Brooklyn Nets 2017 Draft Thread

[Paradise]

Well, the Diallo sweepstakes was fun to discuss.

Read on Twitter

[Prokorov]

Well, the Diallo sweepstakes was fun to discuss.

Read on Twitter

not suprising at all.... if your an elite athlete with length and teams really think you have a high ceiling someone is going to give you a promise in the lotto or at least the top 20. seems like he didnt get that and probably got feedback in his workouts that he has alot to improve on.

still havent seen anything tangible or read anything to believe he has any more potential then someone like ben mclemore or archie goodwin. if Cal couldnt get him a promise in round 1, its a good sign he wasnt 1st round material just yet.

that said, lets see what happens with antother year under calipari... he knows how to get guys pro ready.

[treiz]

because they woudnt give 15. they might not give 20 and only offer 26.

Well then, just hang up the phone then. To eat up that much contract just for the 20th pick is just bad value.

At the end of the day if we were to trade with Portland, we're doing them a favour by taking two massive contracts off their hands and they wouldn't consider the 15th pick for that? Enjoy having your cap locked to those two then.

[jbeachboy]

Adam Zagoria‏ @AdamZagoria 2h2 hours ago

Source on Hamidou Diallo: "Nothing has been solidified at this point."
Again, deadline is 11:59 PM ET Wednesday

[Prokorov]

because they woudnt give 15. they might not give 20 and only offer 26.

Well then, just hang up the phone then. To eat up that much contract just for the 20th pick is just bad value.

I love how everyone is all about Levert and RHJ who were picked 21/22.... all about Diallo and Jeane and Giles and OG and Mitchell and Pasenicks...

but then when it comes to the portland trade its "Just" the 20th pick. thats a better pick then we currently have in what looks like a pretty deep draft. and our 2 best young players who both look really good were taken later then that in weaker drafts.

At the end of the day if we were to trade with Portland, we're doing them a favour by taking two massive contracts off their hands and they wouldn't consider the 15th pick for that? Enjoy having your cap locked to those two then.

1) they arent massive contracts. Leonard is due 3/30. thats not massive in years or annuall salary. Turner is due 3/51. thats a bad contract but stil not huge. its not like we would be taking on one of these 4/78-84 type deals.

2) "enjoy having your cap locked into those two" really doesnt make sense since even trading those guys, they dont get under the cap. so we arent really giving them any cap relief that allows them to do anything. it gets them under the tax... but they could do that simply by waiving Ezili who only has 1 M of his 8M contract gauranteed.

3) no... they wouldnt consider 15... and why would they? your going to give up a pick in the mid teens just to get closer to the cap but still well over it? whats the point of that? even if it got them under the cap by 1-2 million that is still less felxibility then just using the MLE.

they are better off using #15 so they can get a good player who is owed just a rookie scale deal for 3 years. then when that rookie needs to get paid their 3 bad contracts(turner/crabbe) would expire.

I think portland would pay someone to eat turner for a price that makes sense(20 or 26). but 15 would just be a big overpay and not really worth it for them.

But for us... why not do it? we have 28 million in cap and nothing to really spend it on. why not stock pile young players on rookie deals isntead of signing the next trevor booker? I'm all for the sign guys to 1 year deals to roll the cap over for 1-2 more years... i like that strategy as well.... but using our cap to get draft picks is also a really great use of that cap space... especially if we get the same reaction from free agents this year as we did last year

[jbeachboy]

Rodney Romero‏
More
Sources close to Hamidou Diallo: Nothing has been decided. No decision yet. Plans to meet with inner circle tomorrow.

[treiz]

I love how everyone is all about Levert and RHJ who were picked 21/22.... all about Diallo and Jeane and Giles and OG and Mitchell and Pasenicks...

but then when it comes to the portland trade its "Just" the 20th pick. thats a better pick then we currently have in what looks like a pretty deep draft. and our 2 best young players who both look really good were taken later then that in weaker drafts.

I agree with your notion in that this is a deep draft, and there are plenty or talents to be had in the latter stages of the draft.

But the picks and who you take with the pick are two separate entities, you can't take both to have the same face value. If for example hypothetically, Fultz falls to the 20th pick, then that 20th pick becomes really valuable to a lot of the teams from 20 downwards and will probably start offering WAY over market value for that pick for the opportunity to pick him. We would need to offer more than taking Leonard's and Turner's contract in order to get Portland to bite.

1) they arent massive contracts. Leonard is due 3/30. thats not massive in years or annuall salary. Turner is due 3/51. thats a bad contract but stil not huge. its not like we would be taking on one of these 4/78-84 type deals.

2) "enjoy having your cap locked into those two" really doesnt make sense since even trading those guys, they dont get under the cap. so we arent really giving them any cap relief that allows them to do anything. it gets them under the tax... but they could do that simply by waiving Ezili who only has 1 M of his 8M contract gauranteed.

3) no... they wouldnt consider 15... and why would they? your going to give up a pick in the mid teens just to get closer to the cap but still well over it? whats the point of that? even if it got them under the cap by 1-2 million that is still less felxibility then just using the MLE.

they are better off using #15 so they can get a good player who is owed just a rookie scale deal for 3 years. then when that rookie needs to get paid their 3 bad contracts(turner/crabbe) would expire.

I think portland would pay someone to eat turner for a price that makes sense(20 or 26). but 15 would just be a big overpay and not really worth it for them.

But for us... why not do it? we have 28 million in cap and nothing to really spend it on. why not stock pile young players on rookie deals isntead of signing the next trevor booker? I'm all for the sign guys to 1 year deals to roll the cap over for 1-2 more years... i like that strategy as well.... but using our cap to get draft picks is also a really great use of that cap space... especially if we get the same reaction from free agents this year as we did last year

1) But combined it's 3 years for 81 million, how can you say that's not massive? Don't forget they also take up two roster spots (a minor detail that could bite us back if they prove they can't contribute but I'm less worried about that).

2) Well precisely that, how are they suppose to improve their team and challenge in the playoffs if they don't have any cap? At least if we take Leonard and Turner, it gives them a bit of leeway by taking 26million off their books, after that they need to find another 13 million to get under the cap which I guess they could start with by waiving Ezeli. Fair enough they've accumulated multiple draft picks this year to compensate but it's difficult to rely on rookies to push you to the next step. It is a valuable asset and one that can be traded or developed into a key piece but trying to rely on rookies to push you to the next step is a difficult task.

3) This part is my general feelings regarding this. I love using our cap space right now to accumulate future draft picks, especially now that we're at a development phase, in fact I much prefer to use our cap space like this rather than using it on UFAs or RFAs. But, at the end of the day this is what we've become thanks to some incompetency.

I'm not saying that it's fair value for them, and I understand that unlikeliness of Portland even considering trading the 15th pick but as the GM of the Nets I have no reason to trade with Portland unless they offer me something that would pique my interest. Don't get me wrong I would love the 20th pick too, but I want to commit to a trade where (I believe it was MDB or Dise who said it) where we win it overwhelmingly. Not just the Nets making a trade for the sake of it (in this case for the sake that we're lacking draft picks), but trades with intent on screwing the other team.

Would I be upset if we take both Turner/Leonard for the 20th? Not really, at the end of the day their contracts run for 3 years and by the time they are on the final years we should be ready to push on to the playoffs, right now them taking up the cap is not a big deal. But that doesn't change the fact that eating up 81 million for 3 years just for the 20th pick is not great value.

[Prokorov]

I agree with your notion in that this is a deep draft, and there are plenty or talents to be had in the latter stages of the draft.

But the picks and who you take with the pick are two separate entities, you can't take both to have the same face value. If for example hypothetically, Fultz falls to the 20th pick, then that 20th pick becomes really valuable to a lot of the teams from 20 downwards and will probably start offering WAY over market value for that pick for the opportunity to pick him. We would need to offer more than taking Leonard's and Turner's contract in order to get Portland to bite.

I dont really get what you are trying to say here... my point one everyone loves Levert and RHJ and loves all these prospects we will be in range for at #22, but then they turn around say that the #20 pick from portland has little value. it has to go both ways.

