This offseason

[Prokorov]

Which is why even though I'm not a quick fix guy obsessed with the playoffs or even our pick being given away next season, I'd still advocate chasing Millsap or maybe Hill. Unless as Prok is saying, roll the cap on a huge 1 year overpay, or my preferred modus operandi would be use the cap to absorb salary to get 1st round picks, if at all possible.

Yup... i HATE how Hill/Milsaps deals look 2 years out. but thats a better move for the franchise then signing mid level roll guys to long deals. at least overpaying hill/milsap gets you to the playoffs and makes this team more attractive as a future destination. and those guys have name value where it wouldnt be impossible to dump them with 1 year left.

if those guys say no, which i think they will... id rather more overpay 1+1 guys for sure like you said. try again next year. every year this team will look more attractive as a FA destination and every year we will have more young talent.

like marks said, last thing you want is a capped out 25-35 win team.

Remember the Monta Ellis, Brandon Jennings, & Ersan Illyasova led Milwaukee Bucks?

great example.

[vincecarter4pres]

i dont get patty mills either. unless you think he will break out into an avery bradley like 2 way player.

Mills is a good shooter but one who is undersized, can only play one position and at 29 isnt some young prospect with a ton of growth potential anymore. to me he is like barbosa. great role guy if your a playoff team. but not someone a bad team should sink 6-10M per year into and eat into what you can offer other players.

Mills is a guy you use the MLE on. not your cap space

Agreed and my guess is he costs $10 to $14 million a year to come to a team like this, best case like $8 million in the first season for the full 4 years and Mills would have a player option years 3 and 4.

Player options can only be for a single year at the end of a contract. So it can't be a player option in both years 3 and 4.

I'm pretty sure you can do an ETO and a PO back to back, it's sort of a purposeful loophole.

[Paradise]

I don't see any situation where Simmons is maxed out. That's pure assumption. The team with the most cap space sets the market. Not the agent.

Marks referring to free agents that will provide a need but won't drastically improve the teams win total. Guys like Roberson, Mirotic, Hardaway fit that bill. Hill as well.

We're looking at competition from multiple rebuilding teams this season for Mills. Let's not get ahead of ourselves at overvaluing the market. Hill's asking price is too high, Ibaka is too old, Porter and KCP will get matched, Millsap super long shot, etc.

I'd hate to be the naive team that chases out of the question guys and passes on low market, high upside moves once again. Like Boban from San Antonio would've been an excellent move. An offer sheet that didn't get matched but has worked out well.

Your not getting guys who are going to look great statistically. We're in the market for unfinished products that can immediately provide a need and get developed with the core talent. Simmons is one just like Tyler Johnson. Not that different. James Johnson is another possible target.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[pickIBL]

Loading up a contract to any spurs role player other than patty mills probably doesn't make sense. Simmons fills a need for the Spurs off the bench, like Gary Neal did in the past, ask them to be something they are not and you'll be disappointing.

i dont get patty mills either.

If the Nets want to play fast Mills is the guy. You guys must be forgetting the first time Mills hit the radar. He was running circles around team USA. The Spurs playing a deliberate pace hides how fast Mills can play. Mills can really shoot it and he has that rare turbo button. That's why he's the spurs role player that can break out for the Nets.

[Prokorov]

Loading up a contract to any spurs role player other than patty mills probably doesn't make sense. Simmons fills a need for the Spurs off the bench, like Gary Neal did in the past, ask them to be something they are not and you'll be disappointing.

i dont get patty mills either.

If the Nets want to play fast Mills is the guy. You guys must be forgetting the first time Mills hit the radar. He was running circles around team USA. The Spurs playing a deliberate pace hides how fast Mills can play. Mills can really shoot it and he has that rare turbo button. That's why he's the spurs role player that can break out for the Nets.

