Billy King what are you doing

[MrDollarBills]

Ferry says...OK we will take the 4 useless players on expiring contracts but I have to get SOMETHING to justify giving away a 6 time all star and our best player who still has tread on the tires or no deal. What do you do if you are King and plan A Dwight Howard just opted in with Orlando?

No one wanted to touch that contract with a ten foot pole and they wanted to shed salary, the Hawks had zero leverage.

Hawks had plenty of leverage though. They knew the Nets were desperate for a "star" player and Deron Williams was meeting with the Mavericks. Add in the fact they traded him within the Eastern Conference and you have a recipe for disaster.

Deron met with the Mavericks and Mark Cuban couldn't be bothered to show up, or offer him a full max deal.

Hawks had zero leverage. No ONE wanted that contract with that many years remaining. Johnson was regarded as the worst contract in the league until Deron one upped him

[Universe]

No one wanted to touch that contract with a ten foot pole and they wanted to shed salary, the Hawks had zero leverage.

Hawks had plenty of leverage though. They knew the Nets were desperate for a "star" player and Deron Williams was meeting with the Mavericks. Add in the fact they traded him within the Eastern Conference and you have a recipe for disaster.

Deron met with the Mavericks and Mark Cuban couldn't be bothered to show up, or offer him a full max deal.

Hawks had zero leverage. No ONE wanted that contract with that many years remaining. Johnson was regarded as the worst contract in the league until Deron one upped him

What does him not showing up have to do with them meeting with Williams? That's exactly the reason the trade happened. Not saying it wasn't a bad deal, but it was a last minute pitch to Deron Williams. Still don't know how people are confused to why it happened after all the marketing moves they've done for an image.

[therealbig3]

According to Woj, we're the favorites to re-sign both Brook and Thad.

The title of this thread is apt: Billy King what are you doing? Getting locked into long-term contracts for non-star players is exactly what got us into this mess.

[SpeedyG]

According to Woj, we're the favorites to re-sign both Brook and Thad.

The title of this thread is apt: Billy King what are you doing? Getting locked into long-term contracts for non-star players is exactly what got us into this mess.

I don't mind the rumored 2+1 deal with Lopez. But 4/48 for Thad? Ugh. Yeah, it probably won't be "as bad" once the new CBA gets here. But I rather we get someone on a "good" contract than on a "not as bad". Thad was productive here, but not at that price tag. I'm pretty sure we can get similar/slightly less production at half the cost with other guys on the market.

[NyCeEvO]

According to Woj, we're the favorites to re-sign both Brook and Thad.

The title of this thread is apt: Billy King what are you doing? Getting locked into long-term contracts for non-star players is exactly what got us into this mess.

The motto for the Nets is do whatever you can to stay relevant.

They tried to go after a title by being loose with their assets in making deals. Now that they have few assets left, they're clinging to whatever they can to keep the streak of making the playoffs alive.

While I'm not fond of Brook on a 3yr/$60mil deal, I can understand the logic behind doing it.

But re-signing Thad to a 4yr contract is absolutely ridiculous and not needed. Heck, most of us would prefer allowing Thad to come off the books so we can stay under the LTT and have more cap space in 2016.

In the eyes of ownership and the FO, staying in the race to make the playoffs is the best thing that can happen because people will continue to talk about the team (regardless of whether it's good or bad talk). As long as King is here, we can expect more of the same.

[SpeedyG]

According to Woj, we're the favorites to re-sign both Brook and Thad.

The title of this thread is apt: Billy King what are you doing? Getting locked into long-term contracts for non-star players is exactly what got us into this mess.

The motto for the Nets is do whatever you can to stay relevant.

They tried to go after a title by being loose with their assets in making deals. Now that they have few assets left, they're clinging to whatever they can to keep the streak of making the playoffs alive.

While I'm not fond of Brook on a 3yr/$60mil deal, I can understand the logic behind doing it.

But re-signing Thad to a 4yr contract is absolutely ridiculous and not needed. Heck, most of us would prefer allowing Thad to come off the books so we can stay under the LTT and have more cap space in 2016.

In the eyes of ownership and the FO, staying in the race to make the playoffs is the best thing that can happen because people will continue to talk about the team (regardless of whether it's good or bad talk). As long as King is here, we can expect more of the same.

I'm trying to find some silver lining here, but is it possible that we can structure this heavily backloaded so that it doesn't affect this year's and next year's cap too much before ballooning in the last two years?

[Prokorov]

According to Woj, we're the favorites to re-sign both Brook and Thad.

The title of this thread is apt: Billy King what are you doing? Getting locked into long-term contracts for non-star players is exactly what got us into this mess.

The motto for the Nets is do whatever you can to stay relevant.

They tried to go after a title by being loose with their assets in making deals. Now that they have few assets left, they're clinging to whatever they can to keep the streak of making the playoffs alive.

While I'm not fond of Brook on a 3yr/$60mil deal, I can understand the logic behind doing it.

But re-signing Thad to a 4yr contract is absolutely ridiculous and not needed. Heck, most of us would prefer allowing Thad to come off the books so we can stay under the LTT and have more cap space in 2016.

In the eyes of ownership and the FO, staying in the race to make the playoffs is the best thing that can happen because people will continue to talk about the team (regardless of whether it's good or bad talk). As long as King is here, we can expect more of the same.

I'm trying to find some silver lining here, but is it possible that we can structure this heavily backloaded so that it doesn't affect this year's and next year's cap too much before ballooning in the last two years?

not really. the CBA has pretty specific guidelines on how contracts can be structured.

[enetric]

What irks me most about it, are the fans who want to re-sign these guys and throw good money after bad will blame BK when it fails. It's just like Knicks fans. They want instant gratification but don't accept the consequences. When did Nets fans start to sound like Nixies????

This board was never like that in the old days. I can tell you that.

Everyone left cuz you left lol. Every few months, 'where's E?...where's E?'

Now, most of the old posters don't come on the board anymore.

I am sorry to hear that. And nice of you to say...much appreciated but I would guess a lot of people don't have the time anymore.

[enetric]

Ferry says...OK we will take the 4 useless players on expiring contracts but I have to get SOMETHING to justify giving away a 6 time all star and our best player who still has tread on the tires or no deal. What do you do if you are King and plan A Dwight Howard just opted in with Orlando?

No one wanted to touch that contract with a ten foot pole and they wanted to shed salary, the Hawks had zero leverage.

That's a very one sided over statement. They could have opted to keep JJ and move Josh Smith if they wanted to stand firm. The point is you are so wrapped up what you perceive the trade market to be that you aren't fairly considering talent value acquired or how desperate we were at that point to land another key guy despite having few assets. Tell me who was the all star still with some qualiy left we get for less that the small package we gave? Deal with that because you have avoided how much it factors into getting a deal done or not.

[enetric]

Between

- Lopez's foot injuries
- DWill's rapid decline
- KG's rapid decline
- AK's rapid decline
- Wallace's rapid decline
- Mirza being a complete bust.
- Avery killing Marshon's development

We have had a huge run of bad luck in Brooklyn. The only person who was showing decline before we got him was Wallace. DWill was a stud coming over from Utah. KG was coming off a very good year. AK had a very good year in Minny and we got him dirt cheap. Mirza was suppose to be some scoring stud from Europe with a money shot. Marshon got off to a great start, broke his toe and then had to deal with Avery insulting him to the media constantly. It killed his confidence.

The Johnson trade was a success in my opinion. Most judge it unfairly. People need to look at it like when the Mets got Johan Santana. You know his play in the last year or so that his play will decline with age but you do it for his production in the first 2 years. He had foot issues in his first year but in 13-14 he had one of the best seasons for a Net after the Kidd era.

KG, AK and Crash were all massively declined when acquired so I disagree there.

No one killed Marshon. He just wasn't good.

And I don't agree Mirza is a bust. Solid guy who showed improvement season to season. No stud but he has skills. Curious to see if he has more growth coming.

[NyCeEvO]

I'll never understand why King never lets the market determine player values.

Even if you think Brook and Thad are on ok deals given the cap increase, it makes no sense to go out and spend without seeing how much other teams are willing to pay.

If the Nets let Thad and Brook test the market and it turns out that they're worth $12.5mil/yr and $20mil/yr respectively then fine.

But what if they hit the market and you find out that teams are only willing to spend $10mil/yr and $16mil/yr for them? If you come in just a little over that, you'll still be giving them more money than everyone else and unless they really hated their time here, they should come back.

Oh well...this is the price for being a Nets fan under the Billy King regime.

[MrDollarBills]

I'll never understand why King never lets the market determine player values.

Even if you think Brook and Thad are on ok deals given the cap increase, it makes no sense to go out and spend without seeing how much other teams are willing to pay.

If the Nets let Thad and Brook test the market and it turns out that they're worth $12.5mil/yr and $20mil/yr respectively then fine.

