Sam Smith-esque trade idea of the week: get in on Jason Kidd deal
That's right, I'm putting on my sweater-vest again, and trying to come up with a midseason trade for the Bulls. Not sure if it's really to make the team better as much as more interesting, as to be honest I can't stomach watching this same group much longer.
As far as why to trade at all, The Bulls aren't losing enough to have true lottery dreams, and with the pick they'll likely get I wouldn't want another young player clogging up the roster. (then again, I said the same thing last year and am pretty happy with Noah) And, as currently constituted they won't do much in the playoffs either. So while I suppose that makes me for the organization's new lowered-expectations of simply making the Eastern Conference playoffs, I still think changes should be made so a playoff run is made with an eye still to the future.
And while the first option would be to deal Wallace, or make some blockbuster acquisition, it just doesn't seem possible.
But the Bulls do have a nice congruence [or confluence, or in congruence, or confusing -ed.] of circumstances: a goal (or should-be goal) of developing Thomas and Noah for this playoff push, and some solid performing veterans in Joe Smith and Andres Nocioni. The Bulls should be doing what they can to see if any value can be had for those vets, as not only will they have the highest value but they're blocking their most important projects.
Which brings me to the most recent trade speculation floating around the league: Jason Kidd's latest trade demand. Kelly Dwyer broke down the limited options:
Making things more complicated are the tradeable (we think) contracts that the Nets won't want. The Lakers could send Lamar Odom and Kwame to New Jersey in a half-second for Kidd, but why would the Nets want to rebuild with Odom's contract on the books? Odom's in his ostensible prime, he's not some young stud who can develop on a rebuilding team, and his contract expires the same year as Kidd's.
It makes sense that a rebuilding team wouldn't want Odom, but as I stated above the Bulls shouldn't be rebuilding just yet, and acquiring Odom can make sense as long as it means dealing out two other veteran big-men.
Here is my proposed 3-team deal with the Bulls/Lakers/Nets.
Lakers (acquire Jason Kidd, Joe Smith, and Jamaal Magloire): Figure that a triumvirate of Bryant/Kidd/Bynum can give them a 2-year championship window. Smith is a veteran having a great season and thus a great role-playing fit for a contender. Magloire (or as later mentioned, Jason Collins) can be the stopgap center (taking Kwame's role) until Bynum returns. Dealing Kwame's monster expiring deal is their best chance to get a player of Kidd's caliber (or perhaps more importantly, stature) around Kobe, so it seems like now is the time to strike.
Nets (acquire Jordan Farmar, Andres Nocioni, Kwame Brown, Chris Duhon, picks and cash): Are likely resigned to not getting much more than expiring deals and mid-level prospects and picks for Kidd at this point. Nocioni's deal is long and mean (though front-loaded, which is less mean), but perhaps their previously reported interest in the 'tough guy' isn't extinguished even though they're dealing Kidd. Getting a point guard prospect seems like a must, and it can be hashed out between them and the Lakers as to whether it's Farmar or Javaris Crittenton. Another negotiating wrinkle could be forcing L.A. to take Jason Collins (another year on his deal) instead of Magloire, and to make up the salary difference the Lakers could deal Chris Mihm's expiring deal (with Mihm's consent) back. In terms of draft picks, I'm not sure they couldn't get either (or both) the Bulls or Lakers first round selections, and as an added asset: by coincidence the Nets owe their 2009 second rounder to Seattle, and both the Bulls (Knicks) and Lakers (Bobcats) have extra 2009 picks to even out that debit.
Bulls (acquire Lamar Odom, Darrell Armstrong, Bostjan Nachbar): I like this deal for the Bulls because even though it's technically 3-for-3, it still serves as roster consolidation, as it'd replace two players ahead of Noah and Thomas with one. And while Odom is highly paid ($13.2m+$14.1m), it's still only one additional season (same as Smith, and three fewer than Noc), and it'll give Paxson 2 straight years of fat expiring deals (Odom and then Wallace) in case the 'right' superstar comes along. And while he's having a poor season (and overall just aint that great), as previously discussed on this site Odom can still help on the court too. As Hollinger says, he's high-volume and medium-efficiency, but, unlike most of the current Bulls roster, is someone who can create shots and has a more diverse offensive game beyond jumpshooting. He rebounds well enough (14.1 rebound rate this year, compared to 12.9 for Smith and 10.4 for Noc) to stay at the PF spot but can play multiple positions. In this deal the Nets stand to simply trade away bodies, so Armstrong is coming over to take Duh's spot as backup point (asking for Marcus Williams is a bit greedy), and the Bulls and Nets can negotiate whether Nachbar or Antoine Wright is their new backup SF.
