Hornets / Nets (Day 51)

[HornetsGM]

Nets trade:
Dudley Bradley
Dell Curry
Ed Pinckney

Hornets trade:
Calvin Natt
2027 Hornets 1st

[NetsGM]

Nets trade:
Dudley Bradley
Dell Curry
Ed Pinckney

Hornets trade:
Calvin Natt
2027 Hornets 1st

Nets agree.

Natt should be just what the doctor ordered. He should be able to get plenty of put-back points with Milner and Tobey gunning all over the place, and a more natural 3 than Robinson/Tobey were last year. Weakens my depth at the 2, but I can live with that issue atm.

Am leary of trading Curry, especially to the Hornets where the game is suited to him, and where I am constantly reminded of Kyle Macy's emergernce (which could eerily repeat itself here), but on balance, I like this one.

And as NuggetsGM said when I was chatting with him: "then at least Natt can't beat the hell out of you again in the playoffs." This makes sense, if you believe the old adage: 'if you can't beat 'em, trade for 'em.'

It's a wee bit off in the future, but I like that his contract expires right when Tobey's does, the same off-season when I have three picks. By then I should have plenty of cash to buy out Milner's last year if I so choose and/or if he doesn't retire- which could lead to a quick reload - hopefully.

[NetsGM]

Having to wait til day 51 stinks, but with regards to housekeeping type things: there will be NO TR's by this time (FA ones will have expired, and Natt is being dealt on his own which removes that one), and this DOES work in the checker.

When the time comes, I am sure that Hornets will be prompt to address his roster limit issue, receiving 3-for-1. 

[CelticsGM]

If you thin Natt is the answer, ask the Hornets who have now traded him away twice and the Bucks, who he cost the Pacers series being a no-show. I'd always be careful when a player has changed teams 7 times in his first 8 seasons ...

[CelticsGM]

think*

[HornetsGM]

I think Natt is a good player -- just too expensive to play as a backup.

[WizardsGM]

If you thin Natt is the answer, ask the Hornets who have now traded him away twice and the Bucks, who he cost the Pacers series being a no-show. I'd always be careful when a player has changed teams 7 times in his first 8 seasons ...

I think its a very solid move, especially considering he didnt give much up. I also think Natt gave the Nets a tonne of trouble in the playoffs if I remember correctly, and he should fit in nicely behind Tobey and Milner where he doesnt have to be relied upon to be "the man"

[CelticsGM]

I think Natt is a good player -- just too expensive to play as a backup.

I think Natt is a very good backup in fact.











...

[NetsGM]

How did I know that Tom would have something to say about this one? 

I wouldn't particularly care if Natt had been on a million teams - he's still a very good player. Last year I got killed at SF and SG - and this year I won't at one position. I don't need him to carry my team - I just need him to help. There will be some matchups where he will be a big advantage to me.

Oh, and Tom - he may not have dominated every playoff series he's been in, but he was a big part of the reason why I lost to the Hornets a few years back and the Bucks last year; and, oh yeah, he has one more championship under his belt than you or I do since I arrived - so he's got to have something of a winner in him. 

[CelticsGM]

ok, jokes aside, Natt is a good player. I think we got the message that YOU had nobody to match up with Natt on the Nets in the last few seasons, but he certainly trives in good matchups.

But, and I think that is what the other 7 teams (make it six, the Hornets now traded him twice) found out: He's maybe not a difference maker and against bigger, offensive minded opponents he's in trouble (*). I don't know where you got the impression he killed you last seasons in the playoffs, as both Cliff and Palacio held him to average numbers (around 16ppg on 45%) except for 1 game where he got 26pts on 50%

Anyway, i believe you gave way too much for an overpaid 16ppg player. Dell Curry will better Natt's numbers by season 3, Bradley is at least a good defender (who would have been PERFECT between Milner and Natt to take out the opponent SG). And I fear he will disappoint your title hopes.

Just my opinion, no bad blood.



(*) should have traded for Peters probably, last year 25ppg on 55% against Natt's 16ppg on 44%)

[NetsGM]

I get what you're saying about the Natt matchups, Tom 

What I think you're missing here is that my SF's (and SG's!) were consistently a deficit for me. For all of his great (looking defence), Bradley got lit up constantly and rarely could fight back on the offensive end - and my lord, Curry at this time is even worse. I expect Natt to be a plus at the 3, which would be a nice change.

[WizardsGM]

Anyway, i believe you gave way too much for an overpaid 16ppg player. Dell Curry will better Natt's numbers by season 3, Bradley is at least a good defender (who would have been PERFECT between Milner and Natt to take out the opponent SG). And I fear he will disappoint your title hopes.

I think the point is though, he isnt waiting to season 3. He is in championship mode now with Milner and Tobey excelling and doesnt want to have to wait 3 seasons for more wing production.

[CelticsGM]

of course, winning a championship cures everything.

and like the Pacers did prove, somtimes you have to roll the dice. So let's just watch and enjoy !

[HornetsGM]

Pacers, please process this trade before my trade with Golden State -- it will work out more easily with roster spaces.