad Miller also appear somewhere on their list of possibilities. (Just as logically, most of those same names figure to be somewhere on Dallas’ radar.)

   Miami appears to have a plan here, desiring to salvage something from its ownership of Marion while either getting bigger (with the center) or younger (with, among other probable targets, Josh).

   If the Mavs get serious about this, doing so should be the result of a plan.

   Does it make Dallas substantially better on paper? It wouldn’t seem so.

   Does it vault the Mavs into the top tier of Western teams? It wouldn’t seem so.

   Is it a move designed to be ready for 2010 free agency? It wouldn’t seem so. (If Marion comes here and then leaves this summer, there is no resulting created cap room.)

   So what would be the plan? What would be the point?

   Well, Cuban -- who says openly he believes Josh to be a better player than Marion -- will argue that there is no point. And specific to this rumor, let’s go with that.

   That still leaves the possibility of a change for the sake of change. But I find that to be a difficult sell. Ideally, the next trade (or, as our David Lord referred to it, “The Trade’’) should either make the Mavs a better team as it chases an upper-rung playoff berth, or a younger team as it attempts to qualify for this year’s tournament while also aligning its ducks for the future.

   I admire the approach espoused often in this space by Mark Cuban and Donnie Nelson – most recently evidenced by Donnie’s exclusive quote to DB.com, “We will step back into that batter’s box. And we won’t go down looking’’-- but you execute too many Devin-for-Kidd/Josh-for-Marion/youth-for-age deals and the next execution will have your neck on the fanbase’s guillotine.

    Hey, if down-deep somebody thinks Marion represents a legit upgrade over Josh, and that the team is substantially upgraded, do the deal, then re-sign him, and go chase those titles! Me? I would much prefer a chance for Detroit's Tayshaun Prince or for Charlotte’s Gerald Wallace (who earlier this season was judged by Dallas to be slightly inferior to Josh) or someone willing to work his ass off to be a second, third or fourth fiddle.

   One aspect of this that can only be answered by the people inside the room (and unlike the way the Cowboys do it, should NOT be addressed to questioners from outside the room): Is Josh Howard a drain on others, a burden on his teammates, a life-sucker in the room?

   When we see Art Garcia’s NBA.com piece full of its negative hints about locker-room dissatisfaction, we tend to think that a lot of whatever frowning is occurring in there is the result of either the handful of guys who aren't playing or the one guy – the singular Mav -- failing to meet expectations.

   Are Dirk, Kidd and Jet among the unhappy? They sure aren’t playing like it, and I sure haven’t seen it.

   Are Stack, Devean and some JAG in street clothes among the unhappy? Who cares?

   Is Josh Howard – whose occasional body language hints at some sort of problem with something -- the hub of a wheel of unhappiness? Is that how flawed this thing is right now? That Dallas must consider an addition-by-subtraction “change for the sake of change’’?

    That brings us to that “supplementary’’ thing.

   CATEGORY 3: “Josh’s Willingness To Kick Back’’

   Here’s the in-house debate for the Mavs – and as I say, it’s so obvious you can actually see it unfolding out there on the floor.

   Upper management is aware that a Howard-for-Marion trade would be an at-best “push’’ in terms of talent. Those members of The Triangle of Trust would therefore prefer to rescue Josh from himself and to see the 60 cents rise back to its rightful full value. An “even swap’’ featuring Josh for Marion means Marion is also worth 60 cents. … and if we aren’t satisfied with Howard’s 60 cents, why would we be any more satisfied with Marion’s 60 cents?

   The coaching staff, on the other hand, isn’t in charge of that sort of big-picture patience. Rick Carlisle is trying to win. … tonight. In the Philly game, Carlisle started Josh, tolerated more of his early-game “hunting for shots’’ (basketball parlance not meant as a compliment), finally got a great defensive effort out of him in the second half. … and then in the fourth, when Howard collected a fifth foul, pulled him to the bench to save him.

    On the floor instead (not playing the same position, but “instead’’ nevertheless) was Ryan Hollins, who had never before played a game with this team, was in the midst of getting 19 minutes (the eighth highest total he’d ever attained in his pro career) and couldn’t possibly have absorbed even a fraction of the playbook.

   And in the final few minutes, Carlisle stuck with Hollins – even after the kid had collected his own fifth foul.

    That spoke volumes of what the coaching staff thinks of Josh’s reliability at this moment. Sure, J-Ho’s wrist is sore and his ankle is sore, but when it was time to grab for the brass ring of a win over the Sixers, the coach chose to ride a Backup Bobcat.

   Against Milwaukee, Howard seemed cranked up in every way. As I say, he opened with 12 points and he reached 16 by halftime. (Let me tell you this as a matter of fact, and don't ask me how I know this because the team was in Wisconsin while I was in Dallas. ... but the Mavs people were ecstatic about Josh's work.) He was able to add only three more in the second half, however, as the Mavs as a team got absolutely buried by the Bucks.

   The collapse was so complete that most of what Josh did right (or wrong) was rendered insignificant.

   Earlier, I mentioned how Prince or Wallace would be superior alternatives to Marion. (For the record, Eddie Sefko of the DMNews shows Marion little love, positively scoffing at the suggestion that Marion is at Josh level. And the Star-Telegram’s Jan Hubbard opts to leave unchallenged Cuban’s assertion that Marion is clearly inferior to Howard.)

   An alternative superior to even those guys, though, is Josh himself. Is he the sort of guy who is going to giggle his way through his time on the bench? Is he going to push himself injury-wise to get back on the floor? Is he willing to concede that Jason Terry has supplanted him in scoring and that Jason Kidd has supplanted him in authority?

     In the Art Garcia interview, Dirk addressed frankly the idea of a trade.

    “Maybe one more piece can change our momentum,’’ Nowitzki said. “We'll see what happens until the deadline. If nothing happens, we'll go to war with what we've got.’’

    The question The Triangle of Trust must ask itself is, Does Josh still want to be a warrior here? Josh Howard – getting kicked around pretty good by his public, the idea of him being swapped being kicked around by the NBA itself – needs to decide if he wants to kick back.

   And by “kick back,’’ I don’t mean “relax.’’ I mean “fight back’’ and “battle back.’’

  Josh becoming Josh is the best solution.

  But it might not be the easiest solution.

1029pm jan 21 2009