# Rahim may be going to the Kings!



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

Breaking news from the New Jersey Star-Leger:



> According to a Western Conference general manager yesterday, the Nets may have dodged a bullet when Abdur-Rahim told them of his decision, but there still may be some subterfuge in the next few days. The GM said that the Trail Blazers are now trying to work out a sign-and-trade for Abdur-Rahim with Sacramento and a third team that would entice the free agent with a much larger contract, one in the $60 million region.


http://www.nj.com/nets/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/1121838823261520.xml&coll=1

Go Nash, go!!


----------



## BigDtoPDX (Jun 30, 2005)

Wow, this is a double edged sword for me. Sure I would love to see the Blazers be able to move SAR for something legit in return, but I also dont want to see the Kings improve any. 1-They are in the same conference and 2-they are probably my least favorite team in the NBA, it was worse when they had Webber and Christie.

But if the Blazers can pull this off and get something worthwhile in return then I would say it would be a success.


----------



## Bookworm (Feb 23, 2005)

This is great!! 

Hey NJ how good does Ilic look now?

Sac has to be loving this..Traded Webber for Sar and Corliss
not to bad..Way to go Petrie..


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showpost.php?p=2432090&postcount=279

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showpost.php?p=2432306&postcount=286



The pressure just got better on NJ since there is no real other PF's out there for them to get other than Rahim right now.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Ha! Another Line-item For The Screw-fest!

Go Nash Go!!!

Pbf


----------



## BealzeeBob (Jan 6, 2003)

I couldn't get to the second page of the arcticle. But, from what I read, I don't get it. If Reef has already committed to play for the Nets, and that's where he wants to play, that's where he'll play. The Blazers can try to work out a trade with every team in the league, but if Reef wants to play for NJ, and money isn't the deciding factor, they won't be making a trade with anyone but NJ.

Am I missing something?

Go Blazers

PS: I DID like to see that the paper called it 'crucial' that NJ keep their MLE to sign Dooling.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

I might be lacking in imagination, but I don't know why a team with cap space would be willing to participate in a three-way deal.

The Kings want to get rid of Brian Skinner, or Kenny Thomas, or Corliss Williamson. Skinner has 2 years/$10m left with a team option, which is a decent salary anda team like the Hawks could probably use him. Williamson (2/$12.5) and especially Thomas (5/~$49) are overpaid and not worth having, let alone giving up value for.

Even if Sacramento were to give up picks, it would seem they would go to the team that would be taking on the salary hit. Where's the value for Portland?

Nash might surprise me, and I'm happy he's pursuing all his options, but this is a flimsy hope for Blazers fans, indeed.

Ed O.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

:rofl: at this whole situation.

It's one big game of chicken.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

BealzeeBob said:


> I couldn't get to the second page of the arcticle. But, from what I read, I don't get it. If Reef has already committed to play for the Nets, and that's where he wants to play, that's where he'll play. The Blazers can try to work out a trade with every team in the league, but if Reef wants to play for NJ, and money isn't the deciding factor, they won't be making a trade with anyone but NJ.
> 
> Am I missing something?
> 
> ...



because money talks and bull**** walks.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

BealzeeBob said:


> I couldn't get to the second page of the arcticle. But, from what I read, I don't get it. If Reef has already committed to play for the Nets, and that's where he wants to play, that's where he'll play. The Blazers can try to work out a trade with every team in the league, but if Reef wants to play for NJ, and money isn't the deciding factor, they won't be making a trade with anyone but NJ.
> 
> Am I missing something?
> 
> ...


No you're not really missing something. It all boils down to what Rahim wants to do. However, per the article, the Blazers are trying to work out a 3-team deal that will result in a contract for Shareef close to $60M - almost double what he's looking at if the Nets & Blazers agree to the S&T, and MORE than double what he's looking at if he signs with the Nets for the MLE.

You're right that it all boils down to what Rahim wants to do... but the Blazers are apparently hoping he'll WANT a (much) bigger paycheck.

