I Still Know What They Should Do This Summer Brooklyn Nets

[HartfordWhalers]

I feel like I am talking to a wall.

I would question how widespread that belief is, particularly in geographical dispersion. But if LeVert is valued as a budding superstar elsewhere, then it would probably be best for a third team to be included as the buyer of him at that price.

To be clear, as I said clearly then, I don't think he has budding superstar value. But since you brought up LeVert having that value around the league, I suggested you find it outside of Philly...

Which has instead resulted in about a dozen posts how grossly overpaying might be cool if Philly did it, and no posts at all about anywhere else that would value LeVert as a budding superstar.

[getrichordie]

I feel like I am talking to a wall.

I would question how widespread that belief is, particularly in geographical dispersion. But if LeVert is valued as a budding superstar elsewhere, then it would probably be best for a third team to be included as the buyer of him at that price.

To be clear, as I said clearly then, I don't think he has budding superstar value. But since you brought up LeVert having that value around the league, I suggested you find it outside of Philly...

Which has instead resulted in about a dozen posts how grossly overpaying might be cool if Philly did it, and no posts at all about anywhere else that would value LeVert as a budding superstar.

Please feel free to post my reply to that specific quote...

Edit: Hell, I'll do it. You would omit this part of the conversation...

Why do you say it’s better for a third team to be the buyer? You don’t think LeVert in Philly has its merits? And if you are suggesting a third team, who and why?

[HartfordWhalers]

I feel like I am talking to a wall.

I would question how widespread that belief is, particularly in geographical dispersion. But if LeVert is valued as a budding superstar elsewhere, then it would probably be best for a third team to be included as the buyer of him at that price.

To be clear, as I said clearly then, I don't think he has budding superstar value. But since you brought up LeVert having that value around the league, I suggested you find it outside of Philly...

Which has instead resulted in about a dozen posts how grossly overpaying might be cool if Philly did it, and no posts at all about anywhere else that would value LeVert as a budding superstar.

Please feel free to post my reply to that specific quote...

Edit: Hell, I'll do it. You would omit this part of the conversation...

Why do you say it’s better for a third team to be the buyer? You don’t think LeVert in Philly has its merits? And if you are suggesting a third team, who and why?

Do you really not follow?

I don't think he has budding superstar value, therefore I don't think *any* third team would offer budding superstar value.
But, if you are right and he does have this value somewhere (which isn't Philly), that value should be harvested from that somewhere.

Basically, i asked you to justify your budding superstar value. Now you are asking me to? Again.... (only this time with feelings)..

I don't think he has budding superstar value. But since you brought up LeVert having that value around the league, I suggested you find it outside of Philly...

[bondom34]

Saw the edit this afternoon and:

https://www.pbpstats.com/wowy-combos/nba?TeamId=1610612760&Season=2019-20&SeasonType=Regular%2BSeason&PlayerIds=203471,101108,1628983

Schroder w/o CP3 or SGA: 93.89 lineup O Rtg

w/o CP3 and with SGA: 106.02 O rtg

He's going to be asked to be a primary creator on most any other team and not have 2 other ball handlers with him at most times.

Single year LARAPM has them 100 and 109, adjusting for the shooting variance and that's with Richardson's relatively down year and Schroder's peak.

Multi year PIPM has Schroder as a negative (-.6), Richardson as a positive (+.15).

He's having by far a career outlier year, and opponent 3 point shooting variance has been the main reason for the defensive "leap":

https://stats.nba.com/team/1610612760/onoffcourt-opponent/

32% on court, nearly 39% off court and the attempts aren't taken at a much different rate, nor is he actually defending that many of them (this also lines up with other players, ie when he plays with Paul opponent shooting randomly drops, and when Paul is w/o him it randomly jumps up).

Going back just one season entirely flips the numbers to Richardson being a far better player, and he's cheaper. Same for 2 years. Prior to that J Rich really hadn't broken out yet.

Mostly I don't buy that one guy having by far a career outlier year playing on a team that pretty well minimizes all his weaknesses makes him suddenly better than one who's having his worst shooting year on a team that lacks spacing and ball handlers. Dennis has probably been better this year alone, but we've got a few years of history of Richardson being a really good role player and Schroder being a pretty terrible one, and while I think Schroder may have recouped some value most smarter teams wouldn't want to give real value for him.

Schroder was good this year, just to me a lot of it was some variance, and some was that he was on a team with a lot of guys who hid his weaknesses (Paul and SGA especially), allowing him to not really have to take on as much playmaking.

[pacers33granger]

I posted it not too long ago, but LeVert had a clear worse season than TJ Warren, who was dumped to Indy, and has a much bigger contract now while also being only a year younger. Note that this is in no way a knock at LeVert (who I think had a fine season and earned that extension), but moreso to point out that his trade value just isn't there. Maybe the Nets could package him with Allen and something else if there's a disgruntled star or a Gobert situation, but it's doubtful anyone is emptying out their cupboard for LeVert so the Nets are likely best keeping him.

I'd also really pushback on the concept that people believe he's going to be a star next year. What is the basis for that and who believes that? Is it because he'd be less focused on with Kyrie/KD back? Is it a projection based on his talent and production to date? Is it wishful thinking? I think he will be a good player for a number of years, but he will be lucky ot sneak into an all star game imo.

And honestly, some of the arguments in here sound like the BS thrown around about Rozier a year ago, which has proven to be completely wrong.

[Trader_Joe]

I posted it not too long ago, but LeVert had a clear worse season than TJ Warren, who was dumped to Indy, and has a much bigger contract now while also being only a year younger. Note that this is in no way a knock at LeVert (who I think had a fine season and earned that extension), but moreso to point out that his trade value just isn't there. Maybe the Nets could package him with Allen and something else if there's a disgruntled star or a Gobert situation, but it's doubtful anyone is emptying out their cupboard for LeVert so the Nets are likely best keeping him.

I'd also really pushback on the concept that people believe he's going to be a star next year. What is the basis for that and who believes that? Is it because he'd be less focused on with Kyrie/KD back? Is it a projection based on his talent and production to date? Is it wishful thinking? I think he will be a good player for a number of years, but he will be lucky ot sneak into an all star game imo.

And honestly, some of the arguments in here sound like the BS thrown around about Rozier a year ago, which has proven to be completely wrong.

I don't think anyone thinks he is a star or will be for sure, but what LeVert is, is the most polarizing player on the Nets. Some think he's a bad contract who really doesn't have potential, while some think he has the potential to be a bargain deal.

Truth is always somewhat in between. I think many Net fans are content keeping him being he was Marks first draft pick, thus homegrown, and are willing to gamble on the upside and health as opposed to selling low. At the same time I think all are more than willing to listen and would move him in the appropriate offer.

He's been a tease. He was the best player to start last season's team before injury, came back poorly, and then was the best player in the PO. This season, he started fine, then injury, came back poorly and then showed us that potential again.

He has the physical tools to be that swiss army knife in the line up and be our best perimter defender.

I posted this a few weeks back...

... he needs to cut down the mid range game. His forte is getting to the rim (not necessarily finishing yet) and 3 point shooting right now on offense.

"As any Nets fan can tell you, LeVert had a hell of a week before the NBA suspended play: a 51-point game in a win over the Celtics (only the ninth 50 point game the Nets NBA history) and a triple-double vs. the Spurs. Not to mention his 22 points vs. the Lakers in the Nets biggest win of the season."

https://www.netsdaily.com/2020/4/2/21204351/caris-levert-likely-to-be-center-piece-of-nets-summer-until-he-isnt

"From February 1 onward, Caris – crown jewel of Sean Marks’ superstar-seducing rebuilding process – rose to the occasion as the Nets on-court leader, tossing up a cool 23 points, 5.1 assists, 4.7 rebounds, 44 percent from the field and a supremely notable 41.5 percent from the three during that time. All the while, LeVert more than held down the fort defensively, as opponents shot just 42.2 percent from the field with the shooting guard defending – the lowest figure of any Brooklyn starter."

https://www.netsdaily.com/2020/3/24/21192498/caris-levert-goes-to-another-level-howd-he-do-that-can-he-sustain-it


Small sample theater but...I wonder what happens if he stays healthy, gets to play with superior talent and gains chemistry and comfort with those players? I would like to find out. He is about to enter his early prime.

[getrichordie]

Saw the edit this afternoon and:

https://www.pbpstats.com/wowy-combos/nba?TeamId=1610612760&Season=2019-20&SeasonType=Regular%2BSeason&PlayerIds=203471,101108,1628983

Schroder w/o CP3 or SGA: 93.89 lineup O Rtg

w/o CP3 and with SGA: 106.02 O rtg

He's going to be asked to be a primary creator on most any other team and not have 2 other ball handlers with him at most times.

Single year LARAPM has them 100 and 109, adjusting for the shooting variance and that's with Richardson's relatively down year and Schroder's peak.

Multi year PIPM has Schroder as a negative (-.6), Richardson as a positive (+.15).

He's having by far a career outlier year, and opponent 3 point shooting variance has been the main reason for the defensive "leap":

https://stats.nba.com/team/1610612760/onoffcourt-opponent/

32% on court, nearly 39% off court and the attempts aren't taken at a much different rate, nor is he actually defending that many of them (this also lines up with other players, ie when he plays with Paul opponent shooting randomly drops, and when Paul is w/o him it randomly jumps up).

Going back just one season entirely flips the numbers to Richardson being a far better player, and he's cheaper. Same for 2 years. Prior to that J Rich really hadn't broken out yet.

Mostly I don't buy that one guy having by far a career outlier year playing on a team that pretty well minimizes all his weaknesses makes him suddenly better than one who's having his worst shooting year on a team that lacks spacing and ball handlers. Dennis has probably been better this year alone, but we've got a few years of history of Richardson being a really good role player and Schroder being a pretty terrible one, and while I think Schroder may have recouped some value most smarter teams wouldn't want to give real value for him.

Schroder was good this year, just to me a lot of it was some variance, and some was that he was on a team with a lot of guys who hid his weaknesses (Paul and SGA especially), allowing him to not really have to take on as much playmaking.

I'm not sure how much weight I should be putting into variance on the opponent 3-pt shooting thing. I may be misunderstanding as I think I have a migraine coming on but if the opp. shooting % drops with Schroder on the floor, is that not a good sign? How do we know it is variance?

Also, I'll say that Schroder wasn't a finished product when he came to OKC, so it's not crazy to think he's made a leap. And of course ORtg is going to drop w/ two of your best offensive players off the floor. Can't do much on offense as a PG with Adams + Gallinari and leftovers... unless your Harden or Lillard or something...

I tend to weigh the most recent season pretty heavily as I think you don't trade for what a player was a year ago because we know players, especially of the younger variety, can make jumps. Of course, exceptions can be made for injuries, situations, etc.

What is LARAPM? First time I'm hearing of this metric...

[bondom34]

Saw the edit this afternoon and:

https://www.pbpstats.com/wowy-combos/nba?TeamId=1610612760&Season=2019-20&SeasonType=Regular%2BSeason&PlayerIds=203471,101108,1628983

Schroder w/o CP3 or SGA: 93.89 lineup O Rtg

w/o CP3 and with SGA: 106.02 O rtg

He's going to be asked to be a primary creator on most any other team and not have 2 other ball handlers with him at most times.

Single year LARAPM has them 100 and 109, adjusting for the shooting variance and that's with Richardson's relatively down year and Schroder's peak.

Multi year PIPM has Schroder as a negative (-.6), Richardson as a positive (+.15).

He's having by far a career outlier year, and opponent 3 point shooting variance has been the main reason for the defensive "leap":

https://stats.nba.com/team/1610612760/onoffcourt-opponent/

32% on court, nearly 39% off court and the attempts aren't taken at a much different rate, nor is he actually defending that many of them (this also lines up with other players, ie when he plays with Paul opponent shooting randomly drops, and when Paul is w/o him it randomly jumps up).

Going back just one season entirely flips the numbers to Richardson being a far better player, and he's cheaper. Same for 2 years. Prior to that J Rich really hadn't broken out yet.

