Building a Championship Team
by shot-a-reality on Jul 31, 2010 12:14 AM EDT
Email
PrintWHAT THEY WANT
According to Net's Owner , his goal for this team is a "simple one"; to become a "dynasty".
According to Mr. Prokorov, that's the reason he did not break the bank trying to obtain 2nd tier free agents this summer; although they are "very good players", they do not make the nets "a championship team"
He does not just want to become a playoff team, he's talking about winning championships, "multiple" championships, and being able to contend for a championship annually, sustained exellence - that's a "championship team", a "dynasty".
WHAT IT TAKES TO GET THERE
What's needed for a "championshop team", or a "dynsaty"?
There is an excellent article entitled "Reconsidering The Superstar Theory - Part 1 & Part 2". The article is written by Elrod Enchilada, feature writer for "Real GM".
If you have not already done so, I encourage you to read this very insightful article:
"Reconsidering The Superstar Theory Part 1 & Part 2"
Highlights of the Article
The article lists the best regular season players in NBA History, then it puts these players in the following catagories;
Platinum Superstar - These players are the NBA's Mount Rushmore, the legends of the game. They basically ranked as among the top three-five players in the game virtually their entire careers, or until injuries took their toll. They were invariably MVP candidates every year. They personify the term "franchise" player.
Gold Medal Superstar - These players are basically going first-team all-NBA and/or getting top 10 MVP votes a majority of the years when they are healthy. They are among the seven or eight best players in the league throughout much of their career. Many of these guys gave multi-year streches where they are arguably the best players in the league.
Silver Medal Superstar - These players are first or second team all-NBA much of their careers and received frequent recognition in MVP Voting. During much of their careers, these are players who would be considered among the 10 best in the league.
Bronze Medal Superstar - These players all got recognition annually of being among the 15 best players in the game during a majority of their careers.
After catagorizing theses players, the article looks at the playoffs, specifically Championship teams, runner-ups and conference championship participants in the last 54 years.
The findings:
1.Without at least a Bronze Medal superstar (a player who is annually considered to be one of the top 15 players in the league for the majority of their career) it is IMPOSSIBLE to win a nba championship.
2. To be a serious championship contender (a "championship team" ) a team needs to have at lease 1 Gold Medal Superstar.
Elrod Enchilada notes the following key point;
"Just having the best superstar does not guarantee a title. A team needs a supporting cast, role players, coaching and experience. Without that, even the best superstar cannot win a title. The point is rather different; It is impossible to win a title without the foundation of a superstar. That is the ante for admission. All the chemistry and teamwork and experience and role players in the world do not amount to a hill of beans without superstars. Not just any guys who make all-star teams, but guys who make the list of the glorious 101, guys who are a cut above the standard all-star. NBA history is littered with impressive hard-working 50 win teams that never come close to winning an NBA title. There reason is always the same; the best players on the team simply isn't good enough to carry the team when the competition stiffens in April, May and June.
WHAT THEY HAVE
Here's an objective look at the Potential of the Net's Roster
Point Guards
Devin Harris - good player with potential to be a very good supporting player/ key contributor on a championship caliber team. ie Tony Parker - Spurs
Jordan Farmar - above average role player (distributor, spot-up shooter) with potential to be a good role player on a championship caliber team. ie himself - Lakers
Combo Guards
Terrence Williams - versitile role player (wing scorer/ defender) with potential to be a very good role player (defensive stopper) on championship caliber team. ie more athletic version of Larry Hughes - Cavs
Shooting Guards
Courtney Lee - above average role player (wing defender, spot-up shooter) with potential to be a good role player on a championship caliber team. ie himself - Magic
Anthony Morrow - good role player (outside shooter) with potential to be a very good role player (outside shot of becoming a good supporting player/ key contributor) on a championship caliber team. ie Reggie Miller lite - Pacers, Richard Hamilton with better range - Pistons.
