Atlantic Division Offseason Review

[Roy Tarpley]

There was a very good chance he did.
#50 in DX
#45 in CBS prospect ranking
#45 in NBA.Com Mock
#47 basketball insiders Steve Kyler
Don't see him in basketball insiders consensus in the 1st round

etc. Just because we reached, doesn't meant the rest of the GMs would as predicted by most paid "experts" who I will trust more than your "no way" comment.

And no, Thad is worth more than cap and thus returned more than cap. Cap space was overrated this off-season and proven especially to the Nets and especially compared to what was given out.

Even if mock drafts had Levert at high 40s, it doesn't guarantee that he'd be around at #42. Anybody who has done a mock draft knows that, despite what the consensus says about average draft pick, there's always a few smart people who have different evaluations. Even the Nets themselves had pegged Levert as a top 20 pick so it's only natural for Marks to assume that other people had Levert that high too and it was too risky to wait until #42.

Even setting aside Levert, if you're just comparing a swap of Thad and Booker, I think it was at minimum a wash if not a slight positive for the Nets. Booker is almost equal to Thad offensively, but better defensively, and similar height, weight, age. On the whole, I think Booker will be better than Thad for the current Nets team PLUS $3million/year cheaper. Add in Levert, and the deal seems to me like we got two silver dollars for giving up a dollar bill. If Levert turns out to hit 3s at 35%+ and capable defender who can give 20minutes his rookie year, it's a slam dunk.

No real point in bringing up Booker. We could have signed him even if we did not trade Thad since we still have more than Thad's salary in cap space. I also don't see how they are comparable offensively.

As for the draft of course there was no guarantee but there was a good chance based upon the pundits who get paid to predict these things, sometimes with good inside info. And it it wasn't LeVert that "fell" there would have been others there of similar hype/value.

There would have been no point to having both Thad and Booker. I think the choice was:

(1) Keep Thad, with less cap space, and only a 2nd rd pick or
(2) Have his cap space flexibility to sign a FA and get younger through a 1st rd pick in Levert. I guess it became apparent that no big FA was gonna sign here so you quickly move to Plan B, which was Booker plus Levert extra cap space.

I feel like since the Nets doctor had worked on Levert, the Nets were eyeing him pretty intently.

Regarding Booker and Thad offensively, I've already discussed this ad nauseum before but here are their per 36 numbers:

Booker: 4.8 09.4 52%FG 0.2 0.6 31% 3PT 1.7 2.7 62% FT 9.2 REB 1.6 AST 1.1 STL 1.0 BLK 1.6 TO 3.6 PF 11.5 PTS
Young : 7.0 14.1 50%FG 0.4 1.4 32% 3PT 1.9 2.7 69% FT 6.9 REB 1.8 AST 1.7 STL 0.5 BLK 1.7 TO 2.6 PF 16.4 PTS

They're basically the same, but Booker is a better rebounder, and Young shoots more because he is a more advanced offensive player (Young averages 5 more pts/game more than Booker, but if you give Booker the same number of FGA per game, they'd score about the same). Again, same height, weight, and age. Even if you argue that Booker is limited offensively so he would clearly not shoot 5 more attempts per game, that still might be a better fit in the current Nets team, where Booker's better defense would be more valued.

[Trader_Joe]

Even if mock drafts had Levert at high 40s, it doesn't guarantee that he'd be around at #42. Anybody who has done a mock draft knows that, despite what the consensus says about average draft pick, there's always a few smart people who have different evaluations. Even the Nets themselves had pegged Levert as a top 20 pick so it's only natural for Marks to assume that other people had Levert that high too and it was too risky to wait until #42.

Even setting aside Levert, if you're just comparing a swap of Thad and Booker, I think it was at minimum a wash if not a slight positive for the Nets. Booker is almost equal to Thad offensively, but better defensively, and similar height, weight, age. On the whole, I think Booker will be better than Thad for the current Nets team PLUS $3million/year cheaper. Add in Levert, and the deal seems to me like we got two silver dollars for giving up a dollar bill. If Levert turns out to hit 3s at 35%+ and capable defender who can give 20minutes his rookie year, it's a slam dunk.

No real point in bringing up Booker. We could have signed him even if we did not trade Thad since we still have more than Thad's salary in cap space. I also don't see how they are comparable offensively.

