Report: Nets agree to trade Kidd to Mavs

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by octothorp

It sounds from the article that it's not a specific article in his contract, it's something universal to all one-year contracts:

I read that. What a crazy rule. Essentially a NTC when a player signs a one year deal with a club and it's his second contract? Bizzaro.

I just find it funny that a relative no one is holding up this monster deal. Good on his agent though - George started in Dallas and is looking at New Jersey as a bad career move. It will be interesting to see if this trade is broken, how Dallas treats George. This could get ugly... unfortunately.

[octothorp]

You would think the fact that he'll now be the most hated player on the floor at every Dallas home game would be enough to convince him to move on...

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Best day in Raptors history was when they got rid of this LOSER!!! Addition by subtraction is one of the best trades going!!!

In hindsight, yes, because of what the Raptors are today, but any monkey could have gotten "rid" of Carter. Getting a plausible return for the guy was something that Babcock should have looked harder into.

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

I read that. What a crazy rule. Essentially a NTC when a player signs a one year deal with a club and it's his second contract? Bizzaro.

I just find it funny that a relative no one is holding up this monster deal. Good on his agent though - George started in Dallas and is looking at New Jersey as a bad career move. It will be interesting to see if this trade is broken, how Dallas treats George. This could get ugly... unfortunately.

It is really bizzare. Doesn't Joey Graham now have that contract too? I don't know. Imagine if Graham blocked a deal? lol. Anyway, how much did George's agent have to search to find that fine writing in the CBA to pull that one off? That man deserves a raise.

[octothorp]

And it gets worse. Stackhouse publicly flaunts the fact that he'll wait until 30 days has passed, get bought out by NJ, and return to Dallas for the playoffs. The league is not happy.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3247183

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by octothorp

And it gets worse. Stackhouse publicly flaunts the fact that he'll wait until 30 days has passed, get bought out by NJ, and return to Dallas for the playoffs. The league is not happy.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3247183

The article mentions that this 30 day rule was put in place after Boston and Atlanta were engaged in similar shenanigans in 2005. They changed the waiting period from 3 days to 30 days. Why not just make it the whole season?

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by fredr123

The article mentions that this 30 day rule was put in place after Boston and Atlanta were engaged in similar shenanigans in 2005. They changed the waiting period from 3 days to 30 days. Why not just make it the whole season?

Or how about, if you don't show up to play, you can be suspended without pay.

AKA just like real life.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Or how about, if you don't show up to play, you can be suspended without pay.

AKA just like real life.

Are you referring to Alonzo Mourning? I think that situation was a bit different. He was just being a ###### and refused to play in Toronto. I'm surprised you aren't able to suspend someone without pay in the NBA. Heck, you can do it in the NHL, right (Scott Niedermayer)? Ideally, you would have done that or dressed him and kept him on the end of the bench.

The Boston/Atlanta matter as well as the New Jersey/Dallas matter seem to be premeditated side-deals designed to get around the cap. Boston expected, and was probably told outright in a wink wink sort of way, that they planned to waive Payton. Payton, for his part, was probably told in advance that he would be shipped out but that he was welcomed (or expected) to return to Boston after being waived. Same here with Stackhouse. He needed to be included to make the salaries work out (I think). The Nets did not intend to keep him and were planning to buy him out to clear space. Stackhouse and the Mavericks had a plan in place to bring him back.

Both of these situations seem crooked but are within the bounds of the rules. I didn't like the Selanne/Niedermayer/Anaheim deal even though, technically, it was within the bounds of the rules. This one though? I'm fine with. The league had a chance to plug that hole and failed to do so. It's their own fault.

Isn't this side deal business at least somewhat reminiscent of the Edmonton Eskimos trades with Hamilton that included Jason Maas in a lopsided off season deal?

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Are you referring to Alonzo Mourning? I think that situation was a bit different. He was just being a ###### and refused to play in Toronto. I'm surprised you aren't able to suspend someone without pay in the NBA. Heck, you can do it in the NHL, right (Scott Niedermayer)? Ideally, you would have done that or dressed him and kept him on the end of the bench.

The Boston/Atlanta matter as well as the New Jersey/Dallas matter seem to be premeditated side-deals designed to get around the cap. Boston expected, and was probably told outright in a wink wink sort of way, that they planned to waive Payton. Payton, for his part, was probably told in advance that he would be shipped out but that he was welcomed (or expected) to return to Boston after being waived. Same here with Stackhouse. He needed to be included to make the salaries work out (I think). The Nets did not intend to keep him and were planning to buy him out to clear space. Stackhouse and the Mavericks had a plan in place to bring him back.

