Phase 4 / The 2019 Free Agency Thread (Kyrie, KD, Kawhi, AD)

[Netaman]

I love Dinwiddie, but if Marks traded him for #6 I'd be ok with that. A lot of interesting names would be in play.

[NyCeEvO]

Kyrie is just cap space.
Kyrie + KD is DLo's cap hold, Crabbe + pick, and Dinwiddie or Harris.

In the first scenario, no one is moved. However, the Nets would be bringing on a better #1 option than DLo who would no longer be able to do whatever he saw fit to do on offense.

Out of all of the "big change" options, it is the most realistic and easiest to do. This is what I was thinking about when responding to DLo's comment. He performs best when he takes over and has freedom to shoot, not when he has to share the ball and consistently play off of someone else.

I don't think anyone would be opposed to the scenario of just adding a single max FA - whether it's Irving, KD, Leonard, Harris, etc. Even Butler, as a player it would be a great fit, the risk is just age/contract/attitude. I agree with you the most realistic scenario is probably Irving or Harris, and that's exactly what I hope happens - though my preference is strongly for Harris out of that duo. The "blowup the roster" scenarios required for 2 maxes is where things would get dicey.

It seems that we're arguing different points.

My contention is that based on my interpretation of Russell's comments (which could've been taken out of context or easily misconstrued given his choice of words), he was fond of both the offensive system itself AS WELL AS the roles players had in that system. And given that Russell's role was to dictate everything on offense, the prospect of altering his role in such a way that he's no longer the sole or main orchestrator on offense when he's on the court is not something that appeals to him.

In short, he liked the fact that he dictated the offense, and the consideration of him having to accommodate or even be replaced in the pecking order by another player is not as appealing.

The only potential max FA the Nets could sign who probably wouldn't drastically impact Russell's USG% rate would be Tobias Harris, since he's primarily a catch-and-shoot or 1-2 dribble shot threat. Any other single FA (i.e. even if they came by themself) would replace Russell as the #1 option on offense, unless he markedly improves his efficiency and/or adds the ability to attack the lane to his game.

My interpretation of the quote isn't even considering that Russell is mainly worried about 2 new max players coming in. My thoughts are just predicated on one max player coming in and my reading leads me to think that he already feels threatened by the idea that a player from the outside would come in and wrest control of the reigns of "DLo's" team.

The Spurs did not do this.

The Spurs tanked a season, won the lottery, drafted the GOAT PF who came into the league as a machine, and was able to immediately slot him in next David Robinson, a perennial allstar and league MVP candidate.

Once you have a superstar, it's much easier to build around that player. That's the difference between us and the Spurs, and why they were able to build around Duncan and make things work.

Even the Raptors had Derozan who was used to trade for Kawhi. At present, we don't even have a DeRozan level star who could serve as the base part of a package for disgruntled superstar. I hope DLo can into that type of player, but we won't know that until after he's signed a new deal.

What the Spurs did in the mid-90's has little relevance to roster building in today's game other than the obvious, getting someone like Tim Duncan is a cornerstone moment, which I mentioned. But my point was re: what they've done the last 10 or so years to continue to compete in the west beyond Duncan's prime. His last MVP award was 2002-2003 and he only ended in the top 10 of voting 1 time after 2007. The Spurs dynasty continued after Duncan left his prime (and then retired) because they:

- killed it in the draft/development (Parker, Ginobli, Leonard)
- were great at finding undervalued role players who fit their system (George Hill, Patty Mills, Green etc)
- went against the grain in FA being willing to sign tier 2/3 guys or even cast offs who fit roles they needed (Aldridge, Pau, Gay)

They never blew up their roster or went crazy trying to recruit stars. They were willing to spend big on FA at certain moments (like Kidd & LMA) but their model was more integrated with development and drafting - which is what Marks has preached since the moment he arrived. Growing piece by piece. I'd personally prefer that to a more star-centric plan.

1. The Spurs don't try recruiting stars because they know that the tier 1 stars won't sign with them. It's precisely because of this idea that the Spurs invest heavily in the draft. It's their only resource for finding and holding on to talent that could potentially mold a true star/superstar one day.

Brooklyn isn't the Spurs. The Nets have only been in borough for 7 years and they've already had several tier 1 superstars and tier 2 allstars specifically request to be traded to them. I wholeheartedly believe that if free agency was an option for the Spurs to attract superstar talent, they would definitely prioritize it.

