Nets talk with Mavs about Kidd trade?

[Robillion]

damnit.. there are other teams we should be talking to.. Like Memphis for Gasol, .. o wait.
Seriously though.. we cant talk to the clippers more? or the Bucks? or Miami? or the Knicks?.. Pacers, 76ers, .. someone, heh. There are other players that would be much better for Dallas than Kidd. And without giving up Harris.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Rod Thorn will be the reason why Kidd is not traded.

[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.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

I agree that Kidd is slightly overrated, but I'm most definitely proud to be blinded by triple-doubles. No matter what kind of player you are, that is impressive. Look minus shooting, Kidd can do everything else and has an outstanding basketball IQ.

[Dr.Zoidberg]

Deal Or No Deal
Opening Briefcases: 26 'No's' To Kidd
By Mike Fisher -- DB.com

We assemble the reasons to tell the banker “No Deal!’’ in regard to a roster-gutting swap for Jason Kidd – starting with the fact that Jason seems to rack up baby mamas the way Howie Mandel gathers up Briefcase Models:

26. This information doesn’t usually find its way to the sports pages, so props to Murph of the 75-Member Staff for digging this up: Jason Kidd might have six or seven babies out there, by a handful of lovahs. You don’t care? Well, we make fun of Travis Henry and we make fun of Shawn Kemp and I’m just saying we might want to direct some of our sarcasm toward Kidd’s habit of producing Kidds.

25. By the way, the seemingly misogynistic Mr. Kidd has a wife over here and a preggers girlfriend over there and a lawsuit there and a domestic-violence thing over there and a restraining order over here and he groped a girl over there . … well, just in case the Bible Belters care, you know?

24. Because of The Law of Steve Nash: You don’t want to be locked into max contracts for point guards in their mid-30’s with physical ailments. If that was true for Dallas when Nash was 30, it’s certainly true for Kidd as he approaches 35, right?

23. Because Avery Johnson is as addicted to Jerry Stackhouse as Britney Spears is addicted to Starbucks. Trade Jerry Stackhouse, and The General would find himself having to move into Dr. Drew’s Celebrity Rehab house to room with Jeff Conaway.

22. Because Devin is a more efficient and productive player than Kidd. Henry Abbott points out that Devin runs the second-most offensively efficient team in the NBA while Kidd runs the 25th, that Devin’s salary is $4 mil to Kidd’s $20 mil, that Devin is at 24 a decade younger than Kidd and that Devin’s PER is 18.64 while Kidd’s is 16.06. Offensive efficiency of the team Kidd runs: 25th. Me? I’m not buying the statistical mumbo-jumbo; wouldn’t Kidd be running the No. 2 offense in the NBA if HE played in Dallas? (A point made well by the DMNews’ Tim MacMahon.) And if Devin played for the Nets, would they be better than No. 25? But on the whole, the numbers suggest the two players aren’t on completely different levels.

21. Or, let’s allow someone to state it more forcefully: Devin is BETTER than Kidd. Do I share that opinion? No. But the fact that others think it – and that the notion isn’t completely laughable – makes me feel better about standing pat.

20. Because Devin is a Renaissance Man who keeps insisting he wants to co-host a radio show with me. … and who played volleyball at Wisconsin. And because while some critics think Devin looks like a Cosby Kids character, I think -- maybe because I'm koo-koo for the talk radio and the volleyball -- he’s a handsome young man.

19. Because the Mavs are one of the few teams that employ multiple players who are competent traditional centers, and therefore ‘Gana Diop is far too valuable to be anybody’s throw-in.

18. Because while you can’t make moves while worrying too much about the impact on the competition, you’re not really excited about future seasons marching through the West having to overcome a Portland team featuring Oden, Aldridge, and Roy all orchestrated by Devin. The way my man Lang Whitaker writes it makes it seem kinda scary.

17. Because the original plan with Brandon Bass – that he’s a versatile big man built to combat Western foes’ SmallBall – has actually worked. A unique strategy, three years in the making, actually works. … and now we’re going to scrap it?

16. And because Portland feels the same way about Travis Outlaw.

15. Because Avery Johnson says so. He’s in the Circle of Authority, and he’s a terrible poker player, and he’s saying it for all the world to hear:

14. Because a case can be made that Devin is already a comparable player to Kidd. Is it wise to divorce Halle Berry so you can bang Jessica Alba?

