Nail in the Coffin: Why the Dallas Mavericks Are Crumbling

A couple days ago, I wrote an article about my opinion about the Jason Kidd trade and the effects on the Dallas Mavericks. Basically, I just summarized on my thoughts on how trading away a rising talent and draft picks was a huge mistake, and the Mavericks paid for it.

While I still had a tiny ray of hope in my heart that the Mavericks could get the eighth seed in the playoffs, the game against Denver just proved and finally finalized it. The nail is in the coffin and the Mavericks season is basically over.

Call me a pessimist if you want, but the facts are in front of you.

This team cannot beat a winning team. How can a team that had a 15-point lead in one half come in and lose by 13 in the second half?

This was not the Mavericks team of last year or the year before. It doesn't make any sense that a team considered a West super power can drop down to a team that barely can stay in the playoffs.

Yes, this year, the Western Conference is probably the strongest thing we have ever seen but it still doesn't counter the fact that a team with a winning record is unbeatable to the Mavericks.

People question constantly who the blame of the Mavericks' crumble should be placed on. Many argue it's Avery Johnson or Mark Cuban or the players in general, but the answer really is very simple.

I have narrowed it down to three factors that easily can explain the collapse of this once-dominant basketball power.

1. Johnson - Kidd Correlation Factor

Now, for the people who blame Avery for all the failures occurring on the Mavericks, you have to realize that you have to put equal blame on Kidd, as well.

When the Mavericks traded for Kidd, they thought that, if they had a "field general" on the court, they would flow better offensively. The problem is that the "field general" in question uses a completely different mind set than Avery's job that needs to be done. Take this into consideration:

When Kidd was in New Jersey, Lawrence Frank's job was easier in the sense that he didn't need to run the offense as much because he basically had a "general" on the court most of the time.

You could call Frank a more "laid back" coach in that sense that he let Kidd run half the offense on his own with the Nets, while he focused on defense.

But the fact remains. Frank is the head coach and whatever he said, Kidd had to follow to some degree. Plays are nearly always chosen by the coach. The other fact is that Kidd's style of play is something that has to be seen on the court to understand.

While Kidd runs through dozens of plays through his head, his greatest skill is not play-making, rather, opportunity chances with his court vision. What I mean by that is, Kidd doesn't create plays neccessairly, but he passes or lobs the ball to whoever is open or has a higher percentage to score.

Few coaches run a play that involves an ally-oop to another player at the rim ready to dunk the ball. They are just opportunities that arise that give both players the chance to score a quick basket.

That is where Kidd's skills and triple-doubles come from. When there is an oppurtunity, he takes it without question, and that's how he can be such a great rebounding point guard and assister. Now, how that ties with the Mavericks is simple.

For the past couple years, the Mavericks were known as an offensively-minded team. When Don Nelson designed the team along with Mark Cuban, we were looking at one of the higher scoring teams in the NBA at the time.

Right after Avery Johnson came in, he sort of pulled what Larry Brown/Flip Saunders did for Detroit. He kept the offense going while trying to implement new defensive standards on that team. There was a reverse situation in Detroit.

Avery was always a more defensive-minded coach and tried teaching his team to play defense. He is known as the "Little General," just because he runs plays fiercely and follows his own play book set for set.

This was a core reason why the Mavericks got to the NBA Finals the year he took over. Even though disappointed in the Finals, Avery and the team had a core who worked well together and ran sets well. Now, two years later and bring in Jason Kidd, two things were destroyed in this process.

First, you basically destroyed half of what Avery's style of coaching stands for. Like I said earlier, Kidd is a field general, but the fact is that everyone expects him to run every play in his mind, when, in fact, he is more of an opportunist then an actual play-maker.

When he played for the Nets, how many times did you see him ally-oop it to Vince Carter? More than a dozen times.

But do you think that Frank really told them to throw an ally-oop up and see if Carter gets it? Of course not. Kidd takes opportunities and makes them into scoring chances.

He does not run sets over and over again like what Harris was told to do over and over again by Avery. People who say that Avery is apprehending Kidd's full ability to run an offense are completely misled because Kidd's greatest skill is not play-making. Coaches make plays while point guards find opportunties to execute that play.

Second, you destroyed the core of the team. The fact is simple that a team that was put together by Don Nelson and developed by Avery has completely changed itself. My biggest concern was giving up Harris and Diop to try to recompensate for giving up Nash.

While Harris being at the point wasn't the best choice, it certainly worked with both Johnson and Nelson's system. Harris was a legitimate scorer for the Mavericks, who could atleast put on 10-15 points a game, while providing perimeter and defensive stops on point guards.

The key factor really was that Harris basically did everything Avery told him to do. Run this set or run that play or whatever. Harris may not have had a lot of freedom, but it worked.

The Mavericks were a team that came off of Johnson's play calling and the team's to create and manage opportunities when they arose. Now, it just seems like Kidd or Dirk have to be there and run every play in order to allow the entire team to actually execute the play which brings me to the second factor. 

2. The Leader Factor

This may be Avery's team to coach and control, but there isn't a leader amongst the players who can follow. From day one, everybody said this is Dirk's team, but is it really?

Most Mavericks fans know that Dirk probably goes through more criticism than many players will hear in a lifetime, but the fact is simple—he is not a vocal leader. If you are in the Dallas area and listen to ESPN radio and the Michael Irvin show, you may have heard about the leader role they discussed a couple of days ago.

Dirk was injured and did a little tiny jest at a playful commentary on what the team was doing on the court against the Clippers. He may have been just having some fun and joking around, but the setting he did it in was unprofessional.

As the supposed leader of the team, he should have kept a more serious tone and discussed how close they are from being knocked off from playoff contention. Now, if the Mavericks had a 10-game win streak or were one of the top seeds again, I see no problem with that situation.

Don't get me wrong, I love Dirk, and, if he just wanted to have some fun, then it's fine by me. But don't try to give off or ignore the team is falling apart and trying its hardest to stay in the playoff race. You would be pulling an Isiah Thomas right there.

      But anyways, the factor of the matter is simple. Dirk may be a leader in the mind of the actual Mavericks team but there is a part in which he needs to show and present it to the media and to the fans that HE IS the undisputed leader.

3. The Finisher Factor

In my opinion, 90 percent of good teams with great offenses have three things in common—a good point guard, a good big man, and a great finisher.

The problem is that the Mavericks do not have a finisher. Convince yourself all you want, but no one on that team, even Dirk, can finish consistently. All the games, except Denver, were games that could of been won if one player stood up in the fourth quarter and consistently scored.

The problem is that Dirk is looked at to be the answer, but, the truth is, he isn't consistent. If Dirk scores constantly in the first three quarters of the match, he typically runs out of gas by the fourth quareter. Once Dirk stops shooting well, it feels like the entire team shuts down after his shooting night.

The great thing we had in Harris was that he kept the energy running high even late in the game. Just having athletic ability to constantly try to get to the rim was enough to motivate the Mavericks.

Kidd, unfortunately, is not a scoring threat and cannot finish the game when the time calls for it. Each great team has a finisher, and we don't. We don't have a Bryant, Iverson, or Ginobli.

We don't have guys who can just score the key baskets to keep the game close or put them over the summit. Howard, Terry and Stackhouse are inconsistent when it comes to finishing games. The Mavericks lost Harris' energy, and they cannot copy it into the fourth like they used to.

It is really quite simple. We had a team that had minor problems, and we used drastic measures to try to fix it and have gotten worse than before. But the Mavericks are not the only one to blame, obviously.

One even can look at the fans being a problem, as well. I'll admit, I criticized the Mavericks for collapsing in the Finals and the first round back-to-back years.

But I realized that patience and having the ability to grow on our mistakes was the key to fixing a problem and not taking drastic measures because fans called for Johnson, Cuban, or Nowitzki's head after those collapses.

I'd rather be back in those situations in which we actually can beat winning teams and be considered a Western Conference power instead of losing to winning teams and barely holding on to the playoffs.

Wasn't there an old saying once?

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."