Going forward to next season and beyond

[Prokorov]

Two things,

1) Absolutely ridiculous to suggest that Raps still don't do this even if Warriors add the 7th pick OG is a great role player, not an all star, it would be madness to trade the 7th pick in a strong draft for him. The value perception here is similar to Robert Covington last year, who cost 2 lotto protected picks for Portland. OG is more valuable than RoCo, hence higher return here.

2) Sure, GSW might prefer OG over Joe but Nets are giving up extra assets here which allows them to be in the position to get OG here instead. If Warriors wish to cut out Nets out of the deal and get OG themselves, they have to give up more.

'Nets give up nothing of real value outside harris, who outside wigging also has the largest deal i believe.

GSW would defintely prefer OG to Joe and i agree with others, 0 shot Raps do this deal even if its #7

So Claxton and a 1st don't suddenly don't count as assets now? Joe's value is in the gutter around the league because of one awful series?

"A 1st rounder" is a really general way of describing our pick, which is #27 overall. Which is much closer to the second round then it is the lottery and thus has much less value. Some teams actually value early seconds more then picks in the 26-30 range as you get similar talent but on a non-guaranteed deal.

I love Claxton, i think most here do. He has great defensive potential... but the center position is one of the easiest to fill with a rim running/shot blocking big, who typically go later in the draft (i.e. where claxton was picked). Teams arent giving up much for a 2nd year big like claxton, who hasnt played all that much, and hasnt shown a ton of offensive ability with Harden isnt there helping get him easy looks.

#27 + Claxton would probably get you pick number 18-22. which is lower then the pick we needed to get Shamet, let alone OG.

[Prokorov]

OG is good but not that good, you guys are seriously overvaluing the **** out of him and out of your minds if you think the 7th pick for him should be turned down. He doesn't have an all star ceiling at all, he is a very good role player. That's it. This is a stacked draft at the top, and there are plenty of good prospects in the lottery. For a team in rebuild mode, the 7th pick in a good draft is very valuable, it's not about what the outcome usually ends up being. No good FO thinks like that.

And I don't care to ask Toronto fans, they overvalue the **** out of their players, more than other fanbases tend to do. This is the same fanbase that tried to convince GB that Wiseman/7th/14th for Siakam is a laughable offer, I can't ever take them seriously. There's very rarely ever an agreement on a fan presented trade anyways. I would also like to remind you that you constantly argued with me last year that we didn't have enough for a star player trade (among other things that you ended up being wrong on), yet we were able to trade for an MVP candidate caliber player.

if toronto wanted a pick around 7, they could get it without giving up OG.

You are over valuing the 7 pick and criminally underrating OG

The only other way Raps are getting #7 is either they trade down from 4th or trade Siakam. No one else on the roster has that type of value.

I think you guys are severely overrating OG, and I really like OG as a piece. He's not as impactful of a team defender as Robert Covington, who went for less last year. Advanced metrics don't rate OG as an amazing/impactful role player. OG still obviously has more value than RoCo due to age, better offensive play, but ultimately, he's still a 3&D role guy, not the all star caliber talent that you guys seem to be painting him as (judging by trade value).

the 7 year age difference is not a small difference. And OG is a much better offensive player. in his 4th season OG has topped Covingtons career high in points, 3PT % (on higher volume then cobington) TS%, eFG% and basically every relevant offensive stat. I also would not write off OG as a future all-star.

I mean 16/6/2/2/1.5 on 40% from three and All-NBA calibur defense in his 4th season (the 2 most recent during covid) he still has alot of upside. With Lowry probably gone and more volume he could easily be a 20/8/3 wing with all-nba defense and high %/high volume three point shooting. he is better then siakim, who has made an all-star team

in either even, OG is worth more then Covington, even when covington was 24.

[Prokorov]

I wouldn't trade Claxton. I really do think the kid has DPOY potential. I'd actually love to see him get the starting C spot next season.

I agree on his potential and him starting if we keep him.

I would trade him though. We may realistically only have 1-2 year window to win a title. and we may go another 20+ years before we have this kind of realistic shot at a title again.

I think are staff is set on having shooters at the 5, so unless claxton brings that way up, even if he starts he will lose minutes to guys like blake/green or whomever else we bring in.

The Nerlens Noel rumors dont look good for Claxton long term... the team either thinks they need a bigger/bulkier guy or that they plan to need to trade claxton. that on top of nash prefering stretch 5s, not great for claxtons minutes

[DarkXaero]

I wouldn't trade Claxton. I really do think the kid has DPOY potential. I'd actually love to see him get the starting C spot next season.

I agree on his potential and him starting if we keep him.

I would trade him though. We may realistically only have 1-2 year window to win a title. and we may go another 20+ years before we have this kind of realistic shot at a title again.

I think are staff is set on having shooters at the 5, so unless claxton brings that way up, even if he starts he will lose minutes to guys like blake/green or whomever else we bring in.

