I know there are a few threads like this, but I thought I'd start a new one just to get some thoughts down. There are really three paths the Nets can take: (1) nothing; (2) a complete tear-down with a long-term plan to rebuild slowly through the development of Sean/Boone/Marcus and future draft picks; and (3) acquiring a major piece without completely tearing apart the roster, using assets such as young players, expiring contracts, and draft picks. Thorn's comments make it clear that he prefers track #3. He wants to become a contender next year--he's not interested in the slow rebuild. That suggests, of course, that he will actively shop around the lottery pick and the two Williamses, because they can't help the Nets become a contender immediately. Perhaps a package of the pick, a Williams, Swift, and Hassell for a $12 million post player--you all know the story. let's ignore the possiblility of dealing RJ for a moment. Of course, it takes two teams to make a deal. The only teams that realistically would be interested in trading a major part for draft picks and still-developing youth are those that are interested in track #2--slowly building around young players. If we assume that none of the West conference playoff teams are interested in that route--because all of them can realistically say that they are just one small piece away from a championship, that the top five or six East conference teams aren't interested in that route, that major market teams like the heat and the Knicks aren't interested in that route, who does that leave as potential trade partners? Seattle, Memphis, the Clippers, Charlotte, Atlanta, Indiana, Chicago, Milwaukee, Minnesota, Portland, Sacramento, and maybe Golden State. Most of these teams have already purged themselves of their high-profile talent for youth, and are now just waiting for that youth to develop. The question is, other than Brand, who do these teams have that could possibly be targets for the Nets? Drew Gooden? Troy Murphy? Al Harrington? Brad Miller? Is there anyone I'm missing? JON???? You come away with the impression that there are very few legitimate targets for the Nets this offseason. It seems self-evident that Brand has to be the top target. Harrington is good, but if they're worried about Sean being big enough to play PF consistently, I can't imagine anything different. Those other guys don't help.
I had my doubts about Brand, but he clearly recovered nicely. I can't see them going after Al Harrington, too much green for a bench player.
The Clippers have to realisticly be thinking about some form of rebuild now. Unless they land a top pick and can add Rose. Especially if Maggette leaves. Mobley will be 33 at the start of next season and is very much in decline. Cassell is gone. Who knows how well Livingston will come back (considering the extent of the injury I think he has Jay Williams written all over him). Knight will be 33. Thomas is 31. They have 2 really good young players in Kaman and Thornton. If they can add a quality young PG (**cough Marcus cough**) and a quality SG (lottery pick) it would be good for them. Unless they feel they can make a splash in free agency, but it's a pretty shitty free agent class this summer. What Brand wants to do and what that team wants to do this summer is going to be very interesting.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Universe @ Apr 18 2008, 10:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wouldn't mind Gooden. He seems good in the post on offense.</div> The addition of Gooden wouldn't make the team a contender. It would be a wasted effort. Window dressing.
If the Nets keep RJ, I could see someone like Murphy being a big help because he has good range on his shot and can actually make a move to the basket off a fake. Unlike Boki, he rebounds and has the length and weight to offer some kind of post positional defense, so he wouldn't be a big liability on one end. But he's got a long, large contract, and I don't think he's a sound investment overall. I think the presence of Devin on this team HAS to change the thinking in terms of needs. When it was Kidd, RJ, & Carter, you had really only two offensive threats off the dribble, and, even though many thought Jefferson and Carter too similar, their co-existence could be defended on the grounds that you need SOME redundancy in dribble penetrators just to deal with the inevitabilities of resting players and dealing with foul and injury problems. With Devin, you now have another penetrator who is markedly better as a playmaker/passer than RJ, so he has and sees options that contribute more to team involvement in the offense and that make the need for outstanding outside shooters more critical. Yet he and Vince together still give you the needed redundancy in penetrator/playmakers, and Vince is certainly an adequate outside opportunity shooter, much more consistent over his career in that regard than RJ. So, to me, it's clear as day that, after the Harris trade, you have to move RJ's skillset and salary in order to get the type of talent you need most: knockdown outside-shooting wings OR a versatile bigman that can both score and defend. I read something about the Bulls' legion problems this year. Not a good situation there, and I have a feeling they will do something a little unexpected this summer to change the chemistry on that team. Ben Gordon via S&T is an option the Nets should consider in exchange for a pick and a young player. I wouldn't mind them trying to work Gooden into a bigger deal, as he could obviously provide the Nets with a reasonable (if not earth-shattering) two-way big man.
The addition of Brand doesn't make the Nets better than Detroit or Boston now, and would result in them giving up the youth/cap space they need to compete in the future with teams like Orlando and Philadelphia. It basically makes them a better version of the Wizards.
