Jason Kidd is once again a Dallas Maverick. After two weeks of more twists and turns than a daytime soap opera, the Mavericks and Nets announced today that a deal was done.
Originally the mega-trade included sending Mav Jerry Stackhouse to New Jersey. However, Stackhouse shot off his mouth last week. He said in an interview that he looked forward to 30 days rest and then being right back in Dallas.
What?
That's right. The original deal included Stack going to the Nets. The Nets in turn would buy out his contract. The NBA would allow him to re-sign with the Mavs 30 days later.
BUT - since he took it upon himself to reveal this formerly secret detail, NBA officials considered this 'tampering' and said that he could no longer be part of any trade. If he was included, he would be prohibited from rejoining Dallas this season.
That was not going to work for the Mavs. Thanks Stack for making things even more difficult.
Fortunately, Keith VanHorn decided to rejoin the Mavs so he could be included as part of the package.
Questions:
1. What took VanHorn so long to decide that this was a good deal for him?
He's basically retired. He hasn't played in two years. But technically, he's not retired. He hasn't filed papers with the league. His contract calls for him to receive $4.3 million just for the rest of this season. He doesn't have to play. He just has to sign with the Mavericks and be traded to the Nets and give the assurance that he will 'try' to make a comeback. $4.3 million for 4 months 'work.' Who couldn't go for that even if it meant moving to New Jersey for a little while? He should have been on the first plane to Dallas even if he thought it was only a rumor.
2. Why does Dallas (originally) have to send Stackhouse to New Jersey just so he can have his contact bought out? There was never an intention for Stackhouse to play for the Nets which became obvious in his interview last week causing the original deal to implode.
3. Why does Dallas (now) have to pull a 32 year old guy from semi-retirement, trade him to the Nets just so he can ride their payroll for the rest of the season?
Honestly I had no idea. Fortunately my friend (and Legacy Church of Christ preacher) Allan Stanglin is a former sports director for DFW radio station KRLD. He was able to sum it up quite easily for me:
Money.
Apparantly the deal has to be equal on both sides of the ledger. So whatever value the Nets were giving up had to be matched by the Mavs.
What?
I'm still confused. The Nets didn't want Stackhouse. They certainly don't want VanHorn. I just don't get it.
Right now I have two lawnmowers. I'd like to have a new leaf blower. If you had two leaf blowers and needed a lawn mower I think we could make a trade. I don't want you to thown in a Carpenters Greatest Hits CD to make the deal equal from a dollar standpoint. I don't need it. Shanna's already got a copy. Is this too simple for the NBA?
So I'm reserved to classify myself as a basketball deal idiot who obviously doesn't understand the elaborate interworkings of multimillion dollar player trades. I guess it makes sense to someone.
One thing I do know. I'm taking NBA league officials off my list of potential candidates to investigate the baseball steroids scandal. They seem to operate in the same illogical world as congress so just let congress finish what they've started.
Now, if the Mavs can work as hard on the court as they have off the court getting this deal done we may finally win the NBA championship. If that happens they'll probably feel like they got from Kidd exactly what they wanted. Then they'll want to trade him and we get to do this all over again.
We'll see. Go Mavs.
No comments:
Post a Comment