The Nerlens Noel rumors dont look good for Claxton long term... the team either thinks they need a bigger/bulkier guy or that they plan to need to trade claxton. that on top of nash prefering stretch 5s, not great for claxtons minutes

So you agree on Claxton's potential being that high, yet he's only netting you a 1st round pick in 18-22 range IF you package him with another first. That makes no sense...

[DarkXaero]

if toronto wanted a pick around 7, they could get it without giving up OG.

You are over valuing the 7 pick and criminally underrating OG

The only other way Raps are getting #7 is either they trade down from 4th or trade Siakam. No one else on the roster has that type of value.

I think you guys are severely overrating OG, and I really like OG as a piece. He's not as impactful of a team defender as Robert Covington, who went for less last year. Advanced metrics don't rate OG as an amazing/impactful role player. OG still obviously has more value than RoCo due to age, better offensive play, but ultimately, he's still a 3&D role guy, not the all star caliber talent that you guys seem to be painting him as (judging by trade value).

the 7 year age difference is not a small difference. And OG is a much better offensive player. in his 4th season OG has topped Covingtons career high in points, 3PT % (on higher volume then cobington) TS%, eFG% and basically every relevant offensive stat. I also would not write off OG as a future all-star.

I mean 16/6/2/2/1.5 on 40% from three and All-NBA calibur defense in his 4th season (the 2 most recent during covid) he still has alot of upside. With Lowry probably gone and more volume he could easily be a 20/8/3 wing with all-nba defense and high %/high volume three point shooting. he is better then siakim, who has made an all-star team

in either even, OG is worth more then Covington, even when covington was 24.

I agree that OG is a significantly better offensive player than RoCo, and age difference is a factor. But OG is not a better overall defender than RoCo, and advanced stats show RoCo to be a far more impactful defender than OG. That's where you guys are really overrating OG, you think he's some automatic all NBA defense caliber guy who is giving you that kind of offensive production, when that wasn't the case. The more he's doing offensively, the worse his defense is. It's similar to Siakam, whose defense has declined since he became a high volume guy.

[DarkXaero]

^
Look, we can agree to disagree on the granular details of OG's value. The main point is, Toronto already has a top pick, they don't need the #7 or the #14 as another project to develop simultaneously. They are poised to contend if they manage their capspace well, and Anunoby puts them closer to doing that than any rookie. This proposal is DoA, let it go.

I already said the trade works IF Toronto commit to rebuild route, which they very well might. A rebuilding team welcomes as many picks as possible (look at OKC), they aren't necessarily going to say "we already have one top pick in the draft, we don't want another". If Raptors want to contend for a playoffs spot next season, of course, they should keep OG. Masai is a really smart GM however, and I don't think he ever wants to settle for mediocrity though (competing for low playoff seed with big contracts on the roster).

Also, you should be the last person to tell someone to "let it go" on trade proposals after your track record on T&T board

[Prokorov]

I wouldn't trade Claxton. I really do think the kid has DPOY potential. I'd actually love to see him get the starting C spot next season.

I agree on his potential and him starting if we keep him.

I would trade him though. We may realistically only have 1-2 year window to win a title. and we may go another 20+ years before we have this kind of realistic shot at a title again.

I think are staff is set on having shooters at the 5, so unless claxton brings that way up, even if he starts he will lose minutes to guys like blake/green or whomever else we bring in.

The Nerlens Noel rumors dont look good for Claxton long term... the team either thinks they need a bigger/bulkier guy or that they plan to need to trade claxton. that on top of nash prefering stretch 5s, not great for claxtons minutes

So you agree on Claxton's potential being that high, yet he's only netting you a 1st round pick in 18-22 range IF you package him with another first. That makes no sense...

It does. Because potential on guys who are not a plus on both sides of the ball (specifically offense), who havent played much, who didnt dominate at lower levels, and who are not 19-21 typically are not very valuable assets. ESPECIALLY at the center position.

Like take Mitchell Robinson. He was replaced by nerlense noel and it was basically a wash. because centers dont have much value (unless they are a #1 scoring option who shoots threes) and you can typically replace 75-95% of a good defender with a low pick/low salary guy. Like when capella got hurt the hawks brought dedmon off the street with little/no drop off.

I think Claxton can be a great all-nba defender. but at center thats not worth a ton and as a PG through PF its not worth much if you cant shoot threes. It also doesnt help that he isnt a good/great rebounder.

Why trade for Claxton when you can draft 75-100% of claxton with a pick in the 25-35 range?

Teams arent trading picks for 1-way or defensive bigs.


I mean, for a point of reference, Jarrett Allen was dealt for the Bucks first via cleveland. which will end up being 29/30 and was viewed as lock 25 or later. and Allen was much more established on both ends at the time then Claxton is now.

[Prokorov]

The only other way Raps are getting #7 is either they trade down from 4th or trade Siakam. No one else on the roster has that type of value.

I think you guys are severely overrating OG, and I really like OG as a piece. He's not as impactful of a team defender as Robert Covington, who went for less last year. Advanced metrics don't rate OG as an amazing/impactful role player. OG still obviously has more value than RoCo due to age, better offensive play, but ultimately, he's still a 3&D role guy, not the all star caliber talent that you guys seem to be painting him as (judging by trade value).

the 7 year age difference is not a small difference. And OG is a much better offensive player. in his 4th season OG has topped Covingtons career high in points, 3PT % (on higher volume then cobington) TS%, eFG% and basically every relevant offensive stat. I also would not write off OG as a future all-star.

I mean 16/6/2/2/1.5 on 40% from three and All-NBA calibur defense in his 4th season (the 2 most recent during covid) he still has alot of upside. With Lowry probably gone and more volume he could easily be a 20/8/3 wing with all-nba defense and high %/high volume three point shooting. he is better then siakim, who has made an all-star team

in either even, OG is worth more then Covington, even when covington was 24.

I agree that OG is a significantly better offensive player than RoCo, and age difference is a factor. But OG is not a better overall defender than RoCo, and advanced stats show RoCo to be a far more impactful defender than OG. That's where you guys are really overrating OG, you think he's some automatic all NBA defense caliber guy who is giving you that kind of offensive production, when that wasn't the case. The more he's doing offensively, the worse his defense is. It's similar to Siakam, whose defense has declined since he became a high volume guy.

Almost no one is as impactful defensively as RoCo. OG is a legit all-nba defense calibur players. I mean, he didnt make the team the past 2 years, but he did get votes. And in the NBA, GMs value offense alot more then defense, since really, no one can guard a star 1 on 1, so its diminish returns. You want good defenders without sacraficing too much on offense. OG is the prototype for a 2-way role player. he can get you 20-25, shoot threes, and not just sit in the corner. He is probably a year away from being what jaylen brown was this year.

[DarkXaero]

I agree on his potential and him starting if we keep him.

I would trade him though. We may realistically only have 1-2 year window to win a title. and we may go another 20+ years before we have this kind of realistic shot at a title again.

I think are staff is set on having shooters at the 5, so unless claxton brings that way up, even if he starts he will lose minutes to guys like blake/green or whomever else we bring in.

The Nerlens Noel rumors dont look good for Claxton long term... the team either thinks they need a bigger/bulkier guy or that they plan to need to trade claxton. that on top of nash prefering stretch 5s, not great for claxtons minutes

So you agree on Claxton's potential being that high, yet he's only netting you a 1st round pick in 18-22 range IF you package him with another first. That makes no sense...

It does. Because potential on guys who are not a plus on both sides of the ball (specifically offense), who havent played much, who didnt dominate at lower levels, and who are not 19-21 typically are not very valuable assets. ESPECIALLY at the center position.

Like take Mitchell Robinson. He was replaced by nerlense noel and it was basically a wash. because centers dont have much value (unless they are a #1 scoring option who shoots threes) and you can typically replace 75-95% of a good defender with a low pick/low salary guy. Like when capella got hurt the hawks brought dedmon off the street with little/no drop off.

I think Claxton can be a great all-nba defender. but at center thats not worth a ton and as a PG through PF its not worth much if you cant shoot threes. It also doesnt help that he isnt a good/great rebounder.

Why trade for Claxton when you can draft 75-100% of claxton with a pick in the 25-35 range?

Teams arent trading picks for 1-way or defensive bigs.

Bro, that doesn't make sense. There isn't a Claxton or even a Jarrett Allen late in every draft. That's just fantastic opportunistic drafting by Sean Marks. It's also very ironic to bring this up, considering that we had the chance to draft OG Anunoby, who was picked right after Jarrett Allen. The Mitch Robinson/Noel analogy doesn't really work here. They are both centers whose biggest strength was being a rim protector (Noel was also a highly touted prospect drafted in the lotto). It's also a case of Mitch Robinson being overrated by Knicks fans, and Noel being better in that role than many fans think he is. The Capela/Dedmon example is even worse because Hawks were trash that year and didn't make the playoffs (Dedmon was also really bad for them). With Capela healthy, they made playoffs this year.

Claxton's biggest strength isn't being a rim protector, it's something even more valuable: the ability to guard smaller guys on the perimeter on switches. That is so incredibly valuable in today's NBA and Claxton was elite at it this year. Guys like Mitch Robinson, Nerlens Noel, Clint Capela, none of them can do that at the level that Claxton can. Claxton's offensive game is certainly a huge work in progress but if that was along, then we wouldn't even be having this conversation, he'd be an extremely high value asset in the NBA who could be near untouchable status. But yeah the notion that there's a Claxton available in every draft in the 25-35 range is ridiculous. There were like very few if any guys in the NBA this year, who did as well or better than Claxton on guarding switches. And you're talking about this type of player being available late in every draft

[Prokorov]

Bro, that doesn't make sense. There isn't a Claxton or even a Jarrett Allen late in every draft. That's just fantastic opportunistic drafting by Sean Marks. It's also very ironic to bring this up, considering that we had the chance to draft OG Anunoby, who was picked right after Jarrett Allen. The Mitch Robinson/Noel analogy doesn't really work here. They are both centers whose biggest strength was being a rim protector (Noel was also a highly touted prospect drafted in the lotto). It's also a case of Mitch Robinson being overrated by Knicks fans, and Noel being better in that role than many fans think he is. The Capela/Dedmon example is even worse because Hawks were trash that year and didn't make the playoffs (Dedmon was also really bad for them). With Capela healthy, they made playoffs this year.

