The Official Should We Have Signed Thad Thread

[Prokorov]

The Wolves in two seasons of tanking:
.
Jones, Lavine, Wiggins, Towns, Dieng, Muhammad, Bennett.

The Lakers in two seasons of tanking:

Clarkson, Randle, Nance, Russell.

The Bucks in two seasons:

MCW, Parker, Middleton, Vaughn, Giannis.


Star chasing through the draft is alot worse than free egency.

there are pros and const on both sides. when toy chase stars in the draft and fail you are left with kids on small contracts. when you chase stars in free agency and fail you are left with overpaid tier 3 players(in alot of cases). for me im choosing free agency every time, but its not "alot worse" in the draft. the bucks for instance are already better then us and parker could become elite

[Prokorov]

The Nets will have 40 mil in cap space in a year's time and a core of young players already in place on good deals. Outside of the pick situation, I could not say with a straight face that philly is in a better position.

Emulating what they are doing in philadelphia is pure madness. KJ McDaniels took a GAMBLE on his contract situation just to get the **** out of there faster than later.

Are you serious?

40 million in cap space for who?

This is the question I always wonder. Remember what happened the last time we had a lot of cap space? I'll remind you.



The fact of the matter is that big time free agents are not going to come to the Nets unless we already have a really good team. And we don't. And we won't anytime soon.

You guys keep bringing up Philadelphia as if I said they were the model. Paradise brought them up in the first place. All I'm advocating for is a full rebuild.

And you can look at GSW or OKC if you want examples of how that could work out.

I hate when people post that picture and say our cap space amounted to that group. it is such a lazy cop-out. if you paint the full picture, after our cap space couldnt land a big fish we instead were able to get deron williams and joe johnson. the core of a team that while underwhelming went to 3 straight playoffs. its not like we were awful for 5 years. had the dwight thing not have gone south we are probably looking at a team with 3 straight 50 win seasons

[Prokorov]

Can you name any NBA champions in the last 10 years who didn't draft a superstar? Cause I sure can't.

can you name the last one that didnt trade for or sign a superstar? outside of the spurs your probably going to go back a couple decades or more.

sure the heat drafted wade, but they signed lebron and bosh. sure those lakers teams had kobe. but they signed/traded for shaq and pau.

[Dirk]

Can you name any NBA champions in the last 10 years who didn't draft a superstar? Cause I sure can't.

can you name the last one that didnt trade for or sign a superstar? outside of the spurs your probably going to go back a couple decades or more.

sure the heat drafted wade, but they signed lebron and bosh. sure those lakers teams had kobe. but they signed/traded for shaq and pau.

Mavericks, Pistons.

[Prokorov]

Can you name any NBA champions in the last 10 years who didn't draft a superstar? Cause I sure can't.

can you name the last one that didnt trade for or sign a superstar? outside of the spurs your probably going to go back a couple decades or more.

sure the heat drafted wade, but they signed lebron and bosh. sure those lakers teams had kobe. but they signed/traded for shaq and pau.

Mavericks, Pistons.

pistons got rasheed. he was certainly a star and he was enormous for them. they also traded for billups who finals mvp and a huge part of that squad

MAvericks brought in tyson chandler. he isnt a star but was an all nba defender and a big part of that run.

[Dirk]

can you name the last one that didnt trade for or sign a superstar? outside of the spurs your probably going to go back a couple decades or more.

sure the heat drafted wade, but they signed lebron and bosh. sure those lakers teams had kobe. but they signed/traded for shaq and pau.

Mavericks, Pistons.

pistons got rasheed. he was certainly a star and he was enormous for them. they also traded for billups who finals mvp and a huge part of that squad

MAvericks brought in tyson chandler. he isnt a star but was an all nba defender and a big part of that run.

Those are not SUPERstars. When you mention the cap space you immediately think of franchise players. The Durants et al.

Wallace was passed around from the Blazers to the Hawks... to the Pistons. He was 30.

Tyson Chandler was seen as a walking injury and he had failed a physical with OKC.

Obviously you're right about their importance to those championships, but I don't think we get to do revisionist history based on what they went on to do. This works by how they were seen before joining those teams.

