Trade Targets, Part Deux

DWILLoftheGODZ · Post #1381 » by **DWILLoftheGODZ** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:55 am

Plan A: Josh Smith

Plan B: Ben Gordon & JJ Hickson

enetric · Post #1382 » by **enetric** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:56 am

Paradise wrote:So, now everyone is saying it's Humphries on a 2 year deal being the hold up. Which was already obvious but it's painfully obvious nobody wants him on their roster for more than 1 year which wouldn't be the case IF he played like he did a year ago.

We may end up settling on a Gordon/Humphries deal. Ugh.

It really wasnt realistic that we were going to get the last piece this trade deadline. I said it before the season began that for us our best shot is next off season armed with a large expiring. If Gordon is a more valuable expiring then so be it. I am fine with it. And for the short term...for all our complaining this team is doing just fine.

Pen Island · Post #1383 » by **Pen Island** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:56 am

Off Topic but the TRUTH

Ethan J. Skolnick: Expect quiet on Heat trade front tomorrow. As one player told me, "Why do we need to do anything? You've seen 6 play, right?" Twitter @EthanJSkolnick
Read more at http://hoopshype.com/rumors.htm#HDt9TryaQP4xgfpX.99

Pen Island · Post #1384 » by **Pen Island** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:57 am

From AJC Hawks beat writer. Go to bed men:

Chris Vivlamore ‏@ajchawks
I'm told trade involving Josh Smith unlikely to happen tonight. #ATLHawks

624 · Post #1385 » by **624** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:58 am

MarShon and Hump picked the absolute perfect day to both play well for the first time all season.

enetric · Post #1386 » by **enetric** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:59 am

[quote="vincecarter4pres"]

Seriously...I have to ask, why do you even want Nene anymore. Might as look to get Yao Ming. Odds are good they will play about the same number of games per year...lol.

I mean I used to like Nene. But the guy has enough injury seasons that to take him on is just asking for it at this point of his career. I think there are about 20 guys I would prefer over him at this stage.

Pen Island · Post #1387 » by **Pen Island** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:00 am

Stein on Ersan

Marc Stein: Nets have made play this week for Milwaukee's Ersan Ilyasova, I'm told, but their trusty Kris Humphries/MarShon Brooks bundle was rejected Twitter @ESPNSteinLine

It's getting embarrassing.

serp · Post #1388 » by **serp** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:00 am

Pen Island wrote:Beck with insult to injury

Howard Beck ‏@HowardBeckNYT
To those asking why Nets don't want Gordon: He's all offense, no defense. If they wanted that kind of guard, they'd play MarShon Brooks more

Difference is Gordon can shoot without dribbling around for 3/4's of the shotclock like a headless chicken.

enetric · Post #1389 » by **enetric** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:02 am

PetroNet wrote:
Who would we have to play center though? Blatche full time? I dunno how I feel about that. Not sure I'm a fan of Loves attitude. He's been pretty injury prone as well. Only guy I'd trade Lopez for is Howard.

If it went down and I was King I'd immediately be looking to follow up with something like Humphries and Brooks for Emeka Okafor or Nene.[/quote]

im not big on kevin love, so im biased, but id be pissed as hell if we did that trade.

as far as king, i wouldnt put it past him, im sure he would include giving minny our picks and euros cause thats how he rolls[/quote]

Wait....havent you been aggressively dismissing the value of our picks prospects to the Nth degree? And didnt you say 4 picks and prospects for Josh Smith...NO problem. Its Ok not to be a fan of Love...but are you going so far as to say that you would give MORE for Smith than Love? Or did you just not think it through?

I like Smith more than most here. Love is a significantly better player than Smith.

Pen Island · Post #1390 » by **Pen Island** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:02 am

Timmy weighs in as well

Tim Bontemps ‏@TimBontemps
I was told last week that the Nets weren't going to do a Gordon-for-Humphries swap. I would be surprised if it had been revived.

Looks like general consensus (outside of Amico who is FSN and they never break a damn thing) is that we won't get Ben. I'm kind of disappointed. I like the idea of Hump going to Bobcats obscurity and us getting literally anything in return.

Ronito · Post #1391 » by **Ronito** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:08 am

Fact remains no one wants our trash assets

AntwanBoldin · Post #1392 » by **AntwanBoldin** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:10 am

Pen Island wrote:Stein on Ersan

Marc Stein: Nets have made play this week for Milwaukee's Ersan Ilyasova, I'm told, but their trusty Kris Humphries/MarShon Brooks bundle was rejected Twitter @ESPNSteinLine

It's getting embarrassing.

Yea and I heard were moving to Brooklyn

enetric · Post #1393 » by **enetric** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:12 am

PetroNet wrote:1) We arent getting pierce AND garnett. thats idiotic to even speculate. if boston was trading both, it would be in seperate deals to maximize returns, let alone trade one of them for our garbage.

2) if we got pierce for humphries/brooks, thats a great trade. it clears our logjam at PF and frees up minutes for mirza. It allows us to bring wallace off the bench and limit his minutes to keep him healthy. it allows us to play small if we want. It gives us more outside shooting. defensively pierce is very solid. he is also a leader and super competitive, which we lack.

he upgrades us talent wise, we dont lose anything, and we still have the expiring for next year as his contract is the same length as humphries.

Boston has absolutely no control of where KG goes. So to say that so emphatically is actually fairly moronic of you.

What you MEAN to say is Boston would PREFER to trade them separately to maximize their return and of this you will get no argument from me. However, if KG flat out said...NO to anything they brought to him...and we were the only team willing to take Pierce and if we said not willing to give you Teletovic, and the other euro stashes or extra picks you have asked for. But...if you took the package we offered you for Pierce...we would turn Crash into an expiring...and give you the additional pieces you are asking for by adding KG. Now...if you can convince LAC to make the rumored deal with you even though only their coach seems to want that deal and you can get KG to waive the NT....great. But if not...we maximize the asset portion of the trade and save you all that cash over the next few years. Now KG might still say no. But this time when you go to him...be sure to mention that he will still be with Pierce, be in the playoff picture and his starting 5 will still have the Nets 3 best players at the other 3 spots.

Its all about the domino effect. There is what you want to do...and then there is what you CAN do. If Boston trades Pierce alone everyone assumes KG will say yes to LAC...and that LAC will magically say yes to making that deal. if that deal isnt there...what teams can you trade KG to that will net you the assets you want, save you the cash you want and that most importantly...KG WONT KILL before it happens?

Its a terrible trade. But it has way more realistic logic than you have considered.

therealbig3 · Post #1394 » by **therealbig3** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:15 am

Ronito wrote:Fact remains no one wants our trash assets

Which is why I don't understand why we don't want to at least slightly improve them for next year by trading Hump for Gordon.

We don't like Gordon as a player? Fine, don't play him then. He'd strictly be an asset for next year. It's not like Hump plays that much, and when he does, it's not like he plays well (tonight's game excluded). At least give Mirza a chance to play, and give us a better asset for next year.

enetric · Post #1395 » by **enetric** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:15 am

N Ireland Nets wrote:
enetric wrote:
vincecarter4pres wrote:One thing that hasn't been discussed...

If the rumor was true that King was trying to setup a 3 team deal with Love going to Minnesota for Dwight and Lopez going to the Wolves... anyone think there's a chance he offers the Wolves Brook for Love straight up as an eleventh hour deal once he accepts that Mitch is not moving Dwight?

I don't even know how I'd feel about that and although I would love to hear people's thoughts on that swap, I'm more interested in hearing your opinion on if King will actually offer it.

You know what? I dont believe there was ever a reality to Love being available at all. Not now anyway.

Well talks between Minnesota and Utah about Williams for Millsap deal look awfully suspicious...

I dont know. This is Kahn. The guy who once drafted 79 PG's. He loads up on talent best he can fit doesnt always seem to be a part of his thinking.

enetric · Post #1396 » by **enetric** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:16 am

AntwanBoldin wrote:What happened to Atlanta wanting humphries? I was told.....

The only place I read that ATL would be interested in Hump was from a poster on this board.

Shark · Post #1397 » by **Shark** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:16 am

Pen Island wrote:Timmy weighs in as well

Tim Bontemps ‏@TimBontemps
I was told last week that the Nets weren't going to do a Gordon-for-Humphries swap. I would be surprised if it had been revived.

Looks like general consensus (outside of Amico who is FSN and they never break a damn thing) is that we won't get Ben. I'm kind of disappointed. I like the idea of Hump going to Bobcats obscurity and us getting literally anything in return.

So we don't want Gordon for Hump? I think I've heard it all...

therealbig3 · Post #1398 » by **therealbig3** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:17 am

And the logic is ridiculous...we don't want Gordon, because he's all offense and no defense...so we'll hold onto Humphries, who's no offense and no defense.

VCRJKidd15 · Post #1399 » by **VCRJKidd15** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:19 am

lol at you guys wanting Ben Gordon just so you can hate on him and blame billy king. I'd rather keep hump and just play Marshon more but obviously won't happen. Haven't been a fan of Gordon ever since he left the Bulls I wouldn't expect him to go back to his 6th man way either the man got paid he doesn't give a f*** anymore

624 · Post #1400 » by **624** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:19 am

I hope CJ Watson's hot 3 game stretch doesn't have anything to do with not wanting Gordon anymore.