DEAL OR NO DEAL? FISH'S 26 BRIEFCASES ON KIDD
by Mike Fisher    Fri, Feb 1, 2008, 01:32 pm

I've assembled the reasons to tell the banker “No Deal!’’ in regard to a roster-gutting swap for Jason Kidd – starting with the fact that Jason seems to rack up baby mamas the way Howie Mandel gathered up Briefcase Models:

 

26. This information doesn’t usually find its way to the sports pages, so props to Murph of the 75-Member Staff for digging this up: Jason Kidd might have six or seven babies out there, by a handful of lovahs.   You don’t care? Well, we make fun of Travis Henry and we make fun of Shawn Kemp and I’m just saying we might want to direct some of our sarcasm toward Kidd’s habit of producing Kidds.

25. By the way, the seemingly misogynistic Mr. Kidd has a wife over here and a preggers girlfriend over there  and a lawsuit there and a domestic-violence thing over there and a restraining order over here and he groped a girl over there  . … well,  just in case the Bible Belters care, you know?

24. Because of The Law of Steve Nash: You don’t want to be locked into max contracts for point guards in their mid-30’s with physical ailments. If that was true for Dallas when Nash was 30, it’s certainly true for Kidd as he approaches 35, right?

23. Because Avery Johnson is as addicted to Jerry Stackhouse as Britney Spears is addicted to Starbucks. Trade Jerry Stackhouse, and The General would find himself having to move into Dr. Drew’s Celebrity Rehab house to room with Jeff Conaway.

22. Because Devin is a more efficient and productive player than Kidd.  Henry Abbott points out that Devin runs the second-most offensively efficient team in the NBA while Kidd runs the 25th, that Devin’s salary is $4 mil to Kidd’s $20 mil, that Devin is at 24 a decade younger than Kidd and that Devin’s PER is 18.64 while Kidd’s is 16.06. Offensive efficiency of the team Kidd runs: 25th. Me? I’m not buying the statistical mumbo-jumbo; wouldn’t Kidd be running the No. 2 offense in the NBA if HE played in Dallas? (A point made well by the DMNews’ Tim MacMahon.) And if Devin played for the Nets, would they be better than No. 25? But on the whole, the numbers suggest the two players aren’t on completely different levels.

21. Or, let’s allow someone to state it more forcefully: Devin is BETTER than Kidd. Do I share that opinion? No. But the fact that others think it – and that the notion isn’t completely laughable – makes me feel better about standing pat.

20. Because Devin is a Renaissance Man who keeps insisting he wants to co-host a radio show with me. … and who played volleyball at Wisconsin. And because while some critics think Devin looks like a Cosby Kids character I think -- maybe because I'm koo-koo for the talk radio and the volleyball -- he’s a handsome young man.

19. Because the Mavs are one of the few teams that employ multiple players who are competent traditional centers, and therefore ‘Gana Diop is far too valuable to be anybody’s throw-in.

18. Because while you can’t make moves while worrying too much about the impact on the competition, you’re not really excited about future seasons marching through the West having to overcome a Portland team featuring Oden, Aldridge, and Roy all orchestrated by Devin. The way my man Lang Whitaker writes it makes it seem kinda scary.

17. Because the original plan with Brandon Bass – that he’s a versatile big man built to combat Western foes’ SmallBall – has actually worked. A unique strategy, three years in the making, actually works. … and now we’re going to scrap it?

16.  And because Portland feels the same way about Travis Outlaw.

15. Because Avery Johnson says so. He’s in the Circle of Authority, and he’s a terrible poker player, and he’s saying it for all the world to hear:

14. Because a case can be made that Devin is already a comparable player to Kidd. Is it wise to divorce Halle Berry so you can bang Jessica Alba?

13. Because two of the three teams supposedly involved – Dallas and Portland – keep contradicting the smoke being blown in New Jersey. And two of three NBA teams cannot be wrong. Because I care about staying elite for the long term, so I review with caution the recent words of Rick Barry, who said on these pages that if the Mavs acquire Kidd now, they will be a lottery team within two years.

12. Because you can’t go home again. We have a vision of Jason Kidd in a Dallas uniform as a youthful dynamo. … while in New Jersey they now see him nightly as a guy who is kind of a quitter. I’m afraid we’re trying to recapture something that – triple-doubled aside -- isn’t quite there anymore.

