Kidd to Dallas?

[Nash13]

I'm 99.9% sure that SA won't go after JO simply b/c he's a power foward and Tim Duncan's too scared to play center. And as weak as the NBA centers are now, i still don't think JO can survive as a center in the west.

We should start a new thread on whether people think that Nash should be traded over NVE.

[madape]

JO is a waste of time. He's too much of a pansy ass to ever leave the comfortable confines of Indianapolis where Isiah coddles him and tickles him underneath his cute widdle chin.

"You're a cute baby. Yes you are!!!! Yes you ARE!"

[seelenjaeger]

Actually, after all - if there is two guys making the 2 point guard lineup work it´s Kidd and NASH.

So why should be try to push Nash away, while Net´s are forced to take what they can get anyways, when we can have it so much easier?

Package Nick, Eddie, and this years 1st rounder for Kidd and someone, and we have a nice rounded deal for both sides.

Maybe we can even find a way to let them unload Mutombo here by adding Esch, Tariq and AJ.

Nick, Eddie, Esch, Tariq and Aj for Kidd and Deke, and sides are happy (maybe you´ll have to throw in Raef on our side and a guy like Aaron Williams on theirs).

[Lvubun1]

Even if the Nets accepted NVE for Kidd, the Mavs would still have to trade Nash. Nash is a pure PG, he is not a SG. Kidd will play around 40 minutes a game, leaving under 10 minutes a game for Nash at his real posistion. I can't imagine Nash playing the NVE off the bench role, that's not his game. Nash is at his best when he has the ball in his hands, creating shots for others off the dribbble, running the fast break, etc. Yes he is a good shooter but coming off the bench as a two, he is nothing but a younger, quicker Steve Kerr. Kidd will have the ball so he can't use his playmaking skills, he would be nothing but a spot-up shooter. And Kidd would be a worst two then Nash would be, Kidd isn't a great shooter nor is good at creating his own shot, he needs to have the ball in his hands as does Nash, so having Nash run the point with Kidd at the 2 wouldn't work either(also defeats the purpose of having the best PG in the league). It just wouldn't make sense to keep him, why? Just to keep Dirk happy, just to keep him around? He is 3rd team all-NBA as a PG for 28 teams, he is a average 2 for the Mavs, he has a ton of value, he could score a top-flight big man, which would help the Mavs more then Nash playing 6 minutes at the point and 20-25 as a two.

[seelenjaeger]

Lvubun - the Mavs have not been playing in classical positions nor schemes for at least 2 years now. I don´t see any problem with having Nash and Kidd on the floor together which isn´t already here with Nash and Van Exel. other than Kidd beeing able to defend and rebound.

[Mavs_Rule2003]

This is going to be a big mistake from Cuban's and Nellie's part if they pull the trigger on this. Cos we are just not giving anytime to grow this team together. Even when Lakers went for their three peats they played together for 3 full years. And look at SA, they are basically the same team for last few years with addition of Manu and parker.

Bottom line is...Get the player you need.

WE dont need a PG. WE probarbly have the best PG combo in the league with NVE and NASH. KIDD will bring only 4 more rebounds state wise. NASH is 17.7 PPG where KIDD is 18. (Dead even considering that we have more scoring optins edge goes to NASH), Assists NASH is 7 and KIDD is 8 (slight edge to KIDD but we need to conside that we have NVE and NJ got none perticular to take the slack), REbounds NASh is 2.9 and KIDD is 6.4 (big advantage to kidd but, we are also in the free agent market for big body, so that extra 4 rebounds will be taken care of by itself if we really use our exception right way).

MOreover, Nash is the part of BIG THREE. HE is here for almost 6 yrs now. They have build up a chemistry. Trading him will jsut like taking the captain of a ship in the middle of the journey. All sailors willbe lost and they will be need another time period to regroup. Horrible thought.

Only negative i can think of NAsh is he breaks down at the end of the season. FOr that we cant really blame him. HE played all season games for last 2 season including every playoff game. that is nearly 200 games. I think NVE needs to step up more to share his minutes little bit.