2. Being in pursuit of a superstar via free agency doesn't mean we're acting in a Billy King-esque fashion. Billy King rarely had a long term plan for what he was doing. His moves were very short-sighted and he would completely change the team's approach and philosophy to roster construction on a year-to-year basis. That's what killed over these last few years more than anything.

Superstars win titles 95% of the time. This is precisely why the Spurs have been putting together good regular season runs, but have been first or second round fodder since their last true two stars (Duncan and Kawhi) have left.

While the Spurs are still a good playoff team, no one takes them as serious contenders even with B-tier stars like DeRozan and Aldridge, who were both acquired, not drafted by the Spurs. Rudy Gay came to the Spurs after rupturing his achilles, and at most, he has been a role player for the Spurs and nothing more.

Hitting singles will only get you so far in the NBA. You need true home run hitters to have a legitimate shot to win.

3. We like last year's team because they blew away our expectations. The only better feeling a fan can have are: 1) when their team drafts a player who appears to be a sure-fire superstar in the making, and 2) when they win the championship.

Now that a new season is on the horizon, everyone will adjust and raise their expectations. If the Nets win 42 games again this year, we won't be happy. We will be debating what went wrong and why there wasn't more improvement from the team. For the Nets to go +14 wins again, they'd almost surely have to acquire allstar or better level talent. To go from winning just about every other game to winning 2 out of every 3 is a massive shift and much more difficult. It feels like people are supporting the "hit singles" approach because they want to continue the good vibes of last season. It won't last.

I agree with the general sentiment who feel like adding a superstar now feels a bit rushed and too early into the process of rebuilding. Billy King rushed and screwed things up; Marks has gone slow and things have gone quite well. Just because it has worked thus far doesn't mean it will continue to work in the future. It's much harder to win and be a serious contender in this league than it is to go from the lottery to a fringe playoff team.

We need to seize moments and opportunities like this because they don't come around all too often.

[Claud]

I love Dinwiddie, but if Marks traded him for #6 I'd be ok with that. A lot of interesting names would be in play.

Same. You can attach that pick in a bigger trade as well which is what Marks would do.

[Netaman]

My interpretation of the quote isn't even considering that Russell is mainly worried about 2 new max players coming in. My thoughts are just predicated on one max player coming in and my reading leads me to think that he already feels threatened by the idea that a player from the outside would come in and wrest control of the reigns of "DLo's" team.

I understand your point now - and I agree with it on some level because it's human nature. Russell just had a great year for himself and the team, any human being on the planet who cares about their own success and the success of the organization would want to continue that progress. So in terms of role change, I could very well see there being a hesitation with adding Irving in particular since that would shake things up with his own personal role. I share some of those thoughts to a degree which is why I'd prefer one of the frontcourt options at a greater position of need > Irving.

I still think his comments overall were more about really liking the group they have and just not wanting to see dramatic turnover that completely redefines the organization. I also similarly share that feeling as well. I'm all for moving 1 or 2 guys if necessary to sign a max UFA who fits into the team needs, I'm less enthused about cycling out more than 50% of last year's starting lineup + main rotation.

1. The Spurs don't try recruiting stars because they know that the tier 1 stars won't sign with them. It's precisely because of this idea that the Spurs invest heavily in the draft. It's their only resource for finding and holding on to talent that could potentially mold a true star/superstar one day.

Brooklyn isn't the Spurs. The Nets have only been in borough for 7 years and they've already had several tier 1 superstars and tier 2 allstars specifically request to be traded to them. I wholeheartedly believe that if free agency was an option for the Spurs to attract superstar talent, they would definitely prioritize it.

Which tier 1 stars requested brooklyn? Dwight? He also rescinded that request. Melo? He clearly preferred the Knicks and it was never confirmed whether he'd agree to extend in Brooklyn. We were barely able to convince DWill to resign here with more money to offer thanks to Cuban no-showing his FA meeting.

In 1 month we will get a firsthand look at just how able we are to land a tier 1 FA but we're certainly not an odds on favorite to get Durant, Kawhi, or AD like the Lakers were with Lebron last year. I obviously hope we do get 1 of those guys but if don't all hope isn't lost. The only teams that won championships purely thanks to max FA's and the "super team" strategy was Miami + Lebron. And Shaq/LA. You could stretch that list to include KD I guess but he joined a team that had already won a championship so I don't count him.