Mostly I don't buy that one guy having by far a career outlier year playing on a team that pretty well minimizes all his weaknesses makes him suddenly better than one who's having his worst shooting year on a team that lacks spacing and ball handlers. Dennis has probably been better this year alone, but we've got a few years of history of Richardson being a really good role player and Schroder being a pretty terrible one, and while I think Schroder may have recouped some value most smarter teams wouldn't want to give real value for him.

Schroder was good this year, just to me a lot of it was some variance, and some was that he was on a team with a lot of guys who hid his weaknesses (Paul and SGA especially), allowing him to not really have to take on as much playmaking.

I'm not sure how much weight I should be putting into variance on the opponent 3-pt shooting thing. I may be misunderstanding as I think I have a migraine coming on but if the opp. shooting % drops with Schroder on the floor, is that not a good sign? How do we know it is variance?

Also, I'll say that Schroder wasn't a finished product when he came to OKC, so it's not crazy to think he's made a leap. And of course ORtg is going to drop w/ two of your best offensive players off the floor. Can't do much on offense as a PG with Adams + Gallinari and leftovers... unless your Harden or Lillard or something...

I tend to weigh the most recent season pretty heavily as I think you don't trade for what a player was a year ago because we know players, especially of the younger variety, can make jumps. Of course, exceptions can be made for injuries, situations, etc.

What is LARAPM? First time I'm hearing of this metric...

3 point shooting is a lot of variance, the best defense is to prevent it. Basically he's not actually defending shooters, and opponents are missing a ton more when he's on court while he's not actively doing anything.

Edit: This was Partnow's original on the idea, he still writes a lot of it into his current stuff after working w/ the Bucks:

https://fansided.com/2015/02/06/defense-variance-luck

Schroder was also a vet when he got to OKC, he's had a long history of being a pretty poor player in general and was a salary dump when he got there. The O rating was important because if you're asking him to do things like a point guard (like create shots for others efficiently) he still can't. He's in a situation now where that doesn't matter but on most teams it does, including Philly or BKN.

As for this season, yep he's been solid. But at this point he also kind of is what he is and he had a pretty outlier year in every way just to be a solid bench player.

And LARAPM is luck adjusted (it adjusts for the shooting variance earlier).

[getrichordie]

Saw the edit this afternoon and:

https://www.pbpstats.com/wowy-combos/nba?TeamId=1610612760&Season=2019-20&SeasonType=Regular%2BSeason&PlayerIds=203471,101108,1628983

Schroder w/o CP3 or SGA: 93.89 lineup O Rtg

w/o CP3 and with SGA: 106.02 O rtg

He's going to be asked to be a primary creator on most any other team and not have 2 other ball handlers with him at most times.

Single year LARAPM has them 100 and 109, adjusting for the shooting variance and that's with Richardson's relatively down year and Schroder's peak.

Multi year PIPM has Schroder as a negative (-.6), Richardson as a positive (+.15).

He's having by far a career outlier year, and opponent 3 point shooting variance has been the main reason for the defensive "leap":

https://stats.nba.com/team/1610612760/onoffcourt-opponent/

32% on court, nearly 39% off court and the attempts aren't taken at a much different rate, nor is he actually defending that many of them (this also lines up with other players, ie when he plays with Paul opponent shooting randomly drops, and when Paul is w/o him it randomly jumps up).

Going back just one season entirely flips the numbers to Richardson being a far better player, and he's cheaper. Same for 2 years. Prior to that J Rich really hadn't broken out yet.

Mostly I don't buy that one guy having by far a career outlier year playing on a team that pretty well minimizes all his weaknesses makes him suddenly better than one who's having his worst shooting year on a team that lacks spacing and ball handlers. Dennis has probably been better this year alone, but we've got a few years of history of Richardson being a really good role player and Schroder being a pretty terrible one, and while I think Schroder may have recouped some value most smarter teams wouldn't want to give real value for him.

Schroder was good this year, just to me a lot of it was some variance, and some was that he was on a team with a lot of guys who hid his weaknesses (Paul and SGA especially), allowing him to not really have to take on as much playmaking.