There is a claxton type, or multiple every year. many in the D-league, some undrafted. Current NBA doesnt value defensive only/minded bigs, so the go late, dont play a ton. Most teams are going small at center, or if they do have a defensive minded big, they bring alot on offense as well. and even in those instances, there was not alot invested pick/trade wise for those players.

Dedmon was great for the hawks, played well for miami this year as well. Hawks turn around has more to do with the development of Trae Young and the health of collins. The hawks had a winning record last year with collins and similar win% to this year.

Claxton's biggest strength isn't being a rim protector, it's something even more valuable: the ability to guard smaller guys on the perimeter on switches. That is so incredibly valuable in today's NBA and Claxton was elite at it this year. Guys like Mitch Robinson, Nerlens Noel, Clint Capela, none of them can do that at the level that Claxton can. Claxton's offensive game is certainly a huge work in progress but if that was along, then we wouldn't even be having this conversation, he'd be an extremely high value asset in the NBA who could be near untouchable status. But yeah the notion that there's a Claxton available in every draft in the 25-35 range is ridiculous. There were like very few if any guys in the NBA this year, who did as well or better than Claxton on guarding switches. And you're talking about this type of player being available late in every draft

The ability to switch is great. But it doesnt matter if his offense and rebounding arent positives, as teams can get the same result going small. it is part of why claxton didnt play over green/griffin. because playing a PF at C gave you similar switchability with a ton more shooting. obviously, claxton defends better, even on switches, then those 2... but the point is, in todays NBA, offense and shooting are so much more valuable that just being ok on switches is valued more then being great on switches but a non-shooter.

Teams arent giving up much for someone like claxton. there is a reason he went late, a reason he didnt see time in the playoffs even with a ton of injuries, etc...

Yeah, if he starts hitting threes or grabbing 10 rebounds a game he could be worth a lotto pick. certainly not worth near that now. and thats before you factor in he hasnt played much and had some injuries.

[DarkXaero]

There is a claxton type, or multiple every year. many in the D-league, some undrafted. Current NBA doesnt value defensive only/minded bigs, so the go late, dont play a ton. Most teams are going small at center, or if they do have a defensive minded big, they bring alot on offense as well. and even in those instances, there was not alot invested pick/trade wise for those players.

Dedmon was great for the hawks, played well for miami this year as well. Hawks turn around has more to do with the development of Trae Young and the health of collins. The hawks had a winning record last year with collins and similar win% to this year.

This is false, I need you to provide examples here, otherwise its just gibberish. I do agree on the general sentiment that NBA is starting to move away from defense only centers (Gobert's recent failure in playoffs furthers that), but thats the type of case where those guys are being paid a ton of money and end up getting exposed in playoffs. Claxton is on low end rookie scale salary with two years remaining so he's fantastic value atm. Dedmon was trash for the Hawks. He only played 10 games too with a dreadful 46% TS%, i think you're getting your stuff mixed up here Then he got traded and waived, and no one in the NBA picked him up for months until Miami took the chance. Now he was good for Miami, but prior to that, he had been undeniably trash for past year at least.

The ability to switch is great. But it doesnt matter if his offense and rebounding arent positives, as teams can get the same result going small. it is part of why claxton didnt play over green/griffin. because playing a PF at C gave you similar switchability with a ton more shooting. obviously, claxton defends better, even on switches, then those 2... but the point is, in todays NBA, offense and shooting are so much more valuable that just being ok on switches is valued more then being great on switches but a non-shooter.

Teams arent giving up much for someone like claxton. there is a reason he went late, a reason he didnt see time in the playoffs even with a ton of injuries, etc...

Yeah, if he starts hitting threes or grabbing 10 rebounds a game he could be worth a lotto pick. certainly not worth near that now. and thats before you factor in he hasnt played much and had some injuries.

Claxton's rebounding is fine so I don't know why you keep bringing that up. Will he struggle on the boards against great rebounders? Yes. But let's not act like his rebounding rate is mediocre, when it's not. The main reason why Claxton couldn't get playing time in the playoffs was him being an offensive liability. Opposition defenses were forcing us to funnel possession to Claxton who displayed black hole tendencies in the postseason. But that's far from the worst thing, he's young and inexperienced, he'll get much better as he puts on more muscle and develops his offensive game. People forget that this was a 2nd year player on a title contender, and he had barely played many games in his rookie year, then had a huge setback in bubble/offseason with shoulder surgery.

The reason why Claxton went super late in the draft is because teams had massive concerns over his frame/durability. So far in the NBA, he has far exceeded expectations relative to his draft position and a lot of those GMs have been proven wrong already, so it's pointless to bring up him going super late as a negative NOW.

