April 20, 2014

NBA Trade Rumors: Marshon Brooks Could be Included in Deal with Nets

With the Cleveland Cavaliers rumored to be the third team in a deal which would help the Brooklyn Nets land center Dwight Howard, latest reports say that the deal could hinge on the Cavs also acquiring second-year swingman Marshon Brooks.

With the Orlando Magic unwilling to take on power forward Kris Humphries, the Cleveland Cavaliers — with all of their salary cap space and short-term flexibility — were quickly added to the rumor mill as a third team to help facilitate a deal. ESPN reports that both the Nets and Magic are “cautiously optimistic” that the Cavaliers will indeed help finalize the long-discussed trade, but a key piece would also be the Cavs receiving the 23-year-old Brooks in the deal.

Although the Nets have made Brooks available, sources told ESPN that the Magic are not interested and he’s being shopped elsewhere, including Cleveland, to find a package that suits Orlando. The Magic have, to this point, turned down several trade proposals by the Nets, some including the Cavaliers who appear ready and willing to make a deal to acquire additional assets.

The 6-foot-5-inch Brooks averaged 12.6 points and 3.6 rebounds per game for the Nets during his rookie year. Prior to the All-Star game, Brooks averaged 14.6 points and 4.3 rebounds, adding at least one steal and one three-point field goal per game.

[Related: Cavalier Thoughts: Hope And Patience In A Hopeless And Impatient NBA]

  • architrance

    Ha, that’s awesome. That area is changing fast. I’m actually a little bit further from the arena – closer to Ft. Greene Park.

  • Harv 21

    Harden wasn’t drafted to be a rotation guy long term, and was a sixth man b/c what thunder already had. That role for him is probably already over. Cavs have one star, and no shooting guard. Grant isn’t drafting long-term sixth men yet, not intentionally anyway.

  • mgbode

    makes sense. looked up the latest based on your post. apparently, we give up Luke Walton and get Kris Humphries for 1yr, 1st round pick, $3mil + filler in Q-Richardson & Gaines.

    not terrible to turn Luke Walton into Kris Humphries + 1st rounder.

  • mgbode

    Harden starts on the bench, but plays most of crunchtime (and starter minutes). if Waiters did the same, then I wouldn’t complain. that was my point.

    just because someone starts on the bench, doesn’t mean they are really “bench” guys anymore. Pops brought that fad back with Manu and OKC copied it. We are in the same family tree (FO at least), so I wouldn’t be surprised to see us adopt it as well.

  • Harv 21

    It’s not new, Lenny did it with Hot Rod and many others did it before (Auerbach/Havlicek, etc.), but you’re missing my point. Brooks and Waiters play the same position. Kyrie will play crunch time. Brooks is plenty good enough for crunch time. Waiters is also crunch time. Too many 6’3″ – 6’5″ crunchers, not enough room for similar-sized dudes to crunch. Another move would be the expected thing to happen, is my point.

  • mgbode

    that’s why I said Pops brought it back :)

    Brooks is not plenty good enough for crunchtime when you look at his efficiency IMO. He’s really a scoring guard off the bench unless he greatly improves. But, if we decide to let him start and have Waiters off the bench because it helps overall, that’s fine. Also, Brooks and/or Waiters can play temporary PG if needed. That’s always a plus.

    also, Brooks is dirt-cheap rookie deal. plenty of room to add larger guys on the payroll. it’s not like we’d put those 3 out there at the same time in crunchtime. Gee would be it for now at SF and we’d be looking to upgrade. Always looking to upgrade all spots :)

  • BrownsFanSF

    I call it a total slam dunk. Grant is like an asset magnate. He keeps managing to give up non-essential pieces for valuable down the road assets (Mo for a top 10 pick [that magically transformed into 1], JJ for equal player and pick, Razor [who was opting out] for a pick). Taking on a year of Hump’s contract for another pick is right up there with those.

  • woofersus

    Just money

  • Vindictive_Pat

    RIght… seems like a fantastic deal. Humphries’ agent is pushing for 4 years and I haven’t heard the latest on that… Cavs originally weren’t interested in that, but seems one side may have yielded. Depends on the price, but there are worse things than being stuck with Humphries for 4 years… his contract would theoritically still be an asset in that last year for trade purposes.

  • BrownsFanSF

    I actually like Brooks coming off the bench (I don’t think we are getting him though). His is an inefficient volume shooter who can heat up. Let him come in with the second team, jack up his shots while our second unit plays tough D and maybe he gets hot, maybe he doesn’t. Kinda a Jet Terry or Jamal Crawford role.

  • mgbode

    and he would rid us of Walton at the same time. trading Luke = more difficult than trading Kris Humphries at only a slightly higher salary.

  • mgbode

    i would be worried that adding Kris for that long would be putting Andy on the block (theoretically, Andy/Zeller at C and Kris/TT at PF though). but, he is a guy who is going to get a ton of rebounds and “try” on defense (though he hasn’t exactly been stellar there his on/off court splits with NJ were favorable on both ends)

  • BrownsFanSF

    Good point. We could either flip Hump right away to someone willing to give him the 4 years he wants (who knows, maybe pick up another pick lol) or wait till the trade deadline when he’ll be over valued by a team with a few front court injuries, like Memphis this year.

    Of course if there is a team out there willing to give him the 4 years, why wouldn’t the Net’s just trade him there? Aren’t NBA rumors fun!

  • Harv 21

    this makes more sense to me from Cavs viewpoint, sans Brooks. But don’t understand why Humphries would have any interest in a 1-year guaranteed when he’s already an UFA, can go multiyear right now and knows that any moment an injury could instantly render him a very tall “whatever happened to” trivia question.
    This is exactly why we got Walton, to parlay his bad contract into a trade match into an extra first-rounder into another few notches up in a future draft. Nice to have an owner not only willing but also able to play the system.

  • mgbode

    I think Kris is trying to use the little leverage he has to get a bigger, longer deal than he can find elsewhere (since the Nets “need” him to sign-n-trade)

  • Vindictive_Pat

    Yeah it’s really a great move, whether we get Humphries for 1 year or 4 years. He’s a good player and will be valuable when it’s time to trade him. The only hangup is whether Humphries wants to sign with Cleveland… last I heard, his agent hadn’t even been contacted by the Cavs. So he could easily blow this whole thing up if he decides he’d rather not play for Cleveland.