# (Merged) Anyone else hear that we are interested in Kidd?



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

*Anyone else hear that we are interested in Kidd?*

I'm in San Diego right now. Just heard on the radio that Portland has confirmed that they are interested in Jason Kidd....

I would've loved to have him 2 years ago.. but with his age and his contract.. I would definitely think twice about this.


----------



## riehldeal (May 11, 2003)

*not true...*

dont worry, nash wont committ that kind of money to an aging injury prone over the hill player with absolutely no shooting skills whatsoever


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Like Storyteller has said...

a team needs to wait until like December or January so Kidd can prove he still has it after his knee injury


sure all 29 other teams are interested in Kidd..... for the right deal....


----------



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

I guess he could be a decent $20 mill a year mentor for Telfair in a 2 or 3 years.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> Like Storyteller has said...


How tough is it to deal with that name change?????? :laugh:



As for this topic, I'm assuming that the sports talk in San Diego (was it XTRA 690?) got their info. from this story at CBS Sportsline

And, yes, I'm still of the opinion that such a deal would have to wait until December. First of all, Telfair can't be dealt until then. And most importantly, Kidd has to prove that he can still play.


----------



## riehldeal (May 11, 2003)

*you can stop right there...*

telfair is even more untouchable in my mind and i think nash and cheeks' minds than even randolph...telfair will be our starter in 2 years hands down...just wair, telfair will end up being better than kidd and not just the kidd of now but also in his prime


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

What astonishes me is that Patterson is quoted as acknowledging that talks are going on. Since when do the Blazers talk to the media about trade discussions?

Kidd's contract sure is UUUUGLY! I have a hard time believing that the Blazers are willing to give up an ending contract to take on Kidd at his age. I know we want a superstar, but jeez, there are limits.

Anyway, on the off chance that there's more to this than just hot air, how about a little 3-way trade with the Nets and Rockets:

_Portland trades: PF Shareef Abdur-Rahim (16.3 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 2.0 apg in 31.6 minutes) 
PG Damon Stoudamire (13.4 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 6.1 apg in 38.0 minutes) 
Portland receives: PG Jason Kidd (15.5 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 9.2 apg in 36.5 minutes) 
PG Jimmy Jackson (15.5 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 9.2 apg in 36.5 minutes) 
PF Maurice Taylor (11.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 1.4 apg in 27.8 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: -2.7 ppg, +0.2 rpg, and +2.5 apg. 

New Jersey trades: PG Jason Kidd (15.5 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 9.2 apg in 36.5 minutes) 
New Jersey receives: PF Shareef Abdur-Rahim (16.3 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 2.0 apg in 85 games) 
PG Tyronn Lue (10.5 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.2 apg in 76 games) 
Change in team outlook: +11.3 ppg, +3.6 rpg, and -3.0 apg. 

Houston trades: PG Jimmy Jackson (15.5 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 9.2 apg in 36.5 minutes) 
PF Maurice Taylor (11.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 1.4 apg in 27.8 minutes) 
PG Tyronn Lue (10.5 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.2 apg in 30.7 minutes) 
Houston receives: PG Damon Stoudamire (13.4 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 6.1 apg in 82 games) 
Change in team outlook: -8.6 ppg, -3.8 rpg, and +0.5 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED_


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

trading Telfair for Jason Kidd would seem counter productive. Now, before some of you who think that *T*elfair is *long* for bench riding in this NBA career, hear me out.

Trading for Jason, a guy who got in trouble for smackin' around his wife (albeit he's been "clean" since)...who's 31 and has like 5 years on his contract left...on top of having 2 PG's already and neither of them is young (or the "future") is just begging for the team to have Omar Cooks and Clinton Wheelers running this team for the next 10 years.


----------



## MiamiHeat03 (Mar 28, 2003)

> Portland president Steve Patterson confirmed to SportsLine.com Tuesday that the Blazers and the Nets are negotiating a deal which would send G Jason Kidd to Portland and F Shareef Abdur-Raheem in the opposite direction.


http://www.cbs.sportsline.com/nba/story/7681034


----------



## 4-For-Snapper (Jan 1, 2003)

I'll believe it when I see it.

That being said, I'm not even sure if Kidd is worth taking if he'll never be up to his potential again. Which, as we all know, would be the Blazers' luck, per usual.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Yeah, let's kid Jason Kidd and Jimmy Jackson together again. Jamal Mashburn is available too, perhaps the Blazers can go for a clean sweep Dallas' big 3


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

sounds to me like the article author is the one who speculated on adding Telfair to the deal. 

if Portland can work out a deal where we give up SAR + Woods or Outlaw and/or one of the Russkies or a pick, it's worth it. we've got a lot of young talent at the SF position, so we might as well offload it instead of the one guy who is our future at PG. 

even if all we get is just a couple of decent seasons out of him, signing Kidd is still worth it. when he breaks down we start Telfair and use Kidd as a great backup. if he doesn't break down, we trade Telfair for some complimentary talent. 

for this season we keep Damon and NVE until December, when Kidd is expected back. then we trade either of their expiring deals to a team looking to reload, and let Kidd start. Damon or NVE gets the starting SG spot. 

remember, Kidd is only a year removed from being the most sought after free agent on the market. assuming he can get healthy, he's worth every penny of that huge contract.


----------



## WXHOOPS (Jan 15, 2004)

*Rahim & what for Kidd ?*

Just read on cbssportsline.com that the Blazers and Nets are talking about this deal. Makes sense for both teams and I hope it gets done.

http://www.sportsline.com/nba/story/7681034


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

I don't think the Blazers will make any trade for Kidd.

He has a PR problem in his past. He is on the wrong side of 30. He is coming off a major injury. Portland has Telfair. Kidd has a monster contract which would cause big roster problems unless Paul Allen is willing to spend $80 million on payroll again. I don't see that willingness anytime soon with the Rose Garden bankruptcy. Kidd has never proven the ability to sell many tickets to cover that huge salary.

I do think it is plausable that there are "talks".

Why not?

New Jersey has nothing to lose. Portland has nothing to lose in just talking. Nothing will come of it and both teams can then say they are trying hard to move players that are demanding to be moved (SAR and Kidd).

In fact, if Portland can successfully link SAR in serious trade talks with an All-NBA player, it can't help but bolster SAR's trade value.

It is different when teams are "talking" about moving players who will be upset to be in trade talks. SAR and Kidd will be happy to think guys are working the phones, exploring options.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

I wish to hell we could get some of these players on their way up,or at the top.
It seems like Portland is always looking at used to be greats.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

If they traded SAR and 1 young player - Outlaw, Monia or Khyrapa for Kidd, let me explore the roster.

Forget 04-05. That would be a changeover year, and Kidd is recuperating anyway. 

No point in getting Kidd unless you try to make a run in 05-06 and 06-07. That means you extend Zach, whatever it takes. Don't know what that will be. I plugged in the figures from Richard Jefferson's extension. That means you keep Theo. Not sure what it will take to keep him. I put $10mil per.