1) But combined it's 3 years for 81 million, how can you say that's not massive? Don't forget they also take up two roster spots (a minor detail that could bite us back if they prove they can't contribute but I'm less worried about that).

thats not 1 contract though, its 2. and both could be useful players in our system. Turner as a ball handler, passer, and mentor and leonard as a stretch big. its not 3/81. its 2 seperate deals which is important because you have more flexibility with what you do with them

2) Well precisely that, how are they suppose to improve their team and challenge in the playoffs if they don't have any cap? At least if we take Leonard and Turner, it gives them a bit of leeway by taking 26million off their books, after that they need to find another 13 million to get under the cap which I guess they could start with by waiving Ezeli. Fair enough they've accumulated multiple draft picks this year to compensate but it's difficult to rely on rookies to push you to the next step. It is a valuable asset and one that can be traded or developed into a key piece but trying to rely on rookies to push you to the next step is a difficult task.

Even if they could clear 13 million under the cap that does nothing to help them aquire players. lets say they clear another 20 million in salary. that puts them 7 million under the cap... they have no more flexibility then they had before they were under the cap as in both instances the most they can offer is the MLE. it only helps portland if they can get 12+ million under the cap, which means shedding 25 million more, which they simply wont be able to do. So yea, those picks and getting guys on small contracts is important for them.

Also no need for them to try and win a title right away. they have some young guys. warriors arent breaking up anytime soon.

3) This part is my general feelings regarding this. I love using our cap space right now to accumulate future draft picks, especially now that we're at a development phase, in fact I much prefer to use our cap space like this rather than using it on UFAs or RFAs. But, at the end of the day this is what we've become thanks to some incompetency.

I'm not saying that it's fair value for them, and I understand that unlikeliness of Portland even considering trading the 15th pick but as the GM of the Nets I have no reason to trade with Portland unless they offer me something that would pique my interest. Don't get me wrong I would love the 20th pick too, but I want to commit to a trade where (I believe it was MDB or Dise who said it) where we win it overwhelmingly. Not just the Nets making a trade for the sake of it (in this case for the sake that we're lacking draft picks), but trades with intent on screwing the other team.

thats just not a realistic scenario. someone would need to have to be looking to dump like 30+ million per year in salary in order to sign someone iike lebron. otherwise it wont be woth it to them to pay such a high price to dump a player. just getting under the tax apron or the cap isnt enough motivation to give up a super high pick.... and dumping a useful player isnt worth giving up a high first.

this scenario were we only take back like a 2 year 30 million contract and get a pick in the teams just isnt very realistic in my opinion.

Would I be upset if we take both Turner/Leonard for the 20th? Not really, at the end of the day their contracts run for 3 years and by the time they are on the final years we should be ready to push on to the playoffs, right now them taking up the cap is not a big deal. But that doesn't change the fact that eating up 81 million for 3 years just for the 20th pick is not great value.

[/quote]

if you look at the history of salary dumps, that is fair value.

[Kaiser30]

if you look at the history of salary dumps, that is fair value.

Kings - Sixers salary dump which we all know allowed the Sixers to jump into the top 3 recently.

A young player one year into his rookie deal (Stauskas), two pick swaps and one top 10-protected pick which could eventually become unprotected for 21 M IN TOTAL (Landry and Thompson). Even adjusting this figure to the current cap, it's not even 30 M in total while you're claiming nearly 30 M PER YEAR for at least two years (Leonard expires after 2 while Turner is signed for another year) would be fair value when in fact, history absolutely suggests that it's not. And there are even more examples.

The Sixers absolutely robbed the Kings for generating enough cap space to sign Rondo, Koufos, Bellinelli and Casspi. Yikes. We shouldn't get our hopes high that anything close to that deal would be achievable for Marks, but there absolutely is no point selling our cap space for a low level return and calling it fair value.

[Prokorov]

if you look at the history of salary dumps, that is fair value.

Kings - Sixers salary dump which we all know allowed the Sixers to jump into the top 3 recently.

A young player one year into his rookie deal (Stauskas), two pick swaps and one top 10-protected pick which could eventually become unprotected for 21 M IN TOTAL (Landry and Thompson). Even adjusting this figure to the current cap, it's not even 30 M in total while you're claiming nearly 30 M PER YEAR for at least two years (Leonard expires after 2 while Turner is signed for another year) would be fair value when in fact, history absolutely suggests that it's not. And there are even more examples.

The Sixers absolutely robbed the Kings for generating enough cap space to sign Rondo, Koufos, Bellinelli and Casspi. Yikes. We shouldn't get our hopes high that anything close to that deal would be achievable for Marks, but there absolutely is no point selling our cap space for a low level return and calling it fair value.

that was a poor gamble on the kings... who were thinking they'd make the jump to the playoffs... and even so, you are talking about a top 10 protected pick they assume would be close to #20 when conveyed.

if you are saying for turner we should get a future, lotto protected pick, i think thats possible. if you are talking about picks where we already know the draft position of the pick, i dont think anyone is giving you more then #20.

also, the kings situation is the "rare scenario" i mentioned.... where clearing the salary doesnt just get them under the tax/cap it creates eal cap space for them to sign multiple players. even then, an overpay on their part.

i guess if we can find a desperate GM, with a team who needs to make the playoffs or his job is gone, where taking 20-30M in salary puts them 15-20M under the cap, then yeah we could maybe get a future top 10 protected pick and another asset.

that is not the portland situation. thats not the raps situation. thats not really any situation i can see around the league right now.

And there are example on the other side too... the hawks dumped joe johnson... one of the worst contracts maybe ever and they RECIEVED two picks.

[Paradise]

Tony Bradley is staying in the draft.

Read on Twitter

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[twosevenstreet]

I think Hami gets a call from the Nets today and stays in the draft.

[CalamityX12]

Diallo wants a lotto team to pick him up.... IMO.

Maybe its a smarter move to wait out, play and build up your stock. I don't know what next year's draft class but I'd imagine it be weaker than this one.

[treiz]

Double post

[treiz]

I dont really get what you are trying to say here... my point one everyone loves Levert and RHJ and loves all these prospects we will be in range for at #22, but then they turn around say that the #20 pick from portland has little value. it has to go both ways.

Ok then well, of course everyone here is excited at the range of prospects in this region, we've sort of known since the start of the year that we might get a late-lotto to early 20s pick with the pick swap with Boston and a trade midseason to hopefully add another one in the range. With the depth of this draft we've been speculating the whole season and so the people on this board concentrated on prospects within our draft range. But if we had a lottery pick we would be even more excited at the prospects that could be available there too. Just because you're excited about certain prospects doesn't really determine the value of a pick, especially considering what you're giving up for it.

thats not 1 contract though, its 2. and both could be useful players in our system. Turner as a ball handler, passer, and mentor and leonard as a stretch big. its not 3/81. its 2 seperate deals which is important because you have more flexibility with what you do with them

But it's one transaction, so we're taking on two contracts with one move so we have to take into account both contracts as one entity. I'm not saying they couldn't be useful, I'm sure Atkinson can work his magic on them (hence why I said minor detail earlier) but at the end of the day it's one transaction. Really it's all semantics but essentially we're taking in 3 years, $81 million of salary for one draft pick. Once they're on the team, you're right there is flexibility to be had with them but that's something we can discuss if this move happens.

Even if they could clear 13 million under the cap that does nothing to help them aquire players. lets say they clear another 20 million in salary. that puts them 7 million under the cap... they have no more flexibility then they had before they were under the cap as in both instances the most they can offer is the MLE. it only helps portland if they can get 12+ million under the cap, which means shedding 25 million more, which they simply wont be able to do. So yea, those picks and getting guys on small contracts is important for them.

Also no need for them to try and win a title right away. they have some young guys. warriors arent breaking up anytime soon.

I agree with you on this now, fair point.

thats just not a realistic scenario. someone would need to have to be looking to dump like 30+ million per year in salary in order to sign someone iike lebron. otherwise it wont be woth it to them to pay such a high price to dump a player. just getting under the tax apron or the cap isnt enough motivation to give up a super high pick.... and dumping a useful player isnt worth giving up a high first.

this scenario were we only take back like a 2 year 30 million contract and get a pick in the teams just isnt very realistic in my opinion.

if you look at the history of salary dumps, that is fair value.

And that's fine, why force trades we don't have to? Sooner or later somebody will get desperate and try to clear cap with potentially great assets. There's still opportunities to be had down the line, there's no need to rush this and commit cap now. We've just completed year 1. I just don't think that trade is good value and I'm not looking for fair value, I want to completely screw the other team.