Since the Mavs are now in that dead end of staring at: blowing it up -> tank -> draft potential 'superstar' OR rebuild -> inject youth/draft but still try to be decent -> build culture -> trade/fa, I heard some crazy stat about championship teams having a superstar drafted by them(because the radio guys wanted to tank after the Jordan fiasco). I can't find it but googling I found this curiosity on reddit which points kind of in the same direction:

From the last 30 NBA championship rosters, only ONE didn't have a Top #1-3 Draft pick player. Can you guess what team is that?

If you guessed the 2003-2004 Detroit Pistons, they had Milicic at #2, and Billups at #3.
If you guessed the 2010-2011 Dallas Mavericks, they had Kidd and Chandler at #2.
If you guessed the 90's Chicago Bulls, you forgot MJ was #3. Go watch Space Jam again.

BONUS: Only one CURRENT team (still alive in the playoffs) is in the same situation. Can you also guess it?

Spoiler:

MEMPHIS. Conley at #4, Vince Carter & Jeff Green at #5

CORRECT ANSWER:

Spoiler:

CELTICS 2008... ironically they drafted Pierce.

Basically, it seems that for the past few decades, every championship team had a superstar that was drafted by them with the lone exception probably being the Pistons.

[Prokorov]

Mavericks, Pistons.

pistons got rasheed. he was certainly a star and he was enormous for them. they also traded for billups who finals mvp and a huge part of that squad

MAvericks brought in tyson chandler. he isnt a star but was an all nba defender and a big part of that run.

Those are not SUPERstars. When you mention the cap space you immediately think of franchise players. The Durants et al.

Wallace was passed around from the Blazers to the Hawks... to the Pistons. He was 30.

Tyson Chandler was seen as a walking injury and he had failed a physical with OKC.

Obviously you're right about their importance to those championships, but I don't think we get to do revisionist history based on what they went on to do. This works by how they were seen before joining those teams.

Since the Mavs are now in that dead end of staring at: blowing it up -> tank -> draft potential 'superstar' OR rebuild -> inject youth/draft but still try to be decent -> build culture -> trade/fa, I heard some crazy stat about championship teams having a superstar drafted by them(because the radio guys wanted to tank after the Jordan fiasco). I can't find it but googling I found this curiosity on reddit which points kind of in the same direction:

From the last 30 NBA championship rosters, only ONE didn't have a Top #1-3 Draft pick player. Can you guess what team is that?

If you guessed the 2003-2004 Detroit Pistons, they had Milicic at #2, and Billups at #3.
If you guessed the 2010-2011 Dallas Mavericks, they had Kidd and Chandler at #2.
If you guessed the 90's Chicago Bulls, you forgot MJ was #3. Go watch Space Jam again.

BONUS: Only one CURRENT team (still alive in the playoffs) is in the same situation. Can you also guess it?

Spoiler:

MEMPHIS. Conley at #4, Vince Carter & Jeff Green at #5

CORRECT ANSWER:

Spoiler:

CELTICS 2008... ironically they drafted Pierce.

Basically, it seems that for the past few decades, every championship team had a superstar that was drafted by them with the lone exception probably being the Pistons.

Rasheed was in his prime. he was 30 not 40. he was as good/better then anyone on that team. same with billups. same with ben wallace. they certainly didnt draft a superstar. their best players all came through trade.

ill give you the mavs, but no way on detroit.

also, having a player on your team drafted in the top 3 isnt the same as having drafted that player yourself.

[Dirk]

Rasheed was in his prime. he was 30 not 40. he was as good/better then anyone on that team. same with billups. same with ben wallace. they certainly didnt draft a superstar. their best players all came through trade.

ill give you the mavs, but no way on detroit.

also, having a player on your team drafted in the top 3 isnt the same as having drafted that player yourself.

I disagree with you on Wallace. I don't think he'd be in the superstar category if he was in the same context today. No doubt about his talent but he had a lot of baggage and character issues reason for being tossed around. Check out the opening line of an ESPN news article on the trade:

DETROIT -- Rasheed Wallace is headed to the Detroit Pistons, who only had to give up reserves and draft picks to land the frontcourt scorer they coveted.