Only thing is feasible is trade and sign of NVE and RAef for O'neil and some other big guy. or trade raef and pick 29 for pick 4.

That is it. otherwise..keep it like that.

[Just211]

1999-2000 Spurs

1 Derek Anderson
33 Antonio Daniels
5 Derrick Dial
21 Tim Duncan
32 Sean Elliott
35 Danny Ferry
2 Jaren Jackson
6 Avery Johnson
4 Steve Kerr
3 Ira Newble
30 Terry Porter
50 David Robinson
31 Malik Rose
36 Shawnelle Scott
52 Samaki Walker


only those five were on this years roster. Sure 4 of them are important guys, but they added a new starting PG,SG, and SF, so i think sometimes you have to make changes.
Although I'd like to see this team grow together and win, sometimes sacrifices (albeit hard decisions) have to be made.
But I'm not necessary saying trade for Kidd. I loved him the first time, but he hadn't smacked his wife in the face then. Also, I don't think I could stand seeing Jumana and TJ's mugs everygame. But if they got him , I'm sure I'd come around. He used to be my favorite player, and to see him in Maverick Blue, I'm sure I root for him again

[Mavs_Rule2003]

Change the whole MAvs team top to bottom. keep the big three. It aint gonna make any differnece. Like the same case for SA. You keep your best ALL-STAR caliver player. And dont trade ALMOST same caliver player unless he is going to help your team SIGNIFICANTLY. I dont see how KIDD would help us SIGNIFICANTLY. Just dont get it. Maybe KIDD is better player than NASH by a narrow margin. BUt how could he help us to win a championship? Bulk of the scoring would still go to DIRK and FIN. And this is not that, Nash didnt provide wehn DIrk was off. HE did. That is what may be KIDD gonna do.

So, tell some good 5 points where MAVS are SIGNIFICANTLY better with KIDD~~

Can anyone answer me this? 4 more rebound is not an answer. More Asist? i dont think NASH are lacking that. Giving Raef balls in the right place? Huh..well, raef will eventually get fouled out by half time if he tries to be aggressive.

I just dont see it....

[DNNF]

Originally posted by: seelenjaeger
Lvubun - the Mavs have not been playing in classical positions nor schemes for at least 2 years now. I don´t see any problem with having Nash and Kidd on the floor together which isn´t already here with Nash and Van Exel. other than Kidd beeing able to defend and rebound.

I have to disagreed with you on this. True, that the Mavs are playing small ball and out of position most of time when nash and NVE are in there However, NVE is capable of playing the two, while neither Nash or Kidd could. They are best at distrubuting the balls, and very seldomly create shots on their own. NVE on the other hand is a great at one on one basketball which he could play the two guard. This trade would mess up everything. The point is get what we need !! Not get another all star pg to replace another all star pg.

[DNNF]

Originally posted by: Mavs_Rule2003
Change the whole MAvs team top to bottom. keep the big three. It aint gonna make any differnece. Like the same case for SA. You keep your best ALL-STAR caliver player. And dont trade ALMOST same caliver player unless he is going to help your team SIGNIFICANTLY. I dont see how KIDD would help us SIGNIFICANTLY. Just dont get it. Maybe KIDD is better player than NASH by a narrow margin. BUt how could he help us to win a championship? Bulk of the scoring would still go to DIRK and FIN. And this is not that, Nash didnt provide wehn DIrk was off. HE did. That is what may be KIDD gonna do.

So, tell some good 5 points where MAVS are SIGNIFICANTLY better with KIDD~~

Can anyone answer me this? 4 more rebound is not an answer. More Asist? i dont think NASH are lacking that. Giving Raef balls in the right place? Huh..well, raef will eventually get fouled out by half time if he tries to be aggressive.

I just dont see it....

You hit it right in the ball !! [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img] You can only name one thing that Kidd is better than Nash, but then the he would offset Nash with his poor shooting. !! Don't yall remember his name used to be Ason Kidd ??

