DAL and NJ both make out if Kidd deal falls apart (article)

[Basketballmania]

Dallas and New Jersey both make out if the Kidd deal falls apart

By Kelly Dwyer

Thursday, Feb 14, 2008 5:08 pm EST

The Mavs (and, to a lesser extent, the Nets) don't know it, but they are two of the luckier franchises in sports right now.

(The fact that they apparently don't know this, however, is reason enough for their collective fanbases to consider themselves awfully unlucky.)

With Devean George holding things in limbo, these two organizations have a chance to walk away from the table, and pull out of a Jason Kidd-for-parts deal that was agreed-upon this time yesterday, while making life infinitely easier for both sides.

This isn't to say that the deal, as reported, was lacking in merits for both sides. Kidd, flush with new teammates and a desire to prove people wrong, would have likely re-found his defensive stance; and while he wouldn't have discovered the jump shot that has been missing for most of his career (Kidd is shooting 36.6 percent this season), he would have improved upon his current lackluster-yet-curiously-overrated-due-to-triple-double-counts play while in Dallas.

But, forgetting Devin Harris, it would have left the Mavs without their most defensive-minded big man, DaSagana Diop, and left the team awfully thin up front should Erick Dampier pull up lame, or pick up two early fouls - two of Damp's biggest attributes.

It would have also re-introduced Jerry Stackhouse to the club in mid-March after a month of inactivity, and (let's face it), the team would be riding the hopes of a soon-to-be 35 year-old point man who is just as likely to shoot 2-11 as he is of contributing one of those 12-point, 12-assist, 10-rebound stat lines that everybody's so in love with.

Taking the long view, it would have cost them Devin Harris, who will be a better defender than Kidd next season (despite JK's best efforts), and overall is already superior to Jason offensively (the best catch-all offensive stat we have, PER, shows Devin with an 18.8 PER, while Kidd languishes at 16.2).

That said, the stat can't anticipate for interest in the actual games, Kidd had next to little of that so far this season, so his play would have to improve with the Mavs in spite of the unfamiliar surroundings. But that would be enough to make this deal a slight advantage for Dallas for the rest of this season (based on the "Kidd is angry" assumption), and loss for every season after that.

The Nets appeared to make out like bandits in this deal, getting the 25-and-under talent in Harris that few expected them to; but a closer look reveals the transaction (though squarely on New Jersey's side) might not be as strong a steal as we thought it.

For one, while grabbing the expiring deals of Devean George and Diop helps, taking on Jerry Stackhouse for about $7.5 million in 2009 and $8.2 million in 2010 doesn't really help the bottom line for a club that is obviously rebuilding. And this team is really, really rebuilding: Dave D reports that Richard Jefferson might be the next to go.

Worse, if the team had bought Stack out as expected, they couldn't use his potentially expiring deal in 2009-10 to facilitate any other trades. He'd just be a contract, not contributing to the team (not that the Nets would want him), working against the team's salary cap, and outside of currying favor with Stack's agent (Jeff Schwartz, also Jason Kidd's agent), I don't really see the point.

I see two teams that could do better. The Mavs have depth, talent, a smart coach, and a superstar in Dirk Nowitzki who has been biding his time all year. In a seven-game series, against any opponent outside of Golden State, they have as good a chance as any. Counting the Lakers, counting the Suns, counting the Celtics, Pistons and Spurs. This is still a championship-caliber team, when healthy.

If Dallas wants to pay the luxury tax, send a signed-and-traded Keith Van Horn to New Jersey with Harris for Kidd, fine. It will just prolong the misery until 2008-09. That's more passable, mainly because it isn't my money.

New Jersey doesn't come off nearly as badly, but why not wait until the summer? Harris, as good as he is, is already off his rookie contract and playing for an average of $10 million a year starting next season. Stack's contract muddles things, you still have Jefferson to unload, and there's no way anyone outside of Isiah Thomas takes on Vince Carter at this point.

Why not wait to see if the Knicks, after eventually failing to move either Eddy Curry or Zach Randolph, send Stephon Marbury's enormous expiring contract New Jersey's way next summer? That'd be a clean break. Other, much better deals should follow. Teams always get desperate in the summer, when they have the time to talk themselves into things. Even more desperate than they are now, in the wake of a series of giant moves.

