RealGM

---------------------------------------

BKN Gets: Harrison Barnes, Kevin Huerter, Keegan Murray, Davion Mitchell, & 2025 SAC 1st (Unprotected)
BKN Gives: Cam Johnson, Mikal Bridges, & Dorian Finney-Smith
Why for BKN? The Nets get a blue chip asset in Murray to help reset. They also get 25 year old Huerter who is on a solid deal to help with their retool. Barnes gives them a steady forward vet but could be flipped to another team for future assets. The kick the tires on Mitchell to see if there is anything there worth keeping and they get an unprotected 1st round pick to further add to the retool.

PG - Schroder / Mitchell
SG - Huerter / Thomas
SF - Murray / Whitehead / Bates-Diop
PF - Barnes / Simmons / Clowney
C - Claxton / Sharpe

---------------------------------------

SAC Gets: Cam Johnson, Mikal Bridges, & Dorian Finney-Smith
SAC Gives: Harrison Barnes, Kevin Huerter, Keegan Murray, Davion Mitchell, & 2025 SAC 1st (Unprotected)
Why for Kings? The Kings sell off their future assets but bring back a 3rd star to pair with Fox & Sabonis in an attempt to catapult them into a contender. This should help improve their defense, give them more size/length, give them another legitimate go-to scorer, and maintain they’re great spacing around Fox & Sabonis.

PG - Fox / Monk / Ellis
SG - Bridges / Duarte / Jones
SF - Johnson / Vezenkov
PF - Finney-Smith / Lyles
C - Sabonis

---------------------------------------

this offer will be beat by many teams .. sac would win this trade

orlando_joe wrote:this offer will be beat by many teams .. sac would win this trade

What value are you assigning to Murray (2 years left on rookie deal then a RFA) vs. Bridges (2 years left on his deal then an UFA)?

This is a hard no for Sac.

It makes little to no sense. We give up our two wing high percentage three point shooters. Depth. And young controlled contracts to get more expensive and already topped out Bridges, overrated Cam Johnson and a lot of locked up money for non stars that are going to make the team balanced and not a contender?

There is no logic to all this.

OGSactownballer wrote:This is a hard no for Sac.

It makes little to no sense. We give up our two wing high percentage three point shooters. Depth. And young controlled contracts to get more expensive and already topped out Bridges, overrated Cam Johnson and a lot of locked up money for non stars that are going to make the team balanced and not a contender?

There is no logic to all this.

Disagree. The hope with Keegan Murray is that one day he becomes what Mikal Bridges is now. Also Cam Johnson is having a better season than Kevin Huerter. Harrison Barnes has one good game for every 8 games where hes a ghost and is a making twice what he should be, and Davion Mitchell might not be in the league in two years.

Sac owes picks. While Huerter and Murray are good, they are not Bridges good.
Could either Huerter or Murray return 2 FRPs and a good young player?

louc1970 wrote:Sac owes picks. While Huerter and Murray are good, they are not Bridges good.
Could either Huerter or Murray return 2 FRPs and a good young player?

I think Murray could. I also think it needs to be said that the trade value between Huerter and Murray is very different.

CraftylikeaFox wrote:

OGSactownballer wrote:This is a hard no for Sac.

It makes little to no sense. We give up our two wing high percentage three point shooters. Depth. And young controlled contracts to get more expensive and already topped out Bridges, overrated Cam Johnson and a lot of locked up money for non stars that are going to make the team balanced and not a contender?

There is no logic to all this.

Disagree. The hope with Keegan Murray is that one day he becomes what Mikal Bridges is now. Also Cam Johnson is having a better season than Kevin Huerter. Harrison Barnes has one good game for every 8 games where hes a ghost and is a making twice what he should be, and Davion Mitchell might not be in the league in two years.

Is he? I have them as pretty comparable players.

- Johnson has the edge defensively
- Huerter has the edge for ballhandling/passing
- Huerter has the edge age-wise (he’s 2.5 years younger)
- Huerter has the edge contract-wise (he makes ~$7 mil less per year)

I think a case can be made that Huerter holds more trade value than Johnson.

bpcox05 wrote:

louc1970 wrote:Sac owes picks. While Huerter and Murray are good, they are not Bridges good.
Could either Huerter or Murray return 2 FRPs and a good young player?

