https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/250675/Nets-Have-Yet-To-Discuss-Extension-With-DAngelo-Russell I know we already have a glut of guards, so this probably amounts to a fart in a hurricane, but I can tell you that Neil LOVED Russell in college as a prospect. Probably would need multiple trades first, but something to... maybe(?) keep an eye on?
We have no need for a guy with his skills, much less his immaturity. Not sure if my impression of Neil can come down even further, but him being interested in Russell makes it worse.
100% disagree with the skills comment. Russell is talented, you can always use more talent. No idea on the maturity bit, and I'm not sure how you can speak so certainly to it either. Taping his teammates was not a good move but that was almost 2 years ago. People DO grow up... And as for your comment about Neil, you might as well downgrade your opinion of every other GM in the league, because Russell was a consensus top pick. That'd be like basing KP for drafting Oden. EVERY GM IN THE LEAGUE WOULD'VE DONE THE SAME THING.
Just to be clear, I'm not advocating we add Russell on top of the heap of guards we already have. But he might be an interesting trade/MLE option next offseason if we were able to trade CJ and ET, for instance.
I'm not sure I see the talent. His offensive numbers look very inefficient. And he is not a great defensive player either. Honestly I would prefer WBIV over him right now. Baldwin is more efficient and a much better defender. Russell looks to me like he is what he is--a high volume, inefficient scorer with little interest in defense.
What does it tell you when his team that is so devoid of any talent whatsoever is debating whether to extend him at all? Think you overstate his talent. He is slow and struggles to create offense. And as pointed above, he is super inefficient even if he drops 20. Shooting 41% from the field, 32 from 3, and is barely above average when you look at PER.
All fair points, I'm not entirely sold on him myself, but thought it was worth at least bringing up for discussion because, again, our GM -- at one point -- was absolutely gaga for the guy. I'm also a believer in dominance not being a fluke. The guy was a stud (and, worth noting, far more efficient) in a major college conference. I firmly believe that somewhere inside, that great player is still in there. Perhaps he's been inefficient since he's played on crap teams since being drafted -- hard to argue that points = contract $ in the NBA, if your'e going to lose anyway, why not chuck it and look out for #1? Maybe he'd fit better as a second banana -- certainly playing next to Dame wouldn't hurt? Maybe he needs a better team culture? Maybe the big cities weren't his thing (kid is from Kentucky and played at Ohio State -- neither screams NY or LA to me)... As a small market team, we can't afford to get overly picky if we really want to contend for a title. General thought: many posters on this board focus WAAAAAY too much on winning arguments, being right, etc. None of us are ever going to be an NBA GM, so maybe less focus on what the "right" idea is, and more on interesting discussion?
Whatever anyone thought Russell might become before the draft is irrelevant. What matters is his body of work in the actual NBA. Just like any other college graduate, once you establish a work record, nobody cares what you did in college. I'd rather give the Wade Baldwin/Seth Curry experiment a shot over trading for Russell. One reason is Wade's defense; another is my belief that both are more team oriented players.