But what if they hit the market and you find out that teams are only willing to spend $10mil/yr and $16mil/yr for them? If you come in just a little over that, you'll still be giving them more money than everyone else and unless they really hated their time here, they should come back.

Oh well...this is the price for being a Nets fan under the Billy King regime.

The Hawks are about to lose their starting forwards for nothing by doing this

Thad and Brook's contracts are reasonable now considering what is being dished out.

[NyCeEvO]

The Hawks are about to lose their starting forwards for nothing by doing this

Thad and Brook's contracts are reasonable now considering what is being dished out.

Carroll is gone but we don't know about Millsap yet.

Danny Green just accepted a 4/45mil deal to stay with the Spurs. His 3pt shooting is very valuable in today's NBA and his wing defense is needed since it's a guard's league.

What does Thad Young provide that's as (or more) important than Green?

This is a guard's league now. More and more players are hitting 3s at the same percentage and rate that others hit long 2s except 3s are worth more. And because outside shooting is important, you need guys who can do an adequate job in guarding the opponent's wing players.

Not only does Thad not guard wings, he's not even a good big defender. When Thad first came to the Nets, he was shooting lights out from 3 but he regressed to his averages like most of us expected.

Now, if you compare Thad's contract to other role players, it isn't a bad one. And given our situation, even if we lost Thad we wouldn't be able to sign someone to replace him at a similar rate because we're over the cap. I understand the logic in re-signing him because we played better as a team after we traded for him. But it's still frustrating seeing King still not trying to get the most value for his money. Whether it's with re-signing players or looking at how valuable different players' skills are and seeing that even if Danny Green and Thad Young made the same amount of money, Green is more valuable in today's game because of his skillset.

[enetric]

I was clear I preferred to let them both go an go after stars next year. However, I have no problem with giving your own players contracts rather than let them look around if you have decided to keep them. Based on salary trend neither deal is a bad one and you have to consider if I let them field offers what if the offers are better not worse? It seems to me the Nets made fair market offers not over pays. The 50mil for 4 that Thad got is going to look like the old 35 for 5 year deal. The cap changes look like the economic changes will be massive.

The question is...what kind of cap space can we have in 2016 with new cap numbers and dumping or stretching Dwill.

A solid year from Lopez and Thad I could easily change my tune about letting them go. But again...depends on the space we have to work with.

[Trader_Joe]

The Hawks are about to lose their starting forwards for nothing by doing this

Thad and Brook's contracts are reasonable now considering what is being dished out.

Carroll is gone but we don't know about Millsap yet.

Danny Green just accepted a 4/45mil deal to stay with the Spurs. His 3pt shooting is very valuable in today's NBA and his wing defense is needed since it's a guard's league.

What does Thad Young provide that's as (or more) important than Green?

This is a guard's league now. More and more players are hitting 3s at the same percentage and rate that others hit long 2s except 3s are worth more. And because outside shooting is important, you need guys who can do an adequate job in guarding the opponent's wing players.

Not only does Thad not guard wings, he's not even a good big defender. When Thad first came to the Nets, he was shooting lights out from 3 but he regressed to his averages like most of us expected.

Now, if you compare Thad's contract to other role players, it isn't a bad one. And given our situation, even if we lost Thad we wouldn't be able to sign someone to replace him at a similar rate because we're over the cap. I understand the logic in re-signing him because we played better as a team after we traded for him. But it's still frustrating seeing King still not trying to get the most value for his money. Whether it's with re-signing players or looking at how valuable different players' skills are and seeing that even if Danny Green and Thad Young made the same amount of money, Green is more valuable in today's game because of his skillset.

Danny Green was an underpay as he took a discount to stay with the Spurs.. as many of their players do.
Poor example.

Carroll for $15m
Aminu who has done nothing got $7.5m
Dragic got 5/90 and he's not exactly a top tier PG
etc..

Maybe we overpaid Thad by $1-2m per year, but nothing drastic at all, and IMO better than letting him field offers and signing elsewhere for something comparable If he was restricted, it would be a different story.

[Paradise]

The Hawks are about to lose their starting forwards for nothing by doing this

Thad and Brook's contracts are reasonable now considering what is being dished out.

Carroll is gone but we don't know about Millsap yet.

Danny Green just accepted a 4/45mil deal to stay with the Spurs. His 3pt shooting is very valuable in today's NBA and his wing defense is needed since it's a guard's league.

What does Thad Young provide that's as (or more) important than Green?

