Brooklyn's Beat

The Nets face one of the biggest offseasons in their recent history in 2017.  Sean Marks must move the needle for the Nets insofar as the rebuild is concerned (not in the win column, necessarily) by accruing assets or a base of players from which to attract free agents in future years. 

The next phase of their offseason outlook brings me to the Chicago Bulls roster: what pieces can the Nets extract from Chicago’s pool of players and assets this summer?

The Bulls were 41-41 this year, and despite a great playoff start, they flamed out of the first round once Rajon Rondo went down.  After a season of Jimmy Butler trade rumors and rumored Dwyane Wade angst, drama is high in Chicago.  To complicate matters further, this Bulls front office has often placed making a splash or winning the headline over sustainable team building.  The Hoiberg hire to change the offense, then signing Rondo and Wade despite their not fitting in his offense (but they’re big names!) highlighted that.

The first domino for the Bulls is Jimmy Butler. Since he is not free until 2019, the Bulls dealing him rather than using their flexibility to surround him would be ill advised. I believe the Bulls will reach the same conclusion.  From there, the Bulls are faced with trying to upgrade despite Rondo and Wade’s gigantic holds on their cap and Mirotic’s restricted free agency. If all three stay the Bulls will largely be stuck in neutral.

So how does that all relate to the Nets?

For starters, do not expect the Bulls top quartet of Butler, Rondo, Wade, or Robin Lopez to become Nets.  If the Bulls actully deal Butler, they will look for either a trove of picks the Nets lack, or win now pieces better than Brook Lopez and Jeremy Lin. Wade will either take the money on his player option, or leave to win more.  Rondo is almost certain to be back after the Bulls looked downright good with him healthy in the playoffs, and pathetic when he went down; the Bulls have a team option.  Robin is under contract, and a trade to Brooklyn makes little sense.  The Bulls will likely look to win next year and will likely keep Robin around to help them do that, as he is useful at the 5.

Nikola Mirotic could and should be a piece to consider for the Nets. They need a stretch 4, and he is only 26. It can be easy to forget that he was a viable component of the 2015 team that was a LeBron turnaround 3 from going up 3-1 on the Cavs. He also started late in the year for these playoff bound Bulls.  Signing Mirotic would be a gamble that a good fit in Brooklyn on paper – a stretch 4 in a motion offense – would thrive here. A model for success, while he is a better player, would be Ryan Anderson, who looks much better as a Rocket than Pelican because he fits much better. 

Mirotic is phenomenally streaky, however, was downright bad this year before March, and while his rim protection is underrated his defense overall leaves something to be desired.  
Still, Mirotic may represent the rare obtainable restricted free agent.  The Bulls weird management group turns hard on players when it turns, and it turned on Mirotic, going from trying to make Thibodeau play him more to making him an afterthought, despite Hoiberg eventually starting him.  He may be obtainable at a reasonable figure.  The Bulls, if Wade stays especially, may worry that if they keep him next to Wade, Rondo, and Lopez, that they will largely be locked into the same roster as this past season. 
Beyond Mirotic, the Nets should target Cristiano Felicio, who has thrived in Chicago as a rim running center who plays solid defense. A huge asset to a motion offense is a rim protecting big that allows you to go small at your other positions, and who can finish inside. Felicio can be that guy, and given he is unheralded, he may come at a reasonable figure. The Nets, in deciding what players to add, need to assess who out there may balk on keeping a piece. Last summer, Marks gambled that the Blazers wouldn’t want a near record setting payroll full of pieces like Crabbe, Turner, Aminu, and Harkles. He also gambled that keeping Wade would price the Heat out of keeping Tyler Johnson. Both gambles did not work out – but they were reasonable in foresight and represented a sound strategy regardless of the result.

The Bulls have a similar situation brewing, with Mirotic and Felicio. If the Bulls keep Butler, Lopez, Rondo, Wade, Mirotic, and Felicio, then that is largely it for them. They would be capped out with that core. After last season, they cannot possibly want that – right.  They have to desire flexibility to add a bigger fish that fits next to Butler. 

Trying to add one or both of Mirotic and Felicio is worth the Nets’ effort. 

Beyond Mirotic and Felicio, there is the draft. 

From there comes the draft. The Bulls have the 16th and 38th picks in the coming draft. The Nets should test the waters here on Jeremy Lin: would the Bulls take Lin and the 27 in exchange for the 16? That is something the Nets would have to strongly consider at the least: they need assets and better young talent.  Lopez is worth testing the waters on as well, although the Bulls already have his brother, and moving to the 16 from 27 would not be fair value. 

