Author Topic: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?  (Read 2484 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #30 on: February 05, 2016, 07:47:09 AM »

Online Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33464
  • Tommy Points: 1533
why is Brooklyn going to buy out Johnson?  He is a free agent at the end of the year and tanking does them no good (and it isn't like he is taking minutes from a future "star").

To save cash this year. I expect JJ will want to get out and join a contender so he's be willing to leave some money on the table.

In regards to the other posters, Miami and Memphis make a lot of sense, maybe Cleveland put I think that's a bad fit for both sides. He isn't necessarily who you'd expect us to go for as he differs from our style but it's always handy to have a guy that can create his own shot and score in the clutch!
They don't need to save cash.  There is no reason to buy Johnson out.  In fact, Brooklyn might actually want to keep JJ around because they might actually want to bring him back next year (on a greatly reduced contract of course).  There is no reason for Brooklyn to buy out a starter that is an expiring contract.  They get nothing from it, since they can't improve their draft position and he isn't blocking minutes from any young player that has a long term future for them. 

I fully expect Brooklyn to try and trade him before the deadline, I just don't think they will and don't see them buying him out either.
Well judging by Deron Williams buyout it appears that they do like to save money. It's still a business.
As BudweiserCeltic said, agent relations play a part as well. It's rare that you see a case where a player wants a buyout and doesn't come to an agreement with the team. If they flat out refused to buy him out when that is his preference, what incentive does he have to come back next year? It would be a slap in the face for JJ.
Brooklyn sees itself as a free agent destination so I'd expect them to look like they treat players well. Otherwise they harm themselves
Deron had multiple seasons left though.  He wasn't expiring in a couple of months.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #31 on: February 05, 2016, 08:17:50 AM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
why is Brooklyn going to buy out Johnson?  He is a free agent at the end of the year and tanking does them no good (and it isn't like he is taking minutes from a future "star").

To save cash this year. I expect JJ will want to get out and join a contender so he's be willing to leave some money on the table.

In regards to the other posters, Miami and Memphis make a lot of sense, maybe Cleveland put I think that's a bad fit for both sides. He isn't necessarily who you'd expect us to go for as he differs from our style but it's always handy to have a guy that can create his own shot and score in the clutch!
They don't need to save cash.  There is no reason to buy Johnson out.  In fact, Brooklyn might actually want to keep JJ around because they might actually want to bring him back next year (on a greatly reduced contract of course).  There is no reason for Brooklyn to buy out a starter that is an expiring contract.  They get nothing from it, since they can't improve their draft position and he isn't blocking minutes from any young player that has a long term future for them. 

I fully expect Brooklyn to try and trade him before the deadline, I just don't think they will and don't see them buying him out either.
Well judging by Deron Williams buyout it appears that they do like to save money. It's still a business.
As BudweiserCeltic said, agent relations play a part as well. It's rare that you see a case where a player wants a buyout and doesn't come to an agreement with the team. If they flat out refused to buy him out when that is his preference, what incentive does he have to come back next year? It would be a slap in the face for JJ.
Brooklyn sees itself as a free agent destination so I'd expect them to look like they treat players well. Otherwise they harm themselves
Deron had multiple seasons left though.  He wasn't expiring in a couple of months.

It's pretty much standard operating procedure at the point for veterans at the end of their contracts and careers to be offered a buyout if they're on a lottery-bound team.  Assuming Johnson wants to leave, he's been a good soldier this year, so you let him go.  Forcing him to stay only signals to future players you'd like to sign that you're going to force them to stay as well, even if things don't work out.  That's not a good way to attract players when coming off a terrible season.

If Johnson wants to stay, that's another matter.  But if he wants to go, everyone in the league will know, even if he doesn't say a word about it publicly.

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #32 on: February 05, 2016, 11:56:32 AM »

Online Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33464
  • Tommy Points: 1533
why is Brooklyn going to buy out Johnson?  He is a free agent at the end of the year and tanking does them no good (and it isn't like he is taking minutes from a future "star").