As said before, Damon and Nick hold down the fort at PG, until Kidd returns. Then one can be traded at the trade deadline, to clear up the guard core. Damon and/or Nick play SG on offense, and can play with Kidd fine. Kidd in recent years guards the SG often. Telfair won't see playing time until after all-star break, and won't get consistent minutes until his 2nd year or later.

05-06 Starters - Salary in Millions with remaining years:
PG: Jason Kidd - $16.4, $18.0, $19.7, $21.3
SG: Derek Anderson - $9.1, $9.7
SF: Darius Miles - $6.8, $7.6, $8.4, $9.1, $9.9
PF: Zach Randolph - $9.9, $11.1, $12.4, $13.6, $14.8, $16.1
C: Theo Ratliff - $10, $10, $10, $10

Still have Patterson - $6.3, $6.8.
And on rookie deals, the 05 pick, Telfair, Outlaw and the Russians - minus whoever New Jersey took.

Assuming you let both Damon and Nick walk for the salary savings, the 05-06 team salary is $65 million for 11 players. Add several min sal to complete the roster.

Problems are a plenty. No quality depth at the 4 or 5, unless Outlaw grows into a beast AND can play the game.

Not enough proven, veteran experience off the bench, which will be even worse if we have to dump Patterson for garbage, just to be rid of him.

And, still no SHOOTER. The team as constructed, will not win big without one.

Those things are attainable, but they will cost money. Portland can use the MLE. Can consider trading Damon or Nick. But those moves will push the payroll well past $70 million.


----------



## The Pup (Jan 25, 2004)

*Masbee*.....I think you made excellent points that Nash is just trying to create more trade value and it doesn't hurt to be discussing players who both want to move. 

But then again, what is he shooting for?


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

Yes I hope this deal gets done , It has to be in the works if Patterson was talking about it


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

If you can do Rahim for Kidd you do it in a heartbeat.. Kidd is one of the best PG in the league. 

But if you consider Kidd the problem with te wife person.. you may hesistate...


One though on the radio tonight (as I was listening going to soccer practice) was this:

you exchange Ruben for Zo in addition

Portland sends Rahim $14.6 + Patterson $6.8 mil with kicker = $21.4 mil

NJ sends Kidd $14.8 mil + Mourning $5.4 mil = $20.2 mil


I am not in favor at all in sending Telfair or Outlaw :nonono:

You can send them Woods if you like....

taking on both Kidd and Mournings salary is a huge help for NJ. They can take on Ruben as compensation....


any deal taking on Kidd at his age and salary has to also relieve us of some bad contracts...


For example.... DA + Ruben + Rahim for Kidd and ?
still gives NJ salary relief faster. Kidds deal is a killer


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Storyteller</b>!
> How tough is it to deal with that name change?????? :laugh:


not too bad at all actually... I think I have made the switch.... but its takes a few seconds to sink in...


----------



## CrGiants (Dec 4, 2003)

I don't think Portland will make this deal if for no other reason than we've seen what happens when Portland deals ending contracts for longer-term deals. Management has been preaching fiscal responsibility, and now you're telling me they're going to pick up Kidd and his deal while dealing an expiring deal? 

To compound it, Portland just said its future is in the hands of young Telfair.

Methinks this is Portland trying to drive up Rahim's price. And thus far, it has worked. Every month, a hot new rumor involving Rahim has developed, and with each passing month, the player the Blazers would receive has been more intriguing. With Patterson opening his mouth, I'm thinking he's trying to see if he can get other teams on the phone with Portland.


----------



## CelticPagan (Aug 23, 2004)

I think that because Jason Kidd is an excellent passer, and his game revolves more around making plays for his teammates, he can play longer than most players. Just like Magic Johnson or John Stockton, who weren't very athletic late in their careers, but were still very good. Kidd is almost on the same level as Stockton and Magic, and Magic could have played well till he was about 40 if he'd stayed in the game.

But we should definitly not trade Telfair. There would be no need to. Taking on Kidd's massive contract in exchange for Rahim is more than enough compensation for the Nets.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> I wish to hell we could get some of these players on their way up,or at the top.
> It seems like Portland is always looking at used to be greats.


if "used to be greats" like Pippen and Smith can get you 12 minutes away from the NBA finals, then I see nothing wrong with that strategy. 

actually the similarities between Pippen and Kidd are intriguing:

• Kidd's on a miserable team and not terribly happy about it

• acquiring Kidd is going to be expensive, and any trade involves us giving up quantity for quality and a bigger player (SAR/Cato) for a smaller player. 

• Kidd's a proven floor leader and a truly great defensive player

• Kidd's a versatile passer, rebounder and scorer

• Kidd brings a level of maturity and decision making that makes Stoudamire look ridiculous

• Kidd is the kind of guy you want to put next to young talent, and put in a coaching or management job after he retires


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

If Portland can get Kidd for SAR, we should do it.

His contract is huge, that's true. He's coming off of injury, that's true. He'd be the third veteran PG, that's true. He's 31 years old, that's true.

But if he weren't older, and massively paid, and coming off of an injury, Portland wouldn't have a chance at getting him... and they certainly wouldn't have a chance to get him as cheaply as SAR.

Kidd would be a great improvement over our current PGs, and he'd allow the Blazers to play him with either Damon or NVE and match up decently against most backcourts defensively (something a Damon-NVE backcourt cannot do).

It's possible that Kidd's career is on a steep decline, and that he's not an all-star caliber PG anymore... but I doubt it. I think that he's got so many strengths to his game that he's going to age pretty well: he rebounds well, he plays defense and the passing lanes well, and he's a great passer. Those things don't go away overnight.

As always, it depends on the cost of acquisition, but getting a HOF-caliber PG at age 31 for a decent player who might be more valuable for his expiring contract would be too good to pass on.

Ed O.


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

I wonder if something like this would work:

Kidd/Mourning/A. Williams

for

Shareef/Damon/Russkie or Pick

(Works under RealGM)

It's hard for me to see NJ dealing Kidd for SAR straight up, but this gives them even more salary cap space next summer as well as a servicable PG for next year. 

For Portland, dealing Damon clears up the potential logjam of Damon/Nick/Kidd/Telfair, brings us an upgrade at backup big man in A-Train, and Zo will turn out to be either a feel-good comeback story or a salary cap writeoff if he can't ever play again.

It's a huge role of the dice for Portland, of course -- trading fiscal sanity for a guy who could be either the best PG in the game or just an injured old man. 

I'd do it. 

As many have posted, the dream of '05 cap space can't work without completely gutting the team (espcially with Miles' new contract figured in). 

In my opinion, the only way Portland ever rises above mediocrity is by Paul Allen overspending, which, Rose Garden fiasco notwithstanding, he seems willing to do -- if it realistically promises to buy an elite-quality team. The trick is to overspend wisely (Pippen, Steve Smith, Brian Grant's original FA contract) rather than unwisely (Kemp, Stoudamire, DA, Ruben).

For me, the potential reward of Kidd makes it worth the risk.

