# Kidd likes the Lakers, but the Lakers are worried about cap?



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Kidd would prefer to go to the Lakers, Spurs or Mavericks if he's traded 

It says that the Lakers are one of the teams atop of Kidd's wishlist, but that the Lakers would be hesitant to trade for him because he and Kobe would take up much of the caproom. It says a potential deal would be something like we were discussing (GP, Fox, Rush, Walton/Cook, possibly picks for Kidd).

Who the hell cares about cap room when you have Kidd, Kobe and Odom?!


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> Kidd would prefer to go to the Lakers, Spurs or Mavericks if he's traded
> 
> It says that the Lakers are one of the teams atop of Kidd's wishlist, but that the Lakers would be hesitant to trade for him because he and Kobe would take up much of the caproom. It says a potential deal would be something like we were discussing (GP, Fox, Rush, Walton/Cook, possibly picks for Kidd).
> ...


Jkidd, Kobe, and Odom = NBA Finals

I agree lets get this deal done right now.


----------



## Kaas (Apr 8, 2003)

If Kidd comes, then the Lakers will need more finishers ala Martin and Jefferson. Who's the second best finisher? George? :dead: Still, that's a deal they should make in a heat beat.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> Kidd would prefer to go to the Lakers, Spurs or Mavericks if he's traded
> 
> It says that the Lakers are one of the teams atop of Kidd's wishlist, but that the Lakers would be hesitant to trade for him because he and Kobe would take up much of the caproom. It says a potential deal would be something like we were discussing (GP, Fox, Rush, Walton/Cook, possibly picks for Kidd).
> ...


Easy to say this when you are not the one spending the money. It's not a guarantee that the Lakers win the title with Jason Kidd, because trading for him, strips them of their depth. Kidd is better on a team that can absorb the talent losses and still be fairly deep. 

Like Memphis, Portland or Dallas.


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

I guess the Lakers feel if they take on Kidd's contract they'll be sort of be in the same situation they' would've been in had they kept Shaq, which is no flexibility. Kidd, Kobe, Lamar and Grant all have huge, (and more importantly) long-term contracts which I think is what's scaring the Lakers away from trying to make a deal for Kidd. Still, if it was me I'd take the chance.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Locke</b>!
> I guess the Lakers feel if they take on Kidd's contract they'll be sort of be in the same situation they' would've been in had they kept Shaq, which is no flexibility. Kidd, Kobe, Lamar and Grant all have huge, (and more importantly) long-term contracts which I think is what's scaring the Lakers away from trying to make a deal for Kidd. Still, if it was me I'd take the chance.


You have to be careful though, because Kidd has 5 years left on his deal. I suspect the Lakers are going to bow out of Kidd's services, because if they *don't win with him* (which is a distinct possibility), they may have hurt their future and wasted some of Kobe's best years not putting the right talent around him. If Kidd's deal only has 2-3 years on it, I would agree, but his deal is another *5* years. If I am Dr. Buss, I pass.


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> 
> 
> You have to be careful though, because Kidd has 5 years left on his deal. I suspect the Lakers are going to bow out of Kidd's services, because if they *don't win with him* (which is a distinct possibility), they may have hurt their future and wasted some of Kobe's best years not putting the right talent around him. If Kidd's deal only has 2-3 years on it, I would agree, but his deal is another *5* years.


Yep, that's what I'm saying. That's the problem. It may work and it may not. Either way though there are no guarantees, Kidd or no Kidd.

I still see him going to the Mavs.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Payton
Fox
George 
Cook
2 1st Rounders

for Kidd

C-Vlade/Grant
Pf-Malone/Slava/Douthit
Sf-Odom/Butler/Walton
Sg-Kobe/Rush
Pg-Kidd/Vujacic


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wilt_The_Stilt</b>!
> Payton
> Fox
> George
> ...


This is what Im saying Wilt. 

I agree with Locke about being in the same spot with Kidd as we were with Shaq. 

There's no way the Lakers don't win it with Jkidd manning the point, locking down 1's and dishing to Kobe, Lamar, and Butler. 

Lakers have servicable bigs already. Adding Jkidd makes everyone's job easier. 

This is just a pipe dream though No way Buss spends that kinda dough for Kidd. 

He wants to win cheap . Just like the Bulls who didn't want to mortgage the house to win a title anymore. The merchandise sales had leveled off and it wasn't as profitable anymore. 

Lakers I think would easily win the title with those 3 though. 

