2020-2021 MAVS NEWS: Archived

[HanspardsShowerVoice]

https://twitter.com/TheSteinLine/status/...67488?s=20

Yeah, I don't think Mosley is going to have any problems landing a top assistant gig somewhere.

[fifteenth]

The more Cato talks, the more I respect Sam Amick's balancing influence on the original article (that he co-authored). The quality of Tim's reporting on this topic has notably dropped when left to his own merits.

Maybe so, but I've seen good solo work from Cato before

[SwisherPrice]

Except the Pacers. RC and Mosley probably hate each other now 

[dirkfansince1998]

"-why this franchise hasn't earned trust to make a hire like Jason Kidd"

I think the success of Tim's first article (on which I think he did a great job) is encouraging him go a bit overboard. The above statement doesn't make any sense.

This. I guess the Mavs trust his track record since the Nets, Bucks and Lakers signed him. Not like this is his first coaching job.

[ItsGoTime]

https://twitter.com/TheSteinLine/status/...67488?s=20

So the Senior National team is getting a Wrestling belt for whatever it is Mosley does...best practice driller?

[omahen]

https://twitter.com/TheSteinLine/status/...67488?s=20

I would hope he remains on Mavs so we have a recruiter with some of top players

[HanspardsShowerVoice]

I dont think it's been done on here so much, but on social media I see Mosely portrayed as some Xs and Os dunce who only gets recognition because he's Luka's camp counselor in the organization.  I have a hard time believing Pop would put him on his staff if he didn't respect his basketball smarts.  Spoelstra and Mark Few certainly aren't dummies.

[KillerLeft]

"-why this franchise hasn't earned trust to make a hire like Jason Kidd"

I think the success of Tim's first article (on which I think he did a great job) is encouraging him go a bit overboard. The above statement doesn't make any sense.

So I agree, but...

...there are a LOT of people who are SERIOUSLY upset over the spousal abuse thing. Some of it is a bit unfair, imo, but go on twitter and look for female accounts in the Mavs twitter scene, and you'll see that the echo chamber in which Cato lives differs greatly from what we have around here. 

I would conservatively estimate that about 75% of Mavs twitter has been RAISING HELL since Kidd was announced. 

Is it wrong? Maybe, but there's definitely a reason Cuban scheduled Cynt to appear with the basketball people on the 15th. They know what's coming. 

All of this to say: I don't think Cato is trying to create drama, I think he's pandering to the large portion of people who are preaching it.

---

The more Cato talks, the more I respect Sam Amick's balancing influence on the original article (that he co-authored). The quality of Tim's reporting on this topic has notably dropped when left to his own merits.

Yeah, Amick is legit.

[F Gump]

I dont think it's been done on here so much, but on social media I see Mosely portrayed as some Xs and Os dunce who only gets recognition because he's Luka's camp counselor in the organization. 

I have a hard time believing Pop would put him on his staff if he didn't respect his basketball smarts.  Spoelstra and Mark Few certainly aren't dummies.

Maybe. But (lots of pure speculation coming) ...

Maybe his expected role is similar to what it seemed to be in Dallas - ie, less about X's and O's (since they have incredible experts in those areas already) and more about running drills and being the "camp counselor" to some stars. Not saying he's necessarily "an Xs and Os dunce" but it takes various differing strengths to handle a team, and it's entirely possible the X s and Os are NOT his strength, but he's needed for other skills.

A head coach wears a lot of hats, and usually needs help with some.

That also touches on maybe why he hasn't landed a head coach job - ie, while his "camp counselor" skills are apparently great, maybe his ability to navigate relationships with those above him in the pecking order is iffy. Supposedly RC didn't like or trust him; I can't imagine a GM or owner wanting to give the keys to a guy who he wasn't sure he liked or could trust.

[KillerLeft]

I'll say this:

I hope the Mavs handle the tough questions about Kidd that are coming on July 15 better the blazers handled them today at the Billups press conference. 

Twitter is BIG MAD right now.

[Okstate819]

I'll say this:

I hope the Mavs handle the tough questions about Kidd that are coming on July 15 better the blazers handled them today at the Billups press conference. 

Twitter is BIG MAD right now.

Agreed, although i thought the Portland media was ridiculous asking question after question they knew would provide no further useful information.

