Deavan George says, "Don't trade me..."

[Adidas410s]

and then promptly goes 0-11 (including 0-4 from 3pt range) after Avery gives him his 2nd start of the season. Fortunately, the Mavs still beat Portland 96-76.

[Maroon87]

I'm not familiar with his contract...can he totally block this trade?

[JR2004]

Originally posted by Maroon87
I'm not familiar with his contract...can he totally block this trade?

Yes he can. If he doesn't want to be traded he doesn't have to be.

[ASUFrisbeeStud]

Mark my words. The deal will get done, with or without him. He's a primadonna.

[Maroon87]

Originally posted by JR2004
Yes he can. If he doesn't want to be traded he doesn't have to be.

Then if I'm a Mavs fan this is good news...that trade is awful.

[Old Tiger]

PWNED is Deavan George

[JR2004]

Originally posted by Maroon87
Then if I'm a Mavs fan this is good news...that trade is awful.

If I were a fan of the NBA team in Dallas I'd be happy too. That trade is just atrocious for them if it ever goes through.

[Maroon87]

Originally posted by JR2004
If I were a fan of the NBA team in Dallas I'd be happy too. That trade is just atrocious for them if it ever goes through.

No joke...imagine Kidd having to check Nash, Deron Williams, Baron Davis, or a healthy Tony Parker in a best-of 7 series. :doh:

[Maroon87]

Trade would show Dallas' desperation to win title

By Adrian Wojnarowski, Yahoo! Sports
February 13, 2008


Deep down, Jason Kidd always regretted turning down the San Antonio Spurs. Somehow, it felt too easy for him. Everything had been stacked neatly for the Nets point guard – the max-out contract, the best power forward in history, the championship trophy. As much as that 2003 free agent recruitment inspired drama, Kidd never came close to running into Tim Duncan’s arms.

Part of it was Kidd’s wife, who wanted to stay in metropolitan New York for a television career.

Part was that Kidd didn’t like the appearance of leaving the NBA Finals loser for its champion.

And ultimately, there was an ego that understood he would forever be the face of the Nets franchise, the savior of the NBA’s most lost cause. They were his creation. Always, San Antonio belonged to Duncan, but Kidd had sold himself on going down in history as a Net. As it turned out, this was a noble idea that barely lasted a full season before Kidd privately told people he regretted ever passing on the Spurs offer.

He played brilliant basketball, but there was always an undercurrent of frustration with this coach, and that teammate, always a simmering fury that everyone was letting him down. It wasn’t long until Nets management understood that the price of Kidd’s genius would forever come with his changing whims and personal turmoil.

As history goes, it doesn't end well with Kidd.

So, this is Kidd’s chance to transform a checkered legacy. Finally, the Nets gave Kidd what he wanted. He goes to Dallas with an unmistakable mandate: Bring us the title and bring it now.

Only, there was a sudden problem Wednesday night. Devean George, one of the Mavericks in the proposed deal, changed his mind and used a veto provision in his one-year contract. To agree to the trade could cost George his “Bird Rights” which could cost him money as a free agent next summer.

Before the snag on Wednesday, several league executives were impressed with how much Rod Thorn coaxed out of Cuban. Everything on the Nets president’s checklist – a good young player (Devin Harris), expiring contracts (George and DeSagna Diop) and two first-round picks &hndash; was handed over. Most were surprised that a second first-round draft pick was needed to consummate the deal, but Thorn stood firm and delivered a clinic on trading a franchise player. These two teams are motivated to find a solution, and they’ll have six days until the trade deadline on Feb. 21 to get creative.

This tells you everything about how desperately Dallas wants to win a championship, and how intensely they believe that Kidd gives them the toughness, the leadership, to overtake the most imposing Western Conference in years. Yet still, for the second time, the Mavericks have entrusted themselves to Kidd and they pray that they won’t regret it again. Thirteen years ago, Kidd was too immature to honor the responsibility. He wasn’t alone with blame in Dallas, but he did his part to destroy the three J’s of Kidd, Jamal Mashburn and Jimmy Jackson. From there, there was a spectacular, but troubled stay in Phoenix, an acrimonious exit to Jersey. Just this season, Kidd called in sick to a game, sources said, to protest his inability to get a trade or a contract extension out of his bosses. It goes on and on with Kidd, but so does his ability to control basketball games, to transform teammates surrounding him.

