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

[Paradise]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/NYDNInterNets/status/445690631420387328[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/NYDNInterNets/status/445691258213007360[/tweet]

I think he's gone this summer.

[MrDollarBills]

That's fine

For who, and for what is the real question.

Who takes brook and gives up significant assets?

If you are a GM, would you take Brook Lopez on his contract with his foot all **** ed up?

I don't think moving him will be as easy as we think...not if we want something in return that makes us better.

[jeff1624]

That's fine

For who, and for what is the real question.

Who takes brook and gives up significant assets?

If you are a GM, would you take Brook Lopez on his contract with his foot all **** ed up?

I don't think moving him will be as easy as we think...not if we want something in return that makes us better.

Exactly, which is why we're better off not trading him. Besides this whole Brook doesn't fit is bulls***. If the team can play Blatche, why the hell can't they play with Lopez?

[NetsWorld]

That's fine

For who, and for what is the real question.

Who takes brook and gives up significant assets?

If you are a GM, would you take Brook Lopez on his contract with his foot all **** ed up?

I don't think moving him will be as easy as we think...not if we want something in return that makes us better.

Exactly, which is why we're better off not trading him. Besides this whole Brook doesn't fit is bulls***. If the team can play Blatche, why the hell can't they play with Lopez?

As clumsy as Blatche may be with the ball, he's still better at handling the ball outside of the paint much better than Brook. Brook is a low post player. Any open jumpers he gets is because he is set up by his teammates.

[Prokorov]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/NYDNInterNets/status/445690631420387328[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/NYDNInterNets/status/445691258213007360[/tweet]

I think he's gone this summer.

It's a good move for the nets. You really cant have 16M tied up into a player who is an injury concern and who cant be a top 2 player on a championship contender. I think in the perfect situation with the right players around him brook could be a beast. but i dont see this as that perfect situation. I think he needs like an anothony davis next to him and someone like thibs as a coach who will demand the best out of him.

For us, lets be honest. 14-15 and 15-16 are not years where we are going to seriusly contend. If we can get expirings/draft picks/players on rookie deals for brook it will really help us try and reshape this team in the 15-16 offseason.

I mean next year we can let KG retire, let mason be the full time starter, resign pierce on a 1 year deal at 10-15M and have the same team we have had the past 8-9 games which should be good enough to be an 8 seed in the east and not hand atlanta/boston a lotto pick. maybe we even bring bogs over and he is better then expected:

Dwill
Bogs or sdot
JJ
Pierce
Plumlee

Thornton, anderson, and whomever we get for brook. Blatche if he will take 2 years.

we then would be 1 trade (moving JJ as an expiring or moving brook for somone owed 1 less year) from really being able to make a run at 2 superstars in 2016.

[Prokorov]

That's fine

For who, and for what is the real question.

Who takes brook and gives up significant assets?

If you are a GM, would you take Brook Lopez on his contract with his foot all **** ed up?

I don't think moving him will be as easy as we think...not if we want something in return that makes us better.

I think you would need the right team. someone with stupid cap space who really needs to spend some of it and who can take the risk. someone like the sixers for instance. would they give us a large trade exception and lottery protected first for brook?

[Prokorov]

That's fine

For who, and for what is the real question.

Who takes brook and gives up significant assets?

If you are a GM, would you take Brook Lopez on his contract with his foot all **** ed up?

I don't think moving him will be as easy as we think...not if we want something in return that makes us better.

Exactly, which is why we're better off not trading him. Besides this whole Brook doesn't fit is bulls***. If the team can play Blatche, why the hell can't they play with Lopez?

Well for one, Blatche costs us about 15 million dollars less then brook. Second, blatche is an 18-20 mpg backup, not a 30 mpg starter. Blatche plays almost all his minutes vs backups, thus its easier to get away with being poor, and last, while blatche is bad defensively, he is mobile enough no to get completely destroyed in the PnR.

on the offensive end brook is MUCH better then blatche. BUT blatche fits better in that the ball doesnt stick as long, he passes quicker out of double teams, and (most of the time) is quicker to make his move.

[DarkXaero]

That's fine

For who, and for what is the real question.

Who takes brook and gives up significant assets?

If you are a GM, would you take Brook Lopez on his contract with his foot all **** ed up?

I don't think moving him will be as easy as we think...not if we want something in return that makes us better.

Exactly, which is why we're better off not trading him. Besides this whole Brook doesn't fit is bulls***. If the team can play Blatche, why the hell can't they play with Lopez?