I think Murray could. I also think it needs to be said that the trade value between Huerter and Murray is very different.

Ok. Who is 3rd team to bring in and make the trade better for the Nets?

bpcox05 wrote:

CraftylikeaFox wrote:

OGSactownballer wrote:This is a hard no for Sac.

It makes little to no sense. We give up our two wing high percentage three point shooters. Depth. And young controlled contracts to get more expensive and already topped out Bridges, overrated Cam Johnson and a lot of locked up money for non stars that are going to make the team balanced and not a contender?

There is no logic to all this.

Disagree. The hope with Keegan Murray is that one day he becomes what Mikal Bridges is now. Also Cam Johnson is having a better season than Kevin Huerter. Harrison Barnes has one good game for every 8 games where hes a ghost and is a making twice what he should be, and Davion Mitchell might not be in the league in two years.

Is he? I have them as pretty comparable players.

- Johnson has the edge defensively
- Huerter has the edge for ballhandling/passing
- Huerter has the edge age-wise (he’s 2.5 years younger)
- Huerter has the edge contract-wise (he makes ~$7 mil less per year)

I think a case can be made that Huerter holds more trade value than Johnson.

IDK if Huerter is good enough of a ball handler/passer to say he has an edge on Johnson. It seems like they both have about the same role. Only reason I gave the nod to Johnson is because his counting stats are better. IDK even know if he is a good defender, I just know Huerter isn't.

I feel like DFS and Cam Johnson as the *filler* kills this for the Nets.

Bridges and Murray are similar value imo. Maybe SAC owes a little more there, but not a ton. Nets kicking back useful players here doesn’t seem to be helpful in getting to ultimate value.

OGSactownballer wrote:This is a hard no for Sac.

It makes little to no sense. We give up our two wing high percentage three point shooters. Depth. And young controlled contracts to get more expensive and already topped out Bridges, overrated Cam Johnson and a lot of locked up money for non stars that are going to make the team balanced and not a contender?

There is no logic to all this.

This seems a bit harsh.

First of all, Bridges, Johnson, & Finney-Smith is a lot of shooting around Fox & Sabonis (just like Huerter, Murray, & Barnes). I consider this more or less a wash from a shooting/spacing perspective but you seem to disagree?

As for depth, we’re trading 3 starters for 3 starters. And then we’re sending Mitchell out and not getting a 4th player back. Considering I already prefer that Ellis gets Mitchell’s minutes (and that Monk can play backup PG), I would hardly classify this trade as losing depth.

Giving up young controlled contracts is a valid criticism (Murray & 2025 1st. I guess you can throw Mitchell in there but I don’t consider it a very valuable controlled contract). However, that’s the natural trade off when you’re trading potential (Murray & 2025 1st) for win-now talent (Bridges). When you’re trading a for a better player, usually you’re trading youth & cost controlled assets to make up the value gap. I think that’s pretty standard.

I would classify Bridges as a fringe star, and I can easily see him putting up an efficient 20+ points per game as a 2nd option behind Fox while giving us excellent defense. I think he’d really flourish in that 2nd scorer role while also having a guy like Sabonis looking to set him up, free him up off screens, etc. Honestly, if Murray becomes what Bridges is offensively and defensively, I’d be ecstatic. That’s not to say that he couldn’t possibly exceed that level but I’d be pretty surprised if he did.

Again, we get a fringe star and legitimate 2nd option in Bridges allowing us to move Sabonis into that ideal 3rd option/playmaker role. That’s a dimension we don’t have on this team right now. Perhaps Murray can develop into that player but that’s an “if” at this point.

On top of adding a legitimate go-to scoring option, the trade also improves the defense. Murray is great defensively but Bridges has made an all-defensive team. I’d give Bridges the edge over Murray but even if you said it was a wash, Finney-Smith is a much better defender than Barnes and Johnson is a better defender than Huerter. I think you pretty clearly upgrade that end of the floor and don’t really have any players 1-4 that an offense can exploit.

Considering our spacing would be maintained after this trade and we’d be adding a legitimate go-to scoring option, I would imagine our OffRTG would improve and considering we’re upgrading the defense 2-4, I would imagine our DefRTG would improve as well.

