Quote:
|
Originally Posted by G-Man
Don't miss this quote from the Vessey Article.
""People are blinded by his triple doubles," said a respected member of the Nets franchise. "They fail to see he has become a high-priced role player." In other words, the Nets should take what they can get while they can get it, as long as they don't have to take back compost contracts. Then they should fumigate their arena."
Harris will never pass like Jason Kidd. He will never be Jason Kidd. He will never pass like, or be Steve Nash. But he could easily be Tony Parker. Now that his jump shot is falling, he is Tony Parker. And how many rings does Jason Kidd have? And how many does Tony Parker have?
I really don't see enough of Kidd on TV to know how good he still is. I fear that no matter how good he is, if the Mavs trade 3 or 4 rotation players, the upheaval alone will make the team worse. I could see giving up Terry or Stackhouse, but both cost you 30 points a lot of nights, and Kidd's only gonna replace 12 or 14 of those. Thats gonna put a lot of offensive pressure on Josh. And if you trade Diop, that means Damp will have to play every minute when we need a big. He will have to stay healty and consistant. All that is toomuch to gamble, in my opinon.
|
I'm beginning to hate the "number of rings" argument. Do we really think that if we switch Tony Parker and Kidd on those two teams, that the number of rings wouldn't reverse? Tony Parker is a good but not great point guard. Kidd is (or at least was in his prime) a great point guard. I know you didn't explicitly say that Tony is better or even imply that. But I still think bringing up the Tony Parker has more rings argument gets a little deceiving. Tony Parker won those rings because he was with Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, and Greg Popovic. So if Tony=Devin, the question now becomes are Dirk, Josh, and Avery good enough to win with a Devin Harris?