Brooklyn Nets Dame Trade Ideas and Rumors

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
sheed30 said:
Everything you said is so wrong on many levels, I don’t even know where to begin.

how about we get a better package and just so no to Simmons so we don’t even have to deal with all those things you listed.

He is not an asset or a problem, whichever way you look at Simmons, we need to have.

keep him far away and we won’t even have to talk about him, how about that?

sounds like the best thing to me.
Click to expand...
You're wrong! And i'm not gonna provide any reasons why!

Neener neener.
 
Blazers need to be in asset collection mode. Period. Full-stop.

If some deal with the Nets bringing Simmons + assets back is a part of the best deals we can make, then I'm all for it. He's a near-zero risk acquisition that comes with upside and assets attached. If there are better deals to be made out there, great.
 
andalusian said:
I would rather have Simmons and 2 picks than someone else and 1 pick
Click to expand...
Meaning having Simmons and 2 1sts as opposed to, say, Clowney and a 1st?

I’d probably agree. I have not idea if Brooklyn would be interested if that though.

For us, it makes all the sense in the world. 5 1sts as opposed to 4, plus maybe another from Ant and another from Grant. That’s a whole lot of 1sts to have on a team with Scoot, Sharpe, and maybe another piece from a deal for Ant. Taking on Ben’s deal actually makes sense. Summer 2024 only has OG and Okungwu as guys I’d want. In Summer 2025, we would technically get PG or Ingram and also give Marcus smart a big deal for 3 years. That would make for a really competitive team as soon as 2025.

Scoot/Sharpe/Ingram/(Ant Trade)/(Grant Trade) with Smart, Jovic, Kris, Rupert is probably a contending team. That roster doesn’t include a lotto pick in 2024, the 2024 MIA 1st, or a possibly 2025 lotto.

So year, Simmons + 2 1sts > Simmons + rookie + 1 1st.
 
BankTeller said:
Meaning having Simmons and 2 1sts as opposed to, say, Clowney and a 1st?

I’d probably agree. I have not idea if Brooklyn would be interested if that though.

For us, it makes all the sense in the world. 5 1sts as opposed to 4, plus maybe another from Ant and another from Grant. That’s a whole lot of 1sts to have on a team with Scoot, Sharpe, and maybe another piece from a deal for Ant. Taking on Ben’s deal actually makes sense. Summer 2024 only has OG and Okungwu as guys I’d want. In Summer 2025, we would technically get PG or Ingram and also give Marcus smart a big deal for 3 years. That would make for a really competitive team as soon as 2025.

Scoot/Sharpe/Ingram/(Ant Trade)/(Grant Trade) with Smart, Jovic, Kris, Rupert is probably a contending team. That roster doesn’t include a lotto pick in 2024, the 2024 MIA 1st, or a possibly 2025 lotto.

So year, Simmons + 2 1sts > Simmons + rookie + 1 1st.
Click to expand...

I read it as Simmons + 2 picks, or another sizeable contract like Lowry and 1 pick
 
SlyPokerCat said:
You're wrong! And i'm not gonna provide any reasons why!

Neener neener.
Click to expand...
How about I’m not sitting down in front a cpu or phone to have time to address all those silly things that were said, because there is a lot to address.

All those things are a reason to stay away from Simmons, so he is helping my case actually without even knowing it.

And trying to troll basically with that comment, neener neeer, what are you fucking 12?
 
sheed30 said:
How about I’m not sitting down in front a cpu or phone to have time to address all those silly things that were said, because there is a lot to address.

All those things are a reason to stay away from Simmons, so he is helping my case actually without even knowing it.

And trying to troll basically with that comment, neener neeer, what are you fucking 12?
Click to expand...

Hit me with one then. My post made 4 points. Talk me out of one of them.
 
sheed30 said:
How about I’m not sitting down in front a cpu or phone to have time to address all those silly things that were said, because there is a lot to address.

All those things are a reason to stay away from Simmons, so he is helping my case actually without even knowing it.

And trying to troll basically with that comment, neener neeer, what are you fucking 12?
Click to expand...

Can't take the heat, i see.

Neener neener.
 
glazeduck said:
Hit me with one then. My post made 4
points. Talk me out of one of them.
Click to expand...

Well your last point is trash.

“As a player, when he's able to be on the court, he's the perfect forward to pair with a lineup of scorers -- he's a great defender, competent rebounder, doesn't need shots and likes facilitating. If he somehow gets his body and mind right, he's definitely a plus player”

you went and listed all the things you think Simmons is good at, if you haven’t seen he has regressed then there is no point in debating with you. And if you didn’t know, his defense slipped greatly last year, so that was the best point you could make, he is a good defender, he was but he was average last year.

He is a hugeeee lability on offense, you can’t spread the floor at all with him in the game, his ass won’t even attempt a 3 lmao. he distances himself from teammates, not a good locker room guy for the young guys, we need to surround they with hard working vet not mental midgets like Simmons, ya that’s a great thing for the young guys to see.

who cares if he sits? Um, this right here tells me you really don’t know much lol. The team that pays him money cares, the teammates that are fighting their ass off care, the locker room and coach cares. Come on man.

you made better points why we should stay away. Portland is in the driver seat here, Dame has a no trade clause. If we don’t want Simmons we make that clear, plain and simple.
 
Last edited:
Freshtown said:
I do this asap.

Click to expand...

I feel like this can't be real, because you take this and then immediately cut off all communication with the outside world so they can't take it back. I mean this is a monster in our favor 5 picks, Claxton and Simmons? I'd ask for Clowney or Whitehead instead of O'Neale if possible, but yeah this would be amazing.
 
If a player has shown a tendency to give less than 100% he shouldn't be on the team.

Pretend that Scoot Henderson is Jimmy Butler. Would Butler want to play with this guy? If the answer is No, he doesn't belong with Scoot.
 
blazerfan11 said:
If a player has shown a tendency to give less than 100% he shouldn't be on the team.

Pretend that Scoot Henderson is Jimmy Butler. Would Butler want to play with this guy? If the answer is No, he doesn't belong with Scoot.
Click to expand...
He only has two years left. If he is plays well, great… if he doesn’t you just ask him not to come around and let him become and expiring that you can trade.
 
I’ve never understood people coming in and basically saying I’m right you’re wrong my opinion matters and yours doesn’t. What’s the point of coming into a forum if your opinion is only opinion you want to listen to?

I take the open minded approach and with a good argument can be swayed to your opinion.
 
blazerfan11 said:
If a player has shown a tendency to give less than 100% he shouldn't be on the team.

.
Click to expand...

Yes, he reportedly had some attitude problems at LSU. He did not play that hard. But in the NBA hasn't he basically been Kawai Leonard (minutes the two rings) He gives 100% when he plays, he just does not play unless he is 100% healthy. The guy is at the point where he is playing for his next contract. I think the reason he has been working out hard in the weight room is he knows it is now or never if he wants a big contract again.

Again when he played last year, he had some good games. Not saying his back issues are not a worry, but I am not that worried about him giving 100 % when he is out on the floor. I would still rather roll the dice with Ben's bad contract for two years than take Lowry's bad contract and buy him out.
 
blazerfan11 said:
If a player has shown a tendency to give less than 100% he shouldn't be on the team.

Pretend that Scoot Henderson is Jimmy Butler. Would Butler want to play with this guy? If the answer is No, he doesn't belong with Scoot.
Click to expand...

Trying to play psychologist isn't the way to build a team. Ben can be a great player and only has two years on his deal. In one year he'll be a valuable expiring deal. If you can get additional assets then it's worth to take him on. He's still young.
 
Wizard Mentor said:
Seriously, Nate, you should watch this. Pretty interesting stuff (Ben Simmons is by far the worst contract in the NBA):
Click to expand...

Very interesting. Dame, Nurk and Simons all mentioned either directly or indirectly. Duncan Robinson way up there, as was Kyle Lowry.
 
glazeduck said:
I think we've found -- over and over again -- that role playing wings are rather easy to come by. Dynamic, game-changing ones are not. Maybe we get lucky with one of the many picks coming our way, but purely between Clax and Ayton, Ayton seems like you're buying at his floor with a pretty massive ceiling. Claxton can't do half of what Ayton can, you're buying higher and may lose him in a year.

I like Claxton a lot, for the record, but Ayton, for the right price, is super interesting on a young team without a ton of locked in usage...
Click to expand...
Chris Paul saved Ayton's career in Phoenix. I'm thinking Scoot could do the same for him in Portland. I see pick and rolls all day with those two.
 
If the Blazers reached an agreement with the Nets on a Dame trade before the Joe Harris trade is finalized then Harris' outgoing salary could count in our trade as part of a pseudo three team trade.

We could send out Dame and Nurk and really only have to take back the salary of Claxton and O'Neal. Nurk would fit in the KD TPE. The trade could look like this maybe even with one more first. Oh and I don't buy it that Brooklyn wouldn't be interested in trading for Dame.

upload_2023-7-6_8-44-31.png
 
It would be nice if those players were signed to longer term deals. That is the downside I see. On the other hand, that may be what it takes for BKN to do it.
 
Brooklyn is just so logical, I can't believe it hasn't yet been done. We're one of the few teams that wouldn't gag over the Simmons contract, they have young length and tons of draft picks. Lillard would lift that team to the top of the Eastern Conference. Even better, Brooklyn would get to f*** Miami.

So, what's going on? There must be something.
 
maxiep said:
Brooklyn is just so logical, I can't believe it hasn't yet been done. We're one of the few teams that wouldn't gag over the Simmons contract, they have young length and tons of draft picks. Lillard would lift that team to the top of the Eastern Conference. Even better, Brooklyn would get to f*** Miami.

So, what's going on? There must be something.
Click to expand...

The something is that Cronin is bending over backwards trying to appease Dame and his agent.

Both Boston and Brooklyn offer significantly superior returns to Miami.
 
blazerkor said:
If the Blazers reached an agreement with the Nets on a Dame trade before the Joe Harris trade is finalized then Harris' outgoing salary could count in our trade as part of a pseudo three team trade.

We could send out Dame and Nurk and really only have to take back the salary of Claxton and O'Neal. Nurk would fit in the KD TPE. The trade could look like this maybe even with one more first. Oh and I don't buy it that Brooklyn wouldn't be interested in trading for Dame.

View attachment 56705
Click to expand...

I'd do that even if we got less picks back. Brooklyn would be pretty good too (even though losing Claxton hurts). This starting lineup seems top-5 to me.

Lillard/Bridges/DFS/Johnson/Nurk

Best defenders Dame has ever played with and he can go thermonuclear on offense with 4 guys that can hit an open three around him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top