Thread Tools

Display Modes

knickstorm · 08-03-2004, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Trader Bob!
I think Dallas getting Jason Terry does end the Kidd sweepstakes for them

I think the better deal for NJ would be:

Portland trades Damon $15.75 mil + DA $8.4 mil + Woods $1.1 mil =$25.25 mil
NJ trades Kidd $14.7 mil

In the same transaction, but essentially 2 seperate deals to satisfy the CBA, Damon is dealt for Kidd, then:

DA + Woods are received by NJ using their Kittle traded player exception. Their combined salary of $9.5 is less than the $10.3 mil or so traded player exception they have, so they can be termed replacement players. Plus they need a SG since Kittles left.

NJ gain salarys for the year, but get a huge expiring contract to replace Kidds big long term contract. the benefit of getting out from under Kidd's contract is their motivation to do it.

Portland saves $10.55 mil in team salary, $21.1 mil with taxes

**This still leaves us with the ability to trade Rahim for better positional players

Maybe sign Wes person

PG Kidd, Telfair
SG NVE, Hassell?, Person?
SF Miles, Pattterson
PF Randolph, **Rahim, Outlaw
C Ratliff, Stepania, *Sinonovic

IR Khryapa
*Reserves

why would the NEts do this?!???! If they wanted to gain salary this year to help lower it for next year then they would've kept kittles, they wanted the salary lowered now!!! if you were NJ wouldn't it then make sense to reject this trade and get rid of kiddd in the off-season next year should he demand to leave.

**Trader Ed** · 08-03-2004, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theWanker!
I'd be happy with that deal. however, that leaves us with only NVE (and possibly Hassel and Outlaw) at SG. Not a great SG rotation.

However, Kidd is the kind of guy you get then figure out how he fits. Maybe he and NVE could make a good back court tandem, switching on players on defense.

Our outside shooting would be wretched. Worse than wretched if NVE shoots the three at 30% like he did in Golden State.

I was thinking of maybe adding Wes Person for a year to add some dependable shooting

**Trader Ed** · 08-03-2004, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by knickstorm!
why would the NEts do this?!???! If they wanted to gain salary this year to help lower it for next year then they would've kept kittles, they wanted the salary lowered now!!! if you were NJ wouldn't it then make sense to reject this trade and get rid of kiddd in the off-season next year should he demand to leave.

While Da's contract is longer than Kittles is... he is cheaper. By adding Woods they get a backup SG to DA. all for the same money.

If they loose Martin, Kittles and Kidd... they better fill the roster with some players or loose ticket sales even more.

I am just saying its an option to fill their roster with some talent.
Getting DA + Woods is essentially a free acquiistion as far as acquiring them goes.

Blazer Ringbearer · 08-03-2004, 11:21 AM

I think they either signed or were looking at signing some SG's for cheap...

Ron Mercer?

They clearly don't want a guy like DA on their team this year. I don't think there's any way they would take a big multi-year contract for Kidd.

They want to spend as little money as possible this year and even less next year.

Masbee · 08-03-2004, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Yega1979!
Trading Rahim for Kidd straight up would work, and NJ would do that trade right now. It's up to Paul Allen to decide if he wants to pay Kidd's contract.

I don't see it.

Paul Allen did it once before with Scottie Pippen's (then) huge contract, including a final year of $17 mil. He did it, and did it gladly. And the team had a front line of Rasheed Wallace, Brian Grant and Arvydas Sabonis.

That is way better than what we have now: Theo Ratliff and Zach Randolph.

Pippen slid right into the starting Small Forward position taking over for career bench players.

Kidd, if traded for SAR, would cause real problems in the backcourt. Even more so, if Trenton comes aboard. Damon and NVE wants time at the point. It just doesn't fit right now unless Damon goes to NJ and NVE is a 1 year rental.

Pippen's age and injuries burned Allen. Pippen was unable to be a strong enough leader to hold the team together after the Lakers WCF collapse.

And you think Allen is going to fall all over himself to repeat history with a less respected player than Pippen, at a position that doesn't naturally complete the starting lineup, coming to a team with a roster much inferior to the 2000 squad, right after that player has had risky surgery and at his age?

**Schilly** · 08-03-2004, 12:03 PM

Quoting myself from another thread...
RE Cap space...

Quote:

Here we are a season away from around 13 mil or so in cap space, probebly a little less. Here is what they have under contract for next season...

