I like Devin Harris. He is a nice guy. He is a fun guy. He is a very good basketball player. I was sorry to see him leave Dallas. He should have a great career ahead of him barring injuries. I like Jason Kidd. He is a great basketball player. I am glad to have him in Dallas. I am also amused when I see all of the mainstream media and blogs opining on the value of the Harris-Kidd trade. The word of the moment to describe the trade seems to be “fleeced“. Chants of “Thank You Cuban!” reverberate throughout Izod Center.
I do not claim to be a “basketball guru”. Maybe I am a basketball idiot. In the end I am just a fan like anyone else but I can not figure it out. Someone please explain it to me. How did the Dallas Mavericks get fleeced? They were fleeced because Devin is putting up good numbers for the Nets? They were fleeced because every one is crowning Devin the next Jason Kidd or Steve Nash? They were fleeced because someone out there unbeknown to the world is blessed with the ability to predict alternate realities has predicted an NBA championship for the Mavs this year had we kept Devin? That’s what it is about is it not? While it was not a trade, I remember the same type of media and blogosphere bashing when Steve Nash left for the Phoenix Suns. If we use the same “fleece logic” being used with regards to Devin, one could argue that the Phoenix Suns underwent a huge “fleecing” not by the Mavs but by Steve’s agent. They paid a ton for Steve and have nary an NBA championship to show for it. If that’s what it’s all about.
Let’s talk hard court facts. We can start by agreeing that what matters in the end for a NBA team is holding the championship trophy when the the clock reads zero in the last game played. Everything else is conversation for the pundits, gamblers and fantasy leagues. Steve Nash has had a Hall Of Fame career. We can agree he is still playing at a very high level in a very different system than he played in for the Mavs. Jason Kidd has had a Hall Of Fame career. We can agree he is still playing at a very high level in a very different system than he played in for the New Jersey Nets. Systems designed around different players and different chemistry. The formula for an NBA championship is not cookie cutter. You do not have to be smarter than a 5th grader to figure out that its a damn hard equation to master with more talent integration variables than a Rubik’s Cube. Devin Harris is having a good season so far. He is putting up good numbers in a different system than he played in for the Mavs. So who is right for what system? Which great player gives their team the best chance to hold that trophy and at what point during their tenure there? It is much more difficult to assemble than a simple prediction of statistical greatness. The last time I checked, Phoenix Suns have not held up a championship trophy during the Steve Nash era. They have not even made it to the finals. During the Jason Kidd era, the New Jersey Nets made it to the finals in 2002 and 2003. If we are going to talk about degrees of success as meaning anything the Mavs have come closer post Steve Nash than the Suns ever did with him. Jason Kidd is a great player. He has had at great career. He put up great numbers in the Nets system. Last I looked the Nets had not held that trophy either during his stay there. Does that mean the Nets got “fleeced”?
In the end only one NBA team out of 30 calls themselves champs in June. I guess everyone else got “fleeced”.
February 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 pm
I think the question is can the Mavs win a championship with Dirk and company? I feel like the time has passed and the Mavs might be better off trying to re-tool and plan for the future. And I think that's why people might criticize the move – keeping a young guy like Harris is a move towards the future even if it doesn't bring a championship this year or next. You might be right and even if they kept Harris he never would have worked in the chemistry that is the Mavs but I don't see much value in getting Kidd at this stage in his career. How many good years does he have left? Two… maybe three? And are the Mavs really in contention this year? I know you're a fan, but I don't see them winning a championship with anything close to their current lineup which would mean trying to go younger and bring in fresh talent and start thinking about really contending 2 or 3 years down the road.
February 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 pm
"Fleeced" is a strong word, but the trade not only got the Nets a starting point guard for many years to come, it also – from what I have read – took a chunk off our salary cap so we (the Nets) will be in the running for some of the top free agents in 2010. The Mav's needed to win NOW and the Nets are hoping to win SOON.
February 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 pm
The reason people are saying that the trade was one sided was because of the nature of the trade. The Mavs believed they were one player short from getting over that hill. The Lakers just traded for Gasol and the Suns picked up Shaq. The Mavs, well lets be honest haven't been the same since the 2006 Finals. The had the biggest meltdown in NBA history. The team with the best record and the league MVP was knocked out the playoffs in the 1st round by an 8th seed team. Then a year later Chris Paul basically run circles around Kidd and actually yells "He can't guard me. He can't guard me", The Mavs lose in the first round again. This time to a young inexperience team first time in the playoffs since entering the Western Conference.
The Nets did not make the Devin/Kidd trade to win a championship but to build for the future. The Mavs did however. So far the Mavs have lost in the first round of the playoffs and are currently the 9th seed in the playoffs. If Dallas doesn't win a championship than yes this was a one sided trade. Many people have said this Dirk is not the leader that can win a championship and the Kidd trade was probably done to take some pressure off him. What happens when the time comes that the Mavs have to depart with Dirk? At least with Harris you would still have a young good point guard and the players Dirk could bring would eventually have Dallas back on the right track
February 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 pm
The reason people are saying that the trade was one sided was because of the nature of the trade. The Mavs believed they were one player short from getting over that hill. The Lakers just traded for Gasol and the Suns picked up Shaq. The Mavs, well lets be honest haven't been the same since the 2006 Finals. The had the biggest meltdown in NBA history. The team with the best record and the league MVP was knocked out the playoffs in the 1st round by an 8th seed team. Then a year later Chris Paul basically run circles around Kidd and actually yells "He can't guard me. He can't guard me", The Mavs lose in the first round again. This time to a young inexperience team first time in the playoffs since entering the Western Conference.
February 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 pm
Now with Terry, Kidd, Dirk, Stackhouse, and Dampier are all 30 and older you have to wonder where is this team heading. When you have young teams as the Hornets Nuggets Lakers and Portland on the come up.
See when the Nets fans were chanting "Thank You Cuban" please believe they meant it. The Nets went as far as they were going to go with Kidd. If not for Cuban who were the Nets going to get to replace a player of Kidd caliber?? Marcus Williams? Marcus Williams was originally suppose to be the sucessor of Kidd but after the Harris/Kidd trade he was expendable. The Nets traded him to Goldenstate for a first round pick. Now Marcus can not even get playing time on a Warrior team missing their starting point guard and we all know the Warriors are stuggling and will be rebuilding soon to and that first round pick is looking better and better. Nets fans are saying Thank You Cuban because if not for you we would have been stuck with Marcus Williams after Kidd retired or left.
Now "thanks to cuban" we have a young point guard who is putting up all star numbers and this is his first full season as the Nets star player. They are saying thank you Cuban because now we have a brighter future. We have a rookie center who is nearly averaging a double double, cap space for 2010 , a bench and a young good point guard. Which if you look at Utah and New Orleans can be very very helpful. The only question is who will the Mavericks have once Kidd retires???
February 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 pm
9102127391795472095410The reason people are saying that the trade was one sided was because of the nature of the trade. The Mavs believed they were one player short from getting over that hill. The Lakers just traded for Gasol and the Suns picked up Shaq. The Mavs, well lets be honest haven't been the same since the 2006 Finals. The had the biggest meltdown in NBA history. The team with the best record and the league MVP was knocked out the playoffs in the 1st round by an 8th seed team. Then a year later Chris Paul basically run circles around Kidd and actually yells "He can't guard me. He can't guard me", The Mavs lose in the first round again. This time to a young inexperience team first time in the playoffs since entering the Western Conference