# Skip Bayless Wants Jason Kidd to Portland



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

On 1st and 10, they were discussing Jason Kidd and the Nets, and essentially came to the conclusion that they need to part ways. Bayless goes on to say he'd like to see Kidd go to Portland for Aldridge, Jack, and next year's 1st. Your thoughts?

I think helmit has probably posted Kidd-related trades in the past. I'm at the same point essentially as I've been in relation to Kidd for a while now. He doesn't fit with the timeline of the team, and we'd have to give up a decent piece to get him (Aldridge in this case). I don't see it being worth it.


----------



## Krstic All-Star (Mar 9, 2005)

As a Nets fan, it'd be great for us - but, like so much of what Bayless says, it would be stupid for the Blazers to swing it. You've got a hell of a young big man corps growing, and an Oden/Aldridge frontcourt is downright scary.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

If Kidd were 5 years younger, sure. Since he's got about the equivalent of 150K on the odometer, forget it.


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

Bayless = idiot. 

Aldridge isn't going anywhere. Kidd is over the hill, and probably looking for a lengthy extension. We don't need him at that price.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

LameR said:


> On 1st and 10, they were discussing Jason Kidd and the Nets, and essentially came to the conclusion that they need to part ways. Bayless goes on to say he'd like to see Kidd go to Portland for Aldridge, Jack, and next year's 1st. Your thoughts?
> 
> I think helmit has probably posted Kidd-related trades in the past. I'm at the same point essentially as I've been in relation to Kidd for a while now. He doesn't fit with the timeline of the team, and we'd have to give up a decent piece to get him (Aldridge in this case). I don't see it being worth it.


I wouldn't give up LMA for Kidd straight across. LMA is important to go with Oden for the next 10 years. LMA has huge upside and IMO will be a all star caliber PF. I wouldn't mind Kidd for a couple years but wouldn't give up more then Frye, Jack and this years 1st rnd pick


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

I've always been a big fan of Kidd, but the timing is all wrong.

By the time the rest of the roster was ready to make a serious run, Kidd would be at home in his rocking chair! His highest value is to a team ready to contend *now*.


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

I woulden't trade Aldridge but the trade that I would do is Raef LeFrentz, Jarrett Jack, Channing Frye and a 2nd round pick to the Nets for Jason Kidd:cheers: http://realgm.com/src_tradechecker/3/


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

BlazerFan22 said:


> I woulden't trade Aldridge but the trade that I would do is Raef LeFrentz, Jarrett Jack, Channing Frye and a 2nd round pick to the Nets for Jason Kidd:cheers: http://realgm.com/src_tradechecker/3/


I would do that trade. I think that might put us in the playoffs almost for sure this year(we might anyway) and really help us maybe for 2 more years. I wouldn't want to give up anymore and NJ probably would want more though.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Maybe if this trade was for Kidd about 5 years ago (and then it'd probably be a steal). But this trade makes no sense for us now.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

I couldn't see a Jason Kidd-Brandon Roy combo working at all.
Kidd needs the ball in his hands to be most effective, while Roy has been most effective when he has the ball up top and creates for others or himself.
Roy needs a PG who can bring the ball up, hand the ball off to him and hit an open jumper, which is why I think Blake and Jack are working well right now.
Of course, if NJ is willing to give Kidd up for cheap, then sure. But I would not give up Aldridge, AT ALL. That would be dumb and go against the plan that we're trying to win for the future and not now.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Jason Kidds best year: 18.7 ppg 8.9 apg 6.3 rpg .414 fg% 

Brandon Roy in 2nd year: 19.0 ppg 5.6 apg 4.5 rpg .444 fg%

Now consider this. Jason Kidd played on a team that went to the finals with RJ, a healthy Kenyon Martin, and a slew of guys who could put the ball in the hoop. Far be it from a team that is still learning to play together. 

So you go ahead and pull the trigger on that trade if you want. But I think it would be a really, really bad move.


----------



## 2k (Dec 30, 2005)

Inst Skip Bayless that rapper guy who is always sipping cognac and smoking blunts?


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

hasoos said:


> Jason Kidds best year: 18.7 ppg 8.9 apg 6.3 rpg .414 fg%
> 
> Brandon Roy in 2nd year: 19.0 ppg 5.6 apg 4.5 rpg .444 fg%
> 
> ...


