PDA

View Full Version : Did The Nets Give Up Too Much?



JasonJohnHorn
06-28-2013, 10:28 PM
I love Garnett, and Pierce. I think they are two of the best players the league has seen over the last 15 years. They rank up there with Kobe and Duncan in my book. But the bottom line is they aren't who they were. Though they were still great last year with limited minutes, it is ot fair to expect them to be as good this year. And Terry is on a steep decline. Don't get me wrong. I think BK will have a great year, but at the end of the day; are the Nets better?


They gave up Evans, the best rebounder in the league last year. A double-double stud in Humph and a versatile forward in Wallace (even if he was in a slump last year).

I think it is fair to say that PP and Garnett had better seasons than Humph and Wallace, but at the same time, along with Wallace, Humph and the league's best rebounder (even if he is a one-dimensional player) the Nets ALSO gave up three first round draft picks (2014, 2016, 2018). Garnett and Pierce will likley be a year or two into retirement for the 2016 pick and the Nets will be in rebuilding mode by then in all likelihood. They will need those picks.


There is a small window for Pierce and Garnett to compete with the Nets. It seems odd to me that they should give up so much?


Am I the only one thinking the Nets gave up too much? Or am I on crack?

JerseyPalahniuk
06-28-2013, 10:31 PM
We didn't give up Evans. Incorrectly reported. Gave up Marshon Brooks. and Hump was out of the rotation with Lopez/Blatche/Evans/Wallace getting all the minutes at 4/5.

The picks are the only thing that mattered.


READ HERE:

Each team is allowed to spend $3 million each year in trades/buying picks under the new CBA. We have done so the last two years buying Marshon Brooks (moving up) and last year bought 2 late 2nd round picks and moved up to get Tyshawn Taylor. All indication shows that BK (or whoever is GM) will likely have the power to do that again in the 2014 2016 and 2018 drafts anyway since we have Prokhorov as an owner.
WE CAN BUY MORE PICKS

Those picks will all be in the 20s anyway. I'd take that over 2 (3 if Garnett doesn't retire) years of Garnett and Pierce any day.

Riodagoat
06-28-2013, 10:32 PM
It's not the players that screwed them, it's the picks. They got rid of 2 bad contracts in Hump and Wallace and Kg/Pp are definitely an upgrade over them. But seriously, THREE first round picks? They will be screwed in the future. KG/PP probably only have at most 2 years of decent ball.

Jarvo
06-28-2013, 10:33 PM
If they don't make it to The Finals and win hell yeah.

Raidaz4Life
06-28-2013, 10:34 PM
Lol yes they gave up way too much. If Pierce and Garnett were 2 years younger I would say it was a decent trade but there is absolutely no guarantee that Pierce and Garnett are even substantial upgrades over Crash and Hump.

CityofChaos
06-28-2013, 10:37 PM
wasnt Jason Terry involved too? I also thought I heard Bill Simmons say the picks were protected.

4milesperday
06-28-2013, 10:44 PM
They gave up too much for nothing. KG, Pierce and Terry are not going to get them anywhere IMO. They still can't beat Miami, Bulls, Pacers or even Knicks.

JerseyPalahniuk
06-28-2013, 10:48 PM
Lol yes they gave up way too much. If Pierce and Garnett were 2 years younger I would say it was a decent trade but there is absolutely no guarantee that Pierce and Garnett are even substantial upgrades over Crash and Hump.

No way you would be saying that if Celtics still had them man, no way. Both were used terribly under Avery and PJC but Crash relies on his athleticism which is declining, he lost his shot, AND is making $10 mil a year. Hump is kinda of athletic but not smart in anyway - does not compare to Garnett in any facet except rebounding but we have Evans who was better than Hump anyway last year.

Hump's double doubles 2 years in a row was when we had NO low post option. The first time Lopez only played 5 games so he was our BEST big man that got every pass from Dwill/Devin Harris. How much did he score? 14 points. As the NUMBER 1 big man option.

Sssmush
06-28-2013, 10:53 PM
It's not the players that screwed them, it's the picks. They got rid of 2 bad contracts in Hump and Wallace and Kg/Pp are definitely an upgrade over them. But seriously, THREE first round picks? They will be screwed in the future. KG/PP probably only have at most 2 years of decent ball.

Yeah, I'm a Laker fan and I must say it's pretty annoying to see Danny Ainge get everything he wants and more, first for Doc Rivers who was going to leave the Celtics anyway, and then for Pierce (who they were going to waive) and Garnett (who they wouldn't want there anyway in rebuilding mode). And both guys are approaching 40. And you give Danny Ainge 3 more 1st round picks? They're making Ainge seem like some kind of genius or something.

They signed Garnett and Allen in free agency, and drafted Pierce like a million years ago. And in 2013 they come out with 3 first round picks +Gerald Wallace? And you can probably dump off Humphries on somebody for a 2nd round pick or something.

BigBlueCrew
06-28-2013, 10:55 PM
of course...

Forget the players. They are insignificant. Its the picks. 3 first rounds picks and dont tell me they are all gonna be in position 25+, bullcrap. Also the C's get to flip a 2017 first round pick with the Nets. Danny Ainge got a great return for 2 aging players.

celtics 34
06-28-2013, 11:00 PM
Yeah, I'm a Laker fan and I must say it's pretty annoying to see Danny Ainge get everything he wants and more, first for Doc Rivers who was going to leave the Celtics anyway, and then for Pierce (who they were going to waive) and Garnett (who they wouldn't want there anyway in rebuilding mode). And both guys are approaching 40. And you give Danny Ainge 3 more 1st round picks? They're making Ainge seem like some kind of genius or something.

They signed Garnett and Allen in free agency, and drafted Pierce like a million years ago. And in 2013 they come out with 3 first round picks +Gerald Wallace? And you can probably dump off Humphries on somebody for a 2nd round pick or something.
No allen and kg were not signed in free agency they were traded for

Sandman
06-28-2013, 11:05 PM
Yeah, I'm a Laker fan and I must say it's pretty annoying to see Danny Ainge get everything he wants and more, first for Doc Rivers who was going to leave the Celtics anyway, and then for Pierce (who they were going to waive) and Garnett (who they wouldn't want there anyway in rebuilding mode). And both guys are approaching 40. And you give Danny Ainge 3 more 1st round picks? They're making Ainge seem like some kind of genius or something.

They signed Garnett and Allen in free agency, and drafted Pierce like a million years ago. And in 2013 they come out with 3 first round picks +Gerald Wallace? And you can probably dump off Humphries on somebody for a 2nd round pick or something.
they traded Jeff Green for Allen and Al Jefferson for KG

PurpleJesus
06-28-2013, 11:08 PM
This Move Also Gives The Nets More Financial Flexibility In The Years After kG And Pierce Retire

kozelkid
06-28-2013, 11:16 PM
Yeah, I'm a Laker fan and I must say it's pretty annoying to see Danny Ainge get everything he wants and more, first for Doc Rivers who was going to leave the Celtics anyway, and then for Pierce (who they were going to waive) and Garnett (who they wouldn't want there anyway in rebuilding mode). And both guys are approaching 40. And you give Danny Ainge 3 more 1st round picks? They're making Ainge seem like some kind of genius or something.

They signed Garnett and Allen in free agency, and drafted Pierce like a million years ago. And in 2013 they come out with 3 first round picks +Gerald Wallace? And you can probably dump off Humphries on somebody for a 2nd round pick or something.

I know right. LAL never gets the opportunity of raping teams in deals. Oh wait...

JerseyPalahniuk
06-28-2013, 11:17 PM
I know right. LAL never gets the opportunity of raping teams in deals. Oh wait...

hahaah :clap:

More-Than-Most
06-28-2013, 11:19 PM
Way Way Way to much

bagwell368
06-28-2013, 11:19 PM
Those picks will all be in the 20s anyway. I'd take that over 2 (3 if Garnett doesn't retire) years of Garnett and Pierce any day.

You wish. Great chance at least one pick is in the teens. Good chance next year they will be 22-23 range.

bagwell368
06-28-2013, 11:20 PM
It's not the players that screwed them, it's the picks. They got rid of 2 bad contracts in Hump and Wallace and Kg/Pp are definitely an upgrade over them. But seriously, THREE first round picks? They will be screwed in the future. KG/PP probably only have at most 2 years of decent ball.

Pierce was pathetic in last years playoffs. Now way both have 2 good years left.

c.c.
06-28-2013, 11:23 PM
Not at all if they trying to win now. The thing is, they don't got time to develop chemistry. They gotta mesh quick!

PAOboston
06-28-2013, 11:30 PM
Yeah they did. Made Ainge look like a genius. Ainge just got 4 1st round picks, the right to swap picks in 2017, and an expiring contract for 3 35+ players and a coach. Come on man! That's larceny!

As for the picks being in the late 1 round, I would be so sure. Maybe this year and next. By the time 2016/17/18 roll around, it's not that farfetched that the Nets picks could be pretty good.

jrm2054
06-28-2013, 11:32 PM
No try to win for 2 years, the picks will be late and not matter as mentioned before if they want picks they can buy some. The cap relief in a few years from PP and Kg will be great especially once JJ is gone

JerseyPalahniuk
06-28-2013, 11:37 PM
You wish. Great chance at least one pick is in the teens. Good chance next year they will be 22-23 range.


Yeah they did. Made Ainge look like a genius. Ainge just got 4 1st round picks, the right to swap picks in 2017, and an expiring contract for 3 35+ players and a coach. Come on man! That's larceny!

As for the picks being in the late 1 round, I would be so sure. Maybe this year and next. By the time 2016/17/18 roll around, it's not that farfetched that the Nets picks could be pretty good.

Nets chose a win-now mode. We've been "rebuilding" every since Jason Kidd left. It's our time to try to go for a ring.

Celtics had their chance (and did an incredible job in the span) and now they're rebuilding.

None of you guys KNOW that we're gonna have good picks in 2016/17/18, just like we don't KNOW if we're gonna capitalize on this opportunity the next 3 years.

When it's all said and done, I'm glad we're on the contending side rather than the rebuilding side.

That's all there is too it.

NJDrew2
06-28-2013, 11:57 PM
From the Nets side of things, they picked up a power forward who can play good D and be a leader both in the locker room and on the court. Something they needed. They picked up a small forward who is still very effective. That's something they REALLY needed if you watched any of their games last year. Wallace (and Evans, for that matter) couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. That won't be a problem with Pierce or KG. And the Wallace contract if awful. Horrible. They gain financial flexibility in the future and get much better in the present? I'm okay with the Nets giving three picks for that, even if one of them might be a high pick in FIVE years.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 12:04 AM
Lol yes they gave up way too much. If Pierce and Garnett were 2 years younger I would say it was a decent trade but there is absolutely no guarantee that Pierce and Garnett are even substantial upgrades over Crash and Hump.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. You haven't a clue as to how big a joke Reggie Evans and Gerald Wallace were. Wallace wasn't even good on defense last year.

RiceOnTheRun
06-29-2013, 12:13 AM
No way you would be saying that if Celtics still had them man, no way. Both were used terribly under Avery and PJC but Crash relies on his athleticism which is declining, he lost his shot, AND is making $10 mil a year. Hump is kinda of athletic but not smart in anyway - does not compare to Garnett in any facet except rebounding but we have Evans who was better than Hump anyway last year.

Hump's double doubles 2 years in a row was when we had NO low post option. The first time Lopez only played 5 games so he was our BEST big man that got every pass from Dwill/Devin Harris. How much did he score? 14 points. As the NUMBER 1 big man option.

LOL Crash was taking up floor space most of the time. Hump was a bench warmer this season. Pretty sure PP and KG make the Nets substantially better. I'd still leave them behind the Bulls (with Rose back to his usual self at least), Indy and Miami but it's a hell of a lot better than where they'd be without those guys.


We didn't give up Evans. Incorrectly reported. Gave up Marshon Brooks. and Hump was out of the rotation with Lopez/Blatche/Evans/Wallace getting all the minutes at 4/5.

The picks are the only thing that mattered.


READ HERE:

Each team is allowed to spend $3 million each year in trades/buying picks under the new CBA. We have done so the last two years buying Marshon Brooks (moving up) and last year bought 2 late 2nd round picks and moved up to get Tyshawn Taylor. All indication shows that BK (or whoever is GM) will likely have the power to do that again in the 2014 2016 and 2018 drafts anyway since we have Prokhorov as an owner.
WE CAN BUY MORE PICKS

Those picks will all be in the 20s anyway. I'd take that over 2 (3 if Garnett doesn't retire) years of Garnett and Pierce any day.

I'm not too sure about that. If they don't win within the next two years, I find it pretty tough to win when KG and PP retires, JJ will be 34-35. There only move from there is FA and if they don't get it done there, it's a 31 year old D-Will and Lopez running the team. I'd expect them at around a 6-7 seed at that point, and it takes away the option of rebuilding because of the picks. No team is going to give up an early-mid first round pick for cash unless they're in cap clearing mode like Dallas this year.

Yeah, they could buy a decent amount of second rounders I guess, but if they manage to build a winning team around those, BK deserves Executive of the Century.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 12:16 AM
I don't get how so many people think the Nets gave up so much.

- They got rid of Wallace, and by doing so will clear major cap space faster than say if they didn't make the trade.

- They replaced Wallace with KG. I don't think people understand how pathetic Wallace was. Wallace couldn't even play defense. He couldn't hit 3s and airballing layups weren't out of the norm for him, neither was botching fast break passes. KG plays excellent defense, is a real leader, is a deadly mid range jump shooter and finish in the paint. He's also efficient.

- They replaced Humphries with Paul Pierce. Pierce was still a very very good player last year. He was deadly in spot up situations and can really score/pass even at his advanced age. Humphries would only score if he were wide open underneath the basket. Humphries was a joke.

- That being said, we gave up alternating picks. Who cares? These most likely aren't lottery picks. The Nets won't be bad enough to be in the lottery cause they will attract at worst solid players that will keep them out of the lottery. Just in case you guys didn't know, our owner is very rich and can buy 1st round picks in his sleep.

- Deron Williams was injured for the first half last year and it clearly showed. He couldn't get by the slowest of guards and couldn't dunk if he jumped off a trampoline. When he was healthy, they would double him, JJ, and Lopez. Teams would literally leave Wallace alone cause he camped at the 3pt line and nobody cared where Reggie Evans was on the floor. You cannot do that anymore. EVERYBODY in this lineup can shoot and score. Not that impressive?

Kevin Garnett is our worst offensive starter. How many teams can say that if KG was on their team?

Heat? No
Knicks? No
Pacers? No
Bulls? Maybe. If Rose is back and Butler is the 2 with Deng at the 3 and Boozer at the 4, then quite possibly.
Thunder? No.
Lakers? No.
Clippers? No.
Grizzlies? No.
Nuggets? No.
Warriors? No.

Now don't get me wrong I'm not saying that the Nets are better than those teams, I'm saying however that it's possible that there isn't a team with as much offense as the Nets and nobody on this team will get doubled and they can all beat one on one defense.

I'd say the Heat, Bulls(healthy), Thunder(healthy), Grizzlies are all clearly better. In the next group I have Clippers, Nets, Warriors Nuggets, and Pacers in no particular order.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 12:19 AM
I'm not too sure about that. If they don't win within the next two years, I find it pretty tough to win when KG and PP retires, JJ will be 34-35. There only move from there is FA and if they don't get it done there, it's a 31 year old D-Will and Lopez running the team. I'd expect them at around a 6-7 seed at that point, and it takes away the option of rebuilding because of the picks. No team is going to give up an early-mid first round pick for cash unless they're in cap clearing mode like Dallas this year.

Yeah, they could buy a decent amount of second rounders I guess, but if they manage to build a winning team around those, BK deserves Executive of the Century.

There's a problem with this logic though.

1) 31 years old is not old. A 31 year old player can still very well be a very good player.
2) FA. Like you said FA. With the market, owner, and arena this team will attract good players.
3) You also act like the Nets don't have a 1st rd pick in 2015 and 2017. They do and those picks could help.
4) Team are always buying and selling late 1st round picks. Proky can buy picks left and right.

IndyRealist
06-29-2013, 12:22 AM
Humphries was minimal impact due to minutes. Now that I know Evans isn't part of the deal, and Brooks was, I like it a whole lot better for the Nets. They came out ahead assuming the picks are going to be in the late 20's. Joe Johnson and his ridiculous contract are still the sticking point. At this point in his career he's pretty average but paid like an MVP. I don't dislike the Plumlee pick, but does that put Andray Blatche out in the cold? He wasn't bad for them last year. And Teletovic? And outside of Evans, their bench is still pretty awful. The Pacers showed you can get close with a strong starting 5, but if you're bench sucks you're not getting over the hump.

JerseyPalahniuk
06-29-2013, 12:22 AM
I'm not too sure about that. If they don't win within the next two years, I find it pretty tough to win when KG and PP retires, JJ will be 34-35. There only move from there is FA and if they don't get it done there, it's a 31 year old D-Will and Lopez running the team. I'd expect them at around a 6-7 seed at that point, and it takes away the option of rebuilding because of the picks. No team is going to give up an early-mid first round pick for cash unless they're in cap clearing mode like Dallas this year.

Yeah, they could buy a decent amount of second rounders I guess, but if they manage to build a winning team around those, BK deserves Executive of the Century.

So you're saying after KG and Pierce retire (btw we would be in a BETTER salary cap position then if hadn't done the trade), Billy King/Prokhorov are gonna do nothing at all and just play it out with Dwill and Lopez. Seeing the moves we've made, I find it highly unlikely. And $3 million will get you a mid to late first round. Most people agree the 2014 pick will be in the 20s and maybe the 2016 as well. I'm sorry that I couldn't care less about a possibly high pick FIVE years from now haha. Our entire team dynamic can change then. I could name at least 20 teams in the league that are in completely different positions in a span of 5 years. You can't just predict we're going to fall off a cliff and Celtics get a top 5 pick in 2018. Prokhorov is here to stay.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 12:26 AM
Humphries was minimal impact due to minutes. Now that I know Evans isn't part of the deal, and Brooks was, I like it a whole lot better for the Nets. They came out ahead assuming the picks are going to be in the late 20's. Joe Johnson and his ridiculous contract are still the sticking point. At this point in his career he's pretty average but paid like an MVP. I don't dislike the Plumlee pick, but does that put Andray Blatche out in the cold? He wasn't bad for them last year. And Teletovic? And outside of Evans, their bench is still pretty awful. The Pacers showed you can get close with a strong starting 5, but if you're bench sucks you're not getting over the hump.

We have Jason Terry on the bench. Andray Blatche wasn't bad? LOL. Find me a backup Center who put up 10 and 5 shooting 51% from the field. He will most likely come back due to money. If he leaves us, Washington doesn't have to pay him anymore. Also KG won't be getting 35 MPG so there's min to go around.

Deron/Taylor
Johnson/Terry
Pierce/Toko
KG/Blatche/Teletovic
Lopez/Plumlee/Blatche

That bench isn't bad. It's a nice youthful bench that is very athletic.

JerseyPalahniuk
06-29-2013, 12:28 AM
We have Jason Terry on the bench. Andray Blatche wasn't bad? LOL. Find me a backup Center who put up 10 and 5 shooting 51% from the field. He will most likely come back due to money. If he leaves us, Washington doesn't have to pay him anymore. Also KG won't be getting 35 MPG so there's min to go around.

Deron/Taylor
Johnson/Terry
Pierce/Toko
KG/Blatche/Teletovic
Lopez/Plumlee/Blatche

That bench isn't bad. It's a nice youthful bench that is very athletic.

Add Evans and Bogdonavic if he actually comes. If Kidd can develop Toko/Bogs then I'm very excited about the Nets future once Joe/Pierce are gone.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 12:36 AM
Add Evans and Bogdonavic if he actually comes. If Kidd can develop Toko/Bogs then I'm very excited about the Nets future once Joe/Pierce are gone.

Well I heard King wants to use the MLE on someone like Korver so I don't know if Bogs is coming this year.

RiceOnTheRun
06-29-2013, 12:36 AM
There's a problem with this logic though.

1) 31 years old is not old. A 31 year old player can still very well be a very good player.
2) FA. Like you said FA. With the market, owner, and arena this team will attract good players.
3) You also act like the Nets don't have a 1st rd pick in 2015 and 2017. They do and those picks could help.
4) Team are always buying and selling late 1st round picks. Proky can buy picks left and right.

1) Yes, but 31 years old is 2 years older and while I think D-Will can still be an effective PG into his mid-late 30s, let's not pretend like he'll be the same at that point.
2) That's if, though. Nets need to be smarter about their contracts tbh, they can't trade for anymore stupid Gerald Wallace 4yr/40m contracts anymore. Mikhail's sure as hell a better owner than Dolan, but it's a double-edged sword because I think BK went a bit too trigger-happy with contracts last off-season. Hump and Crash to list some, but at least they're gone now.
3) Yes, and that's true. But having two picks in the teens/20s over the next 5 years will honestly be of minimal impact, unless one of those drafts ends up becoming on par with 2012 where it's one of those deep drafts.
4) You have a point there, but as far as rebuilding goes (if they do decide to rebuild somewhere along the line), it's pretty difficult to build a team around there unless you're San Antonio.

Honestly, both the Knicks and Nets have been suffering in futility for some time now, so I totally understand the idea of going all-in with a championship or bust mindset. I think this makes the rivalry even sweeter (Honey Nut Cheerios), and I can't wait for the next Knicks/Nets game. As a Knicks fan, I do hope this blows up and the Knicks dominate the Atlantic :D but I have enough respect to see the Nets as a legit threat next year.

True Sports Fan
06-29-2013, 12:41 AM
Yeah, I'm a Laker fan and I must say it's pretty annoying to see Danny Ainge get everything he wants and more, first for Doc Rivers who was going to leave the Celtics anyway, and then for Pierce (who they were going to waive) and Garnett (who they wouldn't want there anyway in rebuilding mode). And both guys are approaching 40. And you give Danny Ainge 3 more 1st round picks? They're making Ainge seem like some kind of genius or something.

They signed Garnett and Allen in free agency, and drafted Pierce like a million years ago. And in 2013 they come out with 3 first round picks +Gerald Wallace? And you can probably dump off Humphries on somebody for a 2nd round pick or something.

As if the Lakers haven't had their fair share of luck in FA/Draft :laugh2:

JerseyPalahniuk
06-29-2013, 12:47 AM
1) Yes, but 31 years old is 2 years older and while I think D-Will can still be an effective PG into his mid-late 30s, let's not pretend like he'll be the same at that point.
2) That's if, though. Nets need to be smarter about their contracts tbh, they can't trade for anymore stupid Gerald Wallace 4yr/40m contracts anymore. Mikhail's sure as hell a better owner than Dolan, but it's a double-edged sword because I think BK went a bit too trigger-happy with contracts last off-season. Hump and Crash to list some, but at least they're gone now.
3) Yes, and that's true. But having two picks in the teens/20s over the next 5 years will honestly be of minimal impact, unless one of those drafts ends up becoming on par with 2012 where it's one of those deep drafts.
4) You have a point there, but as far as rebuilding goes (if they do decide to rebuild somewhere along the line), it's pretty difficult to build a team around there unless you're San Antonio.

Honestly, both the Knicks and Nets have been suffering in futility for some time now, so I totally understand the idea of going all-in with a championship or bust mindset. I think this makes the rivalry even sweeter (Honey Nut Cheerios), and I can't wait for the next Knicks/Nets game. As a Knicks fan, I do hope this blows up and the Knicks dominate the Atlantic :D but I have enough respect to see the Nets as a legit threat next year.

Awesome comment man, no hate, just your opinion. But to refute some points.

1) Usually a player's prime is considered to be 27-31/32 so I think Dwill still be about the same. It won't be is best season ever but I doubt he will have lost a step. Agree his crossover won't be as deadly haha
2) We didn't trade for that contract, BK foolishly SIGNED him to that contract. And now he doesn't have the luxury of signing any more long term contracts anyway under the salary cap so that's a plus.
3) You can't say that having 2 picks in the next 5 years will be of minimal impact AND that us losing 3 picks in the next 5 years will crush our future dude. That contradicts itself.
4) We won't have to BUILD our team around those picks. Just to add pieces to compliment our roster. We'll have an All-star PG and C still after pierce/garnett retires, just need to add the pieces in between.

And again, excited for this new stage of Nets/Knicks rivalry. Moved this summer and I'm only 30 min away from NYC to hopefully I'll be at a few games (and a Nets/Knicks one!!) this year.

JerseyPalahniuk
06-29-2013, 12:48 AM
Well I heard King wants to use the MLE on someone like Korver so I don't know if Bogs is coming this year.

Eh. I'd be happy with a proven Korver as well. He's learned to be a better defensive player when he was on the bulls. Bogs can wait another year then.

SportsFanatic10
06-29-2013, 12:57 AM
no, but of course if they don't win with this revamped roster in hindsight some people will think so. i think this is a good move for them, it brings excitement to a new team/arena and puts them in the contender conversation. the east will be more interesting now with rose back and indy's young core improving and now this.

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 01:10 AM
The Celtics are getting a lotto pick. Nets will not be good in five years.

bleedprple&gold
06-29-2013, 01:23 AM
No they didn't give up too much. The C's could care less about the mish-mosh of garbage players they got, it was all about the picks. So I look at it player-by-player. Garnett is worth one pick. Pierce is worth one pick. Then throw in the 3rd pick as compensation for taking Wallace's atrocious contract off their hands. And you get a fair deal.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 01:31 AM
The Celtics are getting a lotto pick. Nets will not be good in five years.

I'm willing to bet you anything that you said the Nets won't be a 4th seed their 1st season into Brooklyn when we were in NJ.

odiz
06-29-2013, 01:33 AM
They got rid of 2 bad contracts and the first round picks will more then likely be 23rd+. Its pretty rare to get anything more then a serviceable role player at that point in the draft. I think its a good deal for both teams.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 01:38 AM
1) Yes, but 31 years old is 2 years older and while I think D-Will can still be an effective PG into his mid-late 30s, let's not pretend like he'll be the same at that point.
2) That's if, though. Nets need to be smarter about their contracts tbh, they can't trade for anymore stupid Gerald Wallace 4yr/40m contracts anymore. Mikhail's sure as hell a better owner than Dolan, but it's a double-edged sword because I think BK went a bit too trigger-happy with contracts last off-season. Hump and Crash to list some, but at least they're gone now.
3) Yes, and that's true. But having two picks in the teens/20s over the next 5 years will honestly be of minimal impact, unless one of those drafts ends up becoming on par with 2012 where it's one of those deep drafts.
4) You have a point there, but as far as rebuilding goes (if they do decide to rebuild somewhere along the line), it's pretty difficult to build a team around there unless you're San Antonio.

Honestly, both the Knicks and Nets have been suffering in futility for some time now, so I totally understand the idea of going all-in with a championship or bust mindset. I think this makes the rivalry even sweeter (Honey Nut Cheerios), and I can't wait for the next Knicks/Nets game. As a Knicks fan, I do hope this blows up and the Knicks dominate the Atlantic :D but I have enough respect to see the Nets as a legit threat next year.

1) Who said anything about mid-late 30s? Deron signed a 5 year deal, not a 10 year deal. If you admit that he will still be good at age 31 then what are you debating this for?

2) If? I don't think it's a stretch to say that a franchise in one of the biggest markets, with one of the best owners and arenas won't have much trouble signing solid players.

Ah the Gerald Wallace signing. Seeing your sig I assume you're a Knicks fan so I thought you'd have a little more insight to this deal. It wasn't a trade, it was a signing.

Joe Johnson. If he doesn't get traded for, DWILL leaves. DWILL leaves, the Nets have another lottery team their first year in Brooklyn. They could NOT have that happen.

Gerald Wallace. Bad signing/trade? Yes, but again BK knew he overpaid him. He wanted to sign him to show DWILL that they were serious about winning and wanted a veteran, proven commodity. BK didn't do this for no reason, he knowingly overpaid and I don't see another situation where he has to do the same thing twice.

Kris Humphries. We were over the cap already, but since his contract expired as a member of the Nets, we were allowed to go over the cap to get him. We signed him to a big deal knowing we were going to trade his expiring contract.

3) I don't get how you say the Nets picks in 2015 and 2017 are going to be worthless yet the Nets picks in 2014, 2016, and 2018 would be any better.

4) I never said it's easy, but everybody is saying the Nets overpaid cause they traded away what's most likely going to be late 1st round picks. My point is, they aren't THAT valuable, proven by the fact that it isn't too hard to buy them

uprightciti
06-29-2013, 01:52 AM
Ummmm they really screwed up. Pp is not going to match well with JJ. And KG will hate d will and Lopez under a rookie coach Kidd. This has lakers 2012 written all over it

uprightciti
06-29-2013, 01:57 AM
No way they are better than the heat

Or the pacers

Or the bulls

Or the knicks

This is a 5 seed team looking at a 1st round exit

Yes they have Blanche and Evans and Plumlee and possibly Korver and Collins
But what they don't have is a star
Or heart

Knicks21
06-29-2013, 01:58 AM
Once KG and Pierce expire do the Nets have bird rights?

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 02:05 AM
Ummmm they really screwed up. Pp is not going to match well with JJ. And KG will hate d will and Lopez under a rookie coach Kidd. This has lakers 2012 written all over it

Lakers? What in the world?

Nash was injured and didn't know how to play off the ball, nor did he know how to play with so many guys that need to take a lot of shots to be happy. Not to mention Dantoni didn't use him correctly.

Kobe was exhausted and he also butted heads with Dwight because Kobe believes he deserves to take every shot he takes. Kobe didn't like Dwight because Dwight wasn't professional. Dwight didn't like Kobe cause Kobe's a ball hog.

Gasol was CLEARLY misused. Dantoni doesn't know how to play back to the basket big men, let alone two of them.

KG will hate DWILL? Why?

B'sCeltsPatsSox
06-29-2013, 02:07 AM
No way they are better than the heat

Or the pacers

Or the bulls

Or the knicks

This is a 5 seed team looking at a 1st round exit

Yes they have Blanche and Evans and Plumlee and possibly Korver and Collins
But what they don't have is a star
Or heart

...um?


Anyways, I think they may have given up one pick too many.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 02:07 AM
No way they are better than the heat

Or the pacers

Or the bulls

Or the knicks

This is a 5 seed team looking at a 1st round exit

Yes they have Blanche and Evans and Plumlee and possibly Korver and Collins
But what they don't have is a star
Or heart

LOL. Wait wait wait, you're telling me they didn't improve their team at all? Please don't ever comment on the Nets ever again until you actually watch them play. I'd be willing to bet a lot of money that no team had 2 starters anywhere near as abysmal as Evans and Wallace.

Also everybody says PJ did a fine job. If he did a fine job, why did he get fired?

EVERYBODY's problems with PJ was also shared by the Nets FO. Rotations were ridiculous, lack of developing young players, favoritism to old vets like Stackhouse, refusal to adjust at all during games.

Even analysts saw it. I forgot who said it, but it was very well said. "Coach Thibs is playing chess while PJ is playing checkers.

Ware_Spencer
06-29-2013, 02:09 AM
I think most people will think this will explode but the Nets had to make this move. Its do or die for them.

Deron is overpaid and so is Joe Johnson. They also got rid of that horrible contract of Gerald Wallace. Which I thought would be impossible.
They have to do whatever it takes to WIN NOW. Otherwise the huge contract of Joe Johnson is wasted. He will never be worth that money but the nets have to get the most out of the money they are spending. Late 1st round draft picks rarely pan out.

I originally wouldn't have traded for Joe Johnson or signed Gerald Wallace to that deal but I do think what they are doing with Pierce and Garnett is a good idea. 1st round draft picks in the 20's range are so overrated.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 02:09 AM
...um?


Anyways, I think they may have given up one pick too many.

Well, that's something we'll have to wait and see on, but for now I think it's well worth the risk cause I don't see the Nets being lottery bound in the near future.

Heart is the biggest joke when it comes to sports terms. Nobody can tell me how to measure heart, how much heart has an affect on winning, and how to tell who has heart.

If a player screams at the top of his lungs after every dunk, Chandler and Noah, they say he has heart. If a player looks like he's half asleep, Joe Johnson, they say he has no heart.

Knicks21
06-29-2013, 02:17 AM
I think most people will think this will explode but the Nets had to make this move. Its do or die for them.

Deron is overpaid and so is Joe Johnson. They also got rid of that horrible contract of Gerald Wallace. Which I thought would be impossible.
They have to do whatever it takes to WIN NOW. Otherwise the huge contract of Joe Johnson is wasted. He will never be worth that money but the nets have to get the most out of the money they are spending. Late 1st round draft picks rarely pan out.

I originally wouldn't have traded for Joe Johnson or signed Gerald Wallace to that deal but I do think what they are doing with Pierce and Garnett is a good idea. 1st round draft picks in the 20's range are so overrated.

It is do or die. But this is it, this is there final roster baring minor changes to the bench. And it isnt good enough to win the championship.

They will sell tickets, be better than the knicks, probably finish top three in the East, and maybe make conference finals, but they wont win a championship.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 02:20 AM
It is do or die. But this is it, this is there final roster baring minor changes to the bench. And it isnt good enough to win the championship.

They will sell tickets, probably finish top three in the East, and maybe make conference finals, but they wont win a championship.

Wrong. We are going after Kyle Korver, this team is not done. Also we have Bojan Bogdanovic who would have been a lottery pick this year or last.

You being a Patriots fan, I wonder if you said "The Patriots won't lose to the Giants" in 2007, then "No way they lose again" in the regular season of 2011 and then "Lose 3 in a row? That will never happen" in SB 46.

Ware_Spencer
06-29-2013, 02:22 AM
It is do or die. But this is it, this is there final roster baring minor changes to the bench. And it isnt good enough to win the championship.

They will sell tickets, probably finish top three in the East, and maybe make conference finals, but they wont win a championship.

They will contend in the East though. And if the Pacers gave the heat that much of a problem than you never know how the playoffs will turn out. I wouldn't bet money against the Nets that is for sure. I think Jason Kidd is going to surprise a lot of people. As long as Kidd makes sure he doesn't over play the old guys during the season. And keeps Deron's attitude in check they will be 2nd or 3rd in the east.
Nobody at the beginning of the year said Pacers will get close to the finals. Look what happened. More than anyone can expect. And I don't think Miami will be any better next year.
I just think when you look at contending teams playoffs are crazy and you can't predict it.
The Mavericks Championship for sure was not expected. Match ups are key in the playoffs. Never say never.

Knicks21
06-29-2013, 02:26 AM
Wrong. We are going after Kyle Korver, this team is not done. Also we have Bojan Bogdanovic who would have been a lottery pick this year or last.

You being a Patriots fan, I wonder if you said "The Patriots won't lose to the Giants" in 2007, then "No way they lose again" in the regular season of 2011 and then "Lose 3 in a row? That will never happen" in SB 46.

"Barring minor bench changes" - me

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 02:29 AM
"Baring minor bench changes" - me

Bringing in a guy who shot 53%, 41%, 43% and 45% his last 4 years from 3 is a minor bench change? If he is such a minor player, how was he getting so many minutes on good teams?

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 02:37 AM
I'm willing to bet you anything that you said the Nets won't be a 4th seed their 1st season into Brooklyn when we were in NJ.

Actually that's exactly where I had the Nets. As the fourth seed.

I posted on a Warriors forum in October and here were my predictions: West
1. Spurs
2. Thunder
3. Nuggets
4. Lakers
5. Grizzlies
6. Clippers
7. Jazz
8. Warriors

East
1. Heat
2. Pacers
3. Celtics
4. Nets :-"
5. Sixers
6. Hawks
7. Bulls
8. Knicks

Knicks21
06-29-2013, 02:41 AM
Bringing in a guy who shot 53%, 41%, 43% and 45% his last 4 years from 3 is a minor bench change? If he is such a minor player, how was he getting so many minutes on good teams?

Let me know when you sign him.

And I dont know maybe because he was competing with Dahntay Jones for the starting spot in Atlanta?

Its going to be a half court offence so kiss away any transition threes.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 02:43 AM
Let me know when you sign him.

And I dont know maybe because he was competing with Dahntay Jones for the starting spot in Atlanta?

Its going to be a half court offence so kiss away any transition threes.

So now it only matters if we sign him? You said this team is done, I said no this team is not done we're interested in some players and Korver is one of them.

This team has cap room to get a significant bench piece, that was my point.

Okay that's fair, but how did he get time in Chicago?

RiceOnTheRun
06-29-2013, 03:16 AM
Awesome comment man, no hate, just your opinion. But to refute some points.

1) Usually a player's prime is considered to be 27-31/32 so I think Dwill still be about the same. It won't be is best season ever but I doubt he will have lost a step. Agree his crossover won't be as deadly haha
2) We didn't trade for that contract, BK foolishly SIGNED him to that contract. And now he doesn't have the luxury of signing any more long term contracts anyway under the salary cap so that's a plus.
3) You can't say that having 2 picks in the next 5 years will be of minimal impact AND that us losing 3 picks in the next 5 years will crush our future dude. That contradicts itself.
4) We won't have to BUILD our team around those picks. Just to add pieces to compliment our roster. We'll have an All-star PG and C still after pierce/garnett retires, just need to add the pieces in between.

And again, excited for this new stage of Nets/Knicks rivalry. Moved this summer and I'm only 30 min away from NYC to hopefully I'll be at a few games (and a Nets/Knicks one!!) this year.

1) I see the Nets definitely having to build around Lopez a lot more, and D-Will being the second option at that point. 2 years can make a huge difference, just ask Wade haha. But hey, they're worried about now so not like it matters anyways.
2) I thought they traded their #6 pick for him? The one that turned out to be Lillard?
3) You got me there. I guess what I meant to say is, it really hurts their chances of rebuilding. They could clearly get some solid value from those two but I still think the lose the option of a full-blown rebuild until ~2019/2020
4) Unless Lopez takes some serious steps, I don't think he's ready to carry this team (to a championship) with only DWill yet. Gotta remember Mikhail is all about championship or bust. I wouldn't be surprised if he did something unexpected with Lopez or DWill if they don't get that chip. Not to put him down, he's definitely up there as far as centers go, but he's still a bit raw. He's already at an all-star level offensively, KG could teach him a few tricks on defense though.

Gotta applaud BK for making these risky moves. Hopefully the Knicks can follow suit. There's some trade rumors going on about sending Rondo to the Knicks. That'd spice up the rivalry quite a bit between the two teams...

Respect to my cross-city brother. Haha

RiceOnTheRun
06-29-2013, 03:18 AM
Actually that's exactly where I had the Nets. As the fourth seed.

I posted on a Warriors forum in October and here were my predictions: West
1. Spurs
2. Thunder
3. Nuggets
4. Lakers
5. Grizzlies
6. Clippers
7. Jazz
8. Warriors

East
1. Heat
2. Pacers
3. Celtics
4. Nets :-"
5. Sixers
6. Hawks
7. Bulls
8. Knicks

Celtics...
Sixers...
REALLY...

Get those Lakers outta there too. Grizzlies take 4th, Houston takes Jazz's spot.

Edit: Well ****. I'm stupid. Didn't see that this was from last October. My apologies, I'd actually agree with most of your list as well. Except with the Knicks at 5th and Sixers third.

RiceOnTheRun
06-29-2013, 03:18 AM
double post

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 03:28 AM
Actually that's exactly where I had the Nets. As the fourth seed.

I posted on a Warriors forum in October and here were my predictions: West
1. Spurs
2. Thunder
3. Nuggets
4. Lakers
5. Grizzlies
6. Clippers
7. Jazz
8. Warriors

East
1. Heat
2. Pacers
3. Celtics
4. Nets :-"
5. Sixers
6. Hawks
7. Bulls
8. Knicks

That's October, AFTER we got Joe Johnson, Gerald Wallace, and after we re-signed DWILL. I said when we were in NJ. Where did you have us when we were in NJ?

Brook Lopez coming off broken foot, DWILL might leave, Wallace is our 3rd best player, Brooks is a starter, and Humphries is a starter too.

Chrisclover
06-29-2013, 03:36 AM
spot on

This Move Also Gives The Nets More Financial Flexibility In The Years After kG And Pierce Retire

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 03:42 AM
That's October, AFTER we got Joe Johnson, Gerald Wallace, and after we re-signed DWILL. I said when we were in NJ. Where did you have us when we were in NJ?

Brook Lopez coming off broken foot, DWILL might leave, Wallace is our 3rd best player, Brooks is a starter, and Humphries is a starter too.
Why would I make predictions before rosters were set? I wait until the season almost started and those were my predictions. Why would you have a problem with that?

amos1er
06-29-2013, 04:05 AM
No way. They are gonna be lethal. Look out Miami.

Losoway
06-29-2013, 04:42 AM
lol half the people on this site was saying how the celtics were still contenders now "kg and pp" is too old

lmao

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 04:51 AM
Why would I make predictions before rosters were set? I wait until the season almost started and those were my predictions. Why would you have a problem with that?

Well, you seemed to have lose your concentration so let me refresh our convo for you.

You said the Nets will be giving the Celtics a lotto pick because they won't be good in the future.


The Celtics are getting a lotto pick. Nets will not be good in five years.

I responded to that by asking how you knew the future and said "I bet you wouldn't have said we wouldn't be the 4th seed our 1st season in Brooklyn when we were back in NJ" to show you how much water you prediction holds, of the Nets stinkin up the joint.


I'm willing to bet you anything that you said the Nets won't be a 4th seed their 1st season into Brooklyn when we were in NJ.

You then responded that you had Brooklyn as the 4th seed last October going into the season.

Then I said "I said when we were in NJ, not Brooklyn"


That's October, AFTER we got Joe Johnson, Gerald Wallace, and after we re-signed DWILL. I said when we were in NJ. Where did you have us when we were in NJ?

Then you responded "Of course I make my predictions before the season, what's wrong with that?"


Why would I make predictions before rosters were set? I wait until the season almost started and those were my predictions. Why would you have a problem with that?

THAT right THERE is my point. You, nor anybody else, would have said the Nets would win 49 games and have the 4th seed their 1st season in Brooklyn back in say, 2010, 3 years ago, yet it happened. Thus, it's also possible that your wrong that the Nets will be bad in the near future for those draft picks. Your defense to this was "Of course not, I make my prediction AFTER I SEE THE ROSTER".

Well if you make predictions after you see the roster, how do you predict the Nets will stink up the joint in 2016, 3 years from now or 2018 5 years from now? Deron Williams would be the ONLY player currently signed that will still be here in 2016 and that's if he opts in. Did you somehow see their roster in a magic crystal ball? Do you not see the hypocrisy?

Sssmush
06-29-2013, 05:04 AM
Nets chose a win-now mode. We've been "rebuilding" every since Jason Kidd left. It's our time to try to go for a ring.

Celtics had their chance (and did an incredible job in the span) and now they're rebuilding.

None of you guys KNOW that we're gonna have good picks in 2016/17/18, just like we don't KNOW if we're gonna capitalize on this opportunity the next 3 years.

When it's all said and done, I'm glad we're on the contending side rather than the rebuilding side.

That's all there is too it.


Yeah.... Look, it's almost kind of bizarro how New Jersey actually thinks bringing in KG and Pierce, who were practically retired, is going to somehow win a title in Brooklyn next year. And the fact that they give up every possible draft pick, like "here,have two, three, four draft picks, as much as you want" is almost surreal.

I guess I can imagine that they might be a fun team to watch... but seriously, if you were going to give up all those picks you should've gone for James Harden or something, or try to make a deal for Dwight Howard or something.

Yeah, trying to argue that Pierce and KG are still superstars is pretty difficult... even 3 years ago I'm not sure that this deal makes sense. In 2013 it's pretty freakin' strange.

Gerald Wallace could easily be the most productive player out of this entire deal next year. And you gave Ainge Humphries and Wallace essentially for free, for some guys who were retiring or leaving, AND you throw in 3 first rounders to go with the pick for Doc Rivers. I don't get it.

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 05:07 AM
Well, you seemed to have lose your concentration so let me refresh our convo for you.

You said the Nets will be giving the Celtics a lotto pick because they won't be good in the future.



I responded to that by asking how you knew the future and said "I bet you wouldn't have said we wouldn't be the 4th seed our 1st season in Brooklyn when we were back in NJ" to show you how much water you prediction holds, of the Nets stinkin up the joint.



You then responded that you had Brooklyn as the 4th seed last October going into the season.

Then I said "I said when we were in NJ, not Brooklyn"



Then you responded "Of course I make my predictions before the season, what's wrong with that?"



THAT right THERE is my point. You, nor anybody else, would have said the Nets would win 49 games and have the 4th seed their 1st season in Brooklyn back in say, 2010, 3 years ago, yet it happened. Thus, it's also possible that your wrong that the Nets will be bad in the near future for those draft picks. Your defense to this was "Of course not, I make my prediction AFTER I SEE THE ROSTER".

Well if you make predictions after you see the roster, how do you predict the Nets will stink up the joint in 2016, 3 years from now or 2018 5 years from now? Deron Williams would be the ONLY player currently signed that will still be here in 2016 and that's if he opts in. Did you somehow see their roster in a magic crystal ball? Do you not see the hypocrisy?

Okay, I understand what you are saying now. Doesn't change that the Nets will not be good forever and are very likely to suck given the natural aging process, cap ramifications, and younger teams getting better.

Do you think it's likely they stay good forever? As if their moves are indicative of that?

There has only been three teams that have stayed either consistently great or always in the playoffs. Spurs are one of them. Mavs used to be the other one. And the Nuggets are always in the playoffs.

They all have one thing in common, they build internally and fill holes in free agency cheaply. They build with youth. Teams like the Nets, Knicks, and what was the Celtics have shorter windows. Given how the Celtics built their team, they are one of the teams that lasted longer than the average being built that way.

Nets have nothing in common with teams that are consistently good. It's extremely easy to predict the Nets being bad in the future. History tells us that on how they built their team.


Their is potential of the Nets being bad in 2016. Ainge also has the option of switching the 2018 pick with a 2017 one.

It's almost extremely likely that they get one lottery pick.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 05:12 AM
Yeah.... Look, it's almost kind of bizarro how New Jersey actually thinks bringing in KG and Pierce, who were practically retired, is going to somehow win a title in Brooklyn next year. And the fact that they give up every possible draft pick, like "here,have two, three, four draft picks, as much as you want" is almost surreal.

I guess I can imagine that they might be a fun team to watch... but seriously, if you were going to give up all those picks you should've gone for James Harden or something, or try to make a deal for Dwight Howard or something.

Yeah, trying to argue that Pierce and KG are still superstars is pretty difficult... even 3 years ago I'm not sure that this deal makes sense. In 2013 it's pretty freakin' strange.

Gerald Wallace could easily be the most productive player out of this entire deal next year. And you gave Ainge Humphries and Wallace essentially for free, for some guys who were retiring or leaving, AND you throw in 3 first rounders to go with the pick for Doc Rivers. I don't get it.


Yeah.... Look, it's almost kind of bizarro how New Jersey actually thinks bringing in KG and Pierce, who were practically retired, is going to somehow win a title in Brooklyn next year. And the fact that they give up every possible draft pick, like "here,have two, three, four draft picks, as much as you want" is almost surreal.

New Jersey doesn't have a basketball team. If that was a shot to try and hurt Nets fans, try again everybody calls them NJ. Chris Broussard, Marv Albert, basically everybody on ESPN/TNT calls them New Jersey. If it wasn't a shot, then I just....:facepalm:

Every pick possible? Do you even read the details before commenting? They gave up their 2014, 2016, and 2018 picks. That means they still have their 2015, 2017, 2019+ picks and you say they gave up every pick possible? Late round picks can be EASILY bought and our owner doesn't care how much money it takes.

I guess I can imagine that they might be a fun team to watch... but seriously, if you were going to give up all those picks you should've gone for James Harden or something, or try to make a deal for Dwight Howard or something.

Do you HONESTLY think 3 first round picks would get you James Harden? Dwight Howard? Do you mind telling me how Dwight Howard would fit with the Nets?


Yeah, trying to argue that Pierce and KG are still superstars is pretty difficult... even 3 years ago I'm not sure that this deal makes sense. In 2013 it's pretty freakin' strange.

Find me a Nets fan that isn't DoMeFavors that claimed any of them are even close to being superstars. It's okay , I'll wait. 3 years ago? What kind of basketball were you watching 3 years ago?? Do you have ANY idea who Gerald Wallace and Reggie Evans even are? I highly doubt it.


Gerald Wallace could easily be the most productive player out of this entire deal next year. And you gave Ainge Humphries and Wallace essentially for free, for some guys who were retiring or leaving, AND you throw in 3 first rounders to go with the pick for Doc Rivers. I don't get it.

Okay never mind, you do know who Wallace is but you CLEARLY have never seen him play. He was by far one of the worst starters in the NBA last year. Humphries was an expiring contract. Wallace had one of the worst contracts and one of the "untradeable" contracts in the NBA and you're telling me that they shouldn't gave given them for free? The Nets trading Wallace does the Nets a favor, addition by subtraction.

I fell really, really, stupid for actually responding to such a post.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 05:17 AM
Okay, I understand what you are saying now. Doesn't change that the Nets will not be good forever and are very likely to suck given the natural aging process, cap ramifications, and younger teams getting better.

Do you think it's likely they stay good forever? As if their moves are indicative of that?

There has only been three teams that have stayed either consistently great or always in the playoffs. Spurs are one of them. Mavs used to be the other one. And the Nuggets are always in the playoffs.

They all have one thing in common, they build internally and fill holes in free agency cheaply. They build with youth. Teams like the Nets, Knicks, and what was the Celtics have shorter windows. Given how the Celtics built their team, they are one of the teams that lasted longer than the average being built that way.

Nets have nothing in common with teams that are consistently good. It's extremely easy to predict the Nets being bad in the future. History tells us that on how they built their team.


Their is potential of the Nets being bad in 2016. Ainge also has the option of switching the 2018 pick with a 2017 one.

It's almost extremely likely that they get one lottery pick.

Please go back and read all my comments.

1) I never said they will be good forever, unless you read "near future" as "forever"

2) You keep bringing up this natural aging process and cap restrictions. How many times do I have to say it before you understand? NOBODY on this team will be here in 5 years if none of them are re-signed and the ONLY player that will make any significant money that has a chance of remaining in Brooklyn 5 years from now is Brook Lopez. So do you mind telling me what you're talking about with this age and cap space?

3) Again I never said forever. Indicative of what? Their moves indicate that they will not be anywhere near a lottery team as long as Mikhail Prokorov is in charge of this team. EVERY bad contract this team has embraced, JJ and Wallace, was ALL for DWILL. King learned from his mistakes and dumped Wallace in Boston. I don't get why you think the Nets hand out terrible contracts. They handed out one terrible contract, which they ended up getting rid of and the other one they acquired from another team knowing he is overpaid, so I don't get why you think this FO has a tendency of handing out bad contracts.

Oh wait I forgot about Humphries, but he wasn't a bad signing. We were over the cap already, but we were allowed to go over the cap to sign him and only signed him to 2 years so we can trade his expiring contract, which we just did.

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 05:31 AM
Exactly my point. The Nets will be rebuilding 3 or 4 years. They will most definitely be giving up a lotto pick.

Not sure why you think they won't, but there is a great chance they do.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 05:36 AM
Exactly my point. The Nets will be rebuilding 3 or 4 years. They will most definitely be giving up a lotto pick.

Not sure why you think they won't, but there is a great chance they do.

Because there is this thing called free agency. Also if they are giving up a lotto pick in say 2016, are you saying they wouldn't be getting a lotto pick themselves in 2017?

Free agency. The arena, the market, the owner, the borough, Brooklyn will sell to players. Paul Pierce said if he gets traded he wants Brooklyn.

Brooklyn will attract at worst solid players that will keep them out of the lottery.

THAT is why I believe they won't be hitting the lottery any time soon, I've said that like 3 times I don't know why you're not sure why I think they won't.

sunsfan88
06-29-2013, 05:58 AM
How old will Deron Williams, KG, and Pierce gonna be in 2018. There's a good chance that pick becomes a top 5 pick.

BKN better hope that draft class sucks.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 06:01 AM
how old will deron williams, kg, and pierce gonna be in 2018. There's a good chance that pick becomes a top 5 pick.

Bkn better hope that draft class sucks.

omg please read the posts or do some research. All of them will be gone. All. Will. Be. Gone. Is it that hard to understand?!

JOhnnyTHaJet
06-29-2013, 06:05 AM
How old will Deron Williams, KG, and Pierce gonna be in 2018. There's a good chance that pick becomes a top 5 pick.

BKN better hope that draft class sucks.
This is a pretty ridiculous question. Pierce and Garnett will be retired by 2015 and Deron might not even be on the team in 2018.

The Nets clear a HUGE amount of cap space in 2016 and 2017 , by then they most likely will be going after big time free agents. Brooklyn is a huge market now, where players want to play, I dont think the Nets will be in the lottery then by any means, they'll just have a new squad via free agency. The likes of Durant, Lebron, Love, Noah, and Hibbert are all free agents when the Nets clear a ton of cap space.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 06:08 AM
This is a pretty ridiculous question. Pierce and Garnett will be retired by 2015 and Deron might not even be on the team in 2018.

The Nets clear a HUGE amount of cap space in 2016 and 2017 , by then they most likely will be going after big time free agents. Brooklyn is a huge market now, where players want to play, I dont think the Nets will be in the lottery then by any means, they'll just have a new squad via free agency. The likes of Durant, Lebron, Love, Noah, and Hibbert are all free agents when the Nets clear a ton of cap space.

I don't understand why people find it so ridiculously hard to get this simple concept.

I think like 5 different people have said "They will be old by then".

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 06:12 AM
The Nets roster will be bare in 2016. And Celtics get to choose if they want the pick in 2017 or 2018.

I find it highly unlikely the Nets will be good for all three years of these years.

JOhnnyTHaJet
06-29-2013, 06:16 AM
The Nets roster will be bare in 2016. And Celtics get to choose if they want the pick in 2017 or 2018.

I find it highly unlikely the Nets will be good for all three years of these years.

By 2016 or 2017 we'll have maybe the most spending money in all the NBA, not to mention still being in one of the largest markets in the world. I'm not saying I can guarantee the Nets getting a superstar but it's more than likely they'll have signed an entirely new squad filled with a few great players (some I listed prior). The organization has a plan, they aren't that short sited. The Brooklyn Nets should be in decent shape for a good amount of time.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 06:18 AM
By 2016 or 2017 we'll have maybe the most spending money in all the NBA, not to mention still being in one of the largest markets in the world. I'm not saying I can guarantee the Nets getting a superstar but it's more than likely they'll have signed a entirely new squad filled with a few great players (some I listed prior). The organization has a plan, they aren't that short sited. The Brooklyn Nets should be in decent shape for a good amount of time.

This is what' I've been trying to say. At worst, the Nets will sign solid players who will keep them out of the lottery.

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 06:19 AM
By 2016 or 2017 we'll have maybe the most spending money in all the NBA, not to mention still being in one of the largest markets in the world. I'm not saying I can guarantee the Nets getting a superstar but it's more than likely they'll have signed a entirely new squad filled with a few great players (some I listed prior). The organization has a plan, they aren't that short sited. The Brooklyn Nets should be in decent shape for a good amount of time.

Being free agent players doesn't equate to being good. A study was done. 50 percent of all major free agent signings bust. That's the same rate as draft picks. It's why teams that build through the draft are consistently good and teams that try to do it through free agency/trade are a bit more unpredictable.

JOhnnyTHaJet
06-29-2013, 06:19 AM
I don't understand why people find it so ridiculously hard to get this simple concept.

I think like 5 different people have said "They will be old by then".

Not many on PSD like using their brain.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 06:21 AM
Being free agent players doesn't equate to being good. A study was done. 50 percent of all major free agent signings bust. That's the same rate as draft picks. It's why teams that build through the draft are consistently good and teams that try to do it through free agency/trade are a bit more unpredictable.

Dude this makes NO sense. You said the rate of a player being a bust is the same for draft picks and FA signings, so how can you say that's why teams who build through the draft are consistently good and not teams that build through FA?

Also, may I see this study? Is it using ALL FA signings, or just those that make more than a certain amount of money? It can be very very skewed, because when players hit FA they have proven that they are either bad, decent, or good.

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 06:23 AM
Dude this makes NO sense. You said the rate of a player being a bust is the same for draft picks and FA signings, so how can you say that's why teams who build through the draft are consistently good and not teams that build through FA?

Also, may I see this study? Is it using ALL FA signings, or just those that make more than a certain amount of money? It can be very very skewed, because when players hit FA they have proven that they are either bad, decent, or good.

Because draft picks are cheaper and don't have any kind of long term damages if they bust.

JOhnnyTHaJet
06-29-2013, 06:24 AM
Being free agent players doesn't equate to being good. A study was done. 50 percent of all major free agent signings bust. That's the same rate as draft picks. It's why teams that build through the draft are consistently good and teams that try to do it through free agency/trade are a bit more unpredictable.

Have the Lakers been building through the draft? Did the Celtics from 2007 to 2012? How about the Heat? (Besides Wade of course) The only team as of late who has won championships without major trades have been the Spurs. Besides that, each team that has won in the finals has upgraded dramatically via trade or free agency. Whether that be the C's with Allen/Garnett/Pierce, the Lakers with Gasol (and Shaq before then), the Heat with Shaq then Lebron/Bosh, and even the Mavs bringing on Chandler to put them over the top. Building through the draft is great, but as of late championships haven't been won like that.

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 06:26 AM
Those five teams do not compose the majority of free agent signings and trades.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 06:28 AM
Those five teams do not compose the majority of free agent signings and trades.

But they do share something in common with Brooklyn, the ability to attract good players.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 06:28 AM
Because draft picks are cheaper and don't have any kind of long term damages if they bust.

Cheaper? Long term damages? So we're only talking long term deals? I don't see how a 2-3 FA signing can do long term damage.

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 06:30 AM
Cheaper? Long term damages? So we're only talking long term deals? I don't see how a 2-3 FA signing can do long term damage.

I am talking about how you guys are referring to the 2016, 2017, and 2018 years as a good chance of not being bad because you are free agent players.

Free agents are definitely no sure thing.

JOhnnyTHaJet
06-29-2013, 06:32 AM
I am talking about how you guys are referring to the 2016, 2017, and 2018 years as a good chance of not being bad because you are free agent players.

Free agents are definitely no sure thing.

Of course they arent a sure thing, but when youre in a major market they become a lot more conceivable. NY, LA, Bos, and Chi are all destinations where FA's would love to be. Being in Brooklyn puts us in a special territory many other teams cant say.

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 06:33 AM
Didn't work for the Knicks until recently. What's different about Brooklyn?

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 06:33 AM
I am talking about how you guys are referring to the 2016, 2017, and 2018 years as a good chance of not being bad because you are free agent players.

Free agents are definitely no sure thing.

I have a question for you. Do you REALLY think our owner is going to stand for being bad? No he won't. He will make trades and sign players. He will NOT let this team sink into the lottery.

He doesn't even need to sign a star, if he just signed a handful of solid players, this team stays out of the lottery. This owner won't let them be that bad.

I just don't understand why you don't believe Brooklyn will get a star or solid players, at least good enough to keep them out of the lottery. Brooklyn has almost every requisite to attract good players. Ownership, arena, market, city.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 06:35 AM
Didn't work for the Knicks until recently. What's different about Brooklyn?

Who did the Knicks sign? Tyson and Melo through trades. JR Smith signed for dirt cheap.

The problem with the Knicks is that they either sign bad players or they sign good players that are headcases. Eddy Curry, Stephon Marbury, Jamal Crawford are just some to name a few.

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 06:36 AM
I have a question for you. Do you REALLY think our owner is going to stand for being bad? No he won't. He will make trades and sign players. He will NOT let this team sink into the lottery.

He doesn't even need to sign a star, if he just signed a handful of solid players, this team stays out of the lottery. This owner won't let them be that bad.

I just don't understand why you don't believe Brooklyn will get a star or solid players, at least good enough to keep them out of the lottery. Brooklyn has almost every requisite to attract good players. Ownership, arena, market, city.


Nets won't be bad now. But your owner could put you into a similar position other teams are in different sports. Like the Dodgers or Angels in baseball. Angels signed two (former) MVP's in the last two years. And are god awful along with being restricted in the future. Both teams owners want to win and will not stand for losing.

I like the Nets owner and I like that he wants to win. But he can't always will it. But if the Nets do mess up big time in free agency for one of the years I mentioned, I am sure he will learn from his mistake.

And a team staying good for 5 years in a row is very, very uncommon. Most teams can't do it, regardless of the market.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 06:39 AM
Nets won't be bad now. But your owner could put you into a similar position other teams are in different sports. Like the Dodgers or Angels in baseball. Angels signed two (former) MVP's in the last two years. And are god awful along with being restricted in the future. Both teams owners want to win and will not stand for losing.

I like the Nets owner and I like that he wants to win. But he can't always will it. But if the Nets do mess up big time in free agency for one of the years I mentioned, I am sure he will learn from his mistake,

The Dodgers? The Dodgers are having problems and their problem isn't a guy they got in FA, it's their own homegrown talent Matt Kemp.

Angels got VERY unlucky. VERY unlucky. When you sign two former MVPs that are as good as them, it's HIGHLY unlikely they will both stink together. Name me another team in any other sport this happened to it's gonna be hard.

The Lakers made their own misfortune. They shouldn't have signed Dantoni to coach that team and they shouldn't have run Kobe into the ground. That's their fault.

YES there is a chance we will suck but I don't see why you think there's a good chance we will.

JOhnnyTHaJet
06-29-2013, 06:39 AM
Didn't work for the Knicks until recently. What's different about Brooklyn?
The Knicks ran into a ton of bad luck, especially with Amare's knees going quicker than expected. But that didnt stop them from trading for the likes of Melo/Chandler and becoming a very solid squad. Whats different about Brooklyn is we'll try to avoid the same mistakes while doing a similar thing in bringing in max contract free agents. Thus, making us a competitive team.

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 06:39 AM
Basically, no team can consistently build through free agency. Not the Lakers, not the Knicks, not anyone.

The teams that have stayed relevant for an unnormal amount of time don't do it that way. The nets don't fit that.

I believe they will eventually fall behind the Sixers and Celtics in that division who are set up amazingly for the future now.

And even the championship squads who got their players through trades had elite players from their organization. Kobe, Bynum. Paul Pierce. Dwade. etc

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 06:42 AM
Basically, no team can consistently build through free agency. Not the Lakers, not the Knicks, not anyone.

The teams that have stayed relevant for an unnormal amount of time don't do it that way. The nets don't fit that.

I believe they will eventually fall behind the Sixers and Celtics in that division who are set up amazingly for the future now.

And even the championship squads who got their players through trades had elite players from their organization. Kobe, Bynum. Paul Pierce. Dwade. etc

You still haven't made a case as to why the Nets most likely will suck by then. You told me how it's possible, but you haven't told me why it's the most likely scenario.

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 06:43 AM
The Dodgers? The Dodgers are having problems and their problem isn't a guy they got in FA, it's their own homegrown talent Matt Kemp.

Angels got VERY unlucky. VERY unlucky. When you sign two former MVPs that are as good as them, it's HIGHLY unlikely they will both stink together. Name me another team in any other sport this happened to it's gonna be hard.

The Lakers made their own misfortune. They shouldn't have signed Dantoni to coach that team and they shouldn't have run Kobe into the ground. That's their fault.

YES there is a chance we will suck but I don't see why you think there's a good chance we will.

Hershel Walker trade in football. Larry Brown. Albert Haynesworth.

Cubs and Alfonso. Mariners and Chone Figgins. List goes on and on for free agent busts in every sport.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 06:45 AM
Hershel Walker trade in football. Larry Brown. Albert Haynesworth.

Cubs and Alfonso. Mariners and Chone Figgins. List goes on and on for free agent busts in every sport.

Those are some, but now compare that to the numbers of successful signings. Again, are we just talking about big signings? What's the cutoff?

JOhnnyTHaJet
06-29-2013, 06:46 AM
Hershel Walker trade in football. Larry Brown. Albert Haynesworth.

Cubs and Alfonso. Mariners and Chone Figgins. List goes on and on for free agent busts in every sport.

And it also goes on and on for teams who have been constitently good for long periods of time. It's not this completely irrational thing to think the Nets still can't be a consistent playoff team come 5 years from now (2018).

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 06:49 AM
And it also goes on and on for teams who have been constitently good for long periods of time. It's not this completely irrational thing to think the Nets still can't be a consistent playoff team come 5 years from now (2018).

No it's not, but he seems to think so for some reason I don't know.

I mean he gave me reasons why it's possible, but he never backed up why he thinks it's most likely.

Ugh w.e I'm out. Peace!

Guppyfighter
06-29-2013, 06:50 AM
Those are some, but now compare that to the numbers of successful signings. Again, are we just talking about big signings? What's the cutoff?

There aren't more big successful free agent signings. All the teams in baseball that are doing good are built from their farm systems, prospects, and cheap free agents. The only team that doesn't fit that mold is the Tigers. They are basically the exceptions to the rule.

In basketball, it is a bit different. You can get away with it more, especially in the East. But I find it hard to believe the Nets will be able to fix all problems that age cause and a bare roster through free agencies.

mike_noodles
06-29-2013, 06:56 AM
Yeah, I think they gave up too much. Don't forget that Boston also has the ability to flip picks with them in 2017. That and the 2018 pick should be great ones considering Pierce and Garnett will be done by then.

Badluck33
06-29-2013, 06:56 AM
Good trade for the Nets but I agree with mst, they did give up too much.

However, everyone shuts up (including myself) if they win a title.

Also, if they do NOT win a title, its going to be a major set back for the Nets as they are mortgaging their future with this trade.....

bagwell368
06-29-2013, 07:13 AM
spot on

Let me know when FA flexibility always translates to money well spent in the NBA. They could go and sign the next Lin to stupid money. All you have is potential.

bagwell368
06-29-2013, 07:17 AM
Yeah, I think they gave up too much. Don't forget that Boston also has the ability to flip picks with them in 2017. That and the 2018 pick should be great ones considering Pierce and Garnett will be done by then.

Pierce will be done at the end of '14-'15, KG will play better than PP throughout his stay, but may cash it in at that point as well. Forget '17, those guys will never see '16 in a Nets uniform - and Nets fans wouldn't really like too see that either.

sunsfan88
06-29-2013, 07:29 AM
This is a pretty ridiculous question. Pierce and Garnett will be retired by 2015 and Deron might not even be on the team in 2018.

The Nets clear a HUGE amount of cap space in 2016 and 2017 , by then they most likely will be going after big time free agents. Brooklyn is a huge market now, where players want to play, I dont think the Nets will be in the lottery then by any means, they'll just have a new squad via free agency. The likes of Durant, Lebron, Love, Noah, and Hibbert are all free agents when the Nets clear a ton of cap space.
The Nets aren't getting Durant, he's one of the most loyal guys in the NBA he isn't leaving OKC and that great fan base and team. LeBron's gonna be under contract by then cause he's FA in 2014/2015 where he'll sign a 4 or 5 year contract. Noah (see Durant). Indiana isn't letting Hibbert go anywhere and he loves Indiana and that fanbase, team and coach so he isn't going anywhere either likely.

Of course there are a lot of variable that come in to play here that I'm not accounting for but still to say that the Nets won't suck after their 3 best players right now retire/will be washed up is ridiculous. You can't actually expect the Nets to be good after they retire, do you? If they are good, it should be met with pleasant surprises not expectations.

GrumpyOldMan
06-29-2013, 07:30 AM
It seems to me that both teams go what they wanted and were perfect trade partners for eachother. Sure, the 3 first rounders are a lot, but in the end I think both teams are happy with where they stand going into this season. One team made themselves significantly better immediately while the other team accelerated their rebuild.

bagwell368
06-29-2013, 07:42 AM
It seems to me that both teams go what they wanted and were perfect trade partners for eachother. Sure, the 3 first rounders are a lot, but in the end I think both teams are happy with where they stand going into this season. One team made themselves significantly better immediately while the other team accelerated their rebuild.