New Bulls roster (IR: Nichols, Curry, Khryapa):
Hinrich/Armstrong
Sefolosha/Gordon
Deng/Nachbar/Griffin
Odom/Thomas
Wallace/Noah/Gray
This new Bulls team would be (most importantly?) different, but also both better suited for this year's playoffs and beyond. None of the Bulls young talent is touched, and in fact they'd get opportunity for a developmental boost simply by having fewer guys in their way. Financially the Bulls are in better shape with a big expiring deal next year, and the long-term commitment to Nocioni off the books.
And the rest of this season becomes a lot more fun to watch.
0 recs |
109
comments
Comments
Creative
by balta1701 on Jan 28, 2008 9:17 PM CST 0 recs
I get your point
Plus I'm sick of watching Nocioni 'step up'.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on
Jan 28, 2008 10:34 PM CST
up
0 recs
HOMER TRADE ALERT!!!
-- Why would the Lakers trade Odom and Farmar for a 34-year-old point guard and garbage?
-- Why would the Lakers essentially trade Lamar Odom for Chris Duhon and Joe Smith?
-- And why wouldn't the Lakers just offer Farmar and Brown to the Nets for Kidd without including the Bulls scrubs?
Nice try, guys. Kupchak is stupid, but he ain't that stupid!!!
by biggame james on
Jan 30, 2008 3:08 PM CST
up
0 recs
TRADE MACHINE ALERT
by your friendly BullsBlogger on
Jan 30, 2008 3:56 PM CST
up
0 recs
Interesting
by bullshooter on Jan 28, 2008 9:43 PM CST 0 recs
uh...
If Tyrus booms (he already broke out as far as I'm concerned, ha) then he can take the starting role. Granted this involves a real coach.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on
Jan 28, 2008 10:25 PM CST
up
0 recs
for some reason I want to talk about this more
I think if Odom is starting and Tyrus plays 15-25 minutes a game on a GOOD team (and having 4 good bigs...er 3+Wallace, isn't overdoing things), that's progress. He doesn't have to start and play 35 minutes to not get some arbitrary 'bust' label at age 22, and getting junk minutes on a junk team to end to this season will likely facilitate bad habits anyway.
Plus, it seems that your crediting this idea of waiting until guys get hurt for young players to see action as some brilliant scheme from the coaching (and management?) staff, and not what it is: them falling ass-backwards into competence.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on
Jan 29, 2008 12:35 PM CST
up
0 recs
I would expect TT
by bullshooter on
Jan 29, 2008 12:55 PM CST
up
0 recs
That's my point
'half' the minutes seems arbitrary, but it works for me. I'm not unconvinced they couldn't swing a Tyrus/Odom frontcourt at times too. Again, 4 big men doesn't seem like too much, and I think it's less than 5.
And I still cringe when you mention this 'shot' Tyrus is getting. Quit giving the organization any credit and join us who think they're just complete idiots who are now forced to play Thomas out of unintended circumstances. join us....
by your friendly BullsBlogger on
Jan 29, 2008 3:59 PM CST
up
0 recs
The Dark Side is enticing
by bullshooter on
Jan 29, 2008 6:07 PM CST
up
0 recs
Right now
I can see someone taking Noc or Smith as they are having relatively good years and are overvalued as well. Duhon on the other hand...I guess if he is an upgrade to a desperate team it is possible. I am not sure if we actually get anything with this deal but we do get rid of things and get us in position for the coming years when some really talented players hit open season. And perhaps by then Noah and Thomas and Deng will have kicked it up a notch.
