Brooklyn's Beat

The Nets left the 2015 draft with four new players: Rondae Hollis-Jefferson, Steve Blake, Chris McCullough, and Juan Vaulet (whom is going to play overseas this coming season).  Brooklyn’s active draft night, however, did not come without drama.  In acquiring Hollis-Jefferson and Blake, the Nets traded fan favorite Mason Plumlee, as well as the rights to Pat Connaughton.

In light of the Knicks trading Tim Hardaway Jr. for the 19th pick in the draft, Jerian Grant, there have been murmurs that the Nets did not get enough for Plumlee.  However, the bottom line is that the Nets did well for themselves in the Plumlee deal.

First things first, while it occurred in the same draft, to compare the Plumlee and Hardaway Jr. trades is unfair.  The Hawks trading down from 15 to 19, then moving the 19th pick for Hardaway Jr., was inexplicable, and unrepresentative of the market for a middling young player heading towards the expiration of his rookie deal.  Some believe the Hawks made the trade to save money to retain Paul Millsap and DeMarre Carroll.  The 15 pick will make $295,680 more than Hardaway next year (if signed at the 100% mark on the rookie scale), the 19 pick (if they merely accepted Washington’s offer of two seconds and the 19 for the 15, and took a player at 19) just $5,780 more than Hardaway Jr. Millsap and Carroll are likely to make approximately $30 million combined on the market this summer–negligible savings like that are not changing anything.  As a neutral observer of what the Hawks did, it was inexplicable: either they are unaware Hardaway Jr. is not good, or are pocketing whatever little savings they can.  Some may say the Nets should have made the deal with the Hawks, but with Horford as their centerpiece, if the Hawks wanted a wing and not a big like Plumlee (especially a big who cannot shoot in their floor spread system), what could the Nets do?

Rather, any Plumlee deal must be judged by two circumstances: where the Nets’ talent lies on its roster, and the typical, usual market for a player of Plumlee’s caliber and with Plumlee’s contract.  Through that prism, the Nets did well for themselves.

Starting with the player Plumlee is, while all young players go through rough patches and development is not linear, some of the stunting in his growth is concerning. Plumlee is 25, and will turn 26 during the 2015-2016 season: he is not as young as one may believe.  He has his attributes, that should not be denied.  He runs the floor.  He sets good picks, and excels at rolling to the basket in the pick and roll and filling open spaces.  Those are skills that would fit well with an elite guard running the pick and roll — a thing the Nets do not have, but will likely target in 2016.  And his man to man defense is good.

However, Plumlee has weaknesses that have not improved much during his first two seasons, and which may never improve all that much.  There is a reason, after all, that he was taken 22 in the draft, why 21 teams decided to pass on him.  Most importantly, Plumlee has yet to grasp defensive rotations.  Despite his athleticism, he often finds himself lost defensively, beat to spots and beat to rebounds as a result of being beat to spots.  One concern: he is a very hard worker, and a very high character man, and yet he still has these weaknesses.  It is not as though his effort has been poor, and one wonders if his rotational defense would improve by simply trying harder.  The effort, rather, is there, but the results are not: will they ever be? Maybe, but maybe not.  In addition, Plumlee lacks the touch to score on anything beyond a dunk, or layup if he gets position over another big.  His jump shot is nonexistent, and while he is a center, the league is trending towards maximizing floor space, and that is something Plumlee does not provide.

Couple that with the Nets’ roster crunch, and trading him made sense.  The Nets hope to pay Brook Lopez this summer, and for his weaknesses, he was very, very good for Brooklyn down the stretch, and progressively improved as he grew confidence moving around on his surgically repaired feet.  If you take Lopez’s play since 2011-2012, and eliminate his foot injuries, as well as games where he was clearly recovering from those injuries, Lopez has been very good for several years, and has trended into an elite scorer, who also protects the rim.  According to NBA.com stats, opponents shot 49.7% over Lopez at the rim this season, a figure better than Tyson Chandler, Omer Asik, Al Horford, Joakim Noah, Nene, Tristan Thompson, and Nikola Vucevic, among others.

Can that improve playing with better defenders, rather than scrambling to fix others’ mistakes?  And while Lopez’s slow feet are an issue, Thad Young’s versatility helps counter that, and playing versatile perimeter defenders around Lopez allows Lopez to drop back in pick and roll coverages, where his length and size becomes more amplified and effective, and his slow feet minimized.

The NBA is trending toward teams playing small and fast, and that simply does not permit for a team to start Lopez and Plumlee, and be effective.  Plumlee may be cheap now, but he’s a free agent in 2017, likely seeing a deal in the 4 year, $32 million range at that point.  The Nets simply could not commit big money in the smallball era to both Lopez and Plumlee, and while Plumlee has many good qualities, Lopez is the better player.  It is easy to overlook that he was the best player on the court in the Nets-Hawks series.  He overwhelmed Lopez and Millsap, and forced Atlanta to adjust its defense to adjust to Lopez’s pick and roll game, and make other Nets beat them. Horford and Millsap went on to have a much better time dealing with Marcin Gortat and Nene in round 2.

With paying Lopez and Plumlee not a realistic option, the Nets made their choice.  And while some hoped for the Nets to “reestablish Plumlee’s value,” that also was not a realistic option.  First, if Lopez is healthy, it would be tough to envision Plumlee playing so well in bench minutes as to earn more than a first rounder like Hollis-Jefferson in return for his services.  Some, presumably, wanted to deal Plumlee for a star, but he is nowhere near the caliber of player worth dealing a star for.

