If we strike out on lottery, trades, and free agents, let's go after Nets' bigs!

[jpotter33]

Let me premise this by saying that I am not a fan of Lopez's game for our style, and I'm only slightly higher on Young.

However, there comes a time when "trusting the process" is no longer viable. We are absolutely PRIMED to make a trade for a star or pick up a valuable free agent. But if neither of those things happen and we end up third or fourth or later in the lottery, then why not go after Lopez and Young?

Here's my thought process:

1) Outside of the top two, this draft is really weak in my opinion. With the current construction of our team, I don't really see any guy in our range that would help us very much currently or in the longer term more than Lopez and Young.

2) Though Lopez and Young don't really fit our playing style right now, Stevens is not an ideologue, and he plays the way that our talent dictates. For all the slack that he gets, Lopez is probably the best low-post scorer in the league. Additionally, there's a lot of teams that still have trouble guarding a low-post big, i.e. look at Cleveland, and I still think we'd be the frontrunners in the East by adding those two in the starting lineup to IT, Bradley, and Crowder. Also, think how much better the Nets would've been if they had our perimeter defense and IT to work with. We could really slow down our offense, have both inside and outside threats, and have the defense to contain anybody (at the very least Lopez is a HUGE body to clog the lane).

3) This also serves two purposes. While it definitely makes us better by upgrading our talent, it also would ensure that the Nets are a bottom-5 team the next several seasons when we have their picks.

So let's posit a trade:

To Celtics: Lopez and Young (approximately 30M)

To Nets: Amir, Sully (sign and trade for 12M), Rozier, Young, then whoever we pick with the Brooklyn and Dallas picks.

This would give them a legitimate point guard prospect in Rozier, a longer-term starting PF in Sully (who is as good if not better than Young), a chance to gauge Young, and then a nice prospect (let's say Hield or Brown) along with whoever we get at the Dallas pick. That's a really good haul for them, even if it doesn't really help their draft pick stash the next couple of years. However, though it might set them up good for the future, it pretty much ensures that they're going to stink the next two years, furthering our own interests.

For us, we'd have a really, really good team of:

PG: IT, Smart
SG: Bradley, Hunter
SF: Crowder, Turner (resigned)
PF: KO (I start KO to provide more spacing), Young
C: Lopez, Mickey

That's a really solid team that I think has great matchup advantages versus Cleveland and Toronto in the East. And let's not forget that Brooklyn also played Golden State extremely close this year, too, with one overtime loss and another loss that only got to double digits in the last couple of minutes.

So would you do it? If we got fourth or lower in the lottery, couldn't trade our pick for a star, and couldn't nab any decent free agents, would you make this proposed trade for Lopez and Young?

[wdleehi]

Way to much to give to them considering the players coming back are not worth that much and it gives them hope to rebuild.

[jpotter33]

Way to much to give to them considering the players coming back are not worth that much and it gives them hope to rebuild.

Who do you propose to take out? Rozier?

And who cares if it gives them hope to rebuild, because they won't be amounting to anything for at least several years, meaning our picks are safe.

[alldaboston]

Trade for young, sure. I don't want lopez. He didn't get hurt this year, but his foot issues are too much to be scared of.

[Dino Pitino]

To Celtics: Lopez and Young (approximately 30M)

To Nets: Amir, Sully (sign and trade for 12M), Rozier, Young, then whoever we pick with the Brooklyn and Dallas picks.

You made our already weak rebounding even weaker. You ruined our interior defense. You made us much older. You made the Nets better. You gave them better assets to improve with. Good job. Good effort.

[SHAQATTACK]

Let me premise this by saying that I am not a fan of Lopez's game for our style, and I'm only slightly higher on Young.

However, there comes a time when "trusting the process" is no longer viable. We are absolutely PRIMED to make a trade for a star or pick up a valuable free agent. But if neither of those things happen and we end up third or fourth or later in the lottery, then why not go after Lopez and Young?

Here's my thought process:

1) Outside of the top two, this draft is really weak in my opinion. With the current construction of our team, I don't really see any guy in our range that would help us very much currently or in the longer term more than Lopez and Young.

2) Though Lopez and Young don't really fit our playing style right now, Stevens is not an ideologue, and he plays the way that our talent dictates. For all the slack that he gets, Lopez is probably the best low-post scorer in the league. Additionally, there's a lot of teams that still have trouble guarding a low-post big, i.e. look at Cleveland, and I still think we'd be the frontrunners in the East by adding those two in the starting lineup to IT, Bradley, and Crowder. Also, think how much better the Nets would've been if they had our perimeter defense and IT to work with. We could really slow down our offense, have both inside and outside threats, and have the defense to contain anybody (at the very least Lopez is a HUGE body to clog the lane).

