2026 Random Cowboys Stuff Thread...

Texas Ace said:
And? Big deal. Don Nelson was like a Bill Parcells who never won shit -- a guy that front offices could only tolerate for so long because he ruled with an iron fist, only he didn't have the skins on the wall to deserve that sort of liberty.

Don Nelson coached 5 NBA teams in his career and do you know how many championships he won?

Zero.

Do you know how many times he took a team to the NBA Finals?

Zero.

Don Nelson was to the Mavs what Tony Dungy was to the Bucs -- he took that team as far as he could and someone else needed to take over in order for the franchise to ultimately get where it wanted to go.

And that Mavs team he built? They were fun to watch but they were never going to win anything playing like they were because they were basically playing the equivalent of Mike D'Antoni ball, and that sort of basketball never wins shit.

That's why they even traded Nash -- they had to surround Dirk with tougher, more defensive-minded players to better compliment his game. And that's ultimately what they did and that's why they eventually won a championship.


Yeah, he broke that team up a bit early but this was a calculated risk that didn't work out. They wanted to make a run for Dwight Howard while Dirk still had championship basketball left in him and I don't blame them. That team was great to watch in 2011 and it's one of my favorite sports championships ever.....but they were not going to run it back the next year.

They were a one championship team and that was it.

Many around the NBA considered them the heavy favorites to land Howard but it ultimately didn't work out.

I can live with risks like that, especially since the core they had was not going to be able to make another run.


This is one critique I do agree with. He should have left him there but Cuban was trying to get into the analytics thing too which is why he hired that Voulgaris guy.

This was ultimately a mistake.



Mark Cuban's Mavs were one of the best run organizations in the NBA for the majority of his tenure as majority owner (I'm looking at you @Cotton ).

They were run well financially and they were a top 4 destination in all of basketball for a decade.

They were a perennial playoff team who went to 2 NBA Finals in 5 years.

For whatever hands on approach that Cuban might have had, do you recall the Mavs having puppet coaches under him like Dave Campo, Chain Gailey, or Jason Garrett?

Did he refuse to hire GMs and allow them to run and build the team like Jerry does? No.

So while he may not have been perfect, it is completely disingenuous to say that the Mavs were poorly run or compare him to Jerry in any way.

So I'll say it again -- if it's between him or the Jones' running the Cowboys? I'm taking Cuban 10 times out of 10.
Click to expand...



That 2011 team really caught lightning in a bottle. It was a very unique roster that had zero chance of winning another championship. That stars aligned for that season.
 
I have to run right now and will get to many of those arguments. But first, I never said he was worse than Jerry. That wasn't what I said.

I do think it's pretty obvious that the NBA is a totally different animal from the NFL. If you have one superstar in that sport it's a lot easier to be a good team for many years than in football, with franchise QB as a possible exception. So kind of apples to oranges.
 
Texas Ace said:
For whatever hands on approach that Cuban might have had, do you recall the Mavs having puppet coaches under him like Dave Campo, Chain Gailey, or Jason Garrett?

Did he refuse to hire GMs and allow them to run and build the team like Jerry does? No.

So while he may not have been perfect, it is completely disingenuous to say that the Mavs were poorly run or compare him to Jerry in any way.

So I'll say it again -- if it's between him or the Jones' running the Cowboys? I'm taking Cuban 10 times out of 10.
Click to expand...


This is a really low bar (there are probably millions of people I'd take running the Cowboys over Jerry) and also a straw man argument.

Even if they were to sell a minority piece of the team to Cuban, it won't be a case where Cuban would have any say at all let alone running the team. That's not part of the discussion.

Do I think Cuban would run the cowboys better than Jerry? Yes. Do I think a million other people would run it better? Also yes. Do I think there's any chance Cuban would be able to buy into the team enough to run it? Nope, so the whole discussion is moot.

Personally I don't think he ran the Mavericks as well as you say but that's not even part of this so it doesn't matter. I don't think there's much chance Cuban buys a piece of the team but I think there's virtually no chance he'd run it.
 
Chocolate Lab said:
I have to run right now and will get to many of those arguments. But first, I never said he was worse than Jerry. That wasn't what I said.

I do think it's pretty obvious that the NBA is a totally different animal from the NFL. If you have one superstar in that sport it's a lot easier to be a good team for many years than in football, with franchise QB as a possible exception. So kind of apples to oranges.
Click to expand...


The Mavericks got very very lucky Nowitski lasted to pick 9. He should have gone 1. If that doesn't happen Cuban likely doesn't have a championship.
 
Okay, to my boy Texas Ace:

1. Nelson was a little like Parcells in that be usually inherited terrible teams that had to be completely rebuilt. You may not remember, but Mavs were an absolute joke until Nellie got there. They'd just made a terrible mistake trading Kidd for Finley, and they would have lost him too, but Nelson convinced him to sign at the eleventh hour. And then he also drafted Dirk (when so many experts trashed the pick).and traded for Nash. We'll never know if he could have won with them because Cuban thought he knew everything and ran him off. Was the answer Avery Johnson?

2. Cuban actually did think he knew better than the professionals,. I remember him gloating about using his spreadsheets to outsmart the league and get the great Howard Eisley.

3. Nash went in to win two MVPs after they let him go to Phoenix. Surely you aren't arguing that was a good move?

4. Cuban gets credit now for not getting Dwight Howard?

That's enough, but sorry, it's always been a pet peeve of mine that Cuban buys the team just as Nelson turns it around and somehow got all the credit. And it was mostlyl because he was young and hip at the time and the team had been so bad so long. Always thought he basically was Jerry, only he didn't take over one of the most successful and popular teams in the sport (just the opposite) and didn't have to fire a legendary beloved coach.
 