Second, the true value of the NBA’s rookie scale is that draft picks are underpaid.  However, that changes when rookie contracts expire: suitors know the young player is going to get paid, and being paid decreases their value.  Chandler Parsons made $926,500 in 2014, and $14,700,000 in 2015; there is a huge value change there.

In 2013, the Sacramento Kings decided they would not keep restricted free agent Tyreke Evans.  The return? Greivis Vasquez.  A clear reserve for a very solid NBA starter with potential.  Why did the Kings get so little? Because Evans was restricted that summer, and poised to get paid.  It killed his value.

In 2014-2015, the Knicks (ironically) decided to trade Iman Shumpert before his restricted free agency summer of 2015.  The return? A 2019 second round pick.  Sure, including JR Smith’s contract in the trade hurt Shumpert’s value on paper.  But for all the jokes about the Knicks getting an eighth grader for Shumpert, it happened for a reason: young players on their first contract (especially non stars) lose value as their free agency approaches, because the recipient is not getting cost control, but is going to be forced to pay the player.

So for all the talk that Plumlee could reestablish his value, in reality, his value in trades is more likely to decline as 2017 approaches.  If the Nets waited until 2016-2017, they would have gotten nothing for his services: or perhaps a second rounder or reserve guard.  And even if they waited until the 2015-2016 season, his value is trending downward because his cheap contract is ticking toward expiration.

The Nets, had they waited to trade Plumlee, likely would not have gotten Hollis-Jefferson and Blake for his services.

The final piece to all this: while nobody can definitively say what Hollis-Jefferson will be, he projects on paper as the exact type of piece Brooklyn needs. The Nets need athletes. The Nets need players who can guard multiple positions, especially if they want to build around a slower center.  The league is trending towards teams with multiple rangy, 6’6′-6’9 wings who can switch, guard multiple spots, and run the floor.  Steph Curry gets the accolades, but one masterstroke in Golden State is that they can throw Andre Iguodala, Shaun Livingston, Harrison Barnes, Draymond Green, and even Klay Thompson (who defends better than many realize) at teams defensively. Hollis-Jefferson appears to be have the type of defensive skills and motor that is needed in today’s NBA, and he makes much more sense on a roster with Lopez on it than Plumlee does.

Briefly touching on Blake, he is also a decent addition to the Nets.  He is limited, but is a capable reserve guard who is smart, can shoot the ball, and does not make mistakes.  In many ways, he is the polar opposite of Jarrett Jack, who has more talent than Blake but is not as smart of a player.  Blake enables the Nets to dump Jack this summer, and if the Nets cannot find a point guard this summer (and given their lack of free agency money to spend or tradeable assets, that possibility is very real), he can patch up the spot with Deron Williams for a season.

Perhaps it can be argued the Nets should have traded Plumlee last season. Perhaps the Nets should have been patient with Lopez, and realized his early season struggles were due to psychologically thinking about his foot while he was playing, as well as getting into game shape.  In such an instance, perhaps the Nets could have traded Plumlee at the 2014-2015 trade deadline.

However, whether the Nets would have beaten this package for Plumlee, even at that time, is unclear.  In addition, if he was just used to dump Deron’s contract, that may have been helpful, but the Nets would not have gotten an asset of Hollis-Jefferson’s caliber.  Also, the Nets chose to hold onto Plumlee because they worried about Lopez going forward, until he lasted a full season: that is a reasonable worry to have.

Alas, at least the argument the Nets should have traded Plumlee earlier than this summer.  However, if one looks at the Nets’ situation roster wise, and the typical market for players like Plumlee nearing the end of their first contract, the idea that the Nets failed because of what the Knicks got for Hardaway Jr. is simply unfair.  That trade represents an aberration, and by no means the norm (and were I a Hawks fan, I would be livid).

Plumlee is not the liability his naysayers say he is.  And he is a high character man, a great person, and a player with a clear skill set who does not take plays off. He wore Brooklyn on his chest proudly, represented the organization well, and stood for traits like effort, intensity, speed, and passion that made him popular, and at times, gave the Nets life.  He will be missed, by myself and by many Nets fans, and I wish him well in Portland.

Still, the Nets made the right call trading him.  Welcome to the Nets, Rondae Hollis-Jefferson and Steve Blake.

Nets fans: today is the NBA draft! Join the Nets fan draft forum and conversation!  Coming into the draft, the Nets pick 29th and 41st, have Deron, Joe, Bojan, Karasev, Plumlee, and Jack under guaranteed contracts, and have nonguaranteed contracts with Markel, Jefferson, Clark, and Morris.  What will they do? Let’s talk about it.

Billy King addressed the media on Monday, June 22 to talk Nets draft and free agency. By and large, his comments were unsurprising, although one tidbit was worrisome.

Thaddeus Young opted out of his contract: many conflate this with “well he must be leaving,” but there is no reason to do that.  If Young opted in he would be a Net next season, and a free agent in 2016.  The only way to secure a longterm deal this summer, with the Nets or elsewhere), was to opt out.  All opting out means is he wants a 2-4 year deal: that could be with the Nets.

On retaining Lopez and Thad, Billy mentioned confidence in signing one of the two based upon tools he has.  Per the statement he was more confident in signing one playee than the other. Billy has publicly pined for bringing both back, so less confidence in retaining one of Lopez or Young than the other is concerning.  My hunch: he would offer Lopez more money and has the ability using Bird Rights to max him, making Brook that player he has more confidence in keeping.