So, with the trade deadline on the 21st, you have a week. Listen to the counter-offers that are already probably flowing in from other teams, and make sure this is really, really what you want. Because, if I'm a fan of the Mavs or (slightly less, again) the Nets, I'm not entirely convinced that this is the path I'd like to see my favorite team taking.

Link

there you have it. finally someone who didn't consumed crack

[JES12]

Kelly Dwyer is becoming one of my favorite reporters and I never heard of the guy a month ago.

1) He clearly said that the deal appeared to be a steal for the Nets and point to the money of Stack being the downfall...thus the talent part was the steal.

2) He stated how bad it could have been for Dallas including the fact that Kidd will suck next year no matter what team he is on.

3) The fact that only the NY Knicks are dumb enough to get Carter...Meaning stealing him away with Stack & Hassell is not as lope sided in the Mavs favor as it appears based off name recognition.


I say, call of negotiations for Kidd and pull a "surprising" trade, involving the Nets and Mavs, with Stack going to NJ, but no Kidd coming to Dallas!

[DDansby123]

Same old same old....

"Kidd's PER is worse than Devin's, so Devin's better offensively..."
"Kidd's 35 soon, and most players suck at that age, so Kidd will too..."
"Kidd fans only see triple-doubles and think he's great..."
"Kidd can't defend anymore..."

Not one of these assumptions is legitimate, yet just about every person who argues against Kidd seems to be using them as key components of their arguments.

The irony is that these statements can only be made by people who haven't seen Kidd play on a consistent basis. It still amazes me that a pretty spry-looking Jason Kidd sliced us up only a few nights ago, yet that memory is replaced with "Kidd's washed up." Amazing.

[arkuo]

one thing i personally notice that i would like to tell everyone is that kidd doesnt need to be lighting quick to be effective... at 35 years old, he can still lead a team... its his court awareness and basketball IQ that cuban paid for... he doesnt need to sprint like barbossa to get the job done... he can create opportunities and rack up assists without running up and down the court... players that rely on such attributes like quickness will be out the door by 35, kidd on the other hand doesnt lose basketball IQ as he ages... heck, he could still lead team USA to an olympic gold in the summer, IMO....

[SaintofKillers]

... and left the team awfully thin up front should Erick Dampier pull up lame, or pick up two early fouls - two of Damp's biggest attributes.

ahaha ouch

[DDansby123]

John Stockton ring a bell? At 41, he was still putting up solid numbers in the NBA, though not as good as his career numbers.

Obviously, Stockton and Kidd are different, and the former is definitely the exception to the rule. But there's certainly a possibility that Kidd continues to flourish and doesn't completely fall apart. If you look at his numbers this year relative to his career stats, they're pretty similar with the lone exception of FG% (and that's usually not an indicator of decline due to age...from what I've seen).

Some of the all-time greats in the NBA, which Kidd is, can play beyond the "typical" NBA age...and play well. If you really primarily on your mind, which Kidd does, that's even more true.

[JES12]

The irony is that these statements can only be made by people who haven't seen Kidd play on a consistent basis. It still amazes me that a pretty spry-looking Jason Kidd sliced us up only a few nights ago, yet that memory is replaced with "Kidd's washed up." Amazing.

Yeah...someone elses memory is going away too. Kidd played with emotion against Jason freakin Terry longe enough to put up respectable stats in every catagory except his 3 for 13 shooting night. No way he does that against Harris!

[DDansby123]

-= original quote snipped =-

Yeah...someone elses memory is going away too. Kidd played with emotion against Jason freakin Terry longe enough to put up respectable stats in every catagory except his 3 for 13 shooting night. No way he does that against Harris!

Whether Harris played against Kidd or not is completely irrelevant, because our playoff opponents won't have Harris, either. They'll have defenders more like Terry than Harris (e.g, Parker and Nash). So your argument goes right out the window, as I've said before.

And if Kidd plays with emotion because he wants to be a Mav, why would he not play with that level of emotion FOR the Mavs? Besides, your assertion implies that Kidd doesn't play with emotion against other teams. If that's the case, his stats for the year pretty much go right out the window, don't they? Since you've based pretty much your entire argument on stats, how can you reconcile the two?

[jwa1107]

someone said "make out"

[your_dallas_mavericks]

someone said "make out"

(picture)

God bless the Picture man, how that made my day LOL!