He didn't have much value. Traded as an expiring contract basically. If a guy like him were to be available today... you'd have several posters being very afraid in light of the Deron Williams situation and "culture change". I think some teams wouldn't touch him. He is the guy you take a gamble on if you have an established team with vets. Not a guy that you expect to build your team around.

I am in a dilemma. I wanted the Mavs to tank hard this year to keep their pick(Celtics get it if it's outside top 7), but I don't envision continued tanking. I envision more of a organic growth of a team, kind of like the Blazers are trying to do(although maybe they're doing it because they have Lillard and think of him as a superstar). I wouldn't shy away from adding decent players with upside that are still young because they'd hurt the tank but they could grow with you and be assets. I don't want my team to stay away from free agency. I don't fear being mediocre -- I stopped considering fighting for the lower seeds as a bad thing, as long as you have a plan and are not just trying to hang on to it by overpaying fading players. I guess we have some example in the Bucks who didn't really tank and just recently looked like a team with no future and were getting the 8 seed in the east. Looking at the Nets and where you're located at, it seems unrealistic to expect the team to not be a player in free agency. I'm feeling like the Rockets are a model that I'd prefer. They were fighting hard to win games while "rebuilding". They were an attractive team to watch despite being in the "treadmill".

The curiosity of championship teams having a star drafted by them is a fact, but I really would not like a path where you just deliberately try to be in the lottery every year to get the next Lebron.

[MrDollarBills]

The Nets will have 40 mil in cap space in a year's time and a core of young players already in place on good deals. Outside of the pick situation, I could not say with a straight face that philly is in a better position.

Emulating what they are doing in philadelphia is pure madness. KJ McDaniels took a GAMBLE on his contract situation just to get the **** out of there faster than later.

you are kind of talking out of both sides of your mouths. you have been VERY vocal about it being a joke that any good free agent would want to come here next offseason, yet now you list cap space as a big asset. you say we have a "core of young players on good deals" philly can say the same only with much better prospects. "outside of the pick situation" is thrown in at the end, but its not something minor that can be brushed aside. we have few picks, they pick in the top of the lottery.

I dont think anyone is saying emulate what philly is doing. but where they stand now, i think they are arguably in better shape. or at least have a higher celing may be the better way to put it

No I haven't at all. I don't think that any top tier free agents are coming here(Like Lebron and Durant...you seem to think otherwise), but having cap space has never been a negative. I just am not deluding myself into thinking that the Nets can convince two of the top three players in the sport to come to Brooklyn following a below .500 season and using that as a reason to justify not retaining a serviceable forward.

And I love how now you regard the pick situation as something that can't be brushed aside, you sat here and argued for weeks that the draft pick situation was overblown and you'd go as far as letting Lopez and co walk, while fielding a team that would struggle to crack double digit wins without a pick just to have max slots to sign LEBRON and DURANT...and yet I'm the one talking out of both sides of my mouth?? So now the pick situation is important? Which is it?

Philly's plan may yield fruit...it may not...but in the meantime by fielding teams with d leaguers and 2 NBA caliber players season after season all they are doing is poisoning the well and being a destination that players want to avoid being in. Our lack of picks is a problem, but by getting rid of D-Will and opening things up, I feel like the Nets can improve slowly but surely over the next two seasons.

[MrDollarBills]

Rasheed was in his prime. he was 30 not 40. he was as good/better then anyone on that team. same with billups. same with ben wallace. they certainly didnt draft a superstar. their best players all came through trade.

ill give you the mavs, but no way on detroit.

also, having a player on your team drafted in the top 3 isnt the same as having drafted that player yourself.

I disagree with you on Wallace. I don't think he'd be in the superstar category if he was in the same context today. No doubt about his talent but he had a lot of baggage and character issues reason for being tossed around. Check out the opening line of an ESPN news article on the trade:

DETROIT -- Rasheed Wallace is headed to the Detroit Pistons, who only had to give up reserves and draft picks to land the frontcourt scorer they coveted.

He didn't have much value. Traded as an expiring contract basically. If a guy like him were to be available today... you'd have several posters being very afraid in light of the Deron Williams situation and "culture change". I think some teams wouldn't touch him. He is the guy you take a gamble on if you have an established team with vets. Not a guy that you expect to build your team around.

