Carter, a reason for Kidd's Anger?

Is Vince a reason why Kidd is pissed? I mean Carter has had a bad year thus far and hasn't lived up to expectations. Could VC be a reason?</p>

 

According to Micheal Wilbon "Kidd and RJ" aren't the problem...</p>

 

Bet Wilbon also thought they were winning games when Vince was injured</p>

 

It's not Vinces fault Kidd is upset, wish people would stop blaming dude for everything that goes wrong with this team, when he was out this team lost 6 in a row, when he came back the team went 4 and 1, the problem is that this team isn't consistent , VC re signed with the Nets becasue of Kidd.</p>

 

I think its more along the lines of Tim Walsh (indirectly), Boki Nachbar, and others who have failed to live up to expectation.</p>

 

Actually VC resigned to the Nets because we were the only team able and willing to pay him that much not cause of Kidd</p>

 

"Kidd, 34, was upset with the mounting losses and that he was playing with two bruised thighs while Vince Carter missed five games with a sprained right ankle, sources said. Kidd also was unhappy that the Nets wouldn&rsquo;t meet his price."</p>

This doesn't make any sense. Carter had a legitimate injury and was out until he could come back on the court. Why the hell would Kidd be upset about that? Unless he thought it wasn't a legitimate injury but there is nothing to consider it wasn't. And why be upset about and go on "strike" in part because of it.</p>

Whoever the "team source" was for this story, you got to wonder what their motives were for going public with these accusations. Why would they go public with it with obvious fallout it would produce? If Kidd really wanted out why would a team source hurt Kidds trade value by going public with this.You would think a team source would want to keep it from getting out. Instead they reveal damaging information and cause even more turmoil for the team.</p>

</p>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NOMAM)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

"Kidd, 34, was upset with the mounting losses and that he was playing with two bruised thighs while Vince Carter missed five games with a sprained right ankle, sources said. Kidd also was unhappy that the Nets wouldn&rsquo;t meet his price."</p>

This doesn't make any sense. Carter had a legitimate injury and was out until he could come back on the court. Why the hell would Kidd be upset about that? Unless he thought it wasn't a legitimate injury but there is nothing to consider it wasn't. And why be upset about and go on "strike" in part because of it.</p>

Whoever the "team source" was for this story, you got to wonder what their motives were for going public with these accusations. Why would they go public with it with obvious fallout it would produce? If Kidd really wanted out why would a team source hurt Kidds trade value by going public with this.You would think a team source would want to keep it from getting out. Instead they reveal damaging information and cause even more turmoil for the team.</p>

</p>

</div></p>

</p>

On this rare occasion, I agree 100% with what NOMAM is saying.

However, kinda understand, but not completely though, about the trade value part. I don't see how Kidd complaining really hurts his trade value. Sure, it seems unprofessional or whatever, but this is so rare for Kidd that I don't think any soliciting team would be turned off by it.

 

I'm pretty sure a sprained ankle is more limiting then bruised thighs, and shouldn't be rushed back.</p>