Stepping Razor


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Hey... is Kidd a BYC player this year? I looked at Storyteller's .xls and it looks like he is.

If he is, though, I'm surprised it hasn't been brought up yet.

Ed O.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

*Re: you can stop right there...*



> Originally posted by <b>riehldeal</b>!
> telfair is even more untouchable in my mind and i think nash and cheeks' minds than even randolph...telfair will be our starter in 2 years hands down...just wair, telfair will end up being better than kidd and not just the kidd of now but also in his prime


So you know for a fact he will experience a sudden growth spurt over the next 2 years?


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Whether you want him or not, wifebeater Kidd fails to qualify for consideration due to the 25 point pledge.

But then, so did NVE.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

you think the Spurs sweated much over Kidd's character issues? 

I think it's mostly a dead issue. 


> "In an age where every athlete denies what they've done wrong, here's a guy who stands up, takes responsibility and does something about it," his close friend, golfer Phil Mickelson said. "He and Joumana have made sure to work things through to see that it doesn't happen again. They made sure his family stayed intact.
> 
> "I just have a lot of respect for him, the way he went about his faults. Everybody has faults. It's how you handle them that tells a lot about the person."


http://espn.go.com/nba/preview2002/columns/wojnarowski_adrian/1451770.html

actually, that's a pretty funny article. it was written in October last year and is full of optimistic tidbits about the exciting future of New Jersey's Kidd/Jefferson/Martin core. 

makes you wonder what they'll be saying about Denver or Utah in a year or two....


----------



## August West (Oct 27, 2003)

*Blazer brass confirms pursuit of J Kidd*

I came across this story from Mike Khan of CBS Sportsline:

http://www.cbs.sportsline.com/nba/story/7681034

I have personally always admired Jason Kidd's game for his unmatched court vision, leadership, and ability to enable those around him to thrive. I've have dreamed of him in a Blazer uniform for since he was a Maverick. However, I admittedly think this would be a poor move for the Blazers at this point unless Nash & Co. are able to somehow move Damon out. Otherwise, as Patterson jokes in the article, you essentially have a team of point guards and swing men. 

I think a more logical proposal would be to involve a third team that would allow us to fill a position of need. For example, bring the Sonics in on this deal and have them send us Ray Allen in exchange for Kidd from the Nets who would still receive Rahim. You could also attempt to contact Boston and try to aquire Paul Pierce.


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

> Portland trades: PF Shareef Abdur-Rahim	(16.3 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 2.0 apg in 31.6 minutes)
> Portland receives: PG Jason Kidd	(15.5 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 9.2 apg in 36.5 minutes)
> Change in team outlook: -0.8 ppg, -1.1 rpg, and +7.2 apg.
> 
> ...


SAR for Kidd straight up works. But we'd be robbin' the Nets. Maybe SAR/Woods/Pick(s) package could work.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

I fear they would want Bassy in any deal,if so, then hell no. I would give them an 05 1st and Reefer.

A backcourt rotation of..

Kidd/Stoudy PG
DA/NVE SG

Pretty good to me...if Kidd only has a couple of years left, no biggie.

Kidd throwing entry passes to Zach and lob passes to DMiles = :drool:


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

Telfair signed his rookie contract. He can't be traded until December at the very earliest. So you can rest easy Mas


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> Hey... is Kidd a BYC player this year? I looked at Storyteller's .xls and it looks like he is.
> 
> If he is, though, I'm surprised it hasn't been brought up yet.
> ...


Not anymore. He signed his contract on July 24, 2003. His one year BYC status expired on the anniversary of that date.


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Lakota_Blazer</b>!
> Telfair signed his rookie contract. He can't be traded until December at the very earliest. So you can rest easy Mas


Kidd won't be ready to go until December, so the deal could always be delayed until then.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Lakota_Blazer</b>!
> Telfair signed his rookie contract. He can't be traded until December at the very earliest. So you can rest easy Mas


Thx Lakota :greatjob:


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

talent wise this is great....but kidd's contract is quite scary. on the other hand its not like we're going to sign anyone of his caliber as a FA (even next summer) so its worth considering.


----------



## Tince (Jul 11, 2004)

One of the major complaints Blazer fans have of the team is that we don't have any good outside threats or pure shooters. While Kidd is a way better true point gaurd than Damon, he would give us a lineup with zero outside threat. Teams would play the softest zone on us and Jason Kidd's play making, Darius Miles' athletic drives to the hoop, and Zach Randolph's soft touch around the rim would all be affected in a negative way. 

I'm not sure this is a great trade for Portland. This is a trade Whitsitt makes because it's an upgrade in talent, but Nash might not because of chemistry and salary.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

SAR for Kidd is horrible for the Blazers.

What happens to your capspace in the future?

I thought they wanted to clean up the image of the Blazers not continue their old ways?

What good is it to get a 31 year old PG who is out long with a serious knee injury and has like 5years 90M$ or so left on his contract?


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

With this trade, the question you have to ask is -- will this make us a legit title contender over the next few years? If you think it will, then it's worth doing, regardless of the contract Kidd has. If you don't think it will, then you're taking away flexability and dishing out major dough for a couple extra post season games over the next few years.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

I'd like to see the deal as well, esp. if there is any way to get Damon shipped, too.

SAR is redundant, and not a star. Kidd is one heck of a star, and his skills should age gracefully enough. We don't get the shooter we need, but Kidd is superb at making those around him look better than they are. I would not be surprised to see Kidd make a shooter like Rice or Frahm look like the steal of the year. 

Do it!


----------



## mixum (Mar 19, 2003)

*Suns fan worried*

on how nasty we would be with kidd.....cause kidd, theor, miles, da do something the suns dont and thats play defense!


----------



## riehldeal (May 11, 2003)

*the answer to this quandry is quite SIMPLE...*

it has been reported that the blazers are now just exploring with doctor's opinion on the health of kidd's knee, and if they find that he will have a full recovery then= WE SHOULD DO THIS DEAL IN A HEARTBEAT......are you kiding (no pun intended, haha) with the arguments against it, kidd is the best PG in the game ....i am getting tired of blazer fans that whine and piss and moan for something like kidd (tall pass first floor general Pg who also plays solid D) and then when it seems like a real possibilty and in this case kidd just happens to be the creme of the crop in terms of PG's those same fans find a negative and say "we'll pass".....there is no decision to be made in this proposed deal IF kidd's knee is healthy or will be healthy very soon, you get Jason Kidd

start of season

damon...NVE...bassy...kidd (IR)
DA...NVE...Frahm
miles...patterson
randolph...?
ratliff...stepania...pryzbilla

around november/december

kidd...NVE/damon...bassy
NVE/damon...DA
miles...patterson
randolph...?
ratliff...stepania...pryzbilla


i say NVE/damon because with kidd coming back one of them HAS to go to make room, deciding which one of the two to trade would be tough but i'm sure the blazers would just scour the league for offers for the two and take the best one available, both will be expiring contracts so attractive to other teams...the blazers could just keep both and let there contracts come off the books to help cushion kidd's contract's blow on the blazers and the impending extensions of randolph and ratliff...i dont know about that, but i do know you get kidd if you can get kidd


