naiwf Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 Gotta love Cubes. It wasn't more than a couple of days ago he said the deal wouldn't happen because they'd have to give up half their team to make it work, and he liked their team. I just don't see how the team will be better in the long run if they have to gut the bench, and possibly give up a starter or two to get Kidd.
Ripper Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 I don't see him helping Dallas honestly. I mean, they are already a pretty good team and the point guard position isn't hurting them. Their problem is probably depth. They only have Stackhouse as a consistant bench guy(or Terry depending on the time of the year) with not much contributing. Trading for kidd probably has taken some of that depth they didn't have in the first place.
TheOriginalOrangeGoblin Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 Rumors have it as Harris, Stackhouse, George, Diop, Ager, cash and possible draft picks for Kidd. I don't see this helping Dallas at all. They're losing their only bench scorer and their most consistant big man defender and a point guard who is a LOT younger and cheaper than Kidd. They'll be the ultimate "starter" team with an amazing core (Dirk, Howard, Terry, Kidd) and NOTHING else. I'd say this trade hurts them more than helps them and definetely lowers their chances against the Suns or Lakers (who do they have now that can cover Shaq or Bynum? Dampier?).
bobobrazil1984 Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 The Mavs really, uh, sacrificed their depth there didn't they? I mean none of those guys are great players or anything, but guys like Harris, Stack, and Diop are good at their roles. Cuban better have a backup plan to get at least one other player on that bench.
Guest Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 Dallas doesn't have any bench guards, which is probably just as big a problem as not having anyone who can guard any of the Western Conference bigs. Their best bench guards are Eddie Jones and Jose Barea. Think about that.
Rendclaw Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 I agree that the Mavs should do something, but I don't think that this is it. That's pretty much stripping the cupboard bare for a player who couldn't make it work when he was there before. Granted, it was a much different team with a much different mentality and Kidd was a much less experienced player, but unless Cuban plans on blowing the team up and starting over with say Dirk, Kidd, Howard and maybe one or two others, this trade will not help them at all. Just like with Phoenix, this is a knee-jerk reaction to the Gasol trade. Though I was listening to Jim Rome last night on podcast and he said that the Korver trade is what really got things going in the West, and I agree with him.
alfdogg Posted February 13, 2008 Author Report Posted February 13, 2008 Dallas is also getting Antoine Wright, according to ESPN.com.
Ripper Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 Rendclaw, I really don't think that the Phoenix trade had anything to do with gasol, because if anything, the Suns had to feel pretty good about that trade, because as I have said before....The Suns Bitch was officially traded to the Lakers and if nothing else, gasol was going to have to guard someone Marion or Diaw...all of which have done a good job of shutting him down and making him look bad on the offensive end. I think that trade happened because they were going to lose Marion anyway and trading for shaq gives them 20million off the cap in the summer of great free agents and Phoenix is a desirable location AND they think they can win achampionship with the big guy. Bynums emergence is way more important for the Lakers than aquiring Pau Gasol.
alfdogg Posted February 13, 2008 Author Report Posted February 13, 2008 (edited) I've been tinkering around with this upgraded trade machine on ESPN.com, trying to put together the most lopsided trade possible according to their projections. I just traded Stephon Marbury to the Hawks for Josh Smith, Josh Childress, Marvin Williams, Shelden Williams, Al Horford, and Acie Law. The Hawks were projected with -2 wins and 84 losses after the trade. EDIT: Found a better one, as Marbury for Oden/Roy/Aldridge/Jack/Outlaw/Webster brings Portland a -6 and 88 record. EDIT2: Marbury for Jefferson/Green/Gomes/Telfair/Foye/Brewer/Richard/McCants/Smith = -19 and 101! Edited February 13, 2008 by alfdogg
Lt. Al Giardello Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 If the trade goes down, the Nets will most likely buyout Stackhouse's contract, so theres a chance he could end up back with the Mavs.