[mavsfanforever]

More than anyone else the mavs should ask DIRK about his opinion on playing with Kidd. If Dirk does not have problems it should be alright. Afterall Dirk is the franchise player.

[OutletPass]

After a day of thinking about this, I'm going to have to say no to the Nash for Kidd idea. it really doesn't address our real problems and the risk/reward is just not good enough for a slight improvement at PG. Kidd is a great one, but somewhat over rated in my book.

If we could get a significant big man...we can talk about it...

[superheadcat]

my takes on this:
if this is the only move mavs made this offseason, it is a dumb move;
if this trade hurt mavs' ability to do other trade, then it is a total failure;
if on top of other deals that fill mavs major holes (inside presence, perimeter defense), i don't mind adding kidd.

i still have problem sending nash away, though. remember the 4th meeting with kings during the regular season? i cannot remember similar heroism from kidd. and i am not sure who in mavs' uniform can duplicate that except nash.

[Mavs_Rule2003]

YUp talk about O'neil in sign and trade. Then we can look at it. May be then Nash going out of mavs (though i still would want to part with NVE rather than NASH) would make little sense to me.

you are tlaking about almost 20 points and 10 rebounds from O'neil. we can use that here in Dallas.

With KIDD?

HELL NO!

[superheadcat]

another thing: kidd put up his number in the east, and nash earned his by fighting shaq, kobe, duncan nite in and nite out.

and their stats are still similar.

[Simon2]

Definitely a no go on the Kidd-Nash deal. That would ruin chemistry big time. Also, the Mavs need someone who can hit the three to open up the lane. If Kidd was beyond the arc, teams would let him shoot and clog up the middle. Bad strategy. There's no way the Mavs should do this deal. Unless the Nets give up something really extraordinary.

[MavsFanFinley]

I haven't had time to check the papers, but this Nets fan posted this bit on the LMF board on the -possible- Kidd/Nash trade...

Deal according to press I have read in NYC is:

Nash and LaFrantz for Kidd and Collins

New Jersey have two good GM's in Thorn and Mr. S (can't remember his name) and they are not interested in NVE. Trust me. Attitude and lack of team play does not fit into New Jersey's scheme of how to improve team. Nets want Nash and are willing to take LaFrantz and his huge and long salary because they are getting Nash.

Un-named sources said that Cuban insisted that Collins be part of deal and Thorn still mulling it over I guess.

As a Jersey fan I hope this deal doesn't go through but if alternative is Spurs and no compensation then I suppose I'll take it.

[Rhylan]

Originally posted by: DNNF
I have to disagreed with you on this. True, that the Mavs are playing small ball and out of position most of time when nash and NVE are in there However, NVE is capable of playing the two, while neither Nash or Kidd could. They are best at distrubuting the balls, and very seldomly create shots on their own.

Do you watch the same Steve Nash I watch? He'd be at least as good (if not better) at the 2 spot than Nick. He's very good at creating his own shot, AND is without a doubt the best pure shooter on the team. Kidd and Nash in the backcourt is an offensive dream.

As for the post from LMF that MFF posted.. the Mavs don't want any part of Collins, much less are they 'insisting' he be involved.

The trade: My final thought is do it for NVE, don't do it for Nash.

Kidd doesn't add enough to the team (despite his defensive abilities) to offset what you lose when you lose Nash. And that's without taking the locker room issues into account.

Maybe the end result here is that both Indiana and New Jersey will become terrified of losing their starts without compensation to San Antonio.. and Dallas' willingness to deal (perceived or real, for either player) makes them a player in the S&T possibilities.

edit - i'm hukd on foniks

[Just211]

MavsFanFinley
I don't know if you're sources are right, but I was thinking the Mavs would have to get Collins as well. It'd be the only thing to make the deal absolutely positive. Especially if we got to dump Raef off. IMO we can deal Raef for just about anything. Not that i think he's that bad, but I'd hate to have to pay him that contract. He's not worth it.

[Simon2]

Ask yourself this question, if the Mavs had Kidd last year, would they have reached the WCF? Would they have beaten The Spurs? Don't think so. Spurs would have sagged on Kidd and clogged the lane.