----------



## riehldeal (May 11, 2003)

*other reasons for it being no-brainer if healthy...*

kidd would improve the game's of miles and randolph by leaps and bounds...darius and Z-bo are players that need a good pass to put them in the right position/situation to score...remember randolph playing with Sabas, zach is great at finding little cracks in the D but only sabas was able to find him, its safe to say that if kidd is here that he will find him too...and i forsee (if kidd trade happens) a kidd-miles alley oop connection being made once or twice haha


----------



## riehldeal (May 11, 2003)

*damon trade idea later in season...*

some have proposed trading damon to miami when kidd returns for eddie jones, fillers would need to be included but i dont think thats too bad of an idea, only negatives would jones' contract and increasing age, but i love the way he plays D and not too bad a shooter, what do you guys think

a healthy Kidd
Eddie Jones
Darius Miles
Zach Randolph
Theo Ratliff

i am thinking contender this year and definitely the next 1-3 years depending on the players' (mainly kidd and jones) continued high level play despite age and injury 

thoughts?


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

What we really need to ask ourselves this question. Is Kidd really worth the money he is getting? I don't think so, especially now that he is injured. And this also, pretty much gives Bassy No PT, and will be on the bench until he is about 23. 

Then again, the Nets will want Bassy back, but they aren't gonna get him. So most likely we'll have to send them a young player and a pick. Are you guys willing to scrafice some of our future to be a playoff team, MAYBE a title contender? 

Stick with our team. If SAR *****es, Cut him, who cares if we don't get anything back, atleast he won't be a cancer to the team with his attitude. Since some NBDL'er and give him 5-10 min. To rest Zach. Or let Patterson backup the 4 or Miles. We have a very versitile team. 

Remember, this might not even make us a title contender...Miles needs to have a better J, DA can't hit the broad side of a barn, ZBo is effective at 15-18 ft. and Theo...well he is theo..

BFreak.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

*Re: damon trade idea later in season...*



> Originally posted by <b>riehldeal</b>!
> some have proposed trading damon to miami when kidd returns for eddie jones, fillers would need to be included but i dont think thats too bad of an idea, only negatives would jones' contract and increasing age, but i love the way he plays D and not too bad a shooter, what do you guys think
> 
> a healthy Kidd
> ...


No. No. No. No. No. EJ and Kidd? Thats the salary cap right there...EJ is decent now, and definatly not worth the money.....So, Hell no.

BFreak.


----------



## riehldeal (May 11, 2003)

*yea just went to EJ's bio...*

and have nixed that in my mind as well...his slide is starting and he makes to much $$$

and just so my case is clear, if telfair is included i say HELL NO...but i do not think that kidd's presence would hinder his development, high schoolers arent ready to start for atleast 3 seasons anyways and learning from kidd is not a bad place to be at...if kidd proves to be healthy from the point he becomes activated till the end of the season then i think that both damon and NVE will be gone in the offseason and telfair will be the primary backup for kidd...worrying about such things is crossing too many bridges at once so to speak...yea you can always find negatives in deals if you look hard enough but chances are if you are looking that hard the negative (in this case hindering telfair's development) turns out not as bad as your thinking


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

I hope we dont make this deal... Kidd has too many years and $$$ on his contract, and he probably wont be the same player after knee surgery. He also carries the baggage of being a wife beater, something this team doesnt need.

In a few years, when Kidd slows down and Telfair is our starting PG, we'll be stuck with a VERY expensive back up PG.

I also agree with the post about Kidd not being able to shoot and teams playing a soft zone defense, which would smother Zach and kill his production. IMO.

NO THANKS!


----------



## Public Defender (May 5, 2003)

I was wondering if there might be some chatter about this potential Kidd-for-Abdur-Rahim deal going on... but looks like y'all caught wind of it before it hit the papers. Well done. 

Because it's in The O, I doubt it ever happens, but I tend to agree with Maurice Cheeks who's quoted as saying "if you can get Jason Kidd, you get Jason Kidd," or something very similar. 

I liked the comparison someone made to the Scottie Pippen decision a few years back. Pippen helped the Blazers immeasurably, despite being a step slower and a bit older. Kidd would have the same effect. My biggest concern would become frontcourt depth, as Z-Bo would become our only power forward. Free agents anyone? (and don't say Karl Malone)


----------



## CelticPagan (Aug 23, 2004)

If we aquired Kidd, we wouldn't resign Damon Stoudamire. Making Telfair the backup PG. So what's this about him not getting any PT? Also, Kidd, being older, may only want to play around 32 minutes a game. 

Look, the Nets just want to unload Kidd's contract. They aren't in a position to make demands. Rahim for Kidd straight up is fair, but with greater risks and greater possible returns for the Blazers.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

I'm not a big fan of Kids contract. I think that would really hurt portland's ability to sign and keep the players we really really want for our future. Particularly Telfair and Zach.

But really I think the thing that has gotten the least amount of discussion on this topic is how the aquiring of Kid would affect Damon.

Damon is well documented to skulk and not play well if he thinks he's going to be traded. If you bring in kid, place him on the bench IR while he recovers and play NVE and Damon for the first half of the season.....Your just sitting on a ticking time bomb.

The ONLY way I see this deal getting a chance of going down is if some way we unload Damon at the same time. That is the ONLY way I see us doing the deal. Start NVE at the PG spot for now and play Telfair as backup. Then when kid gets healthy he can slip in to starting with NVE backing up SG and PG with Telfair still getting minutes.

More then likely this would require a third team to get involved. Cause you know the moment Kid came to town, Damon would start playing like crap. hitting bricks, dragging his feet and stinking up the place. If they didn't trade him immediately this stink period would only hurt his trade value.

But if I had to chose between two point guards and I was given Damon and Kid? Kid. arguably the best passer in the game at this point now that stockton is gone. Who better to work with Telfair who is reported to be extremely gifted with passing the rock?

Without sending Damon packing, it just doesn't make sense to pick up yet another starting point guard. We would be setting ourselves up to fail. So Thanks for the offer NJ, We'd be happy to part with Rahim for kid. but only if you help us unload Damon too.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

I liked this quote from the article at CBSsportsline.com

_The concept prompted Steve Patterson to joke, "Actually, we're trying to build a roster with just point guards and small forwards." _ 

I thought that was a hoot....far to close to the truth. But a hoot.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

I think people need to stop all the talk about how Portland would be cap strapped for the next few years. Portland is as we all know a great place to live, but for a high end free agent I don't think it is. There are no endorsment deals to be had here like in bigger markets. If you can get Kidd and maybe Mourning you do it NOW. SAR., Damon and even Woods ......(fingers crossed) For Kidd, Mourning and filler would make us a contender. Hoping for free agents to come here is risky at best. Cap room doesn't giaranty that free agents will come here. A healthy Kidd and semi healthy Mourning are better than most free agents available anyway. The only thing that would make me hesitate would be sending Telfair.....which they might demand.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

with jason quick reporting that the nets have offered us the deal, i think its time to take this rumor seriously

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/

I think I would ok the deal if we could write a clause in his contract stating that he can't blow kisses at the free throw line


----------



## Ukrainefan (Aug 1, 2003)

rx2web,
I agree we would need to get rid of Damon but maybe he could be traded to new jersey without a third team. If they could get a "name" pg back it might lessen the blow to the fans and some of them might keep showing up. plus Damon's expiring contract would be attractive to them. i think there are some earlier post on this thread trading damon and sar for kidd, mourning and aaron williams. There are a couple other combinations that would work also.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

It is very tempting to trade for Kidd, he is a great player and would be an awesome floor leader for this team. HOWEVER, this isn't a perfect match but one that I would be able to live with if Kidd is 100% off of knee surgery.