13. Because two of the three teams supposedly involved – Dallas and Portland – keep contradicting the smoke being blown in New Jersey. And two of three NBA teams cannot be wrong. Because I care about staying elite for the long term, so I review with caution the recent words of Rick Barry, who said on these pages that if the Mavs acquire Kidd now, they will be a lottery team within two years.

12. Because you can’t go home again. We have a vision of Jason Kidd in a Dallas uniform as a youthful dynamo. … while in New Jersey they now see him nightly as a guy who is kind of a quitter. I’m afraid we’re trying to recapture something that – triple-doubled aside -- isn’t quite there anymore.

11. Because Tony Cubes seems increasingly agitated at having to answer questions about it – a mood he wouldn’t be in if he was excited about the prospects of it. A month ago, he calmly explained to DallasBasketball.com that the answer on Kidd is “No. No talks. No talks because it’s not going to happen. They’re not going to trade him. Why spent a lot of time discussing something that won’t happen?’’A few days ago, he shorted it up, dismissing a similar query from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram with a terse “No.’’ On Wednesday he responded to a trade proposal by ordering the inquisitor to “Step away from your crack dealer.’’

10. Because the only real reason the Mavs’ name comes up in all these speculative deals is that it’s a sexy, easy call for teams (and the media) to make. You get some positive PR when you peddle this stuff, thus explaining why somehow Isiah Thomas decided to announce that his Knicks are also in this mix. DB.com was the first place I know of that suggested that this whole thing is a Nets PR gimmick, and now that speculation is everywhere.

9. Because it is up to Avery Johnson to develop Devin Harris into a Kidd-level player. It’s being done wth Parker and Paul and Deron. … it is imperative –and by “imperative’’ I mean that Avery’s job future should depend on it -- that Johnson succeed at that task. Because he’s the kind of guy who leaves acrimony in his wake. A quote from over the weekend from Nets boss Rod Thorn: "There is a quid pro quo. You sign a contract. From the player's perspective, you need to play as hard as you can every night and do everything you can to help your team win. OK? If you do that, then you're fulfilling your part of the quid pro quo. … And if that is the case, then I think, if a guy has done yeoman work for you, if you can get him someplace like it's worked out for Garnett, then you try to do it. But at the end of the day, you're going to trade somebody where you can make the best deal. If it's Memphis, it's Memphis.''
That’s ugly. Why do we want that?

8. Because there is simply no evidence that J-Kidd = Championship. Not even if LeBron says it is so.

7. Because I’m not gutting a team that as presently constructed has a 33-percent chance of making the NBA Finals. Do you really screw with a team that is going to win 55 games?

6. Beause knee-jerking is always wrong. My man Dan Shanoff wonders if the loss will cause the Mavs to suddenly pull the trigger on a trade. And that, Dan, is why you are a wildly successful columnist and not an NBA GM! Follow the money: Kidd is making $19.7 million this season. The lux-tax impact will cost the Mavs $20 mil more. Kidd has one year left on his contract at $21.4 million. And he will almost certainly insist – because this is the way Jason is – on extensions that pile on a couple more $21 mil’s. This thing wouldn’t cost the Mavs $20 mil. … it might cost more like $100 mil. Is Does Jason Kidd make the Mavs 100 million dollars better than they are today? Because there is a chemistry with this team, and it is rare and it is special. And after the game, we can all go over to Josh Howard’s crib to hang.

5. Follow the money some more: Peter Vecsey is writing that he’s got sources saying Mark Cuban has already agreed to give Kidd that 20 mil more for 2009-10. And that sound you here is the Peter Vecsey Bullshit Meter going nuts. … because any column that claims that the Viper has sources inside the Mavs is completely bogus.

4. Because while you “tinker’’ with a good team, you do not scrap a great team. (We’re not talking about dealing Antoine Walker here.) This team truly has a chance to be great. And this trade truly would be a scrapping of it.

3. Because this isn’t KG of this summer or Shaq of three summer ago. Add the 7-foot Kevin Garnett to this roster, or add Shaq to Dallas’ roster three seasons ago, and you’ve changed the fabric of the team in an obviously positive way. If Kidd is so obviously positive. … why isn’t he obviously positive in New Jersey?

2. Because when Avery says, “We like our team’’ and then Donnie says “We like our team’’ and Cubes says “We like our team,’’ I guess I start drowning happily in the We Like Our Team Kool-Aid.

