B/R Eric Pincus, CLE MIA PHI WAS

[DowJones]

What non-2024 picks go where?

Reed and Mitchell to Miami
Butler to Philly
Herro to Cleveland

That's the deal IMO... just need all 3 fan bases to agree on the picks

If it’s just a pick based deal then I don’t see how this competes with Brooklyn when they have the PHX picks.

[BBallFreak]

What non-2024 picks go where?

Reed and Mitchell to Miami
Butler to Philly
Herro to Cleveland

That's the deal IMO... just need all 3 fan bases to agree on the picks

It seems to me the bulk of the picks have to come from Philadelphia. If I'm Miami I'm offering up one pick only.

[NYG]

What non-2024 picks go where?

Reed and Mitchell to Miami
Butler to Philly
Herro to Cleveland

That's the deal IMO... just need all 3 fan bases to agree on the picks

If it’s just a pick based deal then I don’t see how this competes with Brooklyn when they have the PHX picks.

Edit: Simmons for Mitchell and LeVert would require which Nets picks?

[DowJones]

What non-2024 picks go where?

Reed and Mitchell to Miami
Butler to Philly
Herro to Cleveland

That's the deal IMO... just need all 3 fan bases to agree on the picks

If it’s just a pick based deal then I don’t see how this competes with Brooklyn when they have the PHX picks.

Edit: Simmons for Mitchell and LeVert would require which Nets picks?

The Cavs have no reason to take on Simmons.

-Cam Johnson
-DFS
-2027 PHX 1st
-2029 PHX 1st

That is the core of what I have in mind. Swaps, the Dallas pick, Clowney, etc can be negotiated on but what I posted above would be the foundation of a Mitchell to Brooklyn deal that doesn't include Bridges.

[SkyHook]

.

Please include your reasoning as per board policy. I realize it was someone else's idea, but we still need that.

Thanks!

Sorry about that. Didn't even cross my mind as I was commenting on an outside proposal. Looks like there was lively discussion nonetheless.

[jbk1234]

What non-2024 picks go where?

Reed and Mitchell to Miami
Butler to Philly
Herro to Cleveland

That's the deal IMO... just need all 3 fan bases to agree on the picks

If it’s just a pick based deal then I don’t see how this competes with Brooklyn when they have the PHX picks.

Edit: Simmons for Mitchell and LeVert would require which Nets picks?

All of them.

[Texas Chuck]

.

Please include your reasoning as per board policy. I realize it was someone else's idea, but we still need that.

Thanks!

Sorry about that. Didn't even cross my mind as I was commenting on an outside proposal. Looks like there was lively discussion nonetheless.

Yeah there definitely was. And I figured it was like that which is why we kept it open. Still its a good policy in general.

[Godaddycurse]

If it’s just a pick based deal then I don’t see how this competes with Brooklyn when they have the PHX picks.

Edit: Simmons for Mitchell and LeVert would require which Nets picks?

All of them.

you think an expiring mitchell is worth 6 1sts?

[BBallFreak]

Edit: Simmons for Mitchell and LeVert would require which Nets picks?

All of them.

you think an expiring mitchell is worth 6 1sts?

I think it has to do with the Simmons inclusion. That's essentially dead money. No one wants that guy...

[tidho]

Edit: Simmons for Mitchell and LeVert would require which Nets picks?

All of them.

you think an expiring mitchell is worth 6 1sts?

well, CLE is also giving a functional (yet frustratingly inconsistent) rotation player, and more importantly taking on Simmons. LeVert is probably worth the worst of the picks, they'd deserve a pick for the honor of paying Simmons $40M next year, that means four for Mitchell. May or may not be worth that, but it's closer.

[HartfordWhalers]

All of them.

you think an expiring mitchell is worth 6 1sts?

well, CLE is also giving a functional (yet frustratingly inconsistent) rotation player, and more importantly taking on Simmons. LeVert is probably worth the worst of the picks, they'd deserve a pick for the honor of paying Simmons $40M next year, that means four for Mitchell. May or may not be worth that, but it's closer.

I have LeVert as negative value.

[Texas Chuck]

again we can't double count salary to demand extra pay. Yes Simmons isn't worth his money. But that money is already allocated to Mitchell. So you would get compensated for the better player, you don't also get to claim an additional $40M of salary you must be compensated for.

I also notice we never do this when our team uses bad money as salary matching. Kevin Love was sold to this board as an asset because he would eventually be an expiring contract. He wasn't an asset, but if he had been used as matching as an expiring and the team getting him was sending out as much or more money there wouldn't have been a Kevin Love tax. Cleveland would have just been expected to pay for the upgrade.

No idea why this continues.

[Godaddycurse]

you think an expiring mitchell is worth 6 1sts?

well, CLE is also giving a functional (yet frustratingly inconsistent) rotation player, and more importantly taking on Simmons. LeVert is probably worth the worst of the picks, they'd deserve a pick for the honor of paying Simmons $40M next year, that means four for Mitchell. May or may not be worth that, but it's closer.

I have LeVert as negative value.

yea if levert cost a 1st then keep him out of the trade

[jbk1234]

you think an expiring mitchell is worth 6 1sts?

well, CLE is also giving a functional (yet frustratingly inconsistent) rotation player, and more importantly taking on Simmons. LeVert is probably worth the worst of the picks, they'd deserve a pick for the honor of paying Simmons $40M next year, that means four for Mitchell. May or may not be worth that, but it's closer.

I have LeVert as negative value.

Like Mitchell and Simmons, LeVert will be on an expiring contract this summer.

Given this free agency pool, I could see someone giving LeVert a one-year deal at or near what he's making. I can't see anyone giving Simmons a one-year contract at or near his current salary.

[HartfordWhalers]

well, CLE is also giving a functional (yet frustratingly inconsistent) rotation player, and more importantly taking on Simmons. LeVert is probably worth the worst of the picks, they'd deserve a pick for the honor of paying Simmons $40M next year, that means four for Mitchell. May or may not be worth that, but it's closer.

I have LeVert as negative value.

Like Mitchell and Simmons, LeVert will be on an expiring contract this summer.

Given this free agency pool, I could see someone giving LeVert a one-year deal at or near what he's making. I can't see anyone giving Simmons a one-year contract at or near his current salary.

If a gm did give LeVert a one year deal at his deal, I have it a bad decision.
If a gm gave Simmons a 1 year deal at his contract, I have it likely the result of a kidnapping extortion plot.

The second one doesn't make the first one positive value, just provides a worse contract as comparison.

And since Simmons for Mitchel works as is, there is no need to water down a Mitchell return by including LeVert. After all, I would expect the Nets to offer less if LeVert is included and cuts their ability to use cap space or the remaining tpe from the deal and have more flexibility. Certainly not include an extra 1st for the joy of LeVert.

[jbk1234]

I have LeVert as negative value.

Like Mitchell and Simmons, LeVert will be on an expiring contract this summer.

Given this free agency pool, I could see someone giving LeVert a one-year deal at or near what he's making. I can't see anyone giving Simmons a one-year contract at or near his current salary.

If a gm did give LeVert a one year deal at his deal, I have it a bad decision.
If a gm gave Simmons a 1 year deal at his contract, I have it likely the result of a kidnapping extortion plot.

The second one doesn't make the first one positive value, just provides a worse contract as comparison.

And since Simmons for Mitchel works as is, there is no need to water down a Mitchell return by including LeVert. After all, I would expect the Nets to offer less if LeVert is included and cuts their ability to use cap space or the remaining tpe from the deal and have more flexibility. Certainly not include an extra 1st for the joy of LeVert.

Personally, I'd be good keeping LeVert in the last year of his contract, especially if Mitchell is leaving and Simmons, who doesn't really fit our roster at all, is the only one coming back.

The push I'd make is Niang for DFS.

[HartfordWhalers]

Like Mitchell and Simmons, LeVert will be on an expiring contract this summer.

Given this free agency pool, I could see someone giving LeVert a one-year deal at or near what he's making. I can't see anyone giving Simmons a one-year contract at or near his current salary.

If a gm did give LeVert a one year deal at his deal, I have it a bad decision.
If a gm gave Simmons a 1 year deal at his contract, I have it likely the result of a kidnapping extortion plot.

The second one doesn't make the first one positive value, just provides a worse contract as comparison.

And since Simmons for Mitchel works as is, there is no need to water down a Mitchell return by including LeVert. After all, I would expect the Nets to offer less if LeVert is included and cuts their ability to use cap space or the remaining tpe from the deal and have more flexibility. Certainly not include an extra 1st for the joy of LeVert.

Personally, I'd be good keeping LeVert in the last year of his contract, especially if Mitchell is leaving and Simmons, who doesn't really fit our roster at all, is the only one coming back.

The push I'd make is Niang for DFS.

I kind of like Niang with Simmons (needed shooting) while DFS with Mitchell (defense), but obviously that would be a possible way to add value to Cleveland instead of via just picks.

[jbk1234]

If a gm did give LeVert a one year deal at his deal, I have it a bad decision.
If a gm gave Simmons a 1 year deal at his contract, I have it likely the result of a kidnapping extortion plot.

The second one doesn't make the first one positive value, just provides a worse contract as comparison.

And since Simmons for Mitchel works as is, there is no need to water down a Mitchell return by including LeVert. After all, I would expect the Nets to offer less if LeVert is included and cuts their ability to use cap space or the remaining tpe from the deal and have more flexibility. Certainly not include an extra 1st for the joy of LeVert.

Personally, I'd be good keeping LeVert in the last year of his contract, especially if Mitchell is leaving and Simmons, who doesn't really fit our roster at all, is the only one coming back.

The push I'd make is Niang for DFS.

I kind of like Niang with Simmons (needed shooting) while DFS with Mitchell (defense), but obviously that would be a possible way to add value to Cleveland instead of via just picks.

The problem is Simmons would only be on the Cavs for, at most, one season as to where Niang would stick around. If the Nets don't want him, he could be routed to a 3rd (non-playoff) team with minor draft capital. As far as DFS, the Nets still have all of Clowney, Claxton, Bridges, et. al., and getting off of DFS's P.O. would allow the Nets to add a third guy in the summer of 2025. He only started 57 games for them.

[Texas Chuck]

Niang being painted as a positive worth draft compensation while DFS is being painted as a contract a team would be delighted to get off because...checks notes...he only started more than twice as many games last season than Niang has in his career.

It's almost like we are valuing players for reasons other than their actual play.

[jbk1234]

Niang being painted as a positive worth draft compensation while DFS is being painted as a contract a team would be delighted to get off because...checks notes...he only started more than twice as many games last season than Niang has in his career.

It's almost like we are valuing players for reasons other than their actual play.

Are you even reading the posts?