Break it down a little. 


Rahim wants out
Kidd wants out
Rahim isn't really going to be happy playing the three and backing up Randolph at the four.
Rahim has a fat contract that expires after the season
Kidd has a fat contract period
Rahim is a 20/10 guy on bad teams
Kidd is the assist leader in the NBA when healthy
[/list=1] 

So what do you do? Damon is gone after next season and so is Van Exel, so that would leave Kidd as our started and Telfair as our backup? That would be interesting I would think, again if Kidd is healthy.

Like Cheeks said, if you can get Kidd you get Kidd. I think that he would be a decent addition for the price of Rahim and might be able to attract others to follow him to Portland.

It sure would make the Rasheed Wallace trade look a lot better. Rasheed and Wesley for Ratliff and Kidd. I think that you have to pull the trigger on this if your Portland, don't you?

Or this all might be a smoke screen 



> He's just trying to create a bidding war for SAR among other teams. Last season he had Sheed, who was a player that didn't want to play in Portland, everyone knew it and no-one made a serious offer. Suddenly, there was an offer from the Nets for K-Mart. Apparently, there was nothing really there. Now he has SAR, who doesn't want to play in Portland, everyone else knows it and no-one is offering anything significant. He wants Seattle to say "the Nets are offering JKidd, we'd better give up Ray Allen if we want to get SAR."


:whoknows:


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> you exchange Ruben for Zo in addition
> 
> Portland sends Rahim $14.6 + Patterson $6.8 mil with kicker = $21.4 mil
> ...


this deal makes a ton of sense to me. from PR/character side, we actually make a lot of progress. 

we unload a guy associated with rape for a guy known to have beaten his wife. (that's at least a little progress, right?) we also unload a guy known as a decent character (but somewhat winey) for Mourning, one of the more admirable guys in today's game. 

frankly, though, I don't care about any of that. if Mourning can give us just 20 minutes of quality backup play a night, it'd be huge for this team. certainly better than anything Davis or Stepania gave us last year. 

if Mourning can't give us that 20 minutes a night, then most likely he retires. we still come out ahead because we've now unloaded Patterson's salary.


----------



## Zuca (Dec 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>e_blazer1</b>!
> What astonishes me is that Patterson is quoted as acknowledging that talks are going on. Since when do the Blazers talk to the media about trade discussions?
> 
> Kidd's contract sure is UUUUGLY! I have a hard time believing that the Blazers are willing to give up an ending contract to take on Kidd at his age. I know we want a superstar, but jeez, there are limits.
> ...


I don't know if Portland would do this deal... Although he is a good PF, Mo Taylor has a bad contract too... But I've improved this blockbuster idea, including Boston...

Houston trades: PG Tyronn Lue (10.5 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.2 apg in 30.7 minutes) 
PG Jimmy Jackson (10.5 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.2 apg in 30.7 minutes) 
PF Maurice Taylor (11.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 1.4 apg in 27.8 minutes) 
SG Reece Gaines (1.8 ppg, 1.0 rpg, 1.1 apg in 9.6 minutes) 
Houston receives: SF Qyntel Woods (3.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 0.7 apg in 10.8 minutes) 
PG Gary Payton (14.6 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 5.5 apg in 34.5 minutes) 
SF Rick Fox (4.8 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 2.6 apg in 22.3 minutes) 
C Michael Stewart (0.5 ppg, 1.2 rpg, 0.0 apg in 5.9 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: -0.3 ppg, +1.7 rpg, and +2.1 apg. 

New Jersey trades: PG Jason Kidd (15.5 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 9.2 apg in 36.5 minutes) 
New Jersey receives: PG Tyronn Lue (10.5 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.2 apg in 76 games) 
PF Shareef Abdur-Rahim (16.3 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 2.0 apg in 85 games) 
Change in team outlook: +11.3 ppg, +3.6 rpg, and -3.0 apg. 

Portland trades: PF Shareef Abdur-Rahim (16.3 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 2.0 apg in 31.6 minutes) 
PG Damon Stoudamire (13.4 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 6.1 apg in 38.0 minutes) 
SF Qyntel Woods (3.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 0.7 apg in 10.8 minutes) 
Portland receives: PG Jimmy Jackson (10.5 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.2 apg in 76 games) 
PF Maurice Taylor (11.5 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 1.4 apg in 75 games) 
SG Reece Gaines (1.8 ppg, 1.0 rpg, 1.1 apg in 38 games) 
PG Jason Kidd (15.5 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 9.2 apg in 67 games) 
Change in team outlook: -4.5 ppg, -1.0 rpg, and +2.9 apg. 

Boston trades: PG Gary Payton (14.6 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 5.5 apg in 34.5 minutes) 
SF Rick Fox (4.8 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 2.6 apg in 22.3 minutes) 
C Michael Stewart (0.5 ppg, 1.2 rpg, 0.0 apg in 5.9 minutes) 
Boston receives: PG Damon Stoudamire (13.4 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 6.1 apg in 82 games) 
Change in team outlook: -6.5 ppg, -4.3 rpg, and -2.0 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED



The difference? Well... Payton want to play in Western Conference, don't wanna be in Boston. So, they can trade Fox, Michael Stewart and Gary Payton for Damon Stoudamire (well... he isn't a bad player, and his contract is expiring too)

Houston, with Fox (who can be waived), Michael Stewart (C/PF with no offense, but who can be an emergencial backup), and Gary Payton (which is old, but he is still a good quality PG), can improve and be set at PG... Qyntel Woods can play some minutes at SF, or even Sura can play as a SG sometimes, with McGrady playing some SF too... or, they can trade Fox for Pippen!


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

Someone posted at Oregonlive.com which made it into the blog this idea which I kinda like.

Rahim to NJ
Kidd to Seattle
Allen to Portland

They all make around the same $, and the players fit the needs of the teams getting them. But, I dare say seattle would be seriously scared off of the deal by kidds contract. I mean shoot they don't want to sign Allen to a long term $100 Million deal at his age why would they take on another?

Still if this could work this is the deal I would pull the trigger on.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

Seriously, where do I sign...

Kidd + Williams + Mourning = Damon + SAR + Woods?