PBF


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Ed O said:


> I might be lacking in imagination, but I don't know why a team with cap space would be willing to participate in a three-way deal.
> 
> The Kings want to get rid of Brian Skinner, or Kenny Thomas, or Corliss Williamson. Skinner has 2 years/$10m left with a team option, which is a decent salary and a team like the Hawks could probably use him. Williamson (2/$12.5) and especially Thomas (5/~$49) are overpaid and not worth having, let alone giving up value for.
> 
> ...



As has been talked on this board before. There are teams, and Portland may be one of them, which players do not want to go to. Atlanta may get a player of positional need that normally would not want to go there if they participate in this deal for just the price of a draft pick. For Atlanta to pay an average of $5 mil to get Skinner may be very well worth it for them.


It seems Portland is going to do a lot of talking and extra leg work just to get a draft pick


This indeed is a last ditch effort, and very flimsy... but possible I guess




Rahim to Goodwin: said:


> *SHOW ME THE MONEY... SHOW ME THE MONEY*


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

sar might want a bigger pay check and cooled to going to the nets


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Trader Bob said:


> This indeed is a last ditch effort, and very flimsy... but possible I guess


Just depends how much value the Shareef / Goodwin camp really places on $. $60M is a lot more than $30M.

I wonder who the third team is? San Antonio? Miami? Haven't seen anything on that yet.

PBF


----------



## Spud147 (Jul 15, 2005)

ProudBFan said:


> No you're not really missing something. It all boils down to what Rahim wants to do. However, per the article, the Blazers are trying to work out a 3-team deal that will result in a contract for Shareef close to $60M - almost double what he's looking at if the Nets & Blazers agree to the S&T, and MORE than double what he's looking at if he signs with the Nets for the MLE.
> 
> You're right that it all boils down to what Rahim wants to do... but the Blazers are apparently hoping he'll WANT a (much) bigger paycheck.
> 
> PBF


Also, Sacramento is a much better team than the Nets and SAR has indicated he wants to play for a "contender". The Kings may not be one of the elite Western Conference teams anymore but they should still make the play offs (not necessarily the case with the Nets even with SAR).


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> sar might want a bigger pay check and cooled to going to the nets


Or he might just be willing to wait a few more days and see what the Blazers can cook up for him. Let's face it--there's a huge difference between $38 million and $60 million. Rahim would be a fool to sign with the Nets when he can get so much more someplace else.

This is a brilliant piece of GMsmanship on Nash's part. He's exploring every option in order to get the most for Rahim. That's exactly what he should be doing.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

ProudBFan said:


> Just depends how much value the Shareef / Goodwin camp really places on $. $60M is a lot more than $30M.
> 
> I wonder who the third team is? San Antonio? Miami? Haven't seen anything on that yet.


I think it's less a question of SAR and Goodwin taking more money (although at this point they'd look very bad backing out on NJ) but in finding a third team that has (a) cap space, and/or (b) has something Portland would be willing to take back, while (c) being willing to take on Sacramento's filler.

I simply don't see that team sitting out there.

Ed O.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Talkhard said:


> Or he might just be willing to wait a few more days and see what the Blazers can cook up for him. Let's face it--there's a huge difference between $38 million and $60 million. Rahim would be a fool to sign with the Nets when he can get so much more someplace else.
> 
> This is a brilliant piece of GMsmanship on Nash's part. He's exploring every option in order to get the most for Rahim. That's exactly the job of a GM.


Agreed. But still, how much can we really rely on this report? As far as I know, this is the only such report so far mentioning this effort on the part of the Blazers. I'll put more stock into it when we get more coroborrating evidence.

That said, I really hope-hope-hope its true.

PBF


----------



## Chalupa (Jul 20, 2005)

SAR doesn't just take money run because his reputation and legacy as basketball player is at stake. This off-season could possibly be SAR's last best chance to show that he's a star and not just a stat player on bad teams. 
That said the Kings and Nets offer the best opportunity for SAR contribute meaningfully (i.e. start at pf) to good playoff teams.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

Spud147 said:


> Also, Sacramento is a much better team than the Nets and SAR has indicated he wants to play for a "contender". The Kings may not be one of the elite Western Conference teams anymore but they should still make the play offs (not necessarily the case with the Nets even with SAR).