Small Forwards
Travis Outlaw - Role Player (Athletic Defender, Spot-up shooter) with potential to be a great role player (defensive stopper on a championshop caliber team. ie tayshaun prince
Damien James - rookie with potential to be a good role player according to scouting reports. (It's hard to give an analysis due to unfamilarity with his game)
Power Forwards
Derrick Favors - rookie with potential to be a bronze (possibly silver) medal superstar (20 points, 11 rebounds, 2 blocks, ). Think pre-injury version of Antonio McDyess: Antoino McDyess before his knees died
Kris Humphries role player with potential to be a above average Role player (rebounding, hustle, defense) on a championship caliber team. ie Anderson Verajo
Centers
Brook Lopez - good player with potential to be a very good supporting player/ key contributor on a championship caliber team. ie Pau Gasol - Lakers
Johan Petro - average role player with potential to be a good role player (rebounding, interior defense, shot blocking) on a championship caliber team. ie Taller version of Theo Ratliff
WHAT THEY NEED
A few weeks ago, Avery Johnson was asked whether he see's the net's becoming a eastern conference version of the OKC Thunder. Here's his response:
"To become a OKC Thunder you gotta have a superstar. Fortunately for them, they have a guy that's a superstar in Kevin Durant - and right now, we don't have that guy on our roster - and we hope to get it. We hope Derrick Favors in a year and a half can be that type of a superstar and that's why we drafted him." - Conference Call, Wed. July 14, 2010.
HOW TO GET A SUPERSTAR
There are various ways to obtain a superstar player, either by
Free Agency - Obtaining a superstar via this route is quite difficult. Superstars usually only leave their original team if they think that the new team can really do something for their Legacy. ie Shaqulle Oneil - Lakers, Lebron James - Miami
Trade - Obtaining a superstar via this route usually only happens when (1) the superstar's current team's supporting cast is not championship caliber and they don't see the situation getting better without major overhauls or (2) when there are major internal team problems involving the superstar or (3) contract issues involving the superstar . ie Jason Kidd from Suns to Nets, Alonzo Mourning from the Hornets to the Heat.
Draft - Easiest way to obtain a superstar since teams usually do all that they can to hold on to their own superstar. Drafting a superstar is often about (1) being in the right place at the right time, ie Spurs drafting Tim Duncan, Knicks drafting Patrick Ewing, Thunder drafting Kevin Durant or (2) Drafting a high risk/ high reward player, ie Lakers (trading for Hornet's draft pick - Kobe Bryant, Timberwolves drafting Kevin Garnett, Magic drafting Dwight Howard.
CONCLUSION
All NBA front offices say that their priority is having a team that can compete for a championship annually, yet the decisions they make reveal that their ownership and/or front office either (1) have other priorities or (2) are incompetent.
In my opinion: if the Net's Ownership's priority truly is building a championship team and having a dynasty.......
(1) They will
a. Focus on developing Derrick Favors if they truly believe that he is a potential superstar. Why? As discussed it's impossible to win a championship without a superstar?
b. Focus on acquiring a established superstar who is either a gold medal superstar or on their way to becoming one. Why? Even though Derrick Favors has the potential to become a superstar, there's no guarantee he will become one. Also, if he does become a superstar, he is more likely to become a bronze (possibly silver) medal superstar and as previously noted if a team want's to be a serious championship contender, they need a gold medal superstar.
c. Focus on developing the rest of their young roster as supporting cast / role players or as valuable trade chips that can be used to acquire an established gold (sliver approaching gold) medal superstar. Why? As discussed, having a superstar does not guarantee a title. A team also need a supporting cast, role players, experience and coaching. Why develop them with the view to using them as valuable trade chips? As discussed, it doesn't matter how good your supporting cast and role players are. Without a superstar, your not winning anything. So if a superstar becomes available through a trade, the team with the best/most affordable supporting cast / role players available are usually the most attractive trade partners.