As for the draft of course there was no guarantee but there was a good chance based upon the pundits who get paid to predict these things, sometimes with good inside info. And it it wasn't LeVert that "fell" there would have been others there of similar hype/value.

There would have been no point to having both Thad and Booker. I think the choice was:

(1) Keep Thad, with less cap space, and only a 2nd rd pick or
(2) Have his cap space flexibility to sign a FA and get younger through a 1st rd pick in Levert. I guess it became apparent that no big FA was gonna sign here so you quickly move to Plan B, which was Booker plus Levert extra cap space.

I feel like since the Nets doctor had worked on Levert, the Nets were eyeing him pretty intently.

Regarding Booker and Thad offensively, I've already discussed this ad nauseum before but here are their per 36 numbers:

Booker: 4.8 09.4 52%FG 0.2 0.6 31% 3PT 1.7 2.7 62% FT 9.2 REB 1.6 AST 1.1 STL 1.0 BLK 1.6 TO 3.6 PF 11.5 PTS
Young : 7.0 14.1 50%FG 0.4 1.4 32% 3PT 1.9 2.7 69% FT 6.9 REB 1.8 AST 1.7 STL 0.5 BLK 1.7 TO 2.6 PF 16.4 PTS

They're basically the same, but Booker is a better rebounder, and Young shoots more because he is a more advanced offensive player (Young averages 5 more pts/game more than Booker, but if you give Booker the same number of FGA per game, they'd score about the same). Again, same height, weight, and age. Even if you argue that Booker is limited offensively so he would clearly not shoot 5 more attempts per game, that still might be a better fit in the current Nets team, where Booker's better defense would be more valued.

Booker and Thad would have been fine considering Booker has been a bench player and our only other PF at the time (CMC) is still raw. But, even if you don't sign Booker you still have plenty of money for a wing or whatever else. Or sign Booker and then trade Young for a wing.. but one worth the value you send out. I don't have a problem with #20 for Thad, but I really think we reached and think he would have been obtainable other ways or similar value players.

[Prokorov]

No real point in bringing up Booker. We could have signed him even if we did not trade Thad since we still have more than Thad's salary in cap space. I also don't see how they are comparable offensively.

As for the draft of course there was no guarantee but there was a good chance based upon the pundits who get paid to predict these things, sometimes with good inside info. And it it wasn't LeVert that "fell" there would have been others there of similar hype/value.

There would have been no point to having both Thad and Booker. I think the choice was:

(1) Keep Thad, with less cap space, and only a 2nd rd pick or
(2) Have his cap space flexibility to sign a FA and get younger through a 1st rd pick in Levert. I guess it became apparent that no big FA was gonna sign here so you quickly move to Plan B, which was Booker plus Levert extra cap space.

I feel like since the Nets doctor had worked on Levert, the Nets were eyeing him pretty intently.

Regarding Booker and Thad offensively, I've already discussed this ad nauseum before but here are their per 36 numbers:

Booker: 4.8 09.4 52%FG 0.2 0.6 31% 3PT 1.7 2.7 62% FT 9.2 REB 1.6 AST 1.1 STL 1.0 BLK 1.6 TO 3.6 PF 11.5 PTS
Young : 7.0 14.1 50%FG 0.4 1.4 32% 3PT 1.9 2.7 69% FT 6.9 REB 1.8 AST 1.7 STL 0.5 BLK 1.7 TO 2.6 PF 16.4 PTS

They're basically the same, but Booker is a better rebounder, and Young shoots more because he is a more advanced offensive player (Young averages 5 more pts/game more than Booker, but if you give Booker the same number of FGA per game, they'd score about the same). Again, same height, weight, and age. Even if you argue that Booker is limited offensively so he would clearly not shoot 5 more attempts per game, that still might be a better fit in the current Nets team, where Booker's better defense would be more valued.

Booker and Thad would have been fine considering Booker has been a bench player and our only other PF at the time (CMC) is still raw. But, even if you don't sign Booker you still have plenty of money for a wing or whatever else. Or sign Booker and then trade Young for a wing.. but one worth the value you send out. I don't have a problem with #20 for Thad, but I really think we reached and think he would have been obtainable other ways or similar value players.

its irrelevant. thad doesnt help short or long term and booker is a stop gap role player. if thad was here we just have it look a little prettier while losing 55-60 games.