You don't think a core of Kidd/VC/SAR the Nets will make the playoffs?


----------



## ODiggity (Feb 23, 2005)

I think the money would have to count for SOMETHING, but...

Wouldn't it be funny... or sad... if Reef went to the Kings and they absolutely bottomed out next year? I can see it happening. I just want Shareef's team, whichever one it is, to win more games than they lose. He needs to see what that feels like.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> SAR doesn't just take money run because his reputation and legacy as basketball player is at stake.


What reputation is that? Isn't his M.O. at this point basically someone that has a huge contract and doesn't seem to have a positive impact on the win column? How can his reputation be any more at stake than it already is??

Dan


----------



## chula vista blazer (Jul 13, 2005)

The smart way for Rahim is to do it is to have his agent first criticize NJ for not being willing to trade the 1st round pick, wait a day or two, then take the sign and trade with an extra 30 mil!


----------



## Spud147 (Jul 15, 2005)

kaydow said:


> You don't think a core of Kidd/VC/SAR the Nets will make the playoffs?


I didn't mean to say that they wouldn't or couldn't get into the play offs, I just meant it wasn't a guarantee. They should be able to if they can stay healthy but I think Kidd's days of playing a full season are long gone. He's just not the same player.

Vince has also been frequently injured in the last few seasons although that may be mainly due to being unhappy in Toronto.

I'd be surprised to see them get to the end of next season without a major injury to one of their key players.


----------



## Chalupa (Jul 20, 2005)

dkap said:


> What reputation is that? Isn't his M.O. at this point basically someone that has a huge contract and doesn't seem to have a positive impact on the win column? How can his reputation be any more at stake than it already is??
> 
> Dan


Exactly, this could be his last chance to change that.


----------



## kaydow (Apr 6, 2004)

Spud147 said:


> I didn't mean to say that they wouldn't or couldn't get into the play offs, I just meant it wasn't a guarantee. They should be able to if they can stay healthy but I think Kidd's days of playing a full season are long gone. He's just not the same player.
> 
> Vince has also been frequently injured in the last few seasons although that may be mainly due to being unhappy in Toronto.
> 
> I'd be surprised to see them get to the end of next season without a major injury to one of their key players.


VC looked pretty healthy to me . . . as a Net that is. And although Kidd missed the first 20 something games, he still ended up 14/8 (His career averages are 14/9) He looked fine to me too. The Nets were 35-24 in the last 4 months of the season w/o Jefferson. If you add him to Kidd/VC/SAR you have a team that is at LEAST as good as Sac. Even w/o SAR the core of VC/Kidd/Jeff looks solid. I don't think you can say because Kidd had his knee problem that he will never be able to play a whole season or that he just isn't the player he once was. I think NJ could be one of the better teams in the East next year. W or W/O SAR.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

I think Shareef would be a great fit for both teams but he has a better chance getting to the finals in the east


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

cimalee said:


> I think Shareef would be a great fit for both teams but he has a better chance getting to the finals in the east


Exactly what I was thinking. If he truly wants to have the opportunity to go far in the playoffs, he should literally go far... to New Jersey. Sure, San Antonio would be a good spot for him, too, but when you factor in the cash, I could see him in a Nets jersey.


----------



## Bookworm (Feb 23, 2005)

Ed O said:


> I think it's less a question of SAR and Goodwin taking more money (although at this point they'd look very bad backing out on NJ) but in finding a third team that has (a) cap space, and/or (b) has something Portland would be willing to take back, while (c) being willing to take on Sacramento's filler.
> 
> I simply don't see that team sitting out there.
> 
> Ed O.