(2) They will not
a. Take on large contracts via trade or free agency for non superstar player that prevent them from acquiring an established Superstar. Why? Although a team can make a dramatic improvement in the regular season, they are left in the worst place possible, not bad enough to qualify for the draft lottery (an opportunity to acquire a superstar player) and they are not good enough to be a real championship contender. ie Atlanta's signing of Joe Johnson.
b. show an unwillingness to trade valuable players (even potential allstars potential - ie Brook Lopez) / picks to acquire established Gold (or Silver approaching Gold) medal Superstars. Don't overvalue your own players!!
You may not be able to build a team that's guaranteed to win a championship, much less multiple championships. Winning championships often come down to a few key plays during the course of a game. When a owner/ front office is focused on acquiring superstars as their foundation though, they can be successful in building a team that can be a "championship contender". Let's see where the Net's focus lies.
c. become one of those middle of the pack teams always trying to add a another non-superstar to their team to appease their fans. ie bobcats, grizzlies
215 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good Post
Melo would be a perfect fit, but it would be the lbj fiasco all over again. (high hopes but no results) I think draft is the best way. There are two superstar potential SF in this draft, barnes and jones. If we can get either one, o man…
~AC24
by AC24 on Jul 31, 2010 12:46 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Our best bet I think is Melo. But I can't see why this wont be another disappointing end result for us.
That I think leaves the draft. Only guy coming up next year that can be franchise changing (Kevin Durant type) is Harrison Barnes. Freakin excellent player. But I dont see us having a chance at him unless we (once again) have a poor to very poor season. We gotta hit a major stroke of luck to get him on the Nets.
Consequences will never be the same.
Silver Medal Superstar – These players are first or second team all-NBA much of their careers and received frequent recognition in MVP Voting. During much of their careers, these are players who would be considered among the 10 best in the league.
Bronze Medal Superstar – These players all got recognition annually of being among the 15 best players in the game during a majority of their careers.
Derrick Favors – rookie with potential to be a bronze (possibly silver) medal superstar (20 points, 11 rebounds, 2 blocks, ). Think pre-injury version of Antonio McDyess: Antoino McDyess before his knees died
In 6 seasons, pre-injury McDyess had only achieved these crteria honors:
1 AllStar appearance 2001
1 All-NBA Third Team 98-99
When comparing Favors at the upper threshold to pre-knee McDyess, you are comparing him to someone who did NOT even achieve Bronze Level superstar status. To imagine that this future “Bronze Superstar” would then get to Silver is a pretty big stretch.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
When I compare Derrick Favors to McDyess I'm thinking more "style of play".
Draft express say’s he has the potential to be like “McDyess in his Prime”. That prompted me to look at some video of McDyess and I thought Derrick compared "favor"ably to him. No pun intended.
by shot-a-reality on Jul 31, 2010 7:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Sure. I can see the comparison. But the point is that EVEN McDyess, who was a dynamic, dominant player, was not the kind of player that can fundamentally lift a team. When people say that he is going to be a beast, etc, etc, etc, “beasts” generally don’t take teams to the championship.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
wouldn’t you say that Dwight Howard could be described as a beast? He took a team to the championship. Ben Wallace was a beast and he was a key reason for the pistons going to and winning a championship.
by shot-a-reality on Aug 2, 2010 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions
He is a defensive beast, just as Wallace was. Favors has show NO defensive dominance. Defense and rebounding is not something you become dominant in over time. You can improve each through “hard work” but you do not develop into a defensive or rebounding “beast”.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions
I really like your summation and have only a few objections other than that of Favors
is a Bronze-McDyess. I don’t think that Lopez can get near to Gasol who is probably a top 3 big man in the game. Its possible, but its pushing the limit of creditability.