2. Being in pursuit of a superstar via free agency doesn't mean we're acting in a Billy King-esque fashion. Billy King rarely had a long term plan for what he was doing. His moves were very short-sighted and he would completely change the team's approach and philosophy to roster construction on a year-to-year basis. That's what killed over these last few years more than anything.

Superstars win titles 95% of the time. This is precisely why the Spurs have been putting together good regular season runs, but have been first or second round fodder since their last true two stars (Duncan and Kawhi) have left.

While the Spurs are still a good playoff team, no one takes them as serious contenders even with B-tier stars like DeRozan and Aldridge, who were both acquired, not drafted by the Spurs. Rudy Gay came to the Spurs after rupturing his achilles, and at most, he has been a role player for the Spurs and nothing more.

Hitting singles will only get you so far in the NBA. You need true home run hitters to have a legitimate shot to win.

Agreed - I trust Sean Marks 1000x more than BK. But as mentioned above it's extremely rare that max FA = championship teams. Most of them end up being more like Dwill/Joe Johnson. In fact, recently it's been more common for teams to find top guys in the draft even outside the top 5 picks than via FA. Kawhi and Curry are the 2 literal examples who won championships with the teams that drafted them, but beyond them Greek freak, Jokic, and Lillard are a few other examples of franchise players being found in the draft.

You definitely need to hit a HR in the NBA to find a franchise player, the question is if it's easier to do that in the draft or FA? With the way Marks has drafted I'm hoping he stays the course and maintains flexibility to improve both ways vs. going all in on a FA strategy.

3. We like last year's team because they blew away our expectations. The only better feeling a fan can have are: 1) when their team drafts a player who appears to be a sure-fire superstar in the making, and 2) when they win the championship.

Now that a new season is on the horizon, everyone will adjust and raise their expectations. If the Nets win 42 games again this year, we won't be happy. We will be debating what went wrong and why there wasn't more improvement from the team. For the Nets to go +14 wins again, they'd almost surely have to acquire allstar or better level talent. To go from winning just about every other game to winning 2 out of every 3 is a massive shift and much more difficult. It feels like people are supporting the "hit singles" approach because they want to continue the good vibes of last season. It won't last.

I agree with the general sentiment who feel like adding a superstar now feels a bit rushed and too early into the process of rebuilding. Billy King rushed and screwed things up; Marks has gone slow and things have gone quite well. Just because it has worked thus far doesn't mean it will continue to work in the future. It's much harder to win and be a serious contender in this league than it is to go from the lottery to a fringe playoff team.

We need to seize moments and opportunities like this because they don't come around all too often.

We like last year's team because they showed progress. Russell got better, Kurocs was a revelation, Levert/Allen/Dinwiddie took steps forward, etc. Yes that also led to them exceeding expectations in terms of W/L record - but we liked them because we saw progress and we saw that the plan is working. It's a delicate balance between seizing a moment of opportunity and patience. If Jimmy Butler is there for the taking, do we seize that moment or let it go? I'd personally let it go because I think it's too big of a risk for a guy who won't get us to championship level. He is a very expensive double. Irving/Harris are both tougher calls.

Durant, Kawhi, and AD are no brainers and it's never too early to add one of those guys if they want to come here. The question is if they want to come here and what it may take to make it happen.

[Prokorov]

Put me in the group that thinks Kyrie is too much of a move that's too much of a 45-50 win treadmill team.

Treadmill?

Kyrie is 27. russell 23, rhj 23, levert 24, kurucs 20, allen 20, dinwiddie 26, harris 27 and we have musa and 3 picks in this draft. on what planet is that a treadmill team? that is still a super young core with a ton of upside and asssets to add to it.

[/quote]
If he's coming along with AD or KD or Kawhi, that's one thing, but on his own I just don't think it's an extremely efficient addition. For me here's my offseason tiers:

Plan A - Leonard or Durant via UFA
Plan 1A - AD via trade
Plan B - Harris via UFA
Plan C - Crabbe + tbd futures for Otto Porter or Aaron Gordon (both are as good/young as any of the non max FA and I suspect will have better contracts going forward, further negated by dealing Crabbe)
Plan D - Irving via UFA
Plan E - someone like Mirotic/Randle via FA
Plaz Z - Butler[/quote]


Otto porter can not shine kyries shoes. he is a role player /4th best player on a playoff team type. kyrie is a top 15 player.

plan Z is butler but mirotic is E? lol.