[Prokorov]

This is false, I need you to provide examples here, otherwise its just gibberish. I do agree on the general sentiment that NBA is starting to move away from defense only centers (Gobert's recent failure in playoffs furthers that), but thats the type of case where those guys are being paid a ton of money and end up getting exposed in playoffs. Claxton is on low end rookie scale salary with two years remaining so he's fantastic value atm. Dedmon was trash for the Hawks. He only played 10 games too with a dreadful 46% TS%, i think you're getting your stuff mixed up here Then he got traded and waived, and no one in the NBA picked him up for months until Miami took the chance. Now he was good for Miami, but prior to that, he had been undeniably trash for past year at least.

I mean, in the last few drafts

McDaniels (28)
Claxton (31)
Williams III (27)
Martin (25)
Looney (30)
Capella (25)

Then you have guys who went undrafted cause they were a 0 on offense like Koumadje, Kabengele, Isiah todd....

It is just not a valuable position and within that its not a valuable subset of skills. teams would rather play a smallball 5 who can shoot then a big who cant shoot but can switch.

Claxton's rebounding is fine so I don't know why you keep bringing that up. Will he struggle on the boards against great rebounders? Yes. But let's not act like his rebounding rate is mediocre, when it's not. The main reason why Claxton couldn't get playing time in the playoffs was him being an offensive liability.

I wasnt saying he wasnt a bad rebounder. i was saying he wasnt a good/great one, which he isnt. and if your out there for your defense, your losing value if you arent also an outstanding rebounder. case in point, nets where excellent forcing misses, but poor grabbing rebounds. if Claxton rebounded like capella, he probably would have played more (and be worth a bit more). being a great rebounder helps teams play smaller. and makes it easier to keep offense limited bigs on the floor. again this isnt about his weaknesses, its about his value. and alot of them add up to his diminished value, not being a great rebounder is one of them.

Opposition defenses were forcing us to funnel possession to Claxton who displayed black hole tendencies in the postseason. But that's far from the worst thing, he's young and inexperienced, he'll get much better as he puts on more muscle and develops his offensive game. People forget that this was a 2nd year player on a title contender, and he had barely played many games in his rookie year, then had a huge setback in bubble/offseason with shoulder surgery.

These are all good reasons for struggling, they are all poor reasons for him to be valued highlight trade-wise. and while he did play on a title contender, he still struggled to see minutes despite DJ being removed from the rotaiton, Aldridge retiring, and Green being limited with injuries.

saying he is young and inexperienced doesnt factor in when you are talking about his value vs. a draft pick, which would also be young and inexperienced with upside/

The reason why Claxton went super late in the draft is because teams had massive concerns over his frame/durability. So far in the NBA, he has far exceeded expectations relative to his draft position and a lot of those GMs have been proven wrong already, so it's pointless to bring up him going super late as a negative NOW.

[/quote]

i dont think this is true. if anything, the criticism have been accurate. struggles to stay healthy, not a great rebounder, not great offensively. if you did a redraft, he still goes 25 or later... mostly because 95% of the picks are non-centers.

[DarkXaero]

I mean, in the last few drafts

McDaniels (28)
Claxton (31)
Williams III (27)
Martin (25)
Looney (30)
Capella (25)

Then you have guys who went undrafted cause they were a 0 on offense like Koumadje, Kabengele, Isiah todd....

It is just not a valuable position and within that its not a valuable subset of skills. teams would rather play a smallball 5 who can shoot then a big who cant shoot but can switch.

None of those guys are similar to Claxton. Closest thing to Claxton there is probably Robert Williams III, who is still more of a rim protector than a guy who is comfortable on perimeter. The undrafted guys are not even worth mentioning, they're nowhere near Claxton level.

I wasnt saying he wasnt a bad rebounder. i was saying he wasnt a good/great one, which he isnt. and if your out there for your defense, your losing value if you arent also an outstanding rebounder. case in point, nets where excellent forcing misses, but poor grabbing rebounds. if Claxton rebounded like capella, he probably would have played more (and be worth a bit more). being a great rebounder helps teams play smaller. and makes it easier to keep offense limited bigs on the floor. again this isnt about his weaknesses, its about his value. and alot of them add up to his diminished value, not being a great rebounder is one of them.

Key thing is that Claxton has the motor/tenacity for rebounding so he'll eventually become a high level rebounder. Right now, that is how he gets rebounds. When he actually adds strength to his frame, he'll improve significantly and become a great rebounder. Rebounding is not my long term concern with Claxton.

These are all good reasons for struggling, they are all poor reasons for him to be valued highlight trade-wise. and while he did play on a title contender, he still struggled to see minutes despite DJ being removed from the rotaiton, Aldridge retiring, and Green being limited with injuries.

saying he is young and inexperienced doesnt factor in when you are talking about his value vs. a draft pick, which would also be young and inexperienced with upside/

Well, I'm not a homer so I will address the negatives and concerns with Claxton. I know what his flaws are and I also recognize and value his strengths.

i dont think this is true. if anything, the criticism have been accurate. struggles to stay healthy, not a great rebounder, not great offensively. if you did a redraft, he still goes 25 or later... mostly because 95% of the picks are non-centers.

