Here's a trade: http://www.realgm.com/src_tradechecker/3/ RJ and this year's Dallas 1st rounder for Al Harrington and Marco Belinelli. Harrington would bring scoring and offensive versatility to the 4 spot and free us up to acquire a vet wing (yes, I'm plugging Mike Miller again) through trade or FA. If there's someone we really like at 10 and think can make us immediately better, we take him, otherwise trade down to take one of the "safe" prospects that Dumpy identified as fitting the Nets draft mold (Buddinger, CDR). I've never watched Belinelli, but he tore up summer league last year and had draft profiles identifying him as a sleeper with good all-round talent and excellent prospects as a shooter. Played in some big games in Euro league and is only 22. http://www.nbadraft.net/admincp/profiles/marcobelinelli.html http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Marco-Belinelli-198/
The Warriors moved Richardson this past summer because of his salary, so I doubt they bring in a contract like Jefferson's. They have a lot of their own players to extend in the next couple years.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 24 2008, 01:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Where does RJ play for Golden State? Monta and SJax are the starting wings</div> Nelson likes a punch off the bench (as do most intelligent coaches), so he could look to bring Monta off the bench. I think that kid's ego is up to it. And he'd still get his normal minutes as he'd continue to backup at the point and play the entire time that one of RJ or Jackson were on the bench. However Chutney raises a good point in that, if salary dump was the main reason for ridding the team of Richardson, rather than trying to spread the talent around with the acquisition of a lottery level big, it makes little sense for them to get Jefferson. Here's a counter trade proposal, which should appeal if they are concerned about money since it saves them a good amount of $: trade Van Horn, Swift, and NJ's own 2008 1st rounder for Harrington. According to the trade checker, the Nets would have to wait to consummate this trade until after the deadline for Swift to claim his option, which I believe is June 30th. So they would be drafting for Golden State and trading a few days later.
I don't think highly enough of Al Harrington to give up a lottery pick for him and I doubt any team does. Although for the anti-Frank crowd, having a starting lineup with Harris, Vince, RJ and Harrington would certainly cause Frank to have significant heart problems during the season. As for Monta, he will be getting a new contract this summer and with the amount of dollars he will command, I can't see the Warriors using him as a 6th man. Especially since Mullin is building for the future around him.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 24 2008, 02:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't think highly enough of Al Harrington to give up a lottery pick for him and I doubt any team does. Although for the anti-Frank crowd, having a starting lineup with Harris, Vince, RJ and Harrington would certainly cause Frank to have significant heart problems during the season. As for Monta, he will be getting a new contract this summer and with the amount of dollars he will command, I can't see the Warriors using him as a 6th man. Especially since Mullin is building for the future around him.</div> Who do you see available at #10 in THIS year's draft that you believe, to a high degree of certainty, will ever be a better player than Harrington? And even if you see one, how long do believe it will take for him to become better than Al? If a #10 is too high, fine. Offer the Dallas pick at 21. But I predict most GMs would not seriously consider an offer consisting only of expiring contracts and a 21st for a 28 year-old, 6'9"/250 pound forward versatile enough to play the 4 or the 3, who has a few decent moves close to the basket, and who made 280 3s on 40% shooting in the last two years. And I personally think that a fair number of players picked at 10 over the years don't turn out to be as good as Harrington.
I have to go deep into the second round to consistently find players I don't project as being being better than Al Harrington. Yes there will be first rounders picked won't be better than him, but that happens. If only Harrington was actually as good as you describe him. He is one of many players that look much better on paper than they really are. You did leave off his flares up with Nellie, his lack of defense and the general disdain that Warriors fans have for him. As an example, Ryan Gomes and Craig Smith don't put up the pretty numbers or have the physical measurables that Harrington does, but they are both more valuable players.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ Apr 24 2008, 01:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Here's a trade: http://www.realgm.com/src_tradechecker/3/ RJ and this year's Dallas 1st rounder for Al Harrington and Marco Belinelli. Harrington would bring scoring and offensive versatility to the 4 spot and free us up to acquire a vet wing (yes, I'm plugging Mike Miller again) through trade or FA. If there's someone we really like at 10 and think can make us immediately better, we take him, otherwise trade down to take one of the "safe" prospects that Dumpy identified as fitting the Nets draft mold (Buddinger, CDR). I've never watched Belinelli, but he tore up summer league last year and had draft profiles identifying him as a sleeper with good all-round talent and excellent prospects as a shooter. Played in some big games in Euro league and is only 22. http://www.nbadraft.net/admincp/profiles/marcobelinelli.html http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Marco-Belinelli-198/</div> I've watched Al Harrington over the past couple years, and you don't want him here. He's not a bad player, by any means, but he's one of those players that will really frustrate you. Not because he's a bad guy, but just because he doesn't do what he seems like he can do. He'll show flashes... a post move here and there, a great drive and finish, but he is what he is: a very streaky shooter, who's too weak to play in the post and isn't always effective on the drive/face up. Defense is sometimes great, most times not. It's like what Cpaw said. His numbers and measurements look great on paper, but he is not the player the Nets need.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I have to go deep into the second round to consistently find players I don't project as being being better than Al Harrington. Yes there will be first rounders picked won't be better than him, but that happens. If only Harrington was actually as good as you describe him. He is one of many players that look much better on paper than they really are. You did leave off his flares up with Nellie, his lack of defense and the general disdain that Warriors fans have for him. As an example, Ryan Gomes and Craig Smith don't put up the pretty numbers or have the physical measurables that Harrington does, but they are both more valuable players.</div> As usual, you misconstrue either the issue, someone else's position, or both. It's not that I'm a huge Al Harrington fan. Far from it. But I recognize that the Nets are extremely unlikely to land any big through any means any time soon that can significantly help their inside offense, let alone one that can do so without simultaneously degrading their defense by equal or larger measure. Harrington is all-NBA defense compared to either Nachbar or Krstic and, while hardly an offensive workhorse inside, is at least credible there. He has enough touch and athleticism to get off shots inside the paint without having to be spoon fed perfectly every single time. If you feed him at the foul line with a decent beat on his man, he can put the ball on the floor with a dribble and finish with a dunk. Right now we have Nenad, who we might be able to count on for 20 footers but who, post injury, is consistently blocked by the rim when he isn't bricking, traveling, or turning it over inside. We have Williams who, for all his athleticism, is still only a sure scorer inside when fed a perfect alleyoop and who is not even a sure bet to see the court consistently under Frank. We have Swift and have/had Diop . . . do I need to explain? We have Boone, who has definitely improved catching and finishing but has a long way to go in becoming consistently good enough in that role and who still requires guards to do most of the work. Assuming the Nets draft at 10 or lower, there are thought to be prospects like DeAndre Jordan, Speights, and McGee available. If history shows anything, they are just as likely to bust as to blossom. And the latter is several years off in any case while Carter and Harris and possibly even Jefferson are here and will ensure that the Nets aren't bad enough to get an honest crack at a franchise big the next couple of years. So you give up a high risk pick for a big body that can provide offensive support NOW, while you've still got some mature perimeter talent. But by all means, I'd be happy for you to be proved correct (few or no GMs would give up a lottery pick in this draft for Harrington). That would almost have to mean that a 21st would be acceptable, and that's a no brainer for anyone but you. Harrington's contract expires in 2010 (he has an option for next year, which he would likely claim since it's significantly over the MLE. And since the draft pick deal for Harrington should also free you to move RJ for, hopefully, some quality young depth at reasonable prices, you are helping your salary situation substantially for the 2010 FA class. I know nothing of Craig Smith, but Ryan Gomes is not someone who would be very valuable to the Nets unless they underwent massive changes (and even then not much). He doesn't really have an NBA position and would be a poor addition unless serving as a 7th or 8th guy. The Nets need 7th and 8th guys, but they need a guy much more who's 6'9" or better with the weight, length, and quickness to offer some defensive resistance inside and still be a threat to hit shots that aren't spoon fed him.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ Apr 24 2008, 05:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>As usual, you misconstrue either the issue, someone else's position, or both. It's not that I'm a huge Al Harrington fan.</div> I never said or insinuated that you were a huge fan of Al Harrington. I simply said he isn't as good as he looks on paper. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Far from it. But I recognize that the Nets are extremely unlikely to land any big through any means any time soon that can significantly help their inside offense, let alone one that can do so without simultaneously degrading their defense by equal or larger measure. Harrington is all-NBA defense compared to either Nachbar or Krstic and, while hardly an offensive workhorse inside, is at least credible there. He has enough touch and athleticism to get off shots inside the paint without having to be spoon fed perfectly every single time. If you feed him at the foul line with a decent beat on his man, he can put the ball on the floor with a dribble and finish with a dunk. Right now we have Nenad, who we might be able to count on for 20 footers but who, post injury, is consistently blocked by the rim when he isn't bricking, traveling, or turning it over inside. We have Williams who, for all his athleticism, is still only a sure scorer inside when fed a perfect alleyoop and who is not even a sure bet to see the court consistently under Frank. We have Swift and have/had Diop . . . do I need to explain? We have Boone, who has definitely improved catching and finishing but has a long way to go in becoming consistently good enough in that role and who still requires guards to do most of the work.</div> The things you describe that Harrington can do, he doesn't do consistently. Obviously you won't believe me, but look at what kdub posted. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Assuming the Nets draft at 10 or lower, there are thought to be prospects like DeAndre Jordan, Speights, and McGee available. If history shows anything, they are just as likely to bust as to blossom.</div> Well sure, if you are going to list guys that I wouldn't draft like those, I then yes I'd trade the pick for Al Harrington. I'd take DJ White (a second round pick) over Al because I know he is going to give full effort every day. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>And the latter is several years off in any case while Carter and Harris and possibly even Jefferson are here and will ensure that the Nets aren't bad enough to get an honest crack at a franchise big the next couple of years. So you give up a high risk pick for a big body that can provide offensive support NOW, while you've still got some mature perimeter talent.</div> In theory that works, but Al Harrington isn't that reality. Boki is a more consistent player than Al. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>But by all means, I'd be happy for you to be proved correct (few or no GMs would give up a lottery pick in this draft for Harrington). That would almost have to mean that a 21st would be acceptable, and that's a no brainer for anyone but you.</div> Very few teams wanted to sign Al when he was a free agent just a few summers ago and he ended up taking less than he wanted to go back to Indiana. This was after averaging 18 & 7 for two seasons as a starter. In the past two drafts we've seen Jason Richardson, Ray Allen and Shane Battier traded for lottery picks. While Battier has less impressive stats than Al, he plays top notch defense and consistently plays hard every night. History is not on the side of a player like Al getting traded for a lottery pick. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Harrington's contract expires in 2010 (he has an option for next year, which he would likely claim since it's significantly over the MLE. And since the draft pick deal for Harrington should also free you to move RJ for, hopefully, some quality young depth at reasonable prices, you are helping your salary situation substantially for the 2010 FA class.</div> I've got no problem simply swapping RJ for Al because of the shorter and smaller contract. I've got a problem with using a lottery pick to do it. Then, we still have the issue of convincing Golden State to make such a trade for a player that doesn't fit their salary structure. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I know nothing of Craig Smith, but Ryan Gomes is not someone who would be very valuable to the Nets unless they underwent massive changes (and even then not much). He doesn't really have an NBA position and would be a poor addition unless serving as a 7th or 8th guy. The Nets need 7th and 8th guys, but they need a guy much more who's 6'9" or better with the weight, length, and quickness to offer some defensive resistance inside and still be a threat to hit shots that aren't spoon fed him.</div> Again you are back to describing the paper version of Al Harrington. What he gives a team on the court doesn't match the pretty picture he paints on paper. You say Gomes doesn't have an NBA position, but neither does Harrington. Neither Gomes nor Smith look good on paper, yet they both deliver consistently and provide more than just stats. Gomes would score and rebound better than Boki and play much better defense. He would be much more valuable than Harrington because you know what you are going to get from him every night.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ Apr 23 2008, 10:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Speaking of Martell Webster, what's the status on his heart issue? Purely minor and treatable with medication? And to the Portland fans that posted in this thread: Wouldn't the team rather keep Webster than Jones?</div> Websters heart issue isn't a big deal. Portland currently has 3 decent SF's in Webster, Outlaw and Jones. Outlaws value is at its highest it has ever been, but his contract is pretty attractive and he accepts his role off the bench so its hard to say if Portland really wants to trade him. Jones is a locker room leader and a great 3PT shooter. If he accepts a deal around the $4 million a year range, I see Portland keeping him. Webster has the potential to be the best out of the 3, but he is going to have a cap hold for the 09 free agency and he just might be too pricy for Portland to keep him around. Webster is somewhat inconsistent and his psyche isn't the greatest.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 24 2008, 05:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The things you describe that Harrington can do, he doesn't do consistently. Obviously you won't believe me, but look at what kdub posted.</div> All players have flaws, and inconsistency is probably the most common one. I'll still take inconsistent competence over consistent incompetence, which, save for Boone, is what our big man rotation offers. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>History is not on the side of a player like Al getting traded for a lottery pick. . . . I've got no problem simply swapping RJ for Al because of the shorter and smaller contract. I've got a problem with using a lottery pick to do it. Then, we still have the issue of convincing Golden State to make such a trade for a player that doesn't fit their salary structure.</div> Fine. I abandoned the RJ idea immediately after Chutney posted, since he offered the best rationale for why GS wouldn't go for it. I've focussed on a first round pick and expirings, willingly taking the alternate position that, if a #10 in THIS draft (which I don't think too highly of on paper) is too high for Harrington's market value, how about the 21st (or the Nets' second rounder, if you seriously think you could make that fly)? You've skipped twice over that detail in my counterproposal. Evaluating talent that deep in the draft is about as far from a science as you can get, which is why so many players drafted that low and lower (and quite a few drafted higher) don't last particularly long in the league and don't see a lot of minutes even if they do. It's also why some that were consistently passed over end up being phenomenal NBA successes, like John Stockton and Jeff Hornacek, to name just a couple. There is some skill, a lot of homework and preparation, and a good amount of sheer luck involved in making a sound pick once you get beyond the "duh" players. On the other hand there's Harrington, who is known (game-to-game inconsistency and all), and the production you can expect from him over a season is very quantifiable, stable, and reasonably substantial. You can't say the same thing for ANY player you're likely to draft at 21. The league is teaming with average players that have talents in one or two areas and liabilities in two or three others. College is runover with players that had a great one or two years in college but who simply can't compete at the level of athleticism and skill featured in the NBA, yet you can't be sure of that until they are immersed in the league and have the chance to adapt to the competition. And players in those two categories are typically what's available in the 20s. There will always be a chance to acquire these kinds of players, be they hustle players, role-playing shooters, great defenders, etc., by other means. So by forfeiting that pick, you're not very likely to give up anything that you couldn't get back in another form with any trade or FA signing using a chunk of the MLE. I'm merely proposing trading the unknown for the known and getting a PF who could UNQUESTIONABLY contribute more offensively than any Nets' front court player and could do so without simultaneously sabotaging the defense. But, hey, I'm not going to haggle on this deal. I'm not that hot to have Harrington, just throwing out ideas that might help the Nets actually make the playoffs next year (which I know is not high on your list of priorities). May I suggest that instead of simply prolonging this particular debate, why don't you propose what you think would be a reasonable trade(s) for RJ. You are always full of criticisms but woefully short on ideas.
Here is kind of an interesting trade idea based on what Golden State did last season with Richardson: Trade RJ to the Sixers who are under the cap for a large 11-13 million dollar trade exception + 08 Sixers first round pick and maybe try to pry Thaddeus Young or Jason Smith off them. The trade would also put the Nets under the cap. Thorn and Stefanski connection FTW!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ Apr 24 2008, 07:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>May I suggest that instead of simply prolonging this particular debate, why don't you propose what you think would be a reasonable trade(s) for RJ. You are always full of criticisms but woefully short on ideas.</div> I've offered several suggestions in the past, but now that we have Rod Thorn believing that he can wait out any team in trade discussions, I can't find anything that would be logically reasonable to both teams. You have to start with the really dumb GMs and work from there. The other option is a grass is greener type trade of RJ for Zach or RJ for AK-47. Zach and Vince would work for wins in the regular season, but the team would get killed in the playoffs. I can't see why Utah would make such a deal as they would get worse. Although they would save a couple of million per season. Atlanta and Chicago have dumb GM's, but unless Deng works his way out of Chicago, neither team needs a SF. As much as I want and have wanted RJ traded, he isn't easy to trade for what you want.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NOMAM @ Apr 24 2008, 08:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Here is kind of an interesting trade idea based on what Golden State did last season with Richardson: Trade RJ to the Sixers who are under the cap for a large 11-13 million dollar trade exception + 08 Sixers first round pick and maybe try to pry Thaddeus Young or Jason Smith off them. The trade would also put the Nets under the cap. Thorn and Stefanski connection FTW!</div> Why would Ed do that? Iggy and RJ would not fit well on the wings
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 24 2008, 08:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I've offered several suggestions in the past, but now that we have Rod Thorn believing that he can wait out any team in trade discussions, I can't find anything that would be logically reasonable to both teams.</div> Can you refresh my memory on what you suggested in the past? I don't recall any specific trades for RJ that you proposed, although I know you have advocated trading him (or any player) once their value seems to be at peak. And please tell me that you don't mean Zach RANDOLPH. Why in the world would anyone want that cancer on their team? I could have sworn you were among many who objected to proposed trades of Carter or Jefferson for him on that basis.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ Apr 24 2008, 10:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 24 2008, 08:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I've offered several suggestions in the past, but now that we have Rod Thorn believing that he can wait out any team in trade discussions, I can't find anything that would be logically reasonable to both teams.</div> Can you refresh my memory on what you suggested in the past? I don't recall any specific trades for RJ that you proposed, although I know you have advocated trading him (or any player) once their value seems to be at peak. And please tell me that you don't mean Zach RANDOLPH. Why in the world would anyone want that cancer on their team? I could have sworn you were among many who objected to proposed trades of Carter or Jefferson for him on that basis. </div> In February I talked about Sac (Artest and parts), Portland (Raef and Webster, would need more on each side to balance salaries) and Minny (Ratliff's expiring contract) Yes I'm talking about Zach. I don't want him anywhere near the Nets, but his low value continues to fit the Rod Thorn trade profile and he certainly fits in the Kiki fallen angels class.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 24 2008, 10:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>In February I talked about Sac (Artest and parts), Portland (Raef and Webster, would need more on each side to balance salaries) and Minny (Ratliff's expiring contract) Yes I'm talking about Zach. I don't want him anywhere near the Nets, but his low value continues to fit the Rod Thorn trade profile and he certainly fits in the Kiki fallen angels class.</div> The Portland deal might be interesting. Rather than asking what fits Thorn/Kiki profile, though, I'm asking what your thoughts are as a make-believe GM, what YOU would consider a helpful trade for the Nets and that you think had a fair chance of being accepted by the other team.
I think a trade of RJ and MWill for Ford and Kapono could help both teams. We all know that because of Calderon, Ford is expendable, and RJ is the type of player Toronto really needs the most. Then we could either swing Ford for a backup point+stuff or play Devin as a combo guard, with Ford and Kapono playing most of the rest of the time at the guard spots, and whoever we may draft. Plus a Harris/Ford combo would be ridiculously fast. Then draft like Gallinari+Hibbert or something, and sign a 2 Harris/Ford Kapono/???/Hassell Carter/Gallinari Boone/Williams Krstic/Hibbert/Swift