 Atlanta/charlotte probably would take skinner or thomas if
both portland and Sac each cough up a 2cnd rd pick and we
get sacs 1st rd pick

Portland gets another 1st rd pick. 3 for next yr (talk about trade bait)
Sac gets a solid replacement for Webber in Sar 
Atlanta/charlotte gets 2 second rd picks and a solid player
to help out inside, which they both need.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

I hope Portland doesnt get a player back like Kenny thomas


----------



## Bookworm (Feb 23, 2005)

SheedSoNasty said:


> Exactly what I was thinking. If he truly wants to have the opportunity to go far in the playoffs, he should literally go far... to New Jersey. Sure, San Antonio would be a good spot for him, too, but when you factor in the cash, I could see him in a Nets jersey.


 He won't get to the Eastern cofrence finals...Let alone the finals..

Miami/Detroit and the Pacers are all better..Add in webber and
Sar won't find life easy out east. Cleveland has gotten better
as well..Granted as weak as NJ division is they should win it, but
still be 6th or 7th seed.. Can Kidd stay healthy can VC? And have
we forgotten SAR had elbow surgery...thats 3 starters who missed
games last yr due to injury...VC has always missed gms because
of health reasons except his 2cnd yr..

We know DA and Theo will miss games because of health..We
should expect the same from the Nets. IF everyone stays
healthy and jells do you really see them getting by Detroit/Miami
or the Pacers?

With Seattle in ruins there is only 2 teams out west..Spurs and
Suns.. IMO Sar would fit better in Sac, they are used to playing
with a post player...SARs game is closer to Webbers than Thomas
or skinner...Adelman will use him a lot better than Frank Lawrence..


----------



## Bookworm (Feb 23, 2005)

oops.. should of said 3rd seed with 6th -7th worst record,
which means no home court in the playoffs


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Bookworm said:


> Atlanta/charlotte probably would take skinner or thomas if
> both portland and Sac each cough up a 2cnd rd pick and we
> get sacs 1st rd pick.


I doubt it. Atlanta already has a lot of forwards and destroying their cap space over Brian Skinner is worth more than 2 second rounders.

Ed O.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Why not Portland take back Skinner?

2 years and his money to backup zach sounds pretty decent to me. Then Maybe Sactown could swing Bobby Jackson to Atlanta for a 1st round pick top 5 protected or so?


----------



## gatorpops (Dec 17, 2004)

This is very possibly Sar and Goodwin forcing NJ to agree to terms with the Blazers so he can play where he wants and get his price as well. Goodwin is a sly old dude!

By the way who determines how much the contract is that the Blazers sign along with SAR?

gatorpops


----------



## CelticPagan (Aug 23, 2004)

I'd hate to see the darn Nets get Rahim for the MLE right after they stole Carter from us for Jelly Beans. That would suck!


----------



## ebott (Jan 7, 2003)

I'd like to see S.A-R. end up in Sacramento. It seems like a good fit. He's an all offense no defense kind of guy and they're an all offense no defense kind of team. Sacramento has been a winning club for a while now and I think S.A-R. could go in there and give them the same things they were getting from Chris Webber when they were a contender. I also generally like the Kings and I'd like to see them do well.

I'm also sick of New Jersey and all the trash talk we've had from their side about how we won't give them S.A-R. I hope he goes some where else and Vince, Kidd and Jefferson are all injured most of the year and they end up with a top pick in what looks to be the weakest draft in a long time.

But I don't see it happening. S.A-R. and his agent seem to have had a hard on for New Jersey for a long time now. It would take a hell of a lot of money to make them go elsewhere. 

Looking at the Kings roster I just don't see any way that we could do a sign and trade with them that gets him that much more money. The most likely guy is Corliss Williamson and he only makes 1 mil more than New Jersey's trade exception. So instead of getting a 38 mil deal he'd get a 46 mil deal. That's only 6 mil. Wait a tic since Williamson is a player rather than a trade exception the Kings can take back 125% of his salary so doing the numbers it would actually be a 58 million dollar deal. Heck that's 20 million dollars more. I'd call that a hell of a lot of money. I think I've just talked myself into the other side of the argument.

