Kidd Going To Dallas

[LongLiveHinkie]

Maybe we can sneak in and offer Dallas the same for Miller. Tweaked to make the money match.

[eyeatoma]

Maybe we can sneak in and offer Dallas the same for Miller. Tweaked to make the money match.

Although I would love Kidd on this team, I really wish he was Miller's age...the dude's 36...We're one of the youngest teams in the league. For one of our key pieces to be on the wrong side of 30 is taking a huge risk. We already have one of the top 10 point guards in the league. Why don't we just wait for the PF that this team so desperately needs.

Even though you think Dallas missed out big time, Kidds passing would not be utilized very well on that Mavs team. They're a team thats predicated on tons of isolations for Nowitzki and Howard. They lose out on their only defensive big man in Diop, and on Devin Harris who isn't even close to reaching his prime.

Sure Kidd would be terrific in defending bigger guards, but his rebounding/assist numbers would be down, and he still shoots a ghastly 36 percent from the field.

Think of it this way, if the Mavs couldn't properly utilize Nash's passing skills when he was a lot younger and more agile, what makes you think they're going to be able to do it with Kidd?

[LongLiveHinkie]

[quote="eyeatoma"][/quote]

I meant trade Miller to Dallas for the same package they gave for Kidd. So we'd get Harris, etc.

[eyeatoma]

-= original quote snipped =-



I meant trade Miller to Dallas for the same package they gave for Kidd. So we'd get Harris, etc.

Yeah, that would be a good deal!

[The Guilty Party]

why is this funny! its not! its a travesty that someone gave DEVEAN GEORGE a no trade clause. Who gives a ****

George does NOT have a no trade clause... well sort of. Any player that signs a one year deal has the right to veto a trade in that one year.

Ric Bucher has said that if George somehow doesn't give in here that Dallas will do a sign and trade with Keith Van Horn to make the numbers work. Obviously this CBA has flaws when you see the Lakers dig up McKie and now the Mavericks possibly dig up Keith Van Horn for sign and trade purposes.

I can't believe Dallas is trying to do this deal. While the bigger names are heading West, I would make the case that the Nets and the Heat are getting the better end of these trades.

[The Guilty Party]

So there's been some more explanation as to why George is stopping this trade. If he gets traded, George's new team will NOT hold his Bird Rights and therefore he could not be signed to a bigger deal. With so few teams under the cap and only a handful of teams using their MLE's each year, George doesn't think he get paid much on an open market.

If KVH is used in a sign and trade, it will cost Cuban even more money due to the luxory tax so Chris Broussard is reporting that the Nets and Mavs are trying to explore other options.

If the Nets do get Devin Harris, I would like to see us try to get Marcus Williams if the cost isn't much (I suspect it wouldn't be).

[dbodner]

So there's been some more explanation as to why George is stopping this trade. If he gets traded, George's new team will NOT hold his Bird Rights and therefore he could not be signed to a bigger deal.

Um...

That's wrong.

You retain bird rights in a trade.

[The Sixer Fixer]

Nice to see George block the trade, then go out the same night and shoot 0-11 from the floor and 0-2 from the FT line. Good job!

[bech01a1]

So there's been some more explanation as to why George is stopping this trade. If he gets traded, George's new team will NOT hold his Bird Rights and therefore he could not be signed to a bigger deal.

Um...

That's wrong.

You retain bird rights in a trade.

"Before his flight to Dallas, Bartelstein told ESPN.com by phone: "We're not trying to block anything. The issue is that if he agrees to this deal, he has to give up his Bird rights. To lose that tool in today's world of free agency is a difficult thing to do. In this day and age, the sign-and-trade is a valuable tool that I don't want to lose for Devean. We're not trying to cause a problem. Teams have to do what's in their best interest. Sometimes players do, too. I hate to cause grief, but I have to do what's best for Devean. It's not a power play. My job is to protect him.""

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3244818

[bech01a1]

In general, I think this is an awful deal for Dallas. Tony Parker among others are probably thrilled. He will get a chance to abuse Kidd just like he did in the finals. Kidd isn't near the defensive player Harris is, and the Mavs lose a lot of depth.