Playing fast is great... but at 6 feet, not strong defensively, not a guy you can play positionless with, and not a guy who can lead your team to wins i dont think it makes any sense. he is a role guy. last thing we need is more role guys.

the only need his fills is shooter and he does it at a spot where he would NEED to play point gaurd. meaning we woudl be 6'0" and 6'3" in the back court with levert and RHJ being undersized themselves and one of the weakest rebounding centers. Moving bogs helped our D immensly, you dont bring in mills and undo that.

Doesnt make sense to bring in mills unless like i said, we strike out in free agency and you give him a 1 year deal to roll the cap money over.

[spaceballer]

Agreed and my guess is he costs $10 to $14 million a year to come to a team like this, best case like $8 million in the first season for the full 4 years and Mills would have a player option years 3 and 4.

Player options can only be for a single year at the end of a contract. So it can't be a player option in both years 3 and 4.

I'm pretty sure you can do an ETO and a PO back to back, it's sort of a purposeful loophole.

I think they closed that loophole 2 CBA's ago. All those contracts grandfathered from 2 CBA's ago are gone now. The Miami big three contracts for LeBron, Bosh, Wade were the last, since they were signed in the pre-lockout era.

All options (team, player, early termination) can only be for a single year and must be in the final year of a contract, and you can't have more than one type.

The only way around the new restriction is with psuedo-team option by using non-guaranteed years that can be waived.

Other than that non-guaranteed salary loophole for psuedo team options, you can only have one option type out of player option, team option, or early termination option -- and only in the final year, and only for one additional year.

The excepton to this rule are rookie scale contracts for first rounders with a predetermined structure agreed upon in the CBA.

[Prokorov]

I don't see any situation where Simmons is maxed out. That's pure assumption. The team with the most cap space sets the market. Not the agent.

I'm not talking about the max. I'm talking about giving him 10-15 million per would be a really bad idea.

Marks referring to free agents that will provide a need but won't drastically improve the teams win total. Guys like Roberson, Mirotic, Hardaway fit that bill. Hill as well.

Hill would drastically improve the team, and probably make us a playoff team assuming health. Simmons fits that list for sure. he wouldnt drastically improve us or improve us much at all.

We're looking at competition from multiple rebuilding teams this season for Mills. Let's not get ahead of ourselves at overvaluing the market. Hill's asking price is too high, Ibaka is too old, Porter and KCP will get matched, Millsap super long shot, etc.

I'd hate to be the naive team that chases out of the question guys and passes on low market, high upside moves once again. Like Boban from San Antonio would've been an excellent move. An offer sheet that didn't get matched but has worked out well.

Your not getting guys who are going to look great statistically. We're in the market for unfinished products that can immediately provide a need and get developed with the core talent. Simmons is one just like Tyler Johnson. Not that different. James Johnson is another possible target.

Simmons is ALOT different then tyler johnson. Johnson was a 38% three point shooter, simmons was 29%. Johnson was a ball handler and we desperately needed ball handlers.

Simmons would be a really really big mistake. you dont blow your cap space on low end dleague roll players. im all for kilpatrick/diniddie/harris types who you pay peanuts. but blowing cap space on dleaguers is not a good idea.

only way i sign simmons is if its the end of free agency, all other options say no, and we give him a 1+1 deal where we can just cut him and get the cap space back after the season.

otherwise you are locking up 10-15% of your cap into a 1 way player coming off a really bad season and hasnt proven he can defend outside of the spurs sytem.

[pickIBL]

i dont get patty mills either.

If the Nets want to play fast Mills is the guy. You guys must be forgetting the first time Mills hit the radar. He was running circles around team USA. The Spurs playing a deliberate pace hides how fast Mills can play. Mills can really shoot it and he has that rare turbo button. That's why he's the spurs role player that can break out for the Nets.