I don't think we'd necessarily have to get a third team involved either. Assuming we're going to cut NVE and we're not gonna be able to ship off either DA or Ruben to get cap space to resign Joel I wouldn't be opposed to bringing in Corliss for two years. He wouldn't put us into the luxury tax area. He'd be a decent backup. Most importantly he'd come off the books at the same time as the previously mentioned cap hogs thus not interfering with the cap space we'd have in 2007. 

If the Kings are willing to throw in a pick or two I like the deal on both sides. Now if only we can talk S.A-R. into choosing 58 million dollars to sign with a good team that's still relatively young that should continue to be good for years to come instead of 30 (38 if we're willing to play along) million to play with what will be a better team in a weaker conference that is based around two guys that are starting to get up there.


----------



## Bookworm (Feb 23, 2005)

Ed O said:


> I doubt it. Atlanta already has a lot of forwards and destroying their cap space over Brian Skinner is worth more than 2 second rounders.
> 
> Ed O.


 They have small forwards not PF's..and 2yrs at 4.9 and 5.4 mil
isn't destroying their cap space..the 3rd yr is team option..
according to storyteller, Atlanta is under 20mil for the next
2 yrs..They have to take on salary, or they will be fined
for not having a high enough payroll...So if you have to take
on salary why not grab a couple of picks as well...


I'm assuming this new CBA will keep the old provision of
a minimun team salary...


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

SAR to Sacremento

Tony Delk to Portland (maybe Al Harrington)

Bobby Jackson and Skinner to Atlanta


----------



## Bookworm (Feb 23, 2005)

MemphisX said:


> SAR to Sacremento
> 
> Tony Delk to Portland (maybe Al Harrington)
> 
> Bobby Jackson and Skinner to Atlanta


 Works for me.. I'd take Delk for one yr...Do we get a pick?


----------



## CanJohno (Feb 11, 2005)

MemphisX said:


> SAR to Sacremento
> 
> Tony Delk to Portland (maybe Al Harrington)
> 
> Bobby Jackson and Skinner to Atlanta


If that's the case, we might as well just let SAR walk away, in my opinion.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

*Petrie wants Rahim*

Ya gotta love it. The Kings are defintely in the hunt for Rahim. Here's a quote from GM Geoff Petrie in this morning's Sacramento Bee:



> Abdur-Rahim, though reported to be all but delivered to the New Jersey Nets, is by no means counted out around the Kings' front offices.
> 
> "We're obviously still interested in him if he's interested in us," Kings executive Geoff Petrie said Wednesday. "It remains to be seen."


I'm not providing the link, since you have to register.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

New Jersey Star-Ledger is reporting that Shareef has agreed to accept the Nets' MLE:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=rotowire-hareefbdurahimeporte&prov=rotowire&type=lgns

But notice that this update was posted yesterday.

I just received an e-mail from Nash not more than 15 minutes ago indicating that he believes the Blazers will ultimately make a deal with the Nets.

So now I'm totally confused.

PBF


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

ProudBFan said:


> I just received an e-mail from Nash not more than 15 minutes ago indicating that he believes the Blazers will ultimately make a deal with the Nets.
> 
> So now I'm totally confused.


Nothing to be confused by, PBF, as far as I can tell.

1. SAR will be a Net.
2. If Portland doesn't agree to a sign and trade, SAR will sign with NJ for the MLE.
3. If Portland agrees to a sign and trade, SAR will be sent to NJ in a sign and trade.

Nothing is confirmed yet because Portland and NJ are still negotiating (which might be active in that they're haggling, or might be passive in that they're waiting for the trade exception to get closer to expiration).

The Kings angle appears to be an attempt by the Blazers to get additional leverage over the Nets in those negotiations... as well as a straw that some Blazers fans appear to be grasping at. 

Ed O.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Nothing to be confused by, PBF, as far as I can tell.
> 
> 1. SAR will be a Net.
> 2. If Portland doesn't agree to a sign and trade, SAR will sign with NJ for the MLE.
> ...


