Let me preface this with the note that I know nothing about the financial implications of trading Kyrie Irving. If it's completely stupid from that perspective, please enlighten me.
I know we have a very tiny sample size of games (literally 1 game with all three superstars playing together), but Harden and Durant looked pretty damn good together. I also think those two guys are more mature than Irving and I could see the two of them both putting up huge numbers, winning games, and having great chemistry together with no problems. Throw Irving into the mix and it seems like the likelihood of problems becomes greater (because KD and Harden get the ball less AND Irving generally-speaking just seems to me to stir the pot in a negative fashion a bit more).
I'm not saying trade Irving for nothing. But... Why not trade Irving and get some defense? Start with KD and Harden combining to be a lethal offense by themselves, and then from there... There are better basketball minds than mine on this board who I'm sure could come up with a deal involving Irving that would greatly improve this team.
Just surprised I haven't seen a single person in the entire media mention this as a possibility since Harden got to Brooklyn. Was just wondering why.
Too bad he is such a enigma.
I wish he could get his head right and obviously stay healthy.
That all being said, hypothetically, if they could trade him for a good, defensive-minded big man with some moves down low and some bench help (maybe another slasher type who is tough on the ball and grabs some boards) then I’d do it in a heartbeat. I’m a Nets fan, but with this team as it’s constructed it wouldn’t surprise me if they implode in the playoffs and get bounced in the second round. They could also win the East, but I can’t see them beating a team like the Lakers.
I agree with your point re the youngsters.I think this team would’ve been more of a contender if they kept the young guys they gave up and were somehow able to swap KI for Harden.
if they start kyrie, brown, harden, durant, jordan.... and sub properly... they will both run teams out of the gym and also not exposure themselves defensively.
if they have kyrie guarding very good lead guards and brown on the bench all game.... they will let teams that are worse than them stay in every game because of defense.
its so obvious i find it appalling to even have to bring it up all the time---
if they start kyrie, brown, harden, durant, jordan.... and sub properly... they will both run teams out of the gym and also not exposure themselves defensively.
if they have kyrie guarding very good lead guards and brown on the bench all game.... they will let teams that are worse than them stay in every game because of defense.
its so obvious i find it appalling to even have to bring it up all the time---
Nash has not impressed at all. Obviously still only coached a dozen games or so, but he looks like a guy who has only coached a dozen games or so.
if they start kyrie, brown, harden, durant, jordan.... and sub properly... they will both run teams out of the gym and also not exposure themselves defensively.
if they have kyrie guarding very good lead guards and brown on the bench all game.... they will let teams that are worse than them stay in every game because of defense.
its so obvious i find it appalling to even have to bring it up all the time---
I don’t disagree but our bench is thin and guys like Jordan can really only give you quality minutes for half a game.
so you have green/rook at big
you have tlc at 3/4
shamet is good enough to play
brown/harris should be splitting minutes
its not a great bench with no din but you need to have defense on the court- that is brown, play the guy in partic when the other team has a good lead guard
I don't see how you could even trade him and what you'd get back. He's more important to the Nets than any potential return you'd get. Who the hell is giving up anything significant for a guy that may not play...
so you have green/rook at big
you have tlc at 3/4
shamet is good enough to play
brown/harris should be splitting minutes
its not a great bench with no din but you need to have defense on the court- that is brown, play the guy in partic when the other team has a good lead guard
Agree on Brown. Perry looks overwhelmed most of the time (he’s a rookie so not surprising, and Shamet has been totally underwhelming. Without Din they go about 8-9 deep at best, and most of the bench is inconsistent IMO. Maybe it clicks eventually, but the second unit doesn’t show any cohesion.
Hence why I prefaced it in my first sentence with “I don’t know the financial implications.” I know he makes a ton of money but I figured his salary is commensurate with the fact that he’s a star in this league, and I figured there are teams who would love to bring some star power onto their team. That said, Kyrie I know is not a guy who can carry a team by himself, and if his salary is really not worth it in most teams’ minds then I see what you’re saying. I definitely would not want to trade him for nothing.
Part of me just figured if the big 3 does go downhill, And let’s say Irving WANTS to be traded (which he would have no problem voicing given his personality), then you’re definitely not going to get much for him in a deal— it takes away any leverage the nets might have in any possible deal.
So basically I was suggesting this because I’m selling stock on this big 3. I personally don’t think they’re going to work out as well as say: Durant + Harden + a great Big Man Defender + bench help (assuming we could get the matter 2 in a trade for Kyrie). So I’m thinking just do the deal now while the Nets maybe have a LITTLE leverage, instead of being backed in a corner when the entire league sees your little “ Big 3” experiment has failed. That’s all I was saying.