1. And so I like our team.

120pm feb 1 2008

Link

[wmbwinn]

nice article, Dr. Z

[birdsanctuary]

If the Mavs get him, they will not be parting with a quality piece. It'll be the KVH exemption Stack and scrubs ala Shaq and AI... New Jersians are fooling themselves if they think otherwise. Devin is not on the table unless the Mavs are getting significantly more value back then they give...

"In Dallas, Avery Johnson quashed any thoughts of making a move; and though no one believed him because his owner has his fingers in everything, Mark Cuban himself warned a reporter to "step away from the crack dealer" when a Devin Harris-Kidd swap was suggested."
NJ Star Ledger

[Dr.Zoidberg]

^lol

I am happy, Cuban thinks this way.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

That article by Fish is too harsh. Kidd is worth getting just not for anything significant.

[ShaggyDirk]

it's threads like these that make me glad I waste some time at this site.

[MavsFanFinley]

How many times have we heard Cuban say we're not making a trade, we like our team, or this player is untouchable so forget about it, only to have him turn around and make a blockbuster trade?

I don't expect them to come out and say we're looking to trade x for y but Cuban's we're not trading anyone line is very old.

[rabbitproof]

Originally Posted by MavsFanFinley

How many times have we heard Cuban say we're not making a trade, we like our team, or this player is untouchable so forget about it, only to have him turn around and make a blockbuster trade?

I don't expect them to come out and say we're looking to trade x for y but Cuban's we're not trading anyone line is very old.

Except Cuban hasn't made a blockbuster trade in years!

The JET-Toine and Stack/Harris-Jamison trades of a summer long ago were the last moves. So it would appear, he does like this team.

[Burn this City]

Would I rather have an underrated 20-something PG with a decent contract that's just entering his prime or an overrated, overpaid 30-something PG that's only getting worse?

Hmmm....dilemma...

[Robillion]

this Harris vs Kidd debate is getting old. I believe that most Mavs fans wouldnt trade Harris away for Kidd let alone Harris plus multiple others.

[Burn this City]

^I prefer the JJ Barea vs Kidd debate...

[Robillion]

JJB is a better shooter than Jason Kidd...

[Burn this City]

Kidd has better court vision and more illegitimate children...

[chumdawg]

I bet Kidd would a good mentor for JJB. On the court, I mean.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I bet Kidd would a good mentor for JJB. On the court, I mean.

Funny.

[Mavs Rule]

Interesting tidbits from Stein at ESPN:

If Jason Kidd gets traded to Dallas -- or any team in the West -- before the All-Star Game, it'll be certifiably historic.

That's because the NBA will have an unprecedented decision to make.

League officials say that a player voted in by the fans as an All-Star starter has never been traded to the other conference before the midseason classic was actually played. Which is also why the league is not prepared to say exactly what will happen if it has to deal with that scenario. It won't make a decision until it has to.

But the safe assumption, I'm told, is that Kidd would definitely still play in the game in those circumstances even if it meant allowing the West to carry a 13-man roster. You can't punish a player who's voted in as a starter by the fans.

The brain-teaser part for Commissioner Stern would be whether to make Kidd a starter in the West since his vote total (1,246,386) is higher than the total amassed (1,203,152) by Denver's Allen Iverson. In the East, longstanding rules in place dictate that Stern would pick the player that takes Kidd's roster spot and East coach Doc Rivers would have the right to pick the starter who replaces Kidd ... but then someone would have to decide whether the East should get a 13th man as well.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hypothetical Conundrum No. 2 connected to a potential Kidd trade with Dallas: What happens to Jerry Stackhouse if the Nets indeed get him from the Mavs as part of the swap and then buy him out as expected?

As long as Stackhouse is freed from the Nets by March 1, he'd be eligible to play in the playoffs for his next employer.

Yet if Stackhouse were to return to the Mavericks -- an invitation Dallas would surely extend Stack given that his experience, aggressiveness and toughness off the bench are all still valued commodities in Mavsland -- he'd have to sit out 30 days before he could rejoin them.

That's unofficially known as The Gary Payton Rule, which was instituted after Payton was dealt by Boston to Atlanta at the trade deadline in 2005, only to rejoin the Celtics three days later after the Hawks agreed to release him in a pre-arranged deal. Since the summer of 2005, players who are traded and then waived by their new team are forced to wait 30 days before re-signing (only 20 in the offseason) with the team that just traded them.