I am in a dilemma. I wanted the Mavs to tank hard this year to keep their pick(Celtics get it if it's outside top 7), but I don't envision continued tanking. I envision more of a organic growth of a team, kind of like the Blazers are trying to do(although maybe they're doing it because they have Lillard and think of him as a superstar). I wouldn't shy away from adding decent players with upside that are still young because they'd hurt the tank but they could grow with you and be assets. I don't want my team to stay away from free agency. I don't fear being mediocre -- I stopped considering fighting for the lower seeds as a bad thing, as long as you have a plan and are not just trying to hang on to it by overpaying fading players. I guess we have some example in the Bucks who didn't really tank and just recently looked like a team with no future and were getting the 8 seed in the east. Looking at the Nets and where you're located at, it seems unrealistic to expect the team to not be a player in free agency. I'm feeling like the Rockets are a model that I'd prefer. They were fighting hard to win games while "rebuilding". They were an attractive team to watch despite being in the "treadmill".

The curiosity of championship teams having a star drafted by them is a fact, but I really would not like a path where you just deliberately try to be in the lottery every year to get the next Lebron.

^that's because that path never works.

[Prokorov]

Rasheed was in his prime. he was 30 not 40. he was as good/better then anyone on that team. same with billups. same with ben wallace. they certainly didnt draft a superstar. their best players all came through trade.

ill give you the mavs, but no way on detroit.

also, having a player on your team drafted in the top 3 isnt the same as having drafted that player yourself.

I disagree with you on Wallace. I don't think he'd be in the superstar category if he was in the same context today. No doubt about his talent but he had a lot of baggage and character issues reason for being tossed around. Check out the opening line of an ESPN news article on the trade:

DETROIT -- Rasheed Wallace is headed to the Detroit Pistons, who only had to give up reserves and draft picks to land the frontcourt scorer they coveted.

He didn't have much value. Traded as an expiring contract basically. If a guy like him were to be available today... you'd have several posters being very afraid in light of the Deron Williams situation and "culture change". I think some teams wouldn't touch him. He is the guy you take a gamble on if you have an established team with vets. Not a guy that you expect to build your team around.

I am in a dilemma. I wanted the Mavs to tank hard this year to keep their pick(Celtics get it if it's outside top 7), but I don't envision continued tanking. I envision more of a organic growth of a team, kind of like the Blazers are trying to do(although maybe they're doing it because they have Lillard and think of him as a superstar). I wouldn't shy away from adding decent players with upside that are still young because they'd hurt the tank but they could grow with you and be assets. I don't want my team to stay away from free agency. I don't fear being mediocre -- I stopped considering fighting for the lower seeds as a bad thing, as long as you have a plan and are not just trying to hang on to it by overpaying fading players. I guess we have some example in the Bucks who didn't really tank and just recently looked like a team with no future and were getting the 8 seed in the east. Looking at the Nets and where you're located at, it seems unrealistic to expect the team to not be a player in free agency. I'm feeling like the Rockets are a model that I'd prefer. They were fighting hard to win games while "rebuilding". They were an attractive team to watch despite being in the "treadmill".

The curiosity of championship teams having a star drafted by them is a fact, but I really would not like a path where you just deliberately try to be in the lottery every year to get the next Lebron.

Regardless of how you want to view rasheed, the fact still remain that their championship team was build through trades/FA and not by drafting a superstar. they are kind of odd cause you can say they ahd no superstar at all.

but the no doubt best players on their team were not drafted by them: Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace, Chauncey Billups, Rip Hamilton

I think the mavs had the right idea, deandre just pulled a dwight you. i think that would have been an outstanding move that made you relevant now and good long term.

[Prokorov]

The Nets will have 40 mil in cap space in a year's time and a core of young players already in place on good deals. Outside of the pick situation, I could not say with a straight face that philly is in a better position.

Emulating what they are doing in philadelphia is pure madness. KJ McDaniels took a GAMBLE on his contract situation just to get the **** out of there faster than later.

you are kind of talking out of both sides of your mouths. you have been VERY vocal about it being a joke that any good free agent would want to come here next offseason, yet now you list cap space as a big asset. you say we have a "core of young players on good deals" philly can say the same only with much better prospects. "outside of the pick situation" is thrown in at the end, but its not something minor that can be brushed aside. we have few picks, they pick in the top of the lottery.