Playing fast is great... but at 6 feet, not strong defensively, not a guy you can play positionless with, and not a guy who can lead your team to wins i dont think it makes any sense. he is a role guy. last thing we need is more role guys.

the only need his fills is shooter and he does it at a spot where he would NEED to play point gaurd. meaning we woudl be 6'0" and 6'3" in the back court with levert and RHJ being undersized themselves and one of the weakest rebounding centers. Moving bogs helped our D immensly, you dont bring in mills and undo that.

Doesnt make sense to bring in mills unless like i said, we strike out in free agency and you give him a 1 year deal to roll the cap money over.

My point is he's better than most folks think. Not one player available on the market is going to solve the Net's problems, so holding him or anyone to that standard is not fair. People thinking Hill is getting you to the playoffs, that's the problem.

[Prokorov]

If the Nets want to play fast Mills is the guy. You guys must be forgetting the first time Mills hit the radar. He was running circles around team USA. The Spurs playing a deliberate pace hides how fast Mills can play. Mills can really shoot it and he has that rare turbo button. That's why he's the spurs role player that can break out for the Nets.

Playing fast is great... but at 6 feet, not strong defensively, not a guy you can play positionless with, and not a guy who can lead your team to wins i dont think it makes any sense. he is a role guy. last thing we need is more role guys.

the only need his fills is shooter and he does it at a spot where he would NEED to play point gaurd. meaning we woudl be 6'0" and 6'3" in the back court with levert and RHJ being undersized themselves and one of the weakest rebounding centers. Moving bogs helped our D immensly, you dont bring in mills and undo that.

Doesnt make sense to bring in mills unless like i said, we strike out in free agency and you give him a 1 year deal to roll the cap money over.

My point is he's better than most folks think. Not one player available on the market is going to solve the Net's problems, so holding him or anyone to that standard is not fair. People thinking Hill is getting you to the playoffs, that's the problem.

Hill or Milsap get this team to 40 wins and probably the playoffs.

Patty mills might not even help from a wins/loss standpoint and may even create more problems then solutions. Do we need a 4th PG and a guy who cant play SG like at least dinwiddie and whitehead can? Do we need a guy who isnt great on defense with defense being such a big issue?

Mills is great for a team that is a playoff team now. he doesnt help a bad team much

[Prokorov]

Listening and reading marks and atkinsons comments, i really think this offseason will be similar to last years:

-kick the tires on the elite guys only to not get a meeting with them
-maybe make a calculated run at an RFA that gets matched
-look for low price value guys like Joe Harris
-Invest in 1+1 type deals
-look into overseason FAs like we did with sergio
-Be created to add young talent: Draft, undrafted, dleague, end of someone elses bench

Some Comments:

“The big thing, the way Kenny and I look at it, is the progress along the way,” Marks told Roberts. “It's important for us to be taking these steps and really building a foundation. If we go after it all in one year, potentially signing maybe the wrong free agent at the wrong time, then we're going to be back at square one in a couple of years.

This comment excited me... especially thepart about "if you do it wrong your back to square one in a couple of years". they want a sustainable product and they are willing to wait for it. and im glad they are.

If this season turns into:

-Tedosic on a booker type deal
-2 rookies and a eurostash in the draft
- year deal + team option overpay to Pat Patterson or Jaymichael green

id be thrilled with that....

Lin/Tedesic/Levert/RHJ/Lopez

Dinwiddie/Whitehead/KJM/Harris/Acy/Patterson/Booker + 2 rookies

go with development for another year, try and get a pick for lopez at the deadline or let him walk, head into next years offseason coming off 35ish wins with more young talent and a clear sign of trending upwards to make a better free agency pitch

[Paradise]

Sean:

“Let’s try to build this culture, let’s try to build this foundation and have a really rock solid one this year, develop these young guys, get Isaiah and Caris and Rondae and so forth growing up. Lets see where they are on when they're 25, 26 (They’ll be 23 next season.) As Kenny said before, literally they're kids, they're babies still.

“So lets develop those guys, add some nice pieces along the way, whether it's the good solid vets, or we go and make a splash in a strategic unrestricted free agent signing along the way and then let's see. Now it's going to take one more to get us over the hump.

