# Kidd for SAR Trade A Done Deal?



## BLAZER PROPHET (Jan 3, 2003)

As reported on KFXX. The trade is complete and will be announced within a few days. There are no other details.

Also, as announced on KFXX, we will make Zebo a max offer.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

I'm calling this in right now.

I hope it is done, that's for sure.

Although, I'll miss you guys and I can't believe the NJ board is as lively as this bunch.

Play.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Damn, damn, damn... I'm don't know what to make of this yet... I'll have to think about it and come back


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> I'm calling this in right now.
> 
> I hope it is done, that's for sure.
> ...


Stick around, Play. Be a Blazer fan, it's nice here!


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

This is my understanding - the TALKS are still on, but nothing final.

But, what do I know?


----------



## furball (Jul 25, 2004)

*KFXX sources*

kfxx usually has pretty good sources. I think it is a great trade. It's a gamble, but you just picked up the best pointguard in the NBA, period. If health, and this is a big if, this puts us in the top five in the western conference.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

no links, no comment.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Where did you hear this? I have not heard a thing.

Is the FAN reporting it as well?

KFXX is 750AM correct? b\c I haven't heard a thing.


LOL...nevermind......


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> I'm calling this in right now.
> 
> I hope it is done, that's for sure.
> ...



Ah, you're not leaving us over just one trade are ya?


I'm not buying it until I see some details. Someone else has to be involved. We can't have 4 PG's.. Also, Kidds' contract it terrible, and then on top of that max out Zach.. 

If true, seems like going for the now, because Kidd(knee) and Zach(legal problems) could be dead weight later on..


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Good trade for NJ if they are also able to unload Mourning. That means they will have basically Richard Jefferson, Planninic and Kristic to build around with about 25-28 million in cap room. Rod Thorn done good, real good.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

What about POR?

Getting Kidd and Mourning isn't bad for them either IMO.


----------



## furball (Jul 25, 2004)

*Kidd & Mourning?*

Is the fan reporting this? If so, we may have unloaded Ru.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

*Re: KFXX sources*



> Originally posted by <b>furball</b>!
> this puts us in the top five in the western conference.


I don't see it.

I see the team being good, but I just can't see a successful relationship between Kidd and Randolph.

I can definitely see it between Miles and Kidd. 

But, Zach is FAR too me oriented and half-court oriented for Kidd's game.

Play.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

So anyone with any confirmations - I'm standing by what I was told. No deal.

But - sometimes truth isn't allowed to be told.

Play.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Scout226</b>!
> Ah, you're not leaving us over just one trade are ya?


It isn't the trade. I am a Shareef fan, not an NBA fan. Once Reef retires, I probably won't watch another pro-level sporting event.

The pros don't excite me at all. 



> If true, seems like going for the now, because Kidd(knee) and Zach(legal problems) could be dead weight later on..


I could see this turning out very bad for both parties. 

Play.


----------



## furball (Jul 25, 2004)

*Disagree.*

My concern is his knee, I think he and Zack will be great. I think we will see in denver that Kmart was overrated and that Kidd was the main reason Kmart was sucessful. Zack will benefit greatly from having a "true" point guard.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Kobe for Ejones/Wade a done deal!:laugh:


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

*Re: Disagree.*



> Originally posted by <b>furball</b>!
> My concern is his knee, I think he and Zack will be great. I think we will see in denver that Kmart was overrated and that Kidd was the main reason Kmart was sucessful. Zack will benefit greatly from having a "true" point guard.


I agree. Martin was a product of Kidd.

BUT -- Martin is far more athletic and runs the floor a LOT better than Randolph.

Randolph will clog the lane and that will make it difficult to penetrate and dish. Randolph and Kidd WILL be successful (and very much so) IF and only IF Randolph's ego takes a backseat and he plays a team-style of game.

This is why I think Miles would become THE MAN with Kidd.

Play.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

What is the deal then? Is it Rahim for Kidd or is it a bigger trade? I guess we'll find out soon enough huh.