3) This also serves two purposes. While it definitely makes us better by upgrading our talent, it also would ensure that the Nets are a bottom-5 team the next several seasons when we have their picks.

So let's posit a trade:

To Celtics: Lopez and Young (approximately 30M)

To Nets: Amir, Sully (sign and trade for 12M), Rozier, Young, then whoever we pick with the Brooklyn and Dallas picks.

This would give them a legitimate point guard prospect in Rozier, a longer-term starting PF in Sully (who is as good if not better than Young), a chance to gauge Young, and then a nice prospect (let's say Hield or Brown) along with whoever we get at the Dallas pick. That's a really good haul for them, even if it doesn't really help their draft pick stash the next couple of years. However, though it might set them up good for the future, it pretty much ensures that they're going to stink the next two years, furthering our own interests.

For us, we'd have a really, really good team of:

PG: IT, Smart
SG: Bradley, Hunter
SF: Crowder, Turner (resigned)
PF: KO (I start KO to provide more spacing), Young
C: Lopez, Mickey

That's a really solid team that I think has great matchup advantages versus Cleveland and Toronto in the East. And let's not forget that Brooklyn also played Golden State extremely close this year, too, with one overtime loss and another loss that only got to double digits in the last couple of minutes.

So would you do it? If we got fourth or lower in the lottery, couldn't trade our pick for a star, and couldn't nab any decent free agents, would you make this proposed trade for Lopez and Young?

I suggested about the same thing months ago.

Lopez IMO is a better player , I think he proved it this year than Love.   
Lopez would push the needle if added to Celtics , if Smart , Crowder and KO could be retained.

A lot of experts were writing articles that suggested Nets dump Young and Lopez and start over .

[jpotter33]

To Celtics: Lopez and Young (approximately 30M)

To Nets: Amir, Sully (sign and trade for 12M), Rozier, Young, then whoever we pick with the Brooklyn and Dallas picks.

You made our already weak rebounding even weaker. You ruined our interior defense. You made us much older. You made the Nets better. You gave them better assets to improve with. Good job. Good effort.

Such an insightful comment. You should be proud of yourself.



1) What interior defense are you speaking of? Because there's not much to speak of outside of Amir occasionally. We're good defensively due to our perimeter D, not our nonexistent interior D. Furthermore, look what the big body of Mozgov did for the Cavs' defense last year. I expect Lopez would have a similar effect with us.

2) Much older? We're already the youngest team in the league, how much younger do you want us to get? Young is only 27, and Lopez literally just turned 28. Sure, Sully is several years younger, but you'd rather add 3+ rookies to our roster when we already have three rookies that ride the bench and one that gets like eight minutes a game? Think before you speak.

3) In what world will the Nets be better without Lopez and Young replaced by rookies, Sully, and Amir? Who scores for them?? Sure, their long-term prospects are better, but that's way down the line when we won't have their picks anymore. They're certainly a bottom-two team in the league the next two years after this trade. Again, think before you speak.

4) Sure, the rebounding is a fair point, but it's offset by the huge upgrade in talent and interior scoring, which you so happened to leave out.

So, good job, good effort with this abysmal comment. It's definitely much better to just add three more rookies to hardly get any playing time or trade them for even further assets that we're going to hoard and not use. 

[Dino Pitino]

To Celtics: Lopez and Young (approximately 30M)

To Nets: Amir, Sully (sign and trade for 12M), Rozier, Young, then whoever we pick with the Brooklyn and Dallas picks.

You made our already weak rebounding even weaker. You ruined our interior defense. You made us much older. You made the Nets better. You gave them better assets to improve with. Good job. Good effort.

Such an insightful comment. You should be proud of yourself.



1) What interior defense are you speaking of? Because there's not much to speak of outside of Amir occasionally. We're good defensively due to our perimeter D, not our nonexistent interior D. Furthermore, look what the big body of Mozgov did for the Cavs' defense last year. I expect Lopez would have a similar effect with us.

Body size is irrelevant. Amir and Sully are a better defensive frontcourt than Lopez and Young. Sully is a better defensive center than Brook. You're not alone in thinking that our team defense is all about the guards and ignoring how important Sully and Amir are, but you're still wrong.