If the trade is approved, he has a chance to truly reshape his legacy. Funny, but Kidd and the Lakers' Kobe Bryant returned to Team USA to be the saviors responsible for bringing back the Olympic gold medal. When they committed to Beijing for 2008, they did so at a time when they felt they were far from NBA championship contention. Suddenly, everything has changed. Between now and late August, everything they wanted is within reach.

Whatever happens, the opportunity won’t last long for Kidd. In his career, these times of change are traditionally when motivation moves him to an almost possessed state. He’ll play great for the Mavericks, but they didn’t trade the future for him to mess with the present. No more drama at nightclubs, no more of his personal life spilling into his work place. No more griping about his coaches, his teammates, about the commitment of his employers. Remember this: Without him, Dallas was closer to a championship than Kidd was without them. Dallas is going for it now, trusting that all these years later, he can finish the job with which it drafted him to do in 1994.

Three and a half years ago, Kidd wouldn’t join the defending champions, but now that title still belongs to those Spurs and it’s time for him to beat them. Pau Gasol and Shaquille O’Neal have gone West, but they don’t arrive with the pressure on the point guard. This is a legacy on the line.

For the first time, the burden won’t be on everyone surrounding Jason Kidd.

Once and for all, it’s on him.


Adrian Wojnarowski is the NBA columnist for Yahoo! Sports. Send Adrian a question or comment for potential use in a future column or webcast.

[Adidas410s]

Originally posted by Maroon87
I'm not familiar with his contract...can he totally block this trade?
To clarify...DG does not have a no-trade clause in his contract. He is envoking his early bird rights.

Devean George DOES NOT have a no trade clause. Kobe is the only player in the league with a no trade clause in his contract.


League rules dictate that players on a one-year contract -- but who spent the previous season with the same team and are thus eligible for Early Bird free-agent rights at the end of the contract -- cannot be traded without their consent. George, who earns $2.4 million this season, is one of 18 such players in the league at present, afforded the right to either approve or veto trades because those Bird rights are lost if they do get traded.

For more info...you can read up on what Early Bird FA Rights (as opposed to Bird FA Rights) are HERE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Salary_Cap#Larry_Bird_exception) . Personally...if Cuban would just go to George and say, "To hell with your Bird rights...we're not going to keep you after this season," then this would all be over with. George could still hang on...but he'd get benched, or more likely placed on IR for "fatigue", and never play in the NBA again.

[coach]

what i dont understand is why wont the nets make the trade w/o george? lol is he THAT important besides after the 0 for 11 night do you think the nets really want him??

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by coach
what i dont understand is why wont the nets make the trade w/o george? lol is he THAT important besides after the 0 for 11 night do you think the nets really want him??

It is all about the dollars and contracts

In the NBA the money must be within a certain %, plus with George on a one year contract, the Nets can use his slot next year in FA

[crzyjournalist03]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
It is all about the dollars and contracts

In the NBA the money must be within a certain %, plus with George on a one year contract, the Nets can use his slot next year in FA

why hasn't Keith Van Horn been thrown into the deal and called it good to replace George?

[Adidas410s]

Originally posted by crzyjournalist03
why hasn't Keith Van Horn been thrown into the deal and called it good to replace George?
Sign KVH to a $3 mil deal...and that's an extra $6 mil after the 100% luxury tax premium. Cuban doesn't want to throw a few extra million on top of this if he doesn't have to. Plus, George has no made himself an outcast in Dallas if he stays...

[injuredinmelee]

isnt Kidd the best rebounding Pg in the league? Arent his passing skills among the top 3 in the league? He shoots well and can take some of the pressure off Dirk. Why is this bad?

[kepdawg]

Originally posted by Adidas410s
To clarify...DG does not have a no-trade clause in his contract. He is envoking his early bird rights.

Devean George DOES NOT have a no trade clause. Kobe is the only player in the league with a no trade clause in his contract.



For more info...you can read up on what Early Bird FA Rights (as opposed to Bird FA Rights) are HERE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Salary_Cap#Larry_Bird_exception) . Personally...if Cuban would just go to George and say, "To hell with your Bird rights...we're not going to keep you after this season," then this would all be over with. George could still hang on...but he'd get benched, or more likely placed on IR for "fatigue", and never play in the NBA again.

Does it really make a difference if he does or does not have a no trade clause if he can say no to a trade? :thinking:

[Adidas410s]

Originally posted by kepdawg
Does it really make a difference if he does or does not have a no trade clause if he can say no to a trade? :thinking: Yeah because he can only veto a trade through the end of the season. After that...he no longer has that ability! ;)

In related news...glad to hear that Stack will be back with the Mavs:

"I feel great," Stackhouse told the Associated Press. "I get 30 days to rest, then I'll be right back. I ain't going nowhere."

[JR2004]

Originally posted by Adidas410s
"I feel great," Stackhouse told the Associated Press. "I get 30 days to rest, then I'll be right back. I ain't going nowhere."

This is a great quote...It's also illegal to imply what Stackhouse said and can further complicate a trade.

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by JR2004
This is a great quote...It's also illegal to imply what Stackhouse said and can further complicate a trade.

How is it illegal? As long as he sits the 30 days..There is no rule saying a player cannot say his intentions


The more I i think about this trade the more I like it

This present day Mav team IMO was not going to win a title.

This from espn sums it up best IMO

Dallas is not going to reach the Finals as currently constructed. Now, if the Kidd trade goes through, the Mavs will be as formidable as anyone. One of the greatest benefits of getting Kidd would be the mental toughness he'd bring to the Mavs. Let's just be honest here: The Mavs have not won a title the past two seasons because they have been mentally soft.
The collapse against Miami. The shocker at the hands of the Warriors.

Those were heart issues, not basketball issues.

Now, all that could change. Kidd is as tough as they come on the hoop court, prevailing as much because of his mental toughness as his physical gifts. If Dallas gets beat with Kidd on its roster, it would happen because the other team is better. Not because the Mavs got punked.

Would this trade make the Mavs the leading contender in the West? No. But it would put them on equal footing with the other Western powers, which couldn't be said yesterday.


http://mavs.beloblog.com/archives/2008/02/math-geek-thinks-mavs-pushing-panic-butt.html

[crzyjournalist03]

Originally posted by Adidas410s
Sign KVH to a $3 mil deal...and that's an extra $6 mil after the 100% luxury tax premium. Cuban doesn't want to throw a few extra million on top of this if he doesn't have to. Plus, George has no made himself an outcast in Dallas if he stays...

so, take the $3 million in cash out of the deal and it evens out. New Jersey would end up with the same salaries and Dallas would end up spending the same amount of money.

[Adidas410s]

Originally posted by crzyjournalist03
so, take the $3 million in cash out of the deal and it evens out. New Jersey would end up with the same salaries and Dallas would end up spending the same amount of money.
I looked it up...and it would actually be $2 mil for KVH instead of $3 mil...so a $4 mil tax. Why would NJ give up $2 mil in cash AND take on $2 mil in salary for KVH???

[Adidas410s]

Originally posted by JR2004
This is a great quote...It's also illegal to imply what Stackhouse said and can further complicate a trade.
I don't think it's illegal when he's still a part of the Mavs right now. Would be different if the trade had gone through and THEN he said that. Also, I don't think it complicates the trade when NJ has already made known their intentions to cut him.

[JR2004]

Originally posted by Adidas410s
I don't think it's illegal when he's still a part of the Mavs right now. Would be different if the trade had gone through and THEN he said that. Also, I don't think it complicates the trade when NJ has already made known their intentions to cut him.

Saying it before is what makes it illegal. It implies there was an agreement made beforehand that he's being bought out. Seeing as how the commissioner isn't a big fan of the head man in Dallas, I'd venture to say that Stackhouse won't be bought out if he's traded.

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by JR2004
I'd venture to say that Stackhouse won't be bought out if he's traded.