To save cash this year. I expect JJ will want to get out and join a contender so he's be willing to leave some money on the table.

In regards to the other posters, Miami and Memphis make a lot of sense, maybe Cleveland put I think that's a bad fit for both sides. He isn't necessarily who you'd expect us to go for as he differs from our style but it's always handy to have a guy that can create his own shot and score in the clutch!
They don't need to save cash.  There is no reason to buy Johnson out.  In fact, Brooklyn might actually want to keep JJ around because they might actually want to bring him back next year (on a greatly reduced contract of course).  There is no reason for Brooklyn to buy out a starter that is an expiring contract.  They get nothing from it, since they can't improve their draft position and he isn't blocking minutes from any young player that has a long term future for them. 

I fully expect Brooklyn to try and trade him before the deadline, I just don't think they will and don't see them buying him out either.
Well judging by Deron Williams buyout it appears that they do like to save money. It's still a business.
As BudweiserCeltic said, agent relations play a part as well. It's rare that you see a case where a player wants a buyout and doesn't come to an agreement with the team. If they flat out refused to buy him out when that is his preference, what incentive does he have to come back next year? It would be a slap in the face for JJ.
Brooklyn sees itself as a free agent destination so I'd expect them to look like they treat players well. Otherwise they harm themselves
Deron had multiple seasons left though.  He wasn't expiring in a couple of months.

It's pretty much standard operating procedure at the point for veterans at the end of their contracts and careers to be offered a buyout if they're on a lottery-bound team.  Assuming Johnson wants to leave, he's been a good soldier this year, so you let him go.  Forcing him to stay only signals to future players you'd like to sign that you're going to force them to stay as well, even if things don't work out.  That's not a good way to attract players when coming off a terrible season.

If Johnson wants to stay, that's another matter.  But if he wants to go, everyone in the league will know, even if he doesn't say a word about it publicly.
I think that is a bunch of nonsense.  Plenty of players finish out contracts on bad teams with no ill effect to the team.  Sure buy outs do happen, but it isn't an every single time occurrence. 
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #33 on: February 05, 2016, 12:20:41 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21238
  • Tommy Points: 2016
why is Brooklyn going to buy out Johnson?  He is a free agent at the end of the year and tanking does them no good (and it isn't like he is taking minutes from a future "star").
also from Johnson's perspective, he probably loves playing in Brooklyn because he's getting major minutes.  He is playing for a contract this summer.

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #34 on: February 05, 2016, 12:56:57 PM »

Online Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33464
  • Tommy Points: 1533
why is Brooklyn going to buy out Johnson?  He is a free agent at the end of the year and tanking does them no good (and it isn't like he is taking minutes from a future "star").
also from Johnson's perspective, he probably loves playing in Brooklyn because he's getting major minutes.  He is playing for a contract this summer.
well yeah that too.  He hasn't asked for a trade or buyout, and why would he want to take less money.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #35 on: February 05, 2016, 01:49:18 PM »

Offline Kuberski33

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7078
  • Tommy Points: 533
why is Brooklyn going to buy out Johnson?  He is a free agent at the end of the year and tanking does them no good (and it isn't like he is taking minutes from a future "star").
also from Johnson's perspective, he probably loves playing in Brooklyn because he's getting major minutes.  He is playing for a contract this summer.
I'd say you know what you're getting from Johnson at this point.  His value may actually be enhanced if GM's can see what he does with a team that plays hard.
 
I think he would improve the C's for the playoffs.  They need someone else who can consistently knock a shot down when teams take away IT.  He'd be an improvement over Bradley for that specific skill, so I would say yes.

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #36 on: February 05, 2016, 02:19:43 PM »

Offline LooseCannon

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11833
  • Tommy Points: 950
He would be an improvement if he replaced James Young's minutes in the playoffs.
"The worst thing that ever happened in sports was sports radio, and the internet is sports radio on steroids with lower IQs.” -- Brian Burke, former Toronto Maple Leafs senior adviser, at the 2013 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #37 on: February 05, 2016, 07:55:25 PM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
No, I wouldn't even dream of it. Zero interest in him, there's no space for him on this roster. 

