PDA

View Full Version : Could Payton to LA push Kidd to SA?



Archie
07-08-2003, 09:59 PM
If Kidd is really about winning a championship I would think so. Nothing's for certain but GP in LA would seem to make the NBA Finals that much more tougher for an Eastern Conference champ. Kidd's climbed that mountain twice with the Nets. Perhaps playing the rest of his career with Tim Duncan and still getting paid the max might look a little better now that Payton himself has apparently decided a champioship is what he wants to spend the rest of his career seriously pursuing.

ducks
07-08-2003, 10:05 PM
it would be like kidd is not running to join the favorites to win it all

Archie
07-08-2003, 10:06 PM
That's it, ducks. It would look like Kidd is leaving the Nets where he is the man for a not so certain shot at a title.

scott
07-09-2003, 12:40 AM
Of course Kidd is exposed in the same light as J ONeal that "its not about the money, its about winning a title" only applies when the money is the max.

If Kidd wanted to win a title above all else, he'd sign a contract much like Payton or Malone- less than market value to allow for other aquisitions to make the team even more formidable.

NCaliSpurs
07-09-2003, 02:44 AM
I firmly believe that Jason Kidd is more of a lock than ever. If Kidd ever wants to win a title, then he is definitely not going to do it while GP, Kobe, and Shaq are together. He may do it with Parker, Manu, and Duncan though.

About the money- Dusty Garza appears 100% certain that the Spurs only offered 9.6 million to Kidd. This doesn't make any sense to me.

Archie
07-09-2003, 02:47 AM
The Spurs offered the max. The last thing they would want to do is slight Kidd by offering less when the Nets are doing the same.

o0drpill0o
07-09-2003, 03:27 AM
The only way I could see the 9.6 rumor being true is if Kidd, Pop, RC, and TD sat down to discuss how they wanted to build this team, and what it would take to get it done. Kidd is already rich as hell; who knows? Maybe it was his idea... Highly improbable though.

50 Cent
07-09-2003, 03:31 AM
The thing I have been saying this whole offseason is that the Spurs should not offer Kidd the Max deal. If he was serious about winning a Championship, then prove it by taking less than the max and allow us to sign another FA. If Dusty is ever right about one thing, I would hope it would be that the Spurs only offered him 9.6. If that happens, I will respect Kidd and Pop and RC totally for this deal, and it will prove Kidd's committment to the Championship. I doubt it, but we will see.

Archie
07-09-2003, 03:33 AM
Offering anything less than max would be foolish for SA.

o0drpill0o
07-09-2003, 03:35 AM
Unless Kidd was hip to it from the start.

Whottt
07-09-2003, 03:39 AM
I just want to know one thing..did we even call Gary Payton?

And there's not a an emoticon that accurately captures my mood if we didn't.

Half court team ignores GP...we deserve what's gonna happen to us this year.

Archie
07-09-2003, 03:48 AM
Half court team declines to blow entire cap on 35 year old guard.

Of course Kidd would make the Spurs more than a half court team. But nevermind that.

:rolleyes

Whottt
07-09-2003, 04:00 AM
LMAO we're gonna find out, if Kidd signs.

Me I tend to think GP is better than Kidd, he is definitely better on our team.

GP got crappier teams than the Nets to the playoffs last year and this year. And Kidd barely beat him this year, with a much better team.

You will see that points are greater than rebounds...especially coming from your guards.

Archie
07-09-2003, 04:28 AM
We'll see just how good the Nets look without Kidd. The answer may surprise you. You know you really should offer your services to a NBA Front Office near you if you think Kidd sucks so bad.

MadeFromDust
07-09-2003, 04:29 AM
It's possible that when Pop, RC, Tim, and Kidd were talking over all that good food, Pop might have just said to Kidd, it's whatever you want to do. If you want us to give you the max contract it's yours. If you want to take a lesser salary so we can get another good player in addition to you, then we can go with that too. It's all up to you what you want to do. A pitch like that would be hard to refuse since Kidd is already enthused with the idea of playing next to TD.

scott
07-09-2003, 11:10 AM
How NJ looks without Kidd doesn't matter- unless you are a Nets fan.

The only thing I care about is how San Antonio looks WITH Kidd.

Ghost Writer
07-09-2003, 11:15 AM
scott, my priority has always been a star big man, but I don't see that happening. It's time to get with the program. The Spurs want Kidd and he's contemplating coming here. We have to come away with a star now that the Lakers have set the bar so high.

Get Kidd and trade Parker to get a center.


:cooldevil

scott
07-09-2003, 11:19 AM
Your comments and mine are not inconsistent.

I just don't want to hear how bad NJ will be without Kidd. I'm not a Nets fan, and I don't give a shit.

Ghost Writer
07-09-2003, 11:22 AM
The Nets won't be that bad next year with the almighty Parker on their team.


:cooldevil

scott
07-09-2003, 11:26 AM
When the NBA decides to award us championships based on how the Nets do- let me know.

Ghost Writer
07-09-2003, 11:34 AM
When you say something relevent, let me know, scott.

The spurs may need some cooperation from the Nets if we are to acquire Kidd and a starting center this summer.



:cooldevil

Archie
07-09-2003, 11:42 AM
What's the problem now?

Ghost Writer
07-09-2003, 11:44 AM
there's no problem. Some people still aren't comfortable with bringing Kidd in, despite the bigman superstar options fading away and the Lakers setting the bar higher than ever.

It's survival now, people.

We may have to trade some pieces to the NEts to free up cash to address the hole at center.