[Prokorov]

Leonard might stay with Tor
Philly might offer Butler Max
Kemba might stay with CHA to get supermax
KD and Irving probly going to Knicks

If Philly offer max to Butler..then they can't max Tobias Harris. We max Dlo and Harris. Trade crabbe+1st rder to team with cap space to free up salary. Use that money to sign Julius Randle. We fill our two biggest holes at the SF and PF spots.

Dlo/DW
Harris/Levert
Tobias Harris/Musa
Julius Randle/Kurucs
Allen/Davis

Improve the bench, we're a lock to make the playoffs if everybody stays healthy.

Randle is a center.

We dont have a PF in our system

[Prokorov]

I can't wait until Randle signs somewhere else.

This times a bajillion.

[Prokorov]

I guess I just view Kyrie in a different light than you guys. You guys are saying he's a legit star, and in that top 10-20 range of players, and I just disagree. Yeah, he's had times where he's unbelievable and easily that good, but he's also had moments where he's really bad. His overall level of play is top 20 level? IDK. Maybe there just aren't that many good players out there that Kyrie still makes top 20.

What argument is there that he isnt?

statistically he certainly is.
impact wise he is (best player on a 1 seed celtics team and 50 win celtic team this year
Clutch late in games and in the playoffs

he is one of the best penetrators in the league and under the rim finishers of all tme and an outstanding range shooter.

You can't tell me that the season that Kyrie and the Celtics had this year wasn't a big failure. Especially after what they did the year before without Kyrie. What exactly has he done to prove that he's more than a flashy player who puts up impressive but somewhat empty stats? And yeah, I know that he had some unbelievable playoff performances and was the 2nd biggest contributor to a championship a few years ago...how consistently has he been able to replicate that? Can he be that good consistently on a team like ours as opposed to a team with LeBron?

What exactly is empty about Kyrie's stats? year 1 he lead the celtics to 60 wins and 1 seed. this year was a disappointment... but thats hardly alll on him. ego maniacs like tatum and rozier thinking they are superstars cause they beat a young disjointed philly team in the playoffs? Kyrie never wanted to be in boston, he tried to make it work until his deal was up, but the young guys there and the enviornment is toxic, they all agree on that

So I have these questions about a healthy Kyrie, throw in the fact that he's injury-prone and could easily just not be available for half the season and the playoffs just because, and I really just don't know if Kyrie moves the needle much at all and would be worth throwing a bunch of cap space at.

injuries are a more legit concern then some nonsense he has empty stats

The real benefit of signing Kyrie Irving would be if he came attached to another big name player that actually is THAT good, like Durant or Kawhi or Davis. If we end up not getting anyone else and we spent huge money on Kyrie Irving and he's our only big move, I'd be disappointed. I know that you can't say no, and I know that just sitting on cap space is pointless, but I'm just so meh about Kyrie.

the benefit of kyrie is that he moves our floor to a 50 win playoff team and our ceiling to a 60 win #1 seed

[MrDollarBills]

Irving, who I think in all honesty is kind of loopy, would be a beast in the Nets system that caters to his efficiency from downtown and ability to get to the basket. No one can deny this, and I am not a fan of his. I think he needs to seek therapy from a mental health specialist, and I am 100% serious about that based on what I've read about him.

However, I will say this...the more i think about it, the less I buy into an Irving/Russell backcourt. I'd buy more into a Irving/LeVert backcourt.

If the Nets are serious about Kyrie Irving, and we know for sure that Durant wants to team up with Irving, then the Nets need to renounce D'Angelo Russell and let him pursue a contract with the Suns and go from there. I like Russell a lot, I want him here but if this is the route the Nets are going to go, then they need to commit to going big with it. Adding just Irving, going over the cap to sign Russell whole committing millions to three backcourt players with a 4th due for an extension doesn't sit right with me when we need wing and forward depth, and another center as well.

This is now a make or break moment for the Nets, because if the rumors are true, the Nets are going into win now mode and that means they're going to have to crack some eggs.

[MrDollarBills]

I will say that, I am personally fine not giving up on Russell because i think he's going to continue to improve. But if there is interest from two superstar players, I cannot hold my nose up at the Nets having to make a tough decision.

[TheNetsFan]

Irving, who I think in all honesty is kind of loopy, would be a beast in the Nets system that caters to his efficiency from downtown and ability to get to the basket. No one can deny this, and I am not a fan of his. I think he needs to seek therapy from a mental health specialist, and I am 100% serious about that based on what I've read about him.