Jkidd was a bad knee from beating the Pistons last season with KMart and RJ he surely could do it this season with Kobe and Lamar who are better players. 

The Lakers would play at a Showtime type tempo. BUT they'd have Kobe in the halfcourt when the game slowed down. 

Buss isn't gonna pay the bill though.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

First of all, any deal for J Kidd is going to include one if not two of your good players. Most LIKELY Odom and Caron plus throw-ins to make the numbers work. Then you factor in the J Kidd is aging, he has a max contract, just came off kneee surgery, a game SEVEN where he had zero points, and for the next like 7 years, the Lakers will be totally LOCKED DOWN on salary... As in, no way can you sign anybody of decency. The Lakers would get the shaft if they did this deal...


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I think the 3 year title run is definitely clouding people's judgment. The Lakers even with Kidd would not easily win the title. Injury concerns are still a big deal on this team. Having Kidd, vaults them up to a top contender status, but they would not be the odds on favorite.


----------



## City_Dawg (Jul 25, 2004)

Its a risky move, even more so since Kidd has been breaking down lately.

i wouldn't do it, but thats just me


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> First of all, any deal for J Kidd is going to include one if not two of your good players. Most LIKELY Odom and Caron plus throw-ins to make the numbers work. Then you factor in the J Kidd is aging, he has a max contract, just came off kneee surgery, a game SEVEN where he had zero points, and for the next like 7 years, the Lakers will be totally LOCKED DOWN on salary... As in, no way can you sign anybody of decency. The Lakers would get the shaft if they did this deal...


Although I seriously don't see Kidd coming to the Lakers, the Nets reason behind getting rid of Kenyon Martin, Kerry Kittles and J Kidd is to get rid of long-term contracts. So I don't think they'd be looking to get Odom or anybody else with a multiple years remaining. They may want Butler since he's still on his rookie contract, but I doubt they'd want Odom. The trade that Wilt_The_Stilt proposed or something more along the lines of what Dallas will propose (expiring contracts) is more likely something they'd want.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Locke</b>!
> 
> 
> Although I seriously don't see Kidd coming to the Lakers, the Nets reason behind getting rid of Kenyon Martin, Kerry Kittles and J Kidd is to get rid of long-term contracts. So I don't think they'd be looking to get Odom or anybody else with a multiple years remaining. They may want Butler since he's still on his rookie contract, but I doubt they'd want Odom. The trade that Wilt_The_Stilt proposed or something more along the lines of what Dallas will propose (expiring contracts) is more likely something they'd want.


Maybe so, but the Nets aren't going to just give him away for salary... They need something in return, I'm sure if Kidd didn't exist, and they had a ton of money, and Odom wanted to sign with them, I am positive they would sign him. So why wouldn't they want him in a trade. I don't see them taking a bunch of crap and money for a superstar when they can get multiple young good players. Either way, Lakers are getting shafted if a deal does go down, you'll be like the Knicks, so many long term contracts. You'd be locked up for a long time... 5 years I believe Hong Kong said...


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> I think the 3 year title run is definitely clouding people's judgment. The Lakers even with Kidd would not easily win the title. Injury concerns are still a big deal on this team. Having Kidd, vaults them up to a top contender status, but they would not be the odds on favorite.


I think they would be. The Nets took the Pistons to 7 games after having them down 4-3. Jkidd just couldn't push it with his knee. 

Lakers I think would be odds on favorites to win it. 

But there's no right answers here just opinions. Nothing's clouding my mind but a team with 2 of the best 5 players in the league plus Odom as the 3rd wheel would make the lakers potent. 

I agree no one easily wins a title but they would be favorites. 

But I'm not gonna get worked up about a hypothetical thats not gonna happen.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> 
> 
> I think they would be. *The Nets took the Pistons to 7 games after having them down 4-3. Jkidd just couldn't push it with his knee. *
> ...


Wait wait wait, so are you saying that last season the Nets were the second best team in the NBA? :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

So you think a team with Kidd, Kobe and Odom is better than a team lead by Duncan, Parker, Ginobili and Brent Barry? 

What happens when they can't fastbreak? The offense will consist of Kobe creating shots within the confines 7 seconds or less on the shot clock. Kidd rarely posts up anymore, not to mention he doesn't defend PG's anymore. He has defended SG's for the last two years running because his lateral quickness defensively declined. 