:cooldevil

CosmicCowboyXXX
07-09-2003, 11:46 AM
Payton/Malone to the Lakers may actually convince Kidd to stay in Jersey...Knowing that the Spurs road to the finals has to go through the new and improved Lakers may sway him to stay in the East....at least there he has a better than average chance to make it to the finals every year with a relatively young team...

Archie
07-09-2003, 11:47 AM
It depends on what you would receive in return. I don't think that you just send out Parker now simply to send him out.

Ghost Writer
07-09-2003, 11:51 AM
You send him out to the Nets for more cap flexibility to sign a center.


Parker becomes a luxury with Kidd here.

The idea of Parker as a shooting guard was never a real possibilty.


:cooldevil

Archie
07-09-2003, 11:52 AM
You don't just move talent because it's a "luxury" to you.

TwoHandJam
07-09-2003, 11:58 AM
I don't think Parker would be a better 2 than Manu. If Jackson stays, I could see many people being unhappy with their role/minutes.

NCaliSpurs
07-09-2003, 11:59 AM
It's survival now, people.

We may have to trade some pieces to the NEts to free up cash to address the hole at center.


That is the tune I been singing.

Trade Parker and Malik Rose. We would clear an addition 5 million off our cap. We would have 7-9 million left to make a run at Kandi(my #1) or Nesterovic.

However....maybe the Spurs realize what all the Kidd-lovers have been denying. Maybe they realize that Parker is a young star and that he will blossom playing as a third option to Kidd and Duncan.

Maybe we are stealing a page from Dallas, except Duncan is everything Dirk SHOULD be, and defense is a priority.

Instead of Nash, NVE, Finley, and Dirk

we have
Kidd, Parker, Manu, and Duncan.

Archie
07-09-2003, 03:28 PM
I haven't denied Parker's talent in fact I've referred to him as an excellent 3rd star. And if it's Kidd or Rasho Nesterovic the Spurs sign then dammiit you can call me a "Kidd lover" all the F you want. F'in A.

KoriEllis
07-09-2003, 03:31 PM
The idea of Parker as a shooting guard was never a real possibilty.

This is where you and Spurs' management disagree. They think it is a very real possibility.

Archie
07-09-2003, 03:36 PM
Parker has received most of his notoriety because of his scoring ability. You can call him a point all you want but he always seemed able to take the rock and find a way to score. Yeah he doesn't have the prototypical 2 body but wtf does that matter if he will be defending opposing points?

Playing with Kidd will only enhance his scoring ability.

goliath
07-09-2003, 03:36 PM
My understanding is that the Spurs are planning on not have a traditional point and shooting guard. Rather have just 2 "guards. "

One wont be viewed as primarily setting up the offense and the other scoring but that they both will have similar responsibilities depending on how the flow of the game is going.

I've even read that that was part of the presentation to Kidd and he is sold on the idea. Likes that he wont have the sole responsibility of running the team and bringing the ball up the court.

Archie
07-09-2003, 03:45 PM
There is a precedent for not having the perfect traditional lineup and winning championships. You can look at the Lakers without a true point over the last couple of seasons and the Bulls without a great center or true point. It's not like the Lakers had a great 1 on 1 shooting guard during the 80s.

Ghost Writer
07-09-2003, 03:47 PM
Um, yeah, but now the Lakers have stars at every positions expect the small forward, pal.




:cooldevil

Archie
07-09-2003, 03:49 PM
'cept two of those are 35 and 40 years old. There's only one ball. They've improved significantly. If you think the Spurs can't make some good moves this summer then talk to a shrink 'cause I don't want to hear it.

Ghost Writer
07-09-2003, 04:05 PM
I don't want a two point guard, no center lineup going against a perfect lineup in Los Angeles.


:cooldevil

Archie
07-09-2003, 04:07 PM
Then let's forget about Kidd and sign Nesterovic to have that perfect lineup and then you lose because your offense sucks a big fat one.

$3.8 mil motherfucker.

Ghost Writer
07-09-2003, 04:16 PM
No. Better yet, let's keep Parker and say to hell with any center and just start Kidd at the center spot.

Who do you think wins a backcourt matchup of Kidd & Parker vs. Payton & Bryant?






:cooldevil

Archie
07-09-2003, 04:18 PM
Are you really this fucking blind? On the one hand you bitch about LA's infusion of experienced talent and on the other you bitch about the Spurs' pursuing...experienced franchise player talent. Stop bitching and bring something to the discussion or hit the nursery with TPark and MFD.

Ghost Writer
07-09-2003, 04:33 PM
You're drifting. Again.

I don't want a glut of talent at two positions if we can makes some trades and get equal value in return. That should be obvious to you, unless you've got a hard-on for all our current players like most homers do.


:cooldevil

Archie
07-09-2003, 04:41 PM
Yeah, it's perfectly reasonable to pass on a Jason Kidd for dogshit like Olowokandi. That is the lamest fucking take imaginable...surpassed only by your suggestion to deal Parker for Malone or Kwame Brown.

Go. Just go.

NCaliSpurs
07-09-2003, 07:25 PM
I haven't denied Parker's talent in fact I've referred to him as an excellent 3rd star. And if it's Kidd or Rasho Nesterovic the Spurs sign then dammiit you can call me a "Kidd lover" all the F you want. F'in A.

I think at this point, that we all have to be pro-Kidd. Spurs management has given us no choice.

Like I said, we are going to be what Dallas only dreams of being. A team that can run and score (we will probably be the best fast-break team), or dump it to a dominant big man (probably second best half court team besides LA).

I hope that 3.8 million can net us PJ Brown or Zo'. If not, Malik wasn't that bad as a regular season starter.