I don't think that was his best season. He had a season where he averaged 17/11/7 on 44%. Needless to say, Roy over Kidd at this point in terms of what's valuable for this team.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

I wouldn't mind giving up draft picks because we don't need any more young players. We are going to have quite a jam as it is. But of course suggesting we include LA is ridiculas. 

I'd say Raef and our 2008/2009 1st round draft choices. I wouldn't want tamper with any other pieces just to get a 34 year old. 

Only problem is how would Kidd affect Roy. Roy seems to play much better when he is the PG. It would be exciting to get Kidd though. I think it would make us title contenders in 2008.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

makes sense for NJ... not so much for PDX

as we close in on the trade deadline I expect we'll be hearing about all sorts of silly rumors of vets for Portland's young studs, especially involving LA. Most teams do need quality size and there is probably some big market jealousy for the rumormongers to tap. I expect LA will still be a Blazer after the deadline passes... why in the world would KP break up a young frontline that looks to mesh as well as Oden and Aldridge??? Time is on KP's side and I don't see much reason to be wheeling and dealing in the near future. 

Expect the rumors though...

STOMP


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

What gets me is how the media in other parts of the country seem to expect KP to develop a sudden case of stupid and give up the young core he's worked so hard to assemble. IMHO, it's not happening unless somebody's willing to part with a lot more than an aging Jason Kidd.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Kidd couldn't even crack our starting line-up right now.

Not that KP would EVER consider bringing a wife-beating, me-before-the-team POS like Kidd to Portland.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

e_blazer1 said:


> What gets me is how the media in other parts of the country seem to expect KP to develop a sudden case of stupid and give up the young core he's worked so hard to assemble. IMHO, it's not happening unless somebody's willing to part with a lot more than an aging Jason Kidd.


I think we are going to see alot of this going forward. The Blazers have a lot of young promising talent. Evry team that is looking to rebuild (trading away an aging big name player) will be looking towards Portland. And really, I see Ptd having to make some 2/3-1 trade given the roster issues and that Allen will be forking over 3 max contracts in the next 3 years.

So let the trade specculation start . . . but us Blazer fanatics know that KP and company have a 2-3 year plan and it will take something special to get them off that track.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

STOMP said:


> makes sense for NJ... not so much for PDX
> 
> as we close in on the trade deadline I expect we'll be hearing about all sorts of silly rumors of vets for Portland's young studs, especially involving LA. Most teams do need quality size and there is probably some big market jealousy for the rumormongers to tap. I expect LA will still be a Blazer after the deadline passes... why in the world would KP break up a young frontline that looks to mesh as well as Oden and Aldridge??? Time is on KP's side and I don't see much reason to be wheeling and dealing in the near future.
> 
> ...


Good point. Kind of like how Chicago has been the past few years with Gordon, Hinrich, Deng, Thomas, etc. except I'd much rather have our team than the Bulls who are free falling as fast as they can.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

lol at the thought of this team giving up 2 bigs for another guard.


----------



## sportsnut1975 (Jul 6, 2006)

I want some of what Bayless is smoking!


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

A month ago, I said on this board that I wanted Kidd and was willing to give up Outlaw to get him. I hadn't lost faith in Outlaw but I was convinced we needed Kidd to make us an instant contender. But now, I wouldn't give LMA or Outlaw for him. It's been so fun to watch our guys win these 11 games and I'm too attached to them. I don't want to let anyone go. Not even Jack. Plus- it doesn't make any sense for us to bring in a wife beater. That's not what we're about nowadays.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

P.S. Who is Skip Bayless?


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

NathanLane said:


> P.S. Who is Skip Bayless?


A writer who made his bones trashing Barry Bonds. Just another ESPN third string hack.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Oldmangrouch said:


> A writer who made his bones trashing Barry Bonds. Just another ESPN third string hack.


actually he came up trashing Sammy Sosa for the Tribune in Chicago. He moved out West to the San Jose Mercury News where I used to hear him regularly on Rick Barry's radio talkshow. If anything he was fully behind Bonds, often contrasting what a truly terrible person Sammy was off camera to what a decent guy Barry seemed to be and marveling at how differently they were perceived by the general public. I really haven't paid him any attention since he went to ESPN, but he was definitely a big Bonds guy when he worked in the Bay Area... probably moreso then any other journalist there.

Maybe he's become worse on the national stage, but as far as pot stirrers go I found him more tolerable then most. He always took a bit of a wingnut stand to push the public's buttons, but I found him much more compelling/thought out then Canzano/Vesey/Steven A. types who often pretend to have this sanctimonious moral high ground to stand on. I also liked that I sensed him being a true sports nut, which always resonates with me... for that same reason I can stand Dicky V and Walton. 

STOMP


----------



## DucRider (Dec 22, 2007)

e_blazer1 said:


> What gets me is how the media in other parts of the country seem to expect KP to develop a sudden case of stupid and give up the young core he's worked so hard to assemble. IMHO, it's not happening unless somebody's willing to part with a lot more than an aging Jason Kidd.


Exactly.
I expect KP to sit tight and let this group play out the year...if they get an 8th seed, great, a bit of playoff experience would be good, but I don't think that was a pre-season goal of the team, especially with GO out. Over the summer/after the draft I'd expect 2 or 3 guys to be traded, perhaps on draft night they'll be a surprise or six. 
Kidd in PDX would not be a good move as many posts indicated. 

I like LaFrentz, Webster, Jack, and our #1 to San Antonio for Tony Parker and their #1, if it has the right locker room feel and Parker's contract works. Parker adds another player that can get his own shot, he can spot up, has 4-6 years left at a high level and can give way to Sergio over time, and has the rings (maybe another one this year). That trade helps SA with youth and energy (figuring Finley and Horry are done after this year) and still gives them another run for a championship while Timmy is at his peak. It makes room on the Blazers for Rudy and shortens the rotation (which has to happen eventually), moves LaFrentz's salary and keeps the core intact, and I think still give KP a run a the right free-agent after the 08-09 season. Think about the finals, Parker, B-Roy, LA, GO and TO on the floor. 3 players that can get a high percentage shot off anytime and play defense, someone in the huddle/lockerroom that has done it, nothing uncontested in the middle, and a solid bench.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

STOMP said:


> actually he came up trashing Sammy Sosa for the Tribune in Chicago. He moved out West to the San Jose Mercury News where I used to hear him regularly on Rick Barry's radio talkshow. If anything he was fully behind Bonds, often contrasting what a truly terrible person Sammy was off camera to what a decent guy Barry seemed to be and marveling at how differently they were perceived by the general public. I really haven't paid him any attention since he went to ESPN, but he was definitely a big Bonds guy when he worked in the Bay Area... probably moreso then any other journalist there.
> 
> Maybe he's become worse on the national stage, but as far as pot stirrers go I found him more tolerable then most. He always took a bit of a wingnut stand to push the public's buttons, but I found him much more compelling/thought out then Canzano/Vesey/Steven A. types who often pretend to have this sanctimonious moral high ground to stand on. I also liked that I sensed him being a true sports nut, which always resonates with me... for that same reason I can stand Dicky V and Walton.
> 
> STOMP


Interesting. I'm only familiar with his work on the ESPN website. For a time, I would read his articles just to see how he was going to work an anti-Bonds diatribe into a story about the LPGA, or bowling, or whatever! :biggrin:


----------



## BenDavis503 (Apr 11, 2007)

So why would we trade Aldridge? That would be absolutely retarded.
Jermaine O'Neal all over again?

And we already have a Jason Kidd. His name is Brandon Roy.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Jason Kidd is still a really good point guard, one of the top 5 in the league. We aren't going to break up our young uber-core (Roy/LMA/Oden) to get him, but I don't think we need to trash Kidd to make that point.

If we could trade anyone else to get him, we'd be instant contenders next season, assuming Oden comes back strong. Roy does work very well with the ball, but there are 48 minutes in the game. I think having either J-Kidd or Roy or both running the offense for every one of those 48 minutes would make other teams very afraid.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

I would consider adding Kidd, but not as seriously as I was a month or two ago. I agree that it'd be good to have a backcourt mate for Roy who can really shoot. I'm also more concerned about chemistry than I was -- it's more clearly Roy's team and it's clear that that's working. I fully expect guys like Oden, Fernandez, and potentially even Miles to work well within what's already working and with Miles, if he doesn't work out, it's not a huge loss.

With Kidd, it _would_ be a huge loss if he came over and then didn't fit well. It's a gamble that'd _have_ to pay off to be worth it (as opposed to the Knicks' situation with Randolph where it doesn't seem to be working but they could still choose to build around him, making it still pay off).

That said, if the price were right, I could see it. The Blazers need to make at least a two for one trade to free up a roster spot for Fernandez anyway -- might as well look to add the best player they can _if_ they're relatively confident about the chemistry piece.


----------



## SixPack (May 23, 2007)

IMO, I would do the trade in a heart beat because I have always liked Kidd's game. He would be perfect for this team and the only key player we would lose is LA. Well, to get a great player you have to give up a great player, that's just how it goes. Plus our 1st next year is looking lower and lower because we keep winning. With the trade this is our line-up for next season:

PG- Kidd, Blake, Rodriquez
SG- Roy, Webster, Fernandez
SF- Outlaw, Jones
PF- Frye, LaFrentz
C - Oden, Pryzbilla

We then could trade Miles(expiring contract) and one of these 3 (Outlaw, Webster, Jones) for another quality big man. Thoughts?


----------



## yuyuza1 (May 24, 2006)

SixPack said:


> Thoughts?


No. You don't trade a 22 year old budding star big for a 34 year old PG reaching the end of his career, especially when you're the youngest team in the league.


----------



## SixPack (May 23, 2007)

yuyuza1 said:


> No. You don't trade a 22 year old budding star big for a 34 year old PG reaching the end of his career, especially when you're the youngest team in the league.


This is different then trading Dale Davis for Jermaine O'neal. We're not trading for a solid veteran, we are trading for one of the top NBA PG's out there. Our weakness link in the future is the PG spot.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

SixPack said:


> IMO, I would do the trade in a heart beat because I have always liked Kidd's game. He would be perfect for this team and the only key player we would lose is LA. Well, to get a great player you have to give up a great player, that's just how it goes. Plus our 1st next year is looking lower and lower because we keep winning. With the trade this is our line-up for next season:
> 
> PG- Kidd, Blake, Rodriquez
> SG- Roy, Webster, Fernandez
> ...


[strike]Or you are just a "rookie" posting this to peeve people off.[/strike] Nobodyin their right mind would do that trade at this stage of these players careers. You trade for Jason Kidd if you have a window you need to meet for a championship. This is not that situation.

*Come on, let's all play nice.*


----------



## SixPack (May 23, 2007)

hasoos said:


> Or you are just a "rookie" posting this to peeve people off. Nobodyin their right mind would do that trade at this stage of these players careers. You trade for Jason Kidd if you have a window you need to meet for a championship. This is not that situation.


Wow, ok next time I have an opinion I guess I wont say anything.


----------



## Tortimer (Jun 4, 2007)

SixPack said:


> Wow, ok next time I have an opinion I guess I wont say anything.


Really I don't mind you posting your idea and shouldn't worry what other people think. I can see both sides of trading for Kidd. I can't see anyway we would or should give up LMA in a package for Kidd. That would be crazy with this young of a team. LMA is going to be a star in this league for a long time. Kidd has maybe 2 good years left and maybe a couple years at being average at best. I would think NJ would jump at that trade if we offered LMA for Kidd. I can't see anybody offering anything better then LMA with any kind of upside. If NJ traded Kidd they would need to rebuild. LMA isn't going anywhere IMO.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

SixPack said:


> Wow, ok next time I have an opinion I guess I wont say anything.


No offense met, apology offered. What I am saying is that we have a few people on our message board which pose as other people just to try and peeve people off. So they go make a new account, show up as a rookie and just try to bait people. 


Your comments seemed so outlandish, I had to believe you were one of "them".


----------



## SixPack (May 23, 2007)

hasoos said:


> No offense met, apology offered. What I am saying is that we have a few people on our message board which pose as other people just to try and peeve people off. So they go make a new account, show up as a rookie and just try to bait people.
> 
> 
> Your comments seemed so outlandish, I had to believe you were one of "them".