[Roy Tarpley]

If Levert pans out, then the future is a lot brighter.

[Trader_Joe]

There would have been no point to having both Thad and Booker. I think the choice was:

(1) Keep Thad, with less cap space, and only a 2nd rd pick or
(2) Have his cap space flexibility to sign a FA and get younger through a 1st rd pick in Levert. I guess it became apparent that no big FA was gonna sign here so you quickly move to Plan B, which was Booker plus Levert extra cap space.

I feel like since the Nets doctor had worked on Levert, the Nets were eyeing him pretty intently.

Regarding Booker and Thad offensively, I've already discussed this ad nauseum before but here are their per 36 numbers:

Booker: 4.8 09.4 52%FG 0.2 0.6 31% 3PT 1.7 2.7 62% FT 9.2 REB 1.6 AST 1.1 STL 1.0 BLK 1.6 TO 3.6 PF 11.5 PTS
Young : 7.0 14.1 50%FG 0.4 1.4 32% 3PT 1.9 2.7 69% FT 6.9 REB 1.8 AST 1.7 STL 0.5 BLK 1.7 TO 2.6 PF 16.4 PTS

They're basically the same, but Booker is a better rebounder, and Young shoots more because he is a more advanced offensive player (Young averages 5 more pts/game more than Booker, but if you give Booker the same number of FGA per game, they'd score about the same). Again, same height, weight, and age. Even if you argue that Booker is limited offensively so he would clearly not shoot 5 more attempts per game, that still might be a better fit in the current Nets team, where Booker's better defense would be more valued.

Booker and Thad would have been fine considering Booker has been a bench player and our only other PF at the time (CMC) is still raw. But, even if you don't sign Booker you still have plenty of money for a wing or whatever else. Or sign Booker and then trade Young for a wing.. but one worth the value you send out. I don't have a problem with #20 for Thad, but I really think we reached and think he would have been obtainable other ways or similar value players.

its irrelevant. thad doesnt help short or long term and booker is a stop gap role player. if thad was here we just have it look a little prettier while losing 55-60 games.

Thad helps more short term than Booker and has more value than Booker. Both are stop gaps in one way or another, but one is worth more on the court and in trade. But again irrelevant as we did not use Thad's money in Free Agency.

[Prokorov]

Thad helps more short term than Booker and has more value than Booker. Both are stop gaps in one way or another, but one is worth more on the court and in trade. But again irrelevant as we did not use Thad's money in Free Agency.

"helping more short term" is really kind of irrelevant. difference between like 55 or 60 or 65 losses doesnt really matter. Thad is better then booker, but as we saw last year he isnt a difference maker who prevents you from being awful. we are awful with or without him.

the cap space is more relevant. marks being a poor GM thus far doesnt change that. not having thad doesnt effect us short or long term, so its kind of water under the bridge

[Trader_Joe]

Thad helps more short term than Booker and has more value than Booker. Both are stop gaps in one way or another, but one is worth more on the court and in trade. But again irrelevant as we did not use Thad's money in Free Agency.

"helping more short term" is really kind of irrelevant. difference between like 55 or 60 or 65 losses doesnt really matter. Thad is better then booker, but as we saw last year he isnt a difference maker who prevents you from being awful. we are awful with or without him.

the cap space is more relevant. marks being a poor GM thus far doesnt change that. not having thad doesnt effect us short or long term, so its kind of water under the bridge

The cap space is irrelevant to a team like us. It failed us this off-season and again we didn't use his cap space. Doubly irrelevant.

[MrDollarBills]

cap space only helps good basketball teams get better.

[Prokorov]

Thad helps more short term than Booker and has more value than Booker. Both are stop gaps in one way or another, but one is worth more on the court and in trade. But again irrelevant as we did not use Thad's money in Free Agency.

"helping more short term" is really kind of irrelevant. difference between like 55 or 60 or 65 losses doesnt really matter. Thad is better then booker, but as we saw last year he isnt a difference maker who prevents you from being awful. we are awful with or without him.

the cap space is more relevant. marks being a poor GM thus far doesnt change that. not having thad doesnt effect us short or long term, so its kind of water under the bridge

The cap space is irrelevant to a team like us. It failed us this off-season and again we didn't use his cap space. Doubly irrelevant.

of course its relevant. its flexibility. at worst, your not tying up money in bad players. at best you can add a talente dplayer. you can also use that cap space in trades... to aquire a player or pick

there will soon be ALOT of buyers remorse with contract that were thrown around. we could be a candidate to take on a bad contract for compensation.

on the flipside. really 0 upside to keeping thad. best case he helps us win 30 games instead of 20? too old to matter longterm.

[Prokorov]

cap space only helps good basketball teams get better.

False. philly aquired several assets via trades the past 3 years by using their cap space. and they were awful.

teams will soon look to get out of bad contracts. and get udner the cap. even with next years cap increase, teams like say, the blazers could be looking for cap room, and could be looking to pay to get rid of a deal like evan turners

[Trader_Joe]

"helping more short term" is really kind of irrelevant. difference between like 55 or 60 or 65 losses doesnt really matter. Thad is better then booker, but as we saw last year he isnt a difference maker who prevents you from being awful. we are awful with or without him.

the cap space is more relevant. marks being a poor GM thus far doesnt change that. not having thad doesnt effect us short or long term, so its kind of water under the bridge

The cap space is irrelevant to a team like us. It failed us this off-season and again we didn't use his cap space. Doubly irrelevant.

of course its relevant. its flexibility. at worst, your not tying up money in bad players. at best you can add a talente dplayer. you can also use that cap space in trades... to aquire a player or pick

there will soon be ALOT of buyers remorse with contract that were thrown around. we could be a candidate to take on a bad contract for compensation.

on the flipside. really 0 upside to keeping thad. best case he helps us win 30 games instead of 20? too old to matter longterm.

This was the worst season to have cap space...plenty of teams still do and can facilitate trades. Meanwhile, color me unexcited to land Turner for a cruddy first. The deal was dumb then and worse in hindsight. It did nothing for us....again we havent even touched the cap space he cleared.

[MrDollarBills]

cap space only helps good basketball teams get better.

False. philly aquired several assets via trades the past 3 years by using their cap space. and they were awful.

teams will soon look to get out of bad contracts. and get udner the cap. even with next years cap increase, teams like say, the blazers could be looking for cap room, and could be looking to pay to get rid of a deal like evan turners

name these assets?

and if the best we can do from cap space is evan turner, yikes.

[Paradise]

cap space only helps good basketball teams get better.

Cap space helps because a team like us have the most flexibility to absorb or outright sign someone like Chris Bosh. His relationship with the Heat is looking incredibly shaky. Good teams don't have the space nor the assets to acquire Bosh.

Wade has already shown us what having some cap space and an star caliber player can mean in a negotiation process. You get the first and best crack. That is a huge asset.

[MrDollarBills]

cap space only helps good basketball teams get better.

Cap space helps because a team like us have the most flexibility to absorb or outright sign someone like Chris Bosh. His relationship with the Heat is looking incredibly shaky. Good teams don't have the space nor the assets to acquire Bosh.

Wade has already shown us what having some cap space and an star caliber player can mean in a negotiation process. You get the first and best crack. That is a huge asset.

Bosh would probably retire before he played a minute on a losing team like us.

[MrDollarBills]

Kevin Pelton from ESPN did some in depth break downs of our guys (taken from le blog)

Jeremy Lin

Lin has become a good enough 3-point shooter to play off the ball; he played more minutes with Walker last season (1,179) than as lead point guard (868). But Lin is still at his best running the high pick-and-roll with the floor spaced (OK, the latter is unlikely to happen in Brooklyn). He averaged 18.2 points and 5.4 assists per 36 minutes last season as a point guard, according to NBA.com/Stats, as compared to 14.5 and 3.2 playing with Walker.

if we can get 18 and 7 from Lin, that would be solid.

Rondae Hollis-Jefferson

He was one of four guards in the league to rate at least two points better than league average on D in ESPN's real plus-minus (veterans Tony Allen, Danny Green and Chris Paul were the others).

He's also got good court vision and handed out 2.5 assists per 36 minutes. Hollis-Jefferson has the ballhandling chops to create his own shot; now it's just a matter of being able to hit them.

Not much shock here, RHJ is despite the sample size a + player on the floor, which is why I had no hesitation grading him as a C Tier level player despite the lack of games played. Also, this backs up what I was saying a few months ago: despite the fact that he's not a good shooter he doesn't hurt the Nets on offense as much as people think, he makes the right basketball play and doesn't go outside of himself. He's also a pretty decent FT shooter. Once he gets his jumpshot cleaned up he will be a stud, bar none. The Plumlee trade will look like highway robbery in 2 seasons. My bet is that he is in the top 5 in steals per game this season, he's dangerous in the passing lanes.