However, I will say this...the more i think about it, the less I buy into an Irving/Russell backcourt. I'd buy more into a Irving/LeVert backcourt.

If the Nets are serious about Kyrie Irving, and we know for sure that Durant wants to team up with Irving, then the Nets need to renounce D'Angelo Russell and let him pursue a contract with the Suns and go from there. I like Russell a lot, I want him here but if this is the route the Nets are going to go, then they need to commit to going big with it. Adding just Irving, going over the cap to sign Russell whole committing millions to three backcourt players with a 4th due for an extension doesn't sit right with me when we need wing and forward depth, and another center as well.

This is now a make or break moment for the Nets, because if the rumors are true, the Nets are going into win now mode and that means they're going to have to crack some eggs.

The top 5 players in minutes per game this season:
1) Harris
2) Russell
3) Dinwiddie
4) LeVert
5) Crabbe

Adding Irving in place of Dinwiddie with or without Crabbe, will not drastically change our minutes distribution. Kenny plays a lot of guards, and the plan will still be to try to have 2 ball handlers on the court at all times.

[MrDollarBills]

Irving, who I think in all honesty is kind of loopy, would be a beast in the Nets system that caters to his efficiency from downtown and ability to get to the basket. No one can deny this, and I am not a fan of his. I think he needs to seek therapy from a mental health specialist, and I am 100% serious about that based on what I've read about him.

However, I will say this...the more i think about it, the less I buy into an Irving/Russell backcourt. I'd buy more into a Irving/LeVert backcourt.

If the Nets are serious about Kyrie Irving, and we know for sure that Durant wants to team up with Irving, then the Nets need to renounce D'Angelo Russell and let him pursue a contract with the Suns and go from there. I like Russell a lot, I want him here but if this is the route the Nets are going to go, then they need to commit to going big with it. Adding just Irving, going over the cap to sign Russell whole committing millions to three backcourt players with a 4th due for an extension doesn't sit right with me when we need wing and forward depth, and another center as well.

This is now a make or break moment for the Nets, because if the rumors are true, the Nets are going into win now mode and that means they're going to have to crack some eggs.

The top 5 players in minutes per game this season:
1) Harris
2) Russell
3) Dinwiddie
4) LeVert
5) Crabbe

Adding Irving in place of Dinwiddie with or without Crabbe, will not drastically change our minutes distribution. Kenny plays a lot of guards, and the plan will still be to try to have 2 ball handlers on the court at all times.

Do you think an Irving/Russell/LeVert/Dinwiddie backcourt can thrive if we don't improve at the wing and PF spots?

[Keith Van Horn]

Irving, who I think in all honesty is kind of loopy, would be a beast in the Nets system that caters to his efficiency from downtown and ability to get to the basket. No one can deny this, and I am not a fan of his. I think he needs to seek therapy from a mental health specialist, and I am 100% serious about that based on what I've read about him.

However, I will say this...the more i think about it, the less I buy into an Irving/Russell backcourt. I'd buy more into a Irving/LeVert backcourt.

If the Nets are serious about Kyrie Irving, and we know for sure that Durant wants to team up with Irving, then the Nets need to renounce D'Angelo Russell and let him pursue a contract with the Suns and go from there. I like Russell a lot, I want him here but if this is the route the Nets are going to go, then they need to commit to going big with it. Adding just Irving, going over the cap to sign Russell whole committing millions to three backcourt players with a 4th due for an extension doesn't sit right with me when we need wing and forward depth, and another center as well.

This is now a make or break moment for the Nets, because if the rumors are true, the Nets are going into win now mode and that means they're going to have to crack some eggs.

Considering what the Nets have done with their system and utilization, I think you have to view Kyrie "as a Nets system player" instead of just Kyrie on his own. I think he'll cater his play to what Kenny and staff says, and I think his minutes will be heavily managed for the long run (considering injury history).

I'd love to swing for that Suns #6 pick with Dinwiddie and #27 or #17. That could really change the dynamic of this team, whether we keep the pick or flip it in a big name trade.

I'm still so iffy on Irving... and even Durant. The possibility for an ECF trip is increased times 100, but putting all your eggs in that basket could be rough. How will it all fit and work? What happens when the wheel start falling off too? What if Durant doesn't come back during the NBA Finals, and this injury is something that can linger?

