Brooklyn's Beat

Sunday, January 10, 2016, will be remembered as a significant day in Brooklyn Nets history: the Nets fired Lionel Hollins, and reassigned Billy King (which is typically a euphemism for fired).

To touch on Billy and Lionel’s tenures, while you can argue reasons for which neither deserved to be fired, there are, at a minimum, things they both did that cast doubt on their abilities to be a part of a consistent contender in Brooklyn.

The history of both only need be touched on briefly. For his part, Billy indisputably made multiple win now moves that backfired, in epic fashion. And while Mikhail Prokhorov and Dmitry Razumov’s overarching plans gave Billy a bad hand, he still negotiated poorly, and played that hand poorly.

For Lionel’s part, the problem with him is not sitting on the bench during games, or becoming exasperated with the media, but two simple issues: offensive and defensive schemes. Lionel’s offense was stunningly unimaginative. In an era where teams are taking a ton of threes, and moving the ball as much as possible, the Nets are isolating and setting up long 2’s. And his pick and roll and other coverages have often been questionable, and the Nets have seen nary a bump on the defensive end of the court despite his reputation being that of a defensive minded coach.

Alas, the Nets’ problems start at the top of the organization.  Prokhorov’s commitment to spending money exists, but being an owner is about way more than a willingness to spend.  Prokhorov demanded that the Nets win in Brooklyn, immediately.  That led to trades — as it has for many franchises through the course of NBA history — that were suboptimal, from an asset perspective, at best.

Even worse, Prokhorov has, bluntly, put building the Brooklyn brand above building a basketball team under the strictures of the CBA. He admitted that the Boston trade was made for brand building, not basketball, purposes.  Think about that: teams have placed a high priority on the draft since the new CBA came to be in late 2011 because, in light of the brutal luxury tax, and difficulty of prying opposing free agents due to the ability to pay more to an incumbent, and the Nets, in that climate, traded three draft picks without basketball being the basis for the move.

When you look at the moves made after the Boston move — the Nets stopped spending, even though by dealing their draft considerations for win now pieces, their only hope of winning was to continue spending on said win now players to bridge the gap to 2016 when they could turn things over — that only amplifies what Prokhorov confirmed about the trade being brand based. The Nets, clearly, just were not thinking about basketball when they made that, or many other, moves, but about ticket and merchandise sales.

It gets worse.  Just last year, CEO Brett Yormark did an interview wherein he basically said that it is a priority for the Nets to time their success around Knicks’ failures in an effort to grab market share.  Once again, think about that.  The NBA has a CBA of several hundred pages, guiding every move you make.  Every team as a result has a particular circumstance they are in, and should make moves based on that particular circumstance. Yet, the Nets have prioritized making efforts to win when it looks like the Knicks may not.

But then again, how do you make moves based upon your asset and basketball situation, rather than your ticket sale and business situation, when your CEO in Yormark, a figure who runs the business side of the operation, interviews basically on a weekly basis regarding free agency plans, John Calipari, and how he wishes for the ship to turn around.

The Golden State Warriors have former player agent Bob Myers, an attorney who played college basketball, and former NBA great Jerry West, at the controls. The Brooklyn Nets have Brett Yormark asking the Nets to sync wins with Knick losses. Think about that a little.

Combine all this with the incessant need ownership has to make transactions for the purpose of making a splash or creating buzz rather than to build a basketball team, and you do not guarantee the Nets’ current plight, but you sew the seeds for the potential of this.  It is VERY DIFFICULT to build a consistent winner in the NBA, even if you do everything right. You need good luck and fortune. You need some of the unexpected to happen, as far as the development of some players goes.