With everything going on in Dallas the last month I would expect that our media is going to be quicker to move on to other hot topics (power dynamic, roster changes, Luka/KP, etc)

[KillerLeft]

Agreed, although i thought the Portland media was ridiculous asking question after question they knew would provide no further useful information.

With everything going on in Dallas the last month I would expect that our media is going to be quicker to move on to other hot topics (power dynamic, roster changes, Luka/KP, etc)

That's a good point. And, our local media probably isn't as hell bent to get into it in the first place, honestly. 

But, I still think the Mavs would be wise to prep for it.

[F Gump]

On Kidd and whether the Mavs are doing the right thing in hiring him, I understand the idea that "he's learned" or "that was long ago."

But in light of the Mavs repeated issues that keep popping up, hiring a top manager whose track record is like Kidd's has to raise doubts about the Mavs response to such issues, and their sincerity. Didn't Cuban swear that he didn't know, but in the future he wouldn't let people who act like that work for him? Has such behavior really been made a disqualifier for a job with the Mavs? Or does that only apply to the underlings, but not the big shots (who, all along, have been the children with the loathsome behavior problems)?

Those are very legitimate questions. And while I'm sure they'll have pre-planned answers, talk is cheap. In light of the Mavs organizational history, this is a really bad look - and one that they don't seem to care about.

[Scott41theMavs]

I would hope he remains on Mavs so we have a recruiter with some of top players

Wait, what?

I assume that was a troll or sarcasm. If not, I'd like to introduce to two gentlemen named Nico Harrison and Jason Kidd.

[mavsluvr]

On Kidd and whether the Mavs are doing the right thing in hiring him, I understand the idea that "he's learned" or "that was long ago."

But in light of the Mavs repeated issues that keep popping up, hiring a top manager whose track record is like Kidd's has to raise doubts about the Mavs response to such issues, and their sincerity. Didn't Cuban swear that he didn't know, but in the future he wouldn't let people who act like that work for him? Has such behavior really been made a disqualifier for a job with the Mavs? Or does that only apply to the underlings, but not the big shots (who, all along, have been the children with the loathsome behavior problems)?

Those are very legitimate questions. And while I'm sure they'll have pre-planned answers, talk is cheap. In light of the Mavs organizational history, this is a really bad look - and one that they don't seem to care about.

Agree that we should expand our minds to at least consider this point of view. I am blessed to have some strong women in my life, and my understanding of the world has been enriched by listening to what they have to say about various aspects of the world, including sports. 

Many commentators, Mavs and national, have been stunned by the hire. I found it puzzling as well, particularly considering the political aspirations Mark seemed to be nurturing. Some think he shouldn't have been hired, period, end of story. 

I think a more refined point of view, which Cato describes, is that he shouldn't have been hired without even an acknowledgement of the issues. The Mavs are freshly coming off a scandal involving many years of discrimination and harassment, repeatedly looked off or even permitted by the organization.  Even more recently, they have faced at least two issues of employees credibly accused of abuse. Cuban got on national TV after the scandal, cried, and promised they would never tolerate such behavior again. Now, they hire the one coach who is a confessed abuser without a word about it, without even a good head coaching record to justify it. It looks as if they just don't care. 

This point of view suggests that the Mavericks should have talked about the issue and explained their justification -- presumably, that Kidd has redeemed himself. I don't know if Kidd has ever expressed any contrition or remorse for his missteps, or an indication that he is no longer that guy. The feeling here, if I am capturing it accurately, is that the fans who have a concern about this issue deserve better than to have those concerns ignored. 

We may or may not agree with this perspective, but I think we will understand the outrage better if we at least understand that viewpoint and recognize that the concerns are very legitimate in the eyes of many serious and intelligent fans. I assume, from Cynt's anticipated presence at the press conference, that they are planning to address this after the fact. I hope they do better than Portland's middle finger to those with the question.

[F Gump]

Agree that we should expand our minds to at least consider this point of view. I am blessed to have some strong women in my life, and my understanding of the world has been enriched by listening to what they have to say about various aspects of the world, including sports. 

Many commentators, Mavs and national, have been stunned by the hire. I found it puzzling as well, particularly considering the political aspirations Mark seemed to be nurturing. Some think he shouldn't have been hired, period, end of story. 