Cheech Tremendous Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 I've been a Kidd fan for a long time, but is he even that much better than Devin Harris right now? I don't think that upgrading PG was a pressing need for the Mavs right now, especially not at the expense of their bench/depth.
Guest Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 The Nets have no reason to buy out a guy with two years left on his contract. Plus, he can contribute. That really makes no sense.
Cheech Tremendous Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 The Nets have no reason to buy out a guy with two years left on his contract. Plus, he can contribute. That really makes no sense. The whole thing would make more sense if they added Keith Van Horn to the mix in a sign and trade. That way they could avoid the whole buyout/30 day wait nonsense with Stackhouse and get the Nets the immediate cap room that they desire.
Mr. S£im Citrus Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 I've been tinkering around with this upgraded trade machine on ESPN.com, trying to put together the most lopsided trade possible according to their projections. I just traded Stephon Marbury to the Hawks for Josh Smith, Josh Childress, Marvin Williams, Shelden Williams, Al Horford, and Acie Law. The Hawks were projected with -2 wins and 84 losses after the trade. EDIT: Found a better one, as Marbury for Oden/Roy/Aldridge/Jack/Outlaw/Webster brings Portland a -6 and 88 record. EDIT2: Marbury for Jefferson/Green/Gomes/Telfair/Foye/Brewer/Richard/McCants/Smith = -19 and 101! Dude, you've got to share that with the league; that's hilarious.
Brett Favre Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 The East needs another All-Star, and the West may need to get rid of one for Kidd or just go with 13.
Coffin Surfer Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 I said it last year that Dallas needed a true PG and there you go. Harris will not be ready for a long time and Terry certainly can't run an offense, a smart player ball handler and passer like Kidd can get Dirk and Howard playing to their potential and put up some serious points. Its not like Harris was a one million anyway, he will never be a franchise player and other good energy guys will come along. But yeah, I think Dallas is still going to need more depth and muscle to get past the Suns and Lakers in a Playoff series. This is a great move though I think they could have used Gasol more.
Guest Blue Man Czech Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 Hey, look, a brand-new Nets roster that the Bulls will never beat.
Brett Favre Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 The NBA is considering a full scale expansion into Europe over the next decade, SI.com reported Wednesday. According to the report, NBA commissioner David Stern is contemplating a plan to create as many as five franchises in Europe. Citing a league source, SI.com said that Stern will announce the NBA's stance during a news conference on Saturday, the day before the All-Star Game in New Orleans. SI.com reported that the current idea is to form a European Division with five new teams in major markets. The teams would play a full 82-game schedule and compete for the NBA championship. "I'm working on the final details but you've been traded..to Siberia."
Cheech Tremendous Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 The NBA is considering a full scale expansion into Europe over the next decade, SI.com reported Wednesday. According to the report, NBA commissioner David Stern is contemplating a plan to create as many as five franchises in Europe. Citing a league source, SI.com said that Stern will announce the NBA's stance during a news conference on Saturday, the day before the All-Star Game in New Orleans. SI.com reported that the current idea is to form a European Division with five new teams in major markets. The teams would play a full 82-game schedule and compete for the NBA championship. "I'm working on the final details but you've been traded..to Siberia." A perfect place for Isiah Thomas to go after he's done dismantling the Knicks.
Guest Blue Man Czech Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 There isn't NBA-level talent for 30 teams, let alone 35, you greedy morons.
Brett Favre Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 I'm not so sure about that if you include all the players in Europe. But either way, they should contract a few teams (Grizzlies, Hornets, Nets).
Lt. Al Giardello Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 I've been a Kidd fan for a long time, but is he even that much better than Devin Harris right now? Seriously, are you fucking retarded? Jason Kidd is nearly averaging a triple fucking double this year, and is arguably the best PG in the game right now. It's an insult to even question if he's that much better then Devin fucking Harris.