I guess we'll see about all this in about a month or so. I got to say this... I'm happy we're in the mix and in the news. We have definitely one of the most interesting teams to watch this summer.

[Keith Van Horn]

I think we reeeeeaaaallly need to explore Dinwiddie + 27 or 17 for #6. Clears up space for signing people and nets us a great draft prospect. Maybe even Marks keeps, drafts best player available instead of trading him, and then we use some late picks on solid big men.

[Netaman]

Treadmill?

Kyrie is 27. russell 23, rhj 23, levert 24, kurucs 20, allen 20, dinwiddie 26, harris 27 and we have musa and 3 picks in this draft. on what planet is that a treadmill team? that is still a super young core with a ton of upside and asssets to add to it.

Treadmill is the wrong word because you're right, they'd still have maneuverability, but they'd still be a franchise player away with less maneuverability than they have currently. I'm not looking to argue the semantics of how we should label Irving, but he is not one of those guys that automatically makes his team a contender. Acquiring anyone other than 1 of the unlikely big 3 names available (KL, KD, AD) would bring about this same problem, but I'd prefer Harris (or one of the other forwards) to Irving because I think he does has a risk of derailing some of Russell's progress. AIso not sure if he will fit into the culture but I will trust Marks just as I did when he acquired Russell.

Plan A - Leonard or Durant via UFA
Plan 1A - AD via trade
Plan B - Harris via UFA
Plan C - Crabbe + tbd futures for Otto Porter or Aaron Gordon (both are as good/young as any of the non max FA and I suspect will have better contracts going forward, further negated by dealing Crabbe)
Plan D - Irving via UFA
Plan E - someone like Mirotic/Randle via FA
Plaz Z - Butler


Otto porter can not shine kyries shoes. he is a role player /4th best player on a playoff team type. kyrie is a top 15 player.

plan Z is butler but mirotic is E? lol.

Butler is going to be 30 years by the time he steps on the court for his first game and has worn out his welcome for 2 teams now, 1 of them being the T-Wolves who were everyone's favorite up and coming young team just a couple years ago. As a player Butler is exactly what we need, but he's not a guy I'm rolling the dice on for 4 years post 30.

And 1 v 1 Porter is not as good as Irving. But factor in compensation where 1 guy has 2 years 55m left, the other is going to get 4 years $132m and the positional needs/fit and it's not an illegitimate preference. Neither player is an ideal addition like Leonard or KD, but 1 of them allows for a lot more maneuverability to find a player like that going forward and is a near perfect system fit (which is why Marks went after him in the first place).

Re: Mirotic I have no idea what he will cost (or Randle) but if the market is like last year where tier 3 + 4 guys had to settle for 1 or 2 year deals I think he'd be a nice placeholder pickup if we miss out on higher priorities.

[SpeedyG]

I think we reeeeeaaaallly need to explore Dinwiddie + 27 or 17 for #6. Clears up space for signing people and nets us a great draft prospect. Maybe even Marks keeps, drafts best player available instead of trading him, and then we use some late picks on solid big men.

Spencer makes 10M. 27 pick makes about 2M and 17th Pick makes about 3M.

Pick 6 makes about 5M.

That 8M is only a difference maker for a KD deal if we don't want to stretch Crabbe.

If we're making that pick, it's because we want someone there (or, as some have suggested, packaging it as preferred by New Orleans)

Sent from my SM-G925T using RealGM mobile app

[TheNetsFan]

Irving, who I think in all honesty is kind of loopy, would be a beast in the Nets system that caters to his efficiency from downtown and ability to get to the basket. No one can deny this, and I am not a fan of his. I think he needs to seek therapy from a mental health specialist, and I am 100% serious about that based on what I've read about him.

However, I will say this...the more i think about it, the less I buy into an Irving/Russell backcourt. I'd buy more into a Irving/LeVert backcourt.

If the Nets are serious about Kyrie Irving, and we know for sure that Durant wants to team up with Irving, then the Nets need to renounce D'Angelo Russell and let him pursue a contract with the Suns and go from there. I like Russell a lot, I want him here but if this is the route the Nets are going to go, then they need to commit to going big with it. Adding just Irving, going over the cap to sign Russell whole committing millions to three backcourt players with a 4th due for an extension doesn't sit right with me when we need wing and forward depth, and another center as well.

This is now a make or break moment for the Nets, because if the rumors are true, the Nets are going into win now mode and that means they're going to have to crack some eggs.