“So, I would hope every single year, we see improvement, not only in the individual basis but from myself, my staff, from Kenny and his staff, we continually grow and in two years, we're sitting here going, ‘Alright, here we go, we'll make a run.’”

“We'll certainly try and play in the free agent game, both unrestricted and restricted,” Marks told Roberts. “And obviously, if you're in the restricted game, you just roll the dice and see what happens. And that could be the way we go, but we have to be very strategic in who we go after.”

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[vincecarter4pres]

It seems the most important factor in who they chase in free agency is going to be what they do with Lopez on draft night and even more importantly, what their thinking is with him long term.

If they see Lopez as a keeper and don't trade him, they may very well go after Millsap or Hill. If they trade him on draft night, both these guys are probably out of the question completely, both from the players viewpoint and the reality of where we're at.

If they keep Lopez, but it's not by choice and they're going to eventually auction him off at the deadline, pretty much the same.


Also depends on who they draft if they were to trade Lopez. If they get a pick in the 9 to 12 range for him and wind up with a DSJ, Ntilikina, Mitchell, or Monk, there's no way they're going after Hill and not even likely a Mills, KCP or other combo/point guard/or wing who's more a shooting guard.

If they drafted a Collins, Patton or Allen, they're never going to go after a Noel.

[Prokorov]

It seems the most important factor in who they chase in free agency is going to be what they do with Lopez on draft night and even more importantly, what their thinking is with him long term.

If they see Lopez as a keeper and don't trade him, they may very well go after Millsap or Hill. If they trade him on draft night, both these guys are probably out of the question completely, both from the players viewpoint and the reality of where we're at.

If they keep Lopez, but it's not by choice and they're going to eventually auction him off at the deadline, pretty much the same.


Also depends on who they draft if they were to trade Lopez. If they get a pick in the 9 to 12 range for him and wind up with a DSJ, Ntilikina, Mitchell, or Monk, there's no way they're going after Hill and not even likely a Mills, KCP or other combo/point guard/or wing who's more a shooting guard.

If they drafted a Collins, Patton or Allen, they're never going to go after a Noel.

I get the feeling they wont really big going after anyone big... will go with value offers in RFA (like crabbe type money for porter and KCP) who will turn it down or quickly get matched. they will call on chris paul and guys like that but no visit. I think they kick the tires on milsap or hill but balk at the price or get turned down quickly.

9-12 range to me just seems extremely unlikely. im not sure #22 + #27 + Brook/RHJ would get it done. thats alot of value but im not sure who is trading a lottery pick for a lopez rental, tying up 22 million in cap space and 2 late picks. to me the most we are realistically moving up is to the 17-19 range.

that said, thats all fine with me.... i think we can get talent at 16-30 range. I think we have some guys we got late in the year who can develop. I think moving lopez could allow opportuntiy for even more change towards a modern team if/when that ever happens. I think adding a foye upgrade like teodesic or something similar combined with 75+ games from Lin can make a real inmpact on wins.

I think priority should be:

-Move Lopez, Booker, and Hamilton

-Draft 2 bigs who are more modern types

-Add a low level foye upgrade on small or shot money (Teodesic at 3/21?)

-Add a vet big in FA or through trading one of the guys above to mentor the young bigs (Booker + 47 for chandler?)

-Sign a stretch for to an overpay 1+1 (Mirotic/ilyasova?)

Lin - Teodesic - Levert - RHJ - Chandler

Dinwiddie - Goodwin - Whitehead - Harris - McDaniels - Nicholson - Mirotic - Acy - Rookie Big - Rookie Big

To me that team can win 30+ games, you have tons of youth to develop, you get chandler to mentor these young rookie bigs, you have stretch bigs, you have improved defense and you have lots of shooting and you preserve your cap space and probably add a 2018 pick from moving lopez

[Paradise]

Still not convinced they trade up. We have a few holes to fill and I think we could do it without trading up right now. I wouldn't be surprised if we took Justin Jackson and Donovan Mitchell then search for a defensive minded big at Summer league.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[vincecarter4pres]

Still not convinced they trade up. We have a few holes to fill and I think we could do it without trading up right now. I wouldn't be surprised if we took Justin Jackson and Donovan Mitchell then search for a defensive minded big at Summer league.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Feel like Donovan Mitchell will be between 9 and 19 by the time June rolls around, more specifically, probably in the 10 to 17 range.