Kidd/NVE/Telfair
DA/NVE/Frahm
Miles/Patterson
Randolph/Williams
Ratliff/Mourning/Przybilla

That's a solid 12 man roster. All this talk of other teams improving while the Blazers remained medicore would be out the door. The Blazers would be instant contenders for HCA and if allowed to gell, they would be title contenders very soon as Randolph, Miles, Telfair, Outlaw and Khryapa develop.

The nice thing is - if the team sticks together as Kidd is bowing out, guys like Telfair, Outlaw and Khryapa should be coming into their own. Also, Randolph and Miles would be just hitting their prime... this is a team that would be good now AND into the future.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

This would be a great trade for the Blazers *if* Kidd's knee looks like it will be okay. That is a big risk.


----------



## Blazerfan024 (Aug 15, 2003)

> Perhaps the biggest problem with the deal is the Blazers drafted prep point guard Sebastian Telfair with the 13th pick overall in the 2004 draft. Add to that, they already have point guards Damon Stoudamire and Nick Van Exel making some $27 million between them.
> 
> *The concept prompted Steve Patterson to joke, "Actually, we're trying to build a roster with just point guards and small forwards." *


I like that funny man Steve


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

*If* the Blazers add Kidd and *if* he's able to play, I'm not concerned about moving Damon or NVE. Sure, moving Damon and his salary might be a nice bonus but check out this line-up:

PG: Damon and NVE

SG: Kidd and DA

SF: Miles and Patterson

PF: Zach and.... (Honeycutt?)

C: Theo and JP

Either Kidd or Damon (or NVE) bring the ball up the court. Kidd then starts the offense. Damon is the primary range threat with both NVE and DA providing some of that from the bench. At times both Kidd and DA play together, Kidd sliding to PG.

It may be obvious that, as usual, I'm defining positions based on defense rather than offense. On offense it's nice to have a balance of ranged shooting, ball-handling, post play, slashing, and so on. While there are clearly "norms" that are based on position, there were times when Bonzi might well have been the best post player on the roster and he did just fine in that role much of the time.

It's still true that outside shooting is weak. I think of Damon as decent secondary threat (like the number two pitcher in baseball) and would still *very* much love to have someone capable of playing big minutes who could really stick it. That said, I'm not sure that's reason enough to not get Kidd.

Finally, the whole think with Kidd and his wife bothers me. A lot. And, I think I could live with it. My understanding, not to defend him, is that he hit her once. That's different from beating someone, at least in my mind. It's different from Patterson and his.... history. On the whole, my understanding of Kidd is that he's basically a good citizen who's got this one significant black mark. If he were added to the team, I'd be more worried about the stupid things that Patterson, Woods, Randolph and others might do than the things Kidd might do.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned in this forum. Mitch Lawrence also wrote an article about this trade being in the works, for the New York Daily News (this was posted in another forum on this site):



> Nets weight deal to send Kidd to Blazers
> 
> BY MITCH LAWRENCE
> 
> ...


My thoughts, based on a straight Abdur-Rahim for Kidd swamp: I am neither enthused nor horrified by this deal.

Kidd won't play until December and may not ever play at his highest level again. However, the Blazers are trading a player in Abdur-Rahim who, while talented, never fit in with Randolph. Since Randolph is younger and more valuable, that makes Abdur-Rahim not very useful to Portland. Kidd, meanwhile, would still be at least a good point guard even if limited and the ideal player for Telfair to watch and learn from.

As far as contracts go, Abdur-Rahim is an expiring deal and Kidd's is a five-year monstrosity. Win for New Jersey. But not necessarily a loss for Portland. If Portland gives Randolph a big, new deal and re-signs Miles or Ratliff (they likely will keep both), Portland won't be under the cap. If you're over the cap, you're over the cap, in for a penny, in for a pound. It doesn't really matter how much over the cap...except to the guy writing the checks. If Paul Allen can take it, I can, too.

It will make Portland better now and I really don't see it hurting Portland much within the five years Kidd is around for. Getting under the cap is hard unless you gut the team, and Portland was never likely to do that. So even if Kidd ends up as dead weight in a few years, Portland is likely to have been over the cap anyway.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Another thing to consider.... the luxury tax MAY go away next summer under a new CBA....

so the expense of Kidd's contract does not come into play with additional matching taxes... its only his slary straight up as an expense.

Maybe his contract would not be that bad after all under the new CBA next year :whoknows:


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

After reading through the thread, I like the Kidd/Pippen comparison. I think it's a very similar situation, with some small differences, of course. Kidd won't provide the defensive leadership or galvanization that Pippen did, but Kidd does have more pure passing ability than Pippen did.

We all want to see Miles finally take that next step up. Kidd might get him there, as he got Richard Jefferson up to a next level, in my opinion. He'll give Telfair a great mentor. It allows Portland to trade Stoudemire for value, as an expiring contract, without worry that Telfair will then have to start.

There are a lot of indirect values that Kidd may lead to. All in all, if this trade (this particular deal, SAR-for-Kidd, straight up, no throwing in Telfair or anyone else) is available, I think Portland should grab it.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> Kidd won't provide the defensive leadership or galvanization that Pippen did, but Kidd does have more pure passing ability than Pippen did.


actually I disagree on this one point if by "galvanizing" you mean "help bring an identity to a collection of talent." 

Pippen really galvanized a great defensive ethic on this team. at his best he orchestrated assignments on the fly, making great decisions that kept opponents on their heals. 

Kidd probably won't do that, but Kidd really defined that New Jersey team as a fantastic fast break team. on every single defensive rebound you saw all the Nets players scramble down the court because they knew there was a chance Kidd could make them look spectacular. 

most of the time we just seem to walk it up the court with no sense of urgency. it's astounding how lethargic a quick guard like Damon makes our fast break offense look. 

if we add Kidd, just watch how fast Randolph, Miles, Anderson and Ratliff turn this game into a track meet.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Not a good trade at all for Portland in my opinion. It's a *huge* step back financially for the team, and for the present time this deal may(not even a definite thing) vault them into the playoffs, but they still are not title contenders with Kidd, and if they do this trade they won't be for years. Throw in the fact that New Jersey won't trade Kidd just for SAR, I don't see why Portland would be interested. Just the fact that Telfair's name is being thrown around is alarming, I can't see why Portland does this deal. It may be good to have a "superstar" on the team, but they're not title contenders even with him. Throwing away the future and/or cap space just to be mediocre for a few years is counterproductive, and that's what I think Portland is doing if they execute this trade. This isn't a case of Miami giving up 3 good players for Shaq, they're now one of the best teams in the East now and are legit title contenders in the eyes of almost everyone. They have a few years to try and take home the title with Shaq. The Blazers still have little to no chance of winning a title with Kidd on the team barring another big trade.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>theWanker</b>!
> 
> 
> actually I disagree on this one point if by "galvanizing" you mean "help bring an identity to a collection of talent."


Sorry, "defensive" was supposed to modify *both* "leadership" and "galvanization." i.e. Pippen galvanized the Blazers' defense, as they seemed to play with more defensive energy and purpose when he was on the floor.