The top 5 players in minutes per game this season:
1) Harris
2) Russell
3) Dinwiddie
4) LeVert
5) Crabbe

Adding Irving in place of Dinwiddie with or without Crabbe, will not drastically change our minutes distribution. Kenny plays a lot of guards, and the plan will still be to try to have 2 ball handlers on the court at all times.

Do you think an Irving/Russell/LeVert/Dinwiddie backcourt can thrive if we don't improve at the wing and PF spots?

I think Irving/Russell/LeVert is a big upgrade from Russell/LeVert/Dinwiddie. PF is a big need, but you don't not improve elsewhere waiting for the stars to align so that you can improve at the biggest need spot. We can draft for the Wing/PF spot & hope one hits.

I'd seriously explore moving Crabbe & Dinwiddie in order to retain DLo & add the two local kids (Kyrie & Tobias). That team is at worst a perennial 2nd/3rd round playoff team.

[NyCeEvO]

Irving, who I think in all honesty is kind of loopy, would be a beast in the Nets system that caters to his efficiency from downtown and ability to get to the basket. No one can deny this, and I am not a fan of his. I think he needs to seek therapy from a mental health specialist, and I am 100% serious about that based on what I've read about him.

However, I will say this...the more i think about it, the less I buy into an Irving/Russell backcourt. I'd buy more into a Irving/LeVert backcourt.

If the Nets are serious about Kyrie Irving, and we know for sure that Durant wants to team up with Irving, then the Nets need to renounce D'Angelo Russell and let him pursue a contract with the Suns and go from there. I like Russell a lot, I want him here but if this is the route the Nets are going to go, then they need to commit to going big with it. Adding just Irving, going over the cap to sign Russell whole committing millions to three backcourt players with a 4th due for an extension doesn't sit right with me when we need wing and forward depth, and another center as well.

This is now a make or break moment for the Nets, because if the rumors are true, the Nets are going into win now mode and that means they're going to have to crack some eggs.

Even if you don't believe in an Irving + DLo backcourt, signing Kyrie and re-signing Russell isn't the end of the world.

The Nets could do it simply to make sure that they don't let a Russell go away for nothing. Once December rolls around, he'd be eligible to be traded and can be used as the center piece for a trade. If AD isn't dealt by then, simply having Russell's contract around would be good for us. Very few teams would want to give up a major piece for an expiring AD and yet we'd be willing to give up Russell on a 4yr contract and others.

[MGrand15]

Irving, who I think in all honesty is kind of loopy, would be a beast in the Nets system that caters to his efficiency from downtown and ability to get to the basket. No one can deny this, and I am not a fan of his. I think he needs to seek therapy from a mental health specialist, and I am 100% serious about that based on what I've read about him.

However, I will say this...the more i think about it, the less I buy into an Irving/Russell backcourt. I'd buy more into a Irving/LeVert backcourt.

If the Nets are serious about Kyrie Irving, and we know for sure that Durant wants to team up with Irving, then the Nets need to renounce D'Angelo Russell and let him pursue a contract with the Suns and go from there. I like Russell a lot, I want him here but if this is the route the Nets are going to go, then they need to commit to going big with it. Adding just Irving, going over the cap to sign Russell whole committing millions to three backcourt players with a 4th due for an extension doesn't sit right with me when we need wing and forward depth, and another center as well.

This is now a make or break moment for the Nets, because if the rumors are true, the Nets are going into win now mode and that means they're going to have to crack some eggs.

The top 5 players in minutes per game this season:
1) Harris
2) Russell
3) Dinwiddie
4) LeVert
5) Crabbe

Adding Irving in place of Dinwiddie with or without Crabbe, will not drastically change our minutes distribution. Kenny plays a lot of guards, and the plan will still be to try to have 2 ball handlers on the court at all times.

Do you think an Irving/Russell/LeVert/Dinwiddie backcourt can thrive if we don't improve at the wing and PF spots?

I think this Irving thing only works if LeVert plays the 3 spot. Dinwiddie plays the 1/2. Harris plays 2/3 off the bench. We'd need his defense and athleticism in the starting lineup if we go with a DLo/Kyrie back court. I think that makes things a little smoother minutes wise. Managing 3 to 4 ball handlers can be tough though. Kenny's job wouldn't be easy.

[MrDollarBills]

Would we be able to sign Irving, sign Tobias Harris while retaining Russell's cap hold?

I sign up right now for Irving/Russell/LeVert/Harris/Allen