The irony here, though, is that Dallas also got at a player back in Payton-like circumstances at the '05 deadline when Alan Henderson was sent to Milwaukee as part of a deal for Keith Van Horn before the Bucks set Henderson free so he could return to the Mavs. Not that anyone ever suggested that we refer to the new regulation as The Alan Henderson Rule.

[Mavs Rule]

Also on the same page from Stein concerning the lakers picking up Pau:

article

What does this do to the rest of the West?

The Lakers already had teams nervous before Bynum's injury with their speed, length and depth. They had West rivals more nervous than the other surprise teams like New Orleans and Portland, which have no collective playoff experience.

The reaction was thus widespread shock when word began to circulate that the Lakers, without warning, were able to add Gasol for seemingly nothing. "There's not a lot of happy campers out here," said one West exec, echoing the sort of surprise I heard from pretty much every team I spoke to Friday night.

Yet he was mostly referring to the teams from the same tier of newer challengers like the Lakers, such as the Hornets, Nuggets and Rockets. The established power trio of San Antonio, Phoenix and Dallas -- while just as stunned as the rest of us -- isn't going to change course now in response to something L.A. did, impressive as it was.

San Antonio doesn't have the ability to make a major change without breaking up its Big Three of Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker, which naturally won't be happening any time soon. And sources with knowledge of the team's thinking echo the recent proclamations by Suns owner Robert Sarver that Amare Stoudemire and Shawn Marion are going nowhere, regardless of any speculation to the contrary that's been rumbling all season.

Dallas? The Mavericks were discussing Kidd trade scenarios before the Lakers completed their Pau heist, and plugged-in sources maintain that they were planning to continue along that path regardless.

Sources insist, furthermore, that the Mavs' concern is not that the Lakers look so formidable on paper now but whether they can find a way to acquire Kidd without decimating their team. Dallas is resigned to the fact that it will have to part with Devin Harris if it wants Kidd. Harder for them to accept is the notion that getting Kidd might also mean parting with Jerry Stackhouse and one or two key big men: Brandon Bass and/or DeSegana Diop.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by Mavs Rule

Also on the same page from Stein concerning the lakers picking up Pau:

article

Sources insist, furthermore, that the Mavs' concern is not that the Lakers look so formidable on paper now but whether they can find a way to acquire Kidd without decimating their team. Dallas is resigned to the fact that it will have to part with Devin Harris if it wants Kidd. Harder for them to accept is the notion that getting Kidd might also mean parting with Jerry Stackhouse and one or two key big men: Brandon Bass and/or DeSegana Diop.

Good god, that's sound like complete and utter bs.

[chumdawg]

That reasoning (that Dallas is resigned to having to part with Harris if it wants Kidd, but can't stomach losing too much else) makes sense to me. Don't get me wrong, I like Harris. But you have to get to give, and I see Kidd as an upgrade over Harris (as evidently the Mavs do, too, unless Stein is completely misinformed).

There are a couple ways to look at it. One is that promising young PG's seem to be a growing breed of late. Even this kid Crittendon, who most people see as little more than a filler to the Gasol trade, has upside. The idea is that if you acquire Kidd, you are NOT resigning yourself to being barren at the PG position when Kidd is gone. For one thing, there is a decent chance that one way or another you can find a replacement by the time Kidd is gone (after all, who among us could have imagined that Antawn Jamison would have morphed into a Steve Nash replacement, with a Stackhouse to boot?). For another, there is the very real possibility that Kidd plays five or more years. As I have always said with Nash, it was shortsighted to subscribe to the believe that point guards necessarily break down after age 30, just because that's what guys did ten years ago. Sports medicine and training is so much further advanced these days. You can even use steroids and human growth hormone and the like, if you don't get caught or if your league doesn't care much either way. Point is, guys are playing longer these days. And point guard is not all that demanding a position, from a crash-and-bump perspective. Stockton played till he was 40 or so, right? Jerry Rice did, too, in a similar way in the NFL. You aren't necessarily just getting two years of good play from Jason Kidd.

The other way to look at it is, admittedly, harsh and brutal. As they say, it is an upgrade business. And if your business is to win NOW--which it is for teams like the Mavs who are on the cusp--then you have to make tough calls.

I'll just say that I can very easily see the rationale for dealing Harris for Kidd, whether I would be happy about it or not.