It would be nice if the Nets could somehow get Mike Miller which would make RJ very expandable for someone like Brand. If you bring in Miller and Brand things would look good IMO. I'm just not sure what players would need to be traded from the Nets to get those two players. For Miller the Grizzlies are most likely going to be looking for young talent, capspace and/or picks. Maybe send Stromile back to them since he's expiring. Brand could possibly be had for RJ + picks and/or young players. A starting line up of: Devin Harris Vince Carter Mike Miller Elton Brand Josh Boone is good enough to compete with most of the teams in the East. At the same time I still don't think it would be enough to get over Boston or Detroit. If the Nets want to put themselves in the Boston/Detroit category they will have to acquire two all-stars to go along with Vince or Jefferson. Vince and Brand are nice and would likely complement eachother well but they would still need one more BIG impact player.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Balla 15 @ Apr 18 2008, 01:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>It would be nice if the Nets could somehow get Mike Miller which would make RJ very expandable for someone like Brand. If you bring in Miller and Brand things would look good IMO. I'm just not sure what players would need to be traded from the Nets to get those two players. For Miller the Grizzlies are most likely going to be looking for young talent, capspace and/or picks. Maybe send Stromile back to them since he's expiring. Brand could possibly be had for RJ + picks and/or young players. A starting line up of: Devin Harris Vince Carter Mike Miller Elton Brand Josh Boone is good enough to compete with most of the teams in the East. At the same time I still don't think it would be enough to get over Boston or Detroit. If the Nets want to put themselves in the Boston/Detroit category they will have to acquire two all-stars to go along with Vince or Jefferson. Vince and Brand are nice and would likely complement eachother well but they would still need one more BIG impact player.</div> I LOVE Mike Miller, always have since his rookie year in Orlando. When you look at this guy's shot charts over his career, and especially for the last 3-4, it's just mind boggling his consistency as a shooter. If I could wave a wand to get one player here at SF to replace RJ, it would be Miller. (Elsewhere I proposed a 3-team deal that included RJ going to the Clippers, Maggette and a NJ first rounder going to Memphis, and Miller coming here. Maggette would likely opt out, meaning Memphis would save all of Miller's 18M+ over the next two years while getting a first rounder for him.) From what I've observed, Miller is not a good individual defender, and I'm sure RJ would do a much better job against physical SF's like LeBron. But Miller is smart and would likely be a good team defender (on a team that actually cared about defense), and he is a much better ball handler and passer than RJ. And the icing is that he's $4M/year cheaper and his contract expires in 2010.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Apr 18 2008, 12:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Universe @ Apr 18 2008, 10:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wouldn't mind Gooden. He seems good in the post on offense.</div> The addition of Gooden wouldn't make the team a contender. It would be a wasted effort. Window dressing. </div> Say we package Carter or Jefferson for a deal of Deng or Gordon and also happen to pick up Gooden, then it wouldn't be half bad. Not many names out there are going to make us contenders.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ Apr 18 2008, 12:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I think the presence of Devin on this team HAS to change the thinking in terms of needs. When it was Kidd, RJ, & Carter, you had really only two offensive threats off the dribble, and, even though many thought Jefferson and Carter too similar, their co-existence could be defended on the grounds that you need SOME redundancy in dribble penetrators just to deal with the inevitabilities of resting players and dealing with foul and injury problems. With Devin, you now have another penetrator who is markedly better as a playmaker/passer than RJ, so he has and sees options that contribute more to team involvement in the offense and that make the need for outstanding outside shooters more critical. Yet he and Vince together still give you the needed redundancy in penetrator/playmakers, and Vince is certainly an adequate outside opportunity shooter, much more consistent over his career in that regard than RJ. So, to me, it's clear as day that, after the Harris trade, you have to move RJ's skillset and salary in order to get the type of talent you need most: knockdown outside-shooting wings OR a versatile bigman that can both score and defend.</div> I was just wondering, if the Nets were able to get a big like Brand, then would a speedy PG like Harris work best or a better shooting, halfcourt PG like Billups? Would you prefer to have a guy like Billups in the halfcourt with Brand or would Harris work better? And would you do a trade of Billups for Harris even?
This doesn't seem like a popular option, but I choose (1) nothing. A long term rebuild is unlikely to succeed and a terrible idea. A shakeup would be great if Thorn can make it happen, but I just don't think other teams are eager to give up quality big men either with or without requiring an excessive package in return. We'd want someone with strong post offense, good rebounding and at least average defense. Players like that are fairly uncommon and teams are not quick to let them go. Someone with locker room or off court issues might be available, but we don't need that. At least in terms of quantity, the Nets have the best group of bigs they've had in years. It's possible that Williams, Krstic, Boone and even Swift could be better next year, and Diop is already a solid rotation player. Bring Krstic and Diop back, and develop the players you already have. Much of the worst stretches the Nets had this season came with only one of these players on the floor (I'd be curious to see stats on that). Keep two true bigs on the floor at all times and develop them. With the draft picks, definitely get at least one wing or combo guard with good outside shooting. At the tenth pick the best available player may not fit that description. Still, I would prefer not to get a project big man unless the front office is confident he will not be a bust. Whether through the draft, free agency or trades, bring it at least two shooters. Jefferson, Carter, and Harris have been playing a lot of minutes, and that isn't a good thing. Cut Jefferson down to about 30 - 34 minutes per game so he can put energy towards defense again. Also, stop running isos for Jefferson. Some fans seem to think there's something the Nets can do this offseason to guarantee a championship in the next few years. There isn't. Get over it. Just add some shooting off the bench, develop and use our players better, and next season let's see what we have.
Wait, what exactly can Brand do this summer? If he has an option, and can opt out, wouldn't that be bad for us? Cause we cant offer that type of money for him with are cap.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jtballa2o1 @ Apr 18 2008, 05:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wait, what exactly can Brand do this summer? If he has an option, and can opt out, wouldn't that be bad for us? Cause we cant offer that type of money for him with are cap.</div> If he opts out and wants to sign here we can try and get him via a sign and trade with the Clippers. He can somewhat force their hand if he gets offers from teams under the cap by saying he can sign with one of them and they'll get nothing.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NOMAM @ Apr 18 2008, 02:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I was just wondering, if the Nets were able to get a big like Brand, then would a speedy PG like Harris work best or a better shooting, halfcourt PG like Billups? Would you prefer to have a guy like Billups in the halfcourt with Brand or would Harris work better? And would you do a trade of Billups for Harris even?</div> Because of the age difference (when the next season starts, Billups will be 32, Harris 25), I would not swap them in the scenario you mention UNLESS the Nets also obtained someone like a Mike Miller (a consistent, versatile, hot-shooting, starting-caliber veteran for the 3 spot) and were also able to maintain bench depth with at least one double-point scoring wing and a reliable backup PG. If you were able to load the team that successfully, I think it would be worth the risk to swap Devin for Billups because I definitely see Billups as better suited for a halfcourt offense with players like Brand and Carter. And he obviously knows how to perform his best in big games. But those three would still need significant support, so I don't do it without other, substantial moves.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Apr 18 2008, 07:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If we assume that none of the West conference playoff teams are interested in that route--because all of them can realistically say that they are just one small piece away from a championship, that the top five or six East conference teams aren't interested in that route, that major market teams like the heat and the Knicks aren't interested in that route, who does that leave as potential trade partners? Seattle, Memphis, the Clippers, Charlotte, Atlanta, Indiana, Chicago, Milwaukee, Minnesota, Portland, Sacramento, and maybe Golden State. Most of these teams have already purged themselves of their high-profile talent for youth, and are now just waiting for that youth to develop.</div> I've gone through this exercise several times since February. I agree with your assessments for the most part but have a slightly different list of teams that I think would be willing to make a big trade (though not necessarily a trade of their top one or two players): Chicago Indiana Milwaukee New York Toronto Charlotte Miami Memphis Portland Utah Seattle Golden State L.A. Clippers Sacramento MAYBE the L.A. Lakers (Odom) I include Toronto, for example, because I bet they would be very keen to land a Corey Maggette or Richard Jefferson, and Dave D. seemed to imply as much about RJ just recently. Especially in view of the personality and preferences of their coach, they need players with harder noses and an affinity for the paint. I include Utah because they definitely look like a team that could use a different SF than Kirilinko, and his salary and problems with the coach are reasons why he's said to be available. I come at this from the angle of wanting to keep Vince and Devin but being willing to give up any other combination of players and picks for the right return. That's not to say I hope to see 12 new players on the team next year. But I think a healthy Vince is still plenty good enough to build around short term (i.e., with veterans not locked into long contracts). I see Devin as a key, secondary creator and two-way player that would be an asset in any style of play. What Vince needs most to maximize his offensive game and make his team most effective (and something he's only come close to having once, when Del Curry and Dee Brown teamed with him in Toronto) are lights out 3-point shooters. It's simply crazy to ask a guy to repeatedly take on 2 and often 3 or more defenders any time he posts or puts the ball down because the opposition doesn't really fear the consequences of leaving the perimeter open. He also needs a big who can track the ball, create passing angles and finish strong off a dish, and clean up on the offensive boards. Boone is close to giving this now, and, given his rapid growth, he may be that player as soon as next year. Right now, though, he still is not as consistently strong catching and finishing as he needs to be and is not nearly good enough capitalizing from the free throw line. I would rather move Sean than Boone, but, if Boone was part of the price for a guy who could give the Nets what he gives and more, I wouldn't hesitate to include him in a deal. To summarize, then, I would design any series of trades around two mandates: bring back a two-way big man with an inside scoring and defensive presence and at least two lights out shooters, one of whom must be versatile enough to start at the 3 and pull his weight defensively. I would be willing to keep Swift through the opening of the season but only because I think his expiring contract could be an important asset for another key move at the deadline. If he stays to next season, Hassell must be moved this summer. I would try to get as much of this done between the lottery and draft night as possible so that FA decisions could be framed by a more complete picture of team needs. Dumpy, in hopes of continuing your very organized, structured way of going about this, I'm going to look through the rosters of the above teams and throw out the names that most intrigue me, maybe including a few specific proposals.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ Apr 18 2008, 06:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Apr 18 2008, 07:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If we assume that none of the West conference playoff teams are interested in that route--because all of them can realistically say that they are just one small piece away from a championship, that the top five or six East conference teams aren't interested in that route, that major market teams like the heat and the Knicks aren't interested in that route, who does that leave as potential trade partners? Seattle, Memphis, the Clippers, Charlotte, Atlanta, Indiana, Chicago, Milwaukee, Minnesota, Portland, Sacramento, and maybe Golden State. Most of these teams have already purged themselves of their high-profile talent for youth, and are now just waiting for that youth to develop.</div> I've gone through this exercise several times since February. I agree with your assessments for the most part but have a slightly different list of teams that I think would be willing to make a big trade (though not necessarily a trade of their top one or two players): Chicago Indiana Milwaukee New York Toronto Charlotte Miami Memphis Portland Utah Seattle Golden State L.A. Clippers Sacramento MAYBE the L.A. Lakers (Odom) I include Toronto, for example, because I bet they would be very keen to land a Corey Maggette or Richard Jefferson, and Dave D. seemed to imply as much about RJ just recently. Especially in view of the personality and preferences of their coach, they need players with harder noses and an affinity for the paint. I include Utah because they definitely look like a team that could use a different SF than Kirilinko, and his salary and problems with the coach are reasons why he's said to be available. I come at this from the angle of wanting to keep Vince and Devin but being willing to give up any other combination of players and picks for the right return. That's not to say I hope to see 12 new players on the team next year. But I think a healthy Vince is still plenty good enough to build around short term (i.e., with veterans not locked into long contracts). I see Devin as a key, secondary creator and two-way player that would be an asset in any style of play. What Vince needs most to maximize his offensive game and make his team most effective (and something he's only come close to having once, when Del Curry and Dee Brown teamed with him in Toronto) are lights out 3-point shooters. It's simply crazy to ask a guy to repeatedly take on 2 and often 3 or more defenders any time he posts or puts the ball down because the opposition doesn't really fear the consequences of leaving the perimeter open. He also needs a big who can track the ball, create passing angles and finish strong off a dish, and clean up on the offensive boards. Boone is close to giving this now, and, given his rapid growth, he may be that player as soon as next year. Right now, though, he still is not as consistently strong catching and finishing as he needs to be and is not nearly good enough capitalizing from the free throw line. I would rather move Sean than Boone, but, if Boone was part of the price for a guy who could give the Nets what he gives and more, I wouldn't hesitate to include him in a deal. To summarize, then, I would design any series of trades around two mandates: bring back a two-way big man with an inside scoring and defensive presence and at least two lights out shooters, one of whom must be versatile enough to start at the 3 and pull his weight defensively. I would be willing to keep Swift through the opening of the season but only because I think his expiring contract could be an important asset for another key move at the deadline. If he stays to next season, Hassell must be moved this summer. I would try to get as much of this done between the lottery and draft night as possible so that FA decisions could be framed by a more complete picture of team needs. Dumpy, in hopes of continuing your very organized, structured way of going about this, I'm going to look through the rosters of the above teams and throw out the names that most intrigue me, maybe including a few specific proposals. </div> Thanks, that's very thorough--one comment though: I was only considering deals structured around the lottery pick and one of the Williamses. I agree that there would be other potential trade partners for RJ. RJ could be seen as the "last piece" for a number of teams looking to upgrade at SF, and those teams will have a different agenda that the teams interested in the pick+Williams package. I am really expecting the pick to be dealt at this point, but because there seem to be so few potential targets that could really improve the team [for the pick], it's quite possible that nothing will happen. To be honest, though, I wouldn't be surprised if Thorn does both: deals the pick plus a Williams for immediate help, and then turns around and deals RJ for a younger Sf with different skills, while getting a pick back as well. I agree that RJ could go to Utah, Toronto, Golden State, etc. in such a deal. Incidentally, talking about shooters, I wonder if Juan Carlos Navarro is available, with the way Memphis jerked him around.
