Early discussion on the 2023 offseason

[Netaman]

add another young player on a big contract to the list of immovable without an asset attached.

Read on Twitter

if CJ has a stupid market, they need to get something out of it (TPE) but let him go and just hang on to DFS. he's not a sexy choice but he can functionally take that role at an efficient price and a big TPE is probably enough to have your choice of a lot of talented young players in connecting trades (or just a big S&T).

[vincecarter4pres]

add another young player on a big contract to the list of immovable without an asset attached.

Read on Twitter

if CJ has a stupid market, they need to get something out of it (TPE) but let him go and just hang on to DFS. he's not a sexy choice but he can functionally take that role at an efficient price and a big TPE is probably enough to have your choice of a lot of talented young players in connecting trades (or just a big S&T).

I don’t like calling him immovable.

Maybe they were just looking for something or someone way above his value.

Not at all saying he is a desirable contract or a must have player. He’s certainly overpaid, and although productive, he has a lot of bad press circulating that he’s a bit uncoachable and a primma donna, let alone his style of game is a bit dated on offense and only a solid defender.

But what I’m getting at, is Phoenix was probably overplaying their hand with him, and each player is on a case by case basis.

So they were foolishly trying to get Myles Turner and the 7 for him. Yeah, no surprise they got turned down.

Or they tried getting Jarrett Allen and someone else for him. Of course Cleveland doesn’t want a slightly worse young center on a fat contract to continue clogging things.

Etc., etc.

Not advocating bringing back CJ on a ridiculous deal, just saying it’s not apples to apples.

[Netaman]

add another young player on a big contract to the list of immovable without an asset attached.

Read on Twitter

if CJ has a stupid market, they need to get something out of it (TPE) but let him go and just hang on to DFS. he's not a sexy choice but he can functionally take that role at an efficient price and a big TPE is probably enough to have your choice of a lot of talented young players in connecting trades (or just a big S&T).

I don’t like calling him immovable.

Maybe they were just looking for something or someone way above his value.

Not at all saying he is a desirable contract or a must have player. He’s certainly overpaid, and although productive, he has a lot of bad press circulating that he’s a bit uncoachable and a primma donna, let alone his style of game is a bit dated on offense and only a solid defender.

But what I’m getting at, is Phoenix was probably overplaying their hand with him, and each player is on a case by case basis.

So they were foolishly trying to get Myles Turner and the 7 for him. Yeah, no surprise they got turned down.

Or they tried getting Jarrett Allen and someone else for him. Of course Cleveland doesn’t want a slightly worse young center on a fat contract to continue clogging things.

Etc., etc.

Not advocating bringing back CJ on a ridiculous deal, just saying it’s not apples to apples.

the poole trade cuts away a lot of (if not all) wishful optimism on anyone making 20m+ multi-year.

you have to be very careful about who gets those contracts with term because the only ones that are going to be easy to move are the ones with players nobody wants to move.

cam j even at 21m is not likely to be a positive value asset so if someone else is bidding stupid you have walk.

[Netaman]

random but with or without dame, if there's a way to bring back brook he'd be a really good fit for this roster if the numbers make sense. s&t with bucks getting dfs? olynyk would be just as good but not sure what that would cost from utah.

[Marvin Martian]

I'd rather went ahead and trade Mikal for #3 (Scoot) & Simons than to give up 4 or more picks to get Dame.

At least the former allows us to keep the valuable PHX picks while developing young talent, than to blow our load for a 2-3 year window of competence and have no semblance of future afterwards.

As long as you're up against Giannis, Embiid, Tatum and the Heat, I don't think we'll go far in the East.

Otoh, if it's Luka we're talking about, then I'll throw even the kitchen sink for him.

Same.

This is a definition of insanity moment yet again.

Even if we truly contend, it will be as a darkhorse and will probably only last 2 seasons.

I’d prefer to go after Trae Young tbh, he’d probably come cheaper asset-wise as well and you’d likely be able to ship out Simmons in the deal.

Lillard is a great player, borderline all timer, but the stone cold facts are he’s 33.

He’ll probably be a very good player till he retires, but when he starts losing that quickness and first step, elevation on his drives and jumpers, burst and change of direction, he’s going to be $60 million a year Mike Conley.

Lillard is arguably the 3rd best shooter in NBA history. Comparing him to a game manager like Conley is an insult

[therealbig3]

Lillard is great, but he’s going to be on the decline, and we’re not any closer to a title with him. Blowing our load AGAIN on a 2 year window that realistically won’t pay off is what we’ve been doing for over a decade at this point. It would be insanity.