Bottomline, If you trade Shaq because of his age and worry about injury, you can't bring in Jason Kidd for the same reasons. If he does get hurt, the Lakers are sunk, because their team isn't just stocked from top to bottom with quality players. 

Not to mention that Buss is not Paul Allen or Mark Cuban when it comes to spending money (he also is not as rich as they are either).


Edit: The West is too deep to say that even with Kidd the Lakers are the odds-on favorites. I have a feeling that yet again this year, injuries are going to determine who goes to the Finals.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> So you think a team with Kidd, Kobe and Odom is better than a team lead by Duncan, Parker, Ginobili and Brent Barry?
> 
> What happens when they can't fastbreak? The offense will consist of Kobe creating shots within the confines 7 seconds or less on the shot clock. Kidd rarely posts up anymore, not to mention he doesn't defend PG's anymore. He has defended SG's for the last two years running because his lateral quickness defensively declined.
> ...


Always does... Sadly


----------



## radronOmega (Aug 1, 2004)

*re*

Not gonna ask for Odom or Butler, probably expiring contracts, our 2.4 trade ex, and we wil force em to throw in deaven and maybe a draft pick, not 2. He will proabably go to Dallas but 

Kid, Kobe, Odom, how do you NOT go for that? I say we get him then after 60 days trade him after we boost his stock up a bit. Buying low, selling high. Heck we could get Theo or someone of that sort.


----------



## spiraling (Feb 16, 2003)

If the Lakers get kidd there is no doubt that they may go all the way, but the chances are against us. First kidd is declining, second he's aging, third he has an injured knee, and fourth a bad contract. Not to mention how do we know kobe is gonna along with him? Jkidd takes alot of shots and always controlls the ball which is not the style kobe wants to play. Kobe don't want to be the spotup shooter or finisher he wants to play off the dribble, 1v1 that's his game. If things don't work out the lakers are doom for yrs to come, not to mention a waste of kobe's prime yrs and clear out of our depts. While if they stay with this lineup they might be able to pick up a good big man and they're all set. Trading Odom and Butler is ludacris one of the worst move eveeeeeeeeeeeeer, Odom and Butler are future star players and Kidd is a declining oldgie. If we can get him for a few first round picks include Fox like Martin then I'll do it. The bottom line is Jkidd in a Lakers uniform is a bad idea.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> So you think a team with Kidd, Kobe and Odom is better than a team lead by Duncan, Parker, Ginobili and Brent Barry?
> 
> What happens when they can't fastbreak? The offense will consist of Kobe creating shots within the confines 7 seconds or less on the shot clock. Kidd rarely posts up anymore, not to mention he doesn't defend PG's anymore. He has defended SG's for the last two years running because his lateral quickness defensively declined.
> ...


You do understand Jkidd doesn't make 30 mill a year. You do understand that don't you. 

If all we're trading is garbage players to get him like the ones Wilt mentioned. And I'm going on that scenario for the point of this conversation. Then how exactly does a Jkidd injury change anything. We would still have Kobe, odom and Butler. Same team we have now.How would we be sunk. 

We are trading nothing to get him .

Lakers would be better than Manu, Parker and Barry, you speak of them like they're hall of famers. 

Manu is a 10ppg scorer who makes tons of mistakes and not so many jumpers. 

Parker was exposed last post season. 

And Barry is just a role player. 

Duncan is the truth but so what Kobe and Kid are the truth and Odom is better than any of those other 3. 

Lakers will easily be the odds on favorite. 

Manu,Barry and parker thats a joke. 

You really mean Duncan. 

Jkidd does guard pg's what are you saying last season he had a bad wheel the season before he was guarding pg's.

And I like how you conveniently left out Odom . Odom can create in the half court also. He can get a shot and manufacture offense.

Kobe would control the rest of the half court offense.

Kobe and Jkidd are 2 superstars and Odom is on the cusp of being an allstar. 

Parker, Manu and Barry aren't close to that level and Duncan is all world. 

Lakers Odds on favorites with Jkidd, Kobe, and Odom. Plus I' take Butler before I'd take Manu.


----------



## MiamiHeat03 (Mar 28, 2003)

how would you take Butler over Manu?
NO way i say they are about equal but i would take Manu over Butler if i am the Lakers.

Parker is a risen star who will only get better as also Odom. Both of them are good.
Parker > Payton
Barry < Kobe
Bruce < Odom
Duncan > Malone/Grant
Nestoric = Divac


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MiamiHeat03</b>!
> how would you take Butler over Manu?
> NO way i say they are about equal but i would take Manu over Butler if i am the Lakers.
> 
> ...