But that difficulty is only magnified when you start making decisions with the wrong factors and reasons in mind.  Success comes at the perfect intersection of luck, planning, and preparation, and while the Nets may not be at fault for their sufferings with that first factor, they have woefully failed with the second and third.  So many Nets decisions have not come from a place of “what is best for us in building a winner.” Rather, decisions, good or bad, have come from other places.  Let’s trade for Gerald Wallace and fire our athletic trainer to make Deron Williams happy. Let’s trade three picks to Boston to make a splash and generate buzz.  Let’s hire Jason Kidd because of what he did as a Nets player. Let’s hire Hollins, for that matter, because Kidd embarrassed us, so we need to hire a big name to rebound.

Such moves have led to criticism regarding the direction of the team. One minute Lionel is the face. The next he’s on the outs. One minute Billy is hiring his people to fill the front office, and the next the Nets are scouring GM candidates on the down low. Brook Lopez is shopped at the deadline, and then he is, if not THE piece to build around, a significant one. It all begs the question of whether there is a plan, even generally.

So, sure, Billy and Lionel do not have jobs anymore. They did not succeed, despite any mitigating circumstances, and that failure is on them. And sure, there are better candidates out there, which justifies some excitement.

But unless Prokhorov (and Razumov) change their ownership styles, and show that they have learned from the failures they have experienced in their first 5.5 years of ownership, as the saying goes, history repeats itself.

The Nets are not hopeless by virtue of their franchise name.  All 120 or so professional franchises, in the four major sports, can build consistent winners, if they find the right mix of luck, planning, and preparation.  Just right now, the Warriors, Cavaliers Clippers, all historical laughingstocks, are elite (or in the Clippers case, at least near elite) teams, while historically dominant franchises like the Lakers and Celtics are not close to that level.

Still, history does repeat itself.  And unless Prokhorov shows sincere changes in his ownership style, it will repeat in Brooklyn, and Nets fans will be as angry with Billy and Lionel’s replacements as they are right now with Billy and Lionel.

With that, here’s a sift through some options the Nets have, and some do’s and dont’s as they contemplate their next step.

Don’t: Hire a Big Name, or “Experienced Coach,” to generate buzz, “relevance,” or “credibility”

If the Nets hire a big name who is currently unemployed, just to have a fancy pressure and put themselves back in the paper, it will show that they intend to act just as they have the last 5.5 years. The whole reason the Nets are in this mess is because of their sugar rush philosophy: make a hire or sign a player in a manner that makes a splash, gets the media talking, generates a few website hits, and maybe generates some ticket and merchandise sales.  Then, when those hires do not work, where are they?

There is absolutely no reason for a single Nets move to be made with marketing or sales interests in mind. What the Nets seem to fail to realize is that these short term measures they seek, only have short term impact. But then, they have long term fall out. As the saying goes, if it were easy, everyone would do it. The Nets need to accept that becoming “relevant,” and generating a consistent fan appreciation and following, is not easy, and requires them to consistently win, year in and year out. Sugar rush related moves do not accomplish that.

Do: Hire The Antithesis of Lionel Hollins, and disregard experience as a factor in selecting a coach

There are issues with Lionel as a head coach, which issues were exposed in his Nets’ tenure.  His offensive philosophy was dated, exhibiting a lack of focus on the three ball, advanced metrics and statistics as they relate to lineup combinations, and an understanding that, in the modern game, a big is way more effective in the pick and roll and off the move than in isolation style post ups.  They also understand that the league’s greatest weapon after a paint shot, is the corner 3, and construct their offenses accordingly.  Wonder why the Nets faked and drove so often from 3? Why they took so many long 2’s, in the belief they were good shots? Why they isolated so often? Look no further.  Lionel’s defense similarly disregarded the 3 as the weapon it has become, and was also not modern — so many great defensive coaches in today’s game are great not because they are strict, but because they understand that metrics tell us that the worst shots on the court are long and mid range 2’s, and they defend accordingly, to make those shots the desired looks.   The Nets were at times borderline astonishing in how often they rotated off 3 point shooters, particularly from the corner.