Asked whether Brook Lopez was a max player, King said “next question”: H/t to Mike Mazzeo of ESPN for the transcription. Billy declining to portray negotiations with a free agent in public is not a surprise, and his quote says nothing regarding whether Lopez will be back or not.  He should (and Thaddeus Young should), as I stated here.

Billy doubt the ability to move up in the draft, citing the cost: this is not surprising at all.  First round pick are incredibly valuable given the cap jump and CBA: it is hard to build a roster and the % of your cap occupied by a first is so tiny. Contrary to many of the invented trades out there, the Nets have nothing on their roster warranting a team to deal a pick in the lottery, or even in the teens.  You don’t want Mason Plumlee because he hit a plateau, and his upside at 25 is questionable.  You think a team wants to deal a top 20 draft choice to plummet down to 29, just to have that player you so desperately want to deal? I would be pleasantly surprised if Brooklyn moves up, but do not take the failure to move up as an indictment of the front office.

Billy extended a qualifying offer to Mirza Teletovic: I would likewise take nothing from this.  The tender of a qualifying offer ($4.2 million in Mirza’s case, a figure set by the league) triggers the Nets’ right to match any offer made to Mirza in free agency by another team. It does not mean he will be back: if an offer is made and he signs that “offer sheet,” the Nets can simply decline to match it. It jut allows them to match, if they want to.  Not knowing what another team will offer, why not maintain that right? The Nets can work out a deal with Mirza if they would like, but the most common tact teams take with restricted free agents is to allow other teams to set the market, and then react to that.

With that, the following are the possibilities with Mirza:

a) Billy negotiates a new deal with Mirza before he signs another team’s offer sheet: this is extremely unlikely but can occur.

b) Mirza dislikes the market for his services, and signs the $4.2 million qualifying offer.  This could happen, and would be a fine (but rare among restricted free agents) result.  As Mirza has in his hands the qualifying offer (as required to trigger restricted free agency) he can elect to simply sign that tender.  It is why the Nets did not extend one to Jerome Jordan: the market for him would be slim and they do not want to be boxed in.  Restricted free agency is often a chilled market.  Teams are wary of offering money in the event a deal is matched, as their cap space is occupied by that offer sheet during the 3 day matching period (of which teams usually take the entire 3 days).  Mirza could avoid that by signing his 1 year $4.2 million qualifying offer.  That would be fine for Brooklyn: he would be unrestricted in 2016 and would help next year’s roster without impacting the future.

c) Mirza can test the market and sign an offer sheet: If this occurs (and this is the result I expect), the Nets would have three days to decide if they wished to match the offer sheet (in which case Mirza would become a Net under the exact terms of the offer sheet), or if they decline to match, in which case Mirza would be headed to that new team.  Given teams know Brooklyn’s salary predicament, teams know a piece like Mirza may not be a priority, and that there is opportunity here to swipe a player.  The offer sheet could be generally of any amount of money or length up to four years.

My take: if Mirza signs the qualifying offer, I would welcome him back.  If he gets a multiyear free agency pact, I would decline to match the offer.  I like Mirza, but the plan right now is to use flexibility in 2016 to build a winner, which necessitates having as much cap space as possible.  Without lottery picks, or the type of trade assets that net stars, free agency is Brooklyn’s best chance.  And the Nets should not allow a role player — a good person and role player, but a clear role player nonetheless, to eat into the type of cap space they need to transform the roster in 13 months.

As for Alan Anderson, I am of the same exact view.  Flexibility in 2016 is more valuable than either player.  Flexibility, and the ability to win today to make that flexibility appealing, is a delicate balance.  That balance strikes in favor of a star level talent in Lopez, and an established starter who does multiple things like Young, but not in favor of seventh men like Anderson and Teletovic.  Both players making $5 million per in 2016 (their approximate market values) would eat into the Nets grander 2016 plans.  Players of their caliber are readily available on the open market every summer and the Nets should look to find them after building a core, not allow them to preclude that building.

If Anderson would like a one year deal, and Mirza would like the qualifying offer, great. If not, it was grand, and best of luck at your next stops.

Billy did not touch on other issues of note today: he discussed Thad, Brook, the draft, and Mirza.  There are many other questions of note for Brooklyn.  I’ve discussed, in that regard, how the Nets should handle the Deron Williams problem, and options the Nets have with Joe Johnson.

But still, the Nets face some other roster building issues this summer.

The kids: Markel Brown and Cory Jefferson

This is quick and easy.  Keeping both players at the mere price of $845,059 for next season is a no brainer.  Markel began his development into a rotation piece.  He gets lost defensively on rotations and struggles shooting the ball, but his on ball defense and athleticism are clearly NBA ready.  His off ball defense should come along, and if he ever develops a jumper, he can be a legitimate rotation player.  Jefferson’s future is not as clear.  He is clearly an athlete, but cannot shoot, and is rough around the edges.  Still, even his athleticism was a boon to Brooklyn at times this season.  At these prices, on one year deals, the Nets will not, and should not, let either player go.

The bit players: Jerome Jordan, Earl Clark, and Darius Morris.

The Nets may let all three of these players go.  Clearly, the Nets will look to make changes to their roster, and each of these free agents is expendable, despite Jordan showing some potential early in the year.  Teams typically fill their 13th through 15th spots in August, and the Nets will (and should) likely wait on making decisions on any of these three players until later in the summer, after their primary plans, and potential deals, work themselves through.  I would not be surprised to see Jordan back in a Nets uniform.  He showed promise, and is just fine for a reserve center.  I believe the Nets have nothing to lose however, and should explore other options before circling back to Jordan.  Jordan is an unrestricted free agent whose fate will likely hang in the balance until at least August.

I would be surprised to see Clark, and would be stunned to see Morris back in Brooklyn.  Both are on nonguaranteed deals, and are readily tradeable, as the recipient can waive them on arrival.  Neither player has any real trade value on his own, but both can be used to assist the Nets in dealing a bigger piece, like Deron, Joe, or Jack.  Such assistance would help match salaries, or could at least partially mitigate the other party’s expense in taking those contracts on, as they could waive these pieces on receipt.

TRADES: WHAT OF JACK, PLUMLEE, BOGDANOVIC, AND KARASEV?

I’ve gone through my take on the Nets free agents and reached the following decisions: the Nets should keep Lopez, Young, Brown, and Jefferson, and allow Anderson, Teletovic, Jordan, Clark, and Morris to walk. I’ve also touched on Deron and Joe, essentially stating that if the Nets can trade either at a gain, great, but if not, they should keep both players.

However, what is to be made of the other Nets under contract: Bogdanovic, Plumlee, Jack, and Karasev.  I’ll take them each in turn.

Jarrett Jack:  Jack is a piece the Nets should look to move.  From a advanced stats perspective, he was a significant minus for Brooklyn all year.  Even taking his big shot making and viewing him positively, he will be 32 to start the season, he makes $6.3 million next season (exorbitant for a reserve guard), and he is distinctly an aging role player, not a potential star, core piece, or young player who is developing.

Reserve guard is a spot the Nets can fill later (like Mirza and AA’s spots), and Jack offers the Nets little value.  If the Nets had a chance to deal him (http://www.bulletsforever.com/2015/3/5/8153569/jarrett-jack-martell-webster-nba-trade-rumors-washington-wizards-brooklyn-nets) they should have swiped it.

The Nets should not assume future salary for Jack.  He only makes $500,000 next season on a buyout (if the Nets exercise the option), and it would be foolish to swap him for future salary.  But Jack is not a core piece by any stretch of the imagination.  If the Nets can turn Jack into even the smallest of future assets — a favorable pick swap, a couple of second rounders, a young piece languishing on a bench — they should do so.

Mason Plumlee: The Plumlee question is not a simple one, but I think the Nets should explore the market for his services.  Certainly, there are reasons not to explore.  Plumlee is a source of cheap production, set to make just $2,328,530 in 2016-2017.  Having a rotation player making that little will help the Nets in 2016, as they try to use the space they have to import talent, is valuable.  Brook and Thad are the hopeful starters, but you can never have enough quality depth to withstand injuries.  And Plumlee was very good prior to February last season.  He served efficiently as a dive man in the pick and roll, and his energy boosted the Nets.

At the same time, Plumlee struggled mightily for months, and many of his struggles are due to his lack of finesse around the basket, his inability to hit free throws (which, when you’re not as valuable as say, DeAndre Jordan, in other aspects of the game, becomes more magnified), and his cluelessness making defensive rotations (he continues to work hard yet make bad decisions, which is at least a yellow flag).  And while Plumlee is cheap now, he will eventually hit restricted free agency in the 2017 summer. And as the Knicks’ Shumpert trade showed, a non-star set to hit restricted free agency has little trade value, as the recipient knows that you are trading him to avoid paying him, and thus has all the leverage to send little value (JR Smith’s inclusion in that deal hurt the return, but not as much as has been reported).  The Nets, if Lopez continues to play as he is, likely will not wish to pay Plumlee in the $9 million per year range (young players are always overpaid on potential when they hit restricted free agency, and the TV deal will also make contracts bigger generally).  If so, the Nets are better served addressing that issue this summer than waiting.

There is little harm in quietly testing the Plumlee market, if only to see if you can hit a home run, or add a young piece at a position of greater need.  Maybe Teague won the Hawks over so much that they swap Schroder for Plumlee (Schroder was very good before the playoffs).  Maybe the Nets revisit the Sacramento situation and see if Stauskas is available.  The Suns are still guard heavy and maybe there’s something to a Plumlee-Reggie Bullock swap. Is Evan Fournier available given Orlando’s backcourt of the future is Payton-Oladipo? Jason Kidd has committed to Michael Carter-Williams, enjoyed coaching Plumlee, and now coaches his brother Miles: maybe a Plumlee-Ennis swap is something the Nets look into. Do the Lakers look to dump Jordan Clarkson if they add Rajon Rondo?

If those options are not available (and they may not be, especially Schroder, as that would represent Atlanta selling low), the Nets can explore packaging Plumlee with one of their draft picks to move up: but do not expect a move into the top 20 for a 25 year old whose game did not grow after the calendar turned to 2015.

Of note: dealing Plumlee to move up in the draft is a risk. The Nets have scant young assets.  Even the top of the draft can be a crap shoot: the middle and end of it most definitely is.  Given the Nets are not going to pick in the lottery no matter what they do (no lottery picking team would deal that for Mason and the 29), the Nets are likely better off having the most shots at the dartboard, rather than dealing multiple young pieces for one potentially better young piece.  To do that for a surefire top pick, or top 10 pick, is one thing.  To deal Plumlee, and a shot at 29, for a shot at say, 22, is quite another.

