Kidd on Plumlee: "He's not Brook. So, he fits in great"

[Prokorov]

It's best to trade Brook when he is actually able to play. Teams should be able to see that he's available to play.

thats also really risky. his value goes from low to non-exsistant if he sucks or if he has an injury set back. i think we should get whatever we can at the draft and not risk it.

i dont think the upside is worth the risk in this instance. its not like if he stays healthy someone is giving us a stud player on a rookie deal.

[DarkXaero]

It's best to trade Brook when he is actually able to play. Teams should be able to see that he's available to play.

thats also really risky. his value goes from low to non-exsistant if he sucks or if he has an injury set back. i think we should get whatever we can at the draft and not risk it.

i dont think the upside is worth the risk in this instance. its not like if he stays healthy someone is giving us a stud player on a rookie deal.

There's a risk of injury happening again, but why would he suck? The first season he broke his foot and came back for 5 games, he basically got going right away. He's a consistent player when it comes to scoring stats. If the GMs get to see the player healthy, it makes them feel much better about making a deal and what they give up.

[Prokorov]

It's best to trade Brook when he is actually able to play. Teams should be able to see that he's available to play.

thats also really risky. his value goes from low to non-exsistant if he sucks or if he has an injury set back. i think we should get whatever we can at the draft and not risk it.

i dont think the upside is worth the risk in this instance. its not like if he stays healthy someone is giving us a stud player on a rookie deal.

There's a risk of injury happening again, but why would he suck? The first season he broke his foot and came back for 5 games, he basically got going right away. He's a consistent player when it comes to scoring stats. If the GMs get to see the player healthy, it makes them feel much better about making a deal and what they give up.

maybe its weaker this time then the last time he came back. maybe he is more hesistant now. maybe the surgery wasnt as successful or the rehab wasnt as strong. maybe a year away from the game has made him rustier then last time. maybe he overcompensates to try not an injure it again. maybe he just has an outlier down year.

given the way the nets do things even if his game is back, he is likely gonna be lmimited to 20ish minutes a night and be playing in a new system he has never played in before (kidds small ball, which we didint use with brook before) who knows how he takes ot that and what the transition time is to adjust

either way, its not worth the risk in my opinion. id rather take 50 cents on the dollar and not risk his value going to zero then hope to get better value and potentially risk having him here at 32M and having to give up something if we want to move him.

I dont think you can just say he will come back and be the same player after this injury just because he did last time. i mean, there are isntances with some injuries were the guy will come back after the first and retire after the second. not that brook will retire, but its not always the same the second time around

[NyCeEvO]

It's best to trade Brook when he is actually able to play. Teams should be able to see that he's available to play.

thats also really risky. his value goes from low to non-exsistant if he sucks or if he has an injury set back. i think we should get whatever we can at the draft and not risk it.

i dont think the upside is worth the risk in this instance. its not like if he stays healthy someone is giving us a stud player on a rookie deal.

There's a risk of injury happening again, but why would he suck? The first season he broke his foot and came back for 5 games, he basically got going right away. He's a consistent player when it comes to scoring stats. If the GMs get to see the player healthy, it makes them feel much better about making a deal and what they give up.

I actually agree with Prok on this one (and I've made similar comments before).

At this point, I prefer to just get whatever assets we can for Brook asap rather than waiting and taking the chance on him re-injuring himself. I don't really care if we take 30 cents on the dollar for him.

If he gets injured one more time, he'll have absolutely no value to other teams whatsoever.

Then we're really screwed because Brook's cap hit from his contract will get in the way of the signings we'd like to make yet no one would want his contract.

Let Brook's foot heal with some other team. We have bigger things to do deal with in the near future, so I'm ok with getting less value for Brook than what he could possibly/theoretically reach if it means we get a better chance at landing KD and/or other great players.

[DarkXaero]

I understand not wanting to take the chance of Brook getting injured again, it makes sense to me. I'm just saying that he won't hurt his value by his play but there's always a possibility of getting injured again. It's a gamble but it would help us get a much better return.

In regards to the injury, they reconstructed his foot to reduce chances of future injury by giving the area of the foot more support. So technically, he's less likely to get injured (than before) when he returns.

[NyCeEvO]

I understand not wanting to take the chance of Brook getting injured again, it makes sense to me. I'm just saying that he won't hurt his value by his play but there's always a possibility of getting injured again. It's a gamble but it would help us get a much better return.

In regards to the injury, they reconstructed his foot to reduce chances of future injury by giving the area of the foot more support. So technically, he's less likely to get injured (than before) when he returns.

IMO, he'd have to get at least 40 games of solid play in before people really trust him and his foot again.

It's not like after 5 games everyone is going to pay top dollar for him again, especially considering the fact that he went a whole season without problems and yet still had offseason surgery to fix a bent screw and now ankle surgery and a restructuring of his bone on top of the surgery to fix it.

For me, I'd need to see at least 1.5 seasons of injury-free Brook Lopez before I believe that he's actually "healthy". Any good GM is going to cite the same facts I just said to Billy King if and when he gets low-balled with an offer for Lopez.

IMO, Billy needs to recognize that a low-ball offer is better than risking it and waiting for Brook to play through an entire season without problems, because there's a solid chance that may never happen again.

[DarkXaero]

Btw, if Brook comes back healthy next season and plays the whole season (or close to it) being relatively injury free, he'll opt out in 2015 anyway for a new contract. What us Nets fans need to realize that even with the injury, Brook's contract is not that bad at all length wise, so it's not that big of a risk for other teams. Worst case scenario that some team takes on him and he gets injured again, his contract only runs two more years after this season. This isn't like he has 4 or 5 years left on his contract. So having to see him healthy for "1.5 seasons" before believing that he's healthy, is not going to happen.

[NyCeEvO]

Yeah, but it's a big assumption that he'll come back healthy, let alone play for the whole season.

[DarkXaero]

Yeah, but it's a big assumption that he'll come back healthy, let alone play for the whole season.

I didn't assume anything, I'm talking about the possibilities.

[NyCeEvO]

Yeah, but it's a big assumption that he'll come back healthy, let alone play for the whole season.

I didn't assume anything, I'm talking about the possibilities.

I understand. I'm just saying that the possibility is based on the assumption.

I'm not saying that you believe Brook will be healthy.

[DarkXaero]

Yeah, but it's a big assumption that he'll come back healthy, let alone play for the whole season.

I didn't assume anything, I'm talking about the possibilities.

I understand. I'm just saying that the possibility is based on the assumption.

I'm not saying that you believe Brook will be healthy.

Just to be clear, I absolutely understand your stance and I'm not sure myself on when to trade Brook. When I said it's best to trade Brook when he's healthy enough to play, I mean that in terms of getting the most for him, trade value wise. I'm not saying that I would necessarily trade him after the season starts (when he's healthy). If the right deal is there on draft day which makes sense for the team, then I would take it.

[NyCeEvO]

I didn't assume anything, I'm talking about the possibilities.

I understand. I'm just saying that the possibility is based on the assumption.

I'm not saying that you believe Brook will be healthy.

Just to be clear, I absolutely understand your stance and I'm not sure myself on when to trade Brook. When I said it's best to trade Brook when he's healthy enough to play, I mean that in terms of getting the most for him, trade value wise. I'm not saying that I would necessarily trade him after the season starts (when he's healthy). If the right deal is there on draft day which makes sense for the team, then I would take it.

Oh ok. Got ya.

[Prokorov]

Btw, if Brook comes back healthy next season and plays the whole season (or close to it) being relatively injury free, he'll opt out in 2015 anyway for a new contract. What us Nets fans need to realize that even with the injury, Brook's contract is not that bad at all length wise, so it's not that big of a risk for other teams. Worst case scenario that some team takes on him and he gets injured again, his contract only runs two more years after this season. This isn't like he has 4 or 5 years left on his contract. So having to see him healthy for "1.5 seasons" before believing that he's healthy, is not going to happen.

what team wants to give up good assets to inherit that problem? they trade something of value and are stuck between brook gets hurt and they are screwed or brook plays well and opts out of 2015 and hits free agency.

[jeff1624]

These past two games served as reminder of how great we would be with Lopez at Center instead of Plumlee.

[MrDollarBills]

We need Brook back. Plumlee needs to learn how to box out before we have this discussion.

[Prokorov]

These past two games served as reminder of how great we would be with Lopez at Center instead of Plumlee.

we wouldnt be great. we'd be under .500. maybe out of the playoffs.

[slicedbread2]

I like that proposal that a poster made of the 3 way deal. The only modification I'd do would be this:

Chicago: Eric Gordon
New Orleans: Brooks Lopez
Brooklyn: Carlos Boozer, top 40 protected second rounder via New Orleans or top 14 protected first rounder

For all teams involved, you get a big goal accomplished.

Bulls if they miss out on Melo get instant offense to help their anemic offense.

Pelicans get Lopez although he's a liability on defense and health, the defense can be covered with Davis and his Camby like defense not to mention the guard skills he developed before his growth spurt. Love the brow.

Brooklyn may be feeling that they are underselling here, but getting maybe a heavily protected pick and a deal that expires a year early isn't anything to hang your head on. Plus if Boozer doesn't work out and the Nets go in a different direction, they can flip him for expirings and additional picks.

From what I've seen of Lopez, he could easily be the best offensive centre in the NBA when it comes to scoring but the accursed foot has plagued him and his career badly. He also looks like he's a step behind the defense when it comes to reacting to what they are throwing at him in terms of double teams or anything, May be wise to take what you can get for him in the off-season. Plus even a wealthy scion like Mikhail Prohkorov would eventually tire of paying the luxury tax for an at best second round team that doesn't have a lot of options to begin with and the team will try but most likely fail in vain of trying to move D-Will's salary in order to have little to no salary for the Durant, Noah and Horford sweepstakes. Tough spot to be in.

[jeff1624]

These past two games served as reminder of how great we would be with Lopez at Center instead of Plumlee.

we wouldnt be great. we'd be under .500. maybe out of the playoffs.

Oh okay.