Lin could be a useful piece to the Bulls after they cratered with Rondo out. Their win now effort can certainly use higher quality point guard play. The Bulls likely seek a bigger fish to appease Butler, but the formula for the Nets in moving up in the draft is to target teams with higher picks and win now desires. The Bulls are likely one such team. 

The rest of the Bulls pieces make little sense for the Nets. 

As much as Anthony Morrow brings back fond memories, his defense makes him unplayable, and the Nets need developmental pieces, not veterans. He lacks the experience to be much of a mentor, although his status as an undrafted who stuck could be useful to the Nets fringe pieces. 

Michael Carter-Williams’ plight has been depressing since his rookie year, and it seems he has passed the point of being redeemable. 

Bulls management just overpaid to acquire Cameron Payne and spun it as a quality move despite the early results. They will not dump him now before seeing what he is. 

Denzel Valentine was terrible as a rookie despite shooting better late in the year. He is only worth adding if the Bulls give him away; they will not. 

Joffrey Lauvergne can shoot, but does next to nothing else. The Thunder needed shooting desperately and still did not hesitate to deal him this year, which is telling. Isaiah Canaan, similarly, is worthless.

Finally,  Jerami Grant, Bobby Portis and Paul Zipser have played their way into or near the Bulls core, and are under contract at tiny figures that help the Bulls retain flexibility in their roster building. 

All told, the Bulls will likely look to upgrade around Butler this summer. The Nets should see if Mirotic, Felicio, and the Bulls’s picks are available as the Bulls look to win now and chase grander options.

Strategic. Systematic. Patient. Not skipping steps along the way.

These are the sorts of phrases that Sean Marks has properly echoed during his now over 14 month tenure as General Manager of the Brooklyn Nets.  Marks has been very clear in that he will not abandon his plan for instant gratification.  As he told Mikhail Prokhorov when he took the job: if you want another quick fix, I am not your guy.

That message should encourage Nets fans. To date, Marks has said and done the right things, as GM.  His 2016 draft, adding Caris LeVert and Isaiah Whitehead despite only having the 55th pick the morning of, was excellent.  Spencer Dinwiddie developed this year, as did Quincy Acy. Kenny Atkinson’s modern motion offense is the perfect fit for a playoff team — just watch the Boston Celtics’ playoff success. The Bogdanovic trade when compared to the Lou Williams trade of a similar vein extracted good value.

However, one caveat — as with any GM in a rebuild — must be noted.  The easy part of a rebuild is the teardown.  The hard part is converting from asset acquisition into player acquisition, by acquiring the correct players.  Remember: Rob Hennigan was lauded for the Dwight trade and his early Magic tenure.  Ultimately, when he tackled the player acquisition phase, he became a disaster. This caveat and cautionary tale are NOT to say Marks will suffer a similar fate, but is only to say that the hard part of Marks’ job lies ahead, not behind him.

To clarify, the Nets still are in their rebuilding phase. However, now standing just one year from being relatively pick debt free, and having traded every obvious veteran on hand for assets that they had (Brook Lopez is a much less obvious case), harder questions now cross Marks’ desk.

I. How good were the 2016-2017 Nets? Was the 11-13 run after the break a sign of things to come?

The most important thing for a team to assess is its place relative to other teams, or on the arc of contention. This is the case because, depending on your level, the same moves may make sense for you that do not make sense for others, and vice versa.

The “Boston trade” is a great example. The trade was a bust because the Nets killed their future for a 44-38 team. However, if the Los Angeles Clippers, sitting at 55 ish wins with Chris Paul, Blake Griffin, and DeAndre Jordan in tow, made such a trade, the trade would have been a defensible gamble for a title.  A more obvious case is the Cleveland Cavaliers dealing a first round pick in 2018 to acquire Channing Frye, or dealing Andrew Wiggins for Kevin Love.  Such trades would be disastrous for the Nets, or shortsighted for a middling franchise like the Hornets. However, for a Cavs team with a title ready LeBron James, such trades made all the sense in the world.

The same applies to free agency. If a rebuilding team pays Tristan Thompson $16 million that kills other options without making them competitive. But for Cleveland, the contract made sense because they could not replace him without cap space and are a contender.

So what were the 2016-17 Nets? It is easy to say the Nets were 20-62, and stop there, or give full credit to their 11-13 run after the break and finish there.  Both approaches are flawed.

First, while I was unable to locate the article, I recall a John Hollinger (his ESPN work was incredible and inspirational) finding in a column, to the affect that team records before the all star break are more indicative of playoff potential than post break play, despite the idea of “turning it on after the break.”  The premise makes sense.  In November and December, all 30 teams play to win each night.  That makes results more representative of how good teams are.  End of season results are less representative. Good teams, with standings leads, coast and rest more. Inferior teams tank, which skews results further.

Given that, it is true that the Nets’ improved play with Lin cannot be ignored – Lin indisputably makes Brooklyn better.  However, the Nets success after the all star break must be taken, in part, with a grain of salt.  Their 3-9 record with Lin before the break is a small sample, but comes from more representative game play, and only projects to 21 wins.  The Nets did play 34 win ball in Lin’s 24 post break games, but their schedule was watered down, given late season tanking, quitting, and coasting.  Sure, the Nets 21 win pace with Lin in the first half is skewed, negatively, by the fact that Caris LeVert was not yet in the lineup, and multiple young players improved over the course of the year.  However, the skew of non playoff caliber starters is not worth 13 games.

Balancing all of these factors, the Nets are likely something like a 25-30 win team (30 toward the very high, all goes right end) as presently constituted — something better than their record, but not quite what their second half would indicate standing alone.

II. If the Nets are a 25-30 win team, what comes next? The playoffs? Not so fast.

Since 2007, 27 teams have won 20-25 games in a season (prorated to 16-20 wins for the lockout shortened 2012 season).  Of those 27 teams, only four of them made the playoffs the following season: the 2008 and 2015 Celtics, the 2010 Thunder, and the 2014 Hornets.  The Thunder pulled this off because they drafted James Harden, and Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook developed exponentially. The 2008 Celtics pulled this off by trading a hoard of assets for prime Kevin Garnett.  The 2015 Celtics pulled this off because Isaiah Thomas unexpectedly became a star (they were 20-32 when they traded for him that year, and 20-12 afterward.

The only franchise that pulled this off, therefore, without acquiring a star, was the 2014 Hornets, which did so by short circuiting a rebuild in choosing to pay Al Jefferson and other veterans.  The result?  Over the past four years, the Hornets have alternated between first round exits and the lottery; they are stuck on the mediocrity treadmill.  They reside on the treadmill with a bloated cap sheet, no real avenues to improve significantly, and Kemba Walker’s looming free agency.

Given the Nets’ lack of assets, the likelihood they acquire a star this summer is virtually nil.  The worst thing they can do would be to seek out win now moves on the basis of their strong second half, and become the Hornets.  If the Nets do that, then in 2019, the mantra will be “we will be able to rebuild when (players signed in 2017) expire”!

III. If the Nets decide to employ a win now approach, bad things will happen. 

The harsh reality for the Nets going forward: cap space, even if you hit on players, does not get you far unless you nail superstars. Signing non stars can help average teams take the leap to good, but cannot, and will not, bring a bad team to that level. The Nets would be wise to avoid the high end of the market for this reason.

Just check the market, and remember that the cap is projected to be $8 million higher in 2017-18 than it was in 2016-17 (providing for higher salaries). Player contracts are downright scary.

The following players received $25-30 million last summer, annually: Drummond, Horford, DeRozan, Beal, and Batum.  All are good, but is any a “best” player on a contender? DeRozan comes closest, but the Raptors to date are not quite contenders, and he is arguably Lowry’s second in command.

Stepping one level down, the following players received $20-25 million last summer: Whiteside, Wade, Dwight, Parsons, and Harrison Barnes.  All but Whiteside and Barnes are hilariously overpaid for their current production and do not move the needle.  Whiteside is good, but certainly not a franchise player.  Barnes is nothing close to a franchise piece, and hurt the Warriors last year.

From there, the pickings slim, but the salaries budge only a little.  The following players received $16-20 million deals: Bazemore, Anderson, Biyombo, Turner, Fournier, Mahinmi, and Deng.  Bazemore disappointed, floating in and out of the core in Atlanta, and is now overpaid. Anderson is a one trick pony who worked out because he plays with a MVP caliber player in a system perfectly tailored to him; he would not help a team otherwise.  Biyombo’s 2016 postseason did not translate into 2016-17.  Fournier was solid, but unspectacular.  The Turner, Deng, and Mahinmi signings were disasters.  None of these players are needle movers, but all will take him 15-20% of future caps for teams.

From there, the list of free agents delves into pure role players.  If you spend under $16 million on a player, you are not getting anything more than a 5th starter, and more likely a reserve.  The following players are being paid in the $6-$15 million range by virtue of last summer: JR Smith, Gasol, Clarkson, M. Williams, Lee, Afflalo, M. Leonard, Joe Johnson, Rivers, Ezeli Delly, Henderson, Arthur, Boban, Al Jefferson, Mirza, E. Moore, M. Barnes, Dudley, Bayless.  Other than “winner” discounts taken by Gasol and Joe Johnson, none of these players move the needle (and even those players are guys who can help a good team get a little better, but not franchise turners).  JR Smith is purely a role player, as are Marvin Williams and Courtney Lee.  Jordan Clarkson is solid but unspectacular, and being a second rounder in restricted free agency hurt his figure.  Al Jefferson, Austin Rivers, Mirza Teletovic, E’Twaun Moore, and the rest — what are you really getting.

The list of 2017 NBA free agents is here.  The Nets may as well forget about Durant, Curry, Griffin, Hayward, and Paul. Working from the rest of the list, the Nets could regret spending big in free agency.

For starters, consider what they can add.  In 2017, the Nets, assuming a $102 million cap, have $38.9 million in cap room, $36.9 if you assume they draft in their three current places and stash the 22nd pick.  That figure does not account for any of their six players on team options: Dinwiddie, Kilpatrick, Harris, Acy, McDaniels, and Goodwin.

With the numbers and list in hand, even a rosy, homer like view of free agency would not work out long term. Let’s assume — recklessly given his market value and the Nets’ status at 20-62, that George Hill agrees to a 4 year, $90 million deal to run point guard in Brooklyn, and make Lin an off guard slash supersub as he was in a Charlotte (putting Hill squarely between $20-$25 million annually).  To keep things simple and avoid future book clogging, let’s assume the deal contains no raises: $22.5 million is his annual number.  Now, your Nets are at $14.4 million in space, with 4 roster spots to fill.  Sean Marks said the Nets need a small forward, so let’s assume the Nets add someone like James Johnson or Robert Covington, for $8 million annually over three years (again without raises — you are not getting Gallinari at this price point of $14 per).  Both are ambitious values, particularly Covington. From there, rather than sign a bench piece for $6.4 million, let’s assume round out the roster by picking the options they have on Dinwiddie, Goodwin, and either McDaniels or Kilpatrick.

Is a Lopez-RHJ-Johnson/Covington-Levert-Hill-Lin-Booker-Whitehead-Dinwidde-picks rotation solid, compared to 2016-2017? Sure!  But be honest.  Is that roster winning a playoff series in the east, when you stack it up against the Cavs, Raptors, Wizards, and Celtics?  Or the Bucks instead of the Raptors, given their potential rise under Giannis?  Probably not. At best, this Nets team would be fun to watch, put fans in the seats, and be a scrappy round one out.

That is fine, you may say. That sure beats 60 losses!  And the Nets can just finish the team building in 2018.  However, that is where things would get complicated — the moves in 2017 affect your team building abilities in 2018.

The Nets would hit the 2018 free agent market with $50.4 million in cap space, but with Lopez and Lin as free agents.  One approach can be to deal Lopez or let him walk, but if you sign Hill to force Lopez to walk, what did you really accomplish?  You can also let Lin walk but that would be a blow, a blow not made up for unless you add a bigtime star free agent (which is unlikely – and the Nets would still only have $25 million or so to spend; that gets you Chandler Parsons or Harrison Barnes on this market).  Let’s assume the Nets resigned both players at $35 million per combined — again, an overly rosy figure unlikely to come to be because their market values are higher.  The Nets would have just $15 million in space to build the roster.  Perhaps they could add someone like a Wilson Chandler, again an optimistic find, but is he getting them into the meat of a conference that includes LeBron, Giannis, a Boston team with our lottery picks, Wall’s Wizards, and perhaps still these Raptors? That feels unlikely.

From there, in 2019, the Nets would have Lopez, Hill, Lin, Chandler, and Johnson locked into about $80 million of a $100-$105 million cap.  The Nets would also lose the luxury of their cheap youth with pieces like LeVert and RHJ approaching their extension years, so the cap would further bloat just to keep the band together.  Even assuming no decline during 2018-2021 from pieces like Lopez, Hill, Lin, and Chandler, an assumption that is again overly optimistic given their ages, the viability of that core as a contender would be at very best, highly questionable. But Marks would be locked into it.

Given the above, the problem created by an aggressive spending strategy, as outlined above, is simple. The Nets would win more in the short term, sure. But in the long term, they would saddle their roster with pricey veterans that make them at very best good, but not great — and perhaps only makes them above average.  In 2019, fans would say “we can win when Hill and the others expire” – avoid that fate NOW, by not signing these types of players. And keep in mind that the assumptions above of players the Nets recruit and see no decline from are almost reckless in their optimism.

You can perform this exercise substituting players like Millsap, Porter and KCP, and Lowry, in and out as you wish. The results would be similar to the above.

With that, the Nets 2017 summer should NOT be one of huge spending.  Rather, the Nets should explore two paths depending on what the draft pick market bears for Lopez and Lin.  Want to avoid tanking?  Find value in bargain contracts for young players currently not being featured on other teams, like Joe Ingles.  Sign veterans who may produce but be undervalued for various reasons, like Milos Teodosic.  Mix that with dealing non needle movers like Trevor Booker to grow the cupboard.  Use this summer NOT to saddle your cap going forward, but to improve your base. And if you get to the 37 win level at one point, THEN look to the free agent market to supplement your base — when you are ready.

If that does not work, or if the market for your players is strong, then restock. Look to acquire draft picks, move up in the draft, and see what Lopez and Lin can do to restock your cupboard. That is also an appropriate option.

What the Nets cannot do, however, is try to get it all back right now with a signing of a big name to a huge contract. 

As Marks loves to say, he needs to be strategic and systematic, and cannot skip steps along the way. Signing big name free agents right now would amount to just that.

As the Nets gear up for a significant offseason, they must look under every rock for talent. That requires an analysis of every roster in the league, and what opportunities may present themselves for improvement. 

Now, it is time to take a look at the Charlotte Hornets: how can the Nets take advantage of their situation to improve?

In short, the Hornets may be in “win now” mode this summer, and that offers the Nets a chance to take advantage. The Hornets, after intense losing in 2012 and 2013, have been reluctant to rebuild since.  Some smaller markets believe that they cannot rebuild, and must remain competitive or pseudo competitive in order to turn a profit. 

Spending brought the Hornets to 43 wins in 2013-2014, and the Hornets won 33 and 48 games the next two years. However, after benefitting a year ago from talent under market value, the Hornets plummeted to 36-46 due to various defections, including Jeremy Lin.

That puts the Hornets in a precarious position. They sit at 36-46 with no cap space to make upgrades. While they own the 11th pick in the draft, a player at that threshold is unlikely to improve the team in the immediate term. A rebuild would make sense, but the Hornets appear to have no interest in that under Michael Jordan’s ownership, particularly after 2012 and 2013 caused financial struggles and was, frankly, hard to watch. In addition, the Hornets picked up Rich Cho’s option for 2017-2018, which makes him a lame duck with a possible win now mandate.

When you combine the Hornets apparent desire to win now, their lack of money to spend, and the unlikely ability of the Draft’s 11th pick to make an immediate impact inthe win column, the Hornets situation is ripe for draft picks or contracts to be traded. 

Simply put, the Hornets (right or wrong) apparently want to win now, and the easiest way to boost that effort is to use their draft pick and future assets to upgrade the roster through trades. Teams in win now mode often make reckless decisions to satisfy those interests; the Hornets could be that team this summer. 

Kemba is free in 2019, and could develop wandering eye if the Hornets do not start winning. That is yet another undercurrent militating toward a win now move. 

This offers the Nets various opportunities to try to scour future assets. Remember: the Hornets traded the 22 pick for Marco Belinelli last year to upgrade in the short term. 

There is reason to believe the 11th pick is in play, and the Nets should seriously pursue the pick (I am presupposing that the Hornets pick 11, given they have the 11th worst record; they will likely pick close).

Cody Zeller and Frank Kaminsky are solid up front. But Brook Lopez is better. Do the Hornets deal the 11th pick as the prime compensation to secure Lopez? The Nets would have to consider that. Would the Hornets trade Cody Zeller, Marco Belinelli, and their pick for Lopez? They could sell Lopez’s ability to start around Kemba and Batum. Belinelli expires after 2018, so the Nets would not sacrifice much flexibility. If the Nets did not want Zeller’s contract, he is movable, and they could find a third team. If they did want him, he is a good player who thrived in 2016-2017. 

Trading the 11 pick and Zeller for Lopez is likely too much value. If the Hornets wanted the 22 pick, that levels the scales some, and the move would still be one the Nets should strongly consider. 

The Nets can consider similar trades involving Marvin Williams, who Kenny Atkinson worked with in Atlanta. They could also try to get Frank Kaminsky tossed into a deal but he thrived in the second half, which would make things more diffficult. 

The Nets could even try to get the 11th pick from the Hornets another way: trading Jeremy Lin. Lin was huge for the Hornets in 2016, and the Hornets could easily sell his return as a win now stroke. Would Lin land the 11 pick if the Nets took back Belinelli, and threw the 22 pick on the table? What about a Belinelli Sessions, or Belinelli Lamb package, to accomplish the 11 spot move up the ranks. The Lamb addition would require the Nets to eat some post 2018 money, but the Nets again would have to consider such a package.

If Lin’s signing causes the Nets to move up 11 spots this draft, and they find a comparable point guard this summer, is that not a huge win for the franchise? 

Finally, as to trades of both Brook and Lin, the Nets should target the Hornets’ picks in 2019. If the Hornets see Brook or Lin as a serious upgrade, two picks could be on the table because of their desperate state. 

There are other options the Nets may consider here. Kemba and Batum are going nowhere, but perhaps the Hornets do not value Kidd-Gilchrist, and the Nets can trade Lopez for him, all while moving up and swiping the Hornets’ lottery pick. That makes little sense for Charlotte, but desperate teams in win now mode often do things that make little sense.

Miles Plumlee’s dead money is intriguing, but at 12.5 million per through 20, he may make too much to absorb. At some point, too much dead money is a bad thing; cap space will eventually matter in Brooklyn. The Nets would need multiple firsts from the Hornets to take Plumlee on and that is likely not on the table.

There are other options here that could be on the table. Maybe the Hornets think a Booker-Belinelli swap benefits them, and would be willing to dump their second round pick (at place 41) to make it happen. Or maybe a Booker-Ramon Sessions swap could lead to that. 

For that matter, given the Hornets financial crunch BEFORE adding talent, maybe the Hornets would sell the 41st pick to the Nets for cash, or swap the Nets’ 57 pick for the 41st pick as a financial saver. The Nets need every asset they can get and this would help.

Another sneaky add to look at is Johnny O’Bryant. He impressed as a reserve big late in the year, and the Hornets gave him a non guaranteed deal. If the Nets provide the Hornets the talent upgrade they seek, the Hornets may be willing to throw him into a package to get the deal done. Christian Wood also put up big D-League numbers, if the Hornets let him go.

All told, if the Nets want to make a big offseason move, Charlotte is a place to look.

Have Cleveland second in 2018 not theirs. Otherwise stocked. 

With the Nets marching towards a significant offseason, it is now the time to start thinking about who across the league they can get their hands on over the summer.  While some Nets will surely be back and the Nets sincerely want to develop their players, when you are 12-54, the need for talent upgrades is paramount.  The Nets will look to add pieces.

That brings me to the Knicks, and who from across the river may be available.  In Knick like fashion, they sit in a peculiar position. On one hand, there are murmurs that they finally seem to acknowledge a need to rebuild, and will have Porzingis, next year’s top 10 pick, and Hernangomez in house to start that process.  That may lead to a full blown commitment to youth, and a Melo trade. On the other hand, the logistics of dealing Melo given his no trade clause and large salary are difficult, and if Melo sticks around, the Knicks may hedge between rebuilding and winning now.  Lastly, the Knicks appear to be back to evaluating players based on the triangle, which should mean even more personnel change.

So, can the Nets benefit from that change?  For now, it is hard to say, because the direction the Knicks choose this summer is anyone’s guess. A sincere rebuild around Porzingis, another win now like summer, or a hedge between the two (the most likely scenario) are all in the cards.

As for the Nets, for starters, do not expect to see Melo, Rose, Noah, or Lee in a Brooklyn uniform.  Melo will only waive his no trade clause to go to a winner, and the Knicks would want more assets than the Nets can send them.  Rose is a shoot first point guard who, since his knee injuries, has been exposed for his inability to run an offense, and for, frankly, being a ball hog.  There is no place for that in Brooklyn’s motion offense. He also went AWOL on his team (which was 17-20 at the time and has gone 10-21 since), which makes him an awful culture fit on top of being a bad basketball fit.  Noah’s contract is too large an albatross to take on.  And Lee, as a solid shooting, bigger guard, is a nice fit on the Knicks going forward, almost regardless of the direction they assume.

In addition, Porzingis and Hernangomez are going nowhere.

However, depending on what the Knicks do this summer, there are other options for Brooklyn.  Lance Thomas has been a dud for the Knicks, and, if they try to score big on the free agent market, they may see if someone will take on draft compensation in exchange for parking his contract there.  Thomas essentially has only two years on his deal, as his 2019-2020 salary is not guaranteed, so there are worse pills to swallow, although the pick would have to come in 2018 or beyond.  The Knicks under Phil Jackson have been judicious as to not dealing their first rounders, so perhaps they would not bite on dumping Thomas in this fashion.  However, there may be something here.

Kyle O’Quinn may be seen in similar fashion, but unlike Thomas, he has produced this year, and the Knicks are unlikely to part with him unless they receive assets in exchange.  That makes little sense for the Nets to engage in.  Similarly, Mindaugas Kuzminskas would require the Nets to trade assets, and he has had an underwhelming rookie year. I would pass. Lastly as to the “no goes,” Sasha Vujacic makes next to no sense for any role other than as a veteran leader.

Justin Holiday is a piece the Nets can look at. He is already 27, so there may not be any untapped potential there, but he is a high energy wing who competes hard on both ends, brings a lot of energy to the table, and shoots the 3 well.  He may be worth a look this summer.

From there, the Knicks have Ron Baker, Maurice N’Dour, and Chasson Randle at the bottom of their roster.  Baker and N’Dour may have some upside, but do not appear to be upgrades over pieces like Harris and Acy already in house. Randle is a piece the Nets passed over multiple times this year as he was available, and is not an upgrade over Whitehead or Dinwiddie.

As for the draft, the Knicks do have two picks in the second round: Chicago’s and Houston’s.  There is no harm in the Nets seeing what the price point of those picks is, and trying to buy into additional second round stock.

On an ESPN podcast, Brian Windhorst, in a conversation devoted to the Utah Jazz, referenced the Brooklyn Nets having potential interest in George Hill.  Windhorst did not rely on a source telling him the Nets were interested in Hill, but referenced what NBA executives, of other teams have been discussing with regard to the Nets.

Over on Netsdaily.com, Net Income transcribed portions of Windhorst’s conversation on the podcast in this regard.  As Windhorst stated, unnamed NBA executives essentially believe that the Nets may make a huge offer to Hill because he changed agents as, after Allen Crabbe and Tyler Johnson switched agent representation to the same agency, the Nets made bloated offers (totaling $125 million) to them.

As a point of emphasis, my commentary on Windhorst’s comments arises from my logic, as I do not have any source related to these issues.  I am simply analyzing Windhorst’s comments using my own knowledge as a NBA observer.

First, it should be emphasized: the basis for the belief that the Nets may target George Hill is that other teams’ GM’s believe they may.  I would not read much into that.  By definition, the GM’s of other teams do not know what the Nets are doing.  By the same token, the Nets do not know what the Lakers are doing, the Lakers do not know what the Bulls are doing, and the Bulls do not know what the Hawks are doing.  By definition, that is the entire idea: the NBA’s teams are in direct competition and are not telling each other what they are doing.  Accordingly, I would not believe that the Nets are interested in George Hill because other teams’ executives have speculated to Windhorst in that regard.

Second, the basis these GM’s have for believing that the Nets may want Hill is rather odd. The GM’s are not hearing through backchannels that the Nets want Hill.  They are not pointing to prior moves, or discussing the Nets plan as they see it.  Rather, they believe essentially, that the Nets sought to add Crabbe and Johnson after they retained a particular agent, that Hill retained this agent, and that this will cause the Nets to drive Hill’s price up — as they did with Crabbe and Johnson — by making him a similarly hefty offer.  The unnamed team executives come off as believing that the Nets are both targeting this agent’s players, and actively trying to drive prices up for other teams.

That theory is, in short, odd.  One reality of the NBA business, sure, is that teams do favors for agents all the time.  This is a people business, and surely there is a good amount of “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine” going on.  But it is one thing to, if you are the Cavs, for example, sign a 12th man who is represented by Rich Paul (LeBron’s agent) instead of a similar 12th man of another agent, to keep Paul happy.  That is a tiny move, and the favor may outweigh any small difference in such lowly regarded players. It is quite another matter, however, to commit $125 million to two players, just to make an agent happy.  Those are dramatic commitments that a team is not going to make unless they believe in the players at issue.  It is much more likely that the Nets figured “we like these guys, and with Wade and Dragic in Miami, and Lillard and McCollum in Portland, Miami and Portland may balk at these offer sheets.