I'm not a big fan of Jackson either. Think his D will be mediocre at the next level and his shot is way too slow to get off cleanly against NBA closeouts unless he's wide open. The rest of his game is basic.

[Vae Victus]

Lin has a player option after the end of next season. Thus if Lin stays healthy and plays well, there's no reason for him to activate his player option and will have proven him a solid starting PG after 1.5 years of strong play. Does BRK resign him or go full on tank mode now that they own their own picks?

Basically if BroLo isnt resigned and Lin wants to play for a contender, PG/C both become gaping holes unless replacements step up or get drafted and produce immediately.

[Prokorov]

Lin has a player option after the end of next season. Thus if Lin stays healthy and plays well, there's no reason for him to activate his player option and will have proven him a solid starting PG after 1.5 years of strong play. Does BRK resign him or go full on tank mode now that they own their own picks?

Basically if BroLo isnt resigned and Lin wants to play for a contender, PG/C both become gaping holes unless replacements step up or get drafted and produce immediately.

not extending Lin and tanking have nothing to do with one another. if Lin wants to start and take 15M, he can stay, otherwise he goes and we can look at a PG upgrade or draft the next PG. you dont need to tank to do any of that.

[Curns13]

would anybody be mad if we package those picks for a trade up?

I'm a bit against packaging the picks. As the site below shows, statistically you are going to get the same production out of pick 15 as you are from pick 27. Obviously this doesn't take individual athletes into account, but production over a long period of time. I don't wanna give up 2 bites at a 'star' or 'solid' player. I completely trust Markison, so if they think someone is can't miss enough to do a 2 for one than so be it.

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

Here's the thing though. The odds are reasonably close you'll land an actual rotation player from either the 15th or 27th pick specifically, but their have been 3 legitimate franchise level players in the past 21 years from the 15th pick, 2 of them in the last 6 years and an additional 2 All Star level players, an additional 6 starting level players and 2 young guys the jury is still out on. There was only 1 All Star level player in the last 20 years from the 27th pick, 3 starting level guys and a few young guys the jury is still out on.

So that's 11 out of a possible 21 players who are at least starting level good players from the 15th pick specifically, with 2 other recent young guys who could become that and 4 rotation players, with only 4 true busts. That's excellent odds.

At the 27th pick, you have 1 All Star level guy(Gobert, so room for growth still), an additional 3 other starting level players, 3 young guys who could become something still and 5 rotation players, with 9 legitimate confirmed busts. That's not great odds overall and terrible odds to find a diamond in the rough true star.

So actually, the odds aren't so reasonable and the difference between 15th and 27th is absolutely immense.

That is not what this data is saying. It is saying there is minimal difference. I will say that this data is now quite old, it would be interesting to see such a comprehensive gathering of data for the past decade. It may show what you have said above, maybe teams have gotten better at drafting and are more reaponsible with their selections. I would love to see that data.

[Curns13]

I'm a bit against packaging the picks. As the site below shows, statistically you are going to get the same production out of pick 15 as you are from pick 27. Obviously this doesn't take individual athletes into account, but production over a long period of time. I don't wanna give up 2 bites at a 'star' or 'solid' player. I completely trust Markison, so if they think someone is can't miss enough to do a 2 for one than so be it.

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

Here's the thing though. The odds are reasonably close you'll land an actual rotation player from either the 15th or 27th pick specifically, but their have been 3 legitimate franchise level players in the past 21 years from the 15th pick, 2 of them in the last 6 years and an additional 2 All Star level players, an additional 6 starting level players and 2 young guys the jury is still out on. There was only 1 All Star level player in the last 20 years from the 27th pick, 3 starting level guys and a few young guys the jury is still out on.

So that's 11 out of a possible 21 players who are at least starting level good players from the 15th pick specifically, with 2 other recent young guys who could become that and 4 rotation players, with only 4 true busts. That's excellent odds.

At the 27th pick, you have 1 All Star level guy(Gobert, so room for growth still), an additional 3 other starting level players, 3 young guys who could become something still and 5 rotation players, with 9 legitimate confirmed busts. That's not great odds overall and terrible odds to find a diamond in the rough true star.

So actually, the odds aren't so reasonable and the difference between 15th and 27th is absolutely immense.

You also have to look at the likelihood of star or solid player being available later. You can't say that just because there's been more success at 17 than 12, 17 is a better pick. Based on that chart if you look at the picks in the 15 range as compared to the 20s, you're talking roughly a 20% chance at a star versus a 5% chance, and roughly a 40% chance of landing a solid or star player verus a roughly 20% chance of landing a solid or star player. You're 4 times as likely to land a star around 15 and twice as likely to land a solid or better player. Why would you want two cracks at the much lower odds of success?

I think you have completely misread the data. Picks 15 - 20 give you somewhere between a 5 and 20% shot at a star but most likely a 5% shot. Picks 21 - 25 give you somewhere between a 0 and 15% shot but averaging it out probably a 5% shot. You then also have a 5% shot all the way to the 30th pick. You can't look at the 17th and 24th picks on their own. They are outliers, anomalies, like the number 7 coming up most in a lottery. Other than the occasional bump, you have a roughly 5% shot at getting a star all the way from 16 to 30.

For that reason, I would only want Marks to 2 for 1 the picks if it got us into the early teens (where there is a considerable bump in productivity) or if they truly believe an absolute cant miss talent has fallen but wont be available at 22.

[vincecarter4pres]

I'm a bit against packaging the picks. As the site below shows, statistically you are going to get the same production out of pick 15 as you are from pick 27. Obviously this doesn't take individual athletes into account, but production over a long period of time. I don't wanna give up 2 bites at a 'star' or 'solid' player. I completely trust Markison, so if they think someone is can't miss enough to do a 2 for one than so be it.

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

Here's the thing though. The odds are reasonably close you'll land an actual rotation player from either the 15th or 27th pick specifically, but their have been 3 legitimate franchise level players in the past 21 years from the 15th pick, 2 of them in the last 6 years and an additional 2 All Star level players, an additional 6 starting level players and 2 young guys the jury is still out on. There was only 1 All Star level player in the last 20 years from the 27th pick, 3 starting level guys and a few young guys the jury is still out on.

So that's 11 out of a possible 21 players who are at least starting level good players from the 15th pick specifically, with 2 other recent young guys who could become that and 4 rotation players, with only 4 true busts. That's excellent odds.

At the 27th pick, you have 1 All Star level guy(Gobert, so room for growth still), an additional 3 other starting level players, 3 young guys who could become something still and 5 rotation players, with 9 legitimate confirmed busts. That's not great odds overall and terrible odds to find a diamond in the rough true star.

So actually, the odds aren't so reasonable and the difference between 15th and 27th is absolutely immense.

That is not what this data is saying. It is saying there is minimal difference. I will say that this data is now quite old, it would be interesting to see such a comprehensive gathering of data for the past decade. It may show what you have said above, maybe teams have gotten better at drafting and are more reaponsible with their selections. I would love to see that data.

I only went back 21 years and subjectively labeled players.

When I have a chance I'll list all the names and let you guys have at it.

The older data really skews things imho, the entire draft process was totally different from the modern era of scouting, analytics, media coverage, combine, interview process and emphasis on global scouring of leagues.