[dude1394]

I'm not so in love with devin that I wouldn't let him go. Seeing how close their PER and stats is however really does make me wonder if kidd is the difference maker that someone like, gasol might be for example. Or a very solid #2. Battier for example imo.

I haven't watched kidd enough to know how much of a difference he might make to the mavs, judging just by stats he looks like a slight upgrade. But if the mavs are still solidly looking at him they must think he'll make a ton of difference because they are investing, what about 12million + another 12million in luxury tax on him over devin.

[Robillion]

Tomorrow I am writing an email to Cuban, Nelson, Johnson, ect and tell them to read our post on here and take our trade advise, hehe. But seriously I am and I will tell them to stop looking at f'n kidd and try to make a deal to get Miller or Maggette or Artest or someone else that could help out here. Then Im doing to email all the media peeps and ask why the KVH contract is never mentioned ever.

[Mavs Rule]

Did someone already put this one up? If so, I apologize ahead of time:

Nets in three-way talks for Kidd

By Adrian Wojnarowski, Yahoo! Sports
January 30, 2008


The New Jersey Nets are in serious negotiations with the Dallas Mavericks and Portland Trail Blazers about a blockbuster three-way trade that would send Jason Kidd to the Mavericks, league sources said Wednesday afternoon.

In the proposed trade, Dallas and Portland would send the Nets a package that includes the Mavs' Devean George and Jerry Stackhouse and Blazers forwards Travis Outlaw and Channing Frye and guard Jarrett Jack. Mavericks point guard Devin Harris would be sent to Portland. Along with Kidd, the Nets would send reserve forward Malik Allen and center Jamaal Magloire to Dallas.

The Nets would also receive at least one future No. 1 pick and cash. Other players could be included to balance the exchange of contracts.

The Record (N.J.) first reported Wednesday morning that the three teams were in discussions.

League sources say that Nets president Rod Thorn has been working the phones relentlessly since Kidd went public on Monday with his trade request. Thorn seems determined to get a deal done soon and may be looking to completely remake the Nets. He also has been dangling guard Vince Carter.

Kidd, 34, is making $19.7 million this season, and has one year left in on his contract at $21.4 million. Kidd The addition of Kidd could make the Mavericks sudden favorites in the West, where they have had two straight heart-breaking playoff runs and currently have the third-best record in the conference.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slu...yhoo&type=lgns

[ShaggyDirk]

This is a good time for capitalcity to come back and lay down the dead cat.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by dude1394

I'm not so in love with devin that I wouldn't let him go. Seeing how close their PER and stats is however really does make me wonder if kidd is the difference maker that someone like, gasol might be for example. Or a very solid #2. Battier for example imo.

I haven't watched kidd enough to know how much of a difference he might make to the mavs, judging just by stats he looks like a slight upgrade. But if the mavs are still solidly looking at him they must think he'll make a ton of difference because they are investing, what about 12million + another 12million in luxury tax on him over devin.

Yeah, I mean we finish paying off Kidd this year, pay him next year and then extend him...that's like what? 80-100 million including luxury tax for one player? I really think that is why the Nets won't get much in return because the team who gets Kidd has to pay him about half the value of the Grizzlies franchise haha.

[Dr.Zoidberg]

02:19 AM CST on Sunday, February 3, 2008
Point-counterpoint: Kidd to the Dallas Mavericks?

Jason Kidd is on the trading block. SportsDay's David Moore and Eddie Sefko present arguments on why a trade would make sense for the Mavericks and why it wouldn't. The trade deadline is Feb. 21.

These guys argue about everything all the time. David Moore, as you can read below, favors returning Jason Kidd to the team he began his NBA career with, arguing that Kidd could put the Mavericks over the top. Eddie Sefko counters that it's not worth the risk. Here's your chance to weigh in.

For Kidd:

Jason Kidd began his career in a Mavericks uniform.

An argument can be made that he should end it in one.

This is no sentimental stroll down memory lane. Kidd's ability and approach to the game would push the Mavericks closer to that elusive champion ship.

Playoff games are won by players who impose their will on the game. It's not always about who hits the final shot. It's about who sets up the final shot. It's about who grabs the crucial rebound or comes away with the unexpected steal. It's about making plays.

Kidd makes plays. Always has. He's tough mentally and physically. He doesn't shrink in the final moments of a close game. He excels.

