Reply With QuoteThe Spurs' front office would be terminally stupid to offer Kidd less than the max that they can.
Interesting that Byron Scott isn't even involved in the negotiations...
Kidd Draws Closer to San Antonio
By LIZ ROBBINS
www.nytimes.com/2003/07/0...9kidd.html
Jason Kidd, who received a six-year, $94 million offer from San Antonio, has told the Nets and the Spurs that he hopes to decide by Friday and no later than Monday.
Jason Kidd and his wife, Joumana, returned to New Jersey from a lavish 26-hour recruiting visit to San Antonio late Monday, laden with a $94 million maximum offer and visions of winning a championship. The Spurs' presentation was so persuasive that Kidd was leaning toward signing with the N.B.A champions, according to three people with intimate knowledge of the Nets.
When the Nets learned yesterday of Kidd's inclination, the organization acted quickly to try to convince him that New Jersey was still the best place for him and his family. The Nets, though, are running out of time. Kidd told the Spurs and the Nets that he hoped to make a decision by Friday and no later than Monday.
"The Nets are deeply concerned," said a person with intimate knowledge of the organization who spoke on condition of anonymity. "Every effort on earth will be made to retain him." Nets officials were expected to meet with Kidd last night.
The Nets have offered Kidd the maximum contract of six years, worth approximately $99 million. The Spurs did not comment, but according to four people with knowledge of the team's plans, they extended Kidd the maximum contract, which surpasses the Nets' deal because Texas has no state income tax.
The Nets have facilitated national endorsement opportunities for Kidd. They are believed to have made inquiries for Kidd's wife to work on a television show with the team's YES Network. Last week, they arranged for Kidd to play championship golf courses in New Jersey, Baltusrol and Metedeconk.
While the Spurs wooed Kidd and his wife for 26 hours, the Nets have done so for two years. That is why Rod Thorn, the Nets' president, believes the team has the advantage.
"At the end of the deliberations, as the case may be, the pomp and cir stance will take a backseat to the substance," said Thorn, who is the club's principal negotiator. "That's where the Kidds will make their decisions. He obviously knows that we would like to have him."
The Spurs showed Kidd that he is their top priority. Gregg Popovich, the coach of the year, flew to New Jersey before the Kidds went to San Antonio to have dinner with them. He picked them up from the airport when they arrived on Sunday. Popovich and Tim Duncan, the league's most valuable player, entertained the Kidds with gourmet meals prepared by a private chef, gave Kidd a tour of the Spurs' practice facility and showed a video montage that pictured Kidd with the Larry O'Brien championship trophy, according to several people with knowledge of the visit.
Thorn contended that fancy parties would not sell Kidd. "He's an adult," he said. "When you're talking about the team's trying to sell something that the player doesn't know anything about, some teams do lavish things.
"I would assume, at some point in time, we'll have some substantive conversations with his agent," Thorn said, referring to Jeff Schwartz. "I think we've gone after him pretty aggressively as it is. I think he understands that."
Nets Coach Byron Scott has been curiously absent from the proceedings. He is on vacation and is expected to return before the Nets begin their training camp for summer league on Thursday. Kidd's relationship was far stronger with Eddie Jordan, who left to become the Wizards' coach, than with Scott.
According to two Eastern Conference officials, the Nets have had talks with Jeff Wechsler, the agent for Alonzo Mourning. If the Nets were able to sign Mourning with the midlevel exception of $4.9 million, then Kidd would have his All-Star in the frontcourt along with Kenyon Martin and Richard Jefferson.
But the risk is high because of Mourning's health. He is fighting a kidney disease, which is still an unknown factor.
What is far more unclear to the Nets is what happens if Kidd bolts for San Antonio. Yesterday, Gary Payton agreed to sign with the Los Angeles Lakers for the midlevel exception. "Yes, it's official; it's a real good opportunity for him,'' Aaron Goodwin, Payton's agent, said.
That would seem to put pressure on San Antonio to sign Kidd.
Another free-agent point guard, Andre Miller, was visiting Denver yesterday.
The Nets are not trying to think of the alternatives. Barring a sign-and-trade, there are no other high-profile point guards remaining; contingency plans could rely on the 20-year-old draft pick Zoran Planinic or a journeyman.
If the Spurs were to sign Kidd, however, they could have some ramifications.
Jermaine O'Neal withdrew his interest in San Antonio and Dallas. Donnie Walsh, the Pacers' president, said yesterday that the team was "working on the contract, and we're very close to getting it done."