I dont think the Nets will not cut him just to spite the Mavs or anything..Why would they want to create bad feelings with the Mavs for no reason? What would keeping him accomplish? Not like the Mavs are a conference rival...They most likely got the Mavs to agree to throwing Stack in by telling Cuban they were just going to cut him for the salary slot anyway

And it is not illegal for a PLAYER to say that...it is for the Owner of the team to say it

[crzyjournalist03]

Originally posted by JR2004
Saying it before is what makes it illegal. It implies there was an agreement made beforehand that he's being bought out. Seeing as how the commissioner isn't a big fan of the head man in Dallas, I'd venture to say that Stackhouse won't be bought out if he's traded.

How does the commissioner affect a team's ability to buy out a player??? That makes no sense at all...

[BobcatBenny]

D.G.'s lips might have been saying, "Don't trade me . . ."

But in the genre of Jerry Maguire, he was really saying, "Show me the money!!!"

[JR2004]

Originally posted by crzyjournalist03
How does the commissioner affect a team's ability to buy out a player??? That makes no sense at all...

You're a media fanboy...Nothing makes sense to you.

[Necks_Fan]

Originally posted by JR2004
You're a media fanboy...Nothing makes sense to you. Lol, good one.

[Txbroadcaster]

Actually JR might be right..I still dont see how if the NBA cannot actually prove a side deal is in place but we shall see


http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-stackhousesnag021508&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

[themsu97]

yep, this is called tampering which makes this ILLEGAL and the trade will be voided by the commissioners office...

this happened before a few years back when the Rockets first tried to trade for Charles Barkley... since Barkley and Olajuwan had played together on the dream team the league said the Rockets had tampered with Barkley, eventually they allowed the trade...
what it did do was not allow Gary Payton to sign with the Rockets... he had said that he would sign with teh Rockets if the Barkley trade went through, it was not allowed and he resigned with the Sonics...

[crzyjournalist03]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
Actually JR might be right..I still dont see how if the NBA cannot actually prove a side deal is in place but we shall see


http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-stackhousesnag021508&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

here's the issue there...I'm assuming that the players were informed that they had been traded, otherwise George couldn't have exercised his no-trade rights. If the players had indeed been notified, couldn't it be just as plausible that the Nets told Stackhouse not to bother coming to New Jersey because they didn't want him?

I mean, obviously either scenario is plausible, but if the Nets and Mavs both want to make the trade, all that they have to do is say that the Nets said that they didn't want Stackhouse, so he decided he wanted to stay in Dallas.

[crzyjournalist03]

on another note, maybe I understand the inner-workings of deals better than some of you thought...

Looks like Keith Van Horn will be substituted for George after all if they can't convince George to go:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3246325

[jason]

van horn still plays for the mavs ?? wow...

[crzyjournalist03]

Originally posted by jason
van horn still plays for the mavs ?? wow...

apparently he's never actually filed retirement papers, meaning the Mavs still hold his rights.

[Maroon87]

Source: Stackhouse can be in Kidd trade, but can't go back
By Chris Broussard
ESPN The Magazine

The chances of Jason Kidd wearing a Dallas Mavericks uniform this season are shrinking by the day.



First, Devean George refused to consent to the trade to New Jersey. Now, according to a league source, the league will not allow the Mavericks to bring back Jerry Stackhouse if he is traded and subsequently waived by the New Jersey Nets.



According to one league source, the NBA has already made one of the teams aware of its position.



"The league has taken Stackhouse out of the deal," the source said. "They said, 'He can be in the trade, but he can't go back to Dallas after that."'



A call asking for comment from NBA league officials was not immediately returned.



The willingness of Mavericks owner Mark Cuban to include Stackhouse in the trade was based on his knowledge that New Jersey would immediately buy him out of his contract, which would allow Stackhouse to re-sign with Dallas after 30 days.



It was Stackhouse's brazen response to the potential trade on Wednesday that first put the league on notice.



"I get 30 days to rest, then I'll be right back,'' Stackhouse told The Associated Press on Wednesday in response to the proposed trade. "I ain't going nowhere."



Neither apparently is George. Mark Bartelstein, George's agent, said this afternoon that his client is no longer thinking of rescinding his decision. George's refusal is based on the fact that a trade would cost him his "early Bird rights" and therefore the bulk of his leverage as a free agent this summer.



"Anything is possible, but as of now, it's not something Devean's considering," Bartelstein said.