2) Much older? We're already the youngest team in the league, how much younger do you want us to get? Young is only 27, and Lopez literally just turned 28. Sure, Sully is several years younger, but you'd rather add 3+ rookies to our roster when we already have three rookies that ride the bench and one that gets like eight minutes a game? Think before you speak.

Lopez is 28 going on 35. He's fragile. His career's expiration date is looming. Yes, I would rather add rookies with a lotto pick and a mid-1st than add Lopez. And I would also rather keep the improving 24-year-old center.

3) In what world will the Nets be better without Lopez and Young replaced by rookies, Sully, and Amir? Who scores for them?? Sure, their long-term prospects are better, but that's way down the line when we won't have their picks anymore. They're certainly a bottom-two team in the league the next two years after this trade. Again, think before you speak.

Instead of relying on one guy to score the Nets would score as a team, which will be easier because they'll have better interior defense and better rebounding. They'll also have a legit PG prospect now. Yay.

4) Sure, the rebounding is a fair point, but it's offset by the huge upgrade in talent and interior scoring, which you so happened to leave out.

"Talent" is overrated. Brook Lopez is fool's gold whose teams have consistently disappointed and sucked, even when he had much more "talent" surrounding him. Anyway, why do we need Brook's interior scoring? How much interior scoring do the Warriors or Cavs have? They're doing alright.

So, good job, good effort with this abysmal comment. It's definitely much better to just add three more rookies to hardly get any playing time or trade them for even further assets that we're going to hoard and not use. 

You have absolutely no idea how much playing time the rookies would get, because Ainge hasn't drafted them yet, so we have absolutely no idea who they'd be, how well they'd fit, or how ready they are. We do already know who Jared Sullinger and Amir Johnson are and how well they fit, though.

[jpotter33]

To Celtics: Lopez and Young (approximately 30M)

To Nets: Amir, Sully (sign and trade for 12M), Rozier, Young, then whoever we pick with the Brooklyn and Dallas picks.

You made our already weak rebounding even weaker. You ruined our interior defense. You made us much older. You made the Nets better. You gave them better assets to improve with. Good job. Good effort.

Such an insightful comment. You should be proud of yourself.



1) What interior defense are you speaking of? Because there's not much to speak of outside of Amir occasionally. We're good defensively due to our perimeter D, not our nonexistent interior D. Furthermore, look what the big body of Mozgov did for the Cavs' defense last year. I expect Lopez would have a similar effect with us.

Body size is irrelevant. Amir and Sully are a better defensive frontcourt than Lopez and Young. Sully is a better defensive center than Brook. You're not alone in thinking that our team defense is all about the guards and ignoring how important Sully and Amir are, but you're still wrong.

2) Much older? We're already the youngest team in the league, how much younger do you want us to get? Young is only 27, and Lopez literally just turned 28. Sure, Sully is several years younger, but you'd rather add 3+ rookies to our roster when we already have three rookies that ride the bench and one that gets like eight minutes a game? Think before you speak.

Lopez is 28 going on 35. He's fragile. His career's expiration date is looming. Yes, I would rather add rookies with a lotto pick and a mid-1st than add Lopez. And I would also rather keep the improving 24-year-old center.

3) In what world will the Nets be better without Lopez and Young replaced by rookies, Sully, and Amir? Who scores for them?? Sure, their long-term prospects are better, but that's way down the line when we won't have their picks anymore. They're certainly a bottom-two team in the league the next two years after this trade. Again, think before you speak.

Instead of relying on one guy to score the Nets would score as a team, which will be easier because they'll have better interior defense and better rebounding. They'll also have a legit PG prospect now. Yay.

4) Sure, the rebounding is a fair point, but it's offset by the huge upgrade in talent and interior scoring, which you so happened to leave out.

"Talent" is overrated. Brook Lopez is fool's gold whose teams have consistently disappointed and sucked, even when he had much more "talent" surrounding him. Anyway, why do we need Brook's interior scoring? How much interior scoring do the Warriors or Cavs have? They're doing alright.

So, good job, good effort with this abysmal comment. It's definitely much better to just add three more rookies to hardly get any playing time or trade them for even further assets that we're going to hoard and not use. 

You have absolutely no idea how much playing time the rookies would get, because Ainge hasn't drafted them yet, so we have absolutely no idea who they'd be, how well they'd fit, or how ready they are. We do already know who Jared Sullinger and Amir Johnson are and how well they fit, though.

Yeah, I'm calling BS on every single thing you just said. It's all non-sense, confirmation bias-inspired rhetoric.

