PDA

View Full Version : Kurt Thomas Heading to Mavericks.....(it says so in the NY press)


MavKikiNYC
10-13-2003, 09:24 AM
KURT CONSIDERS TAKING OPT-OUT

By MARC BERMAN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

October 13, 2003 -- Kurt Thomas has given his first indication he's considering opting out of his contract after the season to become a free agent.
According to a source close to Thomas, he will opt out of the final year of his contract if he has the same productive season as the past two.

When asked about becoming a free agent this summer, Thomas cracked a smile and told The Post, "I feel the contract will take care of itself. We'll find out. I'm just focusing on the season and not thinking about it."

Thomas' opt-out clause, reported in Saturday's Post, could be a factor in the Knicks' decision whether to trade him. Thomas makes a reasonable $5.4 million this season, but if he voids his $5.9M final year, it's uncertain how much he'd want, considering he was under All-Star center consideration last February.

With the Dikembe Mutombo signing that costs James Dolan $17 million ($8.5M in salary, $8.5M in luxury tax), the Knicks have 16 guaranteed contracts and need to shed one before the Oct. 29 season opener.

The Knicks, who fell to 0-4 in preseason after last night's 85-78 loss to San Antonio in Mutombo's Knick debut, still want to address the point-guard situation. Howard Eisley missed last night with a hamstring strain and has been awful (3 for 20).

If Thomas, 31, has another nice season, his decision to opt out would be a no-brainer for security. Dallas would be Thomas' first choice, sources say, and Don Nelson has admitted interest. Thomas' children still live in his native Dallas. Owner Mark Cuban would have to engineer a sign-and-trade with the Knicks or offer Thomas the $4.9M exception.

Thomas, who finished with a team-high 12 points last night, came into camp having lost 25 pounds, then declared he wasn't ready to give up his starting center's job to Mutombo.

kg_veteran
10-13-2003, 09:28 AM
So if they did a sign-and-trade, who would be involved? They can't link Van Exel to it any more...

MavsFanFinley
10-13-2003, 10:03 AM
So if they did a sign-and-trade, who would be involved?

Looking at players and salary, nothing makes sense for Dallas.

madape
10-13-2003, 10:09 AM
It would be nice if we could get that trade exception from Utah for Mills. That would make it much easier to deal for Thomas at the trade deadline when the Knick's world comes falling apart after they miss the playoffs again. Getting in on that rummage sale shouldn't be too tough, especially for a team owning a rather large trade exception.

kg_veteran
10-13-2003, 10:09 AM
I agree MFF. I wouldn't mind adding Thomas, but from a salary and roster standpoint, the only guy that makes any sense is Bradley, and I wouldn't do that.

kg_veteran
10-13-2003, 10:11 AM
Originally posted by: madape
It would be nice if we could get that trade exception from Utah for Mills. That would make it much easier to deal for Thomas at the trade deadline when the Knick's world comes falling apart after they miss the playoffs again. Getting in on that rummage sale shouldn't be too tough, especially for a team owning a rather large trade exception.

Just saw this post. Great point. Think about this:

Center - LaFrentz, Fortson, Bradley
PF - Nowitzki, Thomas, Fortson
SF - Jamison, Howard


That's amazing depth. Under that scenario you'd have Daniels, Najera, and the Icelander on the IR.

MavsFanFinley
10-13-2003, 10:22 AM
I can't get anything to match using Bradley or Najera. We'd have to add Welsch and Howard. No thanks.

Fortson for Thomas works straight up. Does that make sense for either side though?

Raef for Thomas/Harrington works as well. Having a hard time seeing the benefit there other than ridding of Raef's contract. Thomas could then opt out or not and Harrington would only have one more year left on his contract.

Not much to work with here.

Murphy3
10-13-2003, 10:23 AM
that's just amazing to think that it could be in the realm of possibility. The depth would simply be too much for virtually any team to handle. and hell, the mavs would still have an all-star at the PG and a borderline all-star at the 2 guard.

dirno2000
10-13-2003, 10:24 AM
I like Kurt Thomas, but unless you are willing or able to get rid of somebody where does he fit? You can have a 3-man rotation at center only because all 3 have major deficiencies. We have a perennial all-star at the four. If you put Fortson and Thomas behind him, you'll have two malcontents on the bench. There's also no way Najera becomes an IR guy at about 3 mil per year. I don't know what Cuban's threshold is, but he has to be pretty close to it. I can't se him adding another 5 mil per year player who won't even start unless he unloads someone in the process.

MavKikiNYC
10-13-2003, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by: kg_veteran
I agree MFF. I wouldn't mind adding Thomas, but from a salary and roster standpoint, the only guy that makes any sense is Bradley, and I wouldn't do that.

I think that Fortson would have restrictions as to how soon he could be traded, but isn't his salary almost an exact match of Thomas's?

After being so consistently negative about Thomas as a Mav, it feels odd for me to be considering how he fits this team, but compared to Fortson, Thomas looks pretty good--better scorer, better defender, comparable rebounder, more viable alternative at C.

