|
|
Whoop-De-Damn-Do - A New Jersey Nets Blog
|
Written by Jaime Oppenheim
|
|
Wednesday, 04 August 2010 10:51 |
With an impending NBA lockout next summer, the very creative folks over at The Real Shaq had the great idea to chronicle the contracts that doomed the league since the last work stoppage, aptly named "The Jon Koncak Commemorative Awards". Never one to let a good idea pass without at least acknowledging it as such while it passed by, I joined my fellow Bloguin bloggers in helping them out.
This was a difficult assignment, considering the Nets have spent the majority of the past 11 years doing everything they could to not spend. The more I looked at it, however, the more I realized how curious Richard Jefferson's contract extension in 2004 really was.
Coming off a second round playoff loss to the Pistons that ended a two-year run at the top of the Eastern Conference, the Nets entered the 2004 offseason with Kenyon Martin as a restricted free agent and RJ eligible for an extension. The new ownership group, led by the inimitable Bruce Ratner, was preaching "fiscal responsibility." Once Denver offered Martin the max, the Nets were willing to let him go.
A month later, the Nets gave Jefferson his 6-year, $78 million deal, not too far from the figures Martin received in Denver. The message inside the organization was clear. "We've got $80 million to spend...which one of the two players do we give it to?"
The only way that thought process is at all considered logical is in a universe where you have to spend $80 million just because you can. The NBA, of course, is the only such universe in existence.
Call it revisionist history, but the Jefferson extension was an act of appeasement more than anything else. Both the fan base and Kidd were livid over the refusal to pay Martin. Offering Jefferson within 10% of the max was ownership's way of showing they were committed to remaining competitive while they worked out how to move the team to Brooklyn.
Of course, Jefferson's contract had nothing to do with winning because it wasn't ever a smart basketball decision. For starters, Jefferson was still on his rookie contract in 2004-2005, and nothing is more valuable than a rookie contract during an era of "fiscal responsibility." More so, he had done nothing in his first three seasons to indicate he was worth what the extension was going to pay him. As a third-wheel next to Kidd and Kenyon he was fantastic, but he was never asked to be anything more than that. With Kenyon gone and Kidd recovering from knee surgery, the Nets had an opportunity to evaluate Jefferson as a primary option before extending his contract accordingly.
Once Rod Thorn was allowed to spend again, he did well to acquire Vince Carter for nothing from Toronto. Had the team remained patient and not extended Jefferson during the offseason, they would have been in better position to move him and their remaining draft picks for a player that was a better fit next to Kidd and Carter. Flexibility is a key asset to have when rebuiliding.
Ultimately, was Jefferson a better bet on a long-term contract than Martin? Yes. He was younger and less injury prone. But that doesn't mean he was worth nearly what he was paid. It turned out that there was only one thing RJ enjoyed doing on the court, scoring. He didn't like defense and rebounding, so he stopped doing them. Off the court, he was contumelious. He wanted to be the star and was unhappy with his role on the team.
Jefferson's contract was a PR move from the start. The team had to know they weren't going to win anything with a Kidd-Jefferson duo. There was no on-court plan, so they spent more money than they could afford to cover up their ineptitude then cried poverty every following offseason.
Well done, indeed.
|
|
Written by Rory Toohey
|
|
Monday, 02 August 2010 21:42 |
|
"Kids... how would you... like to go to... Blocko Land??"
"Meh."
Kids...how would you...like to hear...MY OPINIONS ON THE NETS OFFSEASON?!? Meh, you say? So do I. This Nets season, despite the hype, really left me very little to get excited and/or agitated about. Let's start at the beginning.
Nets sign Avery Johnson - Probably the most solid move of the offseason, as he is a real coach (I professed my love to him back on Slippery When Nets in February). But, since then, he has seemed a little too much of a charmer, trying to gain a lot of power in the Nets organization. I'm cautiously optimistic as I fear he may not be 100% dedicated to what is happening on the court.
The draft - Nets get the third pick, and pick the third best player. Given the Nets history and some of the rumors flying around on draft night, we should be grateful they went with what all normal people would do. They make a deal to move up slightly for Damian James, which has both slight positives (He played well in the summer league, but the summer league means nothing) and slight negatives (I liked Jordan Crawford, and it seems like the Nets could have given up cash instead of the 31st pick). Nets also signed Zoubek and Uzoh to non-guaranteed deals, but I have a feel that seeing these two on the court may mean the Nets are having serious injury issues.