While I understand where you're coming from, individual player comparisons have *never* determined who would win a 7 game playoff series better than, say, objective and vigilant watching and statistical analysis. Just an FYI.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

We need to bank our titles while we can, there's plenty of time to stink later.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> 
> 
> While I understand where you're coming from, individual player comparisons have *never* determined who would win a 7 game playoff series better than, say, objective and vigilant watching and statistical analysis. Just an FYI.


Yeah, look at the Pistons, it doesn't go by individual players, but how you all lock together. 

Perimeter Defender - Prince
Interior Defender - Wallacex2
Rebounder - B. Wallace
Scorer - Hamilton / R. Wallace / Billups
Last second shot makers - Hamilton/Billups

And they all meshed, nobody did anything outside of what they needed to do. That's a team. So to go on individual players as to who < who, is not a good measure as to which team will win.


----------



## h8breed (Jun 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MiamiHeat03</b>!
> how would you take Butler over Manu?
> NO way i say they are about equal but i would take Manu over Butler if i am the Lakers.
> 
> ...


it should be 
Parker >>Payton

Barry <<<< Kobe

Bruce << Odom

Duncan >>> Malone/Grant

Nestrovic << Divac

nesterovic is so soft hes jsut a big body at least divac passes well


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>h8breed</b>!
> 
> 
> it should be
> ...


You might want to fix that, you need to put spaces in between your > and < ,s read your post, it makes no sense until you quote it and see it in its original format


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

It's intriguing but I just might stay away from it if I'm the Lakers. Kidd is coming off the first knee operation of his career. That generally doesn't bode well for a 31 year old PG who had lost a step to begin with. His contract isn't all that attractive either. He doesn't make $30 million a year but he makes alot and the duration is incredibly long by NBA standards. He'd kill our cap flexibility for years to come. If we don't win with him, there's little chance of upgrading the roster. Here are the pros and cons as I see them:

*Pros* 
-He's still the best fastbreak PG in the NBA
-He's equally effective as a halfcourt passer
-He'll crash the boards
-He's still a decent finisher
-He's not as quick as he once was but he's a willing defender
-He'll readily take a backseat to Kobe and Odom

*Cons* 
-He's not an effective scorer in the halfcourt
-He can't shoot worth a lick
-He can't defend most PGs anymore
-He's had knee problems for 2 straight years now
-He's old by NBA PG standards


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> First of all, any deal for J Kidd is going to include one if not two of your good players.


Uhh...clearly, the Nets aren't looking to match talent in their deals.

GP, Fox two of our young players and first round picks would certainly be enough.


----------



## JYD (Sep 3, 2002)

<b>Possible contracts for LA</b>
J Kidd...14.8...5 yrs
K Bryant...14.2...7 yrs
B Grant...13.3...3 yrs
L Odom...10.5...5 yrs

With Kobe, Lamar and Vujacic under contract the Lakers are due to pay 38.4 mill in salary in 5 yrs, so assuming they keep there draft picks they and don't sign anybody else they will be very close to the cap anyways, w/o Kidd. If the Nets are interested I say do it. Sure Kidd has his weaknesses, but so does Payton. If Payton does not return after this season, we'll have no PG and no money to sign one.

<b>NJ Nets</b>
C Jason Collins_Nenad Krstic
F Aaron Williams_Brian Scalabrine_Kyle Davis
F Richard Jefferson_Luke Walton_Rick Fox
G Lucious Harris_Kareem Rush_Rodney Buford
G Gary Payton_Jacque Vaughn_Zoran Planinic

*the Nets are expected to sign F Eric Williams and G Ron Mercer

<b>LA Lakers</b>
C Vlade Divac
F Brian Grant_Brian Cook
F Lamar Odom_Caron Butler_Devean George
G Kobe Bryant_Sasha Vujacic
G Jason Kidd

*the Lakers are expected to sign F Slava Medvedenko and C Marcus Douthit


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Next year the Lakers have two draft picks and the MLE and LLE (since it was given out last summer). They will have enough to find someone.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> 
> It says that the Lakers are one of the teams atop of Kidd's wishlist, but that the Lakers would be hesitant to trade for him because he and Kobe would take up much of the caproom. It says a potential deal would be something like we were discussing (GP, Fox, Rush, Walton/Cook, possibly picks for Kidd).