I'm not sure how much weight I should be putting into variance on the opponent 3-pt shooting thing. I may be misunderstanding as I think I have a migraine coming on but if the opp. shooting % drops with Schroder on the floor, is that not a good sign? How do we know it is variance?

Also, I'll say that Schroder wasn't a finished product when he came to OKC, so it's not crazy to think he's made a leap. And of course ORtg is going to drop w/ two of your best offensive players off the floor. Can't do much on offense as a PG with Adams + Gallinari and leftovers... unless your Harden or Lillard or something...

I tend to weigh the most recent season pretty heavily as I think you don't trade for what a player was a year ago because we know players, especially of the younger variety, can make jumps. Of course, exceptions can be made for injuries, situations, etc.

What is LARAPM? First time I'm hearing of this metric...

3 point shooting is a lot of variance, the best defense is to prevent it. Basically he's not actually defending shooters, and opponents are missing a ton more when he's on court while he's not actively doing anything.

Edit: This was Partnow's original on the idea, he still writes a lot of it into his current stuff after working w/ the Bucks:

https://fansided.com/2015/02/06/defense-variance-luck

Schroder was also a vet when he got to OKC, he's had a long history of being a pretty poor player in general and was a salary dump when he got there. The O rating was important because if you're asking him to do things like a point guard (like create shots for others efficiently) he still can't. He's in a situation now where that doesn't matter but on most teams it does, including Philly or BKN.

As for this season, yep he's been solid. But at this point he also kind of is what he is and he had a pretty outlier year in every way just to be a solid bench player.

And LARAPM is luck adjusted (it adjusts for the shooting variance earlier).

Where can I find LARAPM data?

As I'm sure you know by now, I'm a big believer when it comes to Schroder. After all, he's in discussion for being 6MOY this year so I think he's better than solid. Think he's been severely underrated, especially on these boards, but I'm willing to consider different viewpoints.

At first glance, it seems a case can be made both ways as to why you should buy Schroder's production versus why you shouldn't so I'll probably have some kind of internal debate going on with him moving forward.

Before ball-handling duties were marginalized by additions of CP3 and SGA, I remember Schroder posting some killer lineup data w/ George while Westbrook was out. As it stands, I still believe he can be the primary point for a team but can also just see him being a career 6th man.

Anyways, I need to dig into this discussion a fair bit more.

[bondom34]

I'm not sure how much weight I should be putting into variance on the opponent 3-pt shooting thing. I may be misunderstanding as I think I have a migraine coming on but if the opp. shooting % drops with Schroder on the floor, is that not a good sign? How do we know it is variance?

Also, I'll say that Schroder wasn't a finished product when he came to OKC, so it's not crazy to think he's made a leap. And of course ORtg is going to drop w/ two of your best offensive players off the floor. Can't do much on offense as a PG with Adams + Gallinari and leftovers... unless your Harden or Lillard or something...

I tend to weigh the most recent season pretty heavily as I think you don't trade for what a player was a year ago because we know players, especially of the younger variety, can make jumps. Of course, exceptions can be made for injuries, situations, etc.

What is LARAPM? First time I'm hearing of this metric...

3 point shooting is a lot of variance, the best defense is to prevent it. Basically he's not actually defending shooters, and opponents are missing a ton more when he's on court while he's not actively doing anything.

Edit: This was Partnow's original on the idea, he still writes a lot of it into his current stuff after working w/ the Bucks:

https://fansided.com/2015/02/06/defense-variance-luck

Schroder was also a vet when he got to OKC, he's had a long history of being a pretty poor player in general and was a salary dump when he got there. The O rating was important because if you're asking him to do things like a point guard (like create shots for others efficiently) he still can't. He's in a situation now where that doesn't matter but on most teams it does, including Philly or BKN.

As for this season, yep he's been solid. But at this point he also kind of is what he is and he had a pretty outlier year in every way just to be a solid bench player.

And LARAPM is luck adjusted (it adjusts for the shooting variance earlier).

Where can I find LARAPM data?

As I'm sure you know by now, I'm a big believer when it comes to Schroder. After all, he's in discussion for being 6MOY this year so I think he's better than solid. Think he's been severely underrated, especially on these boards, but I'm willing to consider different viewpoints.

