Mavs-At-Deadline: In 'Go-For-It' Mode

   Was that team good like this team is good? Check.

   Was that team blessed with a franchise player in his prime like this team is blessed? Check.

   Was that team hobbled by an injury to a supplementary star like this team is hobbled? Check.

   Was that team around 10-or-so games over .500 as the NBA trade deadline approached like this team is? Check.

   “That team’’ was the LA Lakers, who a year ago took stock in itself and instead of “blowing it up’’ pulled off a league-shaking one-sided steal of All-Star Pau Gasol.

   “This team’’ is. … well, you’ve probably already figured out who “this team’’ is, haven’t you?

    Donnie Comment No. 1, regarding Cuban’s money and the NBA economy: “Mark has the ability to hit the grand-slam home run. Almost everybody else in looking to cut back, but this owner is willing to spend if that right deal comes along.’’

    Donnie Comment No. 2, regarding the Mavs’ pre-2010 approach: “We’re in go-for-it mode for the next two years.’’

    And then there is my conversation with Cuban from last Tuesday. He talked at great length about the February 2008 Lakers. About how LA really had been shopping Kobe, thinking that mess couldn't be repaired, and how wise and lucky they were to change directions. He talked of the wisdom of the Gasol acquisition, and how it was admirable because it represented a ceaseless push toward excellence. He discussed those February 2008 Lakers in vivid detail, indicating that he'd not only followed it at the time (of course), but had more recently reflected on it and studied it. He talked of having the assets to make such a swap with a trade partner that had itself over a barrel.

   The Mavs owner’s references were so specific, it caused me to reflect back: What was the Lakers’ situation a year ago?

   They were 28-16, a dozen games over .500. Not world-beaters, but good. Andrew Byrum had just gone down. There was talk of “Kobe’s window,’’ of Bryant wanting the Lakers to do something dramatic “or else’’ … well, “or else’’ there’d be another offseason of “or else.’’

   Which all sounds rather familiar to fans of the February 2009 Mavs. 

   Then what happened? They took advantage of a budget-minded loser, the Grizzlies, and they acquired Gasol.

   Then what happened? They won the West and made it to the NBA Finals.

   If you want this angle wrapped up in the pretty package of one summary paragraph, here is it:

   The Mavs of today believe they can be the Lakers of a year ago. It is neither the Mavs intention to “blow it up’’ or to “stand pat.’’ The Mavs are out of “We Love Our Team’’ mode and in “Go-For-It’’ mode, and are in search of league-shaking deal that allows them to take advantage of a down-on-its-luck franchise, a deal that vaults them into true contention.

   There it is. In boldface. Cut it out and put it on the fridge.

   Now, “intention’’ is not “accomplishment.’’ I can give you no guarantees of a finalized deal. (Sidebar: Regarding dozens of cases where we’ve accurately reported on Mavs’ intentions, and then in the end they didn’t achieve those intentions – for instance, KG in 2007 – don’t shoot the messenger. And quit whining.) I cannot give you all the specifics of conversations the Mavs have or will have engaged in regarding standout players laboring for cash-strapped and/or bottom-dwelling franchises. Amare or Bosh or Shaq or Beasley or Rasheed or Artest or Kaman or Camby or Chandler or Hamilton or Vince or Caron or Tyrus? Or a dozen other names I’ve left out? (We are, of course, working on all of that.)

  But I can give you intent. And for today, this is important: No “blowing it up’’ and no “standing pat’’ and no “We Love Our Team.’’ "We Love Our Team'' will most certainly be the company line if the trade deadline comes and goes without a deal. But that is definitely not Dallas' approach today.

   The lessons of those Lakers are not lost on these Mavericks. This league’s situation is ripe for it. This team’s situation is ripe for it.

   The Mavs ARE trying to make an impactful trade.

   Three very bright Mavs observers, Dirk Nowitzki and Bob Sturm and Eddie Sefko, have crafted three viable reasons for Dallas to avoid making this deal or that.

   The UberMan on whether the Mavs should keep the nucleus intact: "I think so.We've had a good last two or three weeks. Guys have played hard and I'm looking forward to our last 30 games of the season. … If we can get healthy soon and keep working, keep doing what we're doing, I think we're on a good track.''

    The Sturminator likes our exhaustive studies of the options but shoots down the notion that Dallas will take on a fat contract. “Allow me to be clear here: There is no way that the Mavericks would pay $40mm to have Shaq for next season. No way.’’

    Sefko, who undoubtedly has his finger on a Mavs pulse, is writing and saying things that shut down the notion of a major deal. From the Dallas Morning News in print to a roundtable discussion on ESPN Radio the other night featuring Eddie and yours truly, Sekfo clearly believes the following:

   To which I respond:

   *Re Nowitzki: Dirk is saying the right thing to say. No surprise there.

   But his front office wants MORE, and intimates, “We’re in go-for-it mode.’’

   *Re Bob: Sturm’s take on dollars and sense is understandable. But somebody IS going to pay Shaq $40 million. The list of prospective owners is a short one. Wouldn’t Robert Sarver figure to want off that list? How badly does he want off it? Wouldn’t Mark Cuban figure to be on that list? How cheaply can he get on it?

    This front office intimates, “Almost everybody else in looking to cut back, but this owner is willing to spend if that right deal comes along.’’

    *Re Eddie: A "splash'' as a negative? Conceivably. But if they DON’T make another “splashy’’ trade, they remain sub-Lakers, they remain second-tier contenders and they remain in the wide gray territory between fifth and eighth place in the West.

    You've got an owner willing to spend for "the right deal.'' You've got a league full of possible partners. You've got the precedent of a Lakers team that was in this same spot. ...

    So you go for it.

    Change can be scary, change can be expensive and change can be disruptive.

    But the right change (that obviously upgrades the roster). … made inexpensively (in terms of “commodities’’ if not dollars). … that would be accepted in the locker room (either because the guy fits or because the guy lights a fire). … that change can make you the 2007-08 LA Lakers redux.

    I don’t know that the Mavs can do that.

    But take the economic state of the league, take Dallas' top-of-mind awareness of LA’s dramatic turn-around move last year and take this braintrust's “go-for-it’’ intimations this year as proof:

   The Mavs will try.

1030am feb 15 2009