I'd agree that the highest degree of probability is that SAR will be a Net, but I don't think it's necessarily a certainty. There's still a small chance that another deal might be put together that was attractive enough that Shareef would reconsider, especially if Thorn won't up the ante and leaves only the MLE as an option. I'd agree that the Kings rumor is most probably just an attempt by Nash to regain some leverage...and it does my heart good to see him try it.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

I'm not confused about Shareef being a Net. What I'm confused about is the current state of negotiations. The Yahoo report (from yesterday) seems to indicate that talks have broken off and that SAR will accept the Nets' MLE offer. But the e-mail I got from Nash PLUS today's Blog update from www.nj.com both indicate that the two teams are still talking:



> Thursday, July 21, 2005
> 
> Updates
> As the Nets try to get the sign-and-trade worked out with the Blazers by Friday, the day their trade exception runs out, they have agreed on a deal that will bring "uncle" Cliff Robinson back into the fold. This is a solid move as Cliff does a lot of little things that are intrinsic to a good team. He will be better for the Nets this year because he will not be as relied upon as the second half of last season. Now he will have the role that suits him best, that is the guy who comes off the bench and gets those annoying hustle rebounds, plays stifling defense, and hits 2-3 open three-pointers during his minutes.
> ...


Just got another e-mail from Nash stating that talks w/ the Nets are definately still onging.

Looks like Yahoo got ahold of the old "I'll sign with the Nets for the MLE if it comes to that" line and ran with it. Sad that we fans are able to stay on top of this stuff better than them.

PBF


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

Ed O said:


> The Kings angle appears to be an attempt by the Blazers to get additional leverage over the Nets in those negotiations... as well as a straw that some Blazers fans appear to be grasping at.


Exactly, and I'm glad Nash is doing it. NJ thinks they have a lot of power in this negotiation. I admit that they do, but they would have much more power if they were able to offer Rahim fair market value without help. The fact that they can't opens up the door for other teams to make much sweeter deals to Rahim and I am definitely glad that the Blazers (and maybe Goodwin?) are opening up these channels.

This may be the key to getting that 1st rounder, if not Ilic.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

ProudBFan said:


> I'm not confused about Shareef being a Net. What I'm confused about is the current state of negotiations. The Yahoo report (from yesterday) seems to indicate that talks have broken off and that SAR will accept the Nets' MLE offer. But the e-mail I got from Nash PLUS today's Blog update from www.nj.com both indicate that the two teams are still talking:


The Yahoo report just references old Star Ledger articles that were incomplete or slanted to begin with. IMO, you can discount it completely.


----------



## purplehaze89 (Apr 20, 2005)

e_blazer1 said:


> The Yahoo report just references old Star Ledger articles that were incomplete or slanted to begin with. IMO, you can discount it completely.


Abdur-Rahim isn't going to renege on his words that he declared publicly himself. It remains to be seen whether or not Sacramento even has the wherewithal to potentially make a trade. I'm still banking on SAR going to the Nets.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

purplehaze89 said:


> Abdur-Rahim isn't going to renege on his words that he declared publicly himself. It remains to be seen whether or not Sacramento even has the wherewithal to potentially make a trade. I'm still banking on SAR going to the Nets.


I'm certain he will also. The only question is 'How?'. Obviously, the Blazers would prefer a S&T deal that gets them a decent draft pick. And I *think* the Nets would prefer a S&T deal as well, since it would preserve their MLE for use on another piece to their puzzle. And SAR would definately prefer a S&T deal because it would get him another $8M - $9M above the Nets MLE.

SAR will be a Net. No confusion about that. But will it be in a S&T deal or will Shareff just walk to the Nets for the MLE and leave the Blazers with nothing? That's the question.

My money is on the S&T deal that makes everyone happy. Doesn't seem that complicated... unless the Nets want to have their cake and eat it too (hold onto their MLE *and* their 1st rounder).

PBF


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

That article says NJ's exception runs out on Friday, meaning the 22nd

Everything I had read was that it expired on the 29th. But I had also read Thorn gave Portland until this Friday for a deadline of answering to the S&T demands


ANOTHER THINGS to consider. The Nets need to make Rahim a happy camper. If he is signing for 5 years, they do not want him to be unhappy with the way he is respected and paid. Coughing up a 1st round pick is really meaningless in a 5 year span. The mental health of an expensive player is much more important


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

I see I just fell for it too

lets keep this about Rahim and the Kings to keep it on the topic of th e thread...

or else I am going to have to merge this in teh other thread too


Shall we just make the other thread called "Rahim negotiations"????