The LeBron Thingamajig - I enjoyed the hype, especially the "Blueprint for Success" billboard, but really doubted he would actually sign with the Nets. I did not see the Miami thing coming, though, as I was guessing either Cleveland or Chicago. It has been nearly a month since it all went down, but I've finally come to grips with what happened. As my loyal readers know, I did pen a gushy love letter to LeBron in May, and asked him to leave town. I didn't see "The Decision" coming, so he definitely took a hit in my eyes as to how it went down. But, stepping back, he took less money to play with his friends and be part of a winning team. How can we fault him for this, and then complain when guys like Shawn Marion and Joe Johnson leave to be "The Man" on losing teams and make more money? He spent the first seven years trying to get with the plan, and will spend the next six years trying to be with his friends again. I still feel he is indicative of my generation, and I know several people who would make the same decision he made.
The Rest of Free Agency - The general consensus - Outlaw & Petro got too much, Farmar & Morrow were good deals. I tentatively agree with these statements, although I think Outlaw could surprise some doubters, and I'm concerned Farmar may be this decade's Tyronne Lue. The bright side is that all of these guys are 25 years old or younger, and, to sound like Jay Bilas for a second, they have "high breakout-ability."
So, there you have it. If you are bitching about this offseason, you are just being too nit-picky. If you think the Nets were incredibly successful, you are wearing rose-colored glasses. The Nets were extremely conservative, and they didn't screw up. In the short-term, a 30-win season should be the benchmark. However, I am happy the Nets did not shoot their load in free agency. I would bet anything that Miami will win it this year, and I doubt picking up Carlos Boozer or David Lee would have swung it. Furthermore, it wasn't like Bosh & LeBron told the Nets they wanted to sign with them and the Nets refused - you have to be realistic with your expectations. The goal was never to win a championship and convert Knicks fans to Nets fans in the span of two months. The goal is to win a championship in five years, and it looks like the Nets are sticking to that goal unabated. They have the lowest payroll in the NBA - and, looking at the roster, it is not surprising. Here's hoping for a run at the 8th seed!
(And yes, I'm a total Nets apologist. Check out the laughable article I wrote last year about why the Vince Carter trade wouldn't murder the franchise. "As of right now, the Nets are tied for the best and worst record in the NBA. I cannot wait for the start of the season." What was I thinking?) |
|
Written by Jaime Oppenheim
|
|
Friday, 23 July 2010 21:38 |
Hi. I’m the one Nets fan who doesn’t want the team to trade for Chris Paul. I know, you think I’m crazy. I myself thought I was crazy up until a couple days ago when I finally managed to figure out why my subconscious was so skittish about Paul.
I know Chris Paul is a great player. He’s a superstar, and you can’t win without superstars -- plural. And the Nets even have the pieces to acquire Paul, if he would agree to not pout through the next two seasons. Still, my subconscious remained reticent to the idea that Paul is what the Nets need.
I ran through my usual pet statistics to see if I could figure out my subconscious’ anti-Paul sentiments. As expected, Paul measures out off the charts everywhere: per-48, PER, opponent PER, on court/off court. There’s nothing not to like. The facts are clear: Paul is one of the three best point guards on the planet.
It was after the number crunching I recalled Malcolm Gladwell's Blink. I decided to test Gladwell’s theory that we analyze things almost immediately, and our “hunches” are often right. I wrote down all the things that pop into my mind when I squeamishly think about trading for Paul.
1 - He spends an awful lot of time not being in the playoffs
2 - Ever notice how players acquired by the Hornets in the last four or five years have fallen off the NBA map?
3 - About that knee...
4 - When's the last time a team built around a point guard ever won anything?
Had I been wrong about all those initial qualms? Well...
1 - Paul's star blew up during the '07-'08 season. The Hornets finished second in the Western Conference, beat the Mavs in the first round of the playoffs and then took the Spurs to a game seven before bowing out.
How good were the Hornets that season? They finished only one game behind the Lakers for the best record in the West. They also finished one game ahead of the Houston Rockets and Phoenix Suns for the fifth or sixth seed. The conference was packed very tight. The Hornets might as well have been middle of the pack, if the individual pack members were distinguishable in any way. In fact, of the teams that made the 2008 NBA Playoffs, only the Rockets and Hornets haven't played in the Western Conference Finals in the last five years.
