JO to the Nets in the Offseason

[jerseyjac]

JO should be available. For the past 2 years, I've said very consistently that the Nets should do "whatever it takes" to get either JO or Gasol.

But now? Now I think you look elsewhere. The "window" that Kidd provided is closed, this team needs to build for the future, and it's the wrong direction to grab a superior interior player on the backside of his career.

This summer move VC for younger talent, and ideally a young C or PF. Build around Harris, RJ, and whichever other youngsters can step up. The future is a couple years away, and that's where the assets needs to be spent.

Brand? We have no reason to believe Brand is available.

Now in the seemingly impossible scenario that you could get Brand, you gotta go for it, but I don't see the Clippers making that trade. If they would, however, I'd do VC and Marcus, or VC and a young big (Boone, WIlliams, or even Krstic) in a flash.

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic. ... 8&start=24

I went into it a bit in this thread above...a blockbuster trade seems like a long shot to me too...just talking names, whether they're available or not, you have to want Brand depending on what the Clippers are looking for...

However, as you said, I have no problem rebuilding a bit with a young big man...some more draft picks for VC or RJ...I agree with you Gump...enetric even said it...he has always said...recently we talked and he drilled the point once again...

"the worst place is to be in the NBA is middle of the road"...a mediocre NBA team...its like dying a slow death...

I know we're all excited for the draft, but trades are so difficult, I still cannot believe we pulled off Harris and looked how that came through in last hours of the deadline...

If a team is looking to shake things up, they should come see us...and I'm sure Thorn has put that memo out among other NBA team execs...but I will say at this point, I'm all for rebuilding the right way...and I obviously trust Thorn to know he won't give Vince nor Richard away unless we get a blue chip or some rebuilding pieces...

[FGump]

Reading that thread, and this one, I think a reminder needs to go out that there has to be one priority: find the young (or youngish) big man. Until you do, it'll be mediocrity for MANY years, not just 2 or 3.

Obviously it's easier to say than to do, as we have seen for a few years, but this franchise has wanted to "keep the core of stars together and add somebody big." That focus needs to shift to an all-out search for the big, with a willingness to spend talent to get him.

Sure, you can keep it going with VC, RJ, and Harris, but that's going to be dying a slow death. I don't see anything in the current group to take it to the next level, and winning 30 games or so is pointless. It may even be better to suck hard for a couple years and get some high picks, if you can't find any other option, but I'd shop VC in a major way while he still sells tix, and hope someone bites. VC may attract fans, but winning keeps em coming longer.

[G_MoNeY]

Reading that thread, and this one, I think a reminder needs to go out that there has to be one priority: find the young (or youngish) big man. Until you do, it'll be mediocrity for MANY years, not just 2 or 3.

Obviously it's easier to say than to do, as we have seen for a few years, but this franchise has wanted to "keep the core of stars together and add somebody big." That focus needs to shift to an all-out search for the big, with a willingness to spend talent to get him.

Sure, you can keep it going with VC, RJ, and Harris, but that's going to be dying a slow death. I don't see anything in the current group to take it to the next level, and winning 30 games or so is pointless. It may even be better to suck hard for a couple years and get some high picks, if you can't find any other option, but I'd shop VC in a major way while he still sells tix, and hope someone bites. VC may attract fans, but winning keeps em coming longer.

With all due respect Gump, it sounds like you're saying VC isn't a "winner" here. He's proven since coming to NJ, that if the ball is in his hands, he delivers. People point out that his numbers are down, but anyone who watched the games can see the offense Frank implemented took the ball AWAY from VC. These past 15 games, the ball has been back in his hands, and look at the result.

2007-2008 - On Court: -2.2, Off Court: - 11.7, Net: +9.5 (1st on team)
Once again, Carter is the statistically the most effective player on his team. Kidd is +5.6 and Jefferson is -0.2. But Vince Carter is the problem?