Accordingly, it is a stretch to believe that the Nets were looking to serve an agent’s interests through these deals, rather than their own.  An equal stretch, from these unnamed executives, is their assumption that the offers to Crabbe and Johnson portend a hefty offer to Hill.  Since Marks has been hired, he has, by all accounts, dumped Joe Johnson, traded Thaddeus Young for a first rounder, traded Bojan Bogdanovic for a first rounder in a deal where he ate bad money just to get the pick, and sought two first round picks for Brook Lopez.  In addition, Marks preserved cap space to take bad money on this year, rather than spend through his coffers last summer. Those moves plainly come across as a GM looking to rebuild, not a GM looking to win games in the present.

Sure, Crabbe and Johnson were offered large salaries.  They are also 24 year olds, whom Marks sought to pay for their age 24-28 seasons.  By contrast, when faced with paying Bojan through his age 28 through 32 seasons, Marks sent him packing for cost controlled youth.

Simply put, NOTHING about Marks’ plan, in dumping veterans for picks and kids, is indicative of a GM planning to make a major offer to Hill for his age 31-35 seasons.  Hill is six years older than Crabbe and Johnson — seven if you include this past year (since the signing would be one year later).  Absolutely nothing about trying to secure the pre-prime, under 25 Crabbe and Johnson portends a desire to secure a post-prime, over 31 George Hill.

This begs the question: why do opposing GM’s see the moves as interrelated?  The answer appears simple: never underestimate the ability of the NBA’s 30 franchises, given how competitive they are, to be petty, vindictive, and angry at other teams.

Sometimes, teams get angry over big events, like when Dan Gilbert flipped out about CP3 to the Lakers.  But sometimes, teams become bitter over moves that do not even register on fans’ radar, like when several NBA executives were incensed that the Heat bought out Beno Udrih to escape the luxury tax in 2016.

The unnamed GM’s Windhorst references speaking with: it feels like they harbor resentment toward Brooklyn over their offers to Crabbe and Johnson.  By offering them so much money, the Nets obviously caused Miami and Portland to shell out a ton to match, but also drove the price for other guards up, and teams are certainly aware of that over the long term.  Other agents in the coming summers will say “I want $80 million, my guy is better than Crabbe,” or “my guy has done more than Johnson did so $60 million better be on the table.”  One can foresee a GM bitter at the Nets, saying “they do not have a shot at winning for years, and all they did is drive up our prices just to do these guys a favor. They must want to price us out of the market when they are relevant in two years. And maybe they think (this agency) will just give them a player.”

The reality of the matter, of course, is the Nets did nothing wrong trying to pry Crabbe and Johnson. When a player (like them) is one year from restricted free agency, the team can avoid the process entirely, if the team is willing to give the player an extension by the prior Halloween.  The Warriors did this with Klay Thompson, for example.  Another way to avoid restricted free agency without an extension, in a way, is, when July 1 hits, telling your player you want him back and resigning him before other teams become involved, as the Pistons did with Drummond last summer.

If you do not act proactively, then you leave your restricted free agent in a spot where he has to test the market, and get an offer sheet from someone else.  If you do that, you cannot be bitter, or angry, when “someone else” makes the player an offer, and attempts to pry the player from you. You had every opportunity to avoid that scenario and CHOSE not to.  Really, when Mickey Arison proclaimed that “you’re not poaching any of my guys,” it was nothing but grandstanding.  In reality, the Heat could have locked Johnson up way before the Nets got involved; they chose not to, and they chose to let him find an offer sheet elsewhere.

The Nets, in simply trying to add players, did nothing wrong here.

Alas, bitterness over the Nets’ hefty offers seems to be exactly what these unnamed GM’s who spoke with Windhorst are referencing, in their belief that the Nets will now try to make a big offer to Hill.  Really, in what other prism does this make sense?  Under Marks’ plan of adding young talent under 25, it makes no sense.  Under the premise of large offers to 24 year olds, an offer to a 31 year old makes no sense.  Patting an agent’s back to do a favor through $125 million in contractual commitments? That makes no sense either.  However, a narrative that the Nets are trying to screw others’ teams by driving up prices, and will do the same with Hill?  When you frame the unnamed executives’ comments that way, they have some logic to them.

Essentially, you just get the feeling that these unnamed GM’s are bitter at the Nets for driving the market up when they are condemned to their losing state, and making things harder on other teams.  And it seems like they worked backwards from there, to craft this narrative that the Nets are committed to spending their time offering as much money as possibleclients of Crabbe and Johnson’s agent.

Unnamed GM’s essentially believe that the Nets’ large offers to Crabbe and Johnson portend a large offer to George Hill.  But once you take those beliefs apart, they make little if any sense.