From NYK's perspective, of course, Fortson makes less sense now than ever, although I used to see some people talking him up big as a NYK. He would be in line now with the wide-a$$ brothers Weatherspoon and Harrington as a superfluous, redundant 'tweener on the NYK's pine.

So it's essentially moot, but for the sake of discussion.

I'm guessing that Mantis is less attractive now too to Layden, given the acquisition of Mutombo and Vranes, and given that the NYKs actually have some height on the roster for the first time in 3 years.

kg_veteran
10-13-2003, 10:27 AM
You have to wonder whether Najera for Thomas might work for New York. Probably not, but this is Scott Layden we're talking about.

dirno, I think the Mavs would be able to find a way to use that much depth.

MavsFanFinley
10-13-2003, 10:29 AM
posted by Dooby

Memo to NY media:

Point 1: Thomas, as a free agent, will get what is commonly referred to as the mid-level exception. Because he is not a star in this league.

Point 2: "under All-Star center consideration last February" means nothing for a variety of reasons. That means he is not as good as Brad Miller. "under All-Star center consideration last February" is PR spin for "Not an all-star in the Eastern Conference." BTW, Eastern Conference Allstar is PR spin for "Not an all-star in the Western Conference".

Point 3: When you dream up fantasy trades for Kurt Thomas, please consider the first two points and remember, the only guy probably dumb enough to trade an allstar for Kurt Thomas is Scott Layden.

-------------------------
At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Murphy3
10-13-2003, 10:39 AM
is there a point to where you have too much depth down low?


KG, i was thinking about the najera scenario as well. Perhaps the knicks would like him for marketing purposes. Plus, on a bad team, he might be able to average 10 points and 5-6 rebounds a game

kg_veteran
10-13-2003, 10:48 AM
Originally posted by: Murphy3
is there a point to where you have too much depth down low?

Only if you have a dominant starter or two that are going to eat up all the minutes. Dallas doesn't really have that at center.

Consider this:

There are 96 minutes available at PF/C. Dirk will play about 38 mpg. By putting Dirk at SF for a few minutes, you can find about 60-65 minutes for the rest of the big men on the team. Why not split 60-65 minutes 4 ways between Bradley, LaFrentz, Thomas, and Fortson, depending on who's playing well and who matches up well? I think that foursome would give you a very nice combination of shotblocking, rebounding, post defense, and fouls to give. In a league without Shaq or Duncan stoppers, it's the next best thing.


KG, i was thinking about the najera scenario as well. Perhaps the knicks would like him for marketing purposes. Plus, on a bad team, he might be able to average 10 points and 5-6 rebounds a game

I doubt anything materializes before the offseason, when Thomas can come voluntarily, but it'll be interesting to watch.

LRB
10-13-2003, 10:52 AM
Originally posted by: MavsFanFinley
posted by Dooby

Memo to NY media:

Point 1: Thomas, as a free agent, will get what is commonly referred to as the mid-level exception. Because he is not a star in this league.

Point 2: "under All-Star center consideration last February" means nothing for a variety of reasons. That means he is not as good as Brad Miller. "under All-Star center consideration last February" is PR spin for "Not an all-star in the Eastern Conference." BTW, Eastern Conference Allstar is PR spin for "Not an all-star in the Western Conference".

Point 3: When you dream up fantasy trades for Kurt Thomas, please consider the first two points and remember, the only guy probably dumb enough to trade an allstar for Kurt Thomas is Scott Layden.

-------------------------
At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Weren't Bradley and Raef also in allstar consideration last year? They didn't make the allstar team as well despite being on the ballot like KT.

When will the trade rumors with NY and Thomas stop?

Murphy3
10-13-2003, 10:59 AM
Weren't Bradley and Raef also in allstar consideration last year?

No.

kg_veteran
10-13-2003, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by: Murphy3

Weren't Bradley and Raef also in allstar consideration last year?

No.

Not unless you consider being on the ballot All-Star consideration. Thomas at least was being considered as a reserve by the coaches. Shawn and Raef didn't come close to that.

dirno2000
10-13-2003, 11:14 AM
Originally posted by: kg_veteran

Originally posted by: Murphy3
is there a point to where you have too much depth down low?

Only if you have a dominant starter or two that are going to eat up all the minutes. Dallas doesn't really have that at center.

Consider this:

There are 96 minutes available at PF/C. Dirk will play about 38 mpg. By putting Dirk at SF for a few minutes, you can find about 60-65 minutes for the rest of the big men on the team. Why not split 60-65 minutes 4 ways between Bradley, LaFrentz, Thomas, and Fortson, depending on who's playing well and who matches up well? I think that foursome would give you a very nice combination of shotblocking, rebounding, post defense, and fouls to give. In a league without Shaq or Duncan stoppers, it's the next best thing.

This works in theory if all four are content to be used as spare parts. In reality I don't think Kurt Thomas or Raef Lafrentz are 15 minute per night players (thats Raja Bell like PT). I would be fine with using them as the primary options, but then Fortson pouts. I don't even see how Bradley gets on the floor in that scenario. Dept comes in handy in a long season, but guys have to accept their roles. I would love to have Thomas, I just think we need to ship somebody off before we bring him in. Preferably Bradley or Fortson.

