The future potential of 2020's projected playoff teams from worst to best:

[flyerhawk]

What is so deeply hilarious about Bucky is that he acts like he has superior knowledge.

What is deeply hilarious about Bucky is how he thinks that Google searches somehow make you an expert.

His "projections" are based largely on the players he likes and doesn't like.

Maybe I'll do my own projections that have a little more grounding in reality.

 

[buckalis]

I also expect WCS to be on the move eventually too. I doubt the Warriors end the season with both of those players if possible.

I feel like WCS is a perfect fit for the Celtics who still have plenty of trade assets to return. Burks I can see the Warriors holding out till the deadline to get maximum value out of him. Based off his production and cap impact, he'll be one of the more sought after guys this trade deadline period. At worst, I expect Burks to return a 1st round draft pick from a contender (so low 20's ish).

If the Warriors can get a future 1st and maybe a second rd or two from WCS, that would be optimal.

The Warriors would then this off-season have hopefully a high lottery pick, a future 1st from Burks and a couple more 2nds to trade along with D'Lo and Paschall which could potentially snag a guy like KAT.

1. KAT is not on the move, despite what any web troll says...

2. If the Warriors were going to get back a 1st for Burks, believe me they would have trade him already! Think about it... who is the contender that would pay a 1st for a 28yrs old rental who will be coming from bench and will be bought only for additional depth purposes?

2x2nds is the best the Warriors can expect to get back for Burks, but only a 2nd is the most probable scenario...

As for Stein, I think he will be packed with Russell and then will be waived by the team that buys Russell...

Stein + Russell to the Pelicans for Jrue Holliday is the most probable scenario CAA (the agency of Russell and of Zion) would want in order to "pack" the two together... This way, the Warriors might get 2x2nd picks (although one is more probable), but they also save another 3.5M of salaries on top of getting rid of Burks' and Chriss' salaries.

 

[CitySushi]

1. KAT is not on the move, despite what any web troll says...

2. If the Warriors were going to get back a 1st for Burks, believe me they would have trade him already! Think about it... who is the contender that would pay a 1st for a 28yrs old rental who will be coming from bench and will be bought only for additional depth purposes?

2x2nds is the best the Warriors can expect to get back for Burks, but only a 2nd is the most probable scenario...

As for Stein, I think he will be packed with Russell and then will be waived by the team that buys Russell...

Stein + Russell to the Pelicans for Jrue Holliday is the most probable scenario CAA (the agency of Russell and of Zion) would want in order to "pack" the two together... This way, the Warriors might get 2x2nd picks (although one is more probable), but they also save another 3.5M of salaries on top of getting rid of Burks' and Chriss' salaries.

1. Ok, then what is the move if not for KAT?

2. It's only the beginning of January. The trade deadline is weeks away. Why would another team have offered a 1st already for Burks, not knowing where their team is heading in the first place? The Warriors may not end up with a 1st for Burks, but it's most certainly not because no other team hasn't offered it already. Warriors will hold out till the deadline to deal him for maximum value. Standard practice really.

3. Why would the Warriors want to get rid of D'Lo for Jrue Holiday? That makes absolutely no sense. They would be trading a 23 year old allstar for a 29 year old combo guard (who's signed for 2 more additional years at big figures)? The Warriors additionally are NOT trading D'Lo during this season. It again just doesn't make sense for a myriad of reason. D'Lo's trade value will be at it's peak in the off-season versus in season.

4. So you think WCS is just a guy to waive? I just don't see how you value him at that level.

 

[buckalis]

1. Ok, then what is the move if not for KAT?

I don't think the Warriors will be adding anybody that is on a big contract next to what they already have for another two seasons... They want to go under the lux tax threshold for the following two seasons, in order to stop paying repeaters tax...

The probably wanted to go under the lux tax from this year, but it doesn't look feasible, albeit only by a small amount which won't cost them too much in tax... Still, they lost a season out of the three from the later four a team has in order not to be repeaters tax eligible.

2. It's only the beginning of January. The trade deadline is weeks away. Why would another team have offered a 1st already for Burks, not knowing where their team is heading in the first place? The Warriors may not end up with a 1st for Burks, but it's most certainly not because no other team hasn't offered it already. Warriors will hold out till the deadline to deal him for maximum value. Standard practice really.

