I tend to agree with your opinions Steve, but I have to take the opposite side of this one. I'm relieved and happy that Marks traded Harden.
I do agree with you that at full strength this Nets team could and have won the championship with Harden this year - the problem was that it was never going to happen.
Harden had already started tanking. Irving's situation is a mess. Joe Harris is looking more likely to need another surgery. Claxton has proven to be an injury prone player. The min contracts guys were not able to step up. And lastly Durant's is still a few weeks away from coming back.
This team simply had too many issues to win a ring this year. Sure, Irving's status may change. Harris, Claxton, and Durant may have been healthy for the playoffs....And maybe Harden has a change of heart then, but those are very big 'Ifs'. It's much more likely Irving status stays a mess, Harris is out, ,and Harden continues to stew.
So if the Nets had kept Harden, like you wanted, you are now either signing him to a Super Max until 38 or Harden walks for nothing. Both are bad situations. I think a Harden supermax contract by year two will be a negative asset - and a lot of pundits agree.
Yes, Harden is an amazing talent and yes the Nets were winning with him (when he tried) but this was the right move based on the status of the team and looking at the future. We don't get to have the fantasy world where Harden was happy and the Nets are at full strength. So it was time for him to go.
I'm unsure what the Nets get with Simmons. Ceiling is super high and the floor is super low, but again it's better than Harden walking this summer for nothing or signing that super max until age 38. Plus 2 first round picks and Steph Curry are positive assets. Marks was able to make lemonade from this lemon.
Bottom line - with a healthy Durant, the Nets are still competing for a ring for several more years. Curry, Simmons, additional draft picks and salary flexibility will give Durant more ways to win and so as a Nets fan I am happy with this move.
I wholeheartedly agree with your statement, "This team simply had too many issues to win a ring this year." Whose fault is that? Irving's & Marks's. One point I made is that Marks should have been aware that Kyrie is prone to such issues--that's why he went all out to get Harden as "Kyrie insurance" when Irving went AWOL last season. As such, he needed to build the team better around Harden, surrounding him with shooters, not with so many unplayable offensive zeroes. So Harden was left to go after regular season games, with only KD or by himself, in an ill-fitting environment, all the while not 100% recouped from the hamstring injury & also having to deal with lousy refs. No wonder he got frustrated. Unfortunately, he's not the type to look inward when he has the opportunity to pout and bail. I personally am not a Simmons fan, so I found this whole situation very disappointing.
I disagree and do not think Harden was Kyrie insurance (although I remember reading that excuse). I strongly assume Harden was acquired because that is what Durant wanted. Marks has been extremely strategic with every Nets move. He highly values draft picks and giving up a farm for Harden doesn't fit for him. Further, Harden's play never fit with Kyrie and Durant. Why get another ball dominant player to play with two other stars that need the ball in their hands? It never made sense. From what I've read getting Harden was for Durant (and maybe Irving) - and if this is what got Durant to sign that extension - it was needed.
As for assigning blame and who's fault led to this situation. Again this is my assumption, but I believe Irving and DeAndre Jordan were only signed to get Durant. They came to Brooklyn as a package and Marks complied. Again, Marks is very much all about culture and personality and with that I assume Irving was not a target, but a means to get Durant here. So I do not assign Marks blame for bringing Irving and his craziness to the team as it was needed to get Durant.
Do I blame Irving for not getting vaccinated? Sure - but the Nets knew what they got when they signed Irving. Everyone knew he would unstable and problematic - so if anything, it was expected Irving would cause problems. Again, as a fan, I accepted Irving's wackiness as a necessary means to have Durant in Brooklyn. So while I can point a finger at Irving, it's meaningless as that is who he is. If anything, you can blame Durant for requiring Irving to be in Brooklyn just as much.
So what role does Marks have in this. If Marks is required to sign Irving and his nuttiness to bring in Durant, and if Marks needs to bring in Harden to get Durant to sign his extension, then Marks played it correctly. Maybe you can blame Marks for not convincing Irving to get vaccinated but that's a stretch (although I do have a few good strategy on how Marks can convince him if Marks wants to hear me out).
Lastly, you could blame Marks for not getting good complimentary pieces for Harden, Durant, and Irving, but with all three on max contracts he was handcuff to minimum contracts. He did well signing Mills with the exception. The trade for Carter was a swing and miss and a shooter as an 8th/9th man is sorely lacking, but would that have made a big difference? I do find some fault with the poor play from the backup backup PG and the lack of shooting from an 8th/9th man, but I won't blame these moves for making Harden leave.
Lastly, I too am not a Simmons fan, but again, he's better than Harden walking this summer for nothing (or a supermax Harden age 34-38)
I tend to agree with your opinions Steve, but I have to take the opposite side of this one. I'm relieved and happy that Marks traded Harden.
I do agree with you that at full strength this Nets team could and have won the championship with Harden this year - the problem was that it was never going to happen.
Harden had already started tanking. Irving's situation is a mess. Joe Harris is looking more likely to need another surgery. Claxton has proven to be an injury prone player. The min contracts guys were not able to step up. And lastly Durant's is still a few weeks away from coming back.
This team simply had too many issues to win a ring this year. Sure, Irving's status may change. Harris, Claxton, and Durant may have been healthy for the playoffs....And maybe Harden has a change of heart then, but those are very big 'Ifs'. It's much more likely Irving status stays a mess, Harris is out, ,and Harden continues to stew.
So if the Nets had kept Harden, like you wanted, you are now either signing him to a Super Max until 38 or Harden walks for nothing. Both are bad situations. I think a Harden supermax contract by year two will be a negative asset - and a lot of pundits agree.
Yes, Harden is an amazing talent and yes the Nets were winning with him (when he tried) but this was the right move based on the status of the team and looking at the future. We don't get to have the fantasy world where Harden was happy and the Nets are at full strength. So it was time for him to go.
I'm unsure what the Nets get with Simmons. Ceiling is super high and the floor is super low, but again it's better than Harden walking this summer for nothing or signing that super max until age 38. Plus 2 first round picks and Steph Curry are positive assets. Marks was able to make lemonade from this lemon.
Bottom line - with a healthy Durant, the Nets are still competing for a ring for several more years. Curry, Simmons, additional draft picks and salary flexibility will give Durant more ways to win and so as a Nets fan I am happy with this move.
I wholeheartedly agree with your statement, "This team simply had too many issues to win a ring this year." Whose fault is that? Irving's & Marks's. One point I made is that Marks should have been aware that Kyrie is prone to such issues--that's why he went all out to get Harden as "Kyrie insurance" when Irving went AWOL last season. As such, he needed to build the team better around Harden, surrounding him with shooters, not with so many unplayable offensive zeroes. So Harden was left to go after regular season games, with only KD or by himself, in an ill-fitting environment, all the while not 100% recouped from the hamstring injury & also having to deal with lousy refs. No wonder he got frustrated. Unfortunately, he's not the type to look inward when he has the opportunity to pout and bail. I personally am not a Simmons fan, so I found this whole situation very disappointing.
Thanks for the quick response Steve.
I disagree and do not think Harden was Kyrie insurance (although I remember reading that excuse). I strongly assume Harden was acquired because that is what Durant wanted. Marks has been extremely strategic with every Nets move. He highly values draft picks and giving up a farm for Harden doesn't fit for him. Further, Harden's play never fit with Kyrie and Durant. Why get another ball dominant player to play with two other stars that need the ball in their hands? It never made sense. From what I've read getting Harden was for Durant (and maybe Irving) - and if this is what got Durant to sign that extension - it was needed.
As for assigning blame and who's fault led to this situation. Again this is my assumption, but I believe Irving and DeAndre Jordan were only signed to get Durant. They came to Brooklyn as a package and Marks complied. Again, Marks is very much all about culture and personality and with that I assume Irving was not a target, but a means to get Durant here. So I do not assign Marks blame for bringing Irving and his craziness to the team as it was needed to get Durant.
Do I blame Irving for not getting vaccinated? Sure - but the Nets knew what they got when they signed Irving. Everyone knew he would unstable and problematic - so if anything, it was expected Irving would cause problems. Again, as a fan, I accepted Irving's wackiness as a necessary means to have Durant in Brooklyn. So while I can point a finger at Irving, it's meaningless as that is who he is. If anything, you can blame Durant for requiring Irving to be in Brooklyn just as much.
So what role does Marks have in this. If Marks is required to sign Irving and his nuttiness to bring in Durant, and if Marks needs to bring in Harden to get Durant to sign his extension, then Marks played it correctly. Maybe you can blame Marks for not convincing Irving to get vaccinated but that's a stretch (although I do have a few good strategy on how Marks can convince him if Marks wants to hear me out).
Lastly, you could blame Marks for not getting good complimentary pieces for Harden, Durant, and Irving, but with all three on max contracts he was handcuff to minimum contracts. He did well signing Mills with the exception. The trade for Carter was a swing and miss and a shooter as an 8th/9th man is sorely lacking, but would that have made a big difference? I do find some fault with the poor play from the backup backup PG and the lack of shooting from an 8th/9th man, but I won't blame these moves for making Harden leave.
Lastly, I too am not a Simmons fan, but again, he's better than Harden walking this summer for nothing (or a supermax Harden age 34-38)