Outside of that, Paul's teams have only made playoffs one other season, the following year, and they got bounced in the first round.
All told, Paul’s Hornets have one season being a solid Western Conference playoff team and a second season being a first rounder ouster. That’s less than what Deron Williams and Carmelo Anthony have accomplished with their teams.
2 - Then there’s the bit about Paul’s teammates always being lousy, no matter who they are. They’ve had veteran wings: Desmond Mason, Peja Stojakovic, Morris Peterson, James Posey. All four saw a decrease in production with a Paul-led Hornets team. But Peja, Peterson and Posey were all on the downside of their careers, so is that necessarily Paul’s fault?
They also had JR Smith, who doubled his output the year following his departure from New Orleans. Smith was only two years removed from High School during his one season with Paul, and he had a terrible relationship with Head Coach Byron Scott. Hardly conclusive evidence.
What about draft picks? The Hornets used top-15 selections on Hilton Armstrong, Cedric Simmons and Julian Wright. All three are busts. But they also had Darren Collison and Marcus Thornton last season. Is it coincidental that both guys broke out when Paul's injury and Scott's ousting allowed for extended playing time?
David West is easily the Hornets second best player and Paul’s partner in crime versus the opposition. West's numbers took a sharp turn upward when Paul arrived in 2005. That also happened to be the same year West moved into the starting lineup. And West's numbers didn't suffer when Collison was in the lineup last season.
In fact, the only player that posted significantly better numbers with Paul was Tyson Chandler. Chandler averaged about 10 points per game with the Hornets, has opposed to 7 or 8 points per game elsewhere. His go to move? Run straight to the rim and let Paul throw the ball up above the square. A play Devin Harris and Brook Lopez have already figured out on their own.
3 - About that knee. Last we heard, Paul still wasn't ready to participate in a basketball game. This has been a problem since January. We're past the sixth month mark. While there’s no irrefutable evidence that Paul’s knee, san meniscus, is just waiting to erode, you can’t exactly be confident about his progress, either. Given the choice, you’re taking a Chris Paul with a meniscus in each knee over a Chris Paul with a meniscus in only one knee.
4 - The last time a team built around a point guard won the NBA Championship was 1990, when the Isiah Thomas led Pistons won their second straight title. Since then, it's been all wings and centers. Jason Kidd and Steve Nash have yet to win a championship. John Stockton never did. Gary Payton got his ring as a role player next to Shaq and Wade in Miami.
Can a scoring point guard win in the NBA? Of course. Tony Parker has won many rings as a prominent member of the Spurs next to Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili, and he’s nowhere near the player Paul is. Still, wings and centers have dominated the NBA landscape the last twenty years.
When you add it all up you more or less get a pretty sum of zero. There’s nothing remarkably good or remarkably bad about his teams’ success, his ability to make his teammates better or his long-term health. All three could still be considered something of an unknown quantity, even five years into Paul’s career. So why do I not want the Nets to trade for Paul? Plug our sum into the final equation:
Did the Nets dismantle their entire roster and suffer through one of the worst seasons in NBA history for a player with no clearly defined history of winning, making teammates better and being a lock known quantity for the next decade? To put it another way, would you have gone through the last two seasons of ignominy knowing Chris Paul was the target?
I wouldn’t. Paul is a great player, but I‘m not certain he‘s capable of turning around a franchise, even if that franchise is willing to at least assist in those efforts. He isn’t even bringing an all-star sidekick with him. He’s bringing himself and a decent but overpaid big man. While that may push the Nets into the playoffs, I don’t suspect that’ll make them a threat to do much of anything once they get there. And I’m not willing to give up a combination of Devin Harris, Derrick Favors, Terrence Williams and draft picks when the ceiling could very well end up being the Atlanta Hawks.
And, if you still aren’t convinced, here’s point number five that has begun swimming around my subconscious the last few days:
Chris Paul is a 6’ dynamo that Billy King will have to work around the clock to keep happy. I’m pretty sure I’ve already seen that movie…
|
|
Written by Jaime Oppenheim
|
|
Tuesday, 20 July 2010 15:34 |
|
A lot of people have derided the Nets for giving Travis Outlaw a 5-year, $35 million contract this offseason. He has, after all, been a sixth man for the majority of his career, and he might not get a whole lot better than what we've already seen.