Kidd has appeared in 100 playoff games. That's more than Dirk Nowitzki. That's more than Josh Howard and Jason Terry combined.

Actually, he's done much more than appear. Kidd has averaged 15.9 points, 9.3 assists and 7.7 rebounds in the postseason. Do you think the Mavericks could have used that against Baron Davis and Golden State in the first round last season?

How many easy shots did Nowitzki get against the Warriors? How about against Miami in The Finals the year before?

Kidd will get Nowitzki the ball when he needs it and where he needs it. He will generate better scoring opportunities for Nowitzki, Howard and every other Mavericks player, opportunities that often dry up in the playoffs.

The offense will be more efficient under Kidd. Coach Avery Johnson will tell you that has a positive impact on the team's defense. Kidd can call the plays and run the offense, something Johnson doesn't trust Devin Harris to do at this stage of his career.

Is Kidd the dominant force he was earlier in his career? No. A glance at New Jersey's record makes that clear. But few players make better decisions with the ball in their hands. Few players are as driven as Kidd.

None of this addresses what the Mavericks would give up to obtain him. If the Mavericks must mortgage too much of their future, if they must part with several key contributors, the price is too high.

But if the Mavericks can swing a deal comparable to what the LA Lakers pulled off for Pau Gasol, they would be foolish not to try.
The idea of Kidd ending his career in a Mavericks uniform has nothing to do with symmetry.

It has everything to do with winning a title.

Against Kidd

Let's start by mentioning the obvious. Devin Harris turns 25 later this month. Jason Kidd turns 35 in March.

The Mavericks have invested three years of on-the-job training in Harris. And he's finally looking like he gets it, his ankle injury notwithstanding.

In two years, he could be every bit the player that Tony Parker is. At the very least, the Mavericks appear to have a solid 16-point, six-assist point guard for the foreseeable future.

And, in two years, Kidd will be closer to the Hall of Fame than to the prime of his career.

Fabulous player, Kidd has been. No arguments there. But the key words in that description are "has" and "been."

We've seen teams that think they have a legitimate shot at an NBA title make a desperate stab at it with aging stars. It's known as the magic-bean syndrome. How'd that experiment work for the Los Angeles Lakers and Karl Malone and Gary Payton?

The Mavericks run a great risk by trading for Kidd. First, they will shrink their window for winning a title to two seasons, max. There are already personnel bosses in the Eastern Conference who believe Kidd is a glorified role player at this stage of his career, albeit one who can still post a triple-double.

He's shooting 36.8 percent this season. When Kidd was leading New Jersey to the NBA Finals in 2002 and '03, Bill Walton had a keen analysis of Kidd.

"Imagine if Jason Kidd knew how to shoot," Walton said before a Finals game in San Antonio. "If he did, he'd be in the same class as Walt Frazier, Jerry West, Oscar Robertson and even Magic Johnson."

But even if Kidd still is a championship-worthy point guard, look what the Mavericks would lose if they traded for him. By all accounts, Jerry Stackhouse would have to be traded, along with Harris. That subtracts the toughest dude in the Mavericks' locker room.

Stackhouse has faults, but he can get you 12 points in the fourth quarter and win a playoff game by sheer will. And Harris would have to be traded. If Kidd is brought in to start in front of Harris, the kid would be justifiably cooked emotionally.

Pat Riley made a deal with the hoops devil when he traded for Shaquille O'Neal. It worked, to the extent that they won a championship in 2006, even if it was because of the Mavericks' blunders.

Look at the Heat now. They can't trade O'Neal's contract, and he can't play at a high enough level to help them win. That's what happens when you bank your future on magic beans.

Link

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Good article by Moore. Much more fair than Fish's. Like I said, taking on Kidd's contract is pentaly enough. Noone is going to give up significant pieces if they have to pay him so much money. Remember that Shaq was 32 when Miami got him, not 35. Big difference

[mavs413]

I think George has a trade restriction and must agree to be traded, he wouldnt want to go to the Nets.

[Robillion]

I really wish the media would stop saying that Harris is a must for the deal. It will not happen with him in the deal and shouldnt... The Lakers got Gasol without giving up their future in Bynum.. they didnt even give up Odom. Kidd costs too much(money wise), he will likely only be good for the next couple of years, then Portland will be owning the west for a decade with Harris, or the Nets will have a premier team again while the Mavericks become a lottery pick (that is if we went with the orginal deal of Harris plus half the team). If deal is going down, yeah it will include Stackhouse and/or Terry, KVH contract, Diop, and maybe someone else. And I can deal with that because we can bring up Fazekas, Reyshawn Terry can come over in a few years (and I def bet contribute), and we get Stackhouse back in 30 days.

