Confused by Nets Moves

[celticsclay]

Obviously as Celtics Fans we are all a bit biased with regard to the Nets. However, I am still pretty confused as to what the goals of their franchise are after recently signing Lopez and Thad Young to large contracts. On one hand, I had read they were trying to cut costs in anticipation of a sale, but these two contracts really increase the amount of money on the books.

Also, I am not sure how much more upside there is for their roster. Last season, Lopez, Johnson and Williams were all healthy all season. You could argue that Lopez can build off his success and be a dominant offensive force all season (he started the season off slow), but it is hard to imagine that Williams and Johnson will not get at least a little bit worse given their age. It also seems like there is really limited room for improvement from any of their youngish guys and they seemingly just trade the guy with the highest upside (Plumlee).

What are they trying to do exactly?

[PhoSita]

They have no incentive to be bad because they don't own any of their own picks in the next three years, so they're just treading water.

Kind of like what the Celts are doing ....

[celticsclay]

They have no incentive to be bad because they don't own any of their own picks in the next three years, so they're just treading water.

Kind of like what the Celts are doing ....

well the difference being they are actually locking up money long term young signed for 4 years while lopez signed for 3. We signed one year deals with players. Not to mention we obviously have way more young players than they do. It seems like these moves would make them less attractive for a sale than a clean slate. Teams generally strip down before a sale.

[Geo123]

They have no incentive to be bad because they don't own any of their own picks in the next three years, so they're just treading water.

Kind of like what the Celts are doing ....

Different scenarios altogether.  The Nets have an aging team with no draft picks and limited financial flexibility.  We have a younger team with a lot of promise, cap flexibility and draft picks.   

[celticsclay]

They have no incentive to be bad because they don't own any of their own picks in the next three years, so they're just treading water.

Kind of like what the Celts are doing ....

Different scenarios altogether.  The Nets have an aging team with no draft picks and limited financial flexibility.  We have a younger team with a lot of promise, cap flexibility and draft picks.   

yea i mean, to be honest the teams are complete opposites of each other. I get you are upset with the Celtics moves, but lets not just blindly make everything about that right now.

[Who]

They have no incentive to be bad because they don't own any of their own picks in the next three years, so they're just treading water.

Kind of like what the Celts are doing ....

well the difference being they are actually locking up money long term young signed for 4 years while lopez signed for 3. We signed one year deals with players. Not to mention we obviously have way more young players than they do. It seems like these moves would make them less attractive for a sale than a clean slate. Teams generally strip down before a sale.

With the way the cap is about to rise, I don't think those contracts hinder their ability to add more high priced FAs in the future. It's only about $30 million of a $108 million cap in 2017. Plenty of room left to add top talent to their roster.

[GreenPride17]

We are probably as good as the nets except we have their draft picks

[celticsclay]

They have no incentive to be bad because they don't own any of their own picks in the next three years, so they're just treading water.

Kind of like what the Celts are doing ....

well the difference being they are actually locking up money long term young signed for 4 years while lopez signed for 3. We signed one year deals with players. Not to mention we obviously have way more young players than they do. It seems like these moves would make them less attractive for a sale than a clean slate. Teams generally strip down before a sale.

With the way the cap is about to rise, I don't think those contracts hinder their ability to add more high priced FAs in the future. It's only about $30 million of a $108 million cap in 2017. Plenty of room left to add top talent to their roster.

I will add. This new cap is ridiculous. The league should probably lower ticket prices if Amir Johnson gets 12 million under the current system.

[PhoSita]

The Celts having more cap flexibility means very little due to the rising cap.  Protecting our long term cap flexibility really has not allowed us to stand apart from most other teams due to the massive TV deal.

As for more long term promise ... maybe.  But which of these young players has so much potential and promise?  Mystery boxes like James Young, RJ Hunter, Terry Rozier, Jordan Mickey? 

Now that the Nets look more and more likely to hang around the middle, are we hanging all our hopes on Marcus Smart instead of expecting the obviously-much-worse-run Nets to bail us out with the picks they traded us?