At first glance, it seems a case can be made both ways as to why you should buy Schroder's production versus why you shouldn't so I'll probably have some kind of internal debate going on with him moving forward.

Before ball-handling duties were marginalized by additions of CP3 and SGA, I remember Schroder posting some killer lineup data w/ George while Westbrook was out. As it stands, I still believe he can be the primary point for a team but can also just see him being a career 6th man.

Anyways, I need to dig into this discussion a fair bit more.

nbashotcharts.com

And yep, I know you're a believer, but numbers wise he's not a 6th man I'd really want on a good team, and for me he's well outside the top 3. He still can't do point guard things, and he wants to be a starter but hasn't shown it in more than a handful of games as the lineups show this year. He's been point guard Melo most of his career (and the post-prime version of Melo). I think the poll you put up kind of sums up the general view of him, he's got too much history of being bad.

[getrichordie]

3 point shooting is a lot of variance, the best defense is to prevent it. Basically he's not actually defending shooters, and opponents are missing a ton more when he's on court while he's not actively doing anything.

Edit: This was Partnow's original on the idea, he still writes a lot of it into his current stuff after working w/ the Bucks:

https://fansided.com/2015/02/06/defense-variance-luck

Schroder was also a vet when he got to OKC, he's had a long history of being a pretty poor player in general and was a salary dump when he got there. The O rating was important because if you're asking him to do things like a point guard (like create shots for others efficiently) he still can't. He's in a situation now where that doesn't matter but on most teams it does, including Philly or BKN.

As for this season, yep he's been solid. But at this point he also kind of is what he is and he had a pretty outlier year in every way just to be a solid bench player.

And LARAPM is luck adjusted (it adjusts for the shooting variance earlier).

Where can I find LARAPM data?

As I'm sure you know by now, I'm a big believer when it comes to Schroder. After all, he's in discussion for being 6MOY this year so I think he's better than solid. Think he's been severely underrated, especially on these boards, but I'm willing to consider different viewpoints.

At first glance, it seems a case can be made both ways as to why you should buy Schroder's production versus why you shouldn't so I'll probably have some kind of internal debate going on with him moving forward.

Before ball-handling duties were marginalized by additions of CP3 and SGA, I remember Schroder posting some killer lineup data w/ George while Westbrook was out. As it stands, I still believe he can be the primary point for a team but can also just see him being a career 6th man.

Anyways, I need to dig into this discussion a fair bit more.

nbashotcharts.com

And yep, I know you're a believer, but numbers wise he's not a 6th man I'd really want on a good team, and for me he's well outside the top 3. He still can't do point guard things, and he wants to be a starter but hasn't shown it in more than a handful of games as the lineups show this year. He's been point guard Melo most of his career (and the post-prime version of Melo). I think the poll you put up kind of sums up the general view of him, he's got too much history of being bad.

Am I doing something wrong?

Using LARAPM, I'm not getting #s in the 100s like you are.

Using the 3-year LARAPM (2017-2020), I'm showing Schroder at 3.12 and Richardson at 1.52...

[Trader_Joe]

I think were side tracking folks.
Dennis Schroder isn't a Net.
Can we take this elsewhere?

[bondom34]

Where can I find LARAPM data?

As I'm sure you know by now, I'm a big believer when it comes to Schroder. After all, he's in discussion for being 6MOY this year so I think he's better than solid. Think he's been severely underrated, especially on these boards, but I'm willing to consider different viewpoints.

At first glance, it seems a case can be made both ways as to why you should buy Schroder's production versus why you shouldn't so I'll probably have some kind of internal debate going on with him moving forward.

Before ball-handling duties were marginalized by additions of CP3 and SGA, I remember Schroder posting some killer lineup data w/ George while Westbrook was out. As it stands, I still believe he can be the primary point for a team but can also just see him being a career 6th man.

Anyways, I need to dig into this discussion a fair bit more.

nbashotcharts.com

And yep, I know you're a believer, but numbers wise he's not a 6th man I'd really want on a good team, and for me he's well outside the top 3. He still can't do point guard things, and he wants to be a starter but hasn't shown it in more than a handful of games as the lineups show this year. He's been point guard Melo most of his career (and the post-prime version of Melo). I think the poll you put up kind of sums up the general view of him, he's got too much history of being bad.

