I'm bored so lets revisit the VC trade talk

[Rockice_8]

Lets be realistic here. If the Nets stay in the 11th pick and get say DeRozen, Clark, or Blair they are not championship contenders. The rookie probably won't even make that much of a difference standings wise. Now lets weigh the good and the bad options.

Trading VC:
Good - We get rid of his salary, we get younger, adding maybe a younger player or some picks, clears room for younger players, next years draft we will probably one of the 5 or 6 worst teams in the league giving us a shot a top 3 pick.

Bad - We lose our leader putting a lot of weight on the shoulders of Devin and a second year Brook, we are gonna lose a lot of fans knowing that we're giving up next year (we lose enough money as it is), we probably won't get equal value.

I love VC but I'm leaning towards trading him. The top 3 pick is intriguing to me and next year I really don't want to be in this same postion. This has nothing to do with 2010. I just like the way the Blazers did things and want to piece together 5 young starters and watch them grow together. It may not bring them a championship but they are gonna have an opportunity year after year.

Ideally: We trade VC for expirings and a 1st or two, then package them with the Dallas pick and/or Yi and nab two lottery picks next year and fill in the 3 and 4. We'll have our lottery pick cause we'll suck and package for the other one.

Harris
DeRosen (Keeping my fingers crossed)
Pick
Pick
Lopez

Not gonna happen but like I said I was bored. Thoughts?

[S.I.C. GM]

I agree with you Rockice.

I am for trading him and letting the young guys play.

I dont want to be in this position next year. 11th Pick sucks this year. should be better next but I dont want to take that chance. Top 5 pick should be next years objective.

[CroCop]

How bout Ray Allen for Vince Carter?

[Rockice_8]

^^ I would not want to help the Celtics one bit by giving them VC. The C's can burn.

[Preludepunk27]

I want Ray Allen nowhere near this team. Rule of thumb: NEVER trade with someone in your division unless you have NO other option and HAVe to make a trade...or...you get a godfather deal you cannot pass up (see: NJ/TOR for Vince). Unless we're getting something (Please Use More Appropriate Word), I never want Allen in a Nets uni.

I've been open to trading Vince for the past 2 years. I love Vince and what he has done for this franchise, but I'm open to it. With that said, I'm not giving him up on a discount just to let some of our young guys play. And honestly, we have ONE young guy that can play his positions (CDR) so it's kinda pointless unless after this draft we had an influx of young talent at the 2-3. If that happens, that is the day I'll see about moving Vince at a discount to a WC team, but it's not gonna be at a discount like we got him from Toronto for. Until that situation plays out, I am fine with Vince on our team and I'm fine with moving him if we're getting equal value.

[netsfan2009]

Vince for Ben Wallace and JJ Hickson
We're not getting LeBron regardless of Brooklyn.. this saves Ratner $$, gets us a young PF, and frees up 2010 dollars even more

[Preludepunk27]

^^^ eh do we really want to add 2 more frontcourt guys to our roster. I'd hope we get get a PG or an SG to at least add some depth, an expiring and maybe a pick.

As much as I think about it, I wish we pulled the trigger with Portland last year. It looked like overkill cause we were giving up a ton (and we were) but I bet we could have worked out a deal to land a decent 2 or 3 and their pick this year, send them from front court players, and us get LaFrentz's contract. When I read all that, I figured we were doing it to shed some roster spots and go after Boozer this offseason without significantly hurting 2010. Oh well, I think Portland sensed we were willing to give up a lot and got greedy and we got cold feet.

[CroCop]

I want Ray Allen nowhere near this team. Rule of thumb: NEVER trade with someone in your division unless you have NO other option and HAVe to make a trade...or...you get a godfather deal you cannot pass up (see: NJ/TOR for Vince). Unless we're getting something (Please Use More Appropriate Word), I never want Allen in a Nets uni.

I've been open to trading Vince for the past 2 years. I love Vince and what he has done for this franchise, but I'm open to it. With that said, I'm not giving him up on a discount just to let some of our young guys play. And honestly, we have ONE young guy that can play his positions (CDR) so it's kinda pointless unless after this draft we had an influx of young talent at the 2-3. If that happens, that is the day I'll see about moving Vince at a discount to a WC team, but it's not gonna be at a discount like we got him from Toronto for. Until that situation plays out, I am fine with Vince on our team and I'm fine with moving him if we're getting equal value.

the idea of getting ray isn't supposed to make you a contender, its his expiring contract that you should be interested in.

the fact is that you're not gonna be contending with VC anytime soon. so just hold onto harris and blow everything else up. use ray's expiring to make room fo LeBron in 2010. He's tight with Jay-z so you have way more realistic shot than other teams trying to make cap room for him

[Preludepunk27]

I want Ray Allen nowhere near this team. Rule of thumb: NEVER trade with someone in your division unless you have NO other option and HAVe to make a trade...or...you get a godfather deal you cannot pass up (see: NJ/TOR for Vince). Unless we're getting something (Please Use More Appropriate Word), I never want Allen in a Nets uni.

I've been open to trading Vince for the past 2 years. I love Vince and what he has done for this franchise, but I'm open to it. With that said, I'm not giving him up on a discount just to let some of our young guys play. And honestly, we have ONE young guy that can play his positions (CDR) so it's kinda pointless unless after this draft we had an influx of young talent at the 2-3. If that happens, that is the day I'll see about moving Vince at a discount to a WC team, but it's not gonna be at a discount like we got him from Toronto for. Until that situation plays out, I am fine with Vince on our team and I'm fine with moving him if we're getting equal value.

the idea of getting ray isn't supposed to make you a contender, its his expiring contract that you should be interested in.

the fact is that you're not gonna be contending with VC anytime soon. so just hold onto harris and blow everything else up. use ray's expiring to make room fo LeBron in 2010. He's tight with Jay-z so you have way more realistic shot than other teams trying to make cap room for him

We don't have to acquire an expiring that big to have room for LeBron. We're in the East. Thanks to Brook owning at life, we're one legit player away from having a starting 5 that can run with most teams in this league. Unless is LeBron gonna want to come be the final piece or is Lebron gonna want to go into a situation almost identical to the one he has been in with Cleveland the last few years. Please are team is set up better for him right now in all honesty, which is why I'm not for a move like Vince for Ray Allen as of this exact moment. Now, if we make a move for Carlos Boozer, which would sure up our front court for the next few years, then I'm DEFINITELY open for moving Vince for a player who is decent who is basically a straight salary dump. It sounds mildly hypocritical, but it's basically like the KG situation in Boston. KG didn't really want to go to Boston because just him going there and gutting their young core wasn't gonna win a title, but then they traded for Allen and it all changed. I think a starting core of Harris/CDR/Boozer/Lopez is way more appealing than Harris/Vince/Yi/Lopez and 99.9% of people would agree.

Yeah I know I'm totally rambling and my message probably got lost, but this is it: I am 100% against a straight dump for Vince. We don't have a stockpile of talent at the 2/3 to merit it, and we don't need that much expiring; however, if we were able to land an all-star caliber player for simmons/fillers that would make it more desireable for a top tier FA, then I am for moving Vince for nothing. Until that happens, it's not the smart move though in my book. He's a domino we'll tip over later.

[Rockice_8]

I understand the lack of backcourt depth is an issue having just Harris/Dooling/CDR/Hayes. So losing VC for nothing would really hurt. But we could fill in the third string guys with veterans. The lack of depth is really not that big an issue any seeing as to we aren't trying to be good anyway. Boozer really scares me I don't think I could invest 5 years at max money for a guy that is always hurt. If we can get a few picks and another semi-decent young player for VC we can add young depth and make a run a Carmello in 2011.

[Preludepunk27]

I understand the lack of backcourt depth is an issue having just Harris/Dooling/CDR/Hayes. So losing VC for nothing would really hurt. But we could fill in the third string guys with veterans. The lack of depth is really not that big an issue any seeing as to we aren't trying to be good anyway. Boozer really scares me I don't think I could invest 5 years at max money for a guy that is always hurt. If we can get a few picks and another semi-decent young player for VC we can add young depth and make a run a Carmello in 2011.

I can understand what your saying with your whole post. I definitely think I am in the minority a lot when it comes to moving Vince. I'm just concerned with putting all our eggs in one basket too much for 2010.

Now, as for the bolded part of your comment, I'm just wondering what people think of this? I don't honestly believe Carlos will command max money in any way. I think he can get close to what Vince got, but honestly not as much. Maybe 5 years, 70 million range. I could be way off though. Teams know his past. He's missed over 140 games in 5 years. Even if he's a 20/10 guy, I can't see him getting a max deal. Again, I could be a short bus kid right now in my logic though.

I'm just saying, I'd rather have my 2010 FA be the "final piece" not "the main piece and hope our young guys develop enough." I think the final piece is more appealing to guys because they most likely can come in an instantly be successful instead of tinkering with the roster of young guys until they find something that works.

[vincecarter4pres]

I think Boozer is the one riding the short bus. I read about a week ago he wants max money or extremely close to it. The team that pays him that much is (Please Use More Appropriate Word). But, there is no way a team gets him starting at 9 mill a year as amk482 optimistically suggested.

Prelude, BTW, the Portland deal was horrid. At 1st Pritchard was offering Outlaw and Raef for VC, but Rod was demanding their 1st and Rudy Fernandez were included. Talks went back and forth until somehow Pritchard offered something along the lines of Outlaw, Raef and I want to say Sergio Rodriguez, but he demanded NJ include either their 2009 1st or the 2010 Dallas 1st. Phone hung up on Jersey side, end talks.

[amk482]

he may want max or close to but I dont think anyone is giving that to him. What he will get is the security of a long-term deal and to get the long term deal now rather than take a risk and get it next year, I think he has to take a pay cut starting out, just like others before him (i.e., VC) have done. Maybe Boozer doesnt find his way to the Nets, but I even so, i doubt he gets max or close to.

[vincecarter4pres]

he may want max or close to but I dont think anyone is giving that to him. What he will get is the security of a long-term deal and to get the long term deal now rather than take a risk and get it next year, I think he has to take a pay cut starting out, just like others before him (i.e., VC) have done. Maybe Boozer doesnt find his way to the Nets, but I even so, i doubt he gets max or close to.

I don't think he deserve,s nor gets the max, but I imagine he gets a Granger type deal, which I believe was arund 5 years for 75 or 80 million starting around 11 or 12 mill, maxing around 17 in the 5th year.