RealGM

Simply put, would you do this deal?

Howard is very good friends with Devin, and works well alongside him. He has added range and ball-handling ability this summer, and could immediately provide scoring punch to our team. Finally, his contract has a TEAM OPTION for the '10-'11 year. So, if we decide to go after LeBron, we can waive Howard and still have the same capspace as if we had kept Simmons. But if James is reluctant to leave Cleveland or indicates that he'll sign elsewhere, hey, at least we still have Josh.

The downside to all of this is that we give two nice picks. The future DAL 1st could very well be a lotto pick, and even with Howard on the team, our 1st would be a 18-24 range pick. Is it worth it?

no thanks. Howard is a problem and he's not that good of a player, in my opinion.

Smokes weed, cocky, most importantly - STUPID. Wouldn't likely play with Frank anyways, would be in the doghouse often, just look at SWAT.

He's not really the "character" guy our front office wants, but his talent is through the roof.

It's also possible for this scenario.

Trade for JH. During the 2009/2010 season, sign Howard to a 3-4 year extension and trade Vince for the biggest expiring we could find to free up the room for Lebron. Is that even possible?

I don't see the point of it really... I mean we had a better Josh Howard in Richard Jefferson. Let's just rebuild the right way.

It's going to be painful at times but it'll payoff in the long-run...

NetsForce wrote:I don't see the point of it really... I mean we had a better Josh Howard in Richard Jefferson. Let's just rebuild the right way.

It's going to be painful at times but it'll payoff in the long-run...

Let's get one thing straight. Josh Howard is a one-time All-Star. Richard Jefferson is a coulda-woulda-shoulda-been All-Star, but bottom line, HE AIN'T ONE.

On top of that, Josh makes about 2/3 of what Richard makes. But most importantly, as I mentioned in the OP, Howard's contract would give us the flexibility to go after LeBron if we so choose, OR to keep JoHo at a reasonable price. Richard's contract wouldn't allow that, and we would've had to trade him eventually if we wanted to have a chance at James.

Now, I agree with you that pain is a part of rebuilding. I accept that wholeheartedly, and was a strong proponent of the RJ trade. You have to ask yourself, though: what do we lose here? We lose Bobby Simmons, a serviceable swingman, but he doesn't have anything in spades over Howard. Then, we give up what is likely a late-lotto pick and a mid-1st. Could be Bayless/Hibbert, could be Armstrong/Balkman. There are gems and busts throughout the draft, and we would certainly risk losing two of either here.

I say it's worth the risk, since it doesn't harm to the LeBron plan. It also gives us a fallback option, in case James sours on coming here (which, with the Brooklyn move on hold indefinitely, is a real possibility). if you look at all sides of this trade, I think you'll see what I see.

eww r u serious?

hell no

/thread

Please explain your ewww. I've gone into great detail to explain my side, at least show me the same effort.

ecuhus1981 wrote:Simply put, would you do this deal?

Howard is very good friends with Devin, and works well alongside him. He has added range and ball-handling ability this summer, and could immediately provide scoring punch to our team. Finally, his contract has a TEAM OPTION for the '10-'11 year. So, if we decide to go after LeBron, we can waive Howard and still have the same capspace as if we had kept Simmons. But if James is reluctant to leave Cleveland or indicates that he'll sign elsewhere, hey, at least we still have Josh.

The downside to all of this is that we give two nice picks. The future DAL 1st could very well be a lotto pick, and even with Howard on the team, our 1st would be a 18-24 range pick. Is it worth it?

You really can't do both. It's a nice offer talent wise, but you really have to know what the team brass is thinking. Is it really serious about retooling? Or is this time priming itself for 2010 and that class? If it's retooling, then you make the deal.

If it's not, then why do it? Sure, you get Josh, but what for? So you can rent him for two years while surrendering two picks? Doesn't make sense. If the goal is to position the team for 2010, then you stick with Simmons, keep all the picks we have, and swing hard for the fences in 2010.

I would do this trade because Josh is the younger and way better talent.Plus we already had a good draft we got some good young talent.I want to be good again and win games as soon as possible.

^

I pretty much agree with stevieboy. There are only so many roleplaying youngsters you can develop on one roster, and we're pretty much at critical mass already. Obviously, if either DAL's or NJN's pick looked to be an upper-lotto pick / future All-Star or something, then I could see the impact the pick would provide. One could also argue that the two picks we're giving up could be traded for a higher pick, but we've seen in recent drafts how difficult those trades are to make. And almost always, trading up from two picks in the draft to one higher one is a sucker's bet.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with competing NOW, as long as the 2010 plan remains intact. Is the allure of the unknown the big snag in this deal, for some NJN fans? Would swapping out the future NJN 1st for Sean or the rights to Krstic make the deal more palatable??? At the heart of this deal, DAL is willing to give us Howard for their future 1st returned, plus something. What that something is can be adjusted to suit everyone's needs. So, offer your opinion/solution.

ecuhus1981 wrote:^

I pretty much agree with stevieboy. There are only so many roleplaying youngsters you can develop on one roster, and we're pretty much at critical mass already. Obviously, if either DAL's or NJN's pick looked to be an upper-lotto pick / future All-Star or something, then I could see the impact the pick would provide. One could also argue that the two picks we're giving up could be traded for a higher pick, but we've seen in recent drafts how difficult those trades are to make. And almost always, trading up from two picks in the draft to one higher one is a sucker's bet.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with competing NOW, as long as the 2010 plan remains intact. Is the allure of the unknown the big snag in this deal, for some NJN fans? Would swapping out the future NJN 1st for Sean or the rights to Krstic make the deal more palatable??? At the heart of this deal, DAL is willing to give us Howard for their future 1st returned, plus something. What that something is can be adjusted to suit everyone's needs. So, offer your opinion/solution.

You can never have enough young talent. The Blazers have been accumulating picks for years now, and even now still has holes. Not every young player we draft will pan out and live up to the hype.

Sean looked like a sure fire player to be a contributor his rookie year, now he's on the bottom of the roster. Marcus definitely showed promise, now he's a DNPCD in GS. IN GOLDEN STATE! We were sure our center spot was locked up in Krstic, then an ACL tear later, and we're using a top pick for his replacement.

Besides, Josh Howard isn't that great. Take a look at all the Dallas fans who want him gone. He's a stats player with an IQ of Darko, except he actually has skills and talent. The guy's decision making (on and off the court) is terrible. I'd rather keep our two picks, stink, get a high draft pick, and reload in 2010.

Ask yourself which scenario you'd prefer:

A) Trade for Josh Howard. Make the playoffs as #8 seed this year, maybe #7 next year. Bounced in playoff. First round this year, Second round next year. Pick in middle of first round. 2010 comes, we let Josh go (you guys realize he's OLDER than RJ right? He'll be 30 when 2010 rolls around). Bring in Lebron and build around Bron, Harris, Brook, and Yi (not really counting Vince since I doubt he'll be in team's future by then given his decline due to age). Plus whoever we got in the past two drafts.

B) Don't trade for Josh Howard. We don't make the playoffs, and get two top 10, maybe top 5 picks. Oh did I mention Dallas probably won't be that good also? And how bout them Warriors for trading for Marcus? We suck this year and next. But 2010 rolls around and we still have Harris, Yi, and Brook to build around. Is that enough to entice Bron? Probably not. But by then, we'll have two top 10 picks (if not higher, which is our own), two middle picks (if not higher, Dallas and GS), AND, if we manage to dump Vince before then, plenty of cap space to burn. Even if we don't get to dump Vince's contract, those picks can all be packaged in several different ways. Move up to get the #1 pick (whoever that is at that point). Do a Ray Allen/KG type deal. Keeping our picks gives us soooo much flexibility in what we can do, that trading them for Josh Howard and two early playoff exits isn't worth it.