Anderson 9mil
Patterson 6.4mil
Telfair 1.7mil
Khryapa 1.1mil
Outlaw .9mil
Commited 19.1 mil

Throw in Randolphs Qualifying Offer of 2.7mil an then you are up to 21.8mil. Also add in another draft pick for about 1.5 mil or so an the blazers are up to around 23 mil. Add in Monia total is up to 24 mil or so. And lets assume that the Blazers also keep Hassell for 4.5mil next year brings it up to about 28.5 mil.

Then Factor if the Blazers resign Miles starting at 5mil takes the team pretty close to 33.5mil.

So the Blazers would be an estimated 10.5 mil (assuming they renounce all FA's Stoudamire, Ratliff, Rahim, Stepania, NVE, Woods) under the cap with this lineup.

PG Telfair
SG Anderson/Hassell/Monia
SF Miles/Patterson/Khryapa/Outlaw
PF Randolph
C ? (Draft pick)

So 10 players under contract and only about 10 mil to go out and sign players and that's assuming they walk away entirely form those that expired.

That to me would be the end of the Blazers for a long long time.

Blazer Ringbearer · 08-03-2004, 12:10 PM

Yup, compare that to having Kidd and the option of resigning Theo and NVE for reasonable deals and it's night and day to me...

Kmurph · 08-03-2004, 12:28 PM

Would Kidd & Telfair on the court together be fun to watch or what? Talk about some serious passing skills.

Is Kidd overpaid? Sure he is. But how can you NOT make this deal? Seriously, the guy is one of the top players in the NBA. A player who, IMO has made guys like K-Mart and RJ look MUCH better than they really are.

Yes, he is getting older, and he has played some heavy minutes the past few years. But I think coming to POR could help REDUCE his minutes and INCREASE his effectiveness.

I agree that Damon would need to go, either as a part of this deal, or as part of another one. IF POR got Hassell, then Hassell and NVE could easily handle the SG role, heck even Kidd or Miles at times.

You put Kidd on this team, resign Miles and get Hassell and this would be IMO, a really fun team to watch. Good defensively, very good in transistion (where Kidd excels) and a fantastic passing (a severely underappreciated skill in a teams' success) team.

Just watch how much better Kidd makes Zach, Miles and everyone else on our team look.

If Mourning wants to come back, then deal SAR, Damon and Qyntel for Kidd, Mourning and the DEN draft pick.

**Storyteller** · 08-03-2004, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theWanker!
It's a little risky, but many moves that can push you into a contending team are risky.

The Pacers really stuck their neck out when they traded a proven All-Star PF/C for an unknown Jermaine O'Neal.

LA took a big gamble by giving up on Vlade Divac, a rare quality center, for a high school sg/sf in Kobe Bryant.

San Antonio gave up a season to get Tim Duncan (although they really didn't have a choice).

Detroit gave up what was thought at time the best player in the deal (Grant Hill) that landed them Ben Wallace.

The list goes on.

You're only painting one side of the picture.

Portland took a risk by giving up an unhappy but productive Brian Grant to get Shawn Kemp.

New Jersey took a risk by signing Alonzo Mourning to a guaranteed, non-insured 4 year deal.

In fact, it could be argued that nearly every multi-year contract is "taking a risk". Sometimes it works, but sometimes it results in disaster.

And as Chuck Taylor pointed out, taking a risk on a young player is very different from taking a risk on a guy in his 30's.

Quote:

For every team that succeeds at rolling the dice, there's at least two who fail.

Which is why the Blazers need to be very careful about taking on the $90 million contract of a player who has yet to prove that he can even be productive after having surgery.

Quote:

Fact is that it's really rare to assemble a contending team like Trader Bob did. (He used Allen's money and some savvy trades to get Wallace, Pippen, Smith and Bonzi without really giving up much.)

Is this idea of getting Kidd a "Trader Bob" deal or what? He'd jump all over this idea, IMO.

I'll repeat what I wrote a couple of days ago. Trading for Kidd pre-surgery is a no-brainer. Trading for Kidd post-surgery without seeing how he can play is a deal that could send the Blazers to the bottom of the West for years to come.

If the Nets want to make this deal, it will still be available in January. And as people are pointing out, potential suitors for Kidd are falling out of the race pretty quickly. I vote to wait and see what shape he's in during the season before making a trade for him.

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes