July 10, 2003

JKidd says he won't stay with the Nets ... unless they dump coach Byron Scott. : Sounds like he wants to stay in Jersey, though. Maybe he doesn't give San Antonio much of a shot against the retooled Lakers, either...

posted by ajax to basketball at 09:33 AM - 12 comments

JKidd staying in Jersey makes no sense for JKidd--and I'm a Nets fan saying this. He knows he wants a title. We all know he wants a title. We all know he isn't winning a title with the Nets. We know the Spurs want him and they won the title this year. I don't get it.

posted by Justin Slotman at 09:47 AM on July 10, 2003

fire my coach, get my wife into TV and give me an office job after i retire? sorry, i'd save the money and pass on signing a guy with demands like that. sign and trade him for tony parker? other salaries would have to move from SA to NJ to make it work. obviously San Antonio wants Kidd and if they get him it would put Parker out of a job, or at least out of the role he was playing. I dunno the logistics of a sign and trade but Kidd staying in NJ with all those demands - it just tastes wrong.

posted by gspm at 10:14 AM on July 10, 2003

The inmates are running the asylum. Ownership should put their foot down (IF this story is true, I would think Kidd would deny it...) and tell Kidd that they pay him money to hoop, not make personnel decisions.

posted by vito90 at 10:35 AM on July 10, 2003

Ok but if the Mailman signs with the Lakers how is anyone going to get out of the West, even the Spurs, who badly need another big man. The Lakers are going to be incredibly deep at power forward in a few years by picking up Luke Walton and Brian Cook, I don't see how Kidd's going to ever win a title at this point.

posted by insomnyuk at 11:44 AM on July 10, 2003

Alonzo Mourning is said to be waiting for JKidd to sign somewhere before he makes his decision, thinking, I guess, that he wants to go wherever Kidd goes. If the Spurs can land Kidd and PJ Brown or Zo, and the Lakers land Karl (which I don't think they will, I think he'll stay in Utah to get his scoring. He won't get 25 points a night on a championship caliber team) then the ensuing Lakers/Spurs series would be a very interesting site. Of course, my Mavs would be left picking up the pieces from whichever team blows over them, but what can you do?

posted by Ufez Jones at 12:26 PM on July 10, 2003

OK, Byron Scott did make some bad decisions during the Finals, but... This kind of crap is exactly why I can't stand Jason Kidd. He's been shopping all over Texas looking for a better opportunity, and now he comes back and pisses on his "old" team. He's a mercenary with no loyalty to anyone. You dance with the one that brought you, and Scott has brought the Nets to the Finals two years out of three. Just one more reason for me to hate intensely dislike Jason Kidd.

posted by dusted at 12:40 PM on July 10, 2003

I think there's a side to this story that hasn't been given much thought, which is that the Nets could sign Kidd, sign Zo, fire Byron and then hire Rick Rick Carlisle, a former Nets assistant coach. Does that make them a better team? Yes.

posted by pucksnsuds at 02:44 PM on July 10, 2003

I have to agree with DUSTED. what a bunch of whining crap. I don't think the Nets would have lost to the Spurs if Kidd had played better. Many times he was SHUT DOWN by Tony Parker, yet another reason why its ludicrous for the Spurs to try and go after him. Parker's upside is so large, I kind of *expect him to have a better career than Kidd already and he's only 21. and btw, have I mentioned that I think Kidd is OVERRATED? 'Very good player' is not the same thing as 'one of the best of all-time players'

posted by crux at 03:01 PM on July 10, 2003

You can see why Kidd hates Scott, though, right? I mean, wasn't it Scott who beat Kidd's wife, Jumana, with a closed fist? Oh no, wait...

posted by jonson at 05:06 PM on July 10, 2003

Ah great, I got all lathered up, and now it looks like it's not even true. I knew I shouldn't have trusted a NY Post story! Even untrue, this has to kill any chance of Kidd returning, right?

posted by dusted at 01:05 AM on July 11, 2003


posted by crux at 07:09 AM on July 11, 2003

Crux, What do you base your assessment of Kidd on? The finals? If so I'll just mention one of the weirdest things about the finals ... Kidd was injured. He hurt his ankle in the 4th quarter of the eastern conf. finals. It clearly effected his play in the Finals. Weird that nobody talked about him being hurt. I just mention it because if you're not from the NYC area and all you saw was Kidd in the finals I can understand why you would think he's not that good. But he was really crippled in the Finals. I know you might be sceptical but people who saw Kidd play when he was healthy unanimously agree that he was hurt. You really think that Kittles can D up Parker but Kidd can't? Puuullleeezzzz. It was like watching a different player, he didn't push the ball, he couldn't get to loose balls, no penetrating the lane. It reminds me Barron Davis who looked terrible this year because he had a bad knee. The same people who were saying he was the best pg under 25 when he was destroying a one-legged Tim Hardaway three years ago where asking what's wrong with Barron? Well, he wasn't as good as he looked when he was torching an injured Hardaway and he wasn't as bad as he looked trying to keep up with Iverson with a bad leg. Let him heal and he'll be fine.

posted by Mike McD at 11:24 AM on July 11, 2003

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.