Am I doing something wrong?

Using LARAPM, I'm not getting #s in the 100s like you are.

Using the 3-year LARAPM (2017-2020), I'm showing Schroder at 3.12 and Richardson at 1.52...

I was looking at single year. And 5 year would have Richardson at 2.15 and Schroder at 1.73 if you're looking even larger sample. Schroder's 3 year is a bit better, Richardson's 5 a bit better. Was using luck adjusted because Schroder's defensive numbers made a weird leap (RPM had him as like a defensive player of the year level guard).

[bondom34]

I think were side tracking folks.
Dennis Schroder isn't a Net.
Can we take this elsewhere?

Oops, sorry TJ.

...

We've gotten off the rails a bit.

[drchaos]

All of the Nets players should look better (and more attractive to other teams) next season with Irving and Durant doing the heavy lifting on offense. The Nets should resign Joe, use the MLE to get a veteran ring chaser, and continue to find young players or other unpolished gems to round out the roster.

Once they have a few games under their belt the front office will have a better idea of what isn't working and can start shopping some of the guys that they don't see as the future.

With that said a draft day trade could make some sense depending on what we get back.

[Trader_Joe]

All of the Nets players should look better (and more attractive to other teams) next season with Irving and Durant doing the heavy lifting on offense. The Nets should resign Joe, use the MLE to get a veteran ring chaser, and continue to find young players or other unpolished gems to round out the roster.

Once they have a few games under their belt the front office will have a better idea of what isn't working and can start shopping some of the guys that they don't see as the future.

With that said a draft day trade could make some sense depending on what we get back.

I don't see why all would look better, and most have been around long enough where most should know their value and appeal.
Dinwiddie could lose value if Kyrie and LeVert are healthy and his role is limited and ball out of his hands. Prince might look better in a limited role behind KD, but that doesn't make his contract look better if it shows he's not capable of a larger role. If KD and KI want Jordan to continue to be the starter, perhaps that rattles Allen's confidence.

Either way, I think a good FO needs to be proactive and be able to project these possibilities ahead of time.

[Ruzious]

The fact that Brooklyn's looking for a 3rd star is a hint as to what they think of LeVert. He's talented and versatile, but he's also unreliable. His scoring efficiency is bad even coming off his first good 3 point shooting season. Going back to his last 2 college seasons he's played 18, 15, 57, 71, 40, and 39 games.

[Trader_Joe]

The fact that Brooklyn's looking for a 3rd star is a hint as to what they think of LeVert. He's talented and versatile, but he's also unreliable. His scoring efficiency is bad even coming off his first good 3 point shooting season. Going back to his last 2 college seasons he's played 18, 15, 57, 71, 40, and 39 games.

The fact they extended him, somewhat says otherwise.
And I'm not sure they are shopping for a 3rd star. You are?

[Ruzious]

The fact that Brooklyn's looking for a 3rd star is a hint as to what they think of LeVert. He's talented and versatile, but he's also unreliable. His scoring efficiency is bad even coming off his first good 3 point shooting season. Going back to his last 2 college seasons he's played 18, 15, 57, 71, 40, and 39 games.

The fact they extended him, somewhat says otherwise.
And I'm not sure they are shopping for a 3rd star. You are?

Maybe we both jumped to conclusions there.

[Trader_Joe]

The fact that Brooklyn's looking for a 3rd star is a hint as to what they think of LeVert. He's talented and versatile, but he's also unreliable. His scoring efficiency is bad even coming off his first good 3 point shooting season. Going back to his last 2 college seasons he's played 18, 15, 57, 71, 40, and 39 games.

The fact they extended him, somewhat says otherwise.
And I'm not sure they are shopping for a 3rd star. You are?

Maybe we both jumped to conclusions there.

Ha.. probably.
And I wasn't trying to say they think he is/will be 3rd star, but rather they might just like him and not feel a need to move him. I still don't know who this 3rd star is, if they are available and if they fit.