Sure, Bridges doesn’t have the flashy game & name but he has a very impactful game and brings a lot of what this team is lacking.

louc1970 wrote:

bpcox05 wrote:

louc1970 wrote:Sac owes picks. While Huerter and Murray are good, they are not Bridges good.
Could either Huerter or Murray return 2 FRPs and a good young player?

I think Murray could. I also think it needs to be said that the trade value between Huerter and Murray is very different.

Ok. Who is 3rd team to bring in and make the trade better for the Nets?

Are you saying the Nets wouldn’t want Keegan Murray in a Bridges deal?

CraftylikeaFox wrote:

bpcox05 wrote:

CraftylikeaFox wrote:
Disagree. The hope with Keegan Murray is that one day he becomes what Mikal Bridges is now. Also Cam Johnson is having a better season than Kevin Huerter. Harrison Barnes has one good game for every 8 games where hes a ghost and is a making twice what he should be, and Davion Mitchell might not be in the league in two years.

Is he? I have them as pretty comparable players.

- Johnson has the edge defensively
- Huerter has the edge for ballhandling/passing
- Huerter has the edge age-wise (he’s 2.5 years younger)
- Huerter has the edge contract-wise (he makes ~$7 mil less per year)

I think a case can be made that Huerter holds more trade value than Johnson.

IDK if Huerter is good enough of a ball handler/passer to say he has an edge on Johnson. It seems like they both have about the same role. Only reason I gave the nod to Johnson is because his counting stats are better. IDK even know if he is a good defender, I just know Huerter isn't.

I feel pretty safe saying he’s the better ball handler/passer. As for Johnson’s defense, I’ve always considered him around that average tier.

MoneyTalks41890 wrote:Bridges and Murray are similar value imo. Maybe SAC owes a little more there, but not a ton. Nets kicking back useful players here doesn’t seem to be helpful in getting to ultimate value.

jbk1234 wrote:I feel like DFS and Cam Johnson as the *filler* kills this for the Nets.

I mean I wouldn’t ignore Huerter and Barnes regarding value and useful players.

bpcox05 wrote:

MoneyTalks41890 wrote:Bridges and Murray are similar value imo. Maybe SAC owes a little more there, but not a ton. Nets kicking back useful players here doesn’t seem to be helpful in getting to ultimate value.

jbk1234 wrote:I feel like DFS and Cam Johnson as the *filler* kills this for the Nets.

I mean I wouldn’t ignore Huerter and Barnes regarding value and useful players.

I could maybe get to a place where Cam and Huerter are close in value, but I don't see any team trading DFS for Barnes without a first round pick coming back.

jbk1234 wrote:

bpcox05 wrote:

MoneyTalks41890 wrote:Bridges and Murray are similar value imo. Maybe SAC owes a little more there, but not a ton. Nets kicking back useful players here doesn’t seem to be helpful in getting to ultimate value.

jbk1234 wrote:I feel like DFS and Cam Johnson as the *filler* kills this for the Nets.

I mean I wouldn’t ignore Huerter and Barnes regarding value and useful players.

I could maybe get to a place where Cam and Huerter are close in value, but I don't see any team trading DFS for Barnes without a first round pick coming back.

Yeah agreed. That’s why I have the pick and Mitchell included.

bpcox05 wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

bpcox05 wrote:
I mean I wouldn’t ignore Huerter and Barnes regarding value and useful players.

I could maybe get to a place where Cam and Huerter are close in value, but I don't see any team trading DFS for Barnes without a first round pick coming back.

Yeah agreed. That’s why I have the pick and Mitchell included.

I think Murray and the 1st is a decent starting point for Bridges. I don't really rate Mitchell as having much value.

jbk1234 wrote:

bpcox05 wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:
I could maybe get to a place where Cam and Huerter are close in value, but I don't see any team trading DFS for Barnes without a first round pick coming back.

Yeah agreed. That’s why I have the pick and Mitchell included.

I think Murray and the 1st is a decent starting point for Bridges. I don't really rate Mitchell as having much value.

I have Murray and Bridges as similar value which is where we seem to disagree. It’s largely due to contract and years of control. Bridges has 2 years left and then will be a UFA while Murray has 2 years left and then will be a RFA.