So is this deal done before Halloween? Kidd becomes a Blazer and Randolph gets his max and I get to pass out candy? What a trifecta!!!!!


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

he will not be after he deals with Jason

Jason has the ultimate competitive drive... Zach does too... but not quite on that level


I put little stock in the Fan reports


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Wow! IF this goes through... the interest and speculation on this year's team would be back on in a big way. 

IF it does, that could only be because Nash would believe that he'll regain his health. Experts/Doctors would surely have been consulted and someone in the Blazer organization probably has been watching his workouts. Nash would also be signing off on Kidd's character which some of us have listed as a concern.

Looking forward to a link... 

STOMP


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

My question is, how does NJ's trade exceptions work?

Could the trade be Damon/SAR for Kidd/Mourning/Trade exception?


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Works as is....

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 Jason Kidd (15.5 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 9.2 apg in 36.5 minutes) 
C Alonzo Mourning (8.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 0.7 apg in 17.9 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: -9.8 ppg, -4.8 rpg, and +1.1 apg. 

New Jersey trades: PG Jason Kidd (15.5 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 9.2 apg in 36.5 minutes) 
C Alonzo Mourning (8.0 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 0.7 apg in 17.9 minutes) 
New Jersey receives: PF Shareef Abdur-Rahim (16.3 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 2.0 apg in 85 games) 
PG Damon Stoudamire (13.4 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 6.1 apg in 82 games) 
SF Qyntel Woods (3.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 0.7 apg in 62 games) 
Change in team outlook: +9.8 ppg, +4.8 rpg, and -1.1 apg. 

TRADE ACCEPTED



They will still need a PG, and we will still need a backup PF



PG Kidd, Telfair, NVE
SG DA, Frahm
SF Miles, Patterson, Outlaw, *Khryapa
PF Randolph, Mourning, (Outlaw)
C Ratliff, Pryzbilla, *Stepania

*IR


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>HOWIE</b>!
> I get to pass out candy? What a trifecta!!!!!


Howie: (using his real name) "one for you..one for you, and ooh, a little Shrek...2 for you"


(they leave and he closes the door)

and 12 for me...


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

> This is why I think Miles would become THE MAN with Kidd.


I COMPLETELY agree with this. Having Kidd here could really cause an explosion in Miles's game. Moreso, than any other Blazer player. 

As for Zach, I think Zach could really benefit from Kidd as well, and you just have to hope that the presence of Kidd can fuel Zach's willingness to embrace a more "team" oriented game. But if Kidd is here, unless Zach is an idiot, I can't see how he wouldn't defer to Kidd. The guy is more than likely a future HOF, he commands a lot of respect.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmurph</b>!
> 
> 
> I COMPLETELY agree with this. Having Kidd here could really cause an explosion in Miles's game. Moreso, than any other Blazer player.
> ...


Why wouldn't Zach defer to Kidd? Kidd passes the ball at all times. He gets everyone involved. More than likely, Randolph's numbers offensively would improve as would his shot selection, just from having Kidd out there. The upgrade over Damon is monstrous.


----------



## BLAZER PROPHET (Jan 3, 2003)

I heard this yesterday afternoon at 3:15 in their second segment. Ian stated the Blazer official who informed them of this is very reliable and also gave them heads up on Mile's contract and the trade to get the Gansta from Golden State.


----------



## go_robot (Sep 7, 2004)

IF this does go down, this has to be a precursor to another deal. 4 point guards?


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> It isn't the trade. I am a Shareef fan, not an NBA fan. Once Reef retires, I probably won't watch another pro-level sporting event.


Huh?

This makes about as much sense as everything else you post.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

that is why I think Damon will go and we get Mourning as ewll


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: Re: Disagree.*



> Originally posted by <b>Playmaker0017</b>!
> 
> Randolph and Kidd WILL be successful (and very much so) IF and only IF Randolph's ego takes a backseat and he plays a team-style of game.


I like this Cheeks quote...