I think a more refined point of view, which Cato describes, is that he shouldn't have been hired without even an acknowledgement of the issues. The Mavs are freshly coming off a scandal involving many years of discrimination and harassment, repeatedly looked off or even permitted by the organization.  Even more recently, they have faced at least two issues of employees credibly accused of abuse. Cuban got on national TV after the scandal, cried, and promised they would never tolerate such behavior again. Now, they hire the one coach who is a confessed abuser without a word about it, without even a good head coaching record to justify it. It looks as if they just don't care. 

This point of view suggests that the Mavericks should have talked about the issue and explained their justification -- presumably, that Kidd has redeemed himself. I don't know if Kidd has ever expressed any contrition or remorse for his missteps, or an indication that he is no longer that guy. The feeling here, if I am capturing it accurately, is that the fans who have a concern about this issue deserve better than to have those concerns ignored. 

We may or may not agree with this perspective, but I think we will understand the outrage better if we at least understand that viewpoint and recognize that the concerns are very legitimate in the eyes of many serious and intelligent fans. I assume, from Cynt's anticipated presence at the press conference, that they are planning to address this after the fact. I hope they do better than Portland's middle finger to those with the question.

You said what I tried to say, only much better. Thanks.

As you note so well, there's been nothing in the Mavs actions or words when hiring Kidd that says they considered the issue, cared about it, factored it in, hesitated and looked much closer, or anything else to indicate the issue really means anything to them.

And the Kidd hiring didn't happen to them, out of the blue - they had to plan it and know it was coming for days in advance. This, then, was their CHOSEN PLANNED way to deal with that situation - sign the guy, tell the world they did it, and try to sweep it under the rug until later.

They can do that, of course. It's their call. But it sends a really negative message about who they are.

I am probably more puzzled than outraged, because I haven't personally lived any of this. I detest the actions, but I don't have the emotional tie. Yet to me, it's an incredibly bad look they've chosen to wear.

[TXBamanut]

On Kidd and whether the Mavs are doing the right thing in hiring him, I understand the idea that "he's learned" or "that was long ago."

But in light of the Mavs repeated issues that keep popping up, hiring a top manager whose track record is like Kidd's has to raise doubts about the Mavs response to such issues, and their sincerity. Didn't Cuban swear that he didn't know, but in the future he wouldn't let people who act like that work for him? Has such behavior really been made a disqualifier for a job with the Mavs? Or does that only apply to the underlings, but not the big shots (who, all along, have been the children with the loathsome behavior problems)?

Those are very legitimate questions. And while I'm sure they'll have pre-planned answers, talk is cheap. In light of the Mavs organizational history, this is a really bad look - and one that they don't seem to care about.

Not necessarily right at you, Gump, but just a jumping point.

For me, that was nearly 20 years ago, and he's remarried with no incidents of domestic violence since.  Honestly, I've got no problem with that.  It's a bigger risk than someone who doesnt' have that in his background, because if it were to happen again, it would be WAY worse, because of the history, but I think at some point, this nonsense cancel culture thing needs to stop.  People change, people grow and for me, Billups' stuff shouldn't even have been brought up.

This stuff from decades ago taht get selectively brought up because someone has a special interest in getting their stuff read is pathetic.  There is no one here that thinks either of those guys are beating their spouses right now...no one here would bet their house on it.

MY greater concern is Kidd's continued pattern of questionable ethics situations.  To me, that's worse, because that's has been done multiple times in multiple situations at multiple places from legal judgment to different situations in his career from the way he left the Mavs the first time as a player, to the way that he left the second time to Brooklyn to the Bucks to the DUI to whatever....that's a character pattern and THAT, more than a domestic violence situation from pretty much 2 decades ago, with no incidents since, is a bigger red flag to me.

To translate, if he had consistently had domestic violence allegations since 2003, that's would be a no...yet, he's consistently had these problems with integrity and stuff.

[mavsluvr]

As you note so well, there's been nothing in the Mavs actions or words when hiring Kidd that says they considered the issue, cared about it, factored it in, hesitated and looked much closer, or anything else to indicate the issue really means anything to them.

Sadly, this appears to be what happened. Or, if it isn't, the Mavs seem to be happy for people to perceive it that way, so far.  

And the Kidd hiring didn't happen to them, out of the blue - they had to plan it and know it was coming for days in advance. This, then, was their CHOSEN PLANNED way to deal with that situation - sign the guy, tell the world they did it, and try to sweep it under the rug until later.