[The Guilty Party]

Um...

That's wrong.

You retain bird rights in a trade.

This is the report from Ric Bucher who is stating that this is all caused by George signing the 1 year deal. It didn't seem right to me either but this is what Bucher is reporting on ESPN as the reason George does NOT want to leave the Mavs.

[dbodner]

Maybe it's being misreported. He could be worried that he'd be cut, which would result in losing his two bird years. But regardless of the type of contract he signed during the offseason, he retains his bird rights in a trade. I believe the CBA (which is available publicly online) over Ric Bucher.

[The Guilty Party]

I'm with you to an extent, dabods... but this is what it is being reported all over the place.

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-3 ... rsday.html

Also... bech01a1's post contains quotes from George's agent talking about this very same issue.

[wow444]

So there's been some more explanation as to why George is stopping this trade. If he gets traded, George's new team will NOT hold his Bird Rights and therefore he could not be signed to a bigger deal.

Um...

That's wrong.

You retain bird rights in a trade.

Not if you sign a one year deal, according to the articles I have read. I think it was to keep people from signing players to one year deals and then circumventing the cap by signing them to bigger longer deals the next year.

[dbodner]

Not if you sign a one year deal, according to the articles I have read. I think it was to keep people from signing players to one year deals and then circumventing the cap by signing them to bigger longer deals the next year.

That's why there's a difference between non-qualifying veteran free agents (one year without changing teams), early qualifying veteran free agents (2 years), and qualifying veteran free agents (3+ years). How many bird years you have does affect the next contract you can sign. It wasn't originally in the CBA, and it was abused (i.e. Danny Manning) by signing guys to 1 year minimum deals then next year maxing them out. But the fix was by having multiple "bird types", not losing bird years in trades.

[The Guilty Party]

"Before his flight to Dallas, Bartelstein told ESPN.com by phone: "We're not trying to block anything. The issue is that if he agrees to this deal, he has to give up his Bird rights. To lose that tool in today's world of free agency is a difficult thing to do. In this day and age, the sign-and-trade is a valuable tool that I don't want to lose for Devean. We're not trying to cause a problem. Teams have to do what's in their best interest. Sometimes players do, too. I hate to cause grief, but I have to do what's best for Devean. It's not a power play. My job is to protect him."

That quote from Bartelstein is saying that George "has" to give up his Bird Rights tells me that George isn't afraid of getting cut but that his rights are lost in the transaction. I'm of the same belief you are, dabods... I thought Bird Rights traveled in a trade.

By the way... let's dig a little further. George is making roughly $2.3MIL and isn't having a great season. Who cares about his Bird Rights? I realize that some teams aren't using their MLE every summer but he's not going to come to close to getting the full MLE and will probably get a similar deal next summer with some team.

[wow444]

I stand corrected:
http://www.nbpa.com/cba_articles/article-VII_8.php

(b) A player with a one-year Contract (excluding any Option Year) who would be a Qualifying Veteran Free Agent or an Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agent upon completing the playing services called for under his Contract cannot be traded without the player

[wow444]

-= original quote snipped =-



That quote from Bartelstein is saying that George "has" to give up his Bird Rights tells me that George isn't afraid of getting cut but that his rights are lost in the transaction. I'm of the same belief you are, dabods... I thought Bird Rights traveled in a trade.

By the way... let's dig a little further. George is making roughly $2.3MIL and isn't having a great season. Who cares about his Bird Rights? I realize that some teams aren't using their MLE every summer but he's not going to come to close to getting the full MLE and will probably get a similar deal next summer with some team.

My thinking also. I think his agent is trying to hold up the Mavs for some compensation for agreeing to the trade.

[tk76]

Stackhouse may have accidentally killed the trade for good by admitting he would return to Dallas- which is considered tampering/collusion by other teams, especially when Kidd and Stack have the same agent:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=A ... &type=lgns

[Dedicated_76ers_fan]

That would devastate the Dallas Mavericks completely. Imagine playing knowing you can be dealt at ANY moment. At first, that was a possibility but now it's a bit deeper then that. Rumor has it, the owners did this trade. Donnie Nelson must be upset now.