by cranscape on Jan 28, 2008 9:46 PM CST 0 recs
I wouldn't give up a lottery pick either
by bullshooter on Jan 28, 2008 9:47 PM CST 0 recs
I know you wouldn't
by your friendly BullsBlogger on
Jan 28, 2008 10:26 PM CST
up
0 recs
not to mention
by bullshooter on
Jan 29, 2008 9:18 AM CST
up
0 recs
I like this
by messwiththebull on Jan 28, 2008 10:37 PM CST 0 recs
Wow
This should really happen. I forsee a nightmare scenario, however, with all the GMs ready to pull the trigger, and then Pax suddenly backs out, saying, "I just couldn't trade Nocioni to a team in our conference."
by BenGo07 on Jan 28, 2008 11:59 PM CST 0 recs
definitely interesting
bigger organizational question for the bulls: what to do in the future? would you then extend deng and gordon and hope to land a big FA when odom and corpse come off the books? completely gut the squad by signing and trading deng and/or gordon and hope to make a big splash when odom and corpse expire? lots of directions to go from there.
by Mike C on Jan 29, 2008 12:01 AM CST 0 recs
I like Odom
by eross226 on Jan 29, 2008 1:02 AM CST 0 recs
I'd take this trade
by ForWhomTheBullTolls on Jan 29, 2008 1:51 AM CST 0 recs
Not sure...
Why would the lakers trade an emerging point guard (Farmar) and get rid of an important piece like Odom, just to get one or two good years from Kidd ?
At the moment, they are contenders for the title (with a healthy Bynum), and Kobe being far (I guess, but you never know) from being over-aged, they figure that the'll only get better with the continuous improvement from the youngs (Bynum, Farmar, ...).
If they do this trade, they shorten their window of opportunity for a title.
by Diabolo on Jan 29, 2008 2:54 AM CST 0 recs
Because Kobe
by cranscape on
Jan 29, 2008 8:30 AM CST
up
0 recs
Now to get
by sue369 on Jan 29, 2008 6:44 AM CST 0 recs
Where do I sign up?
by paxson43 on Jan 29, 2008 7:01 AM CST 0 recs
My goal is to move Wallace
by chgobr on Jan 29, 2008 7:33 AM CST 0 recs
"we need Noc"
If Deng's out for the majority of this season, it's doomed either way.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on
Jan 29, 2008 9:08 AM CST
up
0 recs
Matt's probably correct
That said, I'm still not sure how Deng's being out for the remainder evinces a valid criticism of Matt's proposed Odom-acquisition. With Odom, the Bulls would have a PF who - if healthy - is swift/skilled enough to handle significant playing minutes at SF; moreover, his defense at either position would have to better than what Nocioni provides. In Matt's scenario, the Bulls would also add Nachbar to their SF depth, who could provide jump-shooting off the bench (though not as efficiently as Nocioni, which sounds weird to say), and would only be a third-option at SF if Deng can return.
I guess, personally, I'd just prefer the following lineup - on aesthetic grounds, as well as in terms of production-potential - to the non-Deng lineup the Bulls have been sending to the floor:
PG Hinrich
SG Sefolosha
SF Odom
PF Thomas
C Noah/Wallace
Dumping Wallace, while a noble sentiment, is practically intractable; though there may be some viable scenario, I doubt Paxson has enough creativity to arrive to it.
by jpx7 on
Jan 29, 2008 12:59 PM CST
up
0 recs
giving effort
by ScottieCartwright on
Jan 29, 2008 9:59 AM CST
up
0 recs
That's one way to look at it
by bullshooter on
Jan 29, 2008 10:07 AM CST
up
0 recs
I look at it as PER being friendly
by hscs on
Jan 29, 2008 10:09 AM CST
up
0 recs
PER
That says nothing for him because in reality if he were THAT efficient, he'd be 1st among those
by ScottieCartwright on
Jan 29, 2008 10:14 AM CST
up
0 recs
Deng has still played more minutes than Noc
by bullshooter on
Jan 29, 2008 10:24 AM CST
up
0 recs
At first
I think having the flexibility of Odom with our smallish guards could really help us. Odom can handle the ball and play anywhere from 1-4 (though is best suited for 3/4). I like thinking we'd space the floor with Lamar, Sef, Gordon, Deng during some stretches, or even use Lamar's every other game rebounding strengths to play a very fast paced run and gun with Hinrich-Gordon-Sef-Deng-Odom......could be interesting too.