That leaves the Spurs to consider Karl Malone, P. J. Brown, Michael Olowokandi and Mourning for their big man to replace the retiring David Robinson. If they were to sign Kidd, that would leave less than $4 million to spend on other free agents.
And if the Spurs were able to sign Kidd, there could be an issue in the backcourt. The Spurs have told Tony Parker that they envisioned playing him with Kidd. Parker, the second-year point guard, has told friends, family, teammates and Spurs officials that he does not want to take a backseat to Kidd. A person told of Parker's situation said Sunday that Parker would be inclined to ask for a trade.
The Spurs have declined to comment.
Since Parker's salary would come to $713,500 next season, the Nets would not be able to sign Kidd, trade him and then get Parker back in exchange.
--------
Some people are reporting at another site that Kidd was offered less than the max. I guess that is not true. It seems Kidd is deciding between NJ and SA and wants to have his decision within a couple days.
The Spurs' front office would be terminally stupid to offer Kidd less than the max that they can.
Interesting that Byron Scott isn't even involved in the negotiations...
The thing that is interesting is that the Nets continue to refuse, apparently, to offer Kidd that 7th year. That seems rather arrogant on their part, no matter the cap implications.
This article still confirms my feeling that Kidd is using the Spurs' interest to get NJ to do what he wants them to. But if he wants that 7th year and they don't give it? That will be interesting.
Here NJ is on the verge of losing their franchise and at least it seems in public that they are screwing up significantly with their pitch. They don't offer Kidd the max they can, thereby giving the Spurs the opportunity to effectively match their offer outright. BScott isn't even in town (yeah, he can be there via cell but it's just not the same...where's the respect? Kidd's the guy who made you a rising young head coach in the NBA. Where's the thanks?) They're questioning whether or not to sign Mourning. Etc.
Maybe Kidd wants BScott gone?
Meanwhile the Spurs have done what they can to wine and dine Kidd. With Payton ending his brief sojourn in the East and hooking up with the Lakers that road to a le just got a lot tougher. Kidd's gonna need a real big to play with in order to make a complete journey next season. Why not play with Tim Duncan for the rest of your career?
I think a significant non-financial issue facing Kidd if he bolted for SA was that he was leaving the Nets high and dry to jump on the SA bandwagon and win an almost certain le in SA. Now with GP going to LA and Malone apparently to follow that would no longer seem to be a concern. Now it looks like a risk that Kidd would be taking by joining the Spurs. Kidd would be the acquisition that the Spurs need to beat the Lakers. The difference-maker.
And of course long term it would be all but forgotten that Kidd jumped from the runner-ups to the champs in this offseason.
What would be insteresting is if Jersey offered a sign and trade to the Spurs and dared them to give Kidd the seventh year. It would take balls of steel on Thorn's part to try to call Pop's bluff though.
How do you guys know that there isn't something else in the works with another team and there is a reason we offered Kidd that amount?
If we got Kidd for that amount...is it possible we could be doing a trade with the Clippers or something?
Parker and something else for Brand?
Sterling does trade his guys before they walk if he can get young talented guys for cheap in return.
Whott, I agree. It would be awesome if the Spurs' offered Kidd a lesser amount and he accepted it so we could sign someone else. But all indications are that they offered him the MAX.
They don't have the cap room to sign Kidd to the max and then sign Brand to the max in a S&T for Parker.
The Spurs offered him the max they could. The only thing separating the two offers is that NJ's increases at 12.5% and SA's increases at 10%. Both are for 6 years. Of course NJ's state income tax wipes out NJ's advantage and actually would leave Kidd with a lower net amount.
NJ does have the ability to offer a 7th year. So far they haven't. Presumably due to concerns about the Over 36 rule and the Luxury Tax.
Take from it what you will, but Dusty said the Spurs offered Kidd 9.6 mil a year....
feedback.woai.com/ubb/ult...3;t=015344
Who?
You know, Archie, the one that every Spurs transaction must be run by first....
I don't know any of Dusty's sources, but I've had a few thoughts of my own about a similar scenerio.
Would Tim and Kidd take a contract starting at $10 mil each? That way, the Spurs could trade Tony plus the first rounder (high teens) that they aquired from Phoenix to the Clippers for a signed Brand. I doubt Sterling would pass up a cheap Parker plus a first rounder when the proposition of Brand walking for nothing next year stares him in the face.
Tim, Kidd and Brand split $30 mil of the cap space while Bruce, Manu and Malik make up the remaining $10 mil. Once over the cap, they can offer Jax up to the MLE and then fill out the rest of the roster with minimums like Horry, Ferry, Willis, Kerr and the like. The Spurs would be a little short at backup point, but over all, they would be much better than last year.