Well for one, Blatche costs us about 15 million dollars less then brook. Second, blatche is an 18-20 mpg backup, not a 30 mpg starter. Blatche plays almost all his minutes vs backups, thus its easier to get away with being poor, and last, while blatche is bad defensively, he is mobile enough no to get completely destroyed in the PnR.

on the offensive end brook is MUCH better then blatche. BUT blatche fits better in that the ball doesnt stick as long, he passes quicker out of double teams, and (most of the time) is quicker to make his move.

Please, Blatche makes an incredible amount of awful decisions on both ends of the floor, don't even try to compare the both. And Blatche is far worse than Brook defensively overall. This is a ridiculous comparison.

[Prokorov]

Please, Blatche makes an incredible amount of awful decisions on both ends of the floor, don't even try to compare the both. And Blatche is far worse than Brook defensively overall. This is a ridiculous comparison.

Blatche does make alot of awful decisions. i dont see how that is relevant since its not about who is better, it is (in kidds own words) who is a better FIT.

Brook a better overall defender? Sure, i can go along with that. but the areas where brook is week are infinitely tougher to cover up for as a team then the areas where he is poor. and in those areas blatche is better(not good, but better).

i mean, we all see it. Lopez simply doesnt have the impact his stats do. because as elite as his efficiency is it really slows us down, its inconsistent, the ball sticks. its tough to get secondary offense once he touches it.

defensively he might blocks some shots, opposing paint numbers might be lower, but his pick and roll defense causes us to constantly scrable, opens up the 3 and leads to way too many open shots-- and more importantly whats not showing up in box scores, the opponents are too comfortable on offense.

you can disagree with me, but it seems irrelevant because it appears kidd does agree

[Paradise]

That's fine

For who, and for what is the real question.

Who takes brook and gives up significant assets?

If you are a GM, would you take Brook Lopez on his contract with his foot all **** ed up?

I don't think moving him will be as easy as we think...not if we want something in return that makes us better.

I don't see why. If Andrew Bogut, Andrew Bynum can be traded for significant assets with much worse knee/foot issues I don't see why it would be a big deal for teams to give Brook a chance especially when he's really only had two major injuries. It's not like he's Greg Oden or something.

[NyCeEvO]

I TOLD YA'LL!!!!!!!

Brook Lopez is gone for picks and expiring contracts!

[F3LON]

I love Brook Lopez but he has to go. He uses too much of the shot clock on offense, cant rebound and is a poor defender.

Please dont tell me about his ability to defend the rim because it's cherry picking stats. Only a fool would try to attack Lopez when he is camped out in the paint. Instead teams smartly forced him out on the perimeter to defend pick and roll which caused over rotations on defense, lead to wide open 3s if teams made that extra swing pass and gave the opponent tons of offensive rebounds because our entire defense was out of position.

These are the ripple effects caused by a big who is slow footed in today's NBA. People forget that we were on pace to be the worst defense EVER at guarding the 3pter when Lopez was healthy this year.

[therealbig3]

I don't see us getting any draft picks out of Lopez though...MAYBE expirings. Draft picks are at such a premium under the new CBA, even 2nd rounders are valued highly (a decent, young player on a good contract and with Bird Rights like Jordan Hill couldn't even get the Lakers a 2nd rounder, not just from us, but from anyone).

I see us getting draft picks if Lopez proves he can still play and stay healthy for a couple of months next year. But he's had what, 4 surgeries on his foot at this point? He's a HUGE risk for any team to take.

[Prokorov]

That's fine

For who, and for what is the real question.

Who takes brook and gives up significant assets?

If you are a GM, would you take Brook Lopez on his contract with his foot all **** ed up?

I don't think moving him will be as easy as we think...not if we want something in return that makes us better.

I don't see why. If Andrew Bogut, Andrew Bynum can be traded for significant assets with much worse knee/foot issues I don't see why it would be a big deal for teams to give Brook a chance especially when he's really only had two major injuries. It's not like he's Greg Oden or something.

Bynum was different, there was a small list of teams Dwight would agree to go to, and bynum didnt have 32M remanining on his contract.

[Paradise]

That's fine

For who, and for what is the real question.

Who takes brook and gives up significant assets?

If you are a GM, would you take Brook Lopez on his contract with his foot all **** ed up?

I don't think moving him will be as easy as we think...not if we want something in return that makes us better.

