Dave D - Chances of VC Trade “Better than 50-50″

[NOMAM]

http://www.nj.com/nets/index.ssf/2008/12/mails_in_dynamic_duo_edition.html

I have come around to think that it's better than 50-50 that they'll trade Vince. Call it a hunch, call it a case of talking to too many agents and not enough GMs over the last four months, call it whatever. It will be something they wrestle with for a long time, and a deal may not materialize, but it makes sense on a lot of levels if their other building blocks (Devin, Brook, Yi) continue their improvement. Of course, they have to identify a target the same way they zeroed in on Harris when they started shopping Kidd: It has to be a young guy who has the potential to be a top-5 at his position, someone underperforming because of present circumstances ("an undervalued asset" as the business people say) because his team has too many guys at his position and won't be able to reach his full potential without a change of address. They've done well in the first two stages of the rebuilding. But even if they crack the top 8, they're not going to win the title in the next two years, and as the old saying goes, you can't be half-pregnant. Either you go for it now or lay the groundwork to attract the big fish in 2010. By February, they'll know which option is more practical, and it's likely to be "continue the rebuild," and they'll find a landing spot for VC. The one potential snag: He's still the owner's fave.

Hmmm...

If Devin, Brook and Yi continue to improve and show/maintain a star/starter level of play, that would make them more more likely to trade Vince? I would think that would make them more likely to keep Vince and try to acquire another star player at the 3 or maybe the 4.

But Dave says they would be looking for a young guy who could possibly break out into a star player if they were to trade Vince at some point.

Looking over some teams the only team that looks like a potential trade partner is the Clippers(oh god) where Gordon is involved along with Camby's contract possibly in a three way trade for Vince.

What other young swing man could they target in a trade for Vince? Or could they just go for some unprotected picks to try and luck out in the draft lottery?

And is a big fish in 2010 still a realistic plan?

 

[PsychoNetsFan34]

I highly highly doubt Vince Carter is traded this season, or next for that matter unless it's for another star player. The reason for this being with the move to Brooklyn pushed to 2011-2012 at the earliest, the NETS need to have some kind of star player in the Zod to keep what little fans that show up, still coming out to the arena. Also Bruce is a business man, and he wouldn't do a move that would hurt the NETS financially like less ticket sales or season ticket renewals. He wants to have a decent enough product on the floor in Jersey so fans will make the move with them to Brooklyn.

 

[Malorkayel]

LOL Dave D, he was so down on the RJ trade over the summer. Down on the Nets in general. Said some things he shouldn't have. However, it's better to be proven wrong being negative than the reverse.

50% of trading Carter, when Carter makes the shots on if and when he's trade. What does that mean? Kind of like the cup is mostly full, but I'm holding the refill pitcher??? Doesn't mean anything.

 

[Netted]

I doubt it. He's too important to the continued development of these young guys. They need the encouragement from a successful veteran.

Maybe next summer. Maybe.

 

[GrandKenyon6]

Vince is way too important to the continued development of the young guys and he has led the team perfectly so far. They can't trade him.

 

[Balla 15]

I doubt he gets traded anytime soon, especially with how he's leading this team so far. But if they do trade him I hope they have the decency to trade him to a contender and not some crap team considering all he's done for the Nets.

 

[Netted]

I doubt he gets traded anytime soon, especially with how he's leading this team so far. But if they do trade him I hope they have the decency to trade him to a contender and not some crap team considering all he's done for the Nets.

If he's traded to a team that looks like a contender by the time Thorn is done with them they won't be a contender anymore... see Dallas.

 

[Claud]

If he gets traded it will have a negative impact on the chemestry this team now has, it will also affect the youngesters who look at VC as their leader.

 

[DevinNets34]

Don't fuck up with the chemistry, don't trade Vince.

 

[killa kadafi191]

Trying to make sense of a VC trade.

One Lebron is not coming ever so losing VC what exactly are you trying to gain.

Yes their are more players in 2010 than Lebron Bosh and Wade but if your are trying to win and compete for a title those are one of the players you will need.

Plus why are the Nets clearing all this space. How will you be able to attract players to come play here??

Devin Harris is okay but that's not enough.

Yi?? He's Nenad Krstic with better handles.

Lopez? Let's wait two season before we say he is legit.

The Nets don't be careful they'll end up like the Bulls back when they had all that cap space but no one wanted to play there.

Then the big question how long does Devin accept losing?? He's doing good now but teams are focusing on VC. You subtract that it's Starbury all over again

 

[Black Republican]

I'd welcome a vince trade. To a contender, of course. Prolly Utah

 

[AGGiE]

I'd welcome a vince trade. To a contender, of course. Prolly Utah

VC + Ager for AK47 + Brewer +1st round pick?

 

[JRon]

I usually like Dave D, but not here.
He's talking out his arse. He almost admits to as much before he launches into his hypothesis.
Yes, if the winning trend does not continue, I could see a trade done involving VC, but I think it more like 30%.
The problem I have here with Dave is the statement:
"If Devin, Brook, and Yi continue their development."
WTF?!?!?!?
1) If Devin gets any more 'developed' Mark Cuban will kill himself.
2) Lopez - he's a rookie, there will be ups and downs, "development" is something you see in yrs 2-4.
3) Yi - "continues to develop"?????? Umm, that implies that he has already started to Develop. I still hope, but so far, I don't see it. His play bothers me much more often than not and frankly, I'm a tad concerned.

 

[DevinNets34]

I usually like Dave D, but not here.
He's talking out his arse. He almost admits to as much before he launches into his hypothesis.
Yes, if the winning trend does not continue, I could see a trade done involving VC, but I think it more like 30%.
The problem I have here with Dave is the statement:
"If Devin, Brook, and Yi continue their development."
WTF?!?!?!?
1) If Devin gets any more 'developed' Mark Cuban will kill himself.
2) Lopez - he's a rookie, there will be ups and downs, "development" is something you see in yrs 2-4.
3) Yi - "continues to develop"?????? Umm, that implies that he has already started to Develop. I still hope, but so far, I don't see it. His play bothers me much more often than not and frankly, I'm a tad concerned.

good point !

 

[ffz]

no way vince is traded unless you get a star that you think for sure will be better than vince in 2 years. Vince brings in too many fans and puts too many butts in the stands to trade him for anythign less than a sure thing.

 

[Dumpy]

I usually like Dave D, but not here.
He's talking out his arse. He almost admits to as much before he launches into his hypothesis.
Yes, if the winning trend does not continue, I could see a trade done involving VC, but I think it more like 30%.
The problem I have here with Dave is the statement:
"If Devin, Brook, and Yi continue their development."
WTF?!?!?!?
1) If Devin gets any more 'developed' Mark Cuban will kill himself.
2) Lopez - he's a rookie, there will be ups and downs, "development" is something you see in yrs 2-4.
3) Yi - "continues to develop"?????? Umm, that implies that he has already started to Develop. I still hope, but so far, I don't see it. His play bothers me much more often than not and frankly, I'm a tad concerned.

All good points. Vince seems to be a great leader and is helping the kids to develop. If you just have a bunch of young players without any veteran leadership--and the right veteran leadership--they will stagnate and develop bad habits. We're not privy to alot of what happens, but from what i see, Vince is an integral part of the development of the kids into capable players. He's also at the height of his ability right now, from what i can see, when you take into account his passing, leadership, and overall team play. He's irreplaceable. Besides, even though he would be a few years older, if healthy, can anyone really say that he won't be just as effective in two or four years? A core of Devin, Vince, and a more-finished Brook . . . and add a key free agent like Bosh . . . wow.

The Nets also don't need more cap space. Once Swift and Hassell come off the books, they'll have plenty of room. And then we can always hope that they can move Simmons.

 

[Dumpy]

no way vince is traded unless you get a star that you think for sure will be better than vince in 2 years. Vince brings in too many fans and puts too many butts in the stands to trade him for anythign less than a sure thing.

he's also really, really good. He's attacking the basket like a force of nature. Seriously, is he the best in the league at putting some weird spin on the ball and getting those bizarre circus shots off the backboard to bank in?

 

[Netted]

he's also really, really good. He's attacking the basket like a force of nature. Seriously, is he the best in the league at putting some weird spin on the ball and getting those bizarre circus shots off the backboard to bank in?

The new constant attack offense that occasionally uses the dribble drive has gotten Vince to attack more than in the past. He doesn't hang out behind the three point line with Kidd anymore. Him and Devin are both attacking.

He's also become a much better shooter from deep. Better shot selection. I think he can play at a high level for another 3 or 4 years. He won't stay the same high flyer of his youth, but he has really developed his bball IQ, his shooting, and his play making. Having made those adjustments will extend his career.

 

[Shotzy]

But You also have to look at it from a value standpoint. With the way he is playing this season, will he ever have more value than now. Look at RJ has his best season and gets traded. Could the same thing happen?

I personally think we should keep him.

 

[Netted]

I'd welcome a vince trade. To a contender, of course. Prolly Utah

That's funny because I don't think he would. I think he likes what he's doing here.

I think he would hate going to a team like Cleveland and have to give up his new leadership role to a player like Lebron, learn a whole new system that may not bring out his skills, and be just a role player.

 

[Dumpy]

But You also have to look at it from a value standpoint. With the way he is playing this season, will he ever have more value than now. Look at RJ has his best season and gets traded. Could the same thing happen?

I personally think we should keep him.

There are alot of ways to think about the RJ trade. One way is: The Nets felt they needed to trade either RJ or Vince to create cap room and acquire some youth. They chose to keep Vince.

I always liked RJ, but he was overpaid in relation to his contributions. Vince is not overpaid.

You never know what will happen. An injury to Paul Pierce would make the Celtics beatable. I don't see the value in totally giving up because you think you can't compete. The Nets are just one player away from being an elite team. So were the Lakers last year, and they were handed Pau Gasol. Who knows what will happen? Maybe they will be able to acquire Gerald Wallace or someone like that on the cheap. They unexpectedly came away with Vince Carter for essentially nothing. Maybe some team would agree to take Sean/Boone, a couple of picks, plus salary filler (Hassell/Swift/Simmons) for a true star SF or PF.

 

[nets1]

does anybody know if vince has a no trade clause in his contract, or does he get to decide on which team he gets traded to? I know his contract was signed pretty fast when he re-uped, but most superstar vets have certain clauses in them.

 

[Dumpy]

That's funny because I don't think he would. I think he likes what he's doing here.

I think he would hate going to a team like Cleveland and have to give up his new leadership role to a player like Lebron, learn a whole new system that may not bring out his skills, and be just a role player.

Vince also gets to play PG for half the game right now. If he was traded and used as a secondary threat, he wouldn't be as involved in the offense. He really relishes setting up his teammates. I think it is a pain in the neck for opposing defenses how Devin and Vince are constantly switching roles.

 

[DevinNets34]

But You also have to look at it from a value standpoint. With the way he is playing this season, will he ever have more value than now. Look at RJ has his best season and gets traded. Could the same thing happen?

I personally think we should keep him.

RJ gave up his defense, and he is not that effective like Devin Harris.

After many seasons, it proves that Vince and RJ can't cooperate to a better level, specifically Vince and Devin jell so well more than Vince and RJ.

and RJ doesn't have the same leadership as Vince. and Vince brings more fans to the court than RJ.

That's why they decided to deal RJ instead of Vince.

The most important is that Vince is better than RJ in basketball.

 

[MaxaMillion711]

its better to get rid of this injury prone, heartless, un clutch bum. better for both parties.

 

[Real]

You can't gauge the chances of a VC trade, because Kiki and Rod are only going to trade Vince if they can hose the other team for a diamond in the rough like they did with the Kidd trade.

 

[Dumpy]

RJ gave up his defense, and he is not that effective like Devin Harris.

After many seasons, it proves that Vince and RJ can't cooperate to a better level, specifically Vince and Devin jell so well more than Vince and RJ.

and RJ doesn't have the same leadership as Vince. and Vince brings more fans to the court than RJ.

That's why they decided to deal RJ instead of Vince.

The most important is that Vince is better than RJ in basketball.

It also seems as if Coach Frank knew all along how he would structure the offense around Devin. Or Devin plus Vince, if you prefer. The most important two other elements would be inside scoring (which Brook is doing an adequate job at so far), and perimeter shooting. Neither of which RJ really helps at. And, as people noticed, his defense had started to suffer, and is probably little better than Simmons' at this point.

We've all talked about this before, but the Nets' core of Devin-Vince-Brook, plus their primary bench guys of Keyon, Jarvis Hayes, Najera, Boone, Ryan is a pretty good start to a good team. They just need better forwards. I'm willing to give Yi some slack for a few months in deference to my friend Ghoti. If they could somehow improve on Simmons without giving up anyone in that core, they'd be pretty solid.

 

[DevinNets34]

If we read the article by Dave D carefully, it said if the Nets would like to trade Vince, it must be for a young potential player.

OK, maybe the league is filled with young potential players, but the teams that own those players are rebuilding,

how the hell the rebuilding team would like to trade their potential player for Vince ? That's nonsense.

It's not like that Mavs are struggling to win a title, so they decided to trade their young player for a declining all-time star pg, who just makes the USA better, and maybe that point made Cuban believe Jason Kidd is the answer.

The Nets need Vince, and they also can't find a suitable team to trade Vince. Stop talking about trading Vince to Cavs for wally, that is the worst trade idea on the planet ever, and that would make the Cavs to win more games and even close to the Title, LeBron then won't go.

Without Vince, this team is just a sub team, and in 2010, there is no big name player would like to join this team, wake up! We already have the cap space !

 

[NOMAM]

Maybe some team would agree to take Sean/Boone, a couple of picks, plus salary filler (Hassell/Swift/Simmons) for a true star SF or PF.

Why not both?

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/featur...1705~385&teams=27~27~27~27~27~17~17&te=&cash=

 

[nets1]

and can you give me just one reason why washington would do that trade?? I mean really!!