I dont think anyone is saying emulate what philly is doing. but where they stand now, i think they are arguably in better shape. or at least have a higher celing may be the better way to put it

No I haven't at all. I don't think that any top tier free agents are coming here(Like Lebron and Durant...you seem to think otherwise), but having cap space has never been a negative. I just am not deluding myself into thinking that the Nets can convince two of the top three players in the sport to come to Brooklyn following a below .500 season and using that as a reason to justify not retaining a serviceable forward.

And I love how now you regard the pick situation as something that can't be brushed aside, you sat here and argued for weeks that the draft pick situation was overblown and you'd go as far as letting Lopez and co walk, while fielding a team that would struggle to crack double digit wins without a pick just to have max slots to sign LEBRON and DURANT...and yet I'm the one talking out of both sides of my mouth?? So now the pick situation is important? Which is it?

Philly's plan may yield fruit...it may not...but in the meantime by fielding teams with d leaguers and 2 NBA caliber players season after season all they are doing is poisoning the well and being a destination that players want to avoid being in. Our lack of picks is a problem, but by getting rid of D-Will and opening things up, I feel like the Nets can improve slowly but surely over the next two seasons.

so if you dont think we will land good free agents with our cap space, and acknowledge we dont have much pick wise, why do you think we are in a better spot them philly?

as far as draft picks, no, to me they dont matter because my plan was all-in on free agency and signing stars. but you DONT want to do that. for YOUR plan draft picks do matter.

[Hello Brooklyn]

The Nets will have 40 mil in cap space in a year's time and a core of young players already in place on good deals. Outside of the pick situation, I could not say with a straight face that philly is in a better position.

Emulating what they are doing in philadelphia is pure madness. KJ McDaniels took a GAMBLE on his contract situation just to get the **** out of there faster than later.

Are you serious?

40 million in cap space for who?

This is the question I always wonder. Remember what happened the last time we had a lot of cap space? I'll remind you.



The fact of the matter is that big time free agents are not going to come to the Nets unless we already have a really good team. And we don't. And we won't anytime soon.

You guys keep bringing up Philadelphia as if I said they were the model. Paradise brought them up in the first place. All I'm advocating for is a full rebuild.

And you can look at GSW or OKC if you want examples of how that could work out.

i LOVE how you just roll your eyes at the fact that we'll have cap space to make the team better incrementally but in the same breath talk about how people are going to go running to Philly get signed up under the 76ers ton of cap space after several losing seasons to play with their young stars who haven't done jack **** in the league.

Tanking for 4-5 years is not an ideal strategy for a major market team. Stop it. You have tunnel vision because you think that the success of OKC and GSW can be emulated easily...that requires not only great scouting, but PURE LUCK.

Philadelphia has tanked for how many years now and they aren't even close to having drafted a Durant, a Westbrook, or a Harden consecutively. Its laughable to even suggest this as a logical course of action.

When did I say people are going to go running to Philly? Please find me a post where I said that.

Second off, as I have said repeatedly. I'm not advocating for tanking, I'm advocating rebuilding through the draft. I don't get why you keep pretending that I'm saying Philly is the blueprint. All I said was that they were in a better position than us moving forward.

GSW and OKC were not built by "pure luck." Thats a ridiculous claim. They had skilled GMs who knew how to build teams the right way.

And to say that Philly hasn't found a superstar yet is premature. You have no idea how good Okafar or Noel could be.

[Hello Brooklyn]

I'm not admiring the Sixers. Youre the one who even brought them up as an example of a "failure."

Every year they have been drafting players and will continue to who could end up panning out. I don't get why youre making this entirely about the Sixers either. Theyre merely on example. But yes they are in a far superior position to us going forward.

Horford was much younger back then and was injured half the time. Even if you wanna credit Paul Milsap and Kyle Krover, the Hawks are not a contending team. And they showed that when they got decimated by the Cavaliers. Most people don't even think they would have beat the Wizards had John Wall not gotten injured. So no I don't want the Nets to end up like the Hawks either.

