Can the Nets Tank Something That’s Already Been Tanked?
by Mark Ginocchio
Jan 12, 2010 Bobby Simmons, Chris Quinn, Devin Harris, Eduardo Najera, Josh Boone, Kris Humphries, Rafer Alston, Roster
So the common theme surrounding the New Jersey Nets is that after shipping out Rafer Alston, Sean Williams and Eduardo Najera, they’re not even close to being done with their roster makeover. According to numerous league sources, Josh Boone, Tony Battie, Trenton Hassell and Bobby Simmons could all be shipped out at any time, provided the Nets get what they’re looking for in return (younger players who won’t put in a dent in the cap flexibility for the summer). Heck, ESPN’s Chad Ford suggested that even Devin Harris could be on the block if he nets the team a superstar.
But looking at more realistic roster scenarios, ESPN’s Marc Stein recently suggested the Nets are trying to dump their veterans and free up roster space for “fresh blood from the D-League.”
Whenever I see firesales of this magnitude it seems to indicate one thing – a team is tanking the season in an effort to secure a top flight pick in the draft. The fact that the Nets appear more interested in importing D-League players, who they can likely sign on super short-term 10-day contracts, in favor of winning a few more games with some of their veterans, is a clear indicator that they’ve officially given up on trying to salvage any respectability this season.
Or is it? There’s one huge whole in this logic that must be considered for fans and spectators who criticize the “tank” strategy. The Nets have been incredibly awful with their current mix of young up-and-coming players and veteran, playoff –tested guys. At 3-34, is there really any reason to believe the Nets are a better team with Rafer Alston and Eduardo Najera rather than Chris Quinn and Kris Humphries?
The Nets are in a unique situation that a “tanking” strategy could actually make them better. What’s better for a team that’s currently built around five 20-something guys in Devin Harris, Brook Lopez, Courtney Lee, Yi Jianlian and Chris Douglas-Roberts (provided they’re not on the block too)? Picking up players for their bench who have been overlooked for playing time in playoff towns like Miami and Dallas, and filling out the roster using D-League guys who are trying to prove that their NBA-caliber? Or having a veteran guy like Alston who only seemed to succeed in New Jersey at alienating the immature young-uns like Terrence Williams and CDR. Eduardo Najera was supposed to bring toughness and grit off the bench, but he couldn’t keep his body from breaking down long enough to be an example for anyone.
In hindsight, the Nets “tanked” their season on June 25 when they shipped Vince Carter to Orlando for Lee, Battie and Alston. While I’m not criticizing the trade after the fact, 37 games of 2009-10 Nets basketball has demonstrated that Carter was the glue that held this roster together last season. While Brook Lopez and Yi Jianlian have improved in VC’s absence, Devin Harris has regressed and players like Courtney Lee and CDR are looking more and more like complimentary “rotation” guys, rather than NBA starters.
So while it may seem desperate to now turn to the Quinn’s and the D-Leaguers of the world, I do think this is a sincere attempt by the brain trust to make the Nets into a better team for the last half of the season. Rumors that the front office could make a play for one of the big free agents to be in order to retain their Bird Rights this summer so they can be resigned at a premium are further proof that the organization hasn’t given up yet.
Will it work? Well I guess that depends on what your definition of improvement for a 3-34 team is. The Nets seem well positioned regardless of who’s filling their bench, to have the best shot an NBA team can have at the #1 pick in the draft this season. But it’s possible that injecting this roster with some young, hungry players, could help salvage this team from all-time 9-73 infamy.
January 12th, 2010 at 10:11 AM
Uhhh, would trying to get the worst record in the NBA be the dumbest thing to do? Since starting 1990, only 3 teams with the worst record have gone on to win the lottery? If anything we should genuinely be trying to get better. And sabotaging Dallas so their pick becomes better
January 12th, 2010 at 10:22 AM
Yes, but statistically the team with the worst record has the best chance for a #1 pick, and at the very worst, a #4 — if the Nets end up with the worst record in the league, they’re going to get an impact player in this upcoming draft.
January 12th, 2010 at 10:32 AM
Yeah but the statistical chances on paper very rarely translate to real life. Which is why we’re probably gonna have another slew of blog articles this summer about whether the lottery system should be fixed since the teams with the worst records are often the most shafted. I like to think of the one with the worst record as having a 75% chance of not getting the number one pick rather than having a 25% chance of getting it.
January 12th, 2010 at 11:16 AM
This mess we call the Nets may actually be a blessing in disguise. The early season injuries are partly to blame,so is coach and also management but there is always a silver lining.
The Nets could trade for Bosh or Boozer right now and neither would could get this team to 30 wins, and ensure a top 10 pick or John Wall.
The Nets have tons of 2nd round picks to use along with expiring contracts to offer other teams that want something for their big free agent that won’t re sign.
Bosh, Boozer, Amare could move any day, and maybe to NJ
January 12th, 2010 at 11:32 AM
Some random points:
Why would they trade Devin if they don’t have Wall locked up? The 2 through 4 prospects ain’t PGs. Remember all that stuff about “they have a center and a point guard, the 2 hardest spots to fill”? Well, would they go with Keyon and TWill at the point? How could they possibly get better by doing that?
They have more usable bodies at the 3 and the 4 than anywhere else. I would expect CD-R and/or CLee to be brought up in trade talks a lot. I’m OK with that– not everyone on the team has to be young.
If you’re going to have veteran leadership, make sure that the veteran is one of your better players.
It’s a hard needle to thread, raising your win total this year while not mortgaging your future. You basically have to win the trade.
January 12th, 2010 at 12:39 PM
What about T-Mac? I know a dumb suggestion, but why not? His contract expires and why wouldn’t the Rockets want some expiring contracts (Simmons/Battie) and young talent(CDR or LEE or T-will)? Surely at least one of these swingmen is expendable while not destroying the future.
January 12th, 2010 at 1:30 PM
TMAC is a no
DH could be traded for a younger PG like mike Conley and rudy gay.
Lee has to go to another team or to the bench
CDR is a diamond in the rough. If he gets traded he will end up being a star
January 12th, 2010 at 3:28 PM
I’m glad we’re going to re-tool our bench. Our “veterans” don’t help us win. Battie, Hassell, Simmons, and Boone haven’t done much of anything. I don’t know how much Humphries is going to contribute but he can’t be worse than Boone or Najera. Shawne Williams can’t be worse than Hassell or Simmons. Whatever we do to re-tool our bench, it can’t make us worse. Normally when teams tank, they lose 15-20 games. I’d be perfectly fine witht that number sadly.
January 12th, 2010 at 4:54 PM
“Yeah but the statistical chances on paper very rarely translate to real life.”
Are you a Knicks fan? No (smart) Nets fan would complain about a guaranteed top four pick.
And, BTW, the team with the worst record is very much due to get a #1 pick. It could very well happen to the Nets this year.
January 13th, 2010 at 5:26 AM
A guaranteed top four pick is meaningless when there’s only so far one surefire guaranteed superstar in this draft. Others could emerge but as of now, only Wall is a lock to be a multiple all star selection.
And last time I checked, statistical probabilities from year to year are independent from each other. The results from the past cannot affect the chances this year, just because the one with the worst record has not gotten it for a while doesn’t mean it has a greater chance of happening this year.
Pot calling the kettle black?
January 13th, 2010 at 2:15 PM
Similarly the fact that the worst team has NOT gotten it in the past has no affect on having the best odds to get it this year. Obviously the worst record in the NBA has a better chance of drafting Wall than anyone else. That’s mathmatics. 25% is better than anything less than 25%.
January 13th, 2010 at 6:50 PM
“A guaranteed top four pick is meaningless when there’s only so far one surefire guaranteed superstar in this draft.”
Meaningless? Okay, i’m officially ignoring you.
“Similarly the fact that the worst team has NOT gotten it in the past has no affect on having the best odds to get it this year.”
I said it could very well happen. It is not a certainty.
January 14th, 2010 at 8:01 AM
@Greg
The historical results would beg to differ.
@Jordan
John Wall is the uncontested, unchallenged number one pick. No one even comes close to him. It would take a career anding injury for him not to be a lock for the top pick. How many other top picks in the past can say that? He is a lock to be a multiple time all star. No one else in the draft is a lock to transform a team. Good players sure, but franchise cornerstones, not yet. There’s a big difference between superstar and good player, and you very well know the nets need that. A 3-35 team needs that.