I do not see how it is unplausible for Harris and Kidd to start together. Kidd can be the quarter back.. he is use to a run and gun style of play. Well just use Harris at the 2, and have him running and Kidd setting him up. Harris would still be able to play his game and probably more effectively. And if Harris gets an open shot (which Kidd can def create) then his shot is starting to be come very efficient. Harris can shoot that 3 if he's open. I do think we will be the main top contender if we had a starting 5 of Kidd, Harris, Howard, Dirk, Damp

[skylive321]

Originally Posted by Robillion

I really wish the media would stop saying that Harris is a must for the deal. It will not happen with him in the deal and shouldnt... The Lakers got Gasol without giving up their future in Bynum.. they didnt even give up Odom. Kidd costs too much(money wise), he will likely only be good for the next couple of years, then Portland will be owning the west for a decade with Harris, or the Nets will have a premier team again while the Mavericks become a lottery pick (that is if we went with the orginal deal of Harris plus half the team). If deal is going down, yeah it will include Stackhouse and/or Terry, KVH contract, Diop, and maybe someone else. And I can deal with that because we can bring up Fazekas, Reyshawn Terry can come over in a few years (and I def bet contribute), and we get Stackhouse back in 30 days.

I do not see how it is unplausible for Harris and Kidd to start together. Kidd can be the quarter back.. he is use to a run and gun style of play. Well just use Harris at the 2, and have him running and Kidd setting him up. Harris would still be able to play his game and probably more effectively. And if Harris gets an open shot (which Kidd can def create) then his shot is starting to be come very efficient. Harris can shoot that 3 if he's open. I do think we will be the main top contender if we had a starting 5 of Kidd, Harris, Howard, Dirk, Damp

I smell a nellie ball fan. it's very Baron Davis ala Monte Ellis running together --esque

[Mavs Rule]

I agree rob. We can't rob our franchise by trading harris.

Good points about kidd and harris running together. The great thing about kidd is he can make the tight passes in some traffic and harris can pull up much closer to the basket and get a higher percentage shot than the three pointer. I love our team running with kidd. The only thing is we can't give away Diop if we do that. Damp cannot run. We wouldn't need damp with this offense. We know Dirk can run, just as he did with Nash. Damp would move to the backup center, behind Diop, and then we can always go back to bump and grind ball as a secondary offense.

[Robillion]

Originally Posted by skylive321

I smell a nellie ball fan. it's very Baron Davis ala Monte Ellis running together --esque

Not really.. just I know that what we need is for our players to penetrate more and get easy baskets. Harris is our key contributor of that. Yeah he is kinda small for the two, but then you have Kidd which is a big guard on the court as well which would have his main job being the playmaker. I just look at it like.. Kidd assisting to Harris for the slash in layup, or the corner three, Kidd assisting to Howard/Dirk/Terry(if he is still around) for the open shots. With that huge increase in offensive effieciency, their defense would also be improved. I love the idea of Kidd here, but only with Kidd and Harris starting together. Otherwise Im not into it at all.

edit: you added the Baron Davis/Ellis example in there and I guess you can say I am a fan of both of them starting for GS.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

What you do is let Kidd guard the 2 guards. He is definitely big enough for that. Harris will guard the points.

[Robillion]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

What you do is let Kidd guard the 2 guards. He is definitely big enough for that. Harris will guard the points.

definitely.. damn i really really like the idea of this. Just the media is pissing me off by continueing to even mention his name. If they dismiss him as an option as we do then maybe the Nets will be more likely to do make a deal.

[Robillion]

If Kidd and Harris played together.. think about 3 years down the road when Kidd retires/gets hurt. Harris would have 3 years under the wing of one of the best playmakers ever, all while keeping his main game to get to the basket. When Kidd leaves, Harris would eeeasily move back to the PG spot and have the potential to be a top 5 PG. I believe it.

[FINtastic]

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?

[skylive321]

Avery's response to reports that the mavs have been talking to the nets: "Well, they called to inquire if I was available to backup Jason Kidd. I told them no, coaching is all I do nowadays; but I still think I can beat D.A (armstrong) up the court". Gotta love that sense of humor!