Fire his agent. When asked about it he should sound reconciled to staying in NJ and act like the team is very good when healthy refering to Carter and Nenad. He should say that his agent talked him into a lot of this garbage in hopes of getting a big extension. Between all this talk of only going to a contender and the $20mm extension he looks like an idiot that no team wants. Firing Jeff Schwartz will increase his value (both trade and extension) and may actually get him what he wants in the end.
Coming from you Netted, I at least know that there is some business acumen to this, but I have to disagree. Kidd's trade value is what it is. It isn't a news flash that Kidd doesn't want to go to a bad team and we all know that he is a petulant man. His trade value isn't going up or down with the drama. Besides, Kidd obviously wants to force Ratner's hand as he knows that is the only way he is getting traded. Thorn is delusional in what he wants in a trade for Kidd and Ratner is the only person that can make Thorn take less.
This Schwartz guy's first athlete was Kidd. He was in the entertainment business and I think that's when Joumana dumped Kidd's handpicked guys of Goodwin and Duffy. She was looking out for her own career when they brought this guy in. I think Kidd's pushing his buttons and without any experience he went with it. If he was under an experienced NBA guy, I'm sure we'd hear less of this garbage.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Feb 11 2008, 01:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Coming from you Netted, I at least know that there is some business acumen to this, but I have to disagree. Kidd's trade value is what it is. It isn't a news flash that Kidd doesn't want to go to a bad team and we all know that he is a petulant man. His trade value isn't going up or down with the drama. Besides, Kidd obviously wants to force Ratner's hand as he knows that is the only way he is getting traded. Thorn is delusional in what he wants in a trade for Kidd and Ratner is the only person that can make Thorn take less.</div> I don't think there is much interest in Kidd at all. I think teams perceive too much baggage. And I would guess Thorn isn't even that unrealistic about what he would take for him. I think the offers have included little to no talent contracts that wouldn't provide cap relief (i.e. - the Marbury offer). If you were a GM of a team interested in Kidd would you be apprehensive about giving up anything to acquire a 34 year-old PG making $20mm a year and has an agent that is extremely aggressive about getting him a contract extension? Especially after witnessing what happened to the current team he's on that didn't give him an extension? It's damage control time, which if done right would make him interesting again. If not in the near future then maybe this summer.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Feb 11 2008, 02:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Feb 11 2008, 01:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Coming from you Netted, I at least know that there is some business acumen to this, but I have to disagree. Kidd's trade value is what it is. It isn't a news flash that Kidd doesn't want to go to a bad team and we all know that he is a petulant man. His trade value isn't going up or down with the drama. Besides, Kidd obviously wants to force Ratner's hand as he knows that is the only way he is getting traded. Thorn is delusional in what he wants in a trade for Kidd and Ratner is the only person that can make Thorn take less.</div> I don't think there is much interest in Kidd at all. I think teams perceive too much baggage. And I would guess Thorn isn't even that unrealistic about what he would take for him. I think the offers have included little to no talent contracts that wouldn't provide cap relief (i.e. - the Marbury offer). If you were a GM of a team interested in Kidd would you be apprehensive about giving up anything to acquire a 34 year-old PG making $20mm a year and has an agent that is extremely aggressive about getting him a contract extension? Especially after witnessing what happened to the current team he's on that didn't give him an extension? It's damage control time, which if done right would make him interesting again. If not in the near future then maybe this summer. </div> I strongly disagree with you about Thorn. Thorn doesn't want to blow up his baby and he keeps holding out hope that he'll be able to get a valuable player for Kidd.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Universe @ Feb 11 2008, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Like Dumpy said numerous times, accept a buyout.</div> Don't think a $1 buy-out is even feasible with the rules of the collective bargaining agreement. I don't think... anyone know?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Feb 11 2008, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I strongly disagree with you about Thorn. Thorn doesn't want to blow up his baby and he keeps holding out hope that he'll be able to get a valuable player for Kidd.</div> What kind of offer could he possibly have gotten that would have given him either cap relief OR talent and at least one 1st rounder? Not many expiring deals of that magnitude out there. And if he wasn't going to take back immediate cap relief there would need to be talent include, otherwise why make the deal? He's just hard to trade with that kind of salary. Let alone the baggage. Don't get me wrong... I'm sure Thorn would be pained to do it even with a decent offer, if he got one.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Feb 11 2008, 02:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Universe @ Feb 11 2008, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Like Dumpy said numerous times, accept a buyout.</div> Don't think a $1 buy-out is even feasible with the rules of the collective bargaining agreement. I don't think... anyone know? </div> In theory, it is possible. Look back at Derek Fisher. He accepted a 0 dollar buyout for the remaining portion of his contract to leave Utah. However, you have to count what he has been paid in the season.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Feb 11 2008, 02:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Feb 11 2008, 02:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Universe @ Feb 11 2008, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Like Dumpy said numerous times, accept a buyout.</div> Don't think a $1 buy-out is even feasible with the rules of the collective bargaining agreement. I don't think... anyone know? </div> In theory, it is possible. Look back at Derek Fisher. He accepted a 0 dollar buyout for the remaining portion of his contract to leave Utah. However, you have to count what he has been paid in the season. </div> Forgot about Fisher. I guess it can be done.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Feb 11 2008, 02:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Feb 11 2008, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I strongly disagree with you about Thorn. Thorn doesn't want to blow up his baby and he keeps holding out hope that he'll be able to get a valuable player for Kidd.</div> What kind of offer could he possibly have gotten that would have given him either cap relief OR talent and at least one 1st rounder? Not many expiring deals of that magnitude out there. And if he wasn't going to take back immediate cap relief there would need to be talent include, otherwise why make the deal? He's just hard to trade with that kind of salary. Let alone the baggage. Don't get me wrong... I'm sure Thorn would be pained to do it even with a decent offer, if he got one. </div> Agreed that he is difficult to trade, but you don't have to hit an immediate homerun on the trade.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Feb 11 2008, 02:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Feb 11 2008, 02:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Feb 11 2008, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I strongly disagree with you about Thorn. Thorn doesn't want to blow up his baby and he keeps holding out hope that he'll be able to get a valuable player for Kidd.</div> What kind of offer could he possibly have gotten that would have given him either cap relief OR talent and at least one 1st rounder? Not many expiring deals of that magnitude out there. And if he wasn't going to take back immediate cap relief there would need to be talent include, otherwise why make the deal? He's just hard to trade with that kind of salary. Let alone the baggage. Don't get me wrong... I'm sure Thorn would be pained to do it even with a decent offer, if he got one. </div> Agreed that he is difficult to trade, but you don't have to hit an immediate homerun on the trade. </div> Give some non home run scenarios that provide either immediate cap relief or talent. From contenders actually interested in not gutting their teams. We have no idea how unrealistic Thorn is being. Do you think there has been offers on the table, since Kidd demanded the trade, that Thorn should have accepted?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Feb 11 2008, 02:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Feb 11 2008, 02:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Feb 11 2008, 02:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Feb 11 2008, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I strongly disagree with you about Thorn. Thorn doesn't want to blow up his baby and he keeps holding out hope that he'll be able to get a valuable player for Kidd.</div> What kind of offer could he possibly have gotten that would have given him either cap relief OR talent and at least one 1st rounder? Not many expiring deals of that magnitude out there. And if he wasn't going to take back immediate cap relief there would need to be talent include, otherwise why make the deal? He's just hard to trade with that kind of salary. Let alone the baggage. Don't get me wrong... I'm sure Thorn would be pained to do it even with a decent offer, if he got one. </div> Agreed that he is difficult to trade, but you don't have to hit an immediate homerun on the trade. </div> Give some non home run scenarios that provide either immediate cap relief or talent. From contenders actually interested in not gutting their teams. We have no idea how unrealistic Thorn is being. Do you think there has been offers on the table, since Kidd demanded the trade, that Thorn should have accepted? </div> I'll play around with the trade machine during a conference call tomorrow. The key is to take back a few medium contracts and draft choices. While we don't have 100% confirmation, it sure sounds like the Lakers were offering a better package last year even without Bynum.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Feb 11 2008, 02:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Universe @ Feb 11 2008, 02:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Like Dumpy said numerous times, accept a buyout.</div> Don't think a $1 buy-out is even feasible with the rules of the collective bargaining agreement. I don't think... anyone know? </div> I believe there is no restriction, but the union gets angry if anyone even consideres taking less than, say 90% of the remining value of the contract. I think Foyle did, and received backlash. Thorn should hold a press conference and just announce that Kidd has expressed a preference for playing for a winner, and the team is prepared to help him reach that goal, and to allow him to pick the team he wants to play for. And that this is the only way to give him this "gift" within the confines of the salary cap and the CBA. It would be a simplistic, nonsubtle way of forcing Kidd to admit that this is as much about money as it is playing for a winner--in effect, he wants his cake and to eat it too. As we all know, when faced with signing a contract, a player has to CHOOSE between flexibility and long-term stability--you can't have both.