We've all seen Lamar when he's good (when he's on he's great)....
I'd hate to lose Noc though in this deal, and I DEFINATELY would not part with our first round draft picks for this deal because I don't think Odom's stock is high enough to warrant his salary or the loss of Nocioni, who's been more vital to our team than anyone else this year....(I know we're in last place, but we'd be nipping on Miami territory without Noc).
I still think I'd like to see a Deng/Gordon trade for a superstar......first.
by majoyenrac on Jan 29, 2008 7:49 AM CST 0 recs
Wasn't Odom a big part of
Let's book it!
by hhi on Jan 29, 2008 8:05 AM CST 0 recs
don't see
As for the Bulls making this trade, I would be fine with it. Nocioni isn't worth anymore than Odom and Duhon/Smith won't be worth much for much longer. I'm so sick of this team that it would be refreshing to deal some pieces. Although, losing 'bright spots' Nocioni and Smith means we leave ourselves with more disappointments than we had before the deal. But, at this poin, whatever.
by CookDing on Jan 29, 2008 8:14 AM CST 0 recs
Jordan Farmar struck many
Farmar is a good player. Is Kidd better? Yes. And don't limit Kidd's career to only one or two more years. His below-the-rim game could keep him in the game for a good five more years.
The question that jumps out from the Nets' perspective: Why in the world would they add Farmar AND Duhon when they already have Kidd's heir-apparent on the roster in Marcus Williams?
Matt, this whole deal sounds like nothing more than a (not so veiled) attempt to move your nemesis off the Bulls roster.
by alec on Jan 29, 2008 9:46 AM CST 0 recs
Duhon's just an expiring contract
by your friendly BullsBlogger on
Jan 29, 2008 9:48 AM CST
up
0 recs
I like this proposal
by TMD on
Jan 29, 2008 10:02 AM CST
up
0 recs
Matt's right
Marcus Williams was stealing notebook computers while on scholarship at UCONN. He was a top prospect coming to UCONN. He was the next of kin of Ben Gordon. He had amazing recruits around him. you had all these pieces in place and the kid still had one thing on his mind, getting money.
by NBA Observer on
Jan 29, 2008 12:21 PM CST
up
0 recs
Kidd
by ScottieCartwright on
Jan 29, 2008 10:04 AM CST
up
0 recs
Odom is wack
He shows up about once every 4 games.
Yeah, he's a stat filler but he couldn't give a shit about the game.
Once he lost his son a couple years ago, it killed any basketball motivation he once had.
Plus his health is a another issue.
by Option27 on Jan 29, 2008 10:03 AM CST 0 recs
Losing his son...that's a tough thing,
There's no way in the world Paxson would ever invite Odom onto his team.
by alec on
Jan 29, 2008 10:39 AM CST
up
0 recs
If so
by your friendly BullsBlogger on
Jan 29, 2008 10:51 AM CST
up
0 recs
It's not like
I think Pax is at the point where he's willing to give up on some of his self loved players. If it will help the team.
But bringing in Odom won't help the team and that is what was meant. He isn't the guy that's gonna help your team out immediately or for the future.
Now if you're talking on just taking on a bad contract to match with Wallace's when both are up, then I'm sure there are plenty other options out there
by Option27 on
Jan 29, 2008 10:55 AM CST
up
0 recs
I think the league is over what Odom could be
Nocioni shouldn't be on the 'loved' list for Pax. They could use guys who try less and play more.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on
Jan 29, 2008 11:10 AM CST
up
0 recs
Odom does have a good game.
Tyrus is too impressionable, and Odom's laid-back, who-gives-a-shit attitude could infect Tyrus like an air-borne virus...with permanently disabling effects.
by alec on
Jan 29, 2008 11:52 AM CST
up
0 recs
He was
by TMD on
Jan 29, 2008 1:44 PM CST
up
0 recs
yep
by ScottieCartwright on
Jan 29, 2008 2:23 PM CST
up
0 recs
ah more knee jerk reaction
by bullshooter on
Jan 29, 2008 3:07 PM CST
up
0 recs
Changing scenery is what Odom does best
Colleges? Check.
