nevetsov wrote:I would hate to lose Bridges, but if it does become a game of dollars I think he's the easiest minutes to cover.
Craig, Nader
Crowder, Johnson
Are all reasonably interchangeable at both forward spots, are all 2 way players and are all on reasonable deals.
That said, I think we allow Bridges a "show me" fourth year, which is probably a mistake, but if I'm paying a guy $20+ million I want to make sure he can get me 20+ on a nightly basis.
Our wing depth is definitely solid! And the possibility of losing Bridges to a team that might overpay for him ( cough........ cough San Antonio)? Once Derozan is gone would suck big time for sure! In that context, regardless of Nader or Craig, it might look to be a reasonable consideration to consider targeting a rookie scale prospect in the same archetype as Bridges to have on that 4 yr deal with a 2nd round pick.
It may only be a few million less than what we'd bid for the likes of Craig and Nader around the BAE, But that few million disparity can really add up quickly when trying to fill out our roster around three or more max contracts plus potentially! And Johnson is great, but more offensively dominant than a potential lockdown wing. And we do always need more perimeter defense. There are some pretty solid choices to choose from for insurance against losing Bridges honestly. Prospects that are very similar versatile defensive archetypes with solid upside are JT Thor, Herbert Jones, Terrence Shannon Jr, Kessler Edwards, etc. The very best of those options being Thor and Jones!!!
Now we may not know what Craigs or Naders market value could become if they play really well next season or the one after??? They could fluctuate some! But the beauty of the rookie scale contract is in that it provides 4 yrs of low cost contractual control outside of market value fluctuations. So IF we anticipate a fair chance of losing Bridges due to teams being willing to overpay, We should be proactive,
And consider adding further depth in that similar archetype.