11. Because Tony Cubes seems increasingly agitated at having to answer questions about it – a mood he wouldn’t  be in if he was excited about the prospects of it. A month ago, he calmly explained to DallasBasketball.com that the answer on Kidd is “No. No talks. No talks because it’s not going to happen. They’re not going to trade him. Why spent a lot of time discussing something that won’t happen?’’ A few days ago, he shorted it up, dismissing a similar query from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram with a terse “No.’’ On Wednesday he responded to a trade proposal by ordering the inquisitor to “Step away from your crack dealer.’’ 

10. Because the only real reason the Mavs’ name comes up in all these speculative deals is that it’s a sexy, easy call for teams (and the media) to make. You get some positive PR when you peddle this stuff, thus explaining why somehow Isiah Thomas decided to announce that his Knicks are also in this mix. DB.com was the first place I know of that suggested that this whole thing is a Nets PR gimmick, and now that speculation is everywhere.

9. Because it is up to Avery Johnson to develop Devin Harris into a Kidd-level player. It’s being done wth Parker and Paul and Deron. … it is imperative –and by “imperative’’ I mean that Avery’s job future should depend on it -- that Johnson succeed at that task. Because he’s the kind of guy who leaves acrimony in his wake. A quote from over the weekend from Nets boss Rod Thorn: "There is a quid pro quo.  You sign a contract. From the player's perspective, you need to play as hard as you can every night and do everything you can to help your team win. OK? If you do that, then you're fulfilling your part of the quid pro quo. … And if that is the case, then I think, if a guy has done yeoman work for you, if you can get him someplace like it's worked out for Garnett, then you try to do it. But at the end of the day, you're going to trade somebody where you can make the best deal. If it's Memphis, it's Memphis.''

That’s ugly. Why do we want that?

8. Because there is simply no evidence that J-Kidd = Championship. Not even if LeBron says it is so.

7. Because I’m not gutting a team that as presently constructed has a 33-percent chance of making the NBA Finals. Do you really screw with a team that is going to win 55 games?

6. Beause knee-jerking is always wrong. My man Dan Shanoff wonders if the loss will cause the Mavs to suddenly pull the trigger on a trade. And that, Dan, is why you are a wildly successful columnist and not an NBA GM! Follow the money: Kidd is making $19.7 million this season. The lux-tax impact will cost the Mavs $20 mil more. Kidd has one year left on his contract at $21.4 million. And he will almost certainly insist – because this is the way Jason is – on extensions that pile on a couple more $21 mil’s. This thing wouldn’t cost the Mavs $20 mil. … it might cost more like $100 mil. Is Does Jason Kidd make the Mavs 100 million dollars better than they are today?  Because there is a chemistry with this team, and it is rare and it is special. And after the game, we can all go over to Josh Howard’s crib to hang. 

5. Follow the money some more: Peter Vecsey is writing that he’s got sources saying Mark Cuban has already agreed to give Kidd that 20 mil more for 2009-10.  And that sound you here is the Peter Vecsey Bullspit Meter going nuts. … because any column that claims that the Viper has sources inside the Mavs is completely bogus.

4. Because while you “tinker’’ with a good team, you do not scrap a great team. (We’re not talking about dealing Antoine Walker here.) This team truly has a chance to be great. And this trade truly would be a scrapping of it.

3. Because this isn’t KG of this summer or Shaq of three summer ago. Add the 7-foot Kevin Garnett to this roster, or add Shaq to Dallas’ roster three seasons ago, and you’ve changed the fabric of the team in an obviously positive way. If Kidd is so obviously positive. … why isn’t he obviously positive in New Jersey?

2. Because when Avery says, “We like our team’’ and then Donnie says “We like our team’’ and Cubes says “We like our team,’’ I guess I start drowning in the We Like Our Team Kool-Aid.

1. And so I like our team.

Share This Story on Facebook
Comments (1)add comment
...
written by Michael Davis , February 02, 2008

I don't want Kidd either. He still has the same deficiencies - he never worked on his jumper. He also has bad knees, and has never won a title.

Meanwhile, the Lakers got Pau Gasol and gave up nothing (Kwame Brown). Tell Nick Fazekas I said "what's up".




Write comment

busy