_"I spoke to Zach about ... doing a lot of the 'garbage' things he did before," Cheeks said. "That's how he was getting 25 points and 18 rebounds. He was offensive rebounding, picking up a lot of things from other people. That's what he did in the Toronto game."_

http://www.columbian.com/10252004/sports/203580.html

I think ZR's at his best as a garbage man, working the boards cleaning up others messes, so I'm very pleased to see Mo emphisizing this. His great hands would benefit from dump off passes from a penetrating Kidd too. I think both Damon and DA would fit well with JK as both can hit open spot up jumpers. The problem has been getting them those sorts of looks. 



> I think Miles would become THE MAN with Kidd


I think a healthy Kidd would be an on-court windfall for the whole team.

STOMP


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>!
> This makes about as much sense as everything else you post.


How does it not make sense?

I'll spell it clearly for you, since you are obviously slow of mind:

I do not like the NBA. 

I do not like any particular team in the NBA.

I do not have any city allegiance.

I only watch the NBA because Reef and Dice are in it. 

Once they leave I will have no reason to watch anymore.

I don't know what's hard to understand. It's unfortunate that you aren't that intelligent.

Play.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> I'll spell it clearly for you . . .
> 
> I do not like the NBA.
> 
> I do not like any particular team in the NBA.


Oh, I see. That's why you spend so much time on this Blazer board, and why you pontificate about things in the NBA. It's because you don't like the NBA, and you don't care about it at all. You have no interest in Blazer wins or losses, you care nothing about the success of the team, and you hate NBA basketball. You just like to hang out with rabid NBA fans like us.

Thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## go_robot (Sep 7, 2004)

According to hoopshype, Kidd plus Mourning make about $20 million.

Stoudamire plus Reef plus Qyntel is more like $32 million.

How can that deal work?


----------



## azsun18 (Aug 12, 2004)

Oh I hope this happens. Kidd to Miles on the break would be great. And finally a pg who can make a good entry pass to Zbo. Come on, what we have now is not working, we are not scoring points. Yes Kidds contract is beyond huge, but cap space means nothing to Portland, no star is going to sign here, unless Kidd is in town, maybe.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>go_robot</b>!
> According to hoopshype, Kidd plus Mourning make about $20 million.
> 
> Stoudamire plus Reef plus Qyntel is more like $32 million.
> ...


Jersey is under the cap, plus has a 10 million dollar trade exception.

So it would be closer to 31 million altogether.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Talkhard</b>!
> Oh, I see.


I'm glad that when I talk down to you like a parent to their two-year old you are able to comprehend.



> That's why you spend so much time on this Blazer board, and why you pontificate about things in the NBA.


It behooves me to understand the state of the NBA and other teams, if I am to watch Shareef. I don't like the NBA as a whole. It doesn't mean I'm ignorant.

I also don't like getting run over by an 18-wheeler. But, I'm not ignorant of the fact that it'd probably do a lot of damage.

But -- in the end it passes time. You should also look at what I normally post about. 



> you don't like the NBA, and you don't care about it at all.


Ummm... basically. Outside of how it effects Reef, I don't care.



> You have no interest in Blazer wins or losses, you care nothing about the success of the team, and you hate NBA basketball.


Outside of how it relates and pertains to one Shareef Abdur-Rahim, yes.



> You just like to hang out with rabid NBA fans like us.


And bash Zach Randolph and prop a friend ... yeah. It passes time.



> Thanks for clearing that up.


No problem. I knew you were a little slow, so I took my time explaining it so that you could figure it out. Gold star.

Play.


----------



## go_robot (Sep 7, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> 
> 
> Jersey is under the cap, plus has a 10 million dollar trade exception.
> ...


Ah ha. Thanks. That makes sense. I always forget that any team is actually under the cap.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Stop the insults, people (TH and Play). Or at least take them to PMs. I'm not going to go back and edit them, but knock it off, please.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Kidd and 'Zo for Damon and SAR?

Boy, that would get me excited about this team again, both for this year and into the future.