I don't see why. If Andrew Bogut, Andrew Bynum can be traded for significant assets with much worse knee/foot issues I don't see why it would be a big deal for teams to give Brook a chance especially when he's really only had two major injuries. It's not like he's Greg Oden or something.

Bynum was different, there was a small list of teams Dwight would agree to go to, and bynum didnt have 32M remanining on his contract.

Philly didn't have to take him. They volunteered to take him knowing full well both knees were at risk and worse case scenario is he's an expiring contract in 2015. I don't see the downside of a team trading for him like Phoenix.

All we need is one decent pick and matching salary.

[kerry kittles]

The idea we'd get picks and expirings for Brook is laughable. We're selling Brook when his value is lowest. Bynum was sold when his value was highest. He was coming off his best season, a 19/12 season, 3rd in the NBA in FG %, top 10 in PER. Brook's value is the lowest it's ever been.

Everyone thinks we can equal value when a player's trade value is at its lowest and wants the player gone when he's playing terrible, but once he starts playing well everyone wants to keep him. We've seen it with Dwill everyone wanted him gone when he was hurt, but now people view him as close to untradeable. It's the best time to trade DWill because like the Bynum trade we'd be selling when value is highest. Can you imagine if DWill leads us to the 2nd round and the Rockets get bumped in the 1st? We could maybe swindle them for Lin/Asik/Jones/Montejuanas/future pick for Dwill/Mirza.

Any how back on the subject Brook never had a fair shot playing with these guys so I think we're jumping to conclusion. We weren't struggling in 2013 because of Brook, were struggling because of:
1. Pierce fractured his shooting hand causing him to miss time/affect his shooting
2. DWill missed a bunch of games and wasn't himself when he was playing
3. AK didnt play a single game
4. Livingston was awful and was losing playing time to Tyshawn Taylor
5. KG was playing out position at the 4. He can't effectively guard 4's at this stage of his career

[Prokorov]

All we need is one decent pick and matching salary.

matching salary only helps if its the same length as brook or less.

[Prokorov]

Everyone thinks we can equal value when a plater's trade value is at is lowest and wants the player gone when he's playing terrible, but once he starts playing well everyone wants to keep him. We've seen it with Dwill everyone wanted him gone when he was hurt, but now people view him as close to untradeable. It's the best time time to trade a DWill because like the Bynum trade we'd be selling when value is highest. Can you imagine if DWill leads us to the 2nd round and the Rockets get bumped in the 1st? We could maybe swindle them for Lin/Asik/Jones/Montejuanas/future pick for Dwill/Mirza.

who views dwill as untradeable? i'd move him right now for just expirings. that money we'd free up in 2016 is 10000 times more valuable then whatever play he would give us.

i do agree on lopez, i dont think we are doing better then someone else junk

[Paradise]

All we need is one decent pick and matching salary.

matching salary only helps if its the same length as brook or less.

I was thinking something like Miles Plumlee, Okafor's expiring, 1st round pick.

That to me is the best looking realistic package for him today. Phoenix still has 3 round picks to spare so it's not an unreasonable deal.

[lkitt0804]

Everyone thinks we can equal value when a plater's trade value is at is lowest and wants the player gone when he's playing terrible, but once he starts playing well everyone wants to keep him. We've seen it with Dwill everyone wanted him gone when he was hurt, but now people view him as close to untradeable. It's the best time time to trade a DWill because like the Bynum trade we'd be selling when value is highest. Can you imagine if DWill leads us to the 2nd round and the Rockets get bumped in the 1st? We could maybe swindle them for Lin/Asik/Jones/Montejuanas/future pick for Dwill/Mirza.

who views dwill as untradeable? i'd move him right now for just expirings. that money we'd free up in 2016 is 10000 times more valuable then whatever play he would give us.

i do agree on lopez, i dont think we are doing better then someone else junk

Everybody is tradeable. But if Deron and JJ play like they did last night -- we are contenders. I'm not saying we would beat Miami or Indy, but we would have a realistic shot. But here's a question for you. If we dump Deron/Brook and let PP walk and KG retires and play the free agency game in 2 years are you wiling to live with 12-70 for the next year? And what if we lose out in the free agency game? Just because the free agent is there it doesn't mean we'll get them.

I know this team has been awful and was not playing up to potential, but this team is playing really well right now and what you see right now is what I envisioned. I don't think I'm willing to dismantle the team just yet.

Sent from my DROID X2 using RealGM Forums mobile app