The biggest problem is that you have taken the threshold for Championships, and used it to measure what it takes to be a dynasty. Dynasties don’t just need a Gold Level player, they need a Gold, and a Silver and perhaps even a Bronze. In otherwords, even if Favors does achieve Bronze level (which would mean that he exceeds the performance of McDyess and is 6 years away), they need, in all likelihood, SEVERAL elite NBA players, keeping in mind that ALL the NBA teams have the same thing in mind. By what feature are they reasonably assumed to get these players and not some other team?
I think you did a great job of sketching out the scenario, even bringing up the real possibility of trading Lopez whose ceiling simply is not at the Championship type team leader level. It is just, given the criteria, that they are at the bottom of the rung when it comes to Dynasty building, and not much further up from that when trying to become a “championship” type team.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
My mentioning of Gasol was not necessarily to say that Brook will become as good as him.
It was more that Brook has the ability, like Gasol could become a supporting player with major impact on a Championship team.
by shot-a-reality on Jul 31, 2010 7:47 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree. Having a Gold, Silver and possibly a Bronze level Superstar on a team would be an excellent foundation for willing multiple championships.
I don’t think that that you must have all three though. If you have the right “one”, a very good supporting cast and good role players a dynasty is within reach. Take a look at the Spurs over the last decade. They won three championships with only one Superstar. Of course that superstar was a Platinum medal superstar.
by shot-a-reality on Jul 31, 2010 7:58 AM EDT up reply actions
There is the level of player that you did not mention, which is the Platinum Player. One of the 10 greatest players of all time (or 11). Duncan is counted as one of these (top 5 by his estimation). So the “right” player isn’t even a Gold. If you have a Platinum, you can do with a Bronze (Parker) or a Silver/Bronze (Ginoibili). But the Nets are not even close to having a Platinum player.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
Also, I totally agree with your point on the Net's needing another elite player to become a true contender, probably a gold medal superstar.
That’s why I’m kinda opposed to trading Favors. He gives you at least 1 homegrown superstar….. to join forces with another superstar
by shot-a-reality on Jul 31, 2010 8:09 AM EDT up reply actions
The problem is that Favors is NOT a Gold level superstar in the making, in all likelihood. He probably is not a Silver. One of the best rules you gave was “don’t overestimate your own players”.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
I agree with you, I don’t think that he’s a Gold level superstar. But he has potential to be Bronze, possibly even a Silver. I don’t think it’s wise to trade possible superstars away.
by shot-a-reality on Aug 2, 2010 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Trading possible superstars (and I disagree with the Silver assessment, but that’s okay), to get ACTUAL superstars is wise.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions
For those less interested in reading the whole thing, this is the germane conclusion:
It gets worse, or better, depending if your team has one of these guys. It is not just about winning titles; it is about getting within sniffing distance of winning titles. All but two of the losers in the NBA finals since 1956-57 have featured one of these superstars. (The exceptions? The 2000 Pacers and the 1971 Bullets.) So dig this: only 2 of the 108 teams that have played in the NBA finals did not have a player on this list. There is more: Eighty percent of the 108 teams that lost in the conference finals over the past 54 years – the NBA’s "final four" so to speak – were led by players from this list.
In the NBA today, the relevant pool of superstars under the age of 33 in the coming season and still in their prime are James, Bryant, Nowitzki, Howard, Wade, Paul, Durant, Stoudemire, Yao Ming, Anthony, Deron Williams and Roy. You need one of these twelve guys (or guys about to get on the list like possibly Rajon Rondo or Derrick Rose or Chris Bosh) to even pretend to be a contender. That means a lot of teams are going to be out in the cold, no matter what they do.
And that barely begins to capture what a gated community NBA championships live in. The closer to the top of the superstar 101 list, the more likely a player is to being the best player on a championship team. The closer to the bottom of this list of superstars, the more likely the player is on the outside looking in. Fully 102 of these 108 finals teams had at least a qualifying silver medal superstar on their roster; i.e. basically an all-time top 60 player. And if a team does not have a player is his prime from this list, or soon to be on this list, they have but a slim chance to even make the conference finals, let alone dream about playing in the finals or winning a title…
…So if a team is serious about contending, it really needs at least one platinum or gold medal superstar. Who among active players fit that category?
1. James, currently gold and about to become platinum.
2. Bryant, currently gold and likely to become platinum.
3. Howard, currently gold and has a chance to become platinum.
4. Paul who is probable to be gold and has an outside chance at becoming platinum.
5. Durant who is probable to be gold and has an outside chance at becoming platinum.
6. Wade, who is about to be gold, and has only a remote chance of reaching platinum, due to his being 28.
That’s it folks, for the next five years or so. Bryant is about to turn 32, so that leaves five guys, two of whom will be on the same team. Williams and Anthony and Stoudemire and Roy and Yao Ming may surprise, but they are most likely to have outstanding careers as silver or bronze medal superstars. There is no shame in that. They will have impressive Hall of Fame company. But on their own it is foolish to think they can lead a team to a title without another superstar or two on board. Especially in the era of the Heat.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
Notice, the one achievable player is Paul.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Jul 31, 2010 2:42 AM EDT up reply actions
I also think you have to be a little lucky
A lot of the players that have won titles were not the number 1 overall pick. If the teams that draft number 1 overall knew then what I know now, they may have drafted differently. Who knew DWade would be the player that he has become? He didn’t really elevate his game until the season they won the championship. Even Kobe (drafted 13), had to develop into the player that he has become. I think you need to have one of those Gold/Silver/Bronze players on your team already, like Paul Pierce, and then bring in that player or players on the same level to get the actual ring.
Nobody really knows who the stud of this draft will be. It could be someone that’s not even being thought of right now. Or it could be one of the top 5. Favors has just as good of a chance as any. If he’s developed properly and can get to at least a silver/gold level, the Nets will at least have the foundation.
04 pistons had a top 15 players? Even 08 celtics you can make a case that when on the same team those guys are not top 15 in the league.
How bout we put up a competitive team that we will actually want to watch, and see them grow, good enough for me…
I am going to turn this team around 360 Degrees- Jason Kidd
If you look at the article’s rating, it is numerically calculated.
The problem with “hey, how about we put up a competitive team and see what happens” leads to the overpay and overestimation of your own players (less salary cap room), a better record (worse draft position), and a general lockout of ANY possibility of a Championship. Its what most teams do in the league, driven by market pressure.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
exception
The 04 – 05 Detroit Pistons may be the exception to these rules.
The team was full of B level players.
Chauncey Billups – late bloomer, attitude problem early in his career. Didn’t blossom until 03 under Larry Brown
Richard Hamilton great shooter and tenacious defender – did a good job on kobe
Rasheed Wallace – never wanted to be “the man” in Portland but was a great low post scorer
Ben Wallace – just defense and hair! His D on Shaq was the key to beating LA
Those 2 Piston teams had no superstar tha could take over a game. Rip, Sheed, or Billups could drop 30 any night but rarely did.
Defense, Rebounding, and Coaching can get you a title too
EXACTLY!!!
The “Exception” seems to be the most obtainable opportunity here.
We have a good coach who believes in defense and rebounding. And those Dallas players all peaked under Avery. Not one player has exceeded the level of excellence they achieved under Avery since he was gone. I like our chances of building maybe a Young Detroit type of TEAM.
The NETS are coming!
interesting that you all mention that pistons team -
they had two players that make the list of superstars in Chauncy Billups and Ben Wallace. Although they were not dominant for most of their careers, for a two to three year span, they dominated the league. So they really were not just a cast of good players that overachieved.
by shot-a-reality on Jul 31, 2010 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Disagree.
Taking the 3 year span (from 2004-2006):
Chauncey – 27.8
Big Ben – 21.2
Neither are anywhere near the 42 club. I’m in the minority, but I believe that Ben Wallace was an overrated defender. He was a very good weakside defender and a good/great rebounder, but even if you just took his 3 year peak I don’t think he’d make any all-century defense teams.
When relating it to the theory posed, I would argue that both Wallace and Billups are fringe Bronze players.
I’m in the minority, but I believe that Ben Wallace was an overrated defender.
Yeah, he was WAY overrated: He flat out SUCKED:
2001-02 NBA Defensive Player of the Year
2002-03 NBA Defensive Player of the Year
2004-05 NBA Defensive Player of the Year
2005-06 NBA Defensive Player of the Year
2001-02 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
2001-02 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
2002-03 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
2002-03 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2003-04 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
2003-04 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2004-05 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
2004-05 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
2005-06 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
2005-06 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2006-07 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
MVP Award Shares
2001-02 NBA 0.019 (10)
2002-03 NBA 0.028 (8)
2003-04 NBA 0.020 (7)
Offensive Rebounds
2000-01 NBA 303 (2)
2001-02 NBA 318 (2)
2002-03 NBA 293 (1)
2003-04 NBA 324 (2)
2004-05 NBA 292 (3)
2005-06 NBA 301 (1)
2006-07 NBA 303 (2)
2009-10 NBA 245 (7)
Total Rebounds
2000-01 NBA 1052 (1)
2001-02 NBA 1039 (2)
2002-03 NBA 1126 (1)
2003-04 NBA 1006 (2)
2004-05 NBA 902 (3)
2005-06 NBA 923 (4)
2006-07 NBA 821 (6)
Blocks
2000-01 NBA 186 (9)
2001-02 NBA 278 (1)
2002-03 NBA 230 (3)
2003-04 NBA 246 (2)
2004-05 NBA 176 (2)
2005-06 NBA 181 (5)
2006-07 NBA 156 (9)
Steals
2003-04 NBA 143 (6)
2005-06 NBA 146 (7)
Defensive Rating
1999-00 NBA 96.3 (8)
2000-01 NBA 94.0 (5)
2001-02 NBA 92.9 (1)
2002-03 NBA 90.0 (1)
2003-04 NBA 87.5 (1)
2004-05 NBA 94.0 (3)
2005-06 NBA 95.2 (3)
2006-07 NBA 94.8 (2)
Defensive Win Shares
2000-01 NBA 6.0 (3)
2001-02 NBA 7.2 (1)
2002-03 NBA 7.9 (1)
2003-04 NBA 9.1 (1)
2004-05 NBA 6.7 (1)
2005-06 NBA 6.9 (2)
2006-07 NBA 6.6 (2)
When you say you’re in the minority, that is one hell of a minority. Like in minority of the entire league.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
There is, currently on the Nets, not a player who could have started for that Pistons team.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Jul 31, 2010 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Although they were not dominant for most of their careers, for a two to three year span, they dominated the league. So they really were not just a cast of good players that overachieved.
I really don’t agree. Look at Wallace’s stats and awards over an extended length of time. He is All-Defense, and All-NBA. The guy dominated the league defensively for a very long while. And you also have to use the eye-ball test. Rasheed Wallace was HoF talent (as Gina likes to bring up), near Silver level Player, who had issues. He played his best ball in Detroit. It was a total luxury to have a player of his skill level, especially on defense, as your third best player. Rasheed was actually a greatish player (even received a couple of MVP votes) who habitually under-achieved, even in Detroit.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Jul 31, 2010 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions
If you read the article Billups was calculated as a Bronze level superstar, I believe 96th all time.
But you have to calculate the odds on this. It is not just the winners of the championship, its the losers of it, and the Conference finals losers. What Detroit did was like winning the lotto. Not a strategy to be emulated.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
Well I would say
That 3 years as legit title contenders and walking away with one title and coming up just 8 points short of another. And the beat a Laker team with 4 HOF Platinum players. That’s why they are the example. It can be done. It has been done.
The NETS are coming!