Completely disagree on Claxton's draft spot in a redraft. No chance he goes 25 or later.

[DarkXaero]

Article on how Nets view Claxton:

https://hoopshype.com/lists/ben-simmons-trade-scenarios-spencer-dinwiddie-free-agency/

Scotto: Brooklyn absolutely loves Nic Claxton. I was told he wasn’t going anywhere before the trade deadline to give you an idea how much they like him. To get him, it sounded like he’d have to be in a package that was for a star. When they got James Harden, they were able to keep him, which gives you a bit of a glimpse into how much they value him. As he continues to get stronger and put on weight, this is a guy that can potentially be the long-term starting center for the Nets. He’s everything you want in a big man in today’s NBA. He can handle the ball, block shots, and is a good offensive rebounder.

Gozlan: His potential gave them all the confidence they needed to include Jarrett Allen in that Harden trade. Nic came along this year. He’s extension eligible this offseason. It should be somewhere around $55-59 million. That’s the maximum number.

From last September:

https://hoopshype.com/2020/09/06/michael-scotto-anthony-puccio-steve-nash-brooklyn-nets/

What executives and scouts think of Nicolas Claxton as a trade target.

Scotto: “Anytime I’ve had conversations with opposing scouts or executives, Nic Claxton is a guy that they all come out to watch and talk to people about to try and get more background on. If he was in the draft this year, no doubt in my mind he was going to be a lottery pick and probably in the top 10.”

So you're clearly off base on your draft evaluation of Nic Claxton.

[Prokorov]

None of those guys are similar to Claxton. Closest thing to Claxton there is probably Robert Williams III, who is still more of a rim protector than a guy who is comfortable on perimeter. The undrafted guys are not even worth mentioning, they're nowhere near Claxton level.

I disagree. Martin is probably the closest and looney as well. Martin can guard 1-5 and typically do so better then a wing.

Key thing is that Claxton has the motor/tenacity for rebounding so he'll eventually become a high level rebounder. Right now, that is how he gets rebounds. When he actually adds strength to his frame, he'll improve significantly and become a great rebounder. Rebounding is not my long term concern with Claxton.

it doesnt really work that way. and being high energy and not being a good rebounder(again not saying he is bad) in an era where teams dont hit the offensive glass much to me is more evidence he is not likely to be a great one then that it will eventually get there. Rebounding is a big part effort, but its also skill. and saying "if he adds size he will improve there" is also true for every young big.

Most importantly, he isnt a good/great rebounder now. He is basically just a defender. and thats not valuable in a league where already bigs are not valued much. playing a not so valued position while not shooting, not being a great rebounder, being avg or worse offensively, and having some durability concerns doesnt really get you much in trade value.

Well, I'm not a homer so I will address the negatives and concerns with Claxton. I know what his flaws are and I also recognize and value his strengths.

which is fine. he isnt some scrub and he has potential. but value wise in a trade, guys like claxton arent going to gain much interest. Teams would rather try and draft their own claxton, get a guy who fits what they want, who is 1-2 years younger with more team control... and probably someone who shoots.

[Prokorov]

Completely disagree on Claxton's draft spot in a redraft. No chance he goes 25 or later.

I mean, im not sure how you can say with confidence he doesnt go below 25.

Of the top 15 picks, most hit. And it is hard to argue any of these teams would take claxton in a redraft:

Top 15 who stick (13)
-Zion
-Ja
-RJ Barrett
-Hunter
-Garland
-White
-Rui
-Reddish
-Cam Johnson
-PJ Washington
-Herro
-Lankford
-Sekou

That leaves out Jaxson Hayes who is basically a Jarret Allen Clone and Jarrett Culver. While Hayes drops in a redraft, its no lock he goes after claxton, given he is a better rim runner, younger, and more athletic. Culver may drop below claxton, but the wolves likely take a small still, not a big, given their roster and available players being that high. Sekou hasnt beem off the charts, but is 2 years younger with enormous 2-way upside. I dont think detroit expected more from a foreign 19 year old at this point.

Next 10 who stick (7):
-Okeke
-Thybule
-clarke
-Keldon Johnson
-Porter, Jr.
-Alexander-Walker
-Bazley

Okeke has been a great glue guy for orlando, and they likely dont take a big even if they go elsewhere. The rest have all played well to outstanding and been great fits. that brings us to 20 players.

Guys in the same "ballpark" (6)
-Jaxon Hayes
-Ty Jerome
-Grant Williams
-Kabengele
-Poole
-Little

Boston loves williams. Hayes is not a top 10 guy but he is a legit first rounder, younger, and super athletic. Poole played really well this year, and even if you want to rate claxton higher, GSW probably doesnt go with a big in that spot. I know you dont count Kabengele because he played in the G-league, but he was outstanding their defensively (i think all-defense) and Claxton played g-league too. Lets say only 2 of those 6 stick, that brings the total to 22.