This is a guard's league now. More and more players are hitting 3s at the same percentage and rate that others hit long 2s except 3s are worth more. And because outside shooting is important, you need guys who can do an adequate job in guarding the opponent's wing players.

Not only does Thad not guard wings, he's not even a good big defender. When Thad first came to the Nets, he was shooting lights out from 3 but he regressed to his averages like most of us expected.

Now, if you compare Thad's contract to other role players, it isn't a bad one. And given our situation, even if we lost Thad we wouldn't be able to sign someone to replace him at a similar rate because we're over the cap. I understand the logic in re-signing him because we played better as a team after we traded for him. But it's still frustrating seeing King still not trying to get the most value for his money. Whether it's with re-signing players or looking at how valuable different players' skills are and seeing that even if Danny Green and Thad Young made the same amount of money, Green is more valuable in today's game because of his skillset.

Except it works negatively when Thad and Brook see some other guys that aren't superstars either commanding similar money.

[Prokorov]

Between

- Lopez's foot injuries
- DWill's rapid decline
- KG's rapid decline
- AK's rapid decline
- Wallace's rapid decline
- Mirza being a complete bust.
- Avery killing Marshon's development

We have had a huge run of bad luck in Brooklyn. The only person who was showing decline before we got him was Wallace. DWill was a stud coming over from Utah. KG was coming off a very good year. AK had a very good year in Minny and we got him dirt cheap. Mirza was suppose to be some scoring stud from Europe with a money shot. Marshon got off to a great start, broke his toe and then had to deal with Avery insulting him to the media constantly. It killed his confidence.

The Johnson trade was a success in my opinion. Most judge it unfairly. People need to look at it like when the Mets got Johan Santana. You know his play in the last year or so that his play will decline with age but you do it for his production in the first 2 years. He had foot issues in his first year but in 13-14 he had one of the best seasons for a Net after the Kidd era.

KG, AK and Crash were all massively declined when acquired so I disagree there.

No one killed Marshon. He just wasn't good.

And I don't agree Mirza is a bust. Solid guy who showed improvement season to season. No stud but he has skills. Curious to see if he has more growth coming.

you can throw in dwight not becoming a net in the unlucky category as well.

and while some come down too hard on the johnson trade, i think success is a bit of an overstatement.

[NyCeEvO]

I was clear I preferred to let them both go an go after stars next year. However, I have no problem with giving your own players contracts rather than let them look around if you have decided to keep them. Based on salary trend neither deal is a bad one and you have to consider if I let them field offers what if the offers are better not worse? It seems to me the Nets made fair market offers not over pays. The 50mil for 4 that Thad got is going to look like the old 35 for 5 year deal. The cap changes look like the economic changes will be massive.

The question is...what kind of cap space can we have in 2016 with new cap numbers and dumping or stretching Dwill.

A solid year from Lopez and Thad I could easily change my tune about letting them go. But again...depends on the space we have to work with.

Thad definitely fields a tradable contract. Depending on what insurance policy Lopez' deal has, his should be tradable as well especially since it's only a 3yr deal.

I don't have a problem with either of them being here. I guess my post was more a vent/lament of our current situation.

Since we're stuck where we're at, these are the best moves that we can do.


With the cap spiking, I think you're going to see a lot of players preferring to go to better teams since they're still going to get paid handsomely anyway (compared to pre-cap increase numbers) and win while doing so.

[Prokorov]

I'll never understand why King never lets the market determine player values.

Even if you think Brook and Thad are on ok deals given the cap increase, it makes no sense to go out and spend without seeing how much other teams are willing to pay.

If the Nets let Thad and Brook test the market and it turns out that they're worth $12.5mil/yr and $20mil/yr respectively then fine.

But what if they hit the market and you find out that teams are only willing to spend $10mil/yr and $16mil/yr for them? If you come in just a little over that, you'll still be giving them more money than everyone else and unless they really hated their time here, they should come back.

Oh well...this is the price for being a Nets fan under the Billy King regime.

The Hawks are about to lose their starting forwards for nothing by doing this

Thad and Brook's contracts are reasonable now considering what is being dished out.

Brooks contract is reasonable and im sure someone else would have given him 20M. not that i wanted him back, but the cost is not unrealistic.

Thads contract is not reasonable. you cant tie up that portion of the cap into a player who arguably shouldnt even be starting on a good team. we can get comporable impact for about half that.

[Paradise]

Thads contract is not reasonable. you cant tie up that portion of the cap into a player who arguably shouldnt even be starting on a good team. we can get comporable impact for about half that.

Who's making half of his impact currently, though?