This topic contains 15 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by Ash 2 years, 10 months ago.
December 5, 2012 at 3:05 pm #49971
I know that Kris Humphries has had a solid year thus far and last night he put up some good numbers (12 points, 12 boards), but it seems as though he just doesn’t fit on this team. I know that if you watch the game closely, you can see a lot of mistakes that he seems to make on defense, but for me, I’ve come to accept that these “mistakes” are not really his mistakes, but more team defense mistakes that he is trying to cover up. Surprisingly though, he’s not a very good individual defender by any means. In terms of his offense…well there really is no offense. This is the reason why I think the Nets need an upgrade. We saw last night (and throughout the season) how many times he gets a pass from D-Will on a pick and roll and does his usual; head down, power dribble, knock someone down, barrel someone over, while trying to get fouled going to the hoop. I.e: it isn’t pretty. This makes me think of some of the possibilities of having another guy who can finish at the rim and can shoot that 15-18 footer with consistency.
One guy I’ve been thinking about is David West. I’m not sure how the Pacers feel about giving him up, but I think he would be an awesome fit in our offense. There are also some subtle things that Billy King and the Nets have done to make you think that they might try for an upgrade at some point or another. The first thing is Hump’s contract of 2 years $24 million. Obviously this makes him very attractive next year as an expiring contract, and even this year as a guy who can still play and will expire next season. The second biggest thing I think, is the constant praise and build up of the Nets European prospect Bojan Bogdanovic. We’ve seen how reluctant Billy has been to give Bojan up in deals (Dwight, Joe Johnson), and it makes me think that he is just trying to build his trade value for a future deal. These two guys paired with Marshon Brooks might actually be able to land us a nice upgrade at the PF spot. It’s not a dyer need at this point because we’ve been successful, but I think its something that can take is to the net level.
What do you guy think about Hump and possibly moving him for an upgrade?December 5, 2012 at 3:38 pm #49974
I think I’d much rather have Humphries than David West, for the record. There’s also no way that another top team like Indiana would send West to us like that. Humphries and Lopez both are below average defenders, but they’re working very hard to change that. Together, they’ve already far surpassed their efforts in past years. If you’re going to replace Hump, it needs to be with a defense power forward that can muscle with the best in the paint, the last thing we need is another jump shooting big. Sure, it would be theoretically nice to have an upgrade, but I think that Humphries is better than you think and the best thing available to us at this time.December 5, 2012 at 3:57 pm #49978
Let’s not forget that Humphries (as well as a large portion of the roster) can’t be traded until January 15th. If anyone wants to propose a trade and see if it works under league rules, check the ESPN Trade Machine ( http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine )December 5, 2012 at 5:24 pm #49980
Yea – good point Williams, I forgot about that, but it still doesn’t really rule out a possible deal because the deadline this year is February 21st. If a team like Indiana keeps going like this, who knows, they may want to get cheaper and younger. They could definitely get back all we have for West since he is a $10 million expiring this year. I thought, without looking at the contracts, that he would be a good fit for this team. We’ll see.
I also disagree with Benny’s point that we don’t need a scorer at PF. Don’t forget that there are players who can defend and score at the PF spot. I think if we have Reggie as our backup, and we need rebounding or defense, we can just put him in, but I’m just kind of uneasy about having two rebounders with no offense, playing with a great PG.December 5, 2012 at 5:58 pm #49982
I think Ryan Anderson makes the most sense. Lethal scorer who can rebound and on a team years away from competing. Mirza is proving to inexperienced and lacking confidence. Essentially same player. Plus anderson can be a great sixth man off the bench.December 5, 2012 at 5:58 pm #49981
I do think we can use an upgrade at the 4. Moving forward, with Deron Joe Gerald and Brook on their longer deals, the 4 spot is the one position where we can upgrade. Being over the cap, an upgrade would require a team to eat a deal and Humphries is the deal a team would eat.
With the CBA the way it is, teams are looking to save money. West is expiring so I cannot see that working out, but I can see the Nets giving up Humphries for a better player on a worse contract – essentially a team trying to dump talent to save money. A Carlos Boozer, a Nene (debatable if that’s even an upgrade at this point). Those types of deals make sense.
The one place Humphries hurts is that he’s not confident in his jumper. The way the ball moves and Deron runs the pick and roll, a stretch 4 or guy who shoots consistently out to 17 feet could be incredible in this offense. Humphries hesitates on the jumper sometimes and chokes the ball movement a bit.
Brooks is also a trade asset to improve the return on Humphries – if Avery will not play him may as well get a guy back whom he will play.December 5, 2012 at 6:18 pm #49983
I am ok with trading Hump at some point, but if we did trade him for a PF with a longer contract that would be our last big addition for a long time. All of our guys have unattractive, long term contracts so if we trade for a PF, we better make the right move.
A guy I always loved was Paul Millsap, but I’m not so sure the Jazz would take Hump back.
I’m also not so sure why everyone throws Marshon’s name out there like he isn’t that good. His defense may need work, but not many people can score as easily as him. Unfortunately I really don’t see him getting a lot of time with Avery favoring Stack and Joe Johnson being here, but I can easily see it biting us in the ass if we did move him.December 5, 2012 at 7:11 pm #49984
I am a very big Humph fan. I really enjoy watching him play, most of the time.
I watch the game through Humph’s play.
I want Nets to keep Humph.December 5, 2012 at 7:48 pm #49985
Tim Legler was on ESPN radio today saying Ryan Anderson is the type of big needed to take on the Heat. The argument goes that after Bosh is out of the lineup, the Heat have a very small roster and bigs that can shoot and rebound can do damage against the defending champs. Anderson may be mediocre at defense, but other than reggie evans that isn’t really a downgrade.
But Anderson is probably more of an option for the Lakers than the Nets. Not to overemphasize the point, but many players on this roster (including Kim’s ex) cannot be traded until Jan.15 and besides, we need to give this newly vamped roster some time to work out the kinks before making drastic changes. 17 games (no more pink bags for Marswag) is not a tiny sample size, but I’d certainly trust a larger one.December 6, 2012 at 11:49 am #49996
Wish Nets would have drafted Ryan Anderson.
Thank you, RodDecember 6, 2012 at 1:47 pm #50022
Think about that Ryan Anderson trade – Nets wanted to trade VC to Magic and threw in Ryan Anderson to make the deal work. Nets got back (you ready?) – Courtney Lee, Rafer Alston and Tony Battie.
Nice.December 6, 2012 at 4:28 pm #50036
That right there is why I am so happy with the new regime. The old regime threw Anderson in that deal, and did many other things it did, to cut costs. The Nets did not believe Ryan Anderson hurt the team as much as they wanted to slash his salary. This new regime does not make those types of decisions.December 6, 2012 at 4:36 pm #50040
It’s a different culture/mentality when you have an owner who will spend to win vs. an owner who is cheap.December 6, 2012 at 10:24 pm #50048
The Ryan Anderson trade still gives me nightmares.December 8, 2012 at 11:36 am #50191
in the 2008 draft they also passed on ibaka
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.