Finally, the Nets can, and should, look into whether Plumlee can be packaged with Deron to either increase the return for Deron, or to entice a team to add Deron in the first place.  Such a tactic is not smart with Joe or Jack: both expire this summer (Jack with the tiny buyout), so to use Mason to get a team to take them on, or marginally increase the return, is stupid, given they do not harm the Nets’ future plans.  However, Deron’s contract sticks out on the 2016-17 books like a sore thumb, and if Plumlee is the grease that skids the wheels to take him out of town, Brooklyn has to consider it.

Sergey Karasev: The Nets seem to see Karasev as a core piece.  Frankly, I cannot understand why.  He projects as nothing more than an 8th man, capable of hitting jumpers off the bench.  His defense is not good enough to play critical minutes for a playoff team, and Lionel eventually banished him to the bench.  In a league filled with versatile wings who can switch onto multiple offensive options, the Nets best future wing, Bogdanovic, does not do those things, and if they commit to Karasev, that makes two players who cannot do those things, the latter of which has much less upside across the board.

Karasev has little trade value, even disregarding his knee injury.  Plumlee has some value around the league justifying exploration, but Karasev is not going to bring anything back.  He does not cloud their future flexibility.  If a team somehow is only willing to take on Deron because the Nets toss Karasev into a deal, the Nets should jump at the chance.

However, Karasev does have some upside, and given he is unlikely to bring anything back in a deal, the Nets likely will keep him.  Given all the issues they face this summer, exploring Sergey Karasev deals is at the bottom of the list.

Bojan Bogdanovic: Bogdanovic is a legitimate young rotation player.  For whatever reason, it seems that whenever an international player plays in Brooklyn, the player is unreasonably scrutinized, and glorified, all at once.  Bojan is not as good as the star some say he could be, not as bad as the worthless piece others make him out to be.  Rather, Bojan projects as a good NBA rotation player, perhaps a low end starter or high end bench player on a contender.  He improved his 3 point shooting over the course of the season, and developed his ability to make plays off the bounce when ran off the line. Given Bojan’s likely role on a future contender: a weakside shooter — both skills will be critical for him.  He will need to hit 3’s coming off screens, and hit 3’s when double teams leave him open.  And the better he becomes at making plays off the dribble when rushed off his spot, the better he will be.  Finally, his defense is below average: how much he improves on that end will be critical to his value.  An NBA team can play Korver or Redick 40 minutes because they are good defenders, and do way more than just catch and shoot.

A mixture of JJ Redick and perhaps Trevor Ariza (offensively, not defensively) seems to be the type of player Bogdanovic can be if he develops (he is not yet there).  A player who can shoot, make plays off the bounce, fit in with elite players, and serve as a low end starter or high end reserve on an elite team.  If Bogdanovic can do those things, and play competent defense, he could be a very good NBA player.  Bogdanovic’s floor — the 7th-8th man (on a contender) that he likely is now, given he is essentially a streak shooter who plays below average defense, is not that bad.  But the hope of course is he reaches his ceiling.

There is no reason for the Nets to explore Bogdanovic trades this summer.  The Nets should not parlay him into a rotation veteran.  To trade a player with his upside just in the hopes a team takes on Williams would not be smart.  Short of a team parting with a top 25 or so player for Bogdanovic — that is not happening — the smart course for the Nets (and the course they seem to want to chart) is to keep Bojan.

The 2015 offseason is one of many question.  Billy only answered scant few today because he will not have answers for another 3-4 weeks.

When the Detroit Pistons acquired Ersan Ilyasova for Caron Butler and Shawne Williams, some pondered the deal’s ripple effects in Brooklyn. One reason for Jason Kidd’s suspicious sequence of events. He asked his then Nets bosses to deal Brook Lopez to Milwaukee for Ilyasova and Larry Sanders. He left for Milwaukee, and dumped Ilyasova and Sanders for nothing. He then expressed interest in bringing Lopez to Milwaukee. Those are quite the dots. 
But the other reason for chatter about the deal was disconcerting: that the Nets lost an opportunity to deal Joe in a salary dump, akin to the Ilyasova trade. 
Such a deal, however, would be disappointing. It would do nothing good for the Nets except save money for an ownership group with way more of it than you or I.
THE NETS CAP PICTURE
On the surface one would think the Nets have approximately $8.5 million in cap room given they owe $58,678,633 to their players under contract, and the cap sits at $67.1 million. That ignores the reality of cap holds. 
A cap hold under the CBA is essentially a placeholder contract in exchange for bird rights. Although Brook Lopez and Thaddeus Young are free agents, their cap holds, of $16,744,218 and $9,971,739, are still on the Nets cap. The Nets are allowed to exceed the cap to keep them because of this. The only ways to eliminate the cap hold: resign the player (and his new salary replaces the hold), or renounce his bird rights — that would require the Nets to use cap space to sign Lopez and Young, limiting them to the above $8.5 million combined. Essentially, the Nets will not renounce either, meaning they will remain on the Nets cap unless they choose to walk.
THE ALLEGED FLEXIBILITY 
For the sake of this exercise, suppose Lopez and Young sign at their cap holds – a very ambitious goal. The payroll would balloon to $85,394,570. Suppose the Nets successfully dumped Johnson’s entire salary for no money back — more ambitious than getting three draft picks for Paul Pierce and KG’s corpse (whoops). The Nets would have a payroll of $60,427,727, and essentially be looking at mid level exception targets. 
And all along, that has been the idea. Many have been sold on the idea that a Johnson salay dump would be about bringing in talent with the mid level of $5.5 million. Or the $2.1 million biannual exception. While factually accurate, this supposed benefit is not one, on many levels. 
The following players essentially received mid level money in free agency last year: Paul Pierce, Shaun Livingston, Josh McRoberts, Spencer Hawes, Caron Butler, Chris Kaman, Darren Collison, Trevor Booker, Marion Chalmers, Nick Young, PJ Tucker, Vince Carter, and Patty Mills. 
Look at this list. Pierce as an old veteran signing cheap to win (not happening here), and Livingston’s extreme injury history, are aberrations. At this stage, that is a list of by and large, sixth seventh and eighth men off the bench. Perhaps some of those players could be 5th starters on a playoff team, but even that is arguable. 
Even worse, the pool of mid level players this summer may be worse than the above one. Teams are already adjusting to new TV money; what was once a $5 million player is now an $8-9 million player to many. This caliber of player is worth a Johnson salary dump?
Making matters worse is the following: it’s not even smart for the Nets to use the mid level exception this summer. The list above is chock full of players on multiyear deals as is customary for the mid level exception — players of this caliber cannot gamble with the TV deal and need to get paid while they can. Brooklyn wants and needs to maximize its 2016 cap space, and 2017 space and beyond, to add foundational talent. The Nets should not eat into that space this summer by signing a bench player to a multiyear deal they will regret as they try to do bigger things in 2016 with that deal in the way. These players are out there every summer; just wait a year.

 Even if Johnson was Irrelevant to the discussion and the Nets had the mid level waiting for them, it would be dumb to use. To sell it as a rationale for a Joe dump is a mistake.

As for any 2016 benefit to a salary dump, Johnson expires in 2016. Forget that in its entirety.
A Johnson salary dump would do the following: have no good 2016 impact, not open any real 2015 flexibility, worsen the on court product … And save Mikhail Prokhorov a few dollars.
And therein lies the rub. A Johnson salary dump, while being presented in some corners as a tool to open flexibility, is nothing but a transparent effort to save scratch, from a billionaire who relies on your patronage spending ticket buying and merchandise collecting to keep getting richer. 

If the Nets REALLY wanted to add a free agent with a cap exception, the taxpayer exception is there. The players numbers near it produced last year — guys like Devin Harris and Jameer Nelson — are not smart additions but are not much worse than the mid level crop and don’t necessitate dumping Joe. 

But therein lies the rub. A Johnson salary dump does nothing good for anyone except save money for a billionaire reliant on your patronage and support. 

The more the Nets win in 2015-2016, the better off they are. With no draft picks, losing does nothing good. The more they win, the more easily Brooklyn can coax a free agent into believing that the program is close to being good, and that the player can get them there. A Joe trade impedes that goal. Is the goal of selling players on 35-47 good? No, but when your best young talent doesn’t have star potential, you don’t have picks, you don’t have trade assets (look at the Kevin Love trade: the Nets can’t sniff deals like that), and your best player has a thrice operated on foot, you do what you can. 

You must assess every move relative to your place on the arc of contention and your asset picture. In this position, the Nera need to balance maximizing future flexibility with maximizing their current win-loss record, to make that flexibility most attractive to free agents. A Joe salary dump impedes those goals.

Alas, a Joe deal would not reflect arc of contention dealing principles, but rather, “we’re not winning this year anyway let’s save some money.”

As a fan who wants to enjoy a quality product, why should you support that?

The cap and asset situation in Brooklyn, despite all the large contracts and moving parts, is rather simple, and can be broken down as follows.

-The Nets have about $8.5 million in cap space this summer if they were to renounce ALL of their free agents: everyone except Deron, Joe, Jack, Bogdanovic, Karasev, and Plumlee.  The simple math there: if the Nets were to keep one of Lopez or Young, they would not have any cap room this summer, aside from cap exceptions and minimum salaries. The Nets are not going to be notable free agent players this summer: look for trades, and role player signings, to define the 2015 summer.

The reason for that is a little known CBA principle: the cap hold. Under the CBA, the Nets hold the bird rights of Lopez and Thad.  In short, that means the Nets, in resigning them, may exceed the cap.  However, assuming both players opt out, as an exchange for these bird rights, both players would remain on the Nets’ salary sheet, for purposes of cap room calculations by virtue of their cap holds: a hold of $17,695,200 for Lopez and $14,116,304 for Thad.  There are only two ways for the Nets to remove these cap holds.  The first: renounce both players.  However, by renouncing, the Nets lose their bird rights, and must sign them into their cap space (like any other free agent): of which they only have approximately $8.5 million were they to renounce everyone. Translation: renounce either, and the player is gone.  The second way to remove the cap hold: resign the player, and their new contract dollar value replaces the hold.  Of course, that will not open up cap space — the Nets would only have $8.5 million in space by renouncing the holds, and have no space with the holds.

You can continue to do the math, but there is one essential issue this summer: the Nets do not have cap space this summer, unless they renounce both Lopez and Thad, which given the lack of cap space to sign them post renunciation, means bidding farewell to both players.  That renunciation could only open a maximum of $8.5 million if the Nets renounced EVERY free agent, plus whatever savings the Nets could accrue in dealing Deron, Joe, or Jack — which given the need to match money in deals, likely is not much.  Suppose the Nets opened $12 million in cap space this summer — likely the high, high end they could open, but with Brook, Thad, and Markel gone and Joe and/or Deron salary dumped.  Is that at all worth it?

-The cap in the summer of 2016 is projected to be $89-91 million. At this moment in time, assuming Deron opts into his sweet (for him) $22,331,135 deal for that year (why would he?!), the sole Nets under contract that summer are Deron and Bojan, at a total of $25,904,135.  Add Jarrett Jack’s 500,000 buyout for that summer, this summer’s first rounder (at $992,900), and Plumlee’s option if exercised, and the Nets would sit at $29,425,565 in salary commitments in the 2016 summer, and . The short of it: the Nets have a boatload of cap space totaling a potential $59,574,435 or so in 2016 if the Nets choose to completely strip their roster of talent.

-The Nets pick 29th and 41st in the 2015 NBA draft (absent deals between now and then), and no picks in 2016 (again, barring any deals for a pick).  The first round has proven tough to buy into using cash, and with the rookie scale not changing despite the cap jump, those picks have become ridiculous values because they will total an even smaller percentage of the cap.  Given the circumstances, The highest draft pick to join Brooklyn between now and opening night, 2016-2017, is likely the 29 pick this summer.

The Nets free agents this summer are as follows: 

–Player Options: Brook Lopez, Thaddeus Young, and Alan Anderson. Each of their options are due for being exercised in June.  Anderson has declared he will opt out.  If any opt in, they are Nets unless traded. If any opt out, the Nets (and the players) have decisions to make).

–Restricted Free Agents: Mirza Teletovic and Jerome Jordan.  When a player is a restricted free agent, the following occurs. First, the team must decide whether or not to tender a qualifying offer. If the team does not, the player becomes an unrestricted free agent. If the team does, the player is restricted, and the team gets three days to match any contract he signs elsewhere: the team is not required to match, but the qualifying offer allows for this right.  The Nets have announced they will not give a tender to Jordan, which makes sense. He could sign with the Nets like any other unrestricted free agent, but the Nets lose the rights on matching offers to him. The Nets likely will tender a qualifying offer to Mirza allowing them options.  Billy has said the market would dictate with Mirza, which essentially means (as many teams do with restricted free agents) that the Nets will let him get an offer, then decide if they want to match.  I think they should allow him to walk if he is offered an excess of $3.5 million beyond 2016: cap space is more important than role players right now.

–Team Options and Nonguaranteed Deals: Markel Brown, Cory Jefferson, Earl Clark, and Darius Morris: the Nets, essentially, may retain these pieces if they want to.  I listed them in, my opinion, the order of likelihood that they are retained.  It seems a near certainty barring a trade that Brown is back , and close to that on Jefferson. Clark and Morris may be gone, but neither decision would be impactful in terms of overall planning.  All of these pieces are nonguaranteed, which provides flexibility. The Nets can trade them, and their deals count for salary matching purposes.  However, for the recipient, they can cut the player on arrival: essentially using the deal as a tool to save some money (this is why Alonzo Gee was traded so many times last summer). Given none of these deals expire until October, the Nets will likely keep them around.  Clark and Morris in particular will serve as fodder in trades, to help recipient’s save money or serve as potential pieces necessary to make salaries match under league rules.

–So Who IS Under Contract?: Deron, Joe, Bojan, Plumlee, Jack, and Karasev: The Nets, of course, could trade any of the 6.  Deron and Joe are good bets to be shopped, particularly after Billy King’s letter. Jack could (and should) be shopped, too, because he has value to teams seeking a backup PG that are in win now mode.  Bojan, and to a lesser extent, Plumlee, seem like good bets to be back, but if the Nets hit paydirt on the right opportunity, I would rule nothing out after how crazy the Nets’ time in Brooklyn has been.  Karasev is expendable but given his knee injury, may be back: why trade for him?

–Future Drafts Beyond 2016 (where they do not pick at all): The Nets swap firsts with the Hawks in 2017, and do not have a second. They do not have any picks in 2018.  They do not have their second in 2020, but otherwise have their full complement of picks in 2019 and beyond.

That’s the Asset picture.  So how can the Nets get the program on track in 2016?  While this is a 2015 offseason preview piece, with no financial flexibility this summer and the goal of doing damage in the 2016 summer, there is little the Nets can do this summer on the open market.  Again, this summer is about the trade market, which means decisions are to be made on the current core, and how the Nets can tinker with it without killing the 2016 flexibility they have.

The Balancing Act: The Nets MUST Keep Brook Lopez, and Should Keep Thaddeus Young

The Summer of 2010 has sent reverberations around the NBA, both among GM’s and fans alike.  It popularized, and glamorized, the idea of opening up cap space, then signing a whole bunch of stars, to remake a team.  Except, here’s the thing.  Inevitably, only one or two teams can sign the franchise transforming player out there.  Look at the cores of the contenders in 2014-2015. The Warriors drafted theirs. The Spurs theirs. The Rockets acquired their fulcrum in a trade. The Clippers drafted two of their big 3 and dealt for the other. The list goes on from there.

This list of free agents (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/12307054/nba-free-agents-2015-2016) has many good players, but how many both will be free in 2016 (some are 2015 free agents) AND simultaneously be transformative talents.  The class of free agents is full of good and very good players, but there are few great free agents, and way more teams chasing them.  LeBron’s commitment to Cleveland is clear.  Joakim Noah is not the same as he once was. Brow, Kawhi Leonard, Dryamond Green, Bradley Beal, and Jimmy Butler?: restricted free agents of that caliber don’t move; their teams can and will match any and all offers. Are Wade and Dirk really leaving their franchises, and is Marc Gasol really leaving his unless it’s for San Antonio?

