<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ May 22 2008, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Sean, Devin, #10, #21, RJ and we take those contracts. Done.</div> Harris is too valuable to include in a deal like this. But you are closer than NI was. From now on, let's substitute "Durant" whereever we see "Beasley" because there isn't much difference between the quality of those two players. Maybe this will help give a more realistic view of the value of the #2 pick.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ May 22 2008, 02:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ May 22 2008, 01:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome @ May 22 2008, 01:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yeah, something like Banks, Blount, the #2 pick for Jefferson, the #10 and #21 picks. It works under the CBA, by the way. You could even add Marcus. RJ becomes a second option after Wade. Nets get a defensive oriented backup PG, a center who sucks, and Michael Beasley. Problem is what happens if Bulls take Beasley. You wind up with Rose, Harris, Banks.</div> You are dreaming. RJ isn't worth anywhere near that. </div> RJ and the #10th & 21st pick isn't worth the #2 pick and taking a couple crappy contracts? Taking those 2 contracts off Miami's hands allows them to add RJ and keep their cap space and use it more effectively. Way worth it for Miami if they are in win now mode. Not saying Miami should do it, but the exchange of values in the deal isn't that crazy. </div> Isn't RJ about the same cost both per season and overall as Beasley, Blount and Banks? Then why downgrade from Beasley to RJ?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome @ May 22 2008, 12:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yeah, something like Banks, Blount, the #2 pick for Jefferson, the #10 and #21 picks. It works under the CBA, by the way. You could even add Marcus. RJ becomes a second option after Wade. Nets get a defensive oriented backup PG, a center who sucks, and Michael Beasley. Problem is what happens if Bulls take Beasley. You wind up with Rose, Harris, Banks.</div> Which is very likely if they were drafting for need, this is why all trades involving draft picks happen after the picks are made, so if there was a deal it won't be official until after the last pick inthe trade is completed, so this proposed move won't happen until #21 is completed. So basically, if Bulls pick Rose, hand shake deal is done, if Bulls pick Beasley, Heat get their man. I'm sure this is discussed at some level...Thorn-Riley.
I'd do that deal for Rose, too. The Nets get rid of RJ and get back a HUGE asset in Rose. There is no downside to trading RJ for Rose or Beasley. Blount's contract expires after the 2009 season. I'm sure LeBron would love to play with Derrick Rose.
If you guys read the article closer, it says that: <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Because Miami owes its 2009 first-round pick to Minnesota, league rules prohibit the Heat from dealing this year's pick until after the draft.</div> I still don't see the Heat taking on RJ. They have Marion, and even if he resigns with them it will be pretty much for the same money as RJ (~$14-15M per).. and Marion is better than RJ. They need major help at PG, C and quality of their bench. We can't help any of that unless we give them Harris.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ May 22 2008, 02:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ May 22 2008, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Sean, Devin, #10, #21, RJ and we take those contracts. Done.</div> Harris is too valuable to include in a deal like this. But you are closer than NI was. From now on, let's substitute "Durant" whereever we see "Beasley" because there isn't much difference between the quality of those two players. Maybe this will help give a more realistic view of the value of the #2 pick. </div> That's too much to give up. The problem, as I see it, is that the centerpiece of the deal has to be RJ, and I doubt that the Heat value him high enough, just based on where their primary needs are.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#1_Yinka_Dare_Fan @ May 22 2008, 03:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What do you do with Harris then?</div> His trade value has never been higher. I'd rather have Beasley, but if a trade gets RJ off the books and clears space for 2010 Rose is fine, too. This is all pointless, because the proposed trade is not happening. The Nets are not getting either of those guys for RJ.
i;'d definetly do that trade. blount, sucks but we wont have to play him, banks has always been a thorn fav for some reason and beasly could be our PF we have been searching for. i'd love to get rose if he fell to us as well instead of beasly
Another thought. If The Nets trade RJ for Rose, it would make it very painless to include Harris in a S&T for LeBron. He's not going to any team if they have to gut the roster to get him, and he's not going to take less money to walk, either.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ May 22 2008, 03:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#1_Yinka_Dare_Fan @ May 22 2008, 03:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What do you do with Harris then?</div> His trade value has never been higher. I'd rather have Beasley, but if a trade gets RJ off the books and clears space for 2010 Rose is fine, too. This is all pointless, because the proposed trade is not happening. The Nets are not getting either of those guys for RJ. </div> Teams would already know Harris wasn't needed on the Nets. They'd probably get low balled, unless the Mavs come knocking on our door
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#1_Yinka_Dare_Fan @ May 22 2008, 04:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ May 22 2008, 03:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#1_Yinka_Dare_Fan @ May 22 2008, 03:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What do you do with Harris then?</div> His trade value has never been higher. I'd rather have Beasley, but if a trade gets RJ off the books and clears space for 2010 Rose is fine, too. This is all pointless, because the proposed trade is not happening. The Nets are not getting either of those guys for RJ. </div> Teams would already know Harris wasn't needed on the Nets. They'd probably get low balled, unless the Mavs come knocking on our door </div> If teams think Harris is a good asset, it won't matter why he's available. They'll just be glad he is.