[Drbio]

I'd do it for NVE...but probably not for Nash. You cannot discount the Dirk-Nash relationship, not to mention the points most of you raise.



I like Kidd, but NVE+ is the only way I pull that trigger.

[mavsfanforever]

I think this is just a marketing strategy from Kidd's agent. He wants to sell it to the top teams and if nothing happens atleast geta a max contract with the Nets. Mavs will not do it.

Let us see positives:
Kidd
a). Perimeter Defense.
b). A little more assists.
c). 3-4 more rebounds resulting in fast break.
d). Might be a good trade bait in getting that big man in future or atleast luring some good free agents to play with Kidd.
e). Fatigue - Nash is known to be fatigued by the end of season.
Nash:
a). Chemistry - The big three have a lot of chemistry and it shows in many games we win.
b). Pic'n'roll - Nash and Dirk pic'n'roll is probably the deadlest since Stockton to malone.
c). FG% - Nash's shooting percentages are much better than Kidd's(I am looking at last three years).
d). Understanding Nellie's system - It is a complicated system and it takes a few years to understand.
e). Clutch - While Kidd is equally good , Nash has been clutch in some key games against good teams like Spurs, Kings.

As you see there is no sense in pulling this trade because it does not make the team or take the team top next level. So , I say NO to the trade. However, if we could get rid of Tariq's , Esch's contracts it may be worth doing it as long as we are getting another player along with Kidd in return.

[Mandyahl]

i like kidd, i really do. he was my favorite mav when i was a wee girl. but trading nash for kidd is not addressing the problems of this team and really doesn't make us any better. so no.

[digit]

I only read the original post by jacktruth so far...here is my response: NO F*CKING WAY!! Nash and Dirk should stay together unless one of the guys looses an arm, a leg or choose to hit the golf course...

[mavs_afroman]

Originally posted by: Simon2
Ask yourself this question, if the Mavs had Kidd last year, would they have reached the WCF? Would they have beaten The Spurs? Don't think so. Spurs would have sagged on Kidd and clogged the lane.

This is exactly why I wouldn't do the deal. Our offense would stall big time. Teams could double Dirk with Kidd's man and put their best defender on Fin to lock him up, leaving to incredibly streaky shooters to tkae the shots, Kidd and NVE. Kidd makes up for this by getting inside and creating easy looks but none of the mavs outside of Najera make good cuts and movements toward the goal without the ball so that still wouldn't be too effective. At the same time I can still understnd why the mavs would make this deal but the risk outweighs the reward in this instance.

[Mavs_Rule2003]

Exactly!

Kidd will do nothing to improve this team. 4 rebounds is not an answer!

And talking about getting good bait in later free agent with KIDD? IF mavs need to take anything..they should take it this year. Cos there are not that much big guy MAVS can allure anyway after this season.

And anohter thing is that ..that is eastern confernce. and we are talking about western. I dont see any eastern getting NBA championship in next ten years atleast. Atleast as long as TD, DIRK, KOBE, KG, SHAQ are playing at this side of the America.

So, let Kidd stay in NJ or wherever. May be Spurs. That is fine. we can live with this. Kidd wont make them much stronger. I think Point guard play with NAsh with Kidd will always be dead even. Doesnt matter where they meet and in what uniform. So, i wouldnt worry.

I am just happy that KERR guy is gone..i still cant believe those shots...damn it!! rest of the spurs we can handle even without DIRK [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-disgusted.gif[/img]

[Fidel]

What makes any deal to get Kidd intriguing is that we can keep him away from the Spurs. JO will probably resign with the Pacers anyway, Brand is very hard if not impossible to get. So the Spurs might end up sitting there with all their caproom and no really good players available (until next year at least when Brand becomes an unrestricted FA). I know this logic seems a bit strange, but if we want to win it all we should be really concerned about the Spurs. They are good enough as is.