Also, I feel like there's a misunderstanding here, you are saying Turner and Leonard for the 20th pick right?

[NyCeEvO]

I think Hami gets a call from the Nets today and stays in the draft.

I think it's clear that the Nets want him. They have asked his former coaches about, he's worked out for them (despite saying that he wouldn't work out for a team with a pick lower than 20), and Calipari went to HSS to undoubtedly talk with the Nets about him.

For Diallo, I think he probably wants to be top 20 because he wants/needs the money.

For the Nets, I personally think that they would prefer that their first 1st round pick would be used on a player who can contribute immediately like Levert and Whitehead.

Diallo needs at least a year of NCAA/D-League experience and constant reps before he plays in the league, which would basically make him our top 2018 lotto pick.

IMO, I think what Marks & co. ideally want is to have a third 1st round pick in the late lottery to use on a player who's more ready to contribute right now and then select Diallo with the 22nd overall pick. The problem is that Diallo probably won't be there at 22 considering teams like the Bucks and Heat, who have better rosters but can afford to wait 1-2 years for him to develop, would select him before 22.

Don't be surprised if the Nets trade Lopez for cap space and pick between 10 & 25 to use on Diallo (a la the Levert deal). We would gain an extra $20mil to use on free agents and a much better chance to draft and develop Diallo.

[Paradise]

Yeah, I think the ideal interest is two stash picks. One contributor. That's the reason Woj insists we'll be looking for a salary dump. I still think the best bet is Carroll / 23rd. Perhaps for Nicholson?

- Diallo (D-League stash)
- Kurucs (overseas)
- 23rd
- 57th


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[NyCeEvO]

Yeah, I think the ideal interest is two stash picks. One contributor. That's the reason Woj insists we'll be looking for a salary dump. I still think the best bet is Carroll / 23rd. Perhaps for Nicholson?

I knew I forgot to include an additional point in my post. Yes, exactly.

The Nets wanted a pick and were willing to take on Nicholson because his $6mil/yr salary combined with the salary of the rookie selected is peanuts if the rookie they want is developed and pans out to be the player they hope he'd become.

They will do another trade just like that again, if it's available.

The Lakers' 28th pick is too late for the Nets. Also, I think the Nets aren't really interested in the Lakers salary dump because the salaries that they would be willing to give up are too burdensome for just gaining the 28th pick.

We got the 22nd pick and Nicholson (salary dump) for Bogs (RFA) and CMC (currently, a borderline NBA player).
Larry Nance (IMO, borderline NBA player) and Deng/Mozgov (2.5-3x the amount of Nicholson's contract) is too much to pay for the 28th pick.

[Ror1997]

Carroll and 23 is such a no brainer its not even funny. Carroll is the Vet we need, He's familiar with KA, and he's proven his skillset excels in a system similar to ours. Easy call.

If we were to hypothetically draft Diallo, I wouldn't even sign him. He'd go to the DLeague, we'd retain his draft rights, and then we sign him next off season, and be able to give him lotto range money. Works out great for everyone.

[NyCeEvO]

If we were to hypothetically draft Diallo, I wouldn't even sign him. He'd go to the DLeague, we'd retain his draft rights, and then we sign him next off season, and be able to give him lotto range money. Works out great for everyone.

Why would Diallo agree to this?

It's essentially like playing in college for a year. He would have same risk of injury with no financial backing; but it's even worse for him since we would give him the salary number for the draft spot.

Remember, rookie salaries are fixed and scaled according to your draft spot.

The first year salary for a player selected at #22 in the 2016 draft is $1,199,900.
For #10, it's $2,140,500.
For #5, it's $3,227,100.
For #1, it's $4,919,300.

These salaries can only be flexed up or down 20%, so it's not like we can give him the salary of the #1 pick after he played a year in the D-Leaguue.

If he stayed in college for a year, he'd be selected much higher spot and get a more lucrative contract.

Also, if he doesn't have a contract, he can be poached by another team. So you'd be forced to give him a two-way contract. He's not going to (and frankly, shouldn't) jump through all of those loopholes when he can sign with another team that will give him the contract that he wants without conditions.