I could live with a SAR-for-Kidd deal, too, as long as Nash could get something of value for Damon in another deal.

Ed O.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> Stop the insults, people (TH and Play). Or at least take them to PMs. I'm not going to go back and edit them, but knock it off, please.


I will stop, but don't ask me to tolerate someone randomly insulting me. Especially when:
(A) They weren't a part of the conversation
or
(B) It wasn't warranted

And no, I won't run off to PM and tattle on them.

He's a man. (I think)


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>go_robot</b>!
> According to hoopshype, Kidd plus Mourning make about $20 million.
> 
> Stoudamire plus Reef plus Qyntel is more like $32 million.
> ...



It may very well not ... 

I was just specualting that they need a PG and we need a backup PF as well

I am not sure why RealGM trade checker too it?

NJ does have traded player exceptions to use....

in seperate trades they can trade Kidd for Rahim
then (maybe?)
Mourning for Damon (and Q?) (*I just want to get rid of Q)

I am a bit rusty on the TPE thing though. I will have to go back and refresh my memory


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> 
> 
> Jersey is under the cap, plus has a 10 million dollar trade exception.
> ...


New Jersey is not under the cap. Not even close.

$58 million in player salaries + a $5 million trade exception + a $10 million trade exception (both which count against the cap until used or renounced) means they are WAY over the cap.

But I agree with *go-robot's* first objection. I don't believe that the proposed deal (Kidd/Mourning for Stoudamire/Rahim) works - I'm not sure why RealGM says it does. Mostly because NJ cannot use their trade exceptions to bring in either Damon or SAR - because they each make more than any individual exception. You cannot combine trade exceptions to bring in a single player. You also cannot add a trade exception to player salary in order to get a more expensive player.

The essential rule is that if a player makes more than a trade exception, he cannot be obtained by using that trade exception.

A single trade exception can essentially be used to obtain multiple players. But multiple trade exceptions cannot be used to obtain one player.

Hope this makes sense.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

they're saying over on the NBA board that Zo played last night for 19 minutes. fouled out with 12 points, 5 boards and 8 turnovers. sounds a little rusty, but I'd take him for Damon or Ruben.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> Kidd and 'Zo for Damon and SAR?
> 
> Boy, that would get me excited about this team again, both for this year and into the future.
> Ed O.


Agreed :yes:

talent wise.. its a no brainer... wow

but if Kidd can not play at his former intensity, its a loss.. it would be a huge gamble

getting Mourning would be a coup as well... if he can play 16 mins a game its a win for us, Zach with the other 32


Telfair can learn from one of the best PG's in the league


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

*Real GM*

PORTLAND
Rahim $14.6 mil

NJ
KIdd $14.7 mil

straight across = works fine CBA wise



ALTERNATIVE
PDX Damon $15.75 mil, Q $1.1 mil = $16.75 mil
NJ Mourning $5.4 mil

Not even close

So I am not sure why RealGm said it works :banghead:


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

OK, I have listened to KFXX this morning and last night. This trade is not a "done deal". 

Last night they said that it could happen "sooner....rather than later" and that their "source" was the one who has been right on with the heads up they gave the guys on the FAN in the past. As for this morning, that is unchanged. There is no "Kidd deal finalized, will happen in a few days" blurb on the sports updates that I have heard. SO at this point, I think aany speculation of a trade occuring within the next few days is a little little premature.

I do think that things are definitely heating up b\t the two teams. The latest flurry of talks b\t POR mgmt and Zach and his agent. Kidd being cleared for on court work, & his not so obvious comments about wanting out. Possibly even Mourning playing last night as well, though that may very possibly have nothing to do with a Kidd\SAR trade.

So this trade could well happen, but I do not believe that is as imminent as the original post made it appear to be.


----------



## furball (Jul 25, 2004)

*agreed*

This thread was started on the basis of yesterdays info, no new info has been dispersed today. I love the trade, but it doesn't make a lot of sense for New Jersey


----------



## SLAM (Jan 1, 2003)

I'd be more excited about a different combo:

Zach
Ruben
Nick

for

Kidd
Aaron Williams

We dump Ruben finally, and one extra point guard, and pick up a solid back-up PF in AW. 