Because the teams that will be in the playoffs have been known already from the 1st month... It's only the 8th seed in both conferences that is still "on the play", but who will ever take the 8th seed, won't spare a 1st for going nowhere since they know they'll be eliminated from the 1st round either if they add Burks or not...

Burks would interest contenders for the title in order to add depth... I know for instance that the Bucks would be interested in order to back up Bledsoe/Hill/Divincenzo, but they won't give away the 1st they have out of the Pacers and they additionally have to empty a roster spot... If they give away Brown for a 2nd, then it is possible that they would add another 2nd next to it and buy Burks...

3. Why would the Warriors want to get rid of D'Lo for Jrue Holiday? That makes absolutely no sense. They would be trading a 23 year old allstar for a 29 year old combo guard (who's signed for 2 more additional years at big figures)? The Warriors additionally are NOT trading D'Lo during this season. It again just doesn't make sense for a myriad of reason. D'Lo's trade value will be at it's peak in the off-season versus in season.

Financial reasons, but chemistry reasons too... Because Holiday would fit next to what they have better than what Russell does... This doesn't mean that Russell is a worst player than Holiday... Just different to what would fit GSW's "different" game style well...

4. So you think WCS is just a guy to waive? I just don't see how you value him at that level.

GSW has traditionally be a team where Centers were never important parts for their game's style... It therefore clouds your judgment on Stein... He wouldn't attract interest from any team to trade a pick for...

 

[flyerhawk]

Financial reasons, but chemistry reasons too... Because Holiday would fit next to what they have better than what Russell does... This doesn't mean that Russell is a worst player than Holiday... Just different to what would fit GSW's "different" game style well...

This makes no sense. The Warriors don't need a 2 way guard. They need wings.

 

[buckalis]

This makes no sense. The Warriors don't need a 2 way guard. They need wings.

They need a 2-way guard who can also play off the ball at wing too, in order to back up both Thompson and Curry (when back healthy) but also play along with both of them (Curry at 1, Holiday at 2, Thompson at 3) in "small" lineups... The problem with Russell, is that although he is a (fairly) good alternative to have on the floor instead of Curry, he can't be a good alternative to Thompson's game.

 

[packerzrule]

With 5 teams as bright as the sun I think future games may be hard to watch. I mean, have you ever tried to look at the sun?

 

[CitySushi]

I don't think the Warriors will be adding anybody that is on a big contract next to what they already have for another two seasons... They want to go under the lux tax threshold for the following two seasons, in order to stop paying repeaters tax...

The probably wanted to go under the lux tax from this year, but it doesn't look feasible, albeit only by a small amount which won't cost them too much in tax... Still, they lost a season out of the three from the later four a team has in order not to be repeaters tax eligible.

The Warriors have generated so much revenue from the new arena that they're more than willing to pay the luxury tax penalty, given that they're competing for a championship. They have done so in the past so there's no reason to not think they wouldn't do it again with additional money in their pockets to spent. The only way the Warriors would duck the luxury tax was if they didn't think a championship was a viable option. Then I could see what you mean. However they still have prime Steph and Klay and adding a 3rd top tier player next to them would be incentive enough for them to pay the repeater tax. Again, they have done this before.

Because the teams that will be in the playoffs have been known already from the 1st month... It's only the 8th seed in both conferences that is still "on the play", but who will ever take the 8th seed, won't spare a 1st for going nowhere since they know they'll be eliminated from the 1st round either if they add Burks or not...

Burks would interest contenders for the title in order to add depth... I know for instance that the Bucks would be interested in order to back up Bledsoe/Hill/Divincenzo, but they won't give away the 1st they have out of the Pacers and they additionally have to empty a roster spot... If they give away Brown for a 2nd, then it is possible that they would add another 2nd next to it and buy Burks...

Yes teams may believe they have a shot at the playoffs in the first month of a season, but tons of things change. Like you've said in your other posts about the Pistons and their predicted record, you can't plan for injury. Teams are not going to be spending assets on returns when outcomes aren't more solidified. It's just good business sense. In the West there is a 2.5 game difference that separates the 8th seed and the 13th seed. That's incredible parity for that last spot. Burks could be a difference maker to any one of those teams. On top of that top contenders like the Lakers, Clippers, Houston, etc are just trying to make it through the regular season. They're still trying to construct how they play and still trying to find out where they need to get better. Just because you're a lock for a playoff seed doesn't mean you don't still need time in identifying top weaknesses. No one knew prior to the start of the season that the Lakers would be willing to shop Kuzma. But they are because the fit is not ideal to the make up of their team and they potentially need to pivot. Things change throughout an NBA season and NOTHING is set in stone in the first month.