There's a very slim chance of this happening for several reasons. But if any two superstars in this league would take less in the prime of their careers to be on a winning team, Kidd and Duncan could be those type of players.
[/crackpipe]
Another article siting the amount of the Spurs offer...
Nets: Kidd's visit to Texas doesn't move Thorn
Wednesday, July 09, 2003
www.nj.com/sports/ledger/...190280.xml
BY BRAD PARKS
Star-Ledger Staff
Rod Thorn has followed the wooing of Jason Kidd from a safe distance these past few days, reading about how the Spurs wined and dined the free-agent point guard whom the Nets so clearly want back.
And when all was said and done, when Kidd had eaten his last free meal and gotten the last installment of his San Antonio tour, this was Thorn's reaction:
"I have no reaction," Thorn said. "To me, it's just part of the process."
Nothing the Spurs did made Thorn feel like changing his plan of action in the Nets' low-key, no-nonsense, no-pressure efforts to keep Kidd. There will be no effort to try to one-up the Spurs, who fed him five types of desserts his first night in town, by offering him six. There will be no chauffeured limo rides around New Jersey.
"When you're the team a player is playing for, I think it's a little hard to try and give him a sales pitch," Thorn said. "Because he's already played here for two years and he knows everything about the organization. I'm not sure we can do any kind of sell job."
In Thorn's mind, the next part of the process is simply for the Nets to keep waiting for another phone call from Kidd or his agent, Jeff Schwartz.
The Nets are believed to have offered Kidd a maximum-value contract of roughly $99.3 million for six years, just as the Spurs are believed to have countered with a maximum-value offer of roughly $92.3 million for six years. No other NBA teams appear to be in the mix at the moment.
"It'll be up to the Kidds," Thorn said. "When all is said and done, they have to sit down and ascertain what it is that's important to them. Hopefully, in the final analysis, things of substance are going to be more important than pomp and cir stance. But different things appeal to different people."
Spurs are "pomp & cir stance"?
Legitimate contenders, real money....superstar to play with. Ummm, okay.
Interesting.
Someone needs to email Liz RE: trade exceptions from trades with teams under the cap.Since Parker's salary would come to $713,500 next season, the Nets would not be able to sign Kidd, trade him and then get Parker back in exchange.
Prolly not.:winkThorn contended that fancy parties would not sell Kidd.
I think NJ has miscalculated Kidd. SA has shown that they are committed to winning and are treating him like the franchise player he is. NJ seems to be coming with the soft sell, this is your home approach. That would be well and good but the Nets aren't even offering him the max that they can and what they are offering is actually less than SA's offer net of state taxes.
would you offer tp for brand?
Sure, ducks. But the catch would be that Brand would have to be willing to sign for a below market rate for one year.
By Greg Logan
STAFF WRITER
If free agent Jason Kidd were one year younger, the Nets could offer him a seven-year contract worth $116 million to $121 million, depending on where the salary cap is set for the 2003-04 season. But he turns 36 before the seventh year of a new deal would kick in, bringing the quirky "over-36 rule" into play.
As both league and players association sources with expert knowledge of the collective-bargaining agreement explained yesterday, there is no way the Nets can offer Kidd more than a six-year deal worth $95 million to $99 million even if they were willing to pay the luxury tax they would incur.
The over-36 rule requires salary in seasons starting after a player's 36th birthday be applied to the salary cap over the prior seasons. Since no player is allowed to make more than the maximum annual salary for which he is qualified, applying salary from later years to the first year of the contract effectively reduces the base pay.
Technically, the Nets could offer Kidd a seven-year contract, but the monetary value would equal the six-year deal, so it wouldn't make sense for him to play an extra year for the same money. As one expert said, this situation occurs only for maximum-salary players.
No doubt, it will come up in ongoing talks between the union and the league regarding an extension of the current CBA, which runs through next season unless the league exercises its option by Dec. 15 to extend the agreement through the 2004-05 season.
"The system has a lot of overlapping and contradictory rules," union spokesman Dan Wasserman said. "Clearly, from a union perspective, we would like to clean up and eliminate some of the more burdensome restrictions."
The over-36 rule negates most of the usual advantage the Nets would enjoy in signing their own free agent. As a result, the maximum six-year deal San Antonio is allowed to offer will fall short of the Nets' best offer by only $4.5 million to $4.7 million, a minimal difference that will be wiped out by the fact that Kidd would not have to pay state income tax in Texas.