Bojan Bogdanovic

Bogdanovic's strength is more of an asset on defense, where he can guard smaller power forwards at 6-foot-8. He's only OK defending wings, though starting alongside Rondae Hollis-Jefferson allows him to hide out on the opposition's weaker scorer. RPM took an especially dim view of his defense last season, rating Bogdanovic among the league's bottom 10 players in defensive rating.

I can see where he's coming from (we even discussed this on here about Bojan being able to jam weak 4's) but his defense is so bad that i can't see how we can hide him. The line up numbers with him and RHJ looked pretty bad from what i saw. That being said, if he can stay consistent with his blazing shooting he's been doing for pretty much the most of 2016 at least he'll be a factor on the floor

Trevor Booker

Booker did hone his shot selection last season, excising most 2-point attempts away from the basket and actually attempting the highest percentage of shots inside three feet of his career according to Basketball-Reference.com. That discipline could pay greater dividends if Booker shoots closer to his career mark inside three feet (69.6 percent)

He's going to be shooting from downtown this season. I'll say a prayer.

By the way, I saw a sick, sick compilation of his dunks from last season. By far, he will be the most savage dunker we've had on this team since Kenyon Martin, and by savage i mean the sheer explosion and ferocity of his dunks. He dunks like he wants to hurt someone. I love that. I would not jump with that guy head up

Brook Lopez

Only LaMarcus Aldridge scored more points on post-ups, per Synergy Sports tracking on NBA.com/Stats, and Lopez and Nikola Vucevic were the two players to shoot better than 50 percent on at least 200 post-up attempts. Lopez is good facing the basket too. He shot a solid 45.2 percent from 10-16 feet,

Nothing to see here. Lopez is one of the best bigs in the game and his face up game is superb.

Sean Kilpatrick

Once he gets to the paint, Kilpatrick is an excellent finisher who shot 69.1 percent inside 3 feet, per Basketball-Reference.com. He's also effective from longer range, making 36.1 percent of his 3-point attempts with the Nets after shooting 42.6 percent from downtown in the D-League. That's a big improvement since Kilpatrick shot just 34.7 percent from the college 3-point line.

He's going to be fine as our 6th man bench scorer. Even when the 3 isn't falling, you know he's going to get in closer for scores. too bad he can't defend to save his life.

[Prokorov]

The cap space is irrelevant to a team like us. It failed us this off-season and again we didn't use his cap space. Doubly irrelevant.

of course its relevant. its flexibility. at worst, your not tying up money in bad players. at best you can add a talente dplayer. you can also use that cap space in trades... to aquire a player or pick

there will soon be ALOT of buyers remorse with contract that were thrown around. we could be a candidate to take on a bad contract for compensation.

on the flipside. really 0 upside to keeping thad. best case he helps us win 30 games instead of 20? too old to matter longterm.

This was the worst season to have cap space...plenty of teams still do and can facilitate trades. Meanwhile, color me unexcited to land Turner for a cruddy first. The deal was dumb then and worse in hindsight. It did nothing for us....again we havent even touched the cap space he cleared.

were still over a month from preseason, let alone the season or trade deadline. plenty of time to use that space. and id love a deal that lands us a first for taking on turner. we need whatever young assets we can get and at worst turner because another guy who can create offense to help some of these young guys fill into more natural roles and develop organically.

i mean that would basically be thad for 2 firsts and turner. that would be a solid deal. turners deal is one of the worst... but it would expire in 2020, when we can realistically start to turn the corner anyhow.

[Prokorov]

He's going to be shooting from downtown this season. I'll say a prayer.

By the way, I saw a sick, sick compilation of his dunks from last season. By far, he will be the most savage dunker we've had on this team since Kenyon Martin, and by savage i mean the sheer explosion and ferocity of his dunks. He dunks like he wants to hurt someone. I love that. I would not jump with that guy head up

Watch on YouTube

[MrDollarBills]

I'm talking about with sheer power and ferocity. Vince had some brutal slams here and there but his were more on the spectacular "oh my god!!" range. Booker throws down some serious hammer dunks like he's trying to cause bodily harm