Kidd/Damon/Telfair
DA/Damon/Frahm
Miles/Outlaw
Reef/Williams
Theo/JP/VS

That's pretty exciting. A Reef/Miles combo seems like a more effective team for Kidd in both the half-court game and the running game. Reef would certainly have an incentive to resign with us when he has Kidd as a teammate.

It also worked on realgm, though I'm not sure if I was allowed to trade Nick.

And finally, Play would stick around. :yes:


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>SLAM</b>!
> That's pretty exciting. A Reef/Miles combo seems like a more effective team for Kidd in both the half-court game and the running game. Reef would certainly have an incentive to resign with us when he has Kidd as a teammate.


Reef would resign in that situation. Reef and Kidd have always wanted to play together (not counting the Dream Team). 

I also think it would be a dramatically different looking team under that scenario than the one with Randolph.



> And finally, Play would stick around. :yes:


Awwww... Thank you.

I just really think the Blazers management want to tangle themselves up in Zach. If that's the case, then so be it. I think it is a wrong move. Just as I would think it was a wrong move for the Blazers to keep Reef and somehow trade for Kobe Bryant. 

There are certain characters that I just don't think work well for a team. They can be great individual talents ... but as for team unity ... they destroy it. Then the off-the-court stuff is like icing on the cake.

Play.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

I think Reef + Kidd would be awesome. I can see Kidd getting tired of Zach's ball-hoggedness quickly, but then again Zach and Reef have very similar games so maybe Kidd + Zach could work well too.

PBF


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

all else being equal, I don't really see why anyone would want Reef over Randolph long-term. some make a good case for Reef being the better player right now, which I don't care to dispute one way or the other, but I doubt anybody will argue that in five years SAR will still be better. 

in five years, SAR will be on the wrong side of 30. in five years, Miles, Telfair and Randolph will all still be in their primes, and the nucleus of another decent team.


----------



## Playmaker0017 (Feb 13, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>ProudBFan</b>!
> I think Reef + Kidd would be awesome.


Let's be honest - if Kidd is functioning 100%, then Kidd and anyone is a pretty stellar combo.

If Kidd can elevate Martin's offensive game from unwatchable to average ... then he can do anything.



> I can see Kidd getting tired of Zach's ball-hoggedness quickly


There is no doubt that if Zach played that style with Kidd, Kidd would have issues.



> then again Zach and Reef have very similar games so maybe Kidd + Zach could work well too.


The difference in their game is how they set up and demand the ball. Zach plants in one spot. He won't move or re-set or allow anyone else access. Reef moves around. He tries to get picks. He'll clear out. He posts about 4 feet further out than Zach does. 

The lane is more clear if Reef is the 4 than Zach.

I don't think Zach would be horrible with Kidd, even if he continues being a selfish player ... but I don't see them gelling as a team if this would be Zach's style.

Play.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Again, I can't understand why Zach Randolph wouldn't feel he is getting enough touches, when he is playing with the best passing PG in the game. He will see more high percentage shots than he can handle. He will also get to the line more, because someone actually knows how to give him an entry pass. 

Zach Randolph would flourish next to Jason Kidd.


----------



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

If this source is so reliable and in the "know" enough to find out that the trade is back on the table, then...

why can't they reveal the exact players of the deal?

or perhaps even more importantly, which team has put the offer on the table, and which team is mulling it over?

The most likely answer to these questions is that the source is not really reliable at all. Simply put, if they don't know these details, they probably don't know anything.

Now lets take a look at some actual quotes which came out with the first wave of Kidd/SAR rumors, from an actual source with relevance, New Jersey's GM, Rod Thorn: 

"I would never say I won't trade any player," Thorn said. "But you are talking about one of the best players in the league. To think we are just going to give him away is foolish. It's mind boggling." 