No its not. The Hawks were not a serious contender. And yes the Grizzlies made the WCF once, but they still did it by rebuilding. Not by keeping mediocre team together and trying to add more pieces. That doesn't work.

60 games and an ECF? If we were in that position, its very unlikely that we would have the cap space to sign a superstar anyway. Plus I don't see us being in that position without rebuilding in the first place.

I'm not against the concept of rebuilding. I am against the idea we should whore ourselves out for some great white hope in 2019 to 2025 of endless tanking. I'd rather rebuild by amassing talent in various ways including via the draft and that's something have already started.

Yeah.

I'd rather amass talent while maintaining some wiggle room capwise, build a stable environment where guys would actually want to play and win games instead of tanking and being bad just to take blind shots in the dark. The draft should be used to supplement the talent base, not be the central building block

Can you think of an NBA champion in the last 10 years who didnt draft a superstar first. I can't.

That alone is enough to prove to you that your strategy isn't gonna work.

[Hello Brooklyn]

The Nets will have 40 mil in cap space in a year's time and a core of young players already in place on good deals. Outside of the pick situation, I could not say with a straight face that philly is in a better position.

Emulating what they are doing in philadelphia is pure madness. KJ McDaniels took a GAMBLE on his contract situation just to get the **** out of there faster than later.

Are you serious?

40 million in cap space for who?

This is the question I always wonder. Remember what happened the last time we had a lot of cap space? I'll remind you.



The fact of the matter is that big time free agents are not going to come to the Nets unless we already have a really good team. And we don't. And we won't anytime soon.

You guys keep bringing up Philadelphia as if I said they were the model. Paradise brought them up in the first place. All I'm advocating for is a full rebuild.

And you can look at GSW or OKC if you want examples of how that could work out.

I hate when people post that picture and say our cap space amounted to that group. it is such a lazy cop-out. if you paint the full picture, after our cap space couldnt land a big fish we instead were able to get deron williams and joe johnson. the core of a team that while underwhelming went to 3 straight playoffs. its not like we were awful for 5 years. had the dwight thing not have gone south we are probably looking at a team with 3 straight 50 win seasons

Its not a lazy cop out. Its the reality of what happened. We put all our eggs in one basket thinking a big time FA was gonna come here in 2010. And nobody wanted to. So we ended up with a heaping pile of trash.

Getting Deron Williams and Joe Johnson proved to be a colossal failure, so I don't see the point youre trying to make. Building through free agency rather than the draft isn't gonna work. It doesn't put us in a good position moving forward.

Making the playoffs for 3 straight years is not even good. Whats the point if youre not gonna be a serious contender? And the only year we even made it out of the first round was in 2014.

[Hello Brooklyn]

Can you name any NBA champions in the last 10 years who didn't draft a superstar? Cause I sure can't.

can you name the last one that didnt trade for or sign a superstar? outside of the spurs your probably going to go back a couple decades or more.

sure the heat drafted wade, but they signed lebron and bosh. sure those lakers teams had kobe. but they signed/traded for shaq and pau.

Sure. The Mavs in 2011. The Warriors last year. Neither of them did that. And I love how you just say "outside of the Spurs" as if those 4 championships mean nothing.

And maybe teams can sign or trade for superstars after they have already built their foundation. Thats fine. But it started when the originally drafted a star player. Almost always.

[Dirk]

Regardless of how you want to view rasheed, the fact still remain that their championship team was build through trades/FA and not by drafting a superstar. they are kind of odd cause you can say they ahd no superstar at all.

but the no doubt best players on their team were not drafted by them: Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace, Chauncey Billups, Rip Hamilton

I think the mavs had the right idea, deandre just pulled a dwight you. i think that would have been an outstanding move that made you relevant now and good long term.

Prok, recall the original quote:

Can you name any NBA champions in the last 10 years who didn't draft a superstar? Cause I sure can't.

can you name the last one that didnt trade for or sign a superstar? outside of the spurs your probably going to go back a couple decades or more.

sure the heat drafted wade, but they signed lebron and bosh. sure those lakers teams had kobe. but they signed/traded for shaq and pau.

Superstar.