I´d just *love* to see Kidd in our team...
GP is not JKidd;
Fox is a non-factor;
Rush, Walton (who i like) and Cook are easily repleaceble through the draft....

So Kidd´s contract runs for 5 years?
Forgive me by saying this, but i just don't care... Kidd has the right attitude...

People would knock down his game cause we would be shooting too much (and he is a lousy shooter), but that wouldn´t happen in LA: Kobe will take care of the shooting...

Kidd (although his health could raise some eye brows) and Kobe would be a terrific defensive backcourt;
Kidd wouldn´t mind being the "set-up guy", getting the guys involved and finding the open men to shoot;
He wouldn´t demand the ball...
He would be a monster in the fast break till age 40, for he has a great bball IQ, IMHO;

He wouldn´t bring us the title this year (or would he?  ), but a Kidd/Kobe/Odom foundation would be terrific for the following years...

Hell, it would seem like the Showtime Lakers all over again...

I´m all for it...


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> Next year the Lakers have two draft picks and the MLE and LLE (since it was given out last summer). They will have enough to find someone.


Draft picks? In the low first round (hopefully)? I don't think so...

MLE and the LLE? What FA will be willing to join a falling franchise? Malone and Payton were one in a life time chance... think Chicago...


----------



## U reach. I teach (May 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> Next year the Lakers have two draft picks and the MLE and LLE (since it was given out last summer). They will have enough to find someone.


Yeah, but how much easier would it be to find a rebounder/shotblocker with those then to find a replacement for Gary?


----------



## U reach. I teach (May 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>JYD</b>!
> <b>Possible contracts for LA</b>
> With Kobe, Lamar and Vujacic under contract the Lakers are due to pay 38.4 mill in salary in 5 yrs, so assuming they keep there draft picks they and don't sign anybody else they will be very close to the cap anyways, w/o Kidd.


Exactly, the lakers will have no significant "flexablity" (unless the cap goes up alot) until Lamar's contract is over, especially if we re-sign Butler, and Sasha. Lamar's contract is over the same year as Kidd's. I wasn't convinced at first, but if we don't have to give up any significant parts (butler, odom) then I'd pull the trigger. I'd be a little hesitant, though, if I were signing the checks. :laugh:


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

i dont care what anyone says, the lakers need 2 superstars to win it all....


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> Next year the Lakers have two draft picks and the MLE and LLE (since it was given out last summer). They will have enough to find someone.


No, the Lakers won't get Miami's draft pick until 2006. In 2006, it's lottery-protected, but I highly doubt that the Heat will be in the lottery.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PauloCatarino</b>!
> 
> 
> Draft picks? In the low first round (hopefully)? I don't think so...
> ...


Falling franchise where. You can't mean the lakers you need to have your banner revoked for that comment.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> 
> 
> Falling franchise where. You can't mean the lakers you need to have your banner revoked for that comment.


Bad choice of words... Sorry about that... *PauloCatarino kicks himself in the butt*

What i meant was something like: without Shaq, the Lakers are no longer *sure-fire* title contenders, and barring some miraculous trades, won´t be in the near future (that is if *this* Laker team doesn´t overachieve - and i sure hope it does...)
So we *could* be talking about a team going 1st round/2nd round and out till it can get rid of the huge contracts...
And Kobe sure seems to be the kind of player who isn´t easy to play alongside...

In this scenario, i don´t think LA has much appeal for FA... On the other hand could we get a difference-maker kind of player with the MLE? Doubtfulll...

So, let´s get Kidd!!!


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

Not sure why you all are assuming you're going to have to give up a lot to get Kidd. The Nets have already traded 2 starters without getting a single player in return.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

Considering how Mitchsuckchap manages, this is a loongggggggggg shot for us to have Kidd land in the La La Land.


----------



## Sha-Kobe O'Bryant (Jan 3, 2003)

Well according to reports Antoine Walker has been dealt to the Hawks for Jason Terry and Alan Henderson.

I believe this pretty much knocks the Mavs out of contention for Jason Kidd. That's if they really were interested in the first place.

This is incredible. The Lakers are the clear cut favorite to land Jason Kidd IF they want him. Not only that, but to land him for almost nothing.

The best point guard in the league is there for the Lakers taking.
Mitch and Buss HAVE to make that deal.

Vlade
Grant(Malone?)
Odom
Kobe
Kidd

That team would be great. And contenders for the title.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Buss owes it to the Laker fans to bring in Kidd after trading Shaq! Simple as that.


----------