[celticsclay]

The Celts having more cap flexibility means very little due to the rising cap.  Protecting our long term cap flexibility really has not allowed us to stand apart from most other teams due to the massive TV deal.

As for more long term promise ... maybe.  But which of these young players has so much potential and promise?  Mystery boxes like James Young, RJ Hunter, Terry Rozier, Jordan Mickey? 

Now that the Nets look more and more likely to hang around the middle, are we hanging all our hopes on Marcus Smart instead of expecting the obviously-much-worse-run Nets to bail us out with the picks they traded us?

Are you incapable of discussing the nets without comparing to the Celtics? There are 80 million threads right now about the state of the celtics. This is one about the Nets. I realize there is a big connection because of the picks, but that doesn't warrant discussing the Celtics young talent or assets.

[hevel varik]

Obviously as Celtics Fans we are all a bit biased with regard to the Nets. However, I am still pretty confused as to what the goals of their franchise are after recently signing Lopez and Thad Young to large contracts. On one hand, I had read they were trying to cut costs in anticipation of a sale, but these two contracts really increase the amount of money on the books.

Also, I am not sure how much more upside there is for their roster. Last season, Lopez, Johnson and Williams were all healthy all season. You could argue that Lopez can build off his success and be a dominant offensive force all season (he started the season off slow), but it is hard to imagine that Williams and Johnson will not get at least a little bit worse given their age. It also seems like there is really limited room for improvement from any of their youngish guys and they seemingly just trade the guy with the highest upside (Plumlee).

What are they trying to do exactly?

Brooklyn is a huge market. Brooklyn is night life city and wears tone of gear. If the Nets are competitive, that's tons of money in every basketball way. The Nets are a business and I suspect that the ownership (group) would generally always prefer a decade of competitive ball vs a chip and 9 years of bottom dwelling.

Also, the current ownership group is as much interested in the real estate surrounding the center than they are in the team. My hunch in fact is that the team serves the development not the other way around -- google the history of Barclays -- super interesting. Upshot is that Barclay's is central Brooklyn, right on top of the largest subway hub, so your not talking TD Banknorth or the far forum.

Nets are far more a business than will the Celtics ever be (hopefully).

[Snakehead]

I think the Nets just want to make some money and that's as far as it goes.  They have no incentive to tank since we have the picks and they just resigned their same guys.

I don't agree with it either, but hey.   I think Billy King is just a terrible, terrible GM.

[BornReady]

Nets are signing their players to large contracts because they want to keep them and the cap is expected to hit
Also they want to remain a playoff team and stay competitive as they don't own their picks
Not point losing and tanking when ur pick is going to someone else
Might as well stay in the playoff race and try to attract free agents

[tazzmaniac]

They have no incentive to be bad because they don't own any of their own picks in the next three years, so they're just treading water.

Kind of like what the Celts are doing ....

well the difference being they are actually locking up money long term young signed for 4 years while lopez signed for 3. We signed one year deals with players. Not to mention we obviously have way more young players than they do. It seems like these moves would make them less attractive for a sale than a clean slate. Teams generally strip down before a sale.

With the way the cap is about to rise, I don't think those contracts hinder their ability to add more high priced FAs in the future. It's only about $30 million of a $108 million cap in 2017. Plenty of room left to add top talent to their roster.

I will add. This new cap is ridiculous. The league should probably lower ticket prices if Amir Johnson gets 12 million under the current system.

Not only will the cap go up by 20mil but the Johnson's nearly 25mil contract will come off the books after next season.  They'll have plenty of cap space to go after free agents.  Signing Lopez and Young to those deals is a no brainer for the Nets.  Now if Lopez wanted a 5 year deal that would have been a different story. 

[Future Celtics Owner]

They have no incentive to be bad because they don't own any of their own picks in the next three years, so they're just treading water.

Kind of like what the Celts are doing ....

TP