As far as a Nash for Kidd trade. Of course that would hurt chemistry and Kidd is not as good of a shooter but I think he´s superior to Nash in allmost any other area, especially rebounding, defense (and we really need some perimeter D) and durability (one of Nash´s big weaknesses). The NVE for Kidd trade is ok too but we`d also have to trade Nash then. He won´t play backup to Kidd and unlike Nick he is NOT capable of playing the 2 for extended minutes. A Kidd/Nash backcourt won´t work.

[Mavs_Rule2003]

This is what Nash's agent Bill Duffy has to say about this rumor:

Nash's agent, Bill Duffy, said he's heard about the Kidd-to-Dallas-for-Nash rumors and would prefer that his client remain with the Mavericks.

"The Mavericks don't need to upgrade the point-guard position," Duffy said. "But nothing in this business would surprise me.

"I do know a lot of teams are calling [about acquiring Nash]. Clubs are going to come after him, and that's a good sign. That shows his value."

Duffy said Nash, who will earn $5.99 million next season and becomes a free agent next summer, is the third-best pure point guard in the NBA behind Kidd and the Suns' Stephon Marbury. But he also noted that Nash more than held his own against Kidd in the two head-to-head matchups this season. And Nash was voted to the All-Star Game for the second consecutive season by the Western Conference coaches.

In a 96-88 Mavericks victory Nov. 16 in East Rutherford, N.J., Nash scored 11 of his 30 points in the fourth period and dished out nine assists, while Kidd finished with 22 points, nine rebounds and 13 assists. During an 88-79 Mavericks win March 4 at American Airlines Center, Nash collected 24 points and eight assists, while Kidd had 13 points and four assists.

"The only bad thing is Steve has not had a chance to play with a true interior player," Duffy said. "He's had Dirk [Nowitzki] and [Michael] Finley, but he has not had a big man where he's had a chance to show how he can play off a big guy."

[Maringa]

I concede that Nash is definitely a better shooter than Kidd. I have a heart ache in realization that he may be trade bait for Kidd, however both Nash and Nick are horrible defenders. Their defense pretty much off-sets their scoring. I think with Kidd, we have a better defender, more durable, and who's scoring average/percentage will likely increase because he doesn't have to carry the offense on his shoulders like he did in Jersey. He would have better shot selection with Dirk, Finley and Bradley (just joking!). If Nash does go...I definitely will miss those clutch 3 pointers, acrobatic shots...

[Usually Lurkin]

Kidd gets a lot of assists where he is, but would he get them in a system where it's "whoever has the ball, bring it up and shoot if you're open"?

the perimeter defense would be nice, and as has been discussed, addressing that area of weakness may shore up our entire
defense.

But what we lose on offense would mean we have to play traditional. We'd have to get a more traditional inside presence (slasher that can flash quick for a pass inside or big fat guy that can push his way inside) because defenses so often don't have to guard Kidd's shot. But Collins??!! Has that guy shown much more than Raef can give us?


Biggest downside to this Kidd, though is not that his shooting is sometimes off. But that his whole game is sometimes off. He disappears. Maybe that would be ok with stars like Fin and Dirk and NVE instead of KMart, but that tendency cost them a few games in the finals.

[madape]

Kidd doesn't address our needs? Let's take a look:

Our needs:
1) Rebounding
2) Perimeter Defense
3) Interior scoring

Kidd is the best rebounding point guard in the league... one of the best ever. If you add him AND a big rebounding forward, we could turn into the best rebounding team in the league.

Kidd is bigger, stronger, and quicker than Nash. He's can guard ones, twos and sometimes threes and is regarded as a pretty good perimeter defender.

Kidd can post up smaller guards and punish them. He's as big a matchup nightmare as anyone in the league at the PG spot.

Nash is better than Kidd in really only one area: Three point shooting. I think that's an important area for the Mavs. But isn't it the biggest criticism of this team the fact that they have trouble finding other ways to score? Kidd gives you a million ways to score. And if you add a big guy like Malone into the mix, we're not going to be hoisting up threes all the time anyway. With the way Kidd distributes the ball (the best passer by FAR in the league) I think we'd be a much more efficient offense with Kidd and Malone in the game. How do you turn Dirk from an all-star to an MVP? Simple, let him play with Kidd. Defensively, of course there is absolutely no comarison. New Jersey was the best defensive team in the league last year, thanks largely in part to Kidd's play. He's a superstar. Superstars win championships. Whats not to like?