NBA clubs? Check.
by NBA Observer on
Jan 29, 2008 12:17 PM CST
up
0 recs
I like the idea
Also, it doesn't seem like the Lakers are in too much of a hurry to go after Kidd. The rumors are that the Mavericks have moved to the forefront in the race for Kidd. They can't match up the contracts, as of yet, so perhaps the Bulls can hop onto that trade, and see if we can't get something out of that trade. Now that I think of it, I wouldn't want part of that, considering Paxson would probably ask for Trenton Hassell or the washed-up Eddie Jones. We already have enough of those guys on our team!
It is being said that Paxson is willing to trade Duhon, Khryapa, and Thomas. Although, reports are saying that he won't trade Thomas "just to trade him." I'm glad to see that he's not thinking like an NBA Live team owner, and that of an actual GM. My guess is we make no deals that are worth any ink, seeing how we won't get much in return for Duhon and Khryapa.
by BigScott03 on Jan 29, 2008 10:28 AM CST 0 recs
getting in on a Dallas deal
None of these guys are 'the answer', but I think it allows Tyrus or Noah to become that answer, and/or position the Bulls cap-wise to acquire that answer after the season (when Odom's an expiring deal).
by your friendly BullsBlogger on
Jan 29, 2008 10:35 AM CST
up
0 recs
What do you think of
Oh well. I guess we're just getting desperate now.
by BigScott03 on
Jan 29, 2008 11:07 AM CST
up
0 recs
What about just getting Kidd?
by preverbal on Jan 29, 2008 10:44 AM CST 0 recs
Why?
by snley on
Jan 29, 2008 10:52 AM CST
up
0 recs
Not so sure
Kidd, Duhon
Gordon, Thabo
Deng, Noc
Smith, TT
Noah, Gray
It could work. It would definitely be more fun to watch.
by preverbal on
Jan 29, 2008 11:05 AM CST
up
0 recs
might be worth it just to get rid of Wallace
by your friendly BullsBlogger on
Jan 29, 2008 11:07 AM CST
up
0 recs
Back court size? What the hell?
by tyger1147 on
Jan 29, 2008 11:21 AM CST
up
0 recs
It's just a hot phrase
by snley on
Jan 29, 2008 1:30 PM CST
up
0 recs
You're an ass
Backcourt size is significant. Unless you like getting abused by big backcourts. And its not some "hot" phrase that is currently in vogue for no reason. It was, point of fact, a significant factor in the Bulls dynasty's domination, but judging by the tenor of your comments, you were probably being swaddled in the late 90's and missed it.
by preverbal on
Jan 29, 2008 2:25 PM CST
up
0 recs
It's still ridiculous.
by tyger1147 on
Jan 29, 2008 3:17 PM CST
up
0 recs
Its not inherent winning
Size is one reason why Gordon is a liability on defense. It is why Hinrich frequently has to guard opposing 2s. It is also a reason why he gets into such foul trouble -- he has to guard bigger and stronger players almost every game.
by preverbal on
Jan 30, 2008 11:58 AM CST
up
0 recs
Pardon my insult.
I may be quite younger than you, but that does not diminish the validity of my opinions. Again, I apologize for analysis lacking from my previous post. I am old enough, though, to have watched all 6 Bulls championship seasons.
by snley on
Jan 29, 2008 3:40 PM CST
up
0 recs
No problem
If you look at Hinrich and Kidd side by side, you will see that there is a significant size difference between them, not just height but physical bulk and strength. Would that make a meaningful difference? Maybe not, given that Matt thinks Kidd is no longer a strong defender. I have only watched a handful of Nets games this year -- maybe he's fallen off.
Anyway, it was just a thought.
by preverbal on
Jan 30, 2008 12:04 PM CST
up
0 recs
Size matters
by NBA Observer on
Jan 29, 2008 2:54 PM CST
up
0 recs
well said
by preverbal on
Jan 30, 2008 12:04 PM CST
up
0 recs