The way I see it, the #10, #21, and either Marcus or Sean together are worth roughly the #5 pick. Maybe you could get the #4, maybe if the guy you want is there, you deal the package for the #6, but that's the general range. The're no way that the #5 plus RJ plus Harris is worth the #2. No way. You'd be completely overpaying, especially given the crap you'd have to take back to make the salaiers work.
I'd give #5+#40+RJ+whatever Williams is left for #2. If we get Rose, move Devin to SG, and act as a designated slasher and defender. Vince to SF (though he may not be athletic enough for that, anymore).
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ May 22 2008, 04:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The way I see it, the #10, #21, and either Marcus or Sean together are worth roughly the #5 pick. Maybe you could get the #4, maybe if the guy you want is there, you deal the package for the #6, but that's the general range. The're no way that the #5 plus RJ plus Harris is worth the #2. No way. You'd be completely overpaying, especially given the crap you'd have to take back to make the salaiers work.</div> Yeah, that's waaay off. Harris shouldn't be involved in any of these deals. There are no indications that is even a possibility.
basically, we're given the indication as of late that devin isn't going anywhere, we want to ship RJ and Marcus and whoever else. I can't see Devin being involved in this trade or any trade in the foreseable future. having rose and devin on the same team could be interesting, perhaps.
Why are we considering Harris in any trade? This doesnt make sense. First, Harris for Rose(#2 pick) isnt going to happen, people!!!! The reason why Riley is thinking of trading the pick is because the BULLS picked ROSE. Second, Harris is our PG. Thorn and Kiki have publically said that Harris is going to be our PG. Back to this possible 2 pick trade. Clearly Riley wants to win now. Remember Wade might leave in 2010 too. So like the Cavs they need to win to try to keep Wade. If Marion doesnt opt out, they have to win. Riley needs pieces to do that. Since Marion>RJ, maybe Riley would want to take VC. Wade, VC, Marion, Haslem, ? can compete with Boston, Detroit and Cavs. We get Beasley. Harris, ? , RJ, Beasley, ? will be competitive enough for 2 years with the missing pieces, Wade and S&T for Lebron for RJ. 2010 Harris, Wade, Lebron, Beasley, ? WoW!!!! I should write movies.
Time to pay attention to the news. Kiki said on NBA TV that the Nets intend to build their team around Harris. He aint going anywhere. No one smart trades their first round picks on draft night. You make the the pick and trade the rights. No restrictions on trading the rights, just the picks. The easiest deal is for RJ. It works under the CBA. Marion may opt out. If that happens, they could use a scoring SF to play along with Wade and Haslem. Losing Banks and Blount gives them flexibility. There is a precedent for all this: On June 27, 1997, Nets send the rights to Tim Thomas (#7) and Anthony Parker (#21) along with Jimmy Jackson to the Sixers for the rights to Keith Van Horn (#2), Lucious Harris, Michael Cage and Don McLean. Two picks and a good player for a #2 and players with bad contracts.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome @ May 22 2008, 04:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Time to pay attention to the news. Kiki said on NBA TV that the Nets intend to build their team around Harris. He aint going anywhere. No one smart trades their first round picks on draft night. You make the the pick and trade the rights. No restrictions on trading the rights, just the picks. The easiest deal is for RJ. It works under the CBA. Marion may opt out. If that happens, they could use a scoring SF to play along with Wade and Haslem. Losing Banks and Blount gives them flexibility. There is a precedent for all this: On June 27, 1997, Nets send the rights to Tim Thomas (#7) and Anthony Parker (#21) along with Jimmy Jackson to the Sixers for the rights to Keith Van Horn (#2), Lucious Harris, Michael Cage and Don McLean. Two picks and a good player for a #2 and players with bad contracts.</div> Nice!!!! Very close to this year. Besides the players, 7th instead of 10th is the only difference.
Would Chicago be a possibility as a trading partner? The Nets could send them Carter, Krstic, 10th pick, 21st pick for something like 1st overall pick, Hughes, and whatever other contract filler that is necessary. Nets would have Harris, Beasley and maybe Jefferson as the core to build with. Bulls would get more trading chips to try and use for a marquee bigman. Hinrich/Duhon/10th pick Carter/Gordon/Sefolosha Deng/Nocioni/21st pick Gooden/Thomas/Simmons Krstic/Noah/Gray Damn the Bulls are loaded. They could try using Gooden, Nocioni, Thomas, or a resigned Ben Gordon to get a bigman like Brand or Jermaine O'Neil.
