Jason Kidd poll

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, 32

Who would you give up to get Kidd

No votes
Pietrus only
Dunleavy only
Either Pietrus or Dunleavy
No votes
Neither one

Total votes: 10

User avatar

Posts: 2213
» Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:34 am
curious what you all would give up to bring Jason Kidd here
Last edited by hobbes on Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar

Posts: 124
» Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:38 am
Its not that I don't care which one we gave up, its just that I would give up either one to get the best point guard in the league any day. I like Pietrus, if given a choice I'd rather keep him. He is a 2 guard who can be stretched into a 3 maybe, but he does play the position of our newly signed franchise guy, so it'll always be hard to have them both out there and not have a mismatch. There are all those long 3's in the league, Shareef, AK-47, Rashard Lewis, Shawn Marion, etc. MP is a good defender, but probably much better at guys his own size that those 3 or 4 inches taller.

Ideally Dunleavy would go, otherwise we'll end up resigning him for like 70 million and then we'll really really have no cap room left ever again.

Make the deal.
User avatar

Posts: 2213
» Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:40 am
i edited the answers a bit so they made more sense

i am torn here, I would love to get Kidd but would hate to give up either one of those guys. I can see them both flourishing big time with Kidd here.

Starting Lineup
Posts: 675
» Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:48 am
Foyle for Kidd straight up

Hah, I agree with Hobbes, I can see both improving tremendously with Kidd distributing, but NJ demands at least some talent. In this case I say it doesn't matter because MP will always be behind Rich unless Rich somehow gets traded (not happening). Dunleavy would be better to trade, but he would absolutely flourish with Kidd giving him open shots all over the place. Plus who would play SF? MP is nice, but I don't think he has the size to play inside on a nightly basis for 30 minutes. He can cover against some back-ups, but posting him against the top 3's in the league will expose some of his flaws. It really is a toss-up, though my instinc says keep MP because he will explode... on the other hand Dunleavy has a great shot despite what he has shown. And that will definately surface with Kidd... Man what a problem. But it probably won't matter, I just don't see this deal going down.

Posts: 180
» Thu Dec 09, 2004 3:30 pm
lol Foyle for Kidd straight up. I've had a long exhausting day and reading that just made me laugh. Seriously though, it would be cool if Kidd came to the Warriors. Hes an impact player and changes the game when hes in there. Just watching the last two Jersey games brings back memories of when they were a contender. The rest of the team steps their game up knowing they have Kidd out there and it really shows. I would love for the warriors to get him but realistically I think he'll end up in Denver or Dallas.

Posts: 171
» Thu Dec 09, 2004 4:58 pm
ok about pietrus. everyone says hes too small to play the 3. but the 3 position isnt an inside position, most of those guys run around on the perimeter. pietrus is far better guarding a 3 then dunleavy is thats for sure. and pietrus can blow by any 3 in the league. sure he might be a little short, but look how long his arms are.
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 5907
» Thu Dec 09, 2004 5:21 pm
Keeping Dunleavy is my ideal situation because having 2 gifted passes with that kind of court vision would give you LAKERS SHOWTIME or Bird Celtics type of game. 2 men who could see the court that well would be so dangerous.

I mean it would be Kidd on top, the kick out to Dunleavy baseline then straight inside to Murphy for the SLAM.

With keeping Pietrus and sliding him into the 3, it would mean plenty of OOPS. But seriously Dunleavy defensive issues are nothing when you can distribute the ball so well.

Starting Lineup
Posts: 675
» Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:29 pm
Yea, there's nothing saying MP can't play 3, but that doesn't change the fact he's better suited for the 2. It's just hard to play tall 3's night in and out. Ideally, we wouldn't have to give up either because I really feel both will flourish. That said I think we have to give up Dunleavy if NJ really demands something given that he wants out (you can see it in his every move).

But in the end it really doesn't matter. NJ doesn't need a 3, Jefferson has that on lockdown for years to come. So Dunleavy is out. The only guy they could even think about is MP. But he doesn't have enough upside to warrant trading Kidd. Remember, they don't want to get rid of Kidd, HE demanded the trade. So it's not like they HAVE to do anything. They could just stick to their guns and keep him and hope to slip into the playoffs (very possible). Honestly, why would they trade Kidd for MP and some expiring contracts. It would make sense if Mourning is added because they clear an enormous amount of cap space... but I still don't think GS will have anything to do with it. It's just not something we'd do. Taking a chance like that has never happened... if it did I would be estatic. I don't care if Mourning AND Kidd could both end their careers the day after the trade were consumated, because it at least showed the team was trying something new, and pushing the envelope rather than rebuilding every 2 years with players we can't keep down the line anyhow.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests