Category Archives: Analytics

The Grizzlies are at something of a crossroads this offseason.  While the deals were seen as minor, in dealing Courtney Lee and Jeff Green for primarily draft pick considerations (Lance Stephenson was acquired to make the money work), it begged the question: are the Grizzlies planting the seeds to launch into a rebuild if the playoffs are not fruitful?

With that, what Grizzlies may be available this summer?

Free Agency:

Mike Conley: Regardless of what you think of Mike Conley, one thing is true: if the Nets believed Lionel Hollins was not the coach going forward, that he had a relationship with Conley was not a reason to keep him. It’s time for culture change in Brooklyn, and part of culture change is creating a culture where all players are appreciated, but also evaluated, scrutinized, and judged by management.  No player can be bigger than the franchise.  The Nets made those mistakes with Deron Williams.  And it’s time to stop making them.  Beyond that, Conley is the classic “simultaneously overrated and underrated” player.  On one hand, his strong impact defensively, managing the offense, and as a leader does not reflect itself statistically, leading to some underrating him by lazily citing counting stats.  On the other hand, his attackers breed counters, and overcompensation to make their points in opposition, which leads to some overrating.  What Conley is, is a very good, not great, point guard.  The worry: he’s about to get paid like a great point guard, and may sleep from very good to good, or perhaps above average, on his next contract.  Is that worth it for Brooklyn?

JayMychal Green: Green is a raw, undrafted power forward, so is perhaps similar to Chris McCullough.  However, that means he fits the profile of the type of piece the Nets need to pursue.  Green has had several recent productive games, and plays with energy and passion.  The Grizzlies are unlikely, however, to decline his $980,000 team option.

P.J. Hairston: Hairston is a second year player who the Hornets gave up on, and who the Grizzlies are giving a chance to prove he is an NBA player.  Hairston has talent.  He is also obtainable, as he does not figure to be a Memphis priority this summer.  As a young player who has not had much of a chance, and who may be eminently available, Hairston fits the profile of a Nets free agency target.

Matt Barnes: For a contender, Matt Barnes is the type of attitude and defense you want on your bench, in many ways.  During a rebuild, he is not the type of veteran you want around your young players.

Mario Chalmers: Chalmers is a decent role playing guard, marginally better than what the Nets already have at point guard, but not moving the needle.  The Nets simply do not need more fringe reserve guards.  In Chalmers’ case particularly, he is eight years into his career, and the Nets need to look at, outside of stars and legit starters, young players with potential upside, rather than known role players.  Those come closer to contention.

Vince Carter: Carter is extremely popular among Nets fans for obvious reasons. He was fantastic for the Nets during 2004-2009, and is still one of the league’s hugest names.  However, he offers little at this point, as a basketball player.  Carter could be a great veteran leader off the Nets bench, but beyond that, provides little value at this point.  The Grizzlies have a $4.3 million team option that seems smart to decline.

Lance Stephenson: Stephenson has talent, but he flamed out of Indiana, Charlotte, and Los Angeles, despite playing with and playing under some extremely strong leaders.  He is thriving early in Memphis, but will it last?  For a Nets team trying to teach young players a culture of hard work and character, Stephenson is a bad fit.  He is the type of talent you can try to import into an established culture and see if it works; not the type of talent you add when trying to build a culture from the ground up.  The Grizzlies have a $9.4 million team option.

Chris Andersen: Andersen has little left in his basketball tank.  And, like Stephenson, he is not the type of player you want to bring in when trying to develop a culture from the ground floor.

Trades:

Jarrett Jack for Brandan Wright: There is not much for the Nets to work with here.  However, if the Grizzlies do decide to retool or rebuild, they may not want Wright signed through 2018.  This feels unlikely because Wright is signed to a reasonable contract, but perhaps Memphis looks to ditch some long term payroll. This deal would have to occur in June so the Grizzlies could then decline Jack’s option for next year.

The Nets poached Sean Marks from the Spurs.  Will Marks poach any of his former players.  Here’s a look at the Spurs free agents and who the Nets could pursue.

Free Agency:

 Tim Duncan: Duncan is obviously not leaving San Antonio, but as I am listing all free agents on this site, he too is listed.  Duncan took a significant paycut for the Spurs to make room for other talent and has a $5.6 million player option for next year.  Regardless of how the Spurs take care of him, it is clear: Duncan will remain a Spur or retire.

Manu Ginobili: Ginobili like Duncan has an option for pennies relative to worth, at $2.9 million.  And, as with Duncan, he figures to stay with the Spurs or retire.

David West: West has a $1.6 million player option for next year.  He can clearly make more on the open market; he near famously took a drastic paycut from $12 million to $1.4 million to become a Spur in the first place.  So, with that, he may stay another season to continue competing for a championship.  However, perhaps he looks elsewhere to make more money.  If so, however, there is a balance: I would expect him to take a pay day from another contender, or at least a pseudo contender, but not from the Nets at this point in their rebuild.

Jonathan Simmons: As many Nets fans know, Simmons was a Nets summer leaguer who they cut, and who then thrived in San Antonio.  Part of that may reflect poor talent evaluation from the Nets’ previous regime, but part of it may speak to another issue.  Having talent is not just about acquiring talent, but developing it, and the Nets failed in this area.  Simmons exposes another former regime problem: the Nets could not fit him on their roster but fit Lionel Hollins’ son, Austin. That comes off as “it’s just Summer League, it means nothing, who cares about one roster spot.” For a team desperate for any assets it can cobble together, every asset and roster spot must be treated like gold going forward. The Spurs have an $875,000 team option to keep Simmons, and are likely to exercise it.

Boban Marjanovic: Boban clearly does not play much in San Antonio, but there is a chance that he can be a useful NBA big.  He’s well liked in NBA circles.  He plays within such a strong culture.  The Spurs have been vulnerable to losing pieces when those pieces have not been part of their core (think Tiago Splitter, Cory Joseph), and Boban may be a guy who can be pried.  He could be a low cost fourth big in Brooklyn. Should the Spurs wish to keep Boban, he will be a restricted free agent if they choose to extend a qualifying offer.

Boris Diaw: Diaw has been a huge part of the Spurs’ fabric during this more recent run.  The Spurs have a $7 million team option to retain him.  Whether they decide to, at that number, is unclear.  On one hand Boris is likely worth the salary on this market.  On the other, if the Spurs look to add another future nucleus player or two, there is only so much money to go around.  Still, if Diaw leaves the Spurs, he appears unlikely to go to a first building Brooklyn roster.

Andre Miller, Kevin Martin, Rasual Butler, and Matt Bonner: With these four pieces, there is but one theme:  older veterans who once produced more (albeit at various levels), but now are valuable for little more than veteran, high character locker room leadership.

Trades: There is nothing here for the Nets to work with, at this point.

Sean Marks has his work cut out for him this summer.  Through my “Nets Free Agency” series, I have looked at free agency options for the Nets, on a team by team basis.  There are 11 teams left: the Timberwolves, and then a look at the Southwest and Pacific Divisions.

With that, here is a look at the Timberwolves and their free agents (of which they have very few):

Free Agents:

Damjan Rudez: Rudez is in his second year, but is 29 years old – reminiscent of Mirza Teletovic in that he came to the NBA late.  However, he has only played just over one season’s worth of NBA games.  Rudez is not the prototypical piece the Nets need to bring in – they need stars, established rotation talent, and speculative youth, and he is none of those things.  However, in a limited sample, he has shown he can shoot the basketball, and you can never have too much shooting.  He is clearly not a core piece in Minnesota, and could be available this summer to take a look at on a small deal. The Wolves have a $1.2 million team option to keep Rudez.  On one hand, that is a tiny sum to keep him.  On the other, teams in recent years despite the cap jump have shown that once they decide you are not a part of the future, they are no longer willing to invest in you, even a little bit.

Tayshaun Prince: Prince offers nothing but veteran leadership at this point in his career.  He is a piece the Nets can gloss over this summer . . . unless he is only on board to be a teacher.  In that regard, if you think about how Prince was used in his prime, and how the Nets want to use Rondae Hollis-Jefferson, you can see the value of having a piece like Prince around.

Trades:

Nothing here makes sense for the Nets.  A Thaddeus Young-Ricky Rubio swap can be made to work financially, but the Wolves have Towns and Dieng up front going forward and Rubio is their only point guard – why does Minnesota do that?  As for a Lopez-Rubio swap, if your issue with Lopez is the win-loss record, all Rubio has done in his career, even with Kevin Love, is lose, and he cannot shot.  Aside from that, the Nets do not have the future assets to acquire middling assets like Shabazz Muhammad (unless Minnesota is willing to take a way into the future second rounder, which, why would they?), the Wolves bigtime young assets (like Towns and Wiggins) are not going anywhere, and their veterans aside from Rubio have next to no value.

Sean Marks’ roster planning in Brooklyn is faintly beginning to take shape.  Gone are Joe Johnson and Andrea Bargnani.  In are . . . well, Marks hasn’t hashed that part out yet.  But with only 13 players on the roster, and just 5 with guaranteed contracts in 2016-2017 — all of whom are tradeable should they be shopped — it is safe to say that no matter what Marks does, the roster will look different next year.

Here’s a look at roster building options for the Nets, from the Jazz and Nuggets in free agency this year:

Free Agency: 

Darrel Arthur: It’s clear that with Mudiay, Gallinari, Faried, Chandler, Barton, Nurkic, and Jokic all under contract, that Arthur is not a core piece in Denver.  With the TV money explosion, he may decline his $2.9 million player option for next year.  If he does, Arthur is still only 27.  He has shown he can play capable minutes off an NBA bench, and can defend both the interior and the perimeter.  His biggest struggle has been with his health.  Arthur is the type of low cost, no splash addition the Nets should look at this summer.

Trevor Booker: The loss of rotation players hurts, and that can be seen in Washington where the Wizards feel the loss of players like Trevor Booker.  Booker plays with a ton of energy off the bench.  Booker is a quality reserve big who can be a third or fourth big on a playoff team depending on the other components of the roster.  And with the Jazz clearly invested in Gobert, Favors, and Trey Lyles up front, you can only pay so many non stars, and Lyles may be up for grabs.

Jeff Withey: Withey is a fine reserve big. He plays hard, stays ready, and, critically, was a huge component of keeping the Jazz afloat this year when Gobert went down.  He may seek a bigger role in the offseason, but he is a piece the Nets should take a had look at. Utah may be priced out of the Withey market.

Joffrey Lauvergne: Lauvergne is a fine young big in Denver, thriving as a late second rounder (and showing why you don’t discard second round picks in deals).  However, the Nuggets have a $1.7 million team option to retain him, which they are nearly certain to exercise.

JaKarr Sampson: Sampson was recently added by the Nuggets when the Sixers waived him to facilitate the Donatas Motiejunas trade, and who the Sixers could not recover after the deal was rescinded.  Clearly, if you’re the 15th man on a team like Philly, how good are you?  Sampson has no real NBA skill and the Nets should look elsewhere in their roster building.

DJ Augustin: Augustin has essentially vacillated during his 8 year NBA career between competent reserve point guard and journeyman third string guard.  The Nets clearly need upgraded play at the point, but in the way of a starter, or an upper class reserve. Is Augustin helping any more than Donald Sloan? The Thunder just traded him because he lost his reserve role to Cameron Payne.

Shelvin Mack: Your prototypical end of bench guard.  Mack really struggled in limited minutes in Atlanta before being shipped to Utah, where, for some reason, some feel he can boost a playoff run.  The Nets can comfortably pass here.

Christapher Johnson: Johnson is a fringe relatively young player who has bounced around for several years trying to stick.  The Nets do need to look at speculative youth in free agency, but their looks are better spent on undrafted free agents, and players first starting their journeys, rather than guys who have bounced around several years, such that we know what they are.

Mike Miller: Miller is nothing but a veteran bench presence in Denver.  He has nothing left in the tank and could retire this summer.

Trades: 

Nothing really significant here.  The Jazz and Nuggets, like the Nets, are stronger up front with needs at guard (aside from Mudiay and perhaps Exum), which does not lend itself to deals.

The Brooklyn Nets are on pace to go 22-60 in 2015-2016.  Given the talent level, that, sadly, sounds right.  Most projections for the Nets fell in the 20-30 win range, and that was before Jarrett Jack got hurt, and Joe Johnson showed that his decline has furthered.

It is without dispute that the goal in Brooklyn should be to take these Nets from 21 wins, to a product that can consistently compete for 45-55, or even 55+, wins per season.  It is also without dispute, to anyone who reviews the NBA market, that only 3 players on the current roster have anything more than marginal trade value — Rondae Hollis-Jefferson, Brook Lopez, and Thaddeus Young – and that nobody believes the Nets should be looking to trade the first of that trio.

So the tempting question for Sean Marks as he begins his tenure becomes: should the Nets deal Lopez, on a $20 million per year contract, or Young, on a $12.5 million per year contract.

That conversation, necessarily, starts with a judgment of what Lopez and Young are.  The NBA, if you think about where players sit in its hierarchy, has multiple classes of player.  You have superstars, who essentially guarantee that they will drag your team to W’s: there are very few of those.  You have stars, players who are not quite superstars, but are certifiable great players, and will play a huge part of a team winning games.  I like Lopez and Young, in the interest of full disclosure, but they do not fit within this class of NBA player, and there is no argument to the contrary here.  Lopez and Young are not great players.  That is the simple truth.

From there, you have many, many more players.  There are players competing to make NBA rosters.  There are players who definitely belong on rosters, but are not rotation players.  There are fringe rotation players, who would qualify for some rotations, but not for others.  Then you have clear rotation players, and then you have sixth men who excel as the prime piece off a bench: Lopez and Young are better than that (Young has started the majority of his career, and has been an important piece on multiple playoff teams: narratives to the contrary are lazy).

Above your rotation players and sixth men, you have your good players, for lack of a better word: solid NBA starters, and “fourth” or “fifth” starters, who may vacillate between situational starters around 4 clearly better players, due to fit, or fit on a bench.  Lopez and Young?  They’re good NBA players.  And if you look at the key players on playoff teams, placing them there is certainly warranted.  For context, DeMar DeRozan, Jonas Valanciunas, Al Horford, Jeff Teague, Dwyane Wade, Hassan Whiteside (possibly), Pau Gasol, decrepit Derrick Rose, Monta Ellis, George Hill, Tobias Harris, Victor Oladipo, Avery Bradley, and Jae Crowder are arguably the second and third best players on the east’s non Cleveland playoff teams.  You can certainly argue that Lopez can be the second or third best player on a playoff team (he was the best player on a playoff team last year!) depending on who else is on the roster, with Young as the fourth or fifth piece (or perhaps third, but that is likely a reach).

You might wonder.  “Can they really be that good if the Nets are a losing team?”  But just because a team is losing, does not mean all its players are not good.  Has Carmelo Anthony as a Knick vacillated from decent, to great, to mediocre, to terrible, because his team has?  Are Greg Monroe and Giannis Antetokounmpo bad players?  Is Damian Lillard average?  Is Anthony Davis not a star? Brandon Knight?  Danilo Gallinari?  These are all good or better players, players who clearly can be part of a winner with the right group around them, but just do not have that, at the moment. And just because their teams are losing, or pedestrian, does not mean that their teams would be no worse off without their salaries: replace these players with players who are worse, and their teams would win less games.  Replace Lopez and Young with nobody, or with players who are worse, and the 14-40 first half would be closer to 9-45, or 5-49.

It also should be noted that if you want to allege that Lopez and Young are overpaid at $20 and $12.5 million annually, respectively, you need to study the free agent market with the context of an increasing cap. Contracts, first off, must be valued as a percentage of the cap, not a dollar figure, simply because the cap began rising significantly due to the new TV deal.  That makes contracts given out in 2015 and beyond incomparable with contracts given out in 2014 and prior to then.  The salary cap in 2016 jumps from approximately $67-$90 million, at least, and then to $108 million in 2017 – that’s a near 62% increase from 2014, and that absolutely changes what players should make.  Take a look at a representative sampling of the 2015 free agency market:

-Contracts in the $5-6 million range: Alexis Ajinca, Derrick Williams, Mirza Teletovic, Brandan Wright

-$6-7 Million Range: Patrick Beverley (whose team tried to relegate him to the bench), and Marco Belinelli, Ed Davis, and Aron Baynes (all clear career reserves, although Beverley may be able to start if you have superstars around him, as a fifth starter perhaps; still, the Rockets acquired Ty Lawson because Beverly was not the answer at point guard)

-$7-8 Million Range: Lou Williams, Cory Joseph, and Al Farouq Aminu (a career reserve, and two young players only starting to become rotation players prior to the new contract)

-$8-$9 Million Range: Arron Afflalo and Kosta Koufos (Afflalo has struggled sticking with teams and has been mildly disappointing, Koufos is a career backup center)

-$11-$13.5 Million Range, players getting what Young is getting: Monta Ellis, Amir Johnson, Omer Asik, Tyson Chandler, Khris Middleton.  – it can’t be said that Young does not stack up well with this group, r at least in its conversation, especially given Chandler’s regression.  Simply put, players of this caliber, more or less, are worth these salaries, unless you just want to sit out free agency.

-$15-18 Million Range: DeMarre Carroll, Tobias Harris, Reggie Jackson, Greg Monroe, Wesley Matthews, Enes Kanter, Goran Dragic (who is struggling this year).  Given these deals at this threshold, how much merit to the idea of Lopez as overpaid is there?  Some of these pieces may be better than Lopez, but most are not, and they make just a bit less.

-$20 Million: DeAndre Jordan – a third piece on a contender.

It is true that, often, it is smart for a rebuilding franchise to trade players of Lopez’s and Young’s caliber – and players listed above who may be of their caliber – for future considerations.  That way, you can launch a sincere, deliberate rebuild, through the draft.

Alas, this is why the Nets CAN’T trade Lopez and Young, absent being blown away with an offer – the Nets cannot rebuild through the draft!  The following is the current draft pick situation in Brooklyn:

-2016 and 2018: no picks at all, in either round

-2017: a first rounder subject to Boston’s right to swap (and Boston, if they keep this up, will ensure that this pick falls in the 20’s); a second rounder IF Boston swaps first rounders with Brooklyn, but then the second only conveys if it falls between 46-60.  So, essentially, the Nets will have a late first, and late second, in all likelihood in 2017

-2019: a first rounder

-2020: a first rounder

-2021: the Nets finally have their full complement of picks

The short, critical translation of the above is as follows: the Nets have one non lottery

first over the next three drafts, and perhaps one second rounder in the 46-60 range.  That’s it.  With them in the lottery in the east?  The Sixers have multiple young players with upside and a full complement of picks.  Nearly everyone in the lottery has young players in house with more upside than any young (under 25) Net, and their full complement of picks in house.  The Knicks are the exception, given they do not have a 2016 first, but already have Melo and Kristaps in house.

With the dramatic dearth of picks, and lottery picks, the Nets have, they simply cannot decide to rebuild through the draft.  A rebuild through free agency?  That is always wrought with difficulties, as getting free agents to play for you, no matter how hard you try, is simply difficult.  But rebuilding through the draft with one non lottery pick over the next 3 years, RHJ, and Bojan Bogdanovic (no offense to any of these players), when your lottery bound competition features two teams over .500, Melo and Porzingis, Wall and Beal, Giannis MCW Jabari and Monroe, and Noel Embiid Saric and a 2016 top 5 pick on the horizon?  That is suicide.  You cannot keep up with those teams in the draft with those types of deficits: you have to take another course.

Of course, the counter to this by some is, “just replenish the draft pick deficit by dealing Lopez and Young.”  In no uncertain terms, good luck with that.  Thaddeus Young was traded in 2014 (forget the KG deal; the Wolves were hell bent on bringing KG back given his meaning to the franchise, so that was an out of context deal in all respects), and Young likely has value at a similar level now as he did in 2014.  The return in 2014?  A lottery protected pick unlikely to convey for 3 years, Alexey Shved, and Luc Richard Mbah a Moute.  The market for Lopez?  While he nearly netted Reggie Jackson, the Thunder backed off the deal.  Lopez is a good player, but a team would be taking on his contract, and, yes, his injury history.  Lopez is not a star, and a team is not going to deal a lottery pick for his services: that just does not make sense.  For context, look at the trades made at the deadline.  In the Jackson/Enes Kanter trade the first rounder traded by the Thunder was lottery protected until 2018: an asset like that is a possibility for Lopez.  In the Isaiah Thomas deal, the first dealt was a Cavs pick protected top 10 through 2018, and thus unlikely to convey until 2019 given LeBron’s presence in Ohio.

Is Lopez worth much more, in a deal, than protected first rounders of that nature?  It does not appear that this is the case.  So, suppose that is what the Nets fetch for Lopez and Young: two mid first rounders, and perhaps a fringe rotation player or 2 – not unreasonable returns, both for the opposing teams and the Nets.  That leaves the Nets with the current roster, minus its best two players – the Nets without Lopez and Young would be embarrassingly bad.  As for replenishing their picks – their lottery picks the next three years are gone, and the Nets would have three mid to late firsts over the next year, plus perhaps an additional young reserve on the roster and a fringe rotation player.

Translation?  Trade Lopez and Young, and the Nets are most likely looking at a historically bad roster (particularly if the seemingly inevitably Joe Johnson buyout comes), and no lottery picks to escape the abyss.  Imagine having a young rookie with a fractured ankle, with offensive limitations, as your only pseudo known rotation player, and no lottery picks over the next 3 drafts?  That would be the Nets if they traded Lopez and Young to rebuild – the Sixers, minus the big name prospects and upcoming lottery picks.  The Nets also would take whatever limited appeal the current roster has in free agency, and destroy it (the roster only has little appeal: nobody is saying this is LeBron James on South Beach.  But that limited appeal would become a zero).

And while deals may open cap space, what does cap space do for you with nothing on your roster: free agency has persistently shown since 2010 that name talent goes where it can win; the Knicks and particularly the Lakers have done nothing significant with substantial cap space in recent seasons because they headed into free agency without any players already in place. The Nets have $44 million or so in cap space with Lopez and Young in place – they do not need more space than that to add legitimate talent, and weakening their talent base to open more space when they already have plenty of space is counterintuitive: cap space is the one thing the Nets actually do have.  Perhaps the Nets could then sell free agents on “here’s a blank canvas, make your roster,” but what free agent has ever defected to a team on that premise, given the volatility of teams’ plans.  That is simply something that has never happened.

Having players in place is what intrigues players and that requires the Nets – and all franchises seeking gold in free agency — to walk a balance between space, and talent in house.  Right now, the balance is too far in the cap space direction, and not far enough in the talent in house direction.  Why further skew the balance?

Again, the current roster is anything but a free agent magnet.  But at least with Lopez and Young entrenched in the 4-5 spots, and RHJ as a known rotation wing, there is at least a chance of free agents looking at the roster, and seeing the outlines of a team that can compete.  A good team?  Of course not. But you can see the outlines, however faint.  You can perhaps imagine, as a guard, coming in and being a significant upgrade, and having talented frontcourt players to play with.  And then, as Brooklyn, you hope that upgrades take you from 21 wins, to maybe 30-40 wins (unless you hit a home run).  Then, in 2017, you try to step from 30-40 wins, to 40-50 wins, or maybe even the 50 win range (although that likely could not come that quickly.  Those building blocks and steps will be much harder to make if the Nets revert backwards, by dealing away the only good players they have for modest future considerations.

The typical cliché in NBA circles is that if you are bad, that means you must rebuild.  Rebuilding is popular, and often seen as the safe route.  Collect assets! Do it the “right” way!  But here’s the rub: there is no cardinal rule for building an NBA team.  All situations require individualistic review pertinent to the particular circumstances.  And the circumstances here do not warrant a rebuild.

Is relying on Lopez and Young being in house, and trying to add to that core, the world’s best plan?  By no means: not even close.  But it is simply the best plan available to the Nets, given the current asset situation.  The Nets HAVE to add to this roster over the next two-three years by free agency, there is no other viable option.  While their sales pitch is not exactly Brad selling me this pen right here in Wolf of Wall Street, to destroy the one basketball related pitch they have with the pick situation as it is nothing but a death march for the organization.

            There is one caveat to everything I have said in this piece.  I am never averse to the Nets trading anyone on the roster, no matter how good, at the right price.  The Phoenix Suns were willing to give up a vaunted asset last trade deadline in the Lakers’ 2016 pick, only top 3 protected, for Brandon Knight.  If a team is willing to do THAT for Brook Lopez, then, by all means: thanks Brook for all you have done here, but have fun at your next stop.  However, the flip side to my willingness to trade any player for the right price, is my staunch unwillingness to trade any player for the wrong price.  In all likelihood, the price Lopez and Young will demand, given the Nets’ asset situation, will not justify dealing either.

The Nets need to take a step back and realize where they are.  If they had their full arsenal of future draft picks, or close, perhaps a Lopez or Young deal, to go young in a full and complete sense, would be smart, but it simply does not make sense under the current asset circumstances.  The Nets went 17-13 last season after acquiring Young, by surrounding Lopez and Young with average point guard play in Deron Williams (as opposed to the poor play of this year – many including myself do not like Deron, but facts are facts), average wing play in Joe Johnson (whose taken a noticeable step back) and Bojan Bogdanovic (who has failed to replicate his success of last year’s second half), and a pretty deep bench of rotation pieces: rotation pieces matter, and the Nets replacing so many of them with fringe NBA talent has clearly affected the roster.

The hope in Brooklyn has to be that, over time, they can surround Lopez and Young, instead, with better and more athletic perimeter players than they did during last year’s 17-13 run.

It’s the only choice they have.