Reply With Quoteyou're the man now dog
Like I told many of you in chat on Wednesday, there are many things going on behind the scenes right now for the San Antoniio Spurs.
Some of those things are obviously never in the press. The Spurs are considering a variety of different options, including a few trade scenarios that would be implemented after the acquisition of Jason Kidd.
But things are constantly changing. As I told you on Tuesday night, Kidd was making various demands of the Nets. A major one came out tonight -- he wants Byron Scott fired. Obviously the Nets will do whatever they can to satisfy Kidd, they have nothing to lose and everything to gain. The more demands that Kidd makes, the more I think that he will stay in NJ -- as long as he gets it his way.
Therefore, many of the scenarios we talked about would no longer be on the agenda -- they were hinging on Kidd's signing.
So it may be back to the drawing board for the Spurs, but don't fret.
Pop and RC aren't sitting on their laurels. They have auxillary plans in place.
If I am fortunate enough to get anymore details tomorrow morning or afternoon, I will of course share them.
In the meantime, don't jump.
--Kori
:queen
you're the man now dog
If he's worried about who the Nets' coach is then yeah, he's staying. From the Spurs' perspective it is obvious that they need a quick resolution one way or the other.
Just hope to god there's water down there. Man this has got to be the worst off season ever.
[img]http://drs.yahoo.com/S=96062883/K=cliff+diving/v=2/l=IVI/*-http://www.magicmatt.co.uk/diving.jpg[/img]
Archie, I think you're probably right, but it occurred to me that maybe, just maybe, Kidd is making an unreasonable demand, knowing that the Nets won't meet it, giving him an easy way out of Jersey. Kidd can say that he can't play for Scott, the Nets can say they won't fire Scott, Kidd can leave and the Nets can move on. I don't know that it would be a smart basketball move for the Nets, but it's possible that it's just a face-saving effort on Kidd's part.If he's worried about who the Nets' coach is then yeah, he's staying. From the Spurs' perspective it is obvious that they need a quick resolution one way or the other.
I was trying to think who the Nets could hire to replace Scott at this late date, since Kidd's man, Eddie Jordan, has already been hired by Washington. I guess Jersey could fire Scott and make a play for a guy like Carlisle, assuming that Kidd wants to play for someone like that, and assuming that Thorn would hire Carlisle. How bizarre would that be, Carlisle replaced by Larry Brown (who he eliminated in the 2nd round) and Scott replaced by Carlisle (who he eliminated in the Eastern Conference Finals) -- so much for winning as the path to job security.
But the Nets would be forever known as the team that slid into mediocrity because they wouldn't fire the brilliant Byron Scott.
That thought crossed my mind two. First we heard of the demands about bringing back certain players who are friends of Kidd- and now we are hearing he is demanding Scott be fired.
This isn't too different from a game of no limit poker, but if the Nets call Kidd's bluff, who's to say that Kidd doesn't have another raise in store. What will he demand next?
But I tend to agree that this would be Kidd's last demand and he does want to stay in NJ if the conditions are right.
I got to thinking, and some of the line-ups with hypothesized about last night aren't as bad as I thought. They are certainly heartbreaking given the attachments that us Spurs fans have made to some of the Spurs who might have to be ousted as a result- but we'd still have a good team, albeit a different one.
But the moves we hypothesized about last night also had me getting a little more faith in Pop and RC's abilty to make some moves. If we don't get Kidd, maybe we can still work out a deal to bring in the one superstar left (Brand) or some young star potential. We have a lot of cap space that could be enticing to a lot of teams.
agreed, and that's where it comes down to the balls of the Nets front office -- do they blink first and cater to Kidd or do they try to call Kidd's bluff. As a basketball decision, it would be insane for the Nets to tie their wagon to Scott instead of Kidd, but stranger things have happened.
They'd at least get a verbal commitment from Kidd before they terminated Scott's deal.
Then again...what is Scott worth to the Nets if Kidd doesn't want him? If Kidd leaves because of him is Scott really worth keeping?
Great observation Archie.
You would think that Scott would be toast.
The question then becomes: is this Kidd's last demand? Or does he request a new arena and practice facility next?
Great point, Archie -- I hadn't thought of it that way, but it would seem that Scott is done in NJ, no matter what.
I would think that the 7th year would put Thorn's "balls to the wall."
The lack of a demand by Kidd up to this point could mean that he wants to stay and knows that 7th year would be too expensive for the Nets to afford and keep a good supporting cast around him. Of course, him not making that demand could also mean that he already knows that he wants out and wants to make BScott the fall guy. And lastly, the lack of a demand to this point means that Kidd hasn't used it yet.
thorn would want a scapegoat for failign to sign kidd to
Kidd will re-sign with the Nets if his demands are met. It's that simple. He hasn't asked for the 7th year, because he isn't making demands that the Nets can't deliver on. He's giving them a realistic opportunity to re-sign him. Asking for that 7th year would be too much and I don't think he's trying to make it impossible for the Nets to re-sign him.
Kori, please enlighten us on the Spurs auxilliary plans.
I would offer Brand the mac and call Sterling's bluff. If he matches, then I take the same tact with Odom next at about $6-7 million and try to get 'Kandi to come aboard for about $6-7 million.
And don't forget about that Nesterovic guy.
PJ Brown can be had, too.
All is not lost yet, folks.
If Kidd does end up asking for that 7th year, it will become obvious that he is just looking for a scapegoat to make his move to SA easier- simply because that 7th year is not consistent with Kidd's demand of the Nets making moves to remain compe ive.
i thought kidd couldn't sign a 7 year deal in NJ...just a 6 year deal...due to his age or something.....
i tell you, if kidd stays in jersey, i'm gonna be as happy as this gay elephant...
bigzak,
Kidd can sign the 7 year deal. What happens is that the 7th year is prorated over the first 6, inflating Kidd's cap number in those first 6 years.
He can sign that deal, it just isn't in the interest of the team offering that kind of deal.
thank man, that clears it up...
one thing's for sure, JK ain't worth that kind of jack.
well this settles it, Kidd is definitely staying in NJ. Now its time to work on Brand, then Brad Miller.
Well, #7 ain't comin... but let's make the other part of this picture a reality.
Has a coach ever been fired in a situation like this? Seems to me, you don't fire the coach on the demand of one player. I would imagine all of the players would have to agree with this decision. Still don't think it will happen though.
Kidd aqin't coming.
When I've seen this scenario the coach has won exactly once, that being Del Harris over Van Exel in LA a few years back. Of course, it helped to have Shaquille O'Neal on the '**** Van Exel' side too.
If Kidd does end up asking for that 7th year, it will become obvious that he is just looking for a scapegoat to make his move to SA easier- simply because that 7th year is not consistent with Kidd's demand of the Nets making moves to remain compe ive.
That's it, scott. We have our "signal" now. If we don't see reports about Kidd making this demand then we know he isn't coming.
What are some situations where the coach has been fired? I've only paid attention to free agency for 5 years or so, but I'm drawing a blank.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions