Will the Nets get better or worse if (more like when) they buy out Joe Johnson?

[chambers]

Joe Johnson and $25 million contract are eligible for a buyout in February.


We're obviously very invested in the Nets immediate future, and Johnson's potential/likely buyout situation.

So does buying out Joe Johnson make the Nets better or worse?

10.9 points, 35% fg shooting, 31% from three, 4 rebounds, 4 assists in 34.6 minutes per game.

His efficiency is atrocious, but will losing Joe help them or hurt them?
Part of me thinks that it means Lopez and Thad Young will get more shots, which is a bad thing, but part of me also thinks that Jarett Jack will take on even more responsibility on offense, which is great for us, because Jack is a terrible NBA player. The same can be said for Barngani getting more touches.
I also think losing Joe's size on the perimeter will hurt them in switches, especially this season whilst Rondae Hollis Jefferson is injured.

So what are people's thoughts on a JJ buyout?
Is it good for our pick? Bad for our pick? Or is it basically neutral?

[fairweatherfan]

Johnson doesn't have another year.  He's expiring this offseason.  So the likelihood of a buyout depends on how badly he wants to shoot for a ring this year.

[chambers]

Johnson doesn't have another year.  He's expiring this offseason.  So the likelihood of a buyout depends on how badly he wants to shoot for a ring this year.

Yeah you are right, I even looked it up lol.
Anyway I made the topic because the Nets realGM fans seem to think he'll definitely be bought out...I guess the only reason they'd buy him out is if he takes a small discount or as you say, wants to play for a contender?

[Future Celtics Owner]

worse. JJ gets less points but still gets assists and rebounds.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Nets will be worse without Johnson. I'll just say that their offense on at quick glance is significantly worse without Johnson, poor shooting and all. All to say that probably whatever playmaking he brings or merely acting as a decoy is of value to that team currently. He'd need to be replaced with a player capable of filling his role for the team.

So in all, if the Nets buyout Johnson it should ultimately be good for us I think at a quick glance.

[jmen788]

I think they might be better because wouldn't RHJ be back by then and as a result get to start?

[BudweiserCeltic]

I think they might be better because wouldn't RHJ be back by then and as a result get to start?

He's injured, broken ankle.

[jmen788]

I think they might be better because wouldn't RHJ be back by then and as a result get to start?

He's injured, broken ankle.

Yeah but by February when the buyouts happen he will possibly be back.

[mctyson]

Nets will be worse without Johnson. I'll just say that their offense on at quick glance is significantly worse without Johnson, poor shooting and all. All to say that probably whatever playmaking he brings or merely acting as a decoy is of value to that team currently. He'd need to be replaced with a player capable of filling his role for the team.

So in all, if the Nets buyout Johnson it should ultimately be good for us I think at a quick glance.

Joe Johnsons per-100 possession offensive rating is 93, third worst on the team, and he has a PER of 9.1.

They will be significantly better.

[saltlover]

I think they might be better because wouldn't RHJ be back by then and as a result get to start?

RHJ was starting when he got hurt.  No Johnson plus the return of RHJ means that Wayne Ellington keeps getting 15-20 minutes a game.  But also, I think it unlikely RHJ is back up the end of February or beginning of March.  I know they said 8-10 weeks, but a) that is a "return to the court" not return to game action, and b) teams are often optimistic when announcing projected recovery times, because they want to keep selling tickets.  I think his first game back is March 13th.

[saltlover]

Nets will be worse without Johnson. I'll just say that their offense on at quick glance is significantly worse without Johnson, poor shooting and all. All to say that probably whatever playmaking he brings or merely acting as a decoy is of value to that team currently. He'd need to be replaced with a player capable of filling his role for the team.

So in all, if the Nets buyout Johnson it should ultimately be good for us I think at a quick glance.

Joe Johnsons per-100 possession offensive rating is 93, third worst on the team, and he has a PER of 9.1.

They will be significantly better.

So they can play Waybe Ellington and his 10.4 PER?  Or Bojan Bogdanovich's 10.0 PER?  Markel Brown's 5.5 PER? The Nets aren't playing Joe Johnson just because they're tanking or because they want to trade him, or even because he's paid so much.  They also have no one obviously better to take his minutes who plays the 2/3.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Nets will be worse without Johnson. I'll just say that their offense on at quick glance is significantly worse without Johnson, poor shooting and all. All to say that probably whatever playmaking he brings or merely acting as a decoy is of value to that team currently. He'd need to be replaced with a player capable of filling his role for the team.

So in all, if the Nets buyout Johnson it should ultimately be good for us I think at a quick glance.

Joe Johnsons per-100 possession offensive rating is 93, third worst on the team, and he has a PER of 9.1.

They will be significantly better.

I'm talking about team performance, not player performance. At a quick glance the team's offense is significantly better with Johnson than without him.

Same reason that we're better with Turner on the floor when Thomas is off it than when neither is on the floor. It doesn't mean that Turner is good, but he's better than the alternative at the moment.

[Vermont Green]

If they thought that they could be better without him on the court, they could simply put him in the bench or play him less minutes.  I don't see any benefit to the team to buy him out.  Joe might like to be bought out so he can give it a try on a contender, and the Nets may work something out with him but the reason would not be to make the team better.

I actually don't think it would make any difference to the team.  Who ever got his minutes would probably have similar impact.

[pearljammer10]

Iso-Joe is suffering from getting older and he can't play the same iso game that he is used to.

Couple that with the fact that he probably doesn't give a flying bees sting about the nets cause they're so terrible, and he is producing an awful year. He needs to be bought out of traded to a contender to play 15 minutes a game off the bench.