The Mavericks, whose locker room could be in shambles if the Kidd deal doesn't go through, are desperately seeking other alternatives. They are looking at replacing Stackhouse and George in the trade with Trenton Hassell and Keith Van Horn.



But a person with knowledge of the talks said the Nets are leery of taking Hassell because he has two seasons, worth a total of $8.6 million, remaining on his contract after this season.



The source added that while other teams, most notably Cleveland and Denver, are pursuing Kidd, there is no other "realistic" destination out there, and that Kidd would most likely remain with the Nets if nothing can be worked out with Dallas.



The 30-day rule was added to the league's collective bargaining agreement as a response to a trade between Boston and Atlanta in 2005. In that deal, Boston sent Gary Payton to Atlanta to reacquire Antoine Walker with the understanding that the Hawks would immediately waive Payton, who then re-signed with Boston three days later.



The league frowned on this move, and instituted the 30-day rule. By flouting the rule so publicly, Stackhouse may have given the league no choice but to eliminate him from the deal or prevent the Mavericks from re-signing him.



"If Stackhouse had kept quiet, the league would not have been able to prove anything," a Western Conference executive said.



The executive added that team owners have been calling commissioner David Stern to complain about the Stackhouse part of the deal, and that several GMs would have been incensed if he had allowed the trade -- and subsequent return of Stackhouse to Dallas -- to go through.



"Every GM from a potential playoff team in the Western Conference is complaining about this,'' the executive said. "If the league allows this trade to go through, it'll have a major credibility issue on its hands. Our collective bargaining agreement's not worth anything if this goes through.''



Chris Broussard covers the NBA for ESPN The Magazine.

[JR2004]

Yep...I was right and the comments made by Stackhouse are what screwed this up. Then again I actually looked up some stuff on the matter before I posted.

Heck all you had to do was look at this quote from yesterday that was in the New York Times and everyone would've known that Stern wasn't going to let Stackhouse head back to Dallas.

"The executive said it is a violation of trade rules to agree in advance to waive a player. Stackhouse’s public admission of a prearranged deal could have prompted the commissioner’s office to intervene."

And intervene he did.

[Maroon87]

I still say this is good news for Mavs fans.

If you want a precedent, remember in '94 when the Rockets traded Robert Horry to Detroit for Sean Elliott, but Sean failed his physical and the trade was nullified. The Rockets went on to win the title that year.

Sometimes it's the trades you don't make that are the best ones.

[Macarthur]

This is very disappointing. This is inexcusable sloppiness by the Mavericks. This is a perfect example of how Cuban's attitude has come back to bite him. Some other organizations might have been given a slight benefit of the doubt. It's pretty clear that the NBA will cut Cuban zero slack.

[Maroon87]

Originally posted by Macarthur
This is inexcusable sloppiness by the Mavericks. This is a perfect example of how Cuban's attitude has come back to bite him.

Agreed. Plus, Stackhouse should know better.

[Emerson1]

Originally posted by Macarthur
This is very disappointing. This is inexcusable sloppiness by the Mavericks. This is a perfect example of how Cuban's attitude has come back to bite him. Some other organizations might have been given a slight benefit of the doubt. It's pretty clear that the NBA will cut Cuban zero slack.
I agree that it was sloppy. Even if someone is publicly crying to be traded you can't just assume they will go. Don't see how Cuban's attitude has anything to do it. If anything Cuban and Donnie Nelson have been some of the greatest front office people in the league for a few years now.

[Emerson1]

I don't get how they can block it. If Cuban has said we expect him back then I see how, but Stack was just saying how he will likely resign with them after he is bought out.

[kepdawg]

Originally posted by Emerson1
I don't get how they can block it. If Cuban has said we expect him back then I see how, but Stack was just saying how he will likely resign with them after he is bought out.

I think it's pretty simple. Nobody outside of the Nets organization should have been aware of their intentions to buyout Stackhouse.

It looks like Van Horn may be headed towards a big pay day!

[Emerson1]

"Mr. Stackhouse, did you at any time have any knowlege of a pre-arranged deal to buy you out so that in 30 days you could sign back with Dallas?"

"No"

"Thank you for your time"


They can't prove anything.