Financial reasons, but chemistry reasons too... Because Holiday would fit next to what they have better than what Russell does... This doesn't mean that Russell is a worst player than Holiday... Just different to what would fit GSW's "different" game style well...

I disagree, but it's a fair point.

GSW has traditionally be a team where Centers were never important parts for their game's style... It therefore clouds your judgment on Stein... He wouldn't attract interest from any team to trade a pick for...

I again disagree. But if that's how you value him, then I don't have any way to change your mind about it.


Good talk though.

 

[buckalis]

The Warriors have generated so much revenue from the new arena that they're more than willing to pay the luxury tax penalty, given that they're competing for a championship. They have done so in the past so there's no reason to not think they wouldn't do it again with additional money in their pockets to spent. The only way the Warriors would duck the luxury tax was if they didn't think a championship was a viable option. Then I could see what you mean. However they still have prime Steph and Klay and adding a 3rd top tier player next to them would be incentive enough for them to pay the repeater tax. Again, they have done this before.

It's still business... you don't just throw hundreds of millions away only because you make more... It simply doesn't make sense to businessmen because then, they still lose hundreds of millions out of less profits!

Besides, GSW didn't pay repeaters tax (it was only the lux tax), but until the previous season and then, I can remind you that they said "it was one year only for Boogie man" and that they knew KD was walking out (which means that they chose "to pay" for a three-peat and make history when making the decision to pay the repeaters tax last season)...

Now it's a come back you are talking about... not "a continuation" and that makes hell of a difference...

Therefore, here it is how it goes... They will stay out of the lux tax threshold for the next two seasons and then they will enter back into the lux tax for another three seasons... That is of course unless if they can go under the lux tax threshold from this season and save a whole year...

That all, is what in truth happens in business... not what the businessmen will confess in public... When in public, they'll say what the fans (that pay for their business profits) want to hear...

Yes teams may believe they have a shot at the playoffs in the first month of a season, but tons of things change. Like you've said in your other posts about the Pistons and their predicted record, you can't plan for injury. Teams are not going to be spending assets on returns when outcomes aren't more solidified. It's just good business sense. In the West there is a 2.5 game difference that separates the 8th seed and the 13th seed. That's incredible parity for that last spot. Burks could be a difference maker to any one of those teams. On top of that top contenders like the Lakers, Clippers, Houston, etc are just trying to make it through the regular season. They're still trying to construct how they play and still trying to find out where they need to get better. Just because you're a lock for a playoff seed doesn't mean you don't still need time in identifying top weaknesses. No one knew prior to the start of the season that the Lakers would be willing to shop Kuzma. But they are because the fit is not ideal to the make up of their team and they potentially need to pivot. Things change throughout an NBA season and NOTHING is set in stone in the first month.

I knew that Kuzma would be on the trade block and have said it during the preseason...

Lakers, Clippers or the Rockets would all have interest to add Burks on their roster for depth purposes... but none of them has 1st picks to spare after this past off-season...

Celtics, Bucks, Raps, Sixers would also have interest, but none of them would pay a 1st for a rental... Put it this way... why not make a trade and spend the 1st pick there by improving further the roster in the long term, but prefer to waive a player in order to empty a roster spot and pay for a rental that will be "deep roster" that may or may not be needed during the post season?

 

[CitySushi]

It's still business... you don't just throw hundreds of millions away only because you make more... It simply doesn't make sense to businessmen because then, they still lose hundreds of millions out of less profits!

Besides, GSW didn't pay repeaters tax (it was only the lux tax), but until the previous season and then, I can remind you that they said "it was one year only for Boogie man" and that they knew KD was walking out (which means that they chose "to pay" for a three-peat and make history when making the decision to pay the repeaters tax last season)...

Now it's a come back you are talking about... not "a continuation" and that makes hell of a difference...

Therefore, here it is how it goes... They will stay out of the lux tax threshold for the next two seasons and then they will enter back into the lux tax for another three seasons... That is of course unless if they can go under the lux tax threshold from this season and save a whole year...

That all, is what in truth happens in business... not what the businessmen will confess in public... When in public, they'll say what the fans (that pay for their business profits) want to hear...

