RealGM

what could brooklyn get for a package of kris humphries, teletovic and marshon brooks? 2 promising youngsters and an above average backup pf who rebounds and hustles.

i'm guessing the nets could/would also include a draft pick, depending upon the return. atl has the right to swap picks with them twice but since they aren't actually trading away a #1, i believe they can still trade one..say nothing of a second rounder.

the nets need a little more hlep to join the east's elite.....

Nothing, which is probably why they don't make a move other than a simple Hump for BG swap and then try again next season.

From your earlier Bkn-Lal trade seems like you're shopping the LA package for Pau.
Why not send Hump/Brooks to Char for Gordon/'14 2nd.
LA gets stretch 4 Teletubby from Bkn, Gordon as a solid b/u for Kobe who should be playing much more SF anyways, and a hopefully 30's pick in '14 when they'll need players but don't want cap holds.

shagadelic45 wrote:what could brooklyn get for a package of kris humphries, teletovic and marshon brooks? 2 promising youngsters and an above average backup pf who rebounds and hustles.

i'm guessing the nets could/would also include a draft pick, depending upon the return. atl has the right to swap picks with them twice but since they aren't actually trading away a #1, i believe they can still trade one..say nothing of a second rounder.

the nets need a little more hlep to join the east's elite.....

What exactly is promising about marshon brooks?

He isnt all that young at 25. he doesnt have 3 point range, he can only play 1 position,he doesnt have elite athleticism, he has a very low bbiq and understand of the game, and is a negative on defense.

he is really the most common thing in the NBA. a low ceiling volume scoring 2 who doesnt have a feel for the game or play any defense.

I really want to know why the Nets gave Humphries that deal like less than 6 months ago and are now trying to get rid of him?

What's the thought process? Did they think Hump was gonna develop more and be better or something? Did they think some other team is going to give him more money?

I think that package is worth a lot less than a lot of Nets fans think. I have to believe that Humprhey deal was meant to be a chip to get Dwight or someone big in a trade. Like when Keith Van Horn got 4M to come out of retirement, I think Humprhey benefitted in the same manner. Otherwise there is no way to justify paying him 24M over two years, while Illyasova got something like a 4/32 (?)

PetroNet wrote:

shagadelic45 wrote:what could brooklyn get for a package of kris humphries, teletovic and marshon brooks? 2 promising youngsters and an above average backup pf who rebounds and hustles.

i'm guessing the nets could/would also include a draft pick, depending upon the return. atl has the right to swap picks with them twice but since they aren't actually trading away a #1, i believe they can still trade one..say nothing of a second rounder.

the nets need a little more hlep to join the east's elite.....

What exactly is promising about marshon brooks?

He isnt all that young at 25. he doesnt have 3 point range, he can only play 1 position,he doesnt have elite athleticism, he has a very low bbiq and understand of the game, and is a negative on defense.

he is really the most common thing in the NBA. a low ceiling volume scoring 2 who doesnt have a feel for the game or play any defense.

Agreed... as a rookie he took a ton of shots for a terrible team and that convinced a bunch of people he was going to be a poor man's Kobe (or something). The reality is, he has a decent chance of being a poor man's Ricky Davis, but even that will take some luck.

I think the Gasol trade idea makes sense.

Brooks isn't special and Hump seems to has lost his job to the incomparable Reggie Evans.

Worst case is that it leaves Bkl with a MASSIVE expiring to shop.

sunsfan88 wrote:I really want to know why the Nets gave Humphries that deal like less than 6 months ago and are now trying to get rid of him?

What's the thought process? Did they think Hump was gonna develop more and be better or something? Did they think some other team is going to give him more money?

Salary filler. That's it. He's nothing more than a large, will-be expiring contract to the Nets.

M-C-G wrote:I think that package is worth a lot less than a lot of Nets fans think. I have to believe that Humprhey deal was meant to be a chip to get Dwight or someone big in a trade. Like when Keith Van Horn got 4M to come out of retirement, I think Humprhey benefitted in the same manner. Otherwise there is no way to justify paying him 24M over two years, while Illyasova got something like a 4/32 (?)

Nets fans don't think that package is worth a damn, and the only reason why Humphries was given his contract is for the reason I said above.

Humphries, Brooks, Pick could probably land you:

High end: Bargnani

Low end: Jason Maxiell, Stuckey

sunsfan88 wrote:I really want to know why the Nets gave Humphries that deal like less than 6 months ago and are now trying to get rid of him?

What's the thought process? Did they think Hump was gonna develop more and be better or something? Did they think some other team is going to give him more money?

They signed him for the purpose of being able to trade him and take back 15 million in salary. the choices are either:

a) dont sign humphries, and not be able to trade for someone like millsap or josh smith.

or

b) sign humphries, and then have the available salary to send out for a millsap or smith

the nets were over the salary cap and luxury tax by a large margin before signing humphries. the only reason they could bring him back is because they owned his rights. it was a no brainer to not only bring him back, but to bring him back on the highest salary/shortest length possible

milwaukee: gooden, ellis

bos: terry, green, bass (2 of 3)


gs: biedrins, jefferson

det:

cle:


chi:

I could see the Bucks offering an Ellis/Gooden/Daniels package.
Could Ellis thrive in a 6th man role playing with Deron Williams?

might be a good deal

I'd take the trio for Ben Gordon.

RandyBreuer wrote:I could see the Bucks offering an Ellis/Gooden/Daniels package.
Could Ellis thrive in a 6th man role playing with Deron Williams?

Why in the world would we do that? I would way rather just let Ellis opt out, Daniels expire....that's 12M right there, with only 2 more years of Gooden at 6-7M, and actually he has some value as an expiring after next season.

Oh and the Monte Ellis who thinks he is as good as Wade, won't be taking a 6th man role any time soon.

Humphries, Brooks, Pick could probably land you:

High end: Bargnani

Low end: Jason Maxiell, Stuckey

i like the detroit idea...any pistons fans?

I'd take the trio for Ben Gordon.

cha would have to add value...gordon for hump straight up is even

PetroNet wrote:

sunsfan88 wrote:I really want to know why the Nets gave Humphries that deal like less than 6 months ago and are now trying to get rid of him?

What's the thought process? Did they think Hump was gonna develop more and be better or something? Did they think some other team is going to give him more money?

They signed him for the purpose of being able to trade him and take back 15 million in salary. the choices are either:

a) dont sign humphries, and not be able to trade for someone like millsap or josh smith.

or

b) sign humphries, and then have the available salary to send out for a millsap or smith

the nets were over the salary cap and luxury tax by a large margin before signing humphries. the only reason they could bring him back is because they owned his rights. it was a no brainer to not only bring him back, but to bring him back on the highest salary/shortest length possible

Could you honestly ever believe that Humphries could get Milsap or Smith?

It's as if the Nets found a paintbrush, walked over to a corner and started painting themselves into it.

i think the nuggets might like Teletovic for Mozgov.