That leaves Kevin Durant, of course, as well as a few other good, but flawed, options.  Kevin Love could be free in 2016, but is he really leaving LeBron’s side? Maybe, but if he does, the Nets will have plenty of competition.  LaMarcus Aldridge is a good bet to stay in Portland, or become a Spur: he’s also likely signing a long term deal in 2015. Dwight Howard is likely disinclined to leave Harden’s side. Goran Dragic seems to enjoy Miami, but perhaps is a target as well.

That’s not to say the Nets should not try to snag free agents in 2016.  Check out that pick situation above: the Nets cannot pick in the lottery by virtue of their own losing until 2019.  Flatly, tanking is not an option for Brooklyn due to that reality, and the Nets also do not have the types of trade chips that land stars in deals.  Their best bet IS the free agency market in 2016, despite all its risk.

The reason the Nets need to keep Lopez, and probably Young as well, is simple: this generation of NBA players has shown that they do not want to be left on an island.  Sure, the Nets could approach the 2016 summer with $59 million in cap space without Lopez and Young: they would also need, quite literally, an entire roster.  Deron two years from now given his career arc, with Bojan, a 29 pick, Plumlee, perhaps Markel, and nothing else, likely at best? That is a 50-60 loss core, easily.  That is not something a free agent can look at, and express any sort of desire to join.  Literally, at that point, the Nets would be selling free agents on Brooklyn and their arena, and not a thing else.

Keeping Brook and Thad? Would the Nets have less cap space than the currently possible $59 + million? Yes they would! But suppose the pair combine to make $30 million or so in 2016-2017 — a pretty high figure.  The Nets would have something closer to $29 million in cap space (more like $31-32 million if they did not retain Plumlee, perhaps), but they would actually have the outline of a roster.

Would that roster being presented to free agents be superstar laden? No.  And it’s not like the Heat selling Wade in 2010, or the Rockets Harden in 2012.  But, it’s something.  At least a free agent could look at Brook, Thad, Bojan, Markel, maybe Deron if he is not traded, and perhaps a piece like Plumlee, and say to himself “that is a decent group. I could be the piece that takes it to the next level.”  It’s extremely difficult as a free agent to see a 15-20 win team and think the team is worth investing several years into…unless they severely overpay.  If the Nets can present free agents with the outline of a core, that could  be enticing. Guys can say “this group isn’t bad. It’s missing some athletes, some quick guards. They’re close to being a good team in the east. I can be that guy. It’s New York, it’s a nice place, I can see this working.”  Recall the 2011 Pacers adding David West: Paul George was an unestablished rookie at the time and the team was sub .500.  But they had the outlines of a roster, and that intrigued West.

Essentially, the Nets are in a better place entering the 2016 summer with a lot of cap space, and the outlines of a good roster (not a good roster, but a decent one with some component parts), than with “a lot a lot” of cap space, but nothing in house to show guys what they could be joining, other than New York City and a nice building.

Entering free agency with Lopez and Young in house also allows the Nets to more effectively shift gears if the 2016 summer is unsuccessful: remember, there will be more teams chasing good and elite talent, than good and elite talent available. The Nets cannot bottom out for several years.  Their only method of improvement will be to make the jump from mediocre to good, which requires flexibility but also desirability in the form of players wanting to be a part of your franchise.  If the Nets strike out with Lopez and Young in place, they could use the free agent pool to carve together a decent roster, and take another shot in 2017.  Strike out without them, and things could become even more grim in Brooklyn.

Lopez has his weaknesses, for sure.  He has improved defensively, but struggles switching onto smaller players.  He is good using his length and big body to contest shots in the interior, but somewhat vulnerable, especially when he is not in position due to his slow feet.  His feet themselves are another issue entirely.  Young can be beat up by bigger 4’s, and is not a good shooter from the perimeter.

But when push comes to shove, no asset on the Nets roster has the potential of Lopez or Young, or projects to be tradeable for a player as good as Lopez and Young.  Replacing either this summer would be next to impossible, and would essentially require Brooklyn to put all of its eggs in their summer 2016 basket.

Your plan needs to be malleable, flexible to adjust to your situation.  The Nets need to keep Lopez and Young for something of a foundation going forward allowing for that.  Lopez is an elite scorer who has come along some defensively, and for his warts, carried Brooklyn into the 2015 playoffs and overwhelmed Al Horford (who dominated the Wizards front line in the next series) once there. Young can guard multiple positions and switch onto smaller guards, an essential skill in the modern NBA.  Recall his defense on the overtime forcing game 4 possession.  Both play well off of guards because they can score in the paint off quick hitters and rebound crash opportunities, another valuable skill for bigs in today’s game.

The Nets do have other questions this summer.  Are Deron and Joe not only tradeable, but tradeable for a package that makes any sense for Brooklyn?   Why take on future money in trading either, particularly Joe — and why deal for them without dumping that money.  Do Mirza and Anderson want back in, and if so, what type of future money do they want?  Is Plumlee worth keeping around, or should the Nets package him for a veteran, or for a young player at another position?  There are plenty of questions about the Nets going forward, but the most important questions center around their two best players.

The Nets need to retain Brook Lopez and Thaddeus Young this summer.