You do know the Warriors could have simply avoided the Luxury Tax all together this year right? But they didn't. Why do you think that is?

They acquired Russell to get salary in order to "create" cap room to trade for another player. If the goal was a throw away season to avoid a repeater tax, they could have simply done it this year. But they didn't. The Warriors don't care about the luxury tax so long as it produces championship level squads.

They didn't KNOW Durant was walking. No one knew until it was well into the season. Then the Warriors may have had their speculation that he could potentially leave, but not prior to the season. They had plans for him long term and to keep that core together. They couldn't predict how KD would feel slighted and want to eventually leave. That's ridiculous.

I knew that Kuzma would be on the trade block and have said it during the preseason...

Lakers, Clippers or the Rockets would all have interest to add Burks on their roster for depth purposes... but none of them has 1st picks to spare after this past off-season...

Celtics, Bucks, Raps, Sixers would also have interest, but none of them would pay a 1st for a rental... Put it this way... why not make a trade and spend the 1st pick there by improving further the roster in the long term, but prefer to waive a player in order to empty a roster spot and pay for a rental that will be "deep roster" that may or may not be needed during the post season?

Again, I agreed that Burks may not fetch a first round draft pick in return. But it's absolutely incorrect for you to assume it's because it hasn't been done already and that teams already know what's going on 1 month into the season. You're changing your argument here.

 

[flyerhawk]

You do know the Warriors could have simply avoided the Luxury Tax all together this year right? But they didn't. Why do you think that is?

They acquired Russell to get salary in order to "create" cap room to trade for another player. If the goal was a throw away season to avoid a repeater tax, they could have simply done it this year. But they didn't. The Warriors don't care about the luxury tax so long as it produces championship level squads.

They didn't KNOW Durant was walking. No one knew until it was well into the season. Then the Warriors may have had their speculation that he could potentially leave, but not prior to the season. They had plans for him long term and to keep that core together. They couldn't predict how KD would feel slighted and want to eventually leave. That's ridiculous.

They don't want to pay the repeater tax. The repeater tax is VERY punitive. It can get into the 100 million range. The Warriors are doing well, I'm sure, with their new arena but they don't have limitless cash.

They acquired Russell because they could. Had they not acquired Russell they would have been unable to get anyone beyond the mid-level exception. By getting Russell, they were able to get an asset that they could keep or move.

It wasn't about throwing the season away. It was about what flexibility they had.

 

[CitySushi]

They don't want to pay the repeater tax. The repeater tax is VERY punitive. It can get into the 100 million range. The Warriors are doing well, I'm sure, with their new arena but they don't have limitless cash.

They acquired Russell because they could. Had they not acquired Russell they would have been unable to get anyone beyond the mid-level exception. By getting Russell, they were able to get an asset that they could keep or move.

It wasn't about throwing the season away. It was about what flexibility they had.

Yeah, I agree with the premise of everything you said, but do you think the Warriors organization was not aware of the punitive nature of the repeater tax? Additionally in acquiring Russell, even if they flip him they have to take on a player of equal salary, unless they trade him into cap space. In most instances they'll still be over the luxury tax line.

They have Steph on the books. They gave Klay a max extension and signed Draymond to a big extension as well. Then they acquired D'Lo via sign and trade on a max deal. Each of the 4's deals increase in dollar value every season. So if the goal was to get away from the Luxury tax, they're getting further from it by standing still next year doing nothing as well.

The Warriors are either incredibly incompetent or aware of this too.

 

[buckalis]

You do know the Warriors could have simply avoided the Luxury Tax all together this year right? But they didn't. Why do you think that is?

They acquired Russell to get salary in order to "create" cap room to trade for another player. If the goal was a throw away season to avoid a repeater tax, they could have simply done it this year. But they didn't. The Warriors don't care about the luxury tax so long as it produces championship level squads.

They didn't KNOW Durant was walking. No one knew until it was well into the season. Then the Warriors may have had their speculation that he could potentially leave, but not prior to the season. They had plans for him long term and to keep that core together. They couldn't predict how KD would feel slighted and want to eventually leave. That's ridiculous.



Again, I agreed that Burks may not fetch a first round draft pick in return. But it's absolutely incorrect for you to assume it's because it hasn't been done already and that teams already know what's going on 1 month into the season. You're changing your argument here.

But yes... They got Russell to have wanted value and look to gain valuable roster additions out of him... Who disagrees on that? It still doesn't mean they don't plan to go under the lux tax threshold...