They can do that, of course. It's their call. But it sends a really negative message about who they are.

I am probably more puzzled than outraged, because I haven't personally lived any of this. I detest the actions, but I don't have the emotional tie. Yet to me, it's an incredibly bad look they've chosen to wear.

On one of the podcasts in the last day or so, a guy at Silver Screen and Roll was updating the podcaster with Kidd's progress at the Lakers. One thing he said was that Kidd has been actively seeking another head coaching job during his time in LA, appearing as a candidate for most of the vacancies that arose. He found it tough sledding, because, as the culture as a whole has become less tolerant of domestic abuse, whole fan bases were outraged that he would even be considered. Teams were unwilling to deal with that, until the vacancy opened up in Dallas, who apparently didn't care. 

Not that we have to buy into that guy's judgments on what happened, but I think that explanation touches pretty well on how out-of-touch and tone-deaf the Mavs' approach to this matter has come across to many fans and other stakeholders.

[mavsluvr]

Not necessarily right at you, Gump, but just a jumping point.

For me, that was nearly 20 years ago, and he's remarried with no incidents of domestic violence since.  Honestly, I've got no problem with that.  It's a bigger risk than someone who doesnt' have that in his background, because if it were to happen again, it would be WAY worse, because of the history, but I think at some point, this nonsense cancel culture thing needs to stop. Statistically, that just isn't the case. People who have already committed abuse are much more likely to do so in the future than people who never have. I mean, it's really pretty easy not to hit your wife, although some guys have a pattern of doing so.  People change, people grow and for me, Billups' stuff shouldn't even have been brought up.

This stuff from decades ago taht get selectively brought up because someone has a special interest in getting their stuff read is pathetic.  There is no one here that thinks either of those guys are beating their spouses right now...no one here would bet their house on it.

I don't know that the years since a reported incident is determinative. What if he had murdered someone twenty years ago? Should employers necessarily take the view that they should ignore that, since it's been a while and they don't think he's going to do it again, and they should tell customers who have concerns about it to gtfo? Sometimes, an action is bad enough that it deserves addressing, even if it's been a while since the last reported incident. 

Bama, I get that your view is sincere and deeply felt. I just wonder if you have ever felt there might be any merit in legitimately trying to understand how others with a different view might see the situation, rather than simply dismissing their concerns as nonsensical and agenda-driven. 

MY greater concern is Kidd's continued pattern of questionable ethics situations.  To me, that's worse, because that's has been done multiple times in multiple situations at multiple places from legal judgment to different situations in his career from the way he left the Mavs the first time as a player, to the way that he left the second time to Brooklyn to the Bucks to the DUI to whatever....that's a character pattern and THAT, more than a domestic violence situation from pretty much 2 decades ago, with no incidents since, is a bigger red flag to me.

Yes, I think that is the huge concern. The bad things Kidd has done were not minor. And, in some form or another, questionable behavior has continued to occur. This makes people not trust that he is really reformed, and I don't know that he has even tried to convince them otherwise. It seems reasonable to me that the fans who have serious concerns about his character, based on evidence, should listen to why the team is not worried about it, and that it is fair that the team should offer that explanation. 

To translate, if he had consistently had domestic violence allegations since 2003, that's would be a no...yet, he's consistently had these problems with integrity and stuff.

[TXBamanut]

With respect to your post, but in light of your insinuation that, I guess, I don't know what's going on, I'm going to say this.  I am pretty sure I've dealt professionally with more domestic abuse cases than you have unless you work for the government in that area.

Regardless, I am well aware of what might hapoen (far more aware than I ever wanted to be in working with people) and I have seen many marriages where people who have admitted to spousal abuse -- both men and women btw -- have restored their marriages or have successfully initated new relationships.  It's not easy, but far from unheard of like you seem to suggest.

It is extremely manipulative to just up the ante by just doing the "what if they did this" or "what if they did that" to accentuate a point but that's disinginuous and manipulative in my opinion, because we are talking about a specific situation and not those things.  You arent like that, so I'm really surprised you went there.

I think that sometimes, those who only see one side of it -  the damage and arrest/conviction, but don't see the successful healing and restoration -- are far too dismissive of people and their worth as human beings.  I don't think people are so easily disposable.

I'm also not going into a protracted discussion of this.  I said what I said, and I stand by it.