Half the season behind us, what FA targets are you most hoping on Schlenk's radar?

[sturt]

4 minutes ago, kg01 said:

things may be toxic enough that he'd want out.

Just sayin, I doubt it matters unless BKN is ready to pay him the same as the top bidder, in which case other things like that enter into that picture. Who knows, though. Maybe the team puts together an unanticipated playoff run, and Vaughn gets rave reviews enough to be made permanent.

[kg01]

6 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Sounds like the Bulls a few short years ago when Dwade joined and he and Butler splintered with the younger guys.

It'll be interesting to know which side of the aisle Harris falls under. Existing vs new players.

Clearly Kyme's little list of guys (while omitting others) was no coincidence.  Harris was on his list iiuc so they're probably in his ear telling him he's "one of us".  Forget them other chumps.  Great leader there.

[JayBirdHawk]

1 minute ago, kg01 said:

Clearly Kyme's little list of guys (while omitting others) was no coincidence.  Harris was on his list iiuc so they're probably in his ear telling him he's "one of us".  Forget them other chumps.  Great leader there.

I'd keep an eye on Brooklyn to see if they will be looking to move Levert and Allen. That's a way to use our capspace.

[kg01]

9 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I'd keep an eye on Brooklyn to see if they will be looking to move Levert and Allen. That's a way to use our capspace.

Yeah.  People make a big deal about Levert and Durant having used the same foot specialist and Dinwiddie/Kyme being friends from being in the same Harvard "class" this offseason.

But Dinwiddie, Allen, and Levert are gonna be stymied by what the Nets are gonna look like under the Ky-rant regime.

It would behoove them all to want out.  Caveat being, I don't think they're gonna win at a high level the way the on-paper optics seem to suggest they will.  Durant will need time to get back to full speed.

What does that team look like until that happens?  Well it kinda looks like this year's team with Kyme, which was not a good look.  They'll likely ask Levert to step in until Durant is ready.  Then he'll be a bench guy.  Surely Levert sees that coming.  He's not an effective off-ball guy (which may not bode well for him here, honestly).

[sturt]

2 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I'd keep an eye on Brooklyn to see if they will be looking to move Levert and Allen. That's a way to use our capspace.

I can understand them looking to move LeVert and that $16m (20-21), $17.5m (21-22), and $19m (22-23) contract.

But I'm unaware of anyone who considers LeVert to be a max or near-max kind of talent, and you'd be blowing up the July 2020 free agent budget on one player at a position where you already have committed minutes to a promising rookie. If either of those two conditions were not the case, it would make some sense, but because they both are the case, it doesn't.

I can understand us being very interested in Allen. I have no idea why BKN would be at all interested in moving him. Rather, if they're moving a big, it's almost certainly Jordan.

[Lurker]

33 minutes ago, sturt said:

I can understand us being very interested in Allen. I have no idea why BKN would be at all interested in moving him. Rather, if they're moving a big, it's almost certainly Jordan.

While that would certainly make sense to us normal people, Jordan is good buddies with Durant and Kyrie and he got inserted in the starting lineup immediately after Atkinson was ousted.

That's a dead on giveaway that the Nets are going to try to appease the two "superstar talents" they have first before making moves that make more sense. 

[kg01]

3 minutes ago, Lurker said:

While that would certainly make sense to us normal people, Jordan is good buddies with Durant and Kyrie and he got inserted in the starting lineup immediately after Atkinson was ousted.

That's a dead on giveaway that the Nets are going to try to appease the two "superstar talents" they have first before making moves that make more sense. 

Eggsactly.

What stu said makes sense, on paper.  Unfortunately (for Atkinson especially, moves are not made in a vacuum.  The only reason Jordan is even there is because Ky-rant wanted him there.  They ain't movin' him.

[JayBirdHawk]

48 minutes ago, sturt said:

I can understand them looking to move LeVert and that $16m (20-21), $17.5m (21-22), and $19m (22-23) contract.

But I'm unaware of anyone who considers LeVert to be a max or near-max kind of talent, and you'd be blowing up the July 2020 free agent budget on one player at a position where you already have committed minutes to a promising rookie. If either of those two conditions were not the case, it would make some sense, but because they both are the case, it doesn't.

I can understand us being very interested in Allen. I have no idea why BKN would be at all interested in moving him. Rather, if they're moving a big, it's almost certainly Jordan.

Levert is not making near max money or max money. (Max is 2020 is projected at $28 mil for the 25%)

How is it blowing up the July 2020 FAcy money when a trade would more than likely occur during FAcy. So instead of signing a FA you trade for a player already under contract. (FTR, I'm not advocating, just laying out options).

So why would you want to sign a FA (Ingram, max) at a position we have already committed minutes to a promising rookie?

[sturt]

39 minutes ago, Lurker said:

While that would certainly make sense to us normal people, Jordan is good buddies with Durant and Kyrie and he got inserted in the starting lineup immediately after Atkinson was ousted.

That's a dead on giveaway that the Nets are going to try to appease the two "superstar talents" they have first before making moves that make more sense. 

Um.

While that may be true, Occam and his razor suggests this is a just-as-likely if not better explanation... ol JA has been less than productive of-late...

 

 

[sturt]

36 minutes ago, kg01 said:

Eggsactly.

What stu said makes sense, on paper.  Unfortunately (for Atkinson especially, moves are not made in a vacuum.  The only reason Jordan is even there is because Ky-rant wanted him there.  They ain't movin' him.

Um.

Stu didn't say they were.

Stu only said if they were to move a big, it wouldn't likely be Allen ahead of Jordan.

[sturt]

35 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

1) Levert is not making near max money or max money. (Max is 2020 is projected at $28 mil for the 25%)

2) How is it blowing up the July 2020 FAcy money when a trade would more than likely occur during FAcy. So instead of signing a FA you trade for a player already under contract. (FTR, I'm not advocating, just laying out options).

3) So why would you want to sign a FA (Ingram, max) at a position we have already committed minutes to a promising rookie?

1) Right. That's my point. He's not making that kind of money, and that's because he's not a max kind-of talent. You have this rare occasion when you can realistically afford this year, and perhaps next, to pursue a top tier player. Or, you can spend it on players that it's not all that uncommon that you've been able to afford, and whose talent has correlated with that range.

Not sure why you do that, or at least, not until you have reason to abandon pursuit of a top tier player.

 

2)

 

3) 

1 hour ago, sturt said:

But I'm unaware of anyone who considers LeVert to be a max or near-max kind of talent, and you'd be blowing up the July 2020 free agent budget on one player at a position where you already have committed minutes to a promising rookie. If either of those two conditions were not the case, it would make some sense, but because they both are the case, it doesn't.

 

 

 

[JayBirdHawk]

1 minute ago, sturt said:

1) Right. That's my point. He's not making that kind of money, and that's because he's not a max kind-of talent. You have this rare occasion when you can realistically afford this year, and perhaps next, to pursue a top tier player. Or, you can spend it on players that it's not all that uncommon that you've been able to afford, and whose talent has correlated with that range.

Not sure why you do that, or at least, not until you have reason to abandon pursuit of a top tier player.

 

2)

 

3) 

 

 

 

There is only one max worthy FA in 2020 - Anthony Davis and he's not signing with the Hawks. Some others MAY get a max, doesn't mean they are MAX worthy players. Market conditions will dictate.

The way I see it, whichever FA we sign this offseason will be to upgrade our bench, and those aren't max level players.

I'm guessing TS will want to see how his Core 5 plus Capela can develop.

[kg01]

21 minutes ago, sturt said:

Um.

Stu didn't say they were.

Stu only said if they were to move a big, it wouldn't likely be Allen ahead of Jordan.

Not that I'm arguing with you .. because the kinder-gentler kg is in charge now, but if you accept the reason Jordan is there is mainly non-basketball reasons, then it's not that hard to surmise that Allen would be ahead of Jordan in terms of next big moved.

Holy run-on sentence, batman. 

[sturt]

4 minutes ago, kg01 said:

if you accept the reason Jordan is there is mainly non-basketball reasons,

Let me be clear.

He might be. He might not be.

But the decision to start Jordan last game is most easily explained by Allen's recent lack of overall productivity, not by the preferences of two top tier players who aren't even playing right now.

[kg01]

9 minutes ago, sturt said:

Let me be clear.

He might be. He might not be.

But the decision to start Jordan last game is most easily explained by Allen's recent lack of overall productivity, not by the preferences of two top tier players who aren't even playing right now.

You're quite clear, stu.

But, if you think him starting was most easily explained by a "recent lack of overall productivity" then I got some choice beachfront property in Macon for sale.  I'll give you a good price.  Just for you, stu.

Please forgive my sarcasm.  I mean no offense.

- KinderGentler 01

[sturt]

48 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

1) There is only one max worthy FA in 2020 - Anthony Davis and he's not signing with the Hawks. Some others MAY get a max, doesn't mean they are MAX worthy players. Market conditions will dictate.

2) The way I see it, whichever FA we sign this offseason will be to upgrade our bench, and those aren't max level players.

I'm guessing TS will want to see how his Core 5 plus Capela can develop.

1) There is only one irrefutably max-worthy FA in 2020.

If "some other"... let's just say Ingram for instance... gets the max, that means some GM... not you, clearly, but some GM... thought Ingram is worthy... by definition, or the GM would be insane... literally insane, not just hyperbole... for paying max money.

2) I agree he will be looking to upgrade our bench this off-season. And he could even spend $16m on one player (or trade for one).

But the case is reasonable, if not stout that Schlenk's not going to want to spend much more money than that, in order to ensure he has optimal flexibility in 2021 in case some prime opportunity arises.

And again, it's plausible that what talent per dollar value you can get in free agency this summer will be at a zenith since we'll have so much less competition than is typical... such that perhaps the money you'd be committing to LeVert would get you a similar talent, plus a replacement-level player.

[sturt]

1 minute ago, kg01 said:

You're quite clear, stu.

But, if you think him starting was most easily explained by a "recent lack of overall productivity" then I got some choice beachfront property in Macon for sale.  I'll give you a good price.  Just for you, stu.

Please forgive my sarcasm.  I mean no offense.

- KinderGentler 01

You can say those words, but if you believe it's most easily explained by two star players' opinions who aren't even going to be on the floor, then I've got some choice beachfront property even further inland for sale at a good price.

Nonsense. Vaughn wants to win, like anyone else who wants a permanent job. He earns that by making decisions that are more likely to allow him to win, not by making decisions that have nothing to do with winning.

[kg01]

1 minute ago, sturt said:

You can say those words, but if you believe it's most easily explained by two star players' opinions who aren't even going to be on the floor, then I've got some choice beachfront property even further inland for sale at a good price.

Nonsense. Vaughn wants to win, like anyone else who wants a permanent job. He earns that by making decisions that are more likely to allow him to win, not by making decisions that have nothing to do with winning.

I honestly can't tell if you're joking or serious.  You really think they didn't get Atkinson fired?  Whether by overt or, more likely, incredibly passive aggressive actions.

[sturt]

I see what you did there.

Everyone did.

But of course, that's a different question, kinder/gentler.

 

[kg01]

Just now, sturt said:

I see what you did there.

Everyone did.

But of course, that's a different question, kinder/gentler.

 

All kidding aside though, I thought it was quite clear this was Ky-rant's doing.  The firing and Jordan now starting.  Am I missing something?