• E-mail

About a month from now, the regular season will be history and the playoffs will begin.

As tasty an appetizer as the regular season has been with all the trades and rearranging of talent, the playoffs will be an even more delectable main course.

Trying to predict how the Western Conference playoff bracket is going to look is impossible. But here's a piece of advice even D-Moore wouldn't argue with: it will look nothing like it does today.

First, the Mavericks will not finish seventh in the West, which is where they were going into Wednesday's game against Charlotte. They will go higher simply because of a soft schedule to close the season.

But don't expect them to get into the top four, either. There are three teams above them in their own division. Passing one or maybe even two is possible, but not all three. And Phoenix and Los Angeles still have superior records, too.

That said, a home-court advantage in the first round still is a possibility. All the Mavericks have to do is finish fifth in the West and have Utah be the No. 4 seed by virtue of winning the Northworst Division. The Mavericks would have the home court in that series, which would be invaluable given Utah's dominance on its floor.

Eddie Sefko

Q: I can't seem to get excited about the Jason Kidd trade. Now we don't have a backup center and we still need a better shooting guard than we have. I think the trade was made out of desperation. I would have targeted Andre Miller and Mike Miller instead.

Denise K.

SEFKO: I'm sure the Mavericks like the fact that you still refer to them as "we." That means you haven't given up hope.

But the bottom line is that the Millers, Andre from Philly and Mike from Memphis, would have cost the Mavericks a high, high price, too. Probably the same as they spent on the Kidd deal.

While a lot of people are coming over to my side (see this newsletter of two weeks ago) and wondering about the wisdom of this trade, there's no way to judge it until the playoff run is over. And even then, it probably will take another year to give this team a chance to win the whole thing. If it hasn't happened by then, we can all carve up the owner, the coach, the GM and the team.

Q: Why are Avery Johnson and Mark Cuban so averse to criticism? I don't ever remember either of them saying "we were just flat-out wrong." And I can't help but have the feeling that Avery Johnson needs to be gone. He's getting tuned out before our eyes, and the Mavericks need an over-the-hump coach like Larry Brown.

Aneesh D.

SEFKO: I like your question just because of the Larry Brown reference. He has gotten a lot of teams over the hump in his time. But there are few people in the league who like to control things like he does.

The jury is out on whether the Mavericks are still embracing Johnson. We won't know that for sure until the playoffs. And in that regard, trading for Jason Kidd was genius. He will have Johnson's explicit instructions in his heart the rest of this season.

As for why you have never heard either the coach or the owner fess up to an error, that's because it hasn't happened yet. Hey, if you can't admit letting Steve Nash go for nothing was a bad basketball decision, then perhaps there's no hope.

Q: Speaking of Nash, why didn't Cuban build the team around the 2004 core? Isn't anyone aware that it takes two or three years together to build a champion like the Spurs or Bulls?

SEFKO: I couldn't agree more, but I wasn't consulted about the deal. In Cuban's defense, there's a fine line between developing chemistry and getting stale. The Finley departure remains his biggest positive since taking over the team. Cuban saved a ton of money, and, though Finley won a ring, he's clearly near the end of his career.

But it sure would have been fun to see what the Nash-Nowitzki pairing could have done during Nash's two best seasons, which came as soon as he joined the Suns.

Q: It seems like other teams are better equipped this year to defend Avery Johnson's offensive strategies. Do you think his system has become stale and other teams are ready for it? It seemed like that in losses to LA and San Antonio.

Bob A., Dallas

SEFKO: A good system is worth its weight in championship bling. But any system is only as good as the players running it.

Think San Antonio would have four rings in the last nine years if Ben Wallace was the power forward instead of Tim Duncan? Unlikely.

There's nothing wrong with the Mavericks' system, which still is built around Dirk Nowitzki's skills. If there's a problem, it's that there are still two clear holes in the starting lineup – particularly the one in the middle.

Without a dynamic scorer off the bench, a team needs strong starters – or at least starters capable of doing one thing well (think Bruce Bowen).

The Mavericks still have holes in their roster, which is a bigger concern than the system.

Q: Brandon Bass is becoming incredibly important to this team. What do the Mavericks have to do to keep him here for the long term?

Bill W., Dallas

SEFKO: They have him for this season and next under the current contract. My guess is that sometime this summer, his agent will open talks on an extension, but Bass will be better served by waiting until after the second season, when he'll have more value and more financial options.

But the Mavericks won't let him get away. He's a power forward that can play, and, remember, he's eight years younger than Nowitzki.

Q: Where are Eddie Sefko and David Moore this week? I miss their stories?

A.E.

SEFKO: Wow, a groupie.

Actually, after a couple days off, I got the same flu that was making the rounds on the Mavericks. As for D-Moore, he was just doing his usual two days of work per week.

Q: To the mixologists of basketball libations, has the arrival of Jason Kidd eliminated any fear that the Mavericks have of small ball? With Kidd in the mix, Erick Dampier has been better and seems like he could be more usable against fast-paced teams like the Warriors and Suns.

James B.

SEFKO: I've already used this line somewhere before, but this is exactly why J-Kidd is not a point guard. He's a miracle worker.

Anybody who can make Dampier relevant on the offensive end deserves our undying respect.

That said, there's something about confronting demons before you can declare yourself completely healed. Let's wait and see what late regular-season meetings against the Warriors and Suns bring. And, of course, the ultimate exorcism would come in winning a playoff series against one of them.

Q: Is it just me or is it now apparent that Josh Howard is a good player who will never be a great one? At the start of the season, everybody was saying he was as good as Dirk. That's laughable now. Every team has a player like Howard. If the Mavericks don't win it all, do you think he could be the next Mav with real trade value?

Jason

SEFKO: Oh, he'll have trade value. Of that there's no doubt. There are lot of teams who view Howard as a consistent 18-and-8 player for the coming five to six seasons. Those aren't easy to come by, even if you're not a big Howard fan.

He was hurt by the acquisition of Kidd, who is starting to make a conscious effort to get Howard involved in the offense again.

In the meantime, I think it would be premature to write off Howard. He's too talented to shop around.

However, if the playoffs don't go well this season and the Mavericks feel they can swing a deal with Howard and perhaps Erick Dampier (whose contract is getting less cumbersome by the day in regard to trade value) for a high draft pick and a functional young player, they would have to look at it.

That was the strategy they took in getting Devin Harris and Jerry Stackhouse for Antawn Jamison, and look how that worked out.

It was pretty good, considering it eventually landed them Jason Kidd.