How enticing would...

[NOMAM]

The Nets have the Mavs 2010 first round pick which I believe is unprotected. Now, what if they were to offer that up in a trade along with a Nets future unprotected first round pick? How valuable could two unprotected first round picks be in a trade whether to get an established veteran star player or to try and move up in the draft? Or is it something the Nets shouldn't even consider?

 

[FOMW]

So much is unknown that I don't think any party would be willing to make those picks the centerpiece of a trade right now. We don't know what Dallas might do in trades and FA this year, though we know they have a rich, highly motivated owner and a new coach who will give a fresh look to the team. They could be back in the thick of things next year or not. Same for the Nets, really, in that they will have Harris for a full training camp and season, a (hopefully) healthy Vince, and possibly a lot of new pieces. They might very well be a playoff team the next couple of years, devaluing their picks.

The Mavs pick is still a nice asset to have in your back pocket, though. The possibility that it could end up lottery in the tough western conference could be that extra little something to entice a team if included as part of a bigger trade.

 

[Universe]

I wouldn't just yet. Like FOMW stated, the Mavs owner won't let them lose.

 

[SportsTicker]

Of the eight players on the Mavs roster, six of them will be over 30 by opening night 2008: Kidd, Dampier, Stackhouse, Jones, Terry and Nowitzki.

The only two who are under 30 are (the vastly overrated) Bass and Howard. Of their free agents, only two, Barea and Antoine Wright, are under 30. They might sign Wright and Barea but so what? Neither are going to be a key player.

Cuban has hinted the Mavs could be in a rebuilding mode on 2009-10. Take a look at his salary picture the next two years: He is currently screwed. If as was rumored, he promised Kidd an extension beyond next year, he is really screwed. Kidd has said publicly 1) he wants to end his career as a Mav and 2) he wants to play til he is 38, which means 2010-11. There can only be one interpretation of those comments: he wants a two extension from Cuban. Good Luck.

No one can be sure what will happen two years from now, but there is certainly the possibility they could be down that year.

 

[Voodoo Child]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome @ May 25 2008, 01:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Of the eight players on the Mavs roster, six of them will be over 30 by opening night 2008: Kidd, Dampier, Stackhouse, Jones, Terry and Nowitzki.

The only two who are under 30 are (the vastly overrated) Bass and Howard. Of their free agents, only two, Barea and Antoine Wright, are under 30. They might sign Wright and Barea but so what? Neither are going to be a key player.

Cuban has hinted the Mavs could be in a rebuilding mode on 2009-10. Take a look at his salary picture the next two years: He is currently screwed. If as was rumored, he promised Kidd an extension beyond next year, he is really screwed. Kidd has said publicly 1) he wants to end his career as a Mav and 2) he wants to play til he is 38, which means 2010-11. There can only be one interpretation of those comments: he wants a two extension from Cuban. Good Luck.

No one can be sure what will happen two years from now, but there is certainly the possibility they could be down that year.</div>

As FOMW stated, is that 2010 is too far away to project. This is a league where the Boston Celtics went from bottom dwellers to title contenders in one offseason, and the Chicago Bulls went from the projected Eastern Conference champions to the team holding the #1 pick in the draft.

I also doubt that any team would give up a significant part of their franchise for a pick that won't yield anything for two years and isn't promised to even yield anything special when 2010 actually rolls around.

 

[Astral]

Heh. GMs will hope that the pick pans out like NI described, yet in a trade, they will treat it like Voodoo described. There's no point of trading it - everyone will low ball it. For the offers that the pick will draw, we can substitute something less important.. For example, $2M cash.

As for the original idea of trading both unprotected picks I'd say no. Right now, whether you like it or not, we're rebuilding. Throwing away the ability to rebuild for one last chance is absolutely too risky... Even more so now, because while in the past the Nets were a contender, or at least a guaranteed 2nd round team, this team isn't even guaranteed a playoff spot.