Vince makes $13.3 mil this year, the 31st highest paid player in the league. Some of you guys make it sound like he's making Shaq money. It's all about production, RJ is nowhere near VC's level. VC sells tickets, yes, but VC is also the most productive player on the team. You got Harris now, ship the weakest link out and fill a need in return.

[MrDollarBills]

I still say we should focus on improving while getting ready for "the future". It's not set in stone that Lebron James will come here, but I agree with not handicapping the team with any bad contracts until that free agency period comes and we can make a play for a big name.

[FGump]

GMoney, no I'm not saying VC is worthless. Instead, I'm saying that this current mix of talent (with VC "producing" as he does) has only won 32 games.

And if the Nets want to be top tier again, they (a) have to get a big man, and (b) it's likely to take spending some talent to get him. So do you want VC putting up pretty numbers, and the team winning 30-35, for the rest of VC's contract, or do you want to do what it takes to create the next generation of really good Nets teams?

Then again, maybe you like the gaudy numbers and the losing. I don't, and I think ticket sales will go down despite VC's numbers if the team doesn't get a franchise guy for the future. I don't think that guy is on the roster and that's the first priority.

[mack69]

Being ready for the LBJ becomes a FA is good thinking but if your team is not desirable at that time you will attract nothing this plan will make us the Atlanta Hawks!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Arguably good talent but no wins by that time. A possible disaster!!!!!

[G_MoNeY]

I'm not happy with the 30 win seasons, but what would our record be without VC? 20 or so, if that. You can blame some of these losses on VC, sure; but the majority of these losses fall on either the hands of the coach (YES!) and the inconsistency throughout the whole team, our lack of a post presence and a legit shooter.

My whole argument is, you lose VC, you lose more than just "pretty numbers" -- you lose numbers many in the league can't do on a consistent basis, VC despite the critics is one of the most consistent scorers. My point is, you deal away the weakest link (RJ) + fillers and try to obtain an upgrade at the PF/C position. We've all been saying this for a few years now, the "big 3" experiment has gone on long enough. RJ is more attactive to teams anyways. Younger, smaller contract, etc... You pair Harris (all-star PG in the East) with VC and get some type of consistent production on the block -- combined with a shooter either via free agency, trade or draft.. and we've addressed the glaring needs this team lacks. The other being the midget on the sidelines, jumping up and down and clapping.

[S.I.C. GM]

I'm not happy with the 30 win seasons, but what would our record be without VC? 20 or so, if that. You can blame some of these losses on VC, sure; but the majority of these losses fall on either the hands of the coach (YES!) and the inconsistency throughout the whole team, our lack of a post presence and a legit shooter.

My whole argument is, you lose VC, you lose more than just "pretty numbers" -- you lose numbers many in the league can't do on a consistent basis, VC despite the critics is one of the most consistent scorers. My point is, you deal away the weakest link (RJ) + fillers and try to obtain an upgrade at the PF/C position. We've all been saying this for a few years now, the "big 3" experiment has gone on long enough. RJ is more attactive to teams anyways. Younger, smaller contract, etc... You pair Harris (all-star PG in the East) with VC and get some type of consistent production on the block -- combined with a shooter either via free agency, trade or draft.. and we've addressed the glaring needs this team lacks. The other being the midget on the sidelines, jumping up and down and clapping.

Exactly.

Less would be preferred.

[S.I.C. GM]

Being ready for the LBJ becomes a FA is good thinking but if your team is not desirable at that time you will attract nothing this plan will make us the Atlanta Hawks!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Arguably good talent but no wins by that time. A possible disaster!!!!!

But we arent guaranteed Lebron anyway. Other teams are gearing up for him too.

I am for all out REBUILD.

Draft picks, expiring, and young players. VC doesnt fit none of those.

[FGump]

I'm not happy with the 30 win seasons, but what would our record be without VC? 20 or so, if that.

So what? With 20 wins or 30 wins, you suck either way. You're nowhere near a title.

But with 20 you get a shot at a franchise-changer in the draft.

And if you trade away an aging VC on his last run and get some young talent that will develop in the next 2-3 years, you're even farther ahead. Those extra 10 theoretical wins aren't worth keeping him for, but they might mean enough to someone else where you can get pieces to build with.

That was the premise of the Kidd trade, and it was the right move Right now, Kidd is better than Harris and can make you better. But Thorn knew by the time the Nets have enough other talent around him to contend, Kidd will be done and they'd get nothing for him. Better to have Harris instead, who in 2-3 years will still be going strong.

The same applies to VC. Trade him for young developable talent, looking for an interior presence to build around. Keeping VC, and watching him turn to dust, gets you nowhere beyond a few extra meaningless non-contending wins.

[G_MoNeY]

VC is only 31! He's got at least 5 years left in him. My whole premise for this conversation is to argue that we can contend while still looking ahead to the future. VC puts us in a better position to contend NOW and for the move to Brooklyn.

RJ will always be a second, third fiddle type player.

[FGump]

My whole premise for this conversation is to argue that we can contend while still looking ahead to the future.

You can keep this set of players and contend????? No need to swap old-and-declining for young-with-high potential, because this team is just a hair away from contending and about to be there?????

Wake up and smell the coffee, skippy. At 32 wins, this team isn't close at all. You're living in a dreamworld that died already.

[S.I.C. GM]

-= original quote snipped =-



So what? With 20 wins or 30 wins, you suck either way. You're nowhere near a title.

But with 20 you get a shot at a franchise-changer in the draft.

And if you trade away an aging VC on his last run and get some young talent that will develop in the next 2-3 years, you're even farther ahead. Those extra 10 theoretical wins aren't worth keeping him for, but they might mean enough to someone else where you can get pieces to build with.

That was the premise of the Kidd trade, and it was the right move Right now, Kidd is better than Harris and can make you better. But Thorn knew by the time the Nets have enough other talent around him to contend, Kidd will be done and they'd get nothing for him. Better to have Harris instead, who in 2-3 years will still be going strong.

The same applies to VC. Trade him for young developable talent, looking for an interior presence to build around. Keeping VC, and watching him turn to dust, gets you nowhere beyond a few extra meaningless non-contending wins.

Preach On! My Brother! Testify!!!

<as the drums beat in the background and SIC prepares the chicken for the sacrifice.>

[S.I.C. GM]

VC is only 31! He's got at least 5 years left in him. My whole premise for this conversation is to argue that we can contend while still looking ahead to the future. VC puts us in a better position to contend NOW and for the move to Brooklyn.

RJ will always be a second, third fiddle type player.

This makes no sense.

Why contend when we can try to get as many ping pong balls as possible?

[G_MoNeY]

-= original quote snipped =-



You can keep this set of players and contend????? No need to swap old-and-declining for young-with-high potential, because this team is just a hair away from contending and about to be there?????

Wake up and smell the coffee, skippy. At 32 wins, this team isn't close at all. You're living in a dreamworld that died already.

not the entire group, obviously. I'm speaking on Harris, VC, Boone, Sean Williams, etc...I'm still not sold on Krstic as much as others are here either. Look to trade RJ, Krstic, Marcus Williams and basically anyone else on the team, regroup but not rebuild.

[FGump]

I think that's a formula to win 35 for the next 10 years, stuck in the middle with lousy picks and so-so talent. We'll see what happens.

[mack69]

Question: It is clear that we are rebuilding on the fly. if we were to miraculously get beasley do we still move RJ or Vince?

[vincecarter4pres]

I don't know if we are rebuilding on the fly.

Rod is gonna go one of 2 ways with this team.

Complete rebuild or complete overhaul.

Stay tuned.

[FGump]

I think the direction was set when Kidd was traded. Sure, a miracle lottery draw could alter things, but realistically Rod's looking to the future.

[Serpo]

I wouldn't be suprised if neither Vince or RJ are traded this offseason .
Rod's not going to send them as presents just for expirings and bad/mediocre picks away . He hasn't done it with Kidd and most likely won't do it here.

Wouldn't make any sence anyway we can allways get that .