I agree that Kidd can forge a major offensive identity and galvanize the team on that end.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

From everything that I've managed to dig up. It looks like it was NJ that came to Portland and offered up Kidd. Any mention of Telfair has come from the east coast rather then anything mentioned as plausible on the West. 

Which is kinda surprising after all the uproar over draft choice on Draft night ready to lynch Nash/Patterson...suddenly the majority of the people seem to be in favor of keeping Telfair for years and years and years. That's a big turnaround.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>hobojoe</b>!
> 
> but they still are not title contenders with Kidd, and if they do this trade they won't be for years.


Why? Over the cap is over the cap...whether you're a dollar over a hundred million dollars over, you still can't sign free agents and you still *can* sign your own Bird-exception free agents.

So what, in concrete terms, would Portland lose by having Kidd on the payroll, outside of a roster spot and some raw Paul Allen cash?



> *Throw in the fact that New Jersey won't trade Kidd just for SAR*, I don't see why Portland would be interested.


That's not a fact. That's your opinion. Yes, Kidd from a couple years ago was definitely worth far more than SAR, but now: *A.* Kidd seems to be declining a little, *B.* Kidd is coming off severe injury and operation, and *C.* the Nets (or, rather, Ratner) want to dump payroll, and SAR's contract is hundreds of times better, expiring at the end of the year.

Therefore, I'm not sure you're right that it would take more than SAR. If it does, especially Telfair, I'm sure many people's opinions would change on the deal. Mine certainly would.


----------



## Blaze (Jan 25, 2003)

I think that the deal has to be SAR+Damon+Ruben for Kidd, Mourning, and Williams. NVE could start and play point until Kidd returns, possibly playing Telfair until Kidd's return, which could be sooner. I recall a doctor talking about 6 weeks recovery for this type of surgery. 

As for salaries, I say don't worry about it. The lux. tax is going up due to the Lakers TV money, so Allen doesn't have to worry about that. The 'zers probably weren't going to sign anyone next year anyway, so let's see what these guys can do in the new NW division. 

Kidd/NVE/Telfair
Anderson/Frahm
Miles/Woods
Randolph/Williams
Ratliff/Mourning/Pryzbilla


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Could this deal actually make financial sense for Portland? IT enable them to renounce Damon and Nick next summer. If they didn't have Jason they would likely have to retain one of them as well as likely Shareef to do a S&T deal.

Also Jason would be here till Telfair is 22 or 23 which would be about when he is truely ready to step into a starters role.

Good move IMO.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Another plus is the tension that the presence Shareef could present to the team. Granted Kidd would be in the mix with Damon and Nick, but he would in fact be out for a good period of time. And by the time he is back Damon and Nick may be coasting inot Free agency. Whereas Shareef is in a contract year and looking at not getting the time to earn the $$$.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>hobojoe</b>!
> for the present time this deal may(not even a definite thing) vault them into the playoffs, but they still are not title contenders with Kidd, and if they do this trade they won't be for years.... It may be good to have a "superstar" on the team, but they're not title contenders even with him. Throwing away the future and/or cap space just to be mediocre for a few years is counterproductive, and that's what I think Portland is doing if they execute this trade. This isn't a case of Miami giving up 3 good players for Shaq, they're now one of the best teams in the East now and are legit title contenders in the eyes of almost everyone. They have a few years to try and take home the title with Shaq. The Blazers still have little to no chance of winning a title with Kidd on the team barring another big trade.


nope, it's not a case of us landing Shaq. maybe we should hold our breath until Shaq wants traded to Portland? or Duncan or Kobe? 

yeesh. it's not like superstar free agents are beating down the door to get to Oregon. 

with Ratliff, Miles, Pippen, Smith, Anderson, Bonzi and Rasheed, we've got a pretty solid history of adding good players via trade. (we also made a few blunders, Jermaine O'Neal being the most obvious. but these things happen.) we've got almost no history of building by holding out for trades/free agent signings of premiere players at the peak of their games looking to move to Portland. 

the Kidd trade fits in pretty nicely with our traditional (Trader Bob inspired) manner of preying on the misfortunes (and at times incompetence) of others. 

it ain't all pretty, though. it's risky, it involves giving up some youth, and it usually involves us sucking up a bad contract or two. 

but on the other hand, we've had one of the more successful franchises in the past ten years without ever fielding a top 10 players, so it's a decent recipe for success. especially given our small market.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

btw, I do agree that we should have no illusions about being a contending team by adding Kidd. he'll get us fighting for home court in the playoffs (instead of fighting just to get in the playoffs), but he's not the deal breaker for us to become a contender. 

he is a good stepping stone in the road to contention, though. if we can get improvements in Randolphs passing/defense and improvements in Miles' shooting, contention isn't that far away with Kidd at the helm. 

without Kidd leading this team, though, our best hope is to wait for Telfair to mature, which also means finding a replacement for Ratliff (who will be broken down by that point).


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Here's thedeal I would make and looking at the waiving of Harris today it makes some sense.

Shareef and DA for Kidd and Mourning.

While Kidd is injured you start Damon and Nick with Frahm and Woods getting backup minutes at the 2.

Mourning becomes the backup 4 to Zach and can play some 5 if needed.

When Kidd comes back he starts at the 1 with either Nick or Damon at the 2 and there is basically a 3 guard rotation. At 6'4" Kidd defends the 2 of the other team.

In addition factor in parting with Dereks salary and bringing in Kidds is a lttle easier to swallow.

Blazers Lineup (Kidd on IR)

PG Damon/NVE/ST
SG NVE/Woods/Frahm
SF Miles/Patterson
PF Randolph/Mourning
C Ratliff/Mourning/Pryzbilla

Blazers after Kidd is back

PG Kidd/NVE/Damon/Telfair
SG Damon/NVE/Woods/Frahm
SF-C same as above


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Will Kidd follow Martin, Kittles out the door? 



> Nets CEO Rod Thorn told the newspaper Tuesday night that New Jersey is not close to dealing Kidd.


I don't see anything happening right now, but it does give us something to talk about doesn't it?

Even if Kidd has to sit out part of the season or all of this season, I would still do this deal. Portland has the man power to let Kidd sit if they needed to, but only if it meant that he came back 100% and that is the risk that John Nash has to be dealing with right now. IS KIDD GOING TO BE THE SAME JASON KIDD ONCE HE IS CLEARED TO PLAY?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

HOWIE this is the same tactic Thorn used in the days before dealing Martin and Kittles. It means nothing IMO.