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

Trader Bob said:


> That article says NJ's exception runs out on Friday, meaning the 22nd
> 
> Everything I had read was that it expired on the 29th. But I had also read Thorn gave Portland until this Friday for a deadline of answering to the S&T demands


I said this in another thread, but I emailed Nash about the trade exception and the extension of the moratorium on trades/signings, and he says that they think the trade exception WILL get extended.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Trader Bob said:


> That article says NJ's exception runs out on Friday, meaning the 22nd


No, the article says NJ's exception runs out _next_ Friday, meaning the 29th.

PBF


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

purplehaze89 said:


> Abdur-Rahim isn't going to renege on his words that he declared publicly himself. It remains to be seen whether or not Sacramento even has the wherewithal to potentially make a trade. I'm still banking on SAR going to the Nets.


I didn't say that SAR wouldn't end up with the Nets. I think he will. What I said was that the Yahoo report that indicated he had agreed to just take the MLE and that the discussions with the Blazers were dead, was not credible. It was just a bad reading of old reports by the Star Ledger.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

> SAR will be a Net. No confusion about that.


Oh, yeah? I'd say there is a lot of confusion about that. It's clear that Nash is still working the phones with Sacramento, and who knows who else he is talking to? Who knows what Rahim's agent is telling him right now? If a trade materialized that would allow Rahim to get $60 million, you can bet he'd reconsider going to Jersey.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Talkhard said:


> If a trade materialized that would allow Rahim to get $60 million, you can bet he'd reconsider going to Jersey.


If a trade were available that would allow SAR to get $60m, you can bet Goodwin would have found it by now.

Ed O.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

ProudBFan said:


> No, the article says NJ's exception runs out _next_ Friday, meaning the 29th.
> 
> PBF


No it does not



> Thursday, July 21, 2005
> 
> Updates...
> 
> As for the Abdur-Rahim discussions with Portland, it is believed the Nets are sweetening the pot a by bumping up their offer to a lottery-protected first-round draft pick along with their trade exception. *It is important for the Nets to get this done as the exception runs out on Friday* and as Keyon Dooling is in New Jersey today. The Nets would probably like to tender their offer to Dooling face-to-face and unless the sign-and-trade with Portland happens, they have no reserves to offer Dooling anything. Portland wants Ilic which the Nets will not bite on. Reports had it earlier that the Blazers would accept a first-round pick but it is unknown what their stance is on that at this time.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Blazer Ringbearer said:


> I said this in another thread, but I emailed Nash about the trade exception and the extension of the moratorium on trades/signings, and he says that they think the trade exception WILL get extended.


understood... the original date was the 29th, and we expect it to get extended


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Trader Bob said:


> No it does not


We're looking at different articles. Here's the blurb in the OLive Blazers' Blog today:



> Thursday, July 21, 2005
> 
> Will Nets blink first?
> This report out of New Jersey suggests John Nash is winning the staring contest with Rod Thorn:
> The Blazers have to agree to accept the Nets' trade exception in order for them to complete a sign-and-trade deal with Shareef Abdur-Rahim, but if that exception expires -- *as it will next Friday* -- the free-agent forward won't get his six-year, $38 million contract.


So, which article is right? Does the Nets' TE expire tomorrow (7/22) or next Friday (7/29)?

PBF


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Talkhard said:


> Oh, yeah? I'd say there is a lot of confusion about that. It's clear that Nash is still working the phones with Sacramento


No it's not. This from Nash yesterday:



> Yeah but those pieces are not that good and could cause us to have to pay a luxury tax. You won't get Miller, Bibby or Peja from them.


By all accounts, the Kings are squarely out of current talks around SAR.



> and who knows who else he is talking to?