Chocolate Lab said:
Okay, to my boy Texas Ace:

1. Nelson was a little like Parcells in that be usually inherited terrible teams that had to be completely rebuilt. You may not remember, but Mavs were an absolute joke until Nellie got there. They'd just made a terrible mistake trading Kidd for Finley, and they would have lost him too, but Nelson convinced him to sign at the eleventh hour. And then he also drafted Dirk (when so many experts trashed the pick).and traded for Nash. We'll never know if he could have won with them because Cuban thought he knew everything and ran him off. Was the answer Avery Johnson?

2. Cuban actually did think he knew better than the professionals,. I remember him gloating about using his spreadsheets to outsmart the league and get the great Howard Eisley.

3. Nash went in to win two MVPs after they let him go to Phoenix. Surely you aren't arguing that was a good move?

4. Cuban gets credit now for not getting Dwight Howard?

That's enough, but sorry, it's always been a pet peeve of mine that Cuban buys the team just as Nelson turns it around and somehow got all the credit. And it was mostlyl because he was young and hip at the time and the team had been so bad so long. Always thought he basically was Jerry, only he didn't take over one of the most successful and popular teams in the sport (just the opposite) and didn't have to fire a legendary beloved coach.
Click to expand...
Good post. Cuban ruined the Mavs. And, no amount of 3000 words soliloquys will change that, or change my mind. I hate that man. If you combine what he did to the Mavs and Nellie and his politics, I hate him as much as Jerry, to be honest. I was ecstatic when he lost majority ownership. The Luka thing was just the icing on top of a shit-filled sundae. I don't want him anywhere near the Cowboys organization.
 
Cotton said:
Good post. Cuban ruined the Mavs. And, no amount of 3000 words soliloquys will change that, or change my mind. I hate that man. If you combine what he did to the Mavs and Nellie and his politics, I hate him as much as Jerry, to be honest. I was ecstatic when he lost majority ownership. The Luka thing was just the icing on top of a shit-filled sundae. I don't want him anywhere near the Cowboys organization.
Click to expand...
I mean, he doesn't even have the money to buy much of the Cowboys. That's another thing, everyone talks about what a financial genius he is, but if you look at his net worth over the years, it hasn't gone up nearly as much as others he's associated with ever since he got so lucky that Yahoo were morons and made him a billionaire.

And not that it matters, but as much as I dislike his politics, that has absolutely nothing to do with my dislike of him. I couldn't stand him back then when I knew or cared nothing about his political views.
 
Chocolate Lab said:
I mean, he doesn't even have the money to buy much of the Cowboys. That's another thing, everyone talks about what a financial genius he is, but if you look at his net worth over the years, it hasn't gone up nearly as much as others he's associated with ever since he got so lucky that Yahoo were morons and made him a billionaire.

And not that it matters, but as much as I dislike his politics, that has absolutely nothing to do with my dislike of him. I couldn't stand him back then when I knew or cared nothing about his political views.
Click to expand...

Why did he even sell the Mavs?
 
Smitty said:
Why did he even sell the Mavs?
Click to expand...
Don't know, the speculation was that it's difficult to compete with the mega-rich NBA owners. Of course he claimed it was because he thought the market was coming to a top, but I doubt that.

More on what I said before from the Google AI overlord:
=======================================


Yes, Mark Cuban’s net worth growth has been significantly more modest compared to tech founders who aggressively reinvested in hyper-growth tech giants, but his trajectory is unique due to how he protected his wealth. When Yahoo bought Broadcast.com in 1999, Cuban netted roughly $1.1 billion to $1.4 billion after taxes. Growing that to ~$6 billion over 25+ years represents an annualized growth rate of roughly 6% to 7%. [1, 2, 3]

For context, simply tracking the broader S&P 500 index over that same 25-year period would have yielded a comparable or slightly higher return.
 
Chocolate Lab said:
Don't know, the speculation was that it's difficult to compete with the mega-rich NBA owners. Of course he claimed it was because he thought the market was coming to a top, but I doubt that.

More on what I said before from the Google AI overlord:
=======================================


Yes, Mark Cuban’s net worth growth has been significantly more modest compared to tech founders who aggressively reinvested in hyper-growth tech giants, but his trajectory is unique due to how he protected his wealth. When Yahoo bought Broadcast.com in 1999, Cuban netted roughly $1.1 billion to $1.4 billion after taxes. Growing that to ~$6 billion over 25+ years represents an annualized growth rate of roughly 6% to 7%. [1, 2, 3]

For context, simply tracking the broader S&P 500 index over that same 25-year period would have yielded a comparable or slightly higher return.
Click to expand...
The S&P 500 doesn't have to pay taxes, just saying
 
Chocolate Lab said:
Don't know, the speculation was that it's difficult to compete with the mega-rich NBA owners. Of course he claimed it was because he thought the market was coming to a top, but I doubt that.

More on what I said before from the Google AI overlord:
=======================================


Yes, Mark Cuban’s net worth growth has been significantly more modest compared to tech founders who aggressively reinvested in hyper-growth tech giants, but his trajectory is unique due to how he protected his wealth. When Yahoo bought Broadcast.com in 1999, Cuban netted roughly $1.1 billion to $1.4 billion after taxes. Growing that to ~$6 billion over 25+ years represents an annualized growth rate of roughly 6% to 7%. [1, 2, 3]

For context, simply tracking the broader S&P 500 index over that same 25-year period would have yielded a comparable or slightly higher return.
Click to expand...
Damn, he could have done that himself yet he asked you. That is lazy debate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom