Inside Access: "Nurkic is that 'third guy'"

Sure thing!

Player 1 - 52.4 TS%, 28.1 USG%, 15.5 TOV%
Player 2 - 54.5 TS%, 25.6 USG%, 18.0 TOV%
Player 3 - 56.4 TS%, 33.0 USG%, 15.0 TOV%

 

At what point did we sweeten the pot with $$? And why?

 

I'd be interested in all three, but as an armchair GM, I'd also need to know their ages, injury histories, current salary and contract situation.

I'd also want to know of Player 3 is total ass hat and one of the biggest head cases in the league.

BNM

 

Player 2 is obviously Nurkic.

Player 1 is the same age as Nurk, and Player 3 is 26.

 

I'll just say it: Player 3 is Boogie.

Player 1 is also Boogie, at 22.

 

Player 3 is Boogie

 

How does getting lucky equal getting credit?

 

That low usage rate makes me wonder if he can maintain that efficiency in a larger role... but everything else looks enticing.

 

It doesn't. Learn sarcasm, then post.

 

I would say only that we need Nurk's offense as much as his defense; without an offensive threat on both sides of the pick and roll there's no improvement for Dame and CJ. I still like him best.

 

My assumption as to what happened is something like this:

1) Neil wants to make a big FA splash, eventually finds ET.
2) He matches Crabbe, and know he'll need to flip him.
3) He re-signs the rest, knowing he'll need to flip Butters (or possibly ET).

4) He knows the cost of the above is losing Plums for nothing. The cost of re-signing Crabbe and then trading him for a 1st rounder is Plums. By doing this, he's essentially trading Plums (and Crabbe) for that Crabbe 1st rounder.
5) However..... if he could trade Plums and get a first rounder, then he'd effectively get 2 1sts for Crabbe and Plums.
6) If he could get more, than all the better. He got that 1st rounder and Nurkic.

7) So, once he trades Crabbe, he'll have traded Crabbe + Plums for 2 1sts and Nurkic instead of losing Crabbe for nothing and keeping Plums - pretty damn good GMing, IMHO.
8) I'm pretty sure he had all of this in mind (except for how good Nurk would be) BEFORE he matched Crabbe.

9) The game's not over. He still has to flip Crabbe and trade Biebs. Then he can go about smoothing out the roster. A process which should be much easier with 3 1st round picks in the fold.

 

He also knew that with C.J.'s extension coming up, last summer was the one and only time he'd have cap space to use to sign free any agents. He blew his load on Turner and Ezeli, apparently the best he could do.

With such a young roster, we also had a LOT of guys (Crabbe, Leonard and Harkless) all coming off their cheap rookie contracts at exactly the same time. He, no doubt, planned on using their Bird Rights to go over the cap and re-sign all three. I don't think he counted on BRK giving Crabbe that ridiculous offer sheet. In the end, he spent right up to the luxury tax threshold to retain those three.

I agree he knew all along, with using all his available cap space to sign free agents, giving C.J. his extension and retaining his own RFA's he wouldn't be able to also retain Plumlee this summer, without moving Crabbe. Moving Leonard alone would not have been enough to retain Plumlee. Meyers makes about $10 million a year. Plumlee will get far more than that - something closer to Crabbe's $18.5 million. So, had he not flipped Plumlee for Nurkic, this summer would have come down to either trade Crabbe or let Plumlee walk for nothing. In the end, he got a hell of a lot in return for a guy we were going to lose anyway.

BNM

 

Exactly.

 

I liked the trade when it was made. I am a fan of Plums, but our team needed a defensive upgrade badly and we got that in Nurkic. Looking at the trade retrospectively, he's an absolute steal!