That's why we were trying to establish if he fit the mould of let's say... someone that you'd give a max contract with the cap space... from my understanding you have put emphasis on trying to get top free agents to come to Brooklyn by 'teaming up'. Pistons had a solid team and then that trade popped up because the Hawks wanted to dump salary.

Alright so what do you want for next summer. Several teams will compete for the same players. Do you want the Nets to sign guys that will make you a playoff team but you know nowhere near contender or... keep the powder dry and try to find value deals with. On top of my head(assuming the RFAs don't move) only Horford and Conley will be available that can be considered very good. KD is impossible. Like... Derozan, would you be interested? Realistically, it feels far fetched that the Nets would be able to really pull off getting max guys to team up in the next two/three years.

Yeah, Jordan wouldn't have made the Mavs true contenders, but it would have provided a platform to build on for the future and know which guys to target in the next couple of seasons. But honestly after the initial word that he had second thoughts I immediately wished that he wouldn't come. Maybe the Mavs dodged a bullet for the future considering how immature the guy revealed himself to be. After that it's been a mess with two terrible contracts given (Matthews and Barea), but they're in a particular situation with the franchise face playing out the last couple of years of his career. Afterwards, I'm apprehensive. The Mavs have always been about paying role players a lot of money and never really pulled off big fa acquisitions.

[MrDollarBills]

I'm not against the concept of rebuilding. I am against the idea we should whore ourselves out for some great white hope in 2019 to 2025 of endless tanking. I'd rather rebuild by amassing talent in various ways including via the draft and that's something have already started.

Yeah.

I'd rather amass talent while maintaining some wiggle room capwise, build a stable environment where guys would actually want to play and win games instead of tanking and being bad just to take blind shots in the dark. The draft should be used to supplement the talent base, not be the central building block

Can you think of an NBA champion in the last 10 years who didnt draft a superstar first. I can't.

That alone is enough to prove to you that your strategy isn't gonna work.

The Dallas Mavericks.

The Sacramento Kings have been in the lottery every season since 2007. What do they have to show for it outside of DMC who probably wants to get the **** out of there?

[Universe]

The Nets will have 40 mil in cap space in a year's time and a core of young players already in place on good deals. Outside of the pick situation, I could not say with a straight face that philly is in a better position.

Emulating what they are doing in philadelphia is pure madness. KJ McDaniels took a GAMBLE on his contract situation just to get the **** out of there faster than later.

Are you serious?

40 million in cap space for who?

This is the question I always wonder. Remember what happened the last time we had a lot of cap space? I'll remind you.



The fact of the matter is that big time free agents are not going to come to the Nets unless we already have a really good team. And we don't. And we won't anytime soon.

You guys keep bringing up Philadelphia as if I said they were the model. Paradise brought them up in the first place. All I'm advocating for is a full rebuild.

And you can look at GSW or OKC if you want examples of how that could work out.

I hate when people post that picture and say our cap space amounted to that group. it is such a lazy cop-out. if you paint the full picture, after our cap space couldnt land a big fish we instead were able to get deron williams and joe johnson. the core of a team that while underwhelming went to 3 straight playoffs. its not like we were awful for 5 years. had the dwight thing not have gone south we are probably looking at a team with 3 straight 50 win seasons

What did we have to use to get Joe Johnson and Deron Williams?

[Prokorov]

Its not a lazy cop out. Its the reality of what happened. We put all our eggs in one basket thinking a big time FA was gonna come here in 2010. And nobody wanted to. So we ended up with a heaping pile of trash.

only its not what we ended up with, since we still had our cap space

Getting Deron Williams and Joe Johnson proved to be a colossal failure, so I don't see the point youre trying to make. Building through free agency rather than the draft isn't gonna work. It doesn't put us in a good position moving forward.

no a colossal failure would have been adding those guys and being terrible and missing the playoffs the kickoff year in brooklyn

Making the playoffs for 3 straight years is not even good. Whats the point if youre not gonna be a serious contender? And the only year we even made it out of the first round was in 2014.

of course its good. and we were 1 dwight brainfart away from being a legit contender.

it wasnt the ideal situation, but it was some monumental failure either. and it snaive to think if we built through the draft we would have had some contending team. we dont know that.

building through the draft is near impossible. too high a level of failure and too much luck involved