It's ok, I had this account since summer and have started posted again because the Blazers have won 11 in a row now. Winning is the only thing that brought me back.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

I don't see any way Kidd comes to Portland, he is worth much more on a Dal/Bos/LA team that could compete this year and next, so those teams will give up more than we will. Sure if NJ accepts our pick and minor players we do it, but the reality is those other teams will trump our offer.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

Draco said:


> I don't see any way Kidd comes to Portland, he is worth much more on a Dal/Bos/LA team that could compete this year and next, so those teams will give up more than we will. Sure if NJ accepts our pick and minor players we do it, but the reality is those other teams will trump our offer.



Agreed.

If Oden was due back at midseason and the team was considering a serious run at getting into the play-offs, that would be different. A package that didn't include Roy or LMA might start to look interesting. As is, I doubt the front office cares as much about the play-offs as the fans do. I seriously doubt that *any* short-term move is on their radar.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Draco said:


> I don't see any way Kidd comes to Portland, he is worth much more on a Dal/Bos/LA team that could compete this year and next, so those teams will give up more than we will. Sure if NJ accepts our pick and minor players we do it, but the reality is those other teams will trump our offer.


And with that, I could, under normal circumstances, imagine a team like Portland being part of a three-way trade that included Kidd going from the Nets to a team like Dallas, Boston, or the Lakers but at this point I suspect (and hope) that it'd have to be a "no-brainer" deal. The team has been playing so well against some really pretty good teams and the biggest weaknesses are things that Oden and (to a lesser extent) Fernandez should cover nicely, so why mess with it (beyond figuring out a way to get Fernandez on the roster).


----------



## soonerterp (Nov 13, 2005)

1. Skip Bayless is on drugs (and not good ones, apparently).

2. Jason Kidd is a great player. He's also old enough to be carbon-dated and doesn't have a sterling reputation off the court. He isn't someone I'd break up a young core for, mostly because although he's still good, before long we'll be watching him decompose before our eyes.

I'll pass.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

soonerterp said:


> 1. Skip Bayless is on drugs *(and not good ones, apparently).*


That is just baseless and irresponsible on your part. There is absolutely nothing of substance that points to him having anything but the finest in mind-altering substances. Personally, I'm filled with envy. Give me some of that.




soonerterp said:


> 2. Jason Kidd is a great player. He's also old enough to be carbon-dated and doesn't have a sterling reputation off the court. He isn't someone I'd break up a young core for, mostly because although he's still good, before long we'll be watching him decompose before our eyes.
> 
> I'll pass.


I couldn't have said it better myself, and of course, I won't try.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Trade LMA for Kidd...cmon 6 pack...seriously?


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

Welcome back, soonerterp, spot on as usual.


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

not a chance i, or pritchard, would do this.


nevvvvvvvvvvvah!


----------



## MrJayremmie (Dec 29, 2007)

If any of the tier 1 or 2 untouchables get traded or not resigned then i think Portland fans will go crazy!

tier 1: *Roy, Aldridge, Oden*

tier 2: *Webster, Outlaw, Jones, Fernandez, Pryzbilla*

tier 3: *Frye, Blake, Sergio*

tier 4: *Jack* (not saying at all he is a bad player, just feel like he is expendable because Rudy comin' in, and being a '3 SG off the bench is tough) *LaFrentz, Miles, Green, McRoberts*.

preferably noone in the top 3 tiers gets touched, and we keep everyone together and let the team grow. Tier 4 along with some picks i see as trade bait if we want a high pick or a good player.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Nightfly (Sep 24, 2002)

Adding Kidd to this team would make the Blazers an instant Playoff contender. They might even get home court advantage.

I for one would absolutely love Kidd to play for the Blazers. The Blazers are going to need at least one seasoned Vet before they contend for a title, and Kidd fits the mold perfectly.

The problem becomes acquiring him. The asking price is too high. I would not give up Aldridge.

It's too bad the Blazers couldn't have traded Randolph for Kidd somehow.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

Like someone else said, I think the top team out there who could get Kidd is Dallas. Their window seems to be closing day after day, and they have pieces like Devin Harris and/or Jason Terry, with Dirk and Josh Howard being their untouchables.

With that, I would NOT trade LaMarcus for Kidd.. You've got to be crazy..


----------