Teams that drafted small(3):
Suns
Wolves
Cavs

These are teams that all have cemented bigs of the future (Allen/Towns/Ayton) and who drafted small. Lets say just 1 of these 3 stick small and go big and would take claxton. That brings us to 23

Guys who leapfrog claxton(3):
-Eric Paschall
-Talen Horton Tucker
-Terrance Mann

Lets say just 2 of those leapfrog claxton. That brings us to 25

I think that is a pretty conservative 25 ahead of Claxton as well. You could argue a team in the late 1st round would gamble on a better environment with culver over taking claxton. you could argue more of the "ballpark group" would still go ahead of claxton. And then i mean, even someone like Bitzate or Samanic... young foreign guys who went in the teens, who is to say their teams sitll dont really believe in those guys long time. foreign guys who barely played.

I think it is just being homer-ish or ignorant to the other guys drafted that Claxton "no way" goes later then 25. If you look objectively, where he was drafted looks about right. a case could probably be made for 20-24, but even that is far from a no doubt argument.

[DarkXaero]

@prokorov

I appreciate the effort in going through the entire draft class, but you're tripping dude. Your top 15 alone has guys who aren't better prospects than Claxton. How are you going to have guys like Coby White, Cam Reddish (who has been awful in the NBA), Romeo Langford, and Sekou? All of these guys have shown less than Claxton in the NBA. Coby White is a no-defense, inefficient chucker with tunnel vision, whose best case is maybe being a sixth man. Langford has been horrific in the NBA, Sekou looks like one of those long term projects who probably won't pan out. Even someone like PJ Washington or Rui Hachimura, these guys have been mostly below average on both ends, and are older than Claxton. Your top 5 is good and definitely above Claxton in the first list, but everyone else is debatable to super questionable. That's not homerism, it's supported by evidence. You're magnifying Claxton's flaws while ignoring everyone else's flaws. That's what you do.

Guys like Thybulle (who is an elite level defender already), Terence Mann and Keldon Johnson are better names in the lottery instead of those guys. Then you somehow have a guy like Okeke ahead too, like wtf Bazley so far hasn't shown anything other than freakish athleticism (which we already knew) in the NBA. Brandon Clarke had major regression in 2nd year and he's three years older than Claxton. NAW hasn't shown much in the NBA outside of one mini hot stretch this season, jury is still out on him and I'd bet majority of teams out there would rather have Claxton over NAW (Pels fans included). KPJ is very talented but has red flag character issues, which is why he dropped hard in the first place. The guys you mention in the "same ballpark" are certainly not in the same ballpark, except maybe Jaxson Hayes who still has great physical tools but hasn't shown much in his first two years.

Thing is that most of these players that you're listing are not even good players on either end of the floor yet. At least with Claxton, you know you're getting good to elite defense, with plenty of untapped upside left. It's not like Claxton is old or that his body is already developed. Yet somehow all these other guys are going above Claxton. You're completely disregarding what a connected NBA reporter like Michael Scotto has said regarding Claxton, how he is viewed by the Nets FO and how he is perceived around the league. We can also cite other knowledgeable NBA guys like Zach Lowe or Kevin O'Connor. So while I appreciate your effort to go through the entire draft, your draft evaluations are WAY off base, considering everything.

[Prokorov]

@prokorov

I appreciate the effort in going through the entire draft class, but you're tripping dude. Your top 15 alone has guys who aren't better prospects than Claxton. How are you going to have guys like Coby White, Cam Reddish (who has been awful in the NBA), Romeo Langford, and Sekou? All of these guys have shown less than Claxton in the NBA. Coby White is a no-defense, inefficient chucker with tunnel vision, whose best case is maybe being a sixth man. Langford has been horrific in the NBA, Sekou looks like one of those long term projects who probably won't pan out.

Calling Sekou a "long term project who wont pan out at 20 years old with 2 years time in the US during COVID is absolutely bananas. He had just turned 19 when he played his first NBA game. Reddish hasn't shot well, but he has proven to be an outstanding defender, was excellent in the playoffs on that end, and has a very high ceiling. even if he has disappinted, the hawks are happy, and no way are they drafting claxton over him in a redraft with Capella on the team.

White is a 15/5/5 player in just his second year. You can call him an inefficient chucker, but he had a higher TS% then any year of Levert's Pro Career. 36% from three isnt great but it isnt awful, especially for a guy who does it all and has a high iq. i cant see the bulls in a redraft not taking hm. especially with Vucevic and markkanen.

Most of all, you are being EXTREMELY one sided here. all these guys are "awful" "chuckers" or "horrific" but somehow Claxton, whose career looks like:

6 points
5 rebounds
1 assist
1 block
60.6 FG
16.7 3PT
49.4 FTs
* missed 40% of his career games to injury

is some excellent prospect with a huge ceiling? You need to be more fair here. you made points above about claxton being young, gaining weight, getting experience, working on his shot... but for all these other guys, most who are younger without the injuries, are somehow horrific and dont have the same upside or paths to improvement?