Rationality on PSD's NBA Forum? Who let you in?

The one thing that hasn't been mentioned is how a rookie coach is going to handle all these strong personalities and the media - and get the most out of his team. An open question.

JerseyBrave
06-29-2013, 07:46 AM
People we have paul pearce and kevin garnett for 2 years, they will be great for us, especially since they wont have to carry this team, hence more rest for them. Also lets not forget after the 2 years of KG n PPare up joe johnson contract only has 1 year left which means he is an huge expiring contract, Which i guarentee we flip for a star who wants out of his team. So those 3 first rd picks are still going to be from playoff team. Prokorov is owner who spends to win.

Chrisclover
06-29-2013, 07:54 AM
the biggest fault is hiring Kidd as a coach.you cant let a rookie coach to command your super expensive squad. i will see them change for a veteran coach

MTar786
06-29-2013, 08:04 AM
i like this for brooklyn.

dwill/terry
johnnson/brooks/terry
pierce/bogans
kg/MLE
lopez/blatch

i dont get why people think this is a bad trade. bklyn is 2nd best team in east now imo.

kg and lopez have so many 3point specialists around them to kick it out to. kg is still at defense which covers for lopez lack there of. kg can still rebound also which also covers for lopez lack there of. noth of them can score in the pain AND post. dwill is a great pg who now has more reason for motivation to play better. he can hit the 3, joe as we all know can hit the 3 great too. pierce is a 3 point champ. terry may not ne the terry of old.. but he can still score well off the bench. dwill, pierce, johnson, terry lopez and kg can ALL create for themselves and kg and dwill are great passers too. theyre speed may not be top 10.. but they will be GREAT in the half court. and that playoff bball. all they need to do now is sign a good free agent at the 4 position.. maybe a 3 also like ronnie brewer. maybe they can sign odom while they're at it. he can play a good 12 mins a game.

pss. this wont happen but imagine lakers sign and trade dwight along with nash for lopez and dwill

it would help both teams imo.

nets

nash
johnson
pierce
kg
dwight

lakers

dwill
kobe
artest
pau
lopez

then lakers trade lopez to get bynum back lol

Pacerlive
06-29-2013, 08:16 AM
People we have paul pearce and kevin garnett for 2 years, they will be great for us, especially since they wont have to carry this team, hence more rest for them. Also lets not forget after the 2 years of KG n PPare up joe johnson contract only has 1 year left which means he is an huge expiring contract, Which i guarentee we flip for a star who wants out of his team. So those 3 first rd picks are still going to be from playoff team. Prokorov is owner who spends to win.
If you trade Joe Johnson's 24 million contract for a star then I will applaud the Nets but seriously I don't think people touch joe when he expires and to get a Star player for him..please explain that rationale thought to me because I sure don't get it.

Sandman
06-29-2013, 08:41 AM
Pierce was pathetic in last years playoffs. Now way both have 2 good years left.

PP is about to go from the 1/2 option to the 4/5 option though.. And I think with his shot and high BB IQ he's going to age a little better than most (I've always thought he was this decade's Reggie).

KG being the type of player he is will probably happen quick. One year he's just gonna hit the wall.

The_Pharouh
06-29-2013, 08:49 AM
Those picks could hurt the Nets in the long term ,but who knows ,may be their management are sure they will be able to keep making trades and still have a good team then

Pacerlive
06-29-2013, 08:54 AM
Those picks could hurt the Nets in the long term ,but who knows ,may be their management are sure they will be able to keep making trades and still have a good team then

You have to have assets to trade though and the assets that are worth keeping they wouldn't want to trade. I only see their only hope is using the expiring contract of KG as the only viable option to get better after next year but if they win a championship then it was worth it IMO.

Pacerlive
06-29-2013, 08:56 AM
Rationality on PSD's NBA Forum? Who let you in?

The one thing that hasn't been mentioned is how a rookie coach is going to handle all these strong personalities and the media - and get the most out of his team. An open question.

Does Kidd have his head staff assembled yet? If he has a great talent like Charisle was for Larry Bird then Kidd will be fine.

JerseyPalahniuk
06-29-2013, 11:53 AM
Does Kidd have his head staff assembled yet? If he has a great talent like Charisle was for Larry Bird then Kidd will be fine.

Yes he does. Lawrence Frank (former coach of Kidd's, was defensive assistant coach for Celtics), Roy Rodgers (big man coach for Pistons - see the development of Monroe and Drummond), 2 other guys I don't know much about but one is x and o's guy and other will help develop Toko/Tyshawn, etc

Pistol_Pete
06-29-2013, 01:02 PM
I do think it's a bit much. But, you have to keep a few things in mind here. The Celtics are betting that the Nets will be bad then, and give up good picks. The Nets are betting that they will not, and the picks will only be role players, if at all. The Nets plan is to never be a team that needs to be in the lottery, so the players are always going to be a tossup value wise.

The Nets are the kind of team that are unlikely to improve via the draft. They're going to be a free agent focused team. Brooklyn, the arena, and the owner are selling points, and when Garnett and Pierce come off the books (and JJ might be the same time too, I'm not sure), which will provide huge cap relief.

3RDASYSTEM
06-29-2013, 01:10 PM
I love Garnett, and Pierce. I think they are two of the best players the league has seen over the last 15 years. They rank up there with Kobe and Duncan in my book. But the bottom line is they aren't who they were. Though they were still great last year with limited minutes, it is ot fair to expect them to be as good this year. And Terry is on a steep decline. Don't get me wrong. I think BK will have a great year, but at the end of the day; are the Nets better?


They gave up Evans, the best rebounder in the league last year. A double-double stud in Humph and a versatile forward in Wallace (even if he was in a slump last year).

I think it is fair to say that PP and Garnett had better seasons than Humph and Wallace, but at the same time, along with Wallace, Humph and the league's best rebounder (even if he is a one-dimensional player) the Nets ALSO gave up three first round draft picks (2014, 2016, 2018). Garnett and Pierce will likley be a year or two into retirement for the 2016 pick and the Nets will be in rebuilding mode by then in all likelihood. They will need those picks.


There is a small window for Pierce and Garnett to compete with the Nets. It seems odd to me that they should give up so much?


Am I the only one thinking the Nets gave up too much? Or am I on crack?

This officially means that the NETS owner is in full blown CUBAN mode in early 00's when trades and free agents will be basically the only way to be which isn't a bad thing considering MAVS were competitive entire decade and plus some

RiceOnTheRun
06-29-2013, 01:33 PM
No way. They are gonna be lethal. Look out Miami.

Sounds familiar... Where have I heard that before?

http://www.sportsmemes.net/pics/2300.jpg

Obviously they look to be an extremely good team, without a doubt, but you can't put them over the reigning champs until they officially step on the court. They'll be damn good, but hell, technically, KG and PP aren't even on the team yet.

JerseyBrave
06-29-2013, 01:44 PM
People we have paul pearce and kevin garnett for 2 years, they will be great for us, especially since they wont have to carry this team, hence more rest for them. Also lets not forget after the 2 years of KG n PPare up joe johnson contract only has 1 year left which means he is an huge expiring contract, Which i guarentee we flip for a star who wants out of his team. So those 3 first rd picks are still going to be from playoff team. Prokorov is owner who spends to win.
If you trade Joe Johnson's 24 million contract for a star then I will applaud the Nets but seriously I don't think people touch joe when he expires and to get a Star player for him..please explain that rationale thought to me because I sure don't get it.



Thats exactly what the Magic did with Howard, expiring contracts for a superstar.

fingerbang
06-29-2013, 01:49 PM
The Nets significantly improved their team at the expense of mid to late first rounders. This is ridiculous.

Pacerlive
06-29-2013, 02:02 PM
Thats exactly what the Magic did with Howard, expiring contracts for a superstar.

Sorry I must of missed the star player that the Magic recieved... In addition Joe Johnson is no Dwight Howard so factoring in age and production I doubt the Nets will get anything outside of a 15-30 pick for him.

I get that you figure you would be the one acquiring the star player which is Howard in your example but no team is going to look at giving the Nets a Howard type player for Joe Johnson and NO DRAFT PICKS. Teams that trade stars for a rebuild want lotto picks or multiple first round picks but the Nets traded all those away so this is the reason why I said that they don't have anything else besides Joe Johnson which isn't enough to net a star palyer in return.

JerseyBrave
06-29-2013, 03:11 PM
Its called a three team deal just like what the magic lakers and 76ers did. And the magic got nothing but expiring and picks in return. And there are tons of teams in cap trouble that would love to acquire a 23 million dollar expiring contract. And draft picks can be bought

Pacerlive
06-29-2013, 03:49 PM
Its called a three team deal just like what the magic lakers and 76ers did. And the magic got nothing but expiring and picks in return. And there are tons of teams in cap trouble that would love to acquire a 23 million dollar expiring contract. And draft picks can be bought

Do you even know the trade? They got Moe and Affalo and another first. They got one significant expiring contract. Name one trade that has involved one 24 million dollar washed up contract that has netted a star player in return.

The trade that you should be comparing is the JO trade that got a first round pick and a subpar starter. That is more comparable than the best Center in the league in Howard for what you call just expiring contracts.

Robbw241
06-29-2013, 04:06 PM
1 pick for KG, 1 Pick for Pierce, 1 Pick to get rid of Wallace I guess is what it boils down to.

Jamiecballer
06-29-2013, 04:10 PM
they paid a thousand dollars for a hundred dollar hooker. still think it will be worth it short term though.

JerseyBrave
06-29-2013, 04:47 PM
My point was the magic got nothing in return, and the magic just wanted to rebuild. U telling me right now a team like the knicks wouldnt want to trade a guy like tyson chandler and other pieces for a 23 million dollar joe johnson expiring contract. The knicks are in cap hell. And i know tyson isnt a superstar but he is an all star caliber center.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 05:01 PM
Sorry I must of missed the star player that the Magic recieved... In addition Joe Johnson is no Dwight Howard so factoring in age and production I doubt the Nets will get anything outside of a 15-30 pick for him.

I get that you figure you would be the one acquiring the star player which is Howard in your example but no team is going to look at giving the Nets a Howard type player for Joe Johnson and NO DRAFT PICKS. Teams that trade stars for a rebuild want lotto picks or multiple first round picks but the Nets traded all those away so this is the reason why I said that they don't have anything else besides Joe Johnson which isn't enough to net a star palyer in return.

When your star player that's expiring tells your FO "I want out, trade me to the Nets now", there's not much you can do cause other teams won't give up much for him without assurance he stays.

KingPosey
06-29-2013, 05:02 PM
Well they are kind of banking on the teams success in regards to the picks. If they are as good as thy plan on being, their core will be intact for hopefully 3 strong years (we will see about that), and the picks aren't amazingly valuable if their the 26 to last pick of the first round.

BigBlueCrew
06-29-2013, 05:03 PM
My point was the magic got nothing in return, and the magic just wanted to rebuild. U telling me right now a team like the knicks wouldnt want to trade a guy like tyson chandler and other pieces for a 23 million dollar joe johnson expiring contract. The knicks are in cap hell. And i know tyson isnt a superstar but he is an all star caliber center.

Excuse me??? Joe Johnson an expiring contract? Joe Johnson isnt an expiring anything. Maybe skills but thats about all thats expiring on him. You guys are gonna be paying him the max salary for the next three years. No options no nothing.

beasted86
06-29-2013, 05:07 PM
Yes, especially if KG retires after next season.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 05:17 PM
Yes, especially if KG retires after next season.

Not really. If that happens, something magical happens, cap space opens up.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 05:18 PM
People act like the Nets don't have a 1st round pick for the next 10 years.

2014, lost
2015, ours
2016, lost
2017, ours
2018, lost
2019+, ours.

BigBlueCrew
06-29-2013, 05:23 PM
People act like the Nets don't have a 1st round pick for the next 10 years.

2014, lost
2015, ours
2016, lost
2017, better goes to cetics
2018, lost
2019+, ours.

Fixed for ya :)

Sssmush
06-29-2013, 05:32 PM
New Jersey doesn't have a basketball team. If that was a shot to try and hurt Nets fans, try again everybody calls them NJ. Chris Broussard, Marv Albert, basically everybody on ESPN/TNT calls them New Jersey. If it wasn't a shot, then I just....:facepalm:

Every pick possible? Do you even read the details before commenting? They gave up their 2014, 2016, and 2018 picks. That means they still have their 2015, 2017, 2019+ picks and you say they gave up every pick possible? Late round picks can be EASILY bought and our owner doesn't care how much money it takes.

I guess I can imagine that they might be a fun team to watch... but seriously, if you were going to give up all those picks you should've gone for James Harden or something, or try to make a deal for Dwight Howard or something.

Do you HONESTLY think 3 first round picks would get you James Harden? Dwight Howard? Do you mind telling me how Dwight Howard would fit with the Nets?



Find me a Nets fan that isn't DoMeFavors that claimed any of them are even close to being superstars. It's okay , I'll wait. 3 years ago? What kind of basketball were you watching 3 years ago?? Do you have ANY idea who Gerald Wallace and Reggie Evans even are? I highly doubt it.



Okay never mind, you do know who Wallace is but you CLEARLY have never seen him play. He was by far one of the worst starters in the NBA last year. Humphries was an expiring contract. Wallace had one of the worst contracts and one of the "untradeable" contracts in the NBA and you're telling me that they shouldn't gave given them for free? The Nets trading Wallace does the Nets a favor, addition by subtraction.

I fell really, really, stupid for actually responding to such a post.


Again, I feel like Boston was going to buy out Pierce eventually anyway, and once that happened Garnett could've forced his way to Brooklyn, because he had a no trade clause and doesn't want to rebuild without doc Rivers and Pierce.

I guess the deal isn't that bad, if we consider what the deal for just Pierce alone might've looked like. Brooklyn would probably have to send out Gerald Wallace to make salary match, and Boston would want at least one or two 1st rounders to do that, and no third team would likely take Wallace's salary.

Still... why the suddenly just *had* to have Garnett (who would've made a lot of sense for the Clippers if they hadn't got ****blocked by Stern (in what was a pretty suspicious weird move) is a mystery. All in all maybe it makes sense to swap in Pierce and Garnett for Humphries and Wallace, and just kiss the draft picks goodbye.
Even if you only get 1 or 2 good years out of each of those guys, you should probably move up into second round of the playoffs, and possibly ECFs if Kidd turns out to be an awesome coach and everybody stays super healthy (including Deron in that).

So we'll see... but yeah I guess I am changing my view on this one.

JerseyBrave
06-29-2013, 05:41 PM
My point was the magic got nothing in return, and the magic just wanted to rebuild. U telling me right now a team like the knicks wouldnt want to trade a guy like tyson chandler and other pieces for a 23 million dollar joe johnson expiring contract. The knicks are in cap hell. And i know tyson isnt a superstar but he is an all star caliber center.

Excuse me??? Joe Johnson an expiring contract? Joe Johnson isnt an expiring anything. Maybe skills but thats about all thats expiring on him. You guys are gonna be paying him the max salary for the next three years. No options no nothing.


Im trying to make a point that when KG and PP contracts expire joe johnson will also be going into his last year meaning a team in cap hell would love to get a huge expire contract and give good players in return for it. Using the knicks this year as a example of team in cap hell. If you read the early posts you would know what I was talking about.

People need to stop being Nets haters.

Mr.Bean
06-29-2013, 05:49 PM
This trade will work out well for both teams. The Nets get two Veterans that will help them become a dominant team in the playoffs. The Celtics are in rebuilding mode...so this helps them dump salary and with the 3 first rounders, helps them get younger in the future.

OceanSpray
06-29-2013, 05:50 PM
Nets want to win now is pretty much what they did, and it's not going to work. I don't think this team even makes sense. All 5 of those all star players can't possibly provide their full potential each game. At most, 3 all stars is enough and surround them with a solid bench. Joe Johnson is garbage, anyways. The moment they signed him, they were doomed.

BigBlueCrew
06-29-2013, 05:51 PM
Im trying to make a point that when KG and PP contracts expire joe johnson will also be going into his last year meaning a team in cap hell would love to get a huge expire contract and give good players in return for it. Using the knicks this year as a example of team in cap hell. If you read the early posts you would know what I was talking about.

People need to stop being Nets haters.

No no no....

Sadly I ready all of them. First of all I have to say AFTER reading all of them. Perhaps I've I been too hard on DoMeFavors. You guys are all the same.

Next you do realize that Joe Johnson's contract expires a year AFTER Tyson Chandler's right?

No-one is trying to hate on the Nets but fans like you make it too easy. You should stop bringing the Knicks into it if you dont understand their supposed "cap hell"

JerseyBrave
06-29-2013, 05:54 PM
Im trying to make a point that when KG and PP contracts expire joe johnson will also be going into his last year meaning a team in cap hell would love to get a huge expire contract and give good players in return for it. Using the knicks this year as a example of team in cap hell. If you read the early posts you would know what I was talking about.

People need to stop being Nets haters.

No no no....

Sadly I ready all of them. First of all I have to say AFTER reading all of them. Perhaps I've I been too hard on DoMeFavors. You guys are all the same.

Next you do realize that Joe Johnson's contract expires a year AFTER Tyson Chandler's right?

No-one is trying to hate on the Nets but fans like you make it too easy. You should stop bringing the Knicks into it if you dont understand their supposed "cap hell"



Ooooo my god i give up! i was just making an example of why a team would take joe johnsons expiring contract in 2016. I did not mean trade for tyson chandler. I just meant there will be a team like the knicks looking to trade talent for cap relief.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 05:56 PM
Nets want to win now is pretty much what they did, and it's not going to work. I don't think this team even makes sense. All 5 of those all star players can't possibly provide their full potential each game. At most, 3 all stars is enough and surround them with a solid bench. Joe Johnson is garbage, anyways. The moment they signed him, they were doomed.

1) The Nets didn't sign Joe Johnson, I'm starting to think you know nothing about the Nets.

2) Joe Johnson is not garbage.

3) It will not work? What, do you have a magic crystal ball that lets you see into the future?

Pacerlive
06-29-2013, 08:08 PM
When your star player that's expiring tells your FO "I want out, trade me to the Nets now", there's not much you can do cause other teams won't give up much for him without assurance he stays.

Like Dwight Howard right? Smh

You guys are proving my point. The only reason Dwight ended up on the Lakers was because the Nets didn't have the right assets.

ChitownBears22
06-29-2013, 08:14 PM
This trade was pointless. The Celtics win because they got rid of two contracts of declining players and have positioned themselves to go on a decent run in the coming years with young FA's to surround Rondo. I think the Nets actually got worse, because of long term returns on investment.

3RDASYSTEM
06-29-2013, 08:24 PM
[QUOTE=JerseyPalahniuk;26546553]Awesome comment man, no hate, just your opinion. But to refute some points.

1) Usually a player's prime is considered to be 27-31/32 so I think Dwill still be about the same. It won't be is best season ever but I doubt he will have lost a step. Agree his crossover won't be as deadly haha
2) We didn't trade for that contract, BK foolishly SIGNED him to that contract. And now he doesn't have the luxury of signing any more long term contracts anyway under the salary cap so that's a plus.
3) You can't say that having 2 picks in the next 5 years will be of minimal impact AND that us losing 3 picks in the next 5 years will crush our future dude. That contradicts itself.
4) We won't have to BUILD our team around those picks. Just to add pieces to compliment our roster. We'll have an All-star PG and C still after pierce/garnett retires, just need to add the pieces in between.

And again, excited for this new stage of Nets/Knicks rivalry. Moved this summer and I'm only 30 min away from NYC to hopefully I'll be at a few games (and a Nets/Knicks one!!) this year.[/QUOTE



based on recent prime info it seems to vary from 25-30, or like you stated or I've heard some say 32-35

but to me I feel a player prime is soon as he gets drafted, so usually from 18 to 22yrs old to 35, that's a players prime from my view

some people also think a players prime is when they win titles, far from the truth

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 08:37 PM
Like Dwight Howard right? Smh

You guys are proving my point. The only reason Dwight ended up on the Lakers was because the Nets didn't have the right assets.

Uh, no. The only reason Dwight ended up on the Lakers is because he waived his ETO. DWight said many times he wants the Nets but he didn't want to be hated so he signed his ETO.

If he doesn't sign that ETO, Orlando trades him and NOBODY gives a better package than 3 1st rd picks, Brook Lopez, some expiring contracts, and taking had a bad contract from Orlando.

beasted86
06-29-2013, 08:37 PM
Not really. If that happens, something magical happens, cap space opens up.

In what delusional fantasy world do the Nets have cap space with Johnson and Williams making over 20 mil and Lopez eating up $15M?

You do know the salary cap is only about $59M right?

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 08:39 PM
This trade was pointless. The Celtics win because they got rid of two contracts of declining players and have positioned themselves to go on a decent run in the coming years with young FA's to surround Rondo. I think the Nets actually got worse, because of long term returns on investment.

So you think the Nets got worse because in 5 years KG and PP will be gone? How does that make them worse now?

I seriously am starting to question whether anybody on PSD has ever watched a Nets game and if they haven't they shouldn't comment on the Nets like they have. Reggie Evans and Gerald Wallace were two of the worst starters in the league last year.

krisxsong
06-29-2013, 08:44 PM
In what delusional fantasy world do the Nets have cap space with Johnson and Williams making over 20 mil and Lopez eating up $15M?

You do know the salary cap is only about $59M right?

Let's say KG retires after next season. That means both KG and Paul Pierce are gone.

JJ will make 23, Lopez 15, and DWILL 19. There are ways to get over the salary cap. Right now the Nets are paying their team more than 87 million dollars.

Also, don't think that JJ's huge expiring contract won't be attractive.

Pacerlive
06-29-2013, 08:44 PM
Uh, no. The only reason Dwight ended up on the Lakers is because he waived his ETO. DWight said many times he wants the Nets but he didn't want to be hated so he signed his ETO.

If he doesn't sign that ETO, Orlando trades him and NOBODY gives a better package than 3 1st rd picks, Brook Lopez, some expiring contracts, and taking had a bad contract from Orlando.
Lol he didn't want to be hated so he was traded to the Lakers? Listen up because you obviously don't know about the cba. If Howard does sign that ETO he can't be signed by the Nets he can only be traded for equal salary and if he is traded why wouldn't the Best offer still stand per your suggestion? It's because Mr. Lopez had a bum foot that's why and Mrs. Humph had the Nets balls in a jar.

ChitownBears22
06-29-2013, 08:44 PM
So you think the Nets got worse because in 5 years KG and PP will be gone? How does that make them worse now?

I seriously am starting to question whether anybody on PSD has ever watched a Nets game and if they haven't they shouldn't comment on the Nets like they have. Reggie Evans and Gerald Wallace were two of the worst starters in the league last year.

I also think KG and Pierce are shells of what they once were. There is a reason the Celtics were ready to trade away a player that meant so much to their franchise for so long. I saw what they brought to the table in the playoffs and well, nobody was impressed. They played decently for about 30 minutes, then struggled to score 25 points in the second half. The Celtics got away with robbery.

beasted86
06-29-2013, 08:54 PM
Let's say KG retires after next season. That means both KG and Paul Pierce are gone.

JJ will make 23, Lopez 15, and DWILL 19. There are ways to get over the salary cap. Right now the Nets are paying their team more than 87 million dollars.

Also, don't think that JJ's huge expiring contract won't be attractive.
JJ isn't an expiring nothing... maybe expiring talent like others have mentioned. If KG leaves after next season (the 2013-14 season).... that means the Nets have

Johnson $23,180,790 (14-15) ; $24,894,863 (15-16)
Williams $19,754,465 (14-15)
Lopez $15,719,063 (14-15)

Those 3 guys under contract alone eat up: $58,654,318 Million before cap holds or Teletovic or Evans or anyone else who might have a guaranteed contract. That means they will have $0 in cap space which means your previous posts are lies.

If KG leaves they will be totally screwed, because as you mentioned that means Pierce is also retiring. Which means they have a poor roster with no cap space, and an unmovable Johnson with 2 years left.. and no draft picks to package with him or simply use to improve the team. They will most likely be a lottery team, possibly even a bottom 6 team, and they will be giving that pick to Boston.

So, yes, especially if KG retires after next season, they gave up to much to try and go for a homerun with 1 pitch.

ChitownBears22
06-29-2013, 08:57 PM
JJ isn't an expiring nothing... maybe expiring talent like others have mentioned. If KG leaves after next season (the 2013-14 season).... that means the Nets have

Johnson $23,180,790 (14-15) ; $24,894,863 (15-16)
Williams $19,754,465 (14-15)
Lopez $15,719,063 (14-15)

Those 3 guys under contract alone eat up: $58,654,318 Million before cap holds or Teletovic or Evans or anyone else who might have a guaranteed contract. That means they will have $0 in cap space which means your previous posts are lies.

If KG leaves they will be totally screwed, because as you mentioned that means Pierce is also retiring. Which means they have a poor roster with no cap space, and an unmovable Johnson with 2 years left.. and no draft picks to package with him or simply use to improve the team. They will most likely be a lottery team, possibly even a bottom 6 team, and they will be giving that pick to Boston.

So, yes, especially if KG retires after next season, they gave up to much to try and go for a homerun with 1 pitch.

Agree with everything you just said. And there is no way they hit a homerun with this move. I watched KG and PP in the playoffs and it was sad, I am surprised they both didn't retire this year after doc moved on.

beasted86
06-29-2013, 09:06 PM
Agree with everything you just said. And there is no way they hit a homerun with this move. I watched KG and PP in the playoffs and it was sad, I am surprised they both didn't retire this year after doc moved on.

Its stupid to try and hit a homerun in 1 pitch. Maybe 3 or more pitches, but not 1.

If KG retires it also means they weren't able to win a championship or get close enough to warrant him and Pierce coming back. If that's the case, Prokohrov wasted probably $20M in luxury tax and three 1st round picks for 1 year of failure. Very poor and stupid gamble. As a GM/owner you take calculated risks, not reckless gambles.

RiceOnTheRun
06-30-2013, 02:08 PM
So you think the Nets got worse because in 5 years KG and PP will be gone? How does that make them worse now?

I seriously am starting to question whether anybody on PSD has ever watched a Nets game and if they haven't they shouldn't comment on the Nets like they have. Reggie Evans and Gerald Wallace were two of the worst starters in the league last year.

That's why I think the Nets benefitted greatly from this trade. Drop two crap starters and pick up 2 future HoFs. Kidd's gotta limit their minutes though, if he plays them like Woody played him last year, they'll be done by the playoffs. Not to mention, giving them a spark off the bench in Terry. He'd be nice to throw in whenever JJ gets a bit too out of it with his shots.

Like I said, I'd still take the Heat, Pacers over them and it's 50/50 with the Bulls, depending on how Rose comes back. They could easily prove me wrong though, it's just my thought atm. With KG and JET up against Melo and JR, the next few Knicks/Nets games should be quite interesting... A playoff series between the two would be a godsend.

Rockice_8
06-30-2013, 02:13 PM
JJ isn't an expiring nothing... maybe expiring talent like others have mentioned. If KG leaves after next season (the 2013-14 season).... that means the Nets have

Johnson $23,180,790 (14-15) ; $24,894,863 (15-16)
Williams $19,754,465 (14-15)
Lopez $15,719,063 (14-15)

Those 3 guys under contract alone eat up: $58,654,318 Million before cap holds or Teletovic or Evans or anyone else who might have a guaranteed contract. That means they will have $0 in cap space which means your previous posts are lies.

If KG leaves they will be totally screwed, because as you mentioned that means Pierce is also retiring. Which means they have a poor roster with no cap space, and an unmovable Johnson with 2 years left.. and no draft picks to package with him or simply use to improve the team. They will most likely be a lottery team, possibly even a bottom 6 team, and they will be giving that pick to Boston.

So, yes, especially if KG retires after next season, they gave up to much to try and go for a homerun with 1 pitch.


KG and PP aren't retiring after this year. The Nets guaranteed KG's contract for the 2014-15 season which was part of the reason he agreed to the trade so they'll be there for probably two years at least.

That means yes Johnson's contract would be an expiring in 15-16 and all they'd have on the books is Lopez, JJ and D-Will with JJ being a massive expiring. They also get below the luxury tax and won't be subjected to the repeat luxury tax offenders which seriously limits teams.

But I'm sure you already knew all that. The Nets are contenders, something they weren't before this trade along with all the other benefits I mentioned above. Oh and a certain player with the initials KD and his former Nets owner agent becomes a FA in 15-16 just as all these contracts come of the books for Brooklyn.

Not to mention they can just buy picks which happens every year. The Lakers haven't had a 1st round pick in 7 years. The decline of PP and KG are being overrated. They had to carry the C's just to make the playoffs and were shot come playoff time. The Nets are deep and can keep them fresh for the playoffs.

I think both teams got what they wanted.

JerseyBrave
06-30-2013, 05:10 PM
^ Thank you i have been trying make this point for a while now buy people dont read the posts fully

ChitownBears22
06-30-2013, 05:14 PM
KG and PP aren't retiring after this year. The Nets guaranteed KG's contract for the 2014-15 season which was part of the reason he agreed to the trade so they'll be there for probably two years at least.

That means yes Johnson's contract would be an expiring in 15-16 and all they'd have on the books is Lopez, JJ and D-Will with JJ being a massive expiring. They also get below the luxury tax and won't be subjected to the repeat luxury tax offenders which seriously limits teams.

But I'm sure you already knew all that. The Nets are contenders, something they weren't before this trade along with all the other benefits I mentioned above. Oh and a certain player with the initials KD and his former Nets owner agent becomes a FA in 15-16 just as all these contracts come of the books for Brooklyn.

Not to mention they can just buy picks which happens every year. The Lakers haven't had a 1st round pick in 7 years. The decline of PP and KG are being overrated. They had to carry the C's just to make the playoffs and were shot come playoff time. The Nets are deep and can keep them fresh for the playoffs.

I think both teams got what they wanted.

Oh great, then you get a worn down KG for 2 years instead of 1. woohoo. He played horribly in the playoffs, and that was with reduced 29 mpg. And PP has been on a steady decline for 4 years. Have fun with that.

JerseyBrave
06-30-2013, 05:50 PM
^ KG and PP will have alot of help with nets due to depth, and they wont be primary weapons, so they wont be as worn out.

Pacerlive
06-30-2013, 09:22 PM
^ KG and PP will have alot of help with nets due to depth, and they wont be primary weapons, so they wont be as worn out.

Just curious what is this depth you speak of on the Net? I thought they traded away all theiir depth. Who comes off the bench for KG and PP?

krisxsong
06-30-2013, 09:34 PM
Just curious what is this depth you speak of on the Net? I thought they traded away all theiir depth. Who comes off the bench for KG and PP?

All their depth? LOL you thought Kris Humphries, was all our depth at the 4 and 5?

We have Reggie Evans, Mirza Teletovic, Mason Plumlee, and most likely Andray Blatche.

JerseyBrave
06-30-2013, 10:47 PM
And jason terry now, the problem with the nets was they had a bunch of good bench players but not a legit starting pf and sf, problem solved with KG and PP

king4day
07-01-2013, 12:07 AM
They did but that's what happens when you deal within the division (including a guy who bleeds Boston in Pierce). Plus, Boston knew that the Nets really wanted and needed them to have any chance to compete for a title. So they milked them for what they could. Smart on the part of the C's. That alone should get Ainge some votes for GM of the year.

krisxsong
07-01-2013, 05:35 AM
They did but that's what happens when you deal within the division (including a guy who bleeds Boston in Pierce). Plus, Boston knew that the Nets really wanted and needed them to have any chance to compete for a title. So they milked them for what they could. Smart on the part of the C's. That alone should get Ainge some votes for GM of the year.

No.

Boston did not milk anything, if they milked the Nets, they wouldn't be taking back Gerald Wallace.

Boston, after talking with the Nets, talked to other teams in the NBA and nobody budged. Thus Boston knew their only trade partner was Brooklyn. Doesn't sound like they milked anything.

Did the Nets want them? Yes. Did they really want them? I'm gonna say no. Boston offered PP to Brooklyn for Brooks and 2 picks and the Nets said no at the deadline.

Paul Pierce told Boston that if he gets traded, he wants Brooklyn.

So no, Boston did not hold any cards or milk anything out of that deal.

Pacerlive
07-01-2013, 08:01 AM
All their depth? LOL you thought Kris Humphries, was all our depth at the 4 and 5?

We have Reggie Evans, Mirza Teletovic, Mason Plumlee, and most likely Andray Blatche.

Saw an earlier report that Evans apart of the deal. Either way Evans collapses the lane and Humph was at least an offensive threat. A mediocre one but much better than Evans.

But hey hang the banner now since we both know old guys don't get injuries. Thats the crux of the deal really and I doubt the Nets can pull a Spurs mid season rest since they don't have young players and the coaching to do that.

krisxsong
07-01-2013, 08:15 AM
Saw an earlier report that Evans apart of the deal. Either way Evans collapses the lane and Humph was at least an offensive threat. A mediocre one but much better than Evans.

But hey hang the banner now since we both know old guys don't get injuries. Thats the crux of the deal really and I doubt the Nets can pull a Spurs mid season rest since they don't have young players and the coaching to do that.

Hump was an offensive threat. LOLOLOLOLOLOL. Sure maybe if you're comparing him to Reggie Evans, but Reggie Evans makes Tony Allen look like Paul Pierce out there.

They don't have young players. Really now? Do you always talk out of your ***? Do you EVER do research before making such a ridiculous statement?

TyShawn Taylor - 23 PG
Toko Shengelia - 21 SF
Andray Blatch - 27 PF/C
Mirza Teletovic - 27 PF/SF
Mason Plumlee - 23 C/PF
Reggie Evans - 33 PF
Kyle Korver - 32 SG/SF
Jason Terry - 35 PG/SG

But yeah hey you're right, there's no depth in our front court and they're all too old to play.

Can you name me Jason Kidd's assistant coaches? You probably can't without looking them up so I suggest you go ahead and research who they are before you claim they don't know how to rest veterans for the playoffs.

Lawrence Frank is a great Xs and Os guy, a great defensive minded coach. He's coached all kinds of players, including KG and Pierce. A very underrated assistant coach in the NBA.

Roy Rogers has developed many big men in the NBA, one being Brook Lopez(averaged 8.5-9 RPG under Rogers), and last year with Andre Drummond and Greg Monroe.

Eric Hughes has put together training programs for some of the best NBA players in the game including the likes of Durant, Howard, and Horford.

I think these guys would have enough basketball knowledge as to how to rest veterans for the post season.

beasted86
07-01-2013, 08:16 AM
KG and PP aren't retiring after this year. The Nets guaranteed KG's contract for the 2014-15 season which was part of the reason he agreed to the trade so they'll be there for probably two years at least.

That means yes Johnson's contract would be an expiring in 15-16 and all they'd have on the books is Lopez, JJ and D-Will with JJ being a massive expiring. They also get below the luxury tax and won't be subjected to the repeat luxury tax offenders which seriously limits teams.

But I'm sure you already knew all that. The Nets are contenders, something they weren't before this trade along with all the other benefits I mentioned above. Oh and a certain player with the initials KD and his former Nets owner agent becomes a FA in 15-16 just as all these contracts come of the books for Brooklyn.

Not to mention they can just buy picks which happens every year. The Lakers haven't had a 1st round pick in 7 years. The decline of PP and KG are being overrated. They had to carry the C's just to make the playoffs and were shot come playoff time. The Nets are deep and can keep them fresh for the playoffs.

I think both teams got what they wanted.

Nobody can tell the future. For one if KG or Pierce have an injury riddled year like Nash had for the Lakers, they may just hang it up. If the Nets struggle throughout the year and in the postseason, and maybe get knocked out early in the 2nd round by a Pacers or Knicks type team, again, they could leave. If Kidd has his "own ideas" kind of like PJ did, or D'Antoni did and decides he has "X" rotation/offensive scheme in mind (even at the benefit of winning) and it includes Pierce or KG sitting during certain portions of the game or to have a certain role they don't like paired with not winning a championship, again, they may just decide not to come back just like with Ray Allen and the Celtics even with his team getting to the ECF, with the other distractions and forced bench and more limited offensive role just decided enough was enough. So there is no guarantee KG or Pierce don't retire even with a guaranteed 2 years left.

But you are absolutely right. The Nets have improved and are a legit contender on paper. But I still see this as them giving up too much, and I hope you do agree that if those 2 do retire after only 1 season that this is an epic failure of a trade that they gave up too much. Everything isn't just fine and dandy if they retire in 1 year like some of you are trying to be optimistic about.... No... the team is royally screwed for the next 5 years because of it.

krisxsong
07-01-2013, 08:26 AM
Okay, for ANYBODY that thinks this was a stupid deal for the Nets, I again reiterate multiple things.

1) We clear cap space faster this way by getting rid of Gerald Wallace. If KG and PP retire soon, even more cap space.

2) In FA, we WILL attract players. The ownership, market, and arena will be enticing enough.

3) People at like the picks are consecutive. You can't do that anymore under the new CBA. If people are soooo sure the Nets are gonna suck by 2018, are you guys saying the Nets won't suck in 2017 and 2019? What, the Nets will only get lotto picks when they go to Boston? Between now and 2018, we have 2 picks, Boston has 3 of them. Our owner can also buy picks with his pocket change.

4) If you don't believe me on the Nets potential cap space, here's some insight.

http://thebrooklyngame.com/brooklyn-nets-free-agency-2016-kevin-durant/

JordansBulls
07-01-2013, 10:53 AM
They lost to a depleted Bulls team, of course they didn't give up too much.

Clippersfan86
07-01-2013, 11:00 AM
Nope. Although their window is very small to truly contend, no sense in waiting around. Push all your chips in and make a run or two. They certainly have the talent to beat Miami IF they can gel quickly and everybody buys in. It's going to take one hell of an effort from a rookie coach and will either make or break him. I honestly am happy for the Nets and the league. Seeing Miami have such a cake walk outside of 1 or maybe 2 opponents every year is annoying. Now the east gets a lot stronger and Miami has another challenger.

JeremiahWing
07-01-2013, 12:36 PM
The picks are killers. Way too much for way too little. Unless they win a title (which they won't).

Pacerlive
07-01-2013, 12:41 PM
Hump was an offensive threat. LOLOLOLOLOLOL. Sure maybe if you're comparing him to Reggie Evans, but Reggie Evans makes Tony Allen look like Paul Pierce out there.

They don't have young players. Really now? Do you always talk out of your ***? Do you EVER do research before making such a ridiculous statement?

TyShawn Taylor - 23 PG
Toko Shengelia - 21 SF
Andray Blatch - 27 PF/C
Mirza Teletovic - 27 PF/SF
Mason Plumlee - 23 C/PF
Reggie Evans - 33 PF
Kyle Korver - 32 SG/SF
Jason Terry - 35 PG/SG

But yeah hey you're right, there's no depth in our front court and they're all too old to play.

Can you name me Jason Kidd's assistant coaches? You probably can't without looking them up so I suggest you go ahead and research who they are before you claim they don't know how to rest veterans for the playoffs.

Lawrence Frank is a great Xs and Os guy, a great defensive minded coach. He's coached all kinds of players, including KG and Pierce. A very underrated assistant coach in the NBA.

Roy Rogers has developed many big men in the NBA, one being Brook Lopez(averaged 8.5-9 RPG under Rogers), and last year with Andre Drummond and Greg Monroe.

Eric Hughes has put together training programs for some of the best NBA players in the game including the likes of Durant, Howard, and Horford.

I think these guys would have enough basketball knowledge as to how to rest veterans for the post season.

Context is a mysterious thing to you isn't it?

So when somebody is talking about your front court you should use up all that 60 IQ of yours and try to stay on point.. That maybe asking too much of you and I can easily understand if following a conversation is outside your ability in which case I forgive you for your obvious limitiations.

Now when comparing your front court the argument you were making is that you wouldn't have to play KG a lot of minutes to which I respond to you do you honestly think KG will sit and let Reggie Evans play a lot of minutes. You think Kidd has the sack to tell him to sit and even if he does do you think you will win a lot of games playing Reggie Evans a lot backup minutes?

Next year will be all about seeding and if the Nets or anyone else have a chance against the Heat they need to win homecourt and no team will win that many games sitting old starters and playing mediocre backups in their place.

ITs not like I don't understand having a bad bench. The Pacers had one of the worst but if the Nets have a shot I would say they need to get homecourt and force the Heat to play on their court. You don't do that by playing your backups large amounts of minutes and I would say the Nets need to get to 60 wins next year to win homecourt.

GiantsSwaGG
07-01-2013, 12:53 PM
They lost to a depleted Bulls team, of course they didn't give up too much.

Nate Robinson literally schooled their whole squad