I especially enjoyed this little nugget: "Instead of relying on one guy to score the Nets would score as a team, which will be easier because they'll have better interior defense and better rebounding. They'll also have a legit PG prospect now. Yay." Hilarious! So taking away their top two scoring options (one a legit 20 point per game scorer) and replacing them with rookies, two other unproven players, a 7 ppg player, and an overweight 10 ppg player is going to make their offense better, huh? That's some good stuff right there!

[Csfan1984]

I'd trade Dallas pick and C's own pick as well most the teams 2016 second rounders(minus Philly one) for Young and Lopez. No Nets picks and no future picks. That is about it. Young and Lopez replace Sully and Zeller.

[GreenFaith1819]

I like Brook a lot, but he moves the needle marginally on our interior defense.

I'd be cautious about what we'd give up for him, TBH.

[alldaboston]

I'd trade Dallas pick and C's own pick as well most the teams 2016 second rounders(minus Philly one) for Young and Lopez. No Nets picks and no future picks. That is about it. Young and Lopez replace Sully and Zeller.

How much for just young?

[Dino Pitino]

I especially enjoyed this little nugget: "Instead of relying on one guy to score the Nets would score as a team, which will be easier because they'll have better interior defense and better rebounding. They'll also have a legit PG prospect now. Yay." Hilarious! So taking away their top two scoring options (one a legit 20 point per game scorer) and replacing them with rookies, two other unproven players, a 7 ppg player, and an overweight 10 ppg player is going to make their offense better, huh? That's some good stuff right there!

Fast breaks are easier offense than low post isos. There'd be more fast breaks. An unproven super-athletic PG would feast on them. Somebody every night would wind up scoring 20 or thereabouts. Maybe even that overweight schmuck who scored 20 the other night. But all that'd matter is if the Nets would win more games, which they would. Especially if they cashed in all the lovely assets you just handed them. I understand that your premise includes that the Celtics would have struck out on trades, but does your premise also prevent the Nets from using the mid-lotto pick, the mid-1st, Rozier, Young, and Amir to acquire a player more valuable than Lopez like that package is actually worth?

If you want the '17 and '18 Nets picks to be at least as good as this year's will be, then you want them to keep Lopez. If you want the Celtics defense to be at least as good as it is this year, then you want Sully and Amir to stay. If you want the Nets picks to become even better, then you don't give them the starting frontcourt of a great defense, you don't give them a host of assets so they can be more flexible in trades, and you don't take away their biggest injury risk. If you want the Celtics to be more successful, then you don't pay a premium to screw up team chemistry in order to downgrade on defense.

[jpotter33]

I especially enjoyed this little nugget: "Instead of relying on one guy to score the Nets would score as a team, which will be easier because they'll have better interior defense and better rebounding. They'll also have a legit PG prospect now. Yay." Hilarious! So taking away their top two scoring options (one a legit 20 point per game scorer) and replacing them with rookies, two other unproven players, a 7 ppg player, and an overweight 10 ppg player is going to make their offense better, huh? That's some good stuff right there!

Fast breaks are easier offense than low post isos. There'd be more fast breaks. An unproven super-athletic PG would feast on them. Somebody every night would wind up scoring 20 or thereabouts. Maybe even that overweight schmuck who scored 20 the other night. But all that'd matter is if the Nets would win more games, which they would. Especially if they cashed in all the lovely assets you just handed them. I understand that your premise includes that the Celtics would have struck out on trades, but does your premise also prevent the Nets from using the mid-lotto pick, the mid-1st, Rozier, Young, and Amir to acquire a player more valuable than Lopez like that package is actually worth?

If you want the '17 and '18 Nets picks to be at least as good as this year's will be, then you want them to keep Lopez. If you want the Celtics defense to be at least as good as it is this year, then you want Sully and Amir to stay. If you want the Nets picks to become even better, then you don't give them the starting frontcourt of a great defense, you don't give them a host of assets so they can be more flexible in trades, and you don't take away their biggest injury risk. If you want the Celtics to be more successful, then you don't pay a premium to screw up team chemistry in order to downgrade on defense.

I'm sorry, but you're so off-base that this is almost to the point of trolling. I see no benefit in substantially responding any further to this non-sense.

[LooseCannon]

I'm not convinced Lopez is significantly better than Johnson and he's a worse fit.

If the Nets actually want Sullinger, they should just try to overpay on an offer sheet, maybe $18-20m, and see if Ainge wants to match