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

on 1080 Primetime, they said they made a few calls and found out 2 things :

* NJ did infact call Portland with the offer
* Sebastian Telfair will NOT be in the deal.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

I'd pretty much blow off what Thorn says. over and over and over you hear GM's say a deal is not going down right up until the moment the papers get signed.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

In a way I think if this is the best deal around you do it. Free agent money is overrated. You do this deal for now and even in the future. Why? Because when Jason Kidd is no longer the Jason Kidd we know, he would be the best teacher to teach young Sebastian. I think doing this trade benefits both our present and future team.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

The more that I listen to the arguements either way. The more time that I have to ponder this trade. The more that I think that we need to do it. grab the bull by the horns and make it happen. Even if it's a straight up 1 for 1 trade. We need to do it. At this point I think that the only hangup I would have would be Kidd's Medical condition. Let the trade rest on the doctors reports. If they give a big fat OK then I say houston we have a go for launch.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

I hope this deal happens I know most of you have lost faith in woods but we need a growing 2 guard because Da is not the answer long term


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

I suppose most of you have seen this on OregonLive's Blazers blog, but here's a link describing Kidd's surgery:

Microfracture Surgery 

OUCH!  

Roughly 3/4 success rate, but that 3% made worse figure is a concern.


----------



## trifecta (Oct 10, 2002)

I'm a little surprised to see so much opposition to the deal. (Actually I'm surprised that there's ANY!)

Kidd is a legitimate superstar. Characterwise, he made a mistake, stood up and admitted to it, and took corrective actions to keep his family together. Anyone who believes that this alone ought to be a dealbreaker better be preaching that we shouldn't resign Zbo - unlike Kidd, Zbo has a track record of deviance.

Money. Why are we trying to get under the cap if not to sign a player like this? Just as it's no guarantee that Kidd will be at his old form again, it's even less of a guarantee (IMO) that we could attract close to the same talent.

Age. 31 isn't that old - especially for someone who doesn't rely on a huge amount of athletisism for the game. Also, as others have said, once Damon and NVE are gone, there will be plenty of minutes available for Telfair.

I know there would be some attitude problems by bringing in Kidd. With Stouds though, how bad could he act since this is a contract year? If he reverts and acts like a little *****, even he will know that that will bottom-out his trade value.

I just don't see a downside to this. If the docs say Kidd is progressing as well as they were expecting, get this deal done ASAP.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> Why? Over the cap is over the cap...whether you're a dollar over a hundred million dollars over, you still can't sign free agents and you still *can* sign your own Bird-exception free agents.
> ...


In terms of cap space, sure you're right. But that's still money the owner has to shell out, and as the pay roll adds up even higher the team has to become hesitant to add even more pay roll, especially with the prospect of the luxury tax looming. There's a huge difference between having SARs deal come off the books after this season and $90 Million still owed to Kidd. 





> That's not a fact. That's your opinion. Yes, Kidd from a couple years ago was definitely worth far more than SAR, but now: *A.* Kidd seems to be declining a little, *B.* Kidd is coming off severe injury and operation, and *C.* the Nets (or, rather, Ratner) want to dump payroll, and SAR's contract is hundreds of times better, expiring at the end of the year.


SAR certainly doesn't have much value at this point in time either. He's never played for a winner, he was playing 15-20 minutes a game at the end of last season when Portland was making a playoff push, it's well known that Portland is shopping him, he's threatened to hold out for a trade and it's obvious he's unhappy in Portland. On top of that, he's not nearly the player Kidd is, not even close. Kidd's value may be down significantly right now, but so it SAR's.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

I'm weighing in late here, but I have just one thing to say: 

THIS TRADE IS A WINDFALL FOR PORTLAND!!

Jason Kidd is a superstar. He is the best point guard in the NBA, hands down. He is a hustle player. He is the kind of player who makes everybody on the team better. He has an extremely high basketball I.Q. He has a tremendous work ethic. He loves to PASS. He loves to start the fast-break. He plays to WIN. Period.

To get that kind of a player for Abdur-Rahim, who is basically extra baggage on this team, is an incredible bargain.

Kidd single-handedly turned the NJ Nets into title contenders overnight. No other player in recent memory has had such a huge impact on a new team. Have you all forgotten that?

The downside, of course, is Kidd's injury. But you have to weigh that against what we are giving up for him, which is not that much. Rahim is a redundant player. We already have Randolph at power forward. In other words, even if Kidd doesn't pan out, what have we lost? Not much.

This deal MUST happen. NJ is clearly unloading all their stars, and Portland needs a star. They have not had a player of Kidd's caliber since Clyde Drexler. Kidd (assuming he is healthy) would elevate Portland to a title contender immediately. Period.

Do this deal now, Nash. You'll kick yourself if you don't.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>hobojoe</b>!
> 
> 
> In terms of cap space, sure you're right. But that's still money the owner has to shell out, and as the pay roll adds up even higher the team has to become hesitant to add even more pay roll, especially with the prospect of the luxury tax looming. There's a huge difference between having SARs deal come off the books after this season and $90 Million still owed to Kidd.


To Allen's pocketbook, yes. To the team's "future," no. Allen has to approve this deal...if he does, he's saying he doesn't care about the monetary hit.



> SAR certainly doesn't have much value at this point in time either. He's never played for a winner


What, now even you are going to go to that old myth, that a single player is to blame for winning and losing? Tracy McGrady was to blame for the 19-game losing streak, too?

SAR has been on terrible teams. The Memphis Grizzlies and Atlanta Hawks have been two of the worst franchises in basketball, until West, a great GM, arrived in Memphis. SAR was already gone by then. This has nothing to do with SAR.



> he was playing 15-20 minutes a game at the end of last season when Portland was making a playoff push, it's well known that Portland is shopping him, he's threatened to hold out for a trade and it's obvious he's unhappy in Portland. On top of that, he's not nearly the player Kidd is, not even close. Kidd's value may be down significantly right now, but so it SAR's.


The point is that SAR's contract expires. He's a 20/10 type of player as a starter, which is definitely valuable. In fact, he'd more then replace Martin offensively, he's just not Martin's equal defensively. But that's just for this season anyway, a lost season. At the end of the season is SAR's major value to New Jersey, in that he expires, while Kidd has four years left on his deal after next season.

This deal is *far* less lopsided than Kenyon Martin for three draft picks. That deal showed that New Jersey is not looking for good value, just the chance to dump salary.

As far as SAR "not being nearly the player Kidd is," that has yet to be determined. Kidd, post-surgery, may very well not be the player Kidd used to be *or* the player SAR currently is. Portland takes on that risk and a huge contract that pays Kidd until he's 36...well beyond when he's guaranteed to be terrible value for the money.

This isn't very unbalanced at all, unless you completely ignore the risks involved, pretend none of SAR's previous year stats count and assume that Kidd will not decline at all until 36.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Schilly</b>!
> Shareef and DA for Kidd and Mourning.


NJ is going to need a PG period... we are not giving them Telfair, so it leaves either NVE or Damon...

I was not really that enamored with NVE, and I believe Sept 20 he is eligible to be traded.

Hmmmmm


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

OK OK, there is only one way to solve this! Video Game! After I finish some things, I'm gonna try this roster.



BFreak.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Trader Bob</b>!
> 
> 
> NJ is going to need a PG period... we are not giving them Telfair, so it leaves either NVE or Damon...
> ...






I think Damon will be the one shipped to Jersey


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

I'd much rather have Damon shipped than Nick.


----------