Even someone like PJ Washington or Rui Hachimura, these guys have been mostly below average on both ends, and are older than Claxton. Your top 5 is good and definitely above Claxton in the first list, but everyone else is debatable to super questionable. That's not homerism, it's supported by evidence. You're magnifying Claxton's flaws while ignoring everyone else's flaws. That's what you do.

What evidence exactly is that supported by?

PJ Washington has been an outstanding young player so far. tough as a bull, elite finisher and shot 39% from three. Your using stats and metrics for these guys but for claxton you are using opinion and conjecture.

Guys like Thybulle (who is an elite level defender already), Terence Mann and Keldon Johnson are better names in the lottery instead of those guys. Then you somehow have a guy like Okeke ahead too, like wtf Bazley so far hasn't shown anything other than freakish athleticism (which we already knew) in the NBA. Brandon Clarke had major regression in 2nd year and he's three years older than Claxton. NAW hasn't shown much in the NBA outside of one mini hot stretch this season, jury is still out on him and I'd bet majority of teams out there would rather have Claxton over NAW (Pels fans included). KPJ is very talented but has red flag character issues, which is why he dropped hard in the first place. The guys you mention in the "same ballpark" are certainly not in the same ballpark, except maybe Jaxson Hayes who still has great physical tools but hasn't shown much in his first two years.

Again, you are throwing negatives at all these guys that exsist for claxton. if you use the same objectiveness on claxton you would be saying he is a scrub offensively who cant shoot, is mediocure in the pain, doesnt rebound well, and cant stay healthy. you cant have it both ways. all of these guys have similar/higher ceilings, better offense, and play positions teams value more.

IF you ranked them statistically, Claxton is nowhere near the top half of first round picks. if you go anecdotal, he has as many/more red flags as all these guys

Thing is that most of these players that you're listing are not even good players on either end of the floor yet. At least with Claxton, you know you're getting good to elite defense, with plenty of untapped upside left. It's not like Claxton is old or that his body is already developed. Yet somehow all these other guys are going above Claxton. You're completely disregarding what a connected NBA reporter like Michael Scotto has said regarding Claxton, how he is viewed by the Nets FO and how he is perceived around the league. We can also cite other knowledgeable NBA guys like Zach Lowe or Kevin O'Connor. So while I appreciate your effort to go through the entire draft, your draft evaluations are WAY off base, considering everything.

You can find the same thing said about all these guys by their GM/Coach. just look at how Marks/Nash talk about reggie perry.

Also, lets pump the breaks on call Claxton a lock elite defender after 42 games scattered over 2 covid seasons. And if you are going to crown him an elite defender, you can then say someone like brandon clarke is avg or poor on both ends when with more games played has a better DRPM/DRAPM/DBPM/DWS and is nearly the same Drtg (claxton 1.08 vs. Clarke 1.09).

Your holding all these other guys to a higher standard then claxton. you expect them to already been good to established with solid shooting numbers and/or defensive metrics, but for claxton that doesnt matter. Not to mention knockign these guys for their shooting or whatever despite having twice the games and in some cases 5 times more shot attempts (and still shooting better then claxton).

You can hype claxton all you want and i love his defensive potential too. but you are just being very biased if you grade all these other guys so hard at 2nd year guys but dont call out claxton for being a near 0 on offense who is a terrible shooter, terrible from the FT line (cant have him on the floor late) and doesnt rebound.

I mean, to tout Claxton and knock PJ washington is absurd.

[MrDollarBills]

Zion, Ja, RJ, Hunter, Garland, Rui, Thybulle, Mann, Johnson and Washington are the only guys I'd take over Claxton. And honestly, aside from the top 5 on that list, I like Claxton's upside a lot compared to those guys after them. I think that he's right here and poised for a break out.

[haosmoove]

These are just my opinion. From Prok's list, I would have

Poole and Hayes clearly ahead of Claxton.
Sekou, Langford, Bazley, Mann and THT join the "ballpark" tier.
Kabengele and Little dropping off completely.

I'd agree with Prok as my ranking has him in similar range 20-26.

If I really stretch it I can move guys like Cam, Herro, NAW, Clarke into Claxton's tier and remove Jerome and Grant Williams. This puts Claxton in 16-24 range. It's hard for me to justify putting him ahead of the top 15.

Of players I put ahead of Claxton, they belong in 3 categories:
Better stats: Rui, White, PJW, Hunter, Thybulle, Keldon, Poole, these are better players now with a high likelyhood of remaining better.
More untapped potentials: Okeke, Reddish, Hayes, KPJ, I mean they had more potential 2 years ago and given similar situations they should remain higher upside.
Or both: Zion, Ja, Barret, Garland. pretty self explanatory.

I guess the main dispute in people's evaluation comes from Claxton's potential. I tuned down his potential quite a bit since 2 years ago since we have more data points. Meaning that his range of possibility is narrower (higher floor and lower ceiling) now that we've seen how he plays. It's only fair that we do the same for other players in his class, even more so for older players.

Anyways, the originally argument wasn't about Claxton clearly being a top 25 player. It's whether he would be a lock to get drafted in the top 25 in a redraft. I kind of lost track why that's more important.