Looking at the player Johnson is at this point in his career, I'd much rather use Turner in the backup SG/SF role, and we have too many bigs to consider using him as a PF in small ball lineups. 

Only way it would make any sense is if wee use both guys together and go extra big with the second unit (Turner at PG, Johnson at SG, Jerebko at SF) but even that makes no sense because then you're taking minutes away from Smart.

Really no point to be honest, makes zero sense for us.

Also it's completely ludicrous for us to buy out David Lee - I cannot understand any reason whatsoever for us to do that.  He's on the last year of his contract and expires after the season ends, and there is absolutely no interest in either end (his or Boston's) for him to return.  If we can't find a deal to make with him by the trade deadline, then let him sit on the bench as an emergency backup and then enjoy the free cap relief at the end of the season.

He could still have value in the playoffs as am emergency backup if we get hit by multiple injuries, or if our bigs get in major foul trouble.  Lee isn't the best fit on our roster, but he can is still serviceable and much more productive than people give him credit, so if no trade options arise then he is more useful to us on the bench than he is on another team.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2016, 08:01:39 PM by crimson_stallion »

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #38 on: February 05, 2016, 07:57:22 PM »

Offline 2short

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6080
  • Tommy Points: 428
Where does he play? His minutes?
Pass

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #39 on: February 05, 2016, 08:02:46 PM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
He would be an improvement if he replaced James Young's minutes in the playoffs.

You can't replace what doesn't exist.  James Young isn't even getting minutes in the regular season, he sure as hell won't get any in the Playoffs.

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #40 on: February 05, 2016, 08:07:01 PM »

Offline LooseCannon

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11833
  • Tommy Points: 950
He would be an improvement if he replaced James Young's minutes in the playoffs.

You can't replace what doesn't exist.  James Young isn't even getting minutes in the regular season, he sure as hell won't get any in the Playoffs.

Who would you rather have as injury insurance?
"The worst thing that ever happened in sports was sports radio, and the internet is sports radio on steroids with lower IQs.” -- Brian Burke, former Toronto Maple Leafs senior adviser, at the 2013 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #41 on: February 05, 2016, 08:23:49 PM »

Offline walker834

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5240
  • Tommy Points: 238
I'd think about it.  He could be a decent option that would help us more than Lee.  Kind of a last resort thing though at this point in time.  The question to me is would JJ sign a short term contract just to play one year and become a free agent.  He might be able to get a longer deal somewhere else.

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #42 on: February 05, 2016, 09:25:54 PM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
He would be an improvement if he replaced James Young's minutes in the playoffs.

You can't replace what doesn't exist.  James Young isn't even getting minutes in the regular season, he sure as hell won't get any in the Playoffs.

Who would you rather have as injury insurance?

Young. 

If he isn't playing he won't complain and create lockerroom issues, with Johnson may well do if he's sitting on the bench racking up DNP's.

For that reason along, having him on the roster will leave Brad feeling like he HAS to try and give him minutes, which is going to wreck the rotation - pretty much exactly what happened with all those bigs.

Just no point at all in having him here.  No point.

Re: Would you take Joe Johnson after a buyout?
« Reply #43 on: February 05, 2016, 09:29:09 PM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
I'd think about it.  He could be a decent option that would help us more than Lee.  Kind of a last resort thing though at this point in time.  The question to me is would JJ sign a short term contract just to play one year and become a free agent.  He might be able to get a longer deal somewhere else.

I think he would sign until the end of the season if he has a chance to get on a playoff team...but I doubt he'd agree to it with a team like Boston, just zero incentive for him.

Why sign for a team that isn't a serious contender, and where you won't get playing time?   

You'd either sign for a playoff team that will give you big minutes, or you'd sign for a playoff team with title hopes (Clevleand, Golden State, OKC, etc).