Sounds like the only person he's talking to right now is Nets' GM Rod Thorn. But you're right, we really have no idea what's happening behind the scenes.

Let me rephrase that, then: In my OPINION, Shareef will be a Net when all is said and done, and I have no doubts about that.

PBF


----------



## purplehaze89 (Apr 20, 2005)

ProudBFan said:


> No it's not. This from Nash yesterday:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



^^ So according to your emails, Nash isn't interested in what the Kings are offering right? I'm thinking before the week is done or at the very latest early next week the Sign and Trade gets done with a First Round Pick and the TE going to the Blazers. I just don't think the Kings have what it takes to consummate a trade with Portland.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

man, whenever I email nash he gives me 1 sentance responses that makes me think I'm a dullard who doesn't have a clue about how trades work.

oh well.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

Hap said:


> man, whenever I email nash he gives me 1 sentance responses that makes me think I'm a dullard who doesn't have a clue about how trades work.


Would you prefer 1 page responses that make you think you're a dullard?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Blazer Ringbearer said:


> Would you prefer 1 page responses that make you think you're a dullard?


actually, yes. 

because than at least I'd know he's trying to take his time to explain whats what, instead of just going "we'll have to wait and see" or making vague references to something miniscule in my question.

like earlier today, I asked him if he was trying to trade NVE or was he going to wait till the CBA is nailed out..and he responded with "yes but we can't make any trades till then"

I'm like "duh?"

oh well, better to be vague than nothing.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Will someone please clarify what exactly SAR and Goodwin said about NJ?

All these NJ fans are claiming that he "committed " to them and therfore would not back out of his commitment (easy for anyone to say, if you aren't the one possibly leaving up to $20mil on the table)...

Where is the proof (article\quote) that he said this? b\c I think that comment is being taken out of context....I want what SAR and his agent said, not what some reporter speculated on...b\c I was under the impression that SAR was saying he was commited to the Nest if they could work out a S&T deal, and that he would sign for the MLE (and didn't specifically name the Nets) if he had too.

B\c that puts pressure on POR, gives NJ some assurances, but also makes it clear that SAR wants more thean MLE money, and gives him the wiggle room, should such a deal as the SAC rumour, come about.


----------



## purplehaze89 (Apr 20, 2005)

Kmurph said:


> Will someone please clarify what exactly SAR and Goodwin said about NJ?
> 
> All these NJ fans are claiming that he "committed " to them and therfore would not back out of his commitment (easy for anyone to say, if you aren't the one possibly leaving up to $20mil on the table)...
> 
> ...



www.netsdaily.com

Browse through it yourself. SAR has verbally committed to the Nets.


----------



## Spud147 (Jul 15, 2005)

There's an article in the Sac-Bee today saying that they're waiting to see what SAR does but if they don't get him they are going to seriously go after... gulp... Bonzi. They feel that Adelman has been able to get productivity out of difficult players and could turn him around. They also thought his major gripe/issue was lack of playing time during his career and that's why he acts up. He'd get to start for the Kings (I must have been imagining him in the starting two guard role for the Blazers). 

Reminds me of what they said about P-Jax and JR. 

And no I don't have a link, I'm just not that computer literate. :raised_ey


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> Browse through it yourself. SAR has verbally committed to the Nets.


I skimmed through several of those articles and still see nothing resembling a quote by SAR or his agent saying he has committed to NJ. All I can find is regurtitated statements by journalists, which is a far cry from a commitment.

To me, it makes absolutely no sense that he would have committed already if they're still trying to work out a better deal. That would be just about the dumbest business proposition I've ever heard of.

Dan


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Spud147 said:


> There's an article in the Sac-Bee today saying that they're waiting to see what SAR does but if they don't get him they are going to seriously go after... gulp... Bonzi.... They also thought his major gripe/issue was lack of playing time during his career and that's why he acts up. He'd get to start for the Kings (I must have been imagining him in the starting two guard role for the Blazers).


Either that or I was imagining him playing out of position at SF when they brought in DA and gave DA the starting two-guard position.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

The deal is done.

Merge?


----------