Both of these situations seem crooked but are within the bounds of the rules. I didn't like the Selanne/Niedermayer/Anaheim deal even though, technically, it was within the bounds of the rules. This one though? I'm fine with. The league had a chance to plug that hole and failed to do so. It's their own fault.

Isn't this side deal business at least somewhat reminiscent of the Edmonton Eskimos trades with Hamilton that included Jason Maas in a lopsided off season deal?

Yep the Mourning deal.

But that is typical of all the "no show" players who've ever suited up for the Raps. You have to pay the player or buy him out for whatever reason. The Raps certainly thought Zo was going to play for them. Instead they buy him out for 10 million and watch him take league Min to win in Miami.

I really don't care one way or another for this Stackhouse thing - since the Mavs are essentially paying for him to be bought out - this is just a way to circumvent the cap.

[Johnny 99]

Teams only have themselves to blame for this problem. Mourning should have been made to sit just like Eric Lindros had to. Bobby Clarke was my hero for taking a stand in that situation. If more teams had the balls to stand up to players and make them rot on the bench instead of trading them or buying them out, less players would pull that crap.

[FlamingLonghorn]

So the trade is going to happen tomorrow with Van Horn and Trenton hassell replacing George and Stackhouse...

[StrayBullet]

Originally Posted by Sowa

So the trade is going to happen tomorrow with Van Horn and Trenton hassell replacing George and Stackhouse...

Yup! Official...

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3253107

[Clever_Iggy]

I cant believe that the league is letting this pass. Keith Van Horn is unofficially retired yet the league allows the Nets to sign him, trade him to Dallas where Dallas will promptly cut him.

After the Stackhouse comment, I cant believe the league isnt going over this with a fine tooth comb.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

I cant believe that the league is letting this pass. Keith Van Horn is unofficially retired yet the league allows the Nets to sign him, trade him to Dallas where Dallas will promptly cut him.

After the Stackhouse comment, I cant believe the league isnt going over this with a fine tooth comb.

Well apparently Van Horn has said he will make a legitimate attempt at a comeback.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

I cant believe that the league is letting this pass. Keith Van Horn is unofficially retired yet the league allows the Nets to sign him, trade him to Dallas where Dallas will promptly cut him.

After the Stackhouse comment, I cant believe the league isnt going over this with a fine tooth comb.

Van Horn never officially retired. Dallas still retains his rights, to a certain extent. They had to waive a rookie in order to clear roster space before signing Van Horn. Then Dallas will trade Van Horn to the Nets (not the other way around as you indicated above).

[Jason14h]

The only reason these players are included is because trades must come a % of total salaries moved to both teams. The Nets do not want ANY of these bums. They want the two picks, Diap, and the cap room.

That would be the entire trade if it wasn't for these rules. It would be similar to the NHL enforcing the rule, and watching teams try and send Toronto 7 mil in expiring contracts for Sundin.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Van Horn never officially retired. Dallas still retains his rights, to a certain extent. They had to waive a rookie in order to clear roster space before signing Van Horn. Then Dallas will trade Van Horn to the Nets (not the other way around as you indicated above).

I just thought with the league taking issue with the Mavs first plan to trade Stackhouse and then re-sign him after the Nets cut him would mean that they would take issue with a guy that was apparently done.

Interesting that the Mavs will turn around and trade Van Horn.

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Well apparently Van Horn has said he will make a legitimate attempt at a comeback.

Interesting. I suppose he is re-traded back to the Nets, it's a little less suspicious (as fredr indicates).

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

Interesting. I suppose he is re-traded back to the Nets, it's a little less suspicious (as fredr indicates).

You mean back to the Mavericks, right Just to be clear, the deal requires Dallas to sign Van Horn and then trade him to the Nets. Whether the Nets really want him or not is another question but Van Horn merely has to make himself available and, perhaps, make some bona fide effort at a comeback. In all likelihood, he's waived or bought out by the Nets.

That ESPN article contained some subtext regarding Van Horn's connections to Colorado (family and business dealings) and his reluctance to leave the area. Methinks there's a wink wink saynamore saynamore deal there to let Van Horn fade into the Mile High sunset if/when things don't work out in New Jersey.

[Flames in 07]

The NBA really sucks. The product is bad, they have refs that rig games, they have dumb rules that left the Suns on the outside looking in, and you can manufacture BS deals that bring players out of retirement .... only days after a trade that had a player who planned to be bought out then go to his original team. Very rinky dink, how can anyone take this league seriously?

Wake me up when march madness starts. If they just cancelled the NBA season right now, I wouldn't be missing a thing.

[moon]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Methinks there's a wink wink saynamore saynamore deal there to let Van Horn fade into the Mile High sunset if/when things don't work out in New Jersey.

I think the fact that he will get four million for "re-signing" and not having to do anything but take a physical may also contribute to his desire to "make a comeback."