MavsFanatik33
10-13-2003, 11:23 AM
I would LOVE to have Kurt Thomas come play for the Mavericks, but I'm afriad we'd have to just give up too much. I don't know if I'd want to risk his talent for a good player of ours.

LRB
10-13-2003, 11:28 AM
Originally posted by: kg_veteran

Originally posted by: Murphy3

Weren't Bradley and Raef also in allstar consideration last year?

No.

Not unless you consider being on the ballot All-Star consideration. Thomas at least was being considered as a reserve by the coaches. Shawn and Raef didn't come close to that.


I don't see evidence of the difference except that Thomas' name was mentioned in the press as being considered by the coaches where Shawn and Raef's weren't. I will gladly admit IMO Thomas was almost assuredly given higher consideration than Shawn or Raef.

kg_veteran
10-13-2003, 11:40 AM
Thomas was being considered by the coaches and was, based on his stats, worthy of consideration in the Eastern Conference.

Shawn and Raef weren't.

Murphy3
10-13-2003, 11:43 AM
I wouldn't think that Raef or Bradley were given any type of consideration by any of the coaches in the western conference. However, i'm pretty sure that Thomas was a definite bubble guy with regards to making the all-star team last season...




and dirno, i don't see thomas becoming a mav..but, if he's interested then i'm interested in the mavs taking a look and seeing what they can do. perhaps it would require some adjustments to the roster..but, if you can make a slight adjustment to add a quality player, i'm all for it.

kg_veteran
10-13-2003, 11:45 AM
dirno - As I mentioned above, I don't see Thomas coming here until the offseason if he comes at all. At that point, you'd probably see the Mavs looking to move a player to make sure Thomas had adequate time.

Still, I'd love to have that kind of depth "problem".

LRB
10-13-2003, 12:07 PM
Originally posted by: kg_veteran
Thomas was being considered by the coaches and was, based on his stats, worthy of consideration in the Eastern Conference.

Shawn and Raef weren't.


I don't really disagree with you here.

grndmstr_c
10-13-2003, 12:27 PM
I suppose it's a little tempting, but I want to hold off and see how the rest of our bigs do this year (not like we have a choice, though, huh?). Depth is nice but four deep is too much at a position and a quarter. I'd feel a lot better trying to trade for an elite big and if it worked maybe bring in Thomas to replace one of the bigs that we lost as a backup at the MLE. But if the guys we have give us what they're capable of this year I don't know that just adding him really helps much.

MFFL
10-13-2003, 02:53 PM
Lets see where we are after the year is up. If we can get Thomas for the Mills exception (assuming we trade with Utah) then we have to do it. But I doubt that the Knicks are going to just GIVE Thomas away - they ARE trying to contend in the East.

Remember that you can't rebuild in New York - you have to try and contend every year.

jayC
10-13-2003, 03:28 PM
If the mavs are going to start Danny Fortson their is no way in hell they would trade for kurt thomas. Their is only one center that the mavs can't stop and no one can stop him and thats shaq. So why bother.

Fortson can still grab 10 boards a game, note he had 12 against new orleans. Its not a bad trio if you have two shot blocking centers, one guy that can body up post players and rebound.

Murphy3
10-13-2003, 03:39 PM
can fortson body up post players?

Skallinn
10-13-2003, 06:14 PM
Kurt Thomas stays....the only Mavs players I would accept would be Nash, Dirk, Finley or Jón Arnór Stefánnson.

Skallinn
Knicks fan for life.

LRB
10-13-2003, 06:53 PM
Originally posted by: Skallinn
Kurt Thomas stays....the only Mavs players I would accept would be Nash, Dirk, Finley or Jón Arnór Stefánnson.

Skallinn
Knicks fan for life.


Ok Thomas for Stefánnson. i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif

one long blue sock
10-13-2003, 07:01 PM
Originally posted by: jayC
If the mavs are going to start Danny Fortson their is no way in hell they would trade for kurt thomas. Their is only one center that the mavs can't stop and no one can stop him and thats shaq. So why bother.

Fortson can still grab 10 boards a game, note he had 12 against new orleans. Its not a bad trio if you have two shot blocking centers, one guy that can body up post players and rebound.

Well I'm sure Kurt Thomas would be given the full time back up 4 role, then Fortson would be starting center, backed up by Raef, and then that would leave Bradley pretty expendable, seeing as Raef and Fortson will be spending more time at the 5 then 4, leaving less minutes for Bradley.

EricaLubarsky
10-13-2003, 07:02 PM
when the snowmen agree, it's as good as done.

Simon2
10-13-2003, 09:48 PM
He thinks he's going to Dallas but I think Dallas still has a pungent taste in its mouth from what he did the last time he was here.

Kurt Thomas averages 14 pts 8 rbs in 31 mins. His stats are ok so I would like to have him here as the backup for the ball boy. Sorry, I really don't like Thomas.