[Netaman]

Lillard is great, but he’s going to be on the decline, and we’re not any closer to a title with him. Blowing our load AGAIN on a 2 year window that realistically won’t pay off is what we’ve been doing for over a decade at this point. It would be insanity.

they have 10 tradeable picks + 2 rookies not yet signed + several vets who can be rerouted to other teams for yet more picks.

nobody is advocating blowing any loads. they will still have more than average draft capital after any trade.

[Netaman]

bobby marks on miami and brooklyn offers.

https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/37913660

[JoseRizal]

I'd rather went ahead and trade Mikal for #3 (Scoot) & Simons than to give up 4 or more picks to get Dame.

At least the former allows us to keep the valuable PHX picks while developing young talent, than to blow our load for a 2-3 year window of competence and have no semblance of future afterwards.

As long as you're up against Giannis, Embiid, Tatum and the Heat, I don't think we'll go far in the East.

Otoh, if it's Luka we're talking about, then I'll throw even the kitchen sink for him.

Same.

This is a definition of insanity moment yet again.

Even if we truly contend, it will be as a darkhorse and will probably only last 2 seasons.

I’d prefer to go after Trae Young tbh, he’d probably come cheaper asset-wise as well and you’d likely be able to ship out Simmons in the deal.

Lillard is a great player, borderline all timer, but the stone cold facts are he’s 33.

He’ll probably be a very good player till he retires, but when he starts losing that quickness and first step, elevation on his drives and jumpers, burst and change of direction, he’s going to be $60 million a year Mike Conley.

The more I watch Trae, the more I agree with you that he's a better option than Dame.

While Dame is the better player, he'll be turning 33 in 19 days.

Looking back at the past PG's who turned around their teams once they got traded. I was able to come up with 2.

First, Kidd in 2001. He was only 28 then and was at his prime. He was pretty durable as well, but lost a step towards the latter part of his Dallas days.

Then we have Nash in 2004. He was 30 yo. Injuries eventually took him out by his mid 30's.

Trae is a better gamble as he is only 24 yo. Granting his undersized and a liability on D. He compensates it with his shotmaking and playmaking, both which are key weaknesses of the team. He's also clutch and is not afraid to take over games. As long as you surround him with 3 & D's, I think we'll maximize his prime while continue to add potential key contributors.

[Papi_swav]

Welp Naz Reid is off the table. 3/42 is a very good contract for him and I would of loved to have him here for that number. Good job by the Wolves to not let him go though.

[Rastas]

random but with or without dame, if there's a way to bring back brook he'd be a really good fit for this roster if the numbers make sense. s&t with bucks getting dfs? olynyk would be just as good but not sure what that would cost from utah.

Agreed I like both these possibilities or even if they can't get either I would chase a possible budget version in Landale.
At 27 he fits Nets timeline.
Outplayed Ayton in the playoffs.
Weakens Suns bench even more.
Decent rim defence ,and 3pt.
Wont cost too much - say 5m to 8m per.

[Tha King]

add another young player on a big contract to the list of immovable without an asset attached.

Read on Twitter

if CJ has a stupid market, they need to get something out of it (TPE) but let him go and just hang on to DFS. he's not a sexy choice but he can functionally take that role at an efficient price and a big TPE is probably enough to have your choice of a lot of talented young players in connecting trades (or just a big S&T).

I don’t like calling him immovable.

Maybe they were just looking for something or someone way above his value.

Not at all saying he is a desirable contract or a must have player. He’s certainly overpaid, and although productive, he has a lot of bad press circulating that he’s a bit uncoachable and a primma donna, let alone his style of game is a bit dated on offense and only a solid defender.

But what I’m getting at, is Phoenix was probably overplaying their hand with him, and each player is on a case by case basis.

So they were foolishly trying to get Myles Turner and the 7 for him. Yeah, no surprise they got turned down.

Or they tried getting Jarrett Allen and someone else for him. Of course Cleveland doesn’t want a slightly worse young center on a fat contract to continue clogging things.

Etc., etc.

Not advocating bringing back CJ on a ridiculous deal, just saying it’s not apples to apples.

the poole trade cuts away a lot of (if not all) wishful optimism on anyone making 20m+ multi-year.

you have to be very careful about who gets those contracts with term because the only ones that are going to be easy to move are the ones with players nobody wants to move.

cam j even at 21m is not likely to be a positive value asset so if someone else is bidding stupid you have walk.

yea even at 21m he'd be a tough contract. He played well in the playoffs but there were stretches during the regular season where you questioned if he was even better than Royce or DFS. If he's not making C&S threes, there's really little he provides at a starting level.

S&T or just letting him go could be the best long term move.

