How far would Denver have gone with Kidd?

keepthenetsinnj · Post #1 » by **keepthenetsinnj** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:29 am

Imagine if Jason Kidd was traded to Denver for guys like Nene, JR Smith, and Atkins for example. How far do you think this team would go?:

PG: Kidd
SG: Iverson
SF: Anthony
PF: K-Mart
C: Camby

I personally think this team would do great and get to the Western Conference Finals. They would easily become one of the funnest teams to watch in the league.

aikgtd · Post #2 » by **aikgtd** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:41 am

I think they would have been a much better team and would go to at least the semi-finals. I only think they wouldn't go to the Conference Finals because I think SA, PHX, LAL, and maybe Utah would be better.

jzmagik · Post #3 » by **jzmagik** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:43 am

keepthenetsinnj wrote:Imagine if Jason Kidd was traded to Denver for guys like Nene, JR Smith, and Atkins for example. How far do you think this team would go?:

PG: Kidd
SG: Iverson
SF: Anthony
PF: K-Mart
C: Camby

I personally think this team would do great and get to the Western Conference Finals. They would easily become one of the funnest teams to watch in the league.

NM, didn't read that first part, yea tha tlineup would be pretty sick.

legacyinthemakin89c · Post #4 » by **legacyinthemakin89c** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:13 am

To be honest, I don't think he changes a lot. Kidd gives them a better floor general to lead the fast break, but Denver's fast break is good enough as it is. They need a point guard who can set up the half court offense, so its not just Iverson and Carmelo iso all day, and who can hit the 3 point shot. Kidd can't hit the three pointer, which is what they need.

Texas Longhorns · Post #5 » by **Texas Longhorns** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:17 am

At least Semi-finals. I think they had a chance to go past that too, and were a contender for the championship. It's too bad it's never gonna happen though. lol

BobbySura · Post #6 » by **BobbySura** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:33 am

but is iverson effective without the ball?

L-Burna89 · Post #7 » by **L-Burna89** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:36 am

They would advance to the lottery within a couple of seasons after half their lineup hits the graveyard. Really though, it's not like we'd be able to win a title with that lineup in the next couple years, and with four of the five starters being in the 30s in age(30, 32, 34, 35), we'd have nothing left in a few years......no bench, no youth....you know Melo would be bouncing after his contract is up in four years since we'd have no future.

Wouldn't have been wise....just like it wasn't a smart move on Dallas' part(or Phoenix with Shaq, for that matter).

mistatwo mayn · Post #8 » by **mistatwo mayn** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 6:24 am

legacyinthemakin89c wrote:To be honest, I don't think he changes a lot. Kidd gives them a better floor general to lead the fast break, but Denver's fast break is good enough as it is. They need a point guard who can set up the half court offense, so its not just Iverson and Carmelo iso all day, and who can hit the 3 point shot. Kidd can't hit the three pointer, which is what they need.

agreed.... but to a different extent.

Problem with the team is Carmelo.

sweet_jesus · Post #9 » by **sweet_jesus** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:04 am

Well with Kidd in Den, Dallas probably has a better record.

At the very least won't go winless against teams above .500

Its all hypothetical

I think Kidd would had been a bigger impact in Den than he is in Dallas.

dahahuang · Post #10 » by **dahahuang** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:44 am

If AI and Kidd exchange, would both of the teams be better off?

I think Dallas would, not so much for Denver.

Post #11 » by **Flash3** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:47 pm

AI is best WITH the ball in his hands, and Kidd is a PG who needs to the ball to get others involved.

I don't see that working.

MrDollarBills · Post #12 » by **MrDollarBills** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:43 pm

Ike Turner would be great on the fast break with them, but they'd be playing 4 on 5 once the run game gets ground to a halt

Ming Kong! · Post #13 » by **Ming Kong!** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 3:51 pm

I would think they'd get better, but then again the Dallas situation hasn't exactly worked thus far. I think Dallas' trade might still work out after a summer of practice, and some gelling. Remember a PG is much bigger change than a center or foward, which is what Shaq, Gasol, Korver, etc.. are. Dallas had a solid PG in Harris, but they've certainly received a more experienced, arguably better PG, but Denver certainly doesn't have near the caliber of point guard, so yeah I'll say that they wouldn't like fall back, and that they could be better. They'd probably be better than GS, but honestly it'd be hard to put them over SA, LAL, PHX, UTA, NO, HOU, DAL (w/ Harris) before seeing it actually happen.

HarlemHeat37 · Post #14 » by **HarlemHeat37** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:32 pm

if they could have traded Iverson, but got Kidd and kept Smith and Nene in some sort of deal, it would make them better IMO..

that team would actually fit great with Kidd..Martin and Kidd already have chemistry and his game is still explosive(obviously not as much as before)..Nene could have been similar if he got in shape..Smith and Kleiza are 3-point shooters, and Smith is also very explosive..Camby's role wouldn't change..Melo is a great iso player, but he's also very explosive and could have easily played off Kidd..

Kidd's D isn't as good, but it's still better than Iverson's IMO..

not to take anything away from AI, he's having a solid season and is still a great player..

personally, I would have acquired Artest if I was Denver, and kept AI..

elbowthrower · Post #15 » by **elbowthrower** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 6:31 pm

Imagining what they would have to give up in exchange, I'd say it wouldn't help them at all.

Perimeter D would be better, ball movement would be better, but there's still no post D and the bench would most likely be a lot thinner.

big123 · Post #16 » by **big123** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 10:15 pm

No way I trade AI for Kidd. AI looks like he's just hitting his prime now lol, while Kidd is looking like he's well on the decline. I wouldn't give up my whole bench that consists of Nene, JR and Najera either for him. Kidd is a good PG at this point, not a great one anymore. Not worth it.

HarlemHeat37 · Post #17 » by **HarlemHeat37** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 10:33 pm

I wouldn't trade Kidd for Iverson neither, it's too much of a risk..I was just saying that if I was to acquire Kidd, I'd get value for Iverson, otherwise it wouldn't work..they wouldn't fit together..

Franchise_411 · Post #18 » by **Franchise_411** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 10:51 pm

That would be pretty nice on paper ... I'm sure there wouldn't be any chemistry problems either ... but, AI needs to dominate the ball to be effective ... I think they would've gone to the second round at least ...

Scalabrine · Post #19 » by **Scalabrine** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 11:28 pm

L-Burna89 wrote:They would advance to the lottery within a couple of seasons after half their lineup hits the graveyard. Really though, it's not like we'd be able to win a title with that lineup in the next couple years, and with four of the five starters being in the 30s in age(30, 32, 34, 35), we'd have nothing left in a few years......no bench, no youth....you know Melo would be bouncing after his contract is up in four years since we'd have no future.

Wouldn't have been wise....just like it wasn't a smart move on Dallas' part(or Phoenix with Shaq, for that matter).

Shaq brings in tons of revenue to whatever franchise he plays for, when you factor that in he really isnt that bad, and then when you figure that they are playing good basketball with him and were treading water with Marion they needed to do something and Kerr was right, Marion was going to leave at seasons end so they got what they could.