Cheech Tremendous Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 I've been a Kidd fan for a long time, but is he even that much better than Devin Harris right now? Seriously, are you fucking retarded? Jason Kidd is nearly averaging a triple fucking double this year, and is arguably the best PG in the game right now. It's an insult to even question if he's that much better then Devin fucking Harris. Kidd is also an abysmal shooter who has become increasingly turnover prone. He's been a great player for years, but his near triple double numbers this season are covering up a lot of his declining abilities. I know he's better than Harris, but is he that much better that you also give up several bench players and two first round draft picks? It seems like they are making a move just to say they made a move.
Ripper Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 I've been a Kidd fan for a long time, but is he even that much better than Devin Harris right now? Seriously, are you fucking retarded? Jason Kidd is nearly averaging a triple fucking double this year, and is arguably the best PG in the game right now. It's an insult to even question if he's that much better then Devin fucking Harris. Arguably....that would be a short fucking argument. If you even start to argue he is a better point right now than Nash or Paul, people should point and laugh. Still, he is a great point guard and with his no athletism involved game, he should be able to play at a great level for another 4 seasons at least. There is no reason to believe that guys that play like him, Andre Miller and such that stay low to the floor can't play for a long long LONG time.
Lt. Al Giardello Posted February 14, 2008 Report Posted February 14, 2008 I've been a Kidd fan for a long time, but is he even that much better than Devin Harris right now? Seriously, are you fucking retarded? Jason Kidd is nearly averaging a triple fucking double this year, and is arguably the best PG in the game right now. It's an insult to even question if he's that much better then Devin fucking Harris. Arguably....that would be a short fucking argument. If you even start to argue he is a better point right now than Nash or Paul, people should point and laugh. Still, he is a great point guard and with his no athletism involved game, he should be able to play at a great level for another 4 seasons at least. There is no reason to believe that guys that play like him, Andre Miller and such that stay low to the floor can't play for a long long LONG time. No matter who you think is better then Jason Kidd at this point in time, it would be stupid to place Jason Kidd outside the top 5 PG's in the game right now. To even suggest if he's that much better then Devin Harris, should make people point and laugh.
Cheech Tremendous Posted February 14, 2008 Report Posted February 14, 2008 We should also point and laugh at people that have trouble reading and dissecting arguments.
Guest Blue Man Czech Posted February 14, 2008 Report Posted February 14, 2008 I'm not so sure about that if you include all the players in Europe. But either way, they should contract a few teams (Grizzlies, Hornets, Nets). So you're saying that there is more NBA-level talent overseas, yet at the same time, you're contending that current teams should be dissolved. So which is it? Are there more players who could crack a roster in the NBA, or are there too many hacks who should be sent to play in Naples and Tel Aviv? I mean, pick a lane here.
Brett Favre Posted February 14, 2008 Report Posted February 14, 2008 They should contract those teams cause no one watches them, and even if they do decide to contract the teams, THEN add more teams from Europe, the number of players in Europe would offset, and IMO add to the talent pool anyway. I wasn't thinking of sending people there as much as the people that are already there that are NBA talent.
USC Wuz Robbed! Posted February 14, 2008 Report Posted February 14, 2008 Instead of contracting teams, why don't you just... relocate them to the European division?
Cheech Tremendous Posted February 14, 2008 Report Posted February 14, 2008 They should contract those teams cause no one watches them, and even if they do decide to contract the teams, THEN add more teams from Europe, the number of players in Europe would offset, and IMO add to the talent pool anyway. I wasn't thinking of sending people there as much as the people that are already there that are NBA talent. I think it might be the opposite. There is probably more talent buried on NBA benches and in the D-League than there is in Europe. I'm sure between our talent pool and what exists over there you could cobble together the 60 players needed to fill 5 new NBA teams. I'm not sure why Czech feels that the NBA talent pool is so thin. If anything, the pool of players gets restricted each year because of guaranteed contracts. Also, what a random group of teams to select for contraction. Those teams might be uninspiring, but they hardly have enough financial problems that they'd need to be axed. If anything, just moving NO to Oklahoma City or St. Louis would solve most of the problem.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now