[Captain Disaster]

The biggest downside to Kidd is his TURNOVERS, compared to Nash.

[Dooby]

Nash is better than Kidd in really only one area: Three point shooting.

This just isn't accurate. Nash is an all-round better scorer than Kidd. Better jumper. Period. There are games when Kidd can't hit the broad side of a barn.

Kidd's skills sell themselves. We don't need to embelish them.

[Usually Lurkin]

you're right madape.

But because his three point shooting is not so great, that means that instead of having 2-3 shooters that are hot at any one time, we'd have 1-2 shooters that are hot. That means those 1-2 shooters are easier to cover, so don't shoot as well. If Raef is gone, too, that means he doesn't get a chance to get into his groove to add to that.

We'd have to get the Malone down low.

We'd be giving up our scoring advantage on the outside, and would have to compensate with more offensive reliability inside.

[Dooby]

Originally posted by: Usually Lurkin


We'd have to get the Malone down low.

We'd be giving up our scoring advantage on the outside, and would have to compensate with more offensive reliability inside.

Malone 2003 is a jumpshooter and not much else offensively.

[Murphy3]

Rhylan, I think you're wrong.
I actually think NVE creates better looks for himself than Nash does.

Only thing is, Nash hits the more difficult shots at a much higher percentage than NVE hits his easier looks. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

So, in the end..what's more important? I'll go with the guy that can create and still put up a hight FG% over the guy that creates for himself a little bit better but has a hard time hitting 40% of his shots

[Mandyahl]

What makes any deal to get Kidd intriguing is that we can keep him away from the Spurs. JO will probably resign with the Pacers anyway, Brand is very hard if not impossible to get. So the Spurs might end up sitting there with all their caproom and no really good players available (until next year at least when Brand becomes an unrestricted FA). I know this logic seems a bit strange, but if we want to win it all we should be really concerned about the Spurs. They are good enough as is.

i really don't think that this should be considered in the decision-making process at all. and if it is, maybe we should let the spurs have kidd. i don't think kidd helps them all that much...a pg who can shoot works better with san antonio because when ducan gets double teamed he can pass it out for an open jumper. parker is a better shooter than kidd and is a good, young pg. sure kidd would be an upgrade at that position, but i don't think he makes the team significantly better, and it prevents them from going out and getting guys like jo and brand that really would make them better imo.

[Murphy3]

I agree with alot of that dude..

one thing to consider.

If the mavs move Nash for Kidd, what can the mavs get for NVE? He suddenly becomes much more expendable.

So, if bringing in Kidd suddenly makes NVE more expendable and possibly helps to bring in a younger big man or a swing man that can play defense and slash, then this makes more sense for the mavs.

Plus, the mavs would still have their exceptions.

[madape]

I wish people would stop talking about Brand and O'Neil. Those guys aren't going anywhere. It's as much of a waste of time to talk about those guys right now as it is to talk about a Tim Duncan sign and trade. The situation isn't that the pursuit of Kidd is going to cost you Brand and O'Neil, the situation is that the pursuit of O'Neil and Brand is going to cost you Kidd. Now, I don't know if Kidd is a legitimate possibilty, but unlike Brand or O'Neil, it isn't pure fantasy. Kidd has actually hinted at it, the world's most prominent NBA columninst Mark Stein has come out and devoted a whole article on it. The only guys talking about O'Neil are half-ass columnists who don't make phone calls and don't do their research.

[Murphy3]

If Kidd is brought in, it would be difficult to bring in another player that plays at such a high level..such as brand.

the clippers don't want to absorb more payroll.. how in the world are the mavs going to make a move to acquire brand?
If they don't want to pay him, they sure as hell won't want to give big bucks to NVE.

In that aspect, you are definitely right madape