Look at the numbers... KD's salary this season is 16M more... it means 16M + 24M(lux tax) + 36M(repeaters tax) = 76M of savings for GSW... now add the rest of the salary savings they did and the total savings from last season exceed 100M!

Now they are only 8M into the lux tax and if the situation stays as is (which it won't, they'll save more - all the 8M if they can), they'll have to pay 38M in taxes, which is less than 1/5th of what they would pay if they would have last season's payroll... If they can dump Burks and Stein's salaries, it will save them 19M more... If they can trade Russell and have return that adds up to 4M less than Russell's salary, they save all and go under the lux tax threshold!

Therefore Russell was a good and well calculated move to save the money and add up strength to the team!

There are two sides to the coin and it all depends on which side you look at...

One side reads "if they wanted to go under the lux tax, they wouldn't sign Russell", but the other side says "by adding Russell and doing the right moves, it can still end up under the lux tax and retain as much power as possible"...

On Burks I didn't say that a deal would have occurred 1st month into the season... Burks couldn't be moved until the 15th of Dec... could he? What I said is that the playoff teams (the potential buyers) were cleared 1 month into the season...

 

[msgkings322]

Only a blind man goes out in public wearing that...jacket?

 

[buckalis]

Still only in mid-season, but the Grizzlies look to be stepping up game after game...

They now use only the young players in their games rotation with 27y.o. Valanciounas at center being the oldest and more experienced and with Ja Morant along with Jarren Jackson being the roster leaders, they are now in a playoff seed having left the Spurs and the Blazers behind them.

It will be interesting to see if the Grizzlies will be buyers by the trade deadline... They have Andre Iguodala, Kyle Anderson, Jae Crowder and Solomon Hill under contract who all are obviously not in the team's long term plans and have the value which can provide back to the team significant return which could cause the Grizzlies boosting up to challenge the current leaders of the conference...

 

[buckalis]

I think after the Grizzlies have climbed up the ladder to get a seed in the playoff run they should be in the O/P instead of the Blazers and then among the "bright future potential" teams.

The future potential power rankings looking to the next decade starting from next season and until 2030 (based on today's info and not counting for injuries) should then form like this if one combines the lot of the teams:

1. Dallas Mavericks
2. Los Angeles Clippers
3. Boston Celtics
4. Miami Heat
5. Milwaukee Bucks
6. Memphis Grizzlies
7. Utah Jazz
8. OKC Thunder
9. Charlotte Hornets
10. Minnesota Timberwolves
11. Golden State Warriors
12. Washington Wizards
13. Detroit Pistons
14. New Orleans Pelicans
15. Chicago Bulls
16. Toronto Raptors
17. Indiana Pacers
18. Orlando Magic
19. Denver Nuggets
20. Atlanta Hawks
21. Cleveland Cavaliers
22. Sacramento Kings
23. Los Angeles Lakers
24. Houston Rockets
25. Philadelphia 76ers
26. Phoenix Suns
27. New York Knicks
28. Portland Trail Blazers
29. Brooklyn Nets
30. San Antonio Spurs

 

[tlance]

I think after the Grizzlies have climbed up the ladder to get a seed in the playoff run they should be in the O/P instead of the Blazers and then among the "bright future potential" teams.

The future potential power rankings looking to the next decade starting from next season and until 2030 (based on today's info and not counting for injuries) should then form like this if one combines the lot of the teams:

1. Dallas Mavericks
2. Los Angeles Clippers
3. Boston Celtics
4. Miami Heat
5. Milwaukee Bucks
6. Memphis Grizzlies
7. Utah Jazz
8. OKC Thunder
9. Charlotte Hornets
10. Minnesota Timberwolves
11. Golden State Warriors
12. Washington Wizards
13. Detroit Pistons
14. New Orleans Pelicans
15. Chicago Bulls
16. Toronto Raptors
17. Indiana Pacers
18. Orlando Magic
19. Denver Nuggets
20. Atlanta Hawks
21. Cleveland Cavaliers
22. Sacramento Kings
23. Los Angeles Lakers
24. Houston Rockets
25. Philadelphia 76ers
26. Phoenix Suns
27. New York Knicks
28. Portland Trail Blazers
29. Brooklyn Nets
30. San Antonio Spurs

Overall, not completely terrible. Still bad though.

A few really bad ones to point out:

9: Charlotte- No way in hell. They just don’t have that much. And their owner has proven to not know how to build a contending team.

10: Minnesota- Again, no. KAT will be gone in 3 years and they will start the tank over again. They just don’t have any direction.

12: Wizards- are you kidding me? What have they done in the last 30 years to warrant this ranking? They have the worst contract in basketball and their roster is seriously lacking.

13: Pistons- too high.

15: Bulls- probably too high. Who in this core is worth paying a max contract to?

20: Hawks- too low

23: Lakers- absolutely absurd to rank them below teams like Cleveland, Sacramento, Detroit, Charlotte, etc. Talk about trying too hard to present a narrative.

25: Sixers- financially they are strapped. But as long as they have Embiid and Simmons under contract they are top 10. And they project to have those 2 long term.

28, 29, 30- Blazers, Nets, Spurs- all way too low. Their are too many rudderless organizations in the NBA. These 3 all deserve to be in the top 20 simply based of their organizational competence. And honestly, the Nets should be top 10.

Financials matter, but there is way more to building a winning team and a winning culture. A strong organization can turn things around quickly. A bad one like the Wizards tends to mismanage assets and stay bad.

 

[trojanfan12]

Overall, not completely terrible. Still bad though.

A few really bad ones to point out:

9: Charlotte- No way in hell. They just don’t have that much. And their owner has proven to not know how to build a contending team.

10: Minnesota- Again, no. KAT will be gone in 3 years and they will start the tank over again. They just don’t have any direction.

12: Wizards- are you kidding me? What have they done in the last 30 years to warrant this ranking? They have the worst contract in basketball and their roster is seriously lacking.

13: Pistons- too high.

15: Bulls- probably too high. Who in this core is worth paying a max contract to?

20: Hawks- too low

23: Lakers- absolutely absurd to rank them below teams like Cleveland, Sacramento, Detroit, Charlotte, etc. Talk about trying too hard to present a narrative.

25: Sixers- financially they are strapped. But as long as they have Embiid and Simmons under contract they are top 10. And they project to have those 2 long term.

28, 29, 30- Blazers, Nets, Spurs- all way too low. Their are too many rudderless organizations in the NBA. These 3 all deserve to be in the top 20 simply based of their organizational competence. And honestly, the Nets should be top 10.

Financials matter, but there is way more to building a winning team and a winning culture. A strong organization can turn things around quickly. A bad one like the Wizards tends to mismanage assets and stay bad.

You are soooo getting called a deepshit troll for this.

You might even be joining me on the ignore list.

 

[tlance]

You are soooo getting called a deepshit troll for this.

You might even be joining me on the ignore list.

I am already there bro!

 

[buckalis]

To much extend, some teams future may be influenced by FAs decisions, but of what the NETs will be deciding to do by the up coming trade deadline...

1. Darren Collison may decide to return to the league: Collison (surprisingly) retired playing pro basketball last season, but it is highly rumored that the 32yo is considering coming back...

Whether he has retained his capabilities on the floor haven't had an NBA game for 10 months now, is of course questionable, but if he has, teams like the Lakers or the Clippers that need depth in PG could benefit considerably.

What his salary demands would be in order to decide a come back, is also a parameter to consider.

1. Alexey Shved has a provision on his contract with Euroleague's Khimki Moscow, that allows the 31yo to sign with an NBA team at anytime if he chooses to do so... His salary would be low or easily affordable (near the vet min or just a bit more), but it would have to be for a contending team... The game of the explosive combo guard would fit well with the Bucks system, the Nets and the Magic, but all these teams should have to be involved in a trade that empties a roster spot first.

1. Whether the Nets will decide to trade Spencer Dinwiddie now, or whether they decide to pay the lux tax from this season and trade him next summer...

Choosing to hold on Dinwiddie and enter the lux tax this season, would cause the Nets to come a whole year closer to pay the (severe) repeaters tax in a season where they aren't in position to hope on anything better than being eliminated in the 1st round of the playoffs... Therefore the most sensible (and beneficial) for the Nets thing to do, is for them to trade Dinwiddie now and have back players of lower salary in order to go below the lux tax threshold. Obviously, Kyrie Irving's return this week makes the decision even easier (and most sensible) for the Nets to take it...

I guess the Bucks would be particularly interested in trading for Dinwiddie and are among the very few teams (if there is any other at all) that can provide back the return that would be ideal for the Nets.