Is the deal really that bad? Well, let's stack Outlaw up against Rudy Gay, who got an equally panned 5-year, $82 million extension. In a purely numbers based world, the salaries would suggest Gay is twice as good as Outlaw, but since this is the NBA, the only entity suggesting Gay is twice as good as Outlaw is the Grizzlies front office.
Below are the per 48 minute averages for each player. I went with Outlaw's 2008-2009 season due to his injury and trade last year. Pedants should note the seasons used are comparable to each player's career norms.
Rudy Gay's '09-'10 Per 48 Minute Averages
|
Points
|
Rebounds
|
Assists
|
Steals
|
Blocks
|
FG%
|
3PT%
|
3PTM
|
|
23.7
|
7.1
|
2.3
|
1.8
|
1.0
|
46.5
|
32.7
|
1.0
|
Travis Outlaw's '08-'09 Per 48 Minute Averages
|
Points
|
Rebounds
|
Assists
|
Steals
|
Blocks
|
FG%
|
3PT%
|
3PTM
|
|
22.1
|
7.1
|
1.8
|
1.0
|
1.2
|
45.3
|
37.7
|
1.9
|
Say what you want about Outlaw's contract, it could've been a whole lot worse. If Gay -- and Joe Johnson -- are setting the market, Outlaw is a bargain. |
|
Written by Jaime Oppenheim
|
|
Sunday, 18 July 2010 21:38 |
|
Dave D has been floating out the idea the Nets may use Terrence Williams as trade-bait to acquire the power forward they are desperately lacking. As gifted and versatile T-Will is, Dave argues, he might be only the third best point guard, shooting guard and small forward on the roster.
Now if we were ranking everyone by who was the best basketball player, Terrence would probably be at the top. Is it his problem whether he fits one of those other labels? T-Will can do amazing things on the court, why should he limit himself to the conceits of one particular position? More importantly, why should the Nets feel beholden to what a normal lineup is supposed consist of?
We give things labels when we need them to fit some specific need or ideal. We don’t label things that exist in a way we’re content with. It’s why we don’t have vehicles; we have sports cars and pickup trucks and sedans. A vehicle is something that can take you from one place to another. A sports car is something that can take you from one place to another in a way that makes you look cooler than you probably are. Just because no one has come up with a label for what Terrence Williams does on a basketball court does it make him any less effective at his job? Of course not.
The real problem with labels occurs when we’re uneasy using something we haven’t got a label for. During March and April, T-Will averaged 14 points, 7 rebounds and 5 assists per game, and he didn’t do it from any one position. He spent a lot of time running the offense, but there was usually a point guard on the floor with him (Dooling). Some of the most productive stretches of the season occurred when the Nets gave T-Will the freedom to instigate the action. The downside was trying to get the other guys to fit around him. They weren’t totally in the flow of things.
Most of T-Will’s success came when the opposition, and by extension, the game, was disorganized -- transition opportunities, lax weak side defense. Any player on the NBA radar can succeed under those conditions, but few have the ability to create them. T-Will made the defense off-kilter.
While he isn’t completely a point guard or a shooting guard or a small forward, T-Will combines attributes of all three of those positions and unleashes them when the basic organization of the game breaks down. For example, he’ll crash the defensive glass (like a small forward), push the ball up the court with explosive athleticism (elements of both guard positions) and finish the play by finding the open man on the wing (point guard). Was that bad team basketball because Terrence didn’t fill one specific role? Of course not. He started, advanced and finished the play, and was probably the player on the team most capable of doing any one of those three things. That is, the play might not have been successful if those three roles were distributed among three separate players because no one else could have done them quite as well.
Perhaps the best example of what T-Will can bring to the table doesn’t come from basketball, but from football. Troy Polamalu is the starting strong safety for the Pittsburgh Steelers, but anyone who’s watched him play knows he isn’t exactly tethered to the position’s standard role within the defense. Before the snap, Polamalu is in a constant state of motion. He’s trying to cause chaos, and by causing chaos, he’s creating opportunities that wouldn’t otherwise exist.
Why shouldn’t T-Will wreak havoc on the court when he’s more than capable of doing so? This isn’t to suggest he freelance, because that would collapse the structure of the team, rendering the other players position-less as well. The mesh point needs to be where he can run amok within the team’s system. It would be a failure of coaching if the Nets can’t show T-Will when and where to use his considerable talents, and integrate that into the other players’ assignments.
The Nets have a very powerful weapon at their disposal. And, it may be true they don’t quite have a label for this weapon. But if they have their druthers, they’ll start here: Terrence Williams is a basketball player, and he plays for the New Jersey Nets.
The rest can sort itself out when other teams start looking for one of their own. |
|
Written by Jaime Oppenheim
|
|
Saturday, 17 July 2010 20:19 |
When John Wooden passed away last month, there was a certain void left in the basketball community. Even at the age of 99, Coach Wooden was still the standard repository of all things basketball. He, in short, knew more about the game than anyone on the planet. Coaches and players still went to him for advice.
I think it’s pretty clear Coach K is the guy to fill that role. He has the resume, the legacy and the respect for the job. Still, if there was one person I could talk basketball with, it isn’t him.
If I could have one conversation about basketball with anyone of my choosing, it would be Rod Thorn. I can’t think of anyone who has impacted me as a fan and shaped my own thoughts and philosophies about the game more than Rod Thorn has.
There was something very unique and special about the New Jersey Nets teams that earned back-to-back trips to the NBA Finals. It wasn’t just that they happened to be the one amalgamation of players wearing a Nets jersey that was good at basketball. Every piece fit together in a certain way that made the whole thing work. The degree to which the sum was greater than the whole of the parts was remarkable.
A lot of this had to do with Jason Kidd, whom Thorn acquired in a trade for Stephon Marbury. It wasn’t that Kidd made everyone else’s job easier, because everyone on the floor made everyone else’s job easier to an extent, which was the magic of those teams. Thorn couldn’t have planned that -- that's sheer basketball alchemy. What Kidd did was make everyone else on the team a better player. It was understood by his teammates there would be a reward for good play. Everyone did their job, which in turn allowed someone else to do theirs.
The thing that was so special about those guys was how apparent the impact they had on each other was. A lot of today’s advanced analysis focuses on what an individual player is capable of in a given situation, or how efficient they are, or whatever else we’ve come up with. None of them, however, account for how that player affects the other players on the court. Do they make their teammates better? What of the opponent?
And it wasn’t just those teams. Even as the roster changed and evolved, you could see these principles at work. Thorn seemed to be trying a specific formula again and again. He would find guys who were gifted but flawed and have them surround a catalyst that could ignite a positive reaction. Thorn even talked about this as he was filling out the current roster. He said he liked the players he acquired, and thought the team would be a force once you dropped a great player into the mix.
There are many ways to build a basketball team. A lot of it has to do with matching up skill sets, you can’t just wait for the pieces to fall into place. Sometimes you have to keep adding poorly fitting pieces until you can get that someone who can flip the switch and make the whole thing go. If the players are good enough, they’ll find a way to win.
It was comforting to have Thorn at the helm all these years. He was never bound to need or fit when acquiring a player. Sure, he made some mistakes, but he never did anything so colossally stupid that the ramifications were felt years afterwards. You knew he would never give up more than he wanted to for a player, and he never needed to make a trade more than the team he was dealing with.
It was quite a decade. As much as I enjoyed watching the Nets win, I’m equally glad I got to watch a lifelong basketball man ply his trade. So, for that, thanks, Rod.
|
|
Written by Jaime Oppenheim
|
|
Tuesday, 13 July 2010 22:06 |
|
The Greeks invented tragedy. Shakespeare toyed with it endlessly. The Nets perfected it. Sure, every now and again the team’s ineptitude has been marred by fleeting moments of hope and success, but soon enough the Cosmos returned the Nets to their natural state with an opposite but not at all equal reactionary response.
Why Whoop-De-Damn-Do? Mostly because it was the only word capable of capturing the essence of Nets basketball through the years, but also because I thought it would be helpful to have a URL no one could spell.
I’m not entirely sure why I started this blog, although it presumably has something to do with the fact I think about the Nets far too much, and I could never quite find the pertinent information for what was on my mind at any given moment. There are a lot of exciting things going on within the internet’s basketball community, but a lot of them have to do with forgetting about eight or nine of the required ten players that regularly take up occupancy on the court. I figured I might as well plug in the handful of players someone else left out so I knew exactly how awful the Nets really were (or were going to be).
So, welcome to the re-launch of Whoop-De-Damn-Do: A Nets Blog. I suspect this will be the first launch many of you have experienced, but I’m nonetheless confident you will find us at least as hospitable as the nearest Dunkin Donuts. |
|
Written by Jaime Oppenheim
|
|
Monday, 12 July 2010 13:03 |
The Nets traded, by sorts, Vince Carter for Courtney Lee the day before the 2009 draft. Lee was supposed to be a key part of the future, along with Devin Harris and Brook Lopez. Since then, they’ve acquired Terrence Williams, Quinton Ross, Damion James, Travis Outlaw and Anthony Morrow, all wings between the ages of 22 and 29. That’s a total of six players — including Lee — whose primary position is either shooting guard or small forward, with some versatility at point guard and power forward depending on lineups. That consort has essentially marginalized Lee’s value to the Nets, not by sheer number and ability, but by specialization.
Outside of injury, Courtney Lee was locked in as the starting shooting guard last season and delivered an uneven performance. He was a non-entity on offense before and after February, but provided a spark in a relatively significant number of the team’s 12 victories. Lee was simultaneously everything and nothing he was supposed to be coming from Orlando, depending on perspective. He’s the kind of player that fills in the gaps on offense and makes the opposition work when he’s on defense. On a bad team, that role doesn’t exist. Lee’s teammates in New Jersey neither provided him the opportunity to score efficiently nor the assistance to finish a defensive stand.
Lee played, more or less, to his capabilities, which is where his marginalization begins. As a classic “good at many things but great at none” player, Lee works best in a well-functioning system, both offensively and defensively. He can’t, however, do the job alone with any consistency, both offensively and defensively. Last season, he struggled to score off the dribble and couldn’t check the league’s more physically talented shooting guards, such as Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade and Vince Carter. He fared far better against guys like Monta Ellis, OJ Mayo and Ray Allen.
Kobe Bryant Per 48 Minute Averages
|
Points |
FG% |
FGA |
PPS |
| Season |
33.4 |
45.6 |
26.6 |
1.25 |
| Vs. Nets |
44.3 |
57.5 |
30.0 |
1.48 |
Dwyane Wade Per 48 Minute Averages
|
Points |
FG% |
FGA |
PPS |
| Season |
35.2 |
47.6 |
26.0 |
1.35 |
| Vs. Nets |
31.4 |
55.9 |
18.8 |
1.67 |
Vince Carter Per 48 Minute Averages
| |
Points |
FG% |
FGA |
PPS |
| Season |
25.8 |
42.7 |
21.1 |
1.22 |
| Vs. Nets* |
51.2 |
75.0 |
25.6 |
2.00 |
*Courtney Lee only played Orlando once last year — but it wasn’t pretty.
On defense, Lee doesn’t have the size, length and explosiveness to compete with those guys. His technique and effort will force them to work, but the Nets weren’t good enough as a unit to help him when they got into the paint. Even if they were, that’s undue stress to put on your big men. If the Nets want to stop physically dominant shooting guards next season, the best bet will be Terrence Williams and Quinton Ross, players with size, strength and athleticism combination advantages over Lee.
While Lee is more of a threat to score than that duo, he isn’t nearly as proficient as Anthony Morrow. Lee doesn’t compare with Morrow as a pure shooter — few do — and he doesn’t do anything else well enough to make up the difference.
Per 48 Minute Averages
|
Points |
FG % |
3PT Made |
3PT % |
Assists |
Made FG’s Assisted |
| Courtney Lee |
17.9 |
43.6 |
1.5 |
33.8 |
2.4 |
60% |
| Anthony Morrow |
21.4 |
46.8 |
3.3 |
45.6 |
2.5 |
66% |
Lee was a good fit in Orlando during his rookie season because he was rarely put in a position to impact the game as an individual. He had Dwight Howard behind him on defense and was merely asked to hoist up open jumpers on offense. Everything came within the flow of the team’s offensive and defensive systems. That’s Lee’s ideal role, and a role which doesn’t presently exist with the Nets due to the lack of surrounding talent.
While Lee is better-rounded than any of the other wings the Nets have brought in, he can’t make an impact in any one area of the game the others can. He can’t stall an opponent’s star, nor can he provide much offensive fire-power. Even though his wider variety of tools makes him a leading candidate to start, his inability to master any of them makes him equally expendable in a trade. His value to the Nets can come only when they need their shooting guard to impact the game by not impacting it in a negative fashion and only exerting a positive influence when the other nine players on the court allow for it.
The Nets are rebuilding. They have a lot of young, interchangeable players who will be battling for positions and playing time, with shooting guard likely to possess the most active revolving door. Even if Lee survives the offseason and emerges as the starter out of training camp, he’s likely to be the wing the team counts on least during the course of a game.
|
|
Written by #test
|
|
Friday, 25 June 2010 17:48 |
I have been attending Nets games via various ticket plans since the 95-96 season. Sometimes it would be 10 game plans, some times half-season, etc. My mom used to provide these tickets for me, since they were extremely cheap forms of entertainment for pre-teen boys. At the time, some plans were cheaper than going to the movies.
This season, I became a big boy: I bought my own Nets season tickets. Actually, the details are more complicated – I purchased two tickets for the season, but these tickets will be split between two friends, my mom (who still goes to the games without me), and myself. Complicated? Well, we’re going to 10 games each. But, since it was a full season, it was cheaper than each of buying individual 10 game plans. Also, we get season ticket holder perks – such as an invite to the Nets Draft Party at the Prudential Center, which I attended last night.
This is the first time I have been to the Prudential Center. I am not a hockey fan, but I am always amused when Cory Booker refers to Newark as a “hockey town.” Sure thing there, Mr. Booker. Every immediately links hockey to Newark. Totally buying it.
Brick City is not a misnomer with the Nets coming to town
As I entered the event, I was very impressed. Cheerleaders, free food, and free beer. As my long-time readers know, I love free beer (but who doesn’t). The set up was much lavish and grand than the mediocre lottery party I went to last year. There were many guest stars who came by to hype up the Nets and provide some draft analysis, including the aforementioned Cory Booker, my childhood hero Kerry Kittles, and the Whoop-De-Damn-Do kid himself, Derrick Coleman.
Cory Booker
Whoop De Damn Do
Kerry!
To the matter at hand, I’m not really sure who the Nets fans were supporting in the draft. Indiana trade rumors were whispered about, and nothing was definite. The crowd reaction to the Favors pick was mild at best. Perhaps they were a bit sedated by the free alcohol.
Unfortunately, that’s the ONLY PICK we saw all night. Shortly after the Spurs 20th pick, they turned on the lights and switched the televisions to the departing train schedules for Newark Penn Station. Are you kidding me? They pull out all the stops to impress the Nets fans and let them know next year will be different, and they couldn’t get the staff to work an extra 30 minutes (probably less, since the Nets ended up trading for the 24th anyway). The more things change, the more they stay the same. Fortunately, I found another Nets fan waiting for the train, and was able to get updates from him on the ride back. But still…
Overall, I give the same party the same as the draft – a B. I know nothing about college basketball, so I can’t really analyze the players without completely talking out of my ass. But, if the Hawks were just going to sell the 31st pick, couldn’t the Nets have just offered the 27th and cash for the 24th, and used the 31st for their own purposes? And couldn’t they have kept the lights on for 30 more minutes? But, it was a nice night, and they didn’t screw up as royally as they could have, which, for this organization, is a huge plus. So yeah, the night at The Rock was solid.
|
|
Written by #test
|
|
Saturday, 05 June 2010 11:54 |
The greatest NBA rivalry is underway. Yawn. Didn’t we just see this two years ago? Bird-Magic-Chamberlain-Russell-Scalabrine-Morrison blah blah blah.
The Nets franchise has never been successful enough to create what could be called a classic rivalry. However, there have been significant flare-ups with other franchises through-out the year. Let’s examine the Nets top five rilvaries!
5. The Philadelphia 76ers
Above is a picture from the last classic Nets win. Unfortunately, Philadelphia drummed us this season in 4 games, 3 of which were extremely close. Looking back, this rivalry is not that strong. The odd thing about these two teams is that they keep making trades with each other that usually hurt both teams involved, such as the 1995 Derrick Coleman/Shawn Bradley trade, the 1998 Keith Van Horn/Tim Thomas trade, the 2002 Dikembe Mutumbo/Van Horn trade, and, to a lesser extent, the 2005 Marc Jackson trade. The most significant moments in this rivalry happened well before my time: the Dr. J trade, and the Nets’ first round upset of the defending champions in the 1984 playoffs.
4. The Toronto Raptors
Even though it has been a year since Vince Carter left the Nets, I can still hear the boos. And rightfully so: Vince Carter quit on the Raptors, and the fans should be outraged. To pour more salt on the wound, Vince was outstanding in his games when returning to Toronto, hitting multiple game-winning shots and defeating them as underdogs in the 2007 Playoffs. Although Vince’s departure will probably cool this rivalry, I see it growing in the future due to the 2004-05 realignment that placed Toronto in the Atlantic Division.
3. The Miami Heat
Now, onto the real venom. Miami is easily one of hate-able teams in the NBA. My hatred began with Alonzo Mourning, a “former Net” who whined & cried that the Nets were trying to kill him. He ended up riding the coattails of Dwyane Wade to a (ref-assisted) championship. The Nets ran into Miami twice, in the 2005 Playoffs (swept) and the 2006 Playoffs (lost 4-1 in the 2nd round, with a bench rotation that consisted of Jacque Vaughn, Lamond Murray, and John Thomas [how Rod Thorn kept his job after this year I'll never know]). That’s what is truly evil about this team: unlike the other rivals on this list, they always have beaten us.
2. The Boston Celtics
Now, Celtics fans probably don’t even know where the Nets play by now, but back in 2002 and 2003, this was a helluva rivalry. The first time these two teams clashed as in 2002. The only thing people remember from this series is the Celtics comeback in the 4th quarter of game 3 – typical selective memory from Massholes. Nobody ever mentions that the classless crowded chanted “wife-beater” towards Jason Kidd, that Paul Pierce absolutely choked in Game 4, and that the Nets won the next 3 games in a row, including twice in Boston. Then, in 2003, the Nets swept the Celtics – destroying Antoine Walker’s career. Basically, bragging about that Game 3 comeback is like Tiger Woods bragging about banging a Denny’s waitress: it was fun at the time, but absolutely devastating long-term.
Before the Celtics-Lakers series, I really couldn’t decide who to root for. On one hand, if the Celtics won, I wouldn’t have to hear Lakers fans start arguing Kobe is better than Jordan, and the Nets would be able to say that, despite having only 12 wins, they beat the eventual champions. On the other hand, I really want to see Ron Artest shake hands with Barack Obama. So, when I was at a bar watching the game, the Celtics made a small run (like, 4-6 points) and cut the lead to 4 in the 2nd quarter. And the crowd at the bar started chanting “Let’s Go Celtics!” Really? You are losing in the 2nd quarter of Game 1, and you are starting a chant? I knew who I had to root for at that point. Go Lakers, and go asteroid hitting Boston.
1. The New York Knicks
OK, the Knicks were very good in the 90s, and the Nets were very bad. The Nets were very good in the 00s, and the Knicks were very bad. So, these two rarely impacted each other’s chances at being successful. But, man, I just HATE the Knicks. I always say that every day is a little better if the Nets win. But, a Knicks loss is almost as satisfying. Like Lucy pulling the football away from Charlie Brown, watching the Knicks fail will never cease to entertain me. These two are now “competing” for LeBron this offseason. I doubt James will sign with the Nets, but I am hoping moreso that he doesn’t sign with the Knicks.
So there you go. That’s all the hate I could spew out now. Let me hear your hate in the comments.
To see Rory’s older entries and other random tangents, please visit www.slipperywhennets.com
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
|
The Bloguin Network allows advertisers to promote their products and services to our ever-growing number of visitors. We offer both site-specific ad placements as well as the ability to run a network-wide campaign. If you're interested in working with Bloguin to meet your advertising needs, please 
The Bloguin Network is always looking to expand. We're specifically looking for blogs in the sports, entertainment, and video games field, but are open to adding any type of quality site. If you're a blogger and interested in joining our network, please fill out our 
The Bloguin Login gives you full access to everything our network has to offer. Your name and password will work for each and every one of our sites. Signing up is simple, and will allow you to post in all our forums, create member blogs, and access other cool features! What are you waiting for? 