Reply With Quote
Yeah...In the mid 2000s, every year there were trade speculations for Tony and/or Manu. I always argued for keeping them both.
I know man, that dissapointed me as well. We got TURK and MERCER HERE INSTEAD! Lost Jax and gained those two bums. Not a good tradeoff when you have that capspace.
What a damn summer
Don't forget the trade Parker for Calderon + whatever scrubs ideas
That portnoy guy with all the trades centered around Parker for Bustnani.
Jason Kidd alongside Tim might have delivered rings in 2004,05,06,07. that's 2 more rings than we got, right? in 2007, the then 33 years old Kidd averaged a triple double in the PO. he was that good. would I do the Tony for Kidd swap in 2003 in hindsight? yes. Spurs likely wouldn't play the 2013 finals and might already be in rebuilding mode. but they might look back at an even greater past and a MJ-Bulls like domination of the leage during Tim's prime.
That portnoy guy with all the trades centered around Parker for Bustnani.
Pop just said that during his presser, wanted Kidd to mentor Parker and would have TP play the 2 during that time because he was still a good scorer.
Spurs' Gregg Popovich wanted both Jason Kidd and Tony Parker in 2003
MIAMI -- Back in 2003, the San Antonio Spurs put a stop to the Los Angeles Lakers' efforts to become the first team to win four straight NBA championships since the Boston Celtics won eight straight les from 1959 to 1967. The Spurs beat the Lakers in six games during the conference semifinals, dispatched the the Dallas Mavericks in the Western Conference finals, and then beat the New Jersey Nets in the NBA Finals.
At the time, the Spurs had a plucky young point guard named Tony Parker learning with on-the-job experience and they were facing arguably the best point guard in the league at the time in Jason Kidd of the Nets. Kidd was a free agent that coming summer and had narrowly lost the MVP vote to Tim Duncan the previous season. The Spurs had dreams of putting Kidd next to Duncan ... and Parker.
"Well, your question infers that there was an either/or, and that would be false," Popovich explained on Wednesday. "That's not what I had in mind at all. I wanted both of them. It wasn't to get rid of Tony Parker. Tony was really young, and I had a hard time convincing him of that. But I was probably a little bit out of the bubble machine at the time. It seemed to me that it would be a great move if we could get Jason to help mentor Tony.
My illustrious NBA career ended a week and a half. So what the am I going to teach him about being a point guard?"
Could that have worked? Could the Spurs have pulled off a lightning-quick backcourt with two point guards possessing shaky jumpers? Would the positives have outweighed the negatives and given the Spurs a run of les as Kidd molded Parker into a future playmaker? What was the plan?
"I thought that Jason Kidd being there," Popovich said, "being the mentally tough person that he is and with his skills, that would be the greatest education for Tony Parker. And Tony can go play 2. Let him play the 2 position. He was a scoring guard at the time anyway. Not a great shooter, but we could figure it out, and let Jason be the point. As Jason gets older, let him move over to 2, let Tony take 1. Brilliant, brilliant. This is great. Let's go get this thing done. Tony did not love that idea at all. But we still tried to do it."
This may end up being one of the great "what-ifs" of the past two decades. Had the Spurs convinced Kidd to join Parker and Duncan would they have become even more of a dynasty than what we've seen over the past 15 years? Having Tim Duncan in his prime, Jason Kidd in his prime, a developing Tony Parker, and Manu Ginobili backing them both up as the Sixth Man could have developed into one of the best quartets the NBA has ever seen.
Instead, Kidd re-signed with the Nets for six years and $99 million but never led them to another NBA Finals after taking them to back-to-back championship series in 2002 and 2003. Kidd finally got his championship ring in 2011 as a member of the Dallas Mavericks
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/blog/ey...parker-in-2003
Kidd could have helped win les all the way to 2007 IMO.. But he was done by 2009..
And Kidd staying in NJ was one of the dumbest moves he ever made. Tim was just 28 years old and won 2 more rings without him. Kidd's legacy is great but would have been greater had he come to SA..
So do I. I personally wanted them not to go after Kidd but they did, and Kidd decided to stay in New Jersey.
I would've liked that roster with Kidd along with Parker, Ginobili and prime Duncan
Woj on the topic:
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--te...060105541.html
I was super pissed with the jason kidd thing. We wouldnt have won anymore rings after 2003. Tony and Manu both are better players.
If the Spurs kept the draft pick and draft Josh Howard...easily 3 championship from 2004 to 2007.
i didn't realize the idea was to keep tony and kidd. i never liked that rumor.
i always thought the money was there because of 50 leaving, spend the money on a big. my buddy told me he thought the spurs should spot fill for that season and save the cash for a play at garnett that following season. i always liked that idea.
tony was like kawhi, he seemed like a sure bet. i didn't see the need for a big name point guard.
and the mike taylor show is awesome. and geoff sheen has potential. i dunno where that hate is coming from.
I read the woj article . It is really interesting to read that RC wanted both Kidd at PG and Tony at SG. That would have meant no money for keeping Manu and possibly Tony leaving too for other reasona, thats the whole Spurs core gone and it's scary.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