[Tha King]

Lillard is great, but he’s going to be on the decline, and we’re not any closer to a title with him. Blowing our load AGAIN on a 2 year window that realistically won’t pay off is what we’ve been doing for over a decade at this point. It would be insanity.

they have 10 tradeable picks + 2 rookies not yet signed + several vets who can be rerouted to other teams for yet more picks.

nobody is advocating blowing any loads. they will still have more than average draft capital after any trade.

the thing is, unless future Nets picks are involved, there are really only 4 interesting picks (Suns/Mavs) and the Blazers would get most if not all.

All that for a team not really anywhere close to contending. Just seems like a pointless short cut move, and as mentioned, the same kind this organization has been making for a while.

[Paradise]

Lillard is great, but he’s going to be on the decline, and we’re not any closer to a title with him. Blowing our load AGAIN on a 2 year window that realistically won’t pay off is what we’ve been doing for over a decade at this point. It would be insanity.

they have 10 tradeable picks + 2 rookies not yet signed + several vets who can be rerouted to other teams for yet more picks.

nobody is advocating blowing any loads. they will still have more than average draft capital after any trade.

the thing is, unless future Nets picks are involved, there are really only 4 interesting picks (Suns/Mavs) and the Blazers would get most if not all.

All that for a team not really anywhere close to contending. Just seems like a pointless short cut move, and as mentioned, the same kind this organization has been making for a while.

Getting Lillard opens the path to another star pairing alongside Mikal and Cam or we simply stand pat because Lillard is a Simmons fan.

If Ben comes back 100%, we really wouldn’t need to worry about anything but the bench.

[TheNetsFan]

Read on Twitter

[Netaman]

Lillard is great, but he’s going to be on the decline, and we’re not any closer to a title with him. Blowing our load AGAIN on a 2 year window that realistically won’t pay off is what we’ve been doing for over a decade at this point. It would be insanity.

they have 10 tradeable picks + 2 rookies not yet signed + several vets who can be rerouted to other teams for yet more picks.

nobody is advocating blowing any loads. they will still have more than average draft capital after any trade.

the thing is, unless future Nets picks are involved, there are really only 4 interesting picks (Suns/Mavs) and the Blazers would get most if not all.

All that for a team not really anywhere close to contending. Just seems like a pointless short cut move, and as mentioned, the same kind this organization has been making for a while.

why wouldn't nets future picks count? there are only 2 more owed to houston (2024, 2026) plus 2 more swaps (2025, 2027). if the nets are good and houston is bad, or if both are bad, or if both are good, we know what happens with swaps, nothing, same as the first 2 which have already come and gone. with lillard nets would have him and bridges (and probably CJ) under contract through 2027 draft. and prior to the 2027 draft they only have 1 unprotected pick available to trade (2025 suns) which is probably still going to be non-lotto so blazers may not even want it.

the best pick the nets own is probably phoenix 2027 because that is post-KD and they have no assets. all the rest are dart throws with 6 unprotected including the nets own 2028, 2029 picks.

I think 3 unprotected future picks is probably the price on lillard, plus maybe 1 other lesser pick either from the nets (philly 2027?) or a 3rd team. the 3 unprotected could be all 3 phoenix picks, or 1 phoenix, 1 dallas, 1 brooklyn.

[Netaman]

random but with or without dame, if there's a way to bring back brook he'd be a really good fit for this roster if the numbers make sense. s&t with bucks getting dfs? olynyk would be just as good but not sure what that would cost from utah.

Agreed I like both these possibilities or even if they can't get either I would chase a possible budget version in Landale.
At 27 he fits Nets timeline.
Outplayed Ayton in the playoffs.
Weakens Suns bench even more.
Decent rim defence ,and 3pt.
Wont cost too much - say 5m to 8m per.

that's a pretty good fit good call. londale hasnt shot the ball great from deep but he has the FT% that you can dream on it improving not unlike lopez. nets love their aussies and have a few different exceptions to add him.

[Netaman]

good article from the ringer that basically hits on everything ive been talking about in terms of why i think nets are most likely to get lillard if he opts out. not that it's rocket science or anything, he named them and they have the most picks/expirings.

1 interesting thing they mention is that while miami has the best chance at contending this year with lillard, how long does that last since jimmy is older than dame? is the extra chance this year worth the possibility that bridges as a younger ascending player gives him a better chance over the next several years?

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2023/6/26/23773839/damian-lillard-trade-rumors-miami-heat-brooklyn-nets

Though the Nets don’t have their own firsts until 2028 through 2030, they do have Suns firsts in 2025, 2027, and 2029, plus a swap in 2028 and a Mavericks first in 2029. All of those picks likely have more value than any the Heat can offer due to the age of Phoenix’s core and the fact that Luka Doncic can become a free agent in 2026-27. At most, the Heat can offer two firsts and two swaps. If the Nets gave four firsts, they’d still have five remaining future firsts to use in other deals.

[Tha King]

they have 10 tradeable picks + 2 rookies not yet signed + several vets who can be rerouted to other teams for yet more picks.

nobody is advocating blowing any loads. they will still have more than average draft capital after any trade.

the thing is, unless future Nets picks are involved, there are really only 4 interesting picks (Suns/Mavs) and the Blazers would get most if not all.

All that for a team not really anywhere close to contending. Just seems like a pointless short cut move, and as mentioned, the same kind this organization has been making for a while.

why wouldn't nets future picks count? there are only 2 more owed to houston (2024, 2026) plus 2 more swaps (2025, 2027). if the nets are good and houston is bad, or if both are bad, or if both are good, we know what happens with swaps, nothing, same as the first 2 which have already come and gone. with lillard nets would have him and bridges (and probably CJ) under contract through 2027 draft. and prior to the 2027 draft they only have 1 unprotected pick available to trade (2025 suns) which is probably still going to be non-lotto so blazers may not even want it.

the best pick the nets own is probably phoenix 2027 because that is post-KD and they have no assets. all the rest are dart throws with 6 unprotected including the nets own 2028, 2029 picks.

I think 3 unprotected future picks is probably the price on lillard, plus maybe 1 other lesser pick either from the nets (philly 2027?) or a 3rd team. the 3 unprotected could be all 3 phoenix picks, or 1 phoenix, 1 dallas, 1 brooklyn.

I removed future Nets picks because it would be a terrible idea imo to trade away further future for the hopes of being a second round team.

Also, i don't think you can have a forward looking view rn on a roster built around a declining Lillard, a player that has yet to make an all star team with only a ~20 game sample as anything more than a 3&D role player, and a player that's incredibly limited offensively and has barely started in this league and think it'll be for sure good in 2027 and beyond.

[Netaman]

the thing is, unless future Nets picks are involved, there are really only 4 interesting picks (Suns/Mavs) and the Blazers would get most if not all.

All that for a team not really anywhere close to contending. Just seems like a pointless short cut move, and as mentioned, the same kind this organization has been making for a while.

why wouldn't nets future picks count? there are only 2 more owed to houston (2024, 2026) plus 2 more swaps (2025, 2027). if the nets are good and houston is bad, or if both are bad, or if both are good, we know what happens with swaps, nothing, same as the first 2 which have already come and gone. with lillard nets would have him and bridges (and probably CJ) under contract through 2027 draft. and prior to the 2027 draft they only have 1 unprotected pick available to trade (2025 suns) which is probably still going to be non-lotto so blazers may not even want it.

the best pick the nets own is probably phoenix 2027 because that is post-KD and they have no assets. all the rest are dart throws with 6 unprotected including the nets own 2028, 2029 picks.

I think 3 unprotected future picks is probably the price on lillard, plus maybe 1 other lesser pick either from the nets (philly 2027?) or a 3rd team. the 3 unprotected could be all 3 phoenix picks, or 1 phoenix, 1 dallas, 1 brooklyn.

I removed future Nets picks because it would be a terrible idea imo to trade away further future for the hopes of being a second round team.

Also, i don't think you can have a forward looking view rn on a roster built around a declining Lillard, a player that has yet to make an all star team with only a ~20 game sample as anything more than a 3&D role player, and a player that's incredibly limited offensively and has barely started in this league and think it'll be for sure good in 2027 and beyond.

how is lillard declining? he just came off one of his best years and was 3rd in the nba in scoring. with him the blazers were almost a .500 team, without him they were one of the worst teams in NBA.

he has 4 years under contract which would be his a33-36, so younger than KD when he came to nets - and not coming off an achilles. he is younger than jimmy butler, is he also declining? lillard, bridges, claxton is a top 4 team in the east and they'd still have picks, tradeable salary space, + simmons giving them a ceiling beyond that (most likely in the form of a 40m expiring trade chip this time next year).

out of all positions point guards have the longest shelf lives. cp3 was 36 when he went to phoenix and at 38 he just helped washington bring back a FRP. Mike Conley has never been nearly as talented as Lillard and he's still making an impact at age 35. Lowry either and he is on 1 leg at 37 making plays in the playoffs. Lillard right now for nets would be like a supercharged version of paul when he went to phoenix while giving the nets one of the best closers in the gam - which is exactly the thing their existing frankenstein .500 roster lacked. if the trade value is fair it's a no brainer.