"The only way we would trade any player is if it was a good deal for us," Thorn said. "It has nothing to do with money. This has nothing to do with money."

The first quote leads me to believe that Thorn hasn't tempered Kidd's value as much as he should for a 31 year old fresh off of microfracture knee surgery.

The second quote leads me to believe that they are not looking to move Kidd simply to dump more salary. 

So if we can't get a discount on Kidd for his surgery OR his salary, then we probably aren't getting Kidd for SAR - no matter what that mysterious "source" says. 

-Mr. Chuck Taylor


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>theWanker</b>!
> in five years, SAR will be on the wrong side of 30. in five years, Miles, Telfair and Randolph will all still be in their primes, and the nucleus of another decent team.


yeah sure, but 5 years of drafts and trades would have gone by as well... it's not like the future doesn't hold more promising power forwards. Miles and Telfair might also have some decent company in Monia, Kryapa, and Outlaw... heck maybe even Ha and/or Nedzad. Thats a lot of young guys.

IMO 5 years is a pretty decent window of opprotunity to have a starting spot set with a quality player like Rahim. Certainly senerios could exist where trading Zach and going with AR is the better way to go. Off court concerns over him could be such that Nash is only trying to make it appear that the team is hitching it's wagon to Zach to drive up his trade value.

Until one is traded, which will probably happen this year, I'd expect "whose to go?" will be our biggest topic. IMO, it probably depends on the offers more then anything else, and I suspect that teams will vary on who they'd value more. AR's a pretty good player with years of tread left + he's going to represent millions coming off someone's cap while Zach has the promise of youth + talent. Fun stuff.

STOMP


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>STOMP</b>!
> Until one is traded, which will probably happen this year, I'd expect "whose to go?" will be our biggest topic.


Well, if the Reef/Kidd deal happens I've got my money on Damon.



PBF


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

STOMP-

but why give up more overall value than we have to? 

let's all ask ourselves WWDD (what would Damon do)? 

you've got one really fine marijuana plant that's a few years old. it generates some killer bud and gets you high as a kite. problem is that you know it's bound to die on you in a couple years, tops. 

on the other hand, you've got a second plant that also sends you to the moon. sure, it gives you a little attitude, but you just grew it and it's got many more years of dopey bliss built into it. 

now, you can always call your connection and pick up some more bud seeds, but the odds of you stumbling into another plant like either of these isn't that great. 

do you give the younger plant to your dad, knowing you can grow more, or do you bogart that fine young KGB and fob off the quality (albeit more aged) kine, knowing it's on its way to schwag? 

keep in mind. we're talking about the business of baking brownies for the long term, not just a quick fix.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

:laugh: 

...ummm what was I saying again?

STOMP


----------



## Wyrmm (Dec 31, 2002)

Ummmmmmmmm... Brownies


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>theWanker</b>!
> STOMP-
> 
> but why give up more overall value than we have to?
> ...




:rbanana: :banana: :vbanana: :bbanana: :gbanana: :wbanana: :
cbanana:

:allhail: 

Well done, old boy! WWDD needs to become a permanent part of Blazerfanspeak.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

I guess I am in the minority there, but I am not too thrilled about this trade. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't be angry if it went down, I just like the team we got now. I love Darius off the bench, we are a deep team with Rahim on this sqaud. Not to mention that Damon and NVE's contracts run out after this year, and I want Telfair to take the reigns of the team as a super sophomore. The only way Bassy will flourish is if he gets a lot of meaningful pt. Yes he may learn a lot from Kidd, but I'd rather he gets his feet wet on his own like he is doing now. Also, Kidd's knee may not be back to form and his contract is hornedous, add to the fact that we max out Zach and we are putting a lot of dough into this team. If we trade Reef I would still look for a center or shooting guard first before I thought about a point guard. As good as Kidd could be, imo, Bassy could be better, and I want him to get all the playing time in the world.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

If this trade goes down, I'm thrilled. It makes me wayyyy more interested in our team this year.


----------