The Nets disregarded these issues in hiring Hollins, and were sold on his experience.  Here is the problem: as this excellent column states, statistics from 1996-2013 show that first time coaches are more likely to improve their teams during their tenures than are retreads with “experience”. The column does not have statistics from 2013-2014 on, but given the success of Steve Kerr and David Blatt as first time head coaches, among Mike Budenholzer and others (indeed, it is ironic so many feel experience is a critical quality in a hire, when two first time NBA coaches just squared off in the finals), the gap here may have grown.

The Nets just struggled in part (of course not in total) because their coach did not apply modern principles, despite his experience.  His grating style also did not sit well with his players, who as a unit did not improve under it (indeed, this is another myth, coaches do not need to yell and scream and get angry to see results. Kerr, and Frank Vogel, by example, are extremely calm, but extremely successful: it is not a coaches job to badger a player into giving effort, and if he needs to do that, you have already lost the battle).

So what is the point of hiring someone similar, if Lionel was fired because he was a problem.  What is the point of hiring Tom Thibodeau? What is the point of hiring, in particular, Mark Jackson, whose heavy iso post offense, and combativeness with ownership, were huge problems in Golden State (please do not credit him for the Warriors’ title, when Kerr got that title by scrapping Jackson’s offense and defense, as the Warriors plateaud in Jackson’s last two years). What is the point of hiring Jeff Van Gundy, when the sales pitch would be identical to the one given for Hollins 18 months ago?

The Nets should go in a different direction — that would be a GREAT thing, and would show that there is hope for a real change in how they operate.  Hire the antithesis of Hollins as your coach.  An extremely young, first time coach.  An assistant, who has not coached before, but who believes in advanced statistics, applies them in his coaching philosophies, and seeks to play an open, spread the floor style, surrounding Lopez with four ball handlers who can largely dribble, pass, and shoot.  And, then, who seeks to construct a defense that is designed to stop those 2010’s offensive principles.

You’ll hear the backlash from the fanbase if the Nets go this route, but, again, the Nets have brought themselves to their current place by making moves to satisfy fans, and avoid such backlash. When you’re in a hole, step 1 is to stop digging.

And, simply, look at the successful coaching situations around the league.  Popovich, Kerr/Walton, Vogel, Spoelstra, Budenholzer, Stevens.  Hornacek is struggling now, but did extremely well before the Suns began nuking the roster, as a first time coach. Mike Malone was thriving before Sacramento pulled the rug from under him, as a first time coach. The Grizzlies did not miss a beat in replacing Hollins with Joerger, a first time coach (until aging this year).  The jury is out on Kidd, but he gave the Nets their best season in Brooklyn as an obvious first time coach. Donovan and Hoiberg after slow starts may be righting their ships as first time coaches. And while three coaches stand out in their success right now as having prior experience — Rivers, Carlisle, and Stotts — Rivers and Carlisle similarly thrived in their first ever coaching stops.

So for those saying the Nets need to hire a coach with NBA experience because that’s what veteran teams, or teams needing results, must do: just check the metrics on that. Your opinions do not withstand scrutiny.

Lastly, as for the suddenly popular option out there, we saw John Calipari crash and burn at the NBA level.  There is no evidence he has developed NBA coaching chops.  And if you’re hiring a coach not to coach but to be a recruiter, you’ve already lost half the battle — especially when recruiting college kids to a college campus and NBA adult players to an NBA team when other franchises actually offer comparable or better things are completely incomparable experiences. It’s one thing to get a 17 year old boy to want to live in a college town with a great athletic facility, instead of a lesser facility and lesser program. There is a reason so many college coaches failed in the NBA — Calipari included. The world is different. Imagine running Jim Boeheim’s 2-3 zone in the NBA?

As for the GM search, the Nets should do the same thing as with their head coaching position. Hire a young, quant based GM, who very much believes in patience, advanced metrics, and the idea of building a team around multiple players who can dribble, pass, and shoot.  Balance that with someone who has the ability to negotiate with others, and work well with others (a la Bob Myers).

I will never say things are completely hopeless with the Nets. But that is only the case because I will never say that about any franchise. Maybe the Nets, in hiring 2 analytics people in the past month, truly will go about a necessary change.  But with names like Chris Mullin, John Calipari, Patrick Ewing because it would dig at the Knicks, and other flashy names being bandied about, it appears the fans are just spinning their wheels. And with how bad ownership has made things, any presumption should be struck against them: they are presumed to be doing wrong, unless they show us they will do right.

So, even if you do not like Billy King and Lionel Hollins, nothing will change unless the ownership directives that brought about their hires and their failures start changing.

As the Brooklyn Nets continue their 2015-2016 season, I continue my look at free agents around the league, team by team, to evaluate who the Nets could be interested in.  The series continues with a look at the Pistons and Bucks, which will conclude my look at the Atlantic and Central Divisions

#

Free Agents

Andre Drummond: Drummond is a free agent in name only.  He is a restricted free agent who chose not to sign a preseason extension.  Detroit is building around him and will not decline to match an offer.  The Nets surely can place a call to his representation and with a talent of his level, they had better.  But the likelihood he leaves Detroit is remote.

Brandon Jennings: Jennings is an unrestricted free agent, and the Pistons gave Reggie Jackson $80 million to play his position.  He could be on the move.  And the Nets obviously need a point guard: Jennings is a clear upgrade over Jack and Larkin and the Nets will likely express some interest.  Still, it must be noted.  Jennings is extremely popular in a manner that exceeds his production.  He has never shot 42% in a season. The Bucks were clear winners when dealing him away, the Pistons ready to cast him away.  He’s a bottom tier starter at this point.  But he is worth a look if he is affordable.

Ersan Ilyasova: The Pistons have a team option to retain Ilyasova, who has fit well next to Andre Drummond, and Stan Van Gundy has stated his intent to keep him around.  If he chooses not to keep Ilyasova, he is unlikely to be a target, as he plays Thaddeus Young’s position and is going to command $10-$15 million per season when he hits the market.

Jerryd Bayless: Bayless is a solid piece the Nets can look at to fill their guard rotation.  He’s shooting 43% from 3. As the Bucks have dealt with ups and downs from MCW, he has been reliable in relief, and spot starting on occasion.  And given he is a career reserve at this point, he may have reasonable salary demands.  Can Lionel Hollins and Bayless move past this?

Johnny O’Bryant:  O’Bryant is a second round pick from 2014, who plays hard, plays with purpose, and has snuck his way into the back end of Jason Kidd’s rotation.  With just a $980,000 team option for 2016-2017, I expected the Bucks to keep him.  If they do not, he can be an intriguing fourth or fifth big in Brooklyn, should the Nets want him.

Miles Plumlee:  Plumlee’s value has plummeted in Milwaukee; he is barely playing, and the Bucks made him available, according to ESPN, in trades.  Still, Plumlee is a young piece.  Development is not linear, and he started 79 games in 2014 for a 48 win Suns team.  He is an intriguing buy low candidate for Brooklyn. While he is a prospective restricted free agent, the Bucks may renounce him given their current stance on looking at deals.  Even if they do not, he is a player they may balk on matching on.

OJ Mayo: Mayo is never a player that has impressed me.  He’s shooting 39% this season, and finds himself distinctly behind multiple players in the Bucks’ hierarchy.  I think they’ll let him walk, and for good reason.  I do not see him as someone the Nets should be interested in.  He’s been around the block now with several teams and is yet to show he is a true NBA starter.  And if the Nets keep Hollins, the relationship there is poor.

Greivis Vasquez: Vasquez has been a disappointment in Milwaukee.  He was a very useful reserve guard for Toronto the past two years, but is struggling mightily this year.  Jason Kidd wanted the big guard and dealt a 2017 first for him, so he may decide to hold onto him.  He makes $6.6 million, and may command that figure again this summer.  For a clear reserve, I do not believe he is worth it.

Damien Inglis: There could be traction for the Nets to look at here.  Inglis is a forward who can play the 3 and 4.  While he has not done anything as a second rounder in Milwaukee, there are some who like his potential.  The Bucks have a $980,000 team option and, given how small it is and the fact Inglis has upside, they should exercise it.  If they do not, the Nets may look into offering him a back end roster spot.

Anthony Tolliver: Tolliver is a decent role playing reserve at the 4, but the Nets should look elsewhere.  Tolliver is at best average defensively, and his best skill – shooting the basketball – isn’t that great of a strength, as he is a 35.6% three point shooter and 41% shooter overall, for his career, with similar or worse numbers the past two seasons.  Tolliver could be a fringe rotation player in Brooklyn but is certainly no priority.

Steve Blake: Blake is a heady backup guard, but is on the decline, and is shooting under 40% (low) and approximately 33% from 3 (relatively low) on the year.  The Nets also had him, as he came in the RHJ deal, but quickly dumped him for Quincy Miller, who did not even make the team.  That is indicative of the Nets’ opinion of his services.

Darrun Hilliard: A second rounder, Hilliard has shown nothing early in his career.  The Pistons have an $875,000 team option to retain him and I suspect they will permit him a second developmental year at such a low figure.  A young swingman, at a spot where the Nets have need, perhaps they express interest in the event Detroit lets him go.

Chris Copeland: Copeland never lived up to the contract he received after his breakout 2012-2013 in New York, and has not recovered from a stabbing which occurred in April, 2015.  Copeland is likely not a player the Nets will show any interest in.

Spencer Dinwiddie: Dinwiddie was a popular second round pick, but is barely getting playing time in Detroit, and is struggling shooting the ball, particularly from 3.  The Nets have enough fringe youth on the roster that Dinwiddie should not be a priority.  The Pistons do have a $980,000 team option to retain him.

Joel Anthony: Anthony is essentially finished as an NBA player.  The Pistons have a $2.5 million team option they really should decline. The Heat traded draft picks just to dump Anthony in 2014.  He is truly not rosterable at this point.

Trades: You would be hard pressed to find one that makes sense between the Nets and these two teams.

With the new year here, it’s officially the year of the Nets having cap space to spend on importing talent, for the first time since 2011.   On this site, we have looked around the league at free agents, and who the Nets may be able to pry. Today, we take a look at two teams’ free agents: the Bulls and Pacers. We also look at trade options between the Nets and

Free Agents

Pau Gasol: Gasol is a hall of famer, and is still a fantastic big in Chicago. He has a $7.8 million player option, and there is no way he should exercise that. He likes Chicago and may exercise it, or resign long term. I expect Gasol to stay in Chicago. If he should leave, Pau has been with mostly great or very good teams since 2008, and I do not expect him to migrate to Brooklyn to join a team hopefully on the rise, but clearly not at title caliber level at the moment.

Joakim Noah: Noah was the heart and soul of the Tom Thibodeau Bulls, but these are not those Bulls. Noah is coming off the bench in Chicago, playing under 25 minutes a night.  He is not the same athlete he was when he ripped hearts out of Net fans’ sockets during the 2013 playoffs. He still has value, and can help a contender. Chicago has flexibility to keep him, and may indeed do so, but he may look elsewhere now that the Chicago he knew has changed. Any team can use Noah, but Lopez is entrenched at center and the Nets should focus their resources elsewhere.

Ian Mahinmi: Mahinmi has evolved into a nice rim protector who can finish near the basket in Indiana.  He is poised to get a decent payday this summer, however, and not likely to wish to revert back to a reserve role.  The Nets will likely look to spend at another position, but Mahinmi is a nice big man for a playoff team right now.

Aaron Brooks: Brooks is a decent reserve guard, and has been productive as a Bull. He is an unrestricted free agent. I expect the Bulls to look to keep him, but nothing is every certain, particularly with reserves. And if the Bulls look to trade Derrick Rose, there could be many changes in store in Chicago, which often leads to the dispersing of role pieces like Brooks. The Nets have reserve caliber guards in house, but if Shane Larkin leaves with a payday, he could be a cheap replacement.

Jordan Hill: Hill is essentially a third or fourth big on a good team, depending on whether the team plays big or small.  He could be a useful add for the Nets, particularly if he has reasonable salary demands, given the way he has bounced around the league.

Solomon Hill: Hill is a nice defensive wing, and it was surprising when the Pacers did not pickup his small team option for next year.  Still, perhaps that should be a sign.  Hill in his third season still has little in the way of an offensive game, and is struggling to see playing time.  On the other hand, however, the Pacers’ commitment to their new small ball attack was served by adding numerous quality wings which made Hill a numbers crunch victim.  The Nets are weak at the wing, and Hill has little power to command a big salary number — there could be a match here.

Kirk Hinrich: Hinrich is a catchy name because he has been around for a long time.  He is declining, however, and is not who he was when the Nets lost to the Bulls in the 2013 playoffs. Hinrich can fill a role as a pest of a defender, and hard nosed player, the ilk of which you tend to see on playoff teams.  Hinrich is worth a look on a short, tiny contract if the Bulls move on.

E’Twaun Moore: Moore is a fringe rotation guard.  He has showed some ability to score, but has never consistently earned NBA minutes.  The Nets likely will show little interest in his services next summer.

Glenn Robinson, III: Robinson barely plays in Indiana, but there may be something here. He is averaging 14.4 points on 52% shooting per 36 minutes, and the Nets do need better guard play. He may be worth a look on a minimum deal as an end of the bench young player. The Pacers may exercise their team option of a touch over $1 million, but with players this far down the roster, that is never a guarantee.

Chase Budinger: Budinger is a wing with a reputation for doing little, other than shooting the 3 (which he is not even doing well this year), and, frankly, getting hurt. There is little to see here, in essentially a lesser version of Wayne Ellington.

Cameron Bairstow: The Bulls have an $980,000 team option on Bairstow’s contract. He never gets minutes, and will be fighting to stay in the NBA next summer. I do not expect the Nets to be looking to bring him aboard.

Cristiano Felicio: Felicio is even closer to the fringe than Bairstow, and the Bulls have a $875,000 team option here. There is likely nothing to see here from a free agency standpoint.

Shayne Whittington: Whittington is the last guy on the Pacers’ roster, and he may not be in the league next year, regardles off the Pacers $980,000 team option. The Nets likely pass.

Trades

Joe Johnson, Bojan Bogdanovic, and Shane Larkin for Derrick Rose, Kirk Hinrich, and Cameron Bairstow. — If the Nets are to dump Joe Johnson, this may be their only shot. The Bulls, it appears, wish to move on from Rose. This deal would provide them with the opportunity to do that. The Bulls should not make a deal like this. If they deal Rose, they should get more back than fringe youth in a package like this. And Rose expires in 2017 — why make a downgrade this significant just to dump him. Still, if the Bulls look to dump Rose, there may not be many suitors, given his contract and the glut of talent across the NBA at point guard. That could open a door for Brooklyn. The Nets have so much cap space next summer that they could do a deal like this, and still have plenty of money to spend on free agents.  Placing a call wouldn’t hurt.

Jarrett Jack for Solomon Hill and Lavoy Allen — Hill is out of the Pacers’ rotation, and given they declined his small 2016-17 team option, out of their plans. Still, he was picked in the 2013 first round.  The Nets would be providing the small ball Pacers with another at least competent small in Jack, while giving themselves a look at Hill.  Allen is not in the Pacers’ plans either but makes $4 million in 2016-17, so Indiana would also open some future flexibility. Perhaps the Nets could leverage a future second or even a first in this deal, although a first is perhaps reaching.

As you know, 2016 free agency is absolutely enormous for the Nets. They do not have to create a contender overnight. But, they must get rotation players, and step from bad to decent, as a tool to later step from decent to good.

This series will tour the league, scouring for free agents, and has already considered the Atlantic Division. We now start the central division, with the Cavaliers. With so many pricey names and contracts in the fold, Cleveland is interesting, as they may simply decide to let some of their free agents walk, which opens the door to teams like Brooklyn to grab them.

Cavaliers’ Free Agents: 

LeBron James: Let’s make this quick. LeBron will not leave the Cavaliers a second time. He is listed here because this series is listing all free agents of all teams. He has a player option only so he can opt out and resign at the new max.

Timofey Mozgov: Mozgov is a nice piece at the center position. He showed the value of size in today’s small NBA, punishing the Warriors frontline and legitimately scaring Golden State in the finals for 3.5 games. He is struggling this year, and perhaps Cleveland lets him walk, given he is looking at a $15 million a year deal. He is a good player, but makes little sense for Brooklyn with Lopez in the fold.

JR Smith: The Cavaliers have a $5.4 million team option to retain Smith. If there is one thing they lack, it is quality wing play other than LeBron. With no money to spend this summer, exercising his option makes worlds of sense and should be expected. Were Cleveland to let him walk, he is an intriguing piece. However, he is a risk on a long term deal, and is not a starter in the NBA. I would take a look at him in the 2 year, $16 million range, but nothing excessive beyond that.

Jared Cunningham: A first round pick in 2012, Cunningham has started three games for the Cavaliers this season and has made his way into the rotation. He is shooting 38.5% from 3, and competes on a nightly basis.  Again, Cleveland has a decision to make here, and Cunningham is an unrestricted free agent.

Mo Williams: Williams is a nice reserve guard. He can shoot the 3, and fits well with many teams as a role playing spot up shooter, who can handle the basketball serviceably. He has a $2.2 million player option which he may decline, but he also loves being LeBron’s teammate. If he hits the market, he is worth a look, as the Nets sorely lack competent guard play.

Matthew Dellavedova: Delly is a restricted free agent, which gives Cleveland the right to keep him, but also presents them with a tough decision given all the contracts on the books. Delly is nothing more than a reserve, but plays with pride and passion, can shoot in spurts, and is never afraid to get after it. He is a useful player, and has the type of attitude most playoff teams have. The Nets can look into his services, but I would not use too much space on him.

Anderson Varejao: The Cavaliers have a $10.4 million team option on Varejao’s deal. Given the extent of his decline, it makes little sense to exercise, but he is LeBron’s good friend, and given the Cavaliers have no cap space regardless, they cannot pay for a replacement and may exercise the option. Regardless, he is not the game changing rebounder and hustle player he was in his prime, and the Nets should look elsewhere.

Richard Jefferson: Jefferson has done a great job reinventing himself as a 3 point shooter to enable his career to continue. That is a useful skill anywhere, but at this stage in his career, Jefferson is going to sign where he believes he can win the most games, and that likely is not Brooklyn.

James Jones: Jones is a shooter who does little else. He has value for that shooting, but at this point, he really is nothing more than LeBron’s guy in Cleveland, who seems prepared to stick it out with him there.

Joe Harris: The Cavaliers have a $980,000 team option on Harris. They may not exercise it as he is yet to show he is NBA ready. The Nets should not seek out his services.

Trades With Cleveland: Jack and a trade exception (from Cleveland) to the Clippers; Sasha Kaun and second round picks to the Nets; Lance Stephenson to the Cavaliers

No trade makes sense with Cleveland. Their players are almost all properly paid, they have no interest in worsening the roster, and they have little that would intrigue the Nets from who they would deal. The Nets, here, would be dumping Jack for a young big Cleveland lacks the room to give a chance, and some second rounders, to increase their asset pool for a player that should not be part of their future.  Los Angeles dumps Stephenson, who they are desperate to get rid of, and gets to look at a rotation player to boost their chances out west. Cleveland would be getting Stephenson for nothing and gambling on LeBron’s ability to bring Lance in line. A big gamble, as even CP3 and Paul Pierce seem unable to harness his attitude.

The Philadelphia Sixers are inarguably the worst team in basketball.  Still, the Nets must explore every single avenue when building their 2016-2017 roster.  No team in the NBA, no matter how bad, is completely devoid of talent.  The Sixers have little talent, but little is greater than nothing.  Philly is largely filled with young players whom they have team options on, so how many players hit the market this summer is really up to them.  And with Jerry Colangelo now at the helm, it will be impossible to gauge their plan next summer.

Who can the Nets pry from Philly to build their roster next summer?

Free Agents:

Robert Covington: Covington is a legitimate player.  He is a good defender at the small forward position.  And while his shooting numbers are down, he can shoot the ball from deep and off the bounce.  He would look better playing with real NBA players.  With a team option of a touch over $1 million, I cannot see the Sixers letting him go.  But if he unexpectedly hits the market, the Nets should make a play for him.

TJ McConnell: McConnell has played decent point guard for the Sixers.  He is clearly not a starter, but may be a nice reserve point guard in the NBA who provides offensive flow with the right cast.  However, with a meager $875,000 team option for next year and a team option for 2017-2018, I cannot see Philly relinquishing his services right now, outside of a trade.

Jerami Grant: Grant is not as good as Covington, but he can defend.  However, he is limited offensively, and is close to but not quite rotation caliber.  As is the theme, the Sixers have a $980,000 team option for his services they probably will exercise, but the Nets should look into his services should Philly let him go.

Isaiah Canaan: Canaan was misplaced early as the Sixers’ starting point guard, which is beyond his capabilities.  He is just not good enough to receive steady minutes, but has one NBA skill: he can shoot the 3.  He may be worth a look as an end of the bench piece who can get minutes on nights where he is hot.  A restricted free agent, I expect the Sixers to renounce him rather than offer a qualifying offer, thus making him unrestricted (like the Nets did with Mirza last summer).

Tony Wroten Jr.: Wroten is a competent, dribble drive reserve point guard . . . if you can live with a point guard who cannot shoot and struggles defensively.  That is, he is a decent reserve, at most: arguably a slightly more established, 6’6’’ Shane Larkin who will get paid more than Larkin.  He is a restricted free agent, but I expect him to be renounced.  Still, whether he helps the Nets is an open question, especially given his ACL tear.

Hollis Thompson: In limited time, Thompson has shown that he can shoot the 3, if nothing else.  The Sixers have a $1 million team option to retain him which they may exercise.  Thompson lost his starting role to Nik Stauskas – he’s not exactly solving problems in Brooklyn.  But I prefer him near the end of my bench over a grizzled veteran like Wayne Ellington.

Kendall Marshall:  Marshall is still young, but has done nothing and is now in his fourth season, and also recovering from a torn ACL.  He was fairly productive in 2013-2014 with the Lakers but has struggled, and even failed to thrive Jason Kidd despite Kidd, who likes big guards, liking his skill set and handpicking him.  Marshal has an approximate $2 million team option I expect the Sixers to decline, but I do not see the Nets having any interest.

Jakarr Sampson: Sampson is a shooting guard who cannot shoot.  He quickly lost his starting role to Nik Stauskas.  The Sixers have a $980,000 team option but even if they decline it, the Nets should not show any interest.

Christian Wood: Wood is a young big who can barely get minutes for the lowly Sixers.  The Nets should not be interested in his services, and he may be out of the league soon.

Trades

The Sixers are not looking to add veterans.  That makes dealing with the Sixers right now tough for Brooklyn.  They have no use for Joe Johnson.  They have no use for Jarrett Jack.  With the Nets seeking picks and Philadelphia hoarding them, there just isn’t much to see here.

Perhaps a Jarrett Jack for Carl Landry deal, given Landry is on Philadelphia’s 2016-2017 books, makes sense.  But the Nets would need at least one second rounder for that deal to make sense.  And Philly is not spending money right now, so opening cap space in exchange for books seems wasteful for them.