From Don Ohlmeyer (ESPN Ombudsman)

The agenda of anonymous sources is something reporters are supposed to consider. The Associated Press cautions that “When it’s relevant, [the reporter must] describe the source’s motive for disclosing the information.” But how often is motivation deemed relevant enough to be included in a story? Often, it seems, the description of the source is the one that gives the most credence to the source’s relative expertise … all without actually exposing identity.

There’s no question that anonymous sources lead journalists to valuable information and that their motives can be pure — to right an injustice, to call the public’s attention to outrageous behavior, to correct dangerous situations, to shine a light on corruption. And there’s also no question that sometimes, if the source is to avoid retribution, the only way this can be done is anonymously.

But they can also be used to further personal agendas that harm others, benefit the source and/or mislead the audience — agents attempting to create a bidding war for their clients, players attempting to undermine their coaches, disgruntled or former employees seeking revenge, conferences attempting to poach new members, rivals looking to denigrate one another, etc.

With the start of free agency (yes, the start … as in no one should expect this free agency period to end for a few weeks) less than 48 hours away, the pace of updates on who is going where (as well as where they aren’t going) is frantic and almost manic, to say the least.   And with a 24/7 news cycle (fueled by sports news networks, talk radio, the internet, Twitter, blogs, etc.), we can all expect the rate of back and forth clamor of “news”, “leaks”, etc. to increase even more.

With that said, take these updates from reporters and their anonymous sources with a grain of salt.  Let’s let this thing play out.  Then we can celebrate or complain as much as we want.

The Portland Trailblazers are threatening litigation against any team that signs Darius Miles for the sake of simply ruining the Blazers salary cap outlook going forward. If Miles plays in two more games, the Blazers will have the final two years, $18 million tacked back onto their cap number.

Truthfully, I feel bad for Miles, who has come all the way back from injury to ready himself to play in the NBA again. It is a shame that there has to be a “situation” surrounding his comeback attempt.

Marc Berman wrote a piece about Jason Kidd’s impending free agency and whether he would be willing to come play for the Knicks on their MLE. At 35, Kidd is averaging 8.6 ppg, 8.3 apg, and 6.5 rpg, while still swiping 2.5 spg.

Look, if Kidd was willing to play for the MLE, I would not mind having him. He is a future HOF, in my opinion, and he might have been the best player in Nets history. Much like John Stockton in the 90′s, Kidd defined the meaning of “pure point guard” for the first half off this decade (Nash might have claimed that from him over the last couple of years, and Deron and Paul are taking it from here on out). But with Chris Duhon in place, we might be better suited to fill a need with our MLE than to go out of our way to sign Kidd. Speaking of veterans who will be FAs this off-season, I wonder if Rasheed Wallace will be willing to sign for the MLE. His signing would alleviate the pressure of having to sign Chris Bosh the following off-season.

Lastly, the Bulls are desperately trying to deal off guard Larry Hughes. I do not like Hughes much, and if we thought that players like Nate and Al Harrington could be erratic, then Hughes might make them look like the aforementioned Jason Kidd. But he can handle the ball, and his contract expires after next season. A deal involving Eddy Curry and Larry Hughes would be the only way I would touch Hughes. And if any deal could extend to include a player like Drew Gooden (or dare I mention J Noah), then I would strongly consider taking on Hughes, if for nothing else, than to create more cap space.

TKB has reached out to several well-placed sources in the Bay Area, all of whom say trade discussions regarding the Knicks and Al Harrington are, not surprisingly, dead.

We noted that the Knicks would be unlikely to include David Lee in any talks, but we offered up the idea of including Nate Robinson and, to a man, sources said they don’t think Mullin or Nellie would feel comfortable moving forward with Nate and Monta Ellis in the backcourt, from a size standpoint. They are looking for frontcourt help, but not in the form of Eddy Curry, whom Nellie is NOT fond of in the least.

The Warriors would listen to offers including a bigger guard to pair with Ellis past this season, but at this point are comfortable sticking with Harrington for the time being.

Tim Kawakami of the Left Coast’s Mercury News feels the Warriors could use a point guard and he wants, you guessed it, Jamal Crawford.

There are point guards out there within reach. My current choice would be the New York Knicks’ Jamal Crawford, a big, scoring point guard who may be trade bait as the Knicks seek to dump salary.

If the Warriors offered Al Harrington (big contract that expires in 2010, right when LeBron James and Dwyane Wade can be free agents) and a protected future No. 1 pick, and took back Crawford and the horrible contract of Zach Randolph, would the Knicks bite? They might.

Crawford can be erratic and he’s not the commander-on-the-court that Baron is, but Crawford is a giant talent worth a look if there is money to spend.

Not a bad fit here and yes, we’d bite. In fact, we’d eat the whole friggin’ pie.

Harrington, a Jersey kid, would absolutely excel in this structure, as he has developed into a solid inside/out jump shooter that could take some heat off the post, all the while getting a pick, protected or not, and dumping salary? Too good to be true.

***With Davis gone, the Warriors are under the cap, so salaries don’t have to match***