Kidd Might Pass on Team USA. Jason Kidd said he might not play in Puerto Rico this summer with the Olympic qualifying team. "Right now, my body is a little banged up, so we'll see how I feel," Kidd said. Nets GM Rod Thorn, on the committee that selected Team USA, was surprised to hear Kidd is thinking of pulling out. - Barbara Barker
www.nynewsday.com/sports/...-headlines
By Greg Logan
Staff Writer
June 18, 2003
If San Antonio tries to sign free-agent Nets star Jason Kidd after beating New Jersey for the NBA le, money won't be the deciding factor. Because of a quirk in the collective bargaining agreement, the Spurs can offer almost as much as the Nets.
The salary cap, which determines the maximum first-year salary, hasn't been established for next season yet, but management sources and a spokesman for the players association agree the Nets likely will be able to offer only a six-year deal worth $95 million to $99 million. That is approximately $4.5 million to $4.7 million more than what the Spurs can offer, but since there is no state income tax in Texas, Kidd actually might end up with more money by signing with San Antonio.
"When you're talking about that kind of money, there's not enough of a difference for the money part to make a huge difference," Nets general manager Rod Thorn said Tuesday. "I think it comes down to where he wants to go and where he would like to play."
The CBA is designed to give teams an advantage in re-signing their own free agents by allowing the in bent team to offer a seven-year deal and 12.5 percent annual raises compared to a six-year deal with 10 percent raises competing bidders can offer.
However, there is a provision known as the "over-36" rule that penalizes a team for signing a long-term deal with players who turn 36 before the end of the contract. If the Nets offered Kidd the seventh year, the total deal would be worth between $116 million and $121 million.
But for salary-cap purposes, the seventh-year salary (approximately $21 million-$22 million) would be pro-rated over the first six years of the contract, costing the Nets an additional $3.5 million per season in luxury tax and boosting their total payout to the $137-million-to-$142- million range. That doesn't make economic sense.
Thorn declined to discuss his bargaining position, but he acknowledged a seven-year deal "really affects the luxury tax adversely . . . From a monetary standpoint, it would be a tough pill to swallow."
The question that will be answered on July 1, when competing teams are permitted to negotiate with free agents, is whether the Spurs will tender a maximum offer to Kidd. The retirement of 14-year veteran center David Robinson creates a hole in their lineup. They have a promising point guard in Tony Parker and young shooting guard Emanuel Ginobili, but they could use a rebounder to help two-time MVP power forward Tim Duncan.
"There's a lot of speculation that San Antonio might be better served signing a big player to replace David Robinson," Thorn said. The Spurs' major selling point is the opportunity to play with Duncan. After watching him for six games, Thorn said, "I don't even think it's arguable now. He's the best player in the league."
Naturally, Thorn believes the Nets have the ingredients to win an NBA le after winning the Eastern Conference the past two seasons. He said power forward Kenyon Martin, who faltered in the last two games of the Finals after playing well in the early games, is "on the cusp of being at that elite level."
Despite the wrinkle in the CBA that prevents the Nets from offering significantly more money than San Antonio, Thorn is confident he can sign Kidd if he wants to be in New Jersey. "We're in a position to do what we need to do and make a very fair offer," Thorn said. "I don't feel the bargaining agreement is bothering us."
This sounds almost like Thorn is not only insulting us, but Jason and Joumanna as well.......Hopefully, in the final analysis, things of substance are going to be more important than pomp and cir stance. But different things appeal to different people."
He sounds desperate, he sounds edgy- not a good sign if you're a Nets fan.
Ultimately I think he'll stay in Jersey however.
However, there is a provision known as the "over-36" rule that penalizes a team for signing a long-term deal with players who turn 36 before the end of the contract. If the Nets offered Kidd the seventh year, the total deal would be worth between $116 million and $121 million.
But for salary-cap purposes, the seventh-year salary (approximately $21 million-$22 million) would be pro-rated over the first six years of the contract, costing the Nets an additional $3.5 million per season in luxury tax and boosting their total payout to the $137-million-to-$142- million range. That doesn't make economic sense.
Thorn declined to discuss his bargaining position, but he acknowledged a seven-year deal "really affects the luxury tax adversely . . . From a monetary standpoint, it would be a tough pill to swallow."
There's the answer. NJ's unwillingness to offer that 7th year is what has put the Spurs in a rather solid position to lure away Kidd from NJ. The real question would be if Kidd asks for the 7th year from the Spurs do they give it?
They can't give it unless there's a sign and trade involved - and New Jersey has repeatedly stated that they are not interested in such a deal.
Spurs could only offer the 7th year in a sign and trade.
then kiss getting a serviceable big guy with the cap change left over goodbye...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions