clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Darrell Arthur's a backup big the Mavericks should be trying to trade for

New, comments

There's a good chance Denver says no, but Arthur fits enough of Dallas' needs that they should inquire anyway.

Scott Halleran/Getty Images

This morning, our site's email chain stumbled onto the topic of Darrell Arthur, currently a Nuggets bench player. Arthur, a 27-year-old from Dallas, is averaging 20 minutes for Denver while spacing the floor with a surprisingly reliable catch-and-shoot jumper that stretches out to the three-point line, all on a one-year deal worth about $3 million.

Like a vast majority of trades, chances are this won't happen. But for the reasons we discuss below, man should Dallas be take some time out of their day to inquire if there's any chance at all this could work. Here were our thoughts about him, which were lightly edited for clarity and cohesiveness.

Josh Bowe: If I were the Mavs, I'd be calling the Nuggets everyday about Darrell Arthur. You can probably get him without giving up Justin Anderson, too.

Andrew Kreighbaum: Yeah, I would love that pickup. He'd be a great backup to Dirk. Not the same floor spacer but he can stretch a defense out.

Josh: Denver has so many young bigs, they could wanna trade him. But they probably want picks more than players and savings since it's not like Arthur is hurting their cap space.

Doyle Rader: The real question is: would Carlisle give him minutes?

Tim Cato: Arthur's shooting is what Charlie V was supposed to be. He won't take the same type of jumpers but he does plenty more to make up for it.

Josh: Arthur would be the first big off the bench and could easily play next to Zaza or Dirk. He would also be a really nice piece to have to give Dirk some days off. He's shooting like 46 percent from the midrange and like 42 percent on threes (although he only takes one or two a game on average). He would fit in insanely well, probably close some games as well. He'd be my biggest trade target because he gives you most of what Taj Gibson does but without the price tag in both contract and assets.

Bailey Rogers: You guys are making me sad because this isn't going to happen

Kirk Henderson: Guys, Carlisle might not play Arthur. There's a reason he was nearly free in terms of his contract. He got caught as a rookie smoking weed at the rookie retreat. In high school, he was involved in not one, but two academic scandals requiring Oak Cliff to forfeit state titles. He had his grades fixed because he couldn't pass.

Josh: Yeah, I forgot about that. I was at Kansas when he was there as a freshman and we wondered any day if he would get suspended because of grades.

Jonathan Tjarks: Rick needs to get over himself if that's the case. Arthur was huge when the Grizzlies upset the Spurs in 2011. Basketball doesn't have to be all that complicated, especially for a big men who can play, which he can.

Rami Michail: Arthur is a better version of Powell. Powell might be bigger and more athletic? But not like he finishes much inside anyways. I'd be worried Mavs call for Arthur and hangup with Hickson.

Andrew: A lot of guys do stupid stuff in high school/college. Arthur's been a productive vet in this league for a little while now.

Tjarks: Hickson is an example of a guy with no basketball IQ whom I can see why Rick would bury. He should be able to make it work with Arthur.

Andrew: He's 27 and established in the league. Seems like he fits the profile of a veteran Rick would play decent minutes.

Bailey: To be fair, Rick has played JaVale plenty of minutes this season. I can't imagine Arthur would be more of an issue for him.

Josh: I don't want to get carried away because Arthur is young (27), on a really cheap deal that will look like peanuts next year and is productive. I get Denver has young bigs but I dunno how much having Arthur around would block their development since his deal is up next year anyway. (He has a player option he'll almost assuredly decline.) Moving Arthur isn't really a cap-saving move, either, since he's so cheap. They have enough guards so they don't need Felton. They have enough bigs so they don't need Powell. And the Mavericks are probably shaky on moving Anderson after the way Jae Crowder exploded in Boston.

Maybe Evans, Powell and some second rounders get it done?

Bailey: If the whole reason Denver might move Arthur is that they have a lot of young bigs, why would they want Evans and Powell?

Doyle: I don't think that the Mavs would actually trade for Arthur. He's not splashy enough. Mavs make big deals (Kidd, Rondo) at the deadline. This would be a counter to everything they've done traditionally.

Tim: I don't think five trades over a decade is enough of a sample size to say "the Mavs front office only does this."

* * *

It's an interesting discussion and certainly Denver fits the mold of a team that might be ready to sell. But like we talked about, there isn't a compelling reason to believe they just have to ship Arthur to Dallas. For some additional insight, we asked Adam Mares, who does an excellent job running SB Nation's Nuggets blog, Denver Stiffs.

And then, specifically when asked about what it might take if Denver were interested, Mares didn't see anything interesting in Dallas.

There's a very good chance it goes nowhere, but the Mavericks should at least call and ask. It seems like the least they can do, you know?