vincecarter4pres wrote:Prokorov wrote:MrDollarBills wrote:
I would be fine with that option as well, but I would probably prefer to keep Harris over Spencer since Spencer deserves a chance to run his own team.
yeah im fine losing dinwidie but harris is the low key engine for this offense. we would miss him
I don't disagree with either of you, but Dinwiddie is also signed for 3 years on a value contract, is injury insurance for stuff like broken fingers, high ankle sprains, knee scopes, shoulder strains, etc. and he's probably worth a lot more in trade for a few reasons including being locked up for 3 seasons. If trading one or the other to make things happen, I'm retaining Dinwiddie.
Dinwiddie raises the floor of a team better, but Joe's game raises its ceiling better.
The Nets will (hopefully) be at a stage where the foundation will be more or less built, but they need role players/specialists who possess unique skills that can take our offense and/or defense to the next level.
Joe Harris, like a Kyle Korver or JJ Reddick, does that for your offense. He's somebody that will break your back, because you've been able to manage covering the rest of the team but you can't expend the additional energy to track Joe wherever he's going. He's a mini-offense unto himself. If you have someone like Kyrie and DLo or another (better?) star wing to cover, the presence of Harris in addition to those stars is terrifying.
Plus, Dinwiddie's contact really isn't that long. He signed 2+1, so he could be gone in free agency as early as next year. If you can get a high-ish 1st rd draft pick for him now, I think you have to pull the trigger, especially if we're going to have at least two dynamic ball handlers always on the court like 2017-18 HOU. Then there's more of a redundancy and you don't benefit from having him as much as you would benefit from having Harris on the team. I'd rather use the pick I'd get in a trade for Dinwiddie to develop a young guard than try to find another Harris.