The Lakers did not have 4 Platinum players. Read the article. Its not just teams that win, it all the “final four” teams that are invited to the dance. Now, if you plan is to build a “Hoosiers” team, that’s really not genius plan.
Further of course. There is not single player on the Nets who could start on that Hoosiers Detroit team. They are not even in line to have the quality of players that make up the furthest end of the limit of what makes a Championship team.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Jul 31, 2010 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions
The Nets Are Building The Right Way
The Nets have four players with great potential to be a part of something big: Devin Harris, Brook Lopez, Derrick Favors and Terrence Williams. Harris is in his prime now and should blossom again under Avery Johnson. Lopez is already in my opinion a top 5 center and should continue to get better on both ends throughout his career. Favors is an athletic freak who is quite raw but can help right away defensively. Williams can fill the stat sheet, run the floor and bring energy to the team. With those four, the Nets are in good but not great shape.
The Nets already have legitimate role players that would thrive on championship teams. Lee is an athletic, talented shooter and defender, Farmar is already a two-time champion back-up, Outlaw would be excellent off the bench because of his clutch shooting, James seems to be a workhorse with excellent attitude and Petro is a solid backup. Humphries I like but I don’t see him staying here for very much longer. Zoubek and Uzoh are expendable and are merely filling out spots (I’m shocked Zoubek has lasted this long, he provides very little outside of rebounding).
What’s next? The Nets need to acquire a starting forward or shooting guard who can take over a game and set the tone. Is that piece Carmelo Anthony? Maybe, I just don’t see the Nets getting him.
Can the Nets get Chris Paul? Doubtful, but I would give up Harris, Outlaw and three first rounders to get him. A lineup of Paul, Lee, Williams, Favors and Lopez would be fun to watch, reminiscent of the Kidd Era. If they had to take on Okafor, that’s fine, he could come off the bench next to Petro making the Nets formidable in their frontcourt. They could also buy out Okafor, Prohkorov can afford it.
What’s likely? Building through the draft. If the Nets don’t get the number 1 overall pick, Harrison Barnes, there is some good talent in the top 4. The Nets could draft Kyrie Irving, who looks ridiculous, and trade Harris and future picks for a legitimate swingman.
Granted, all this is assuming the Nets continue to stink, which is doubtful. Avery Johnson and the rest of the staff should turn this team into minimum a 30-win team, they are too talented and athletic not to do so.
by ZR on Jul 31, 2010 3:32 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
How?
You’re actually going to sit there and tell me that if the Nets added a star, like Paul or Anthony to this team, the Nets won’t be able to compete with other elite teams?
Lopez compares favorably to almost any center in the league outside of Dwight Howard. Lopez can and will do well against guys like Bynum. Harris is clearly a number 2-3 on a championship team but is still very good because of his athleticism and ability to get to the hole and get fouls. Remember when he was playing with Carter, a talented guard next to him, he flourished, if the Nets added a star swingman to Harris, expect him to return to his 2008 level.
Favors can be great and also could be a 2-3 on a championship team. Or he could be a bust, only time will tell, but he has some serious talent.
You’re telling me that Williams isn’t an athletic freak who fills the stat sheet. The Shawn Marion comparisons are valid, he just needs to find some consistency with his jump shot.
I never said any of those guys are stars, I specifically wrote they could be part of something big, not the entire solution. Read before you post.
by ZR on Aug 1, 2010 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
You’re actually going to sit there and tell me that if the Nets added a star, like Paul or Anthony to this team, the Nets won’t be able to compete with other elite teams?
Clearly you did not read the article.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 1, 2010 6:49 PM EDT up reply actions
The Nets have four players with great potential to be a part of something big: Devin Harris, Brook Lopez, Derrick Favors and Terrence Williams.
None of these players are Championship level lead players. The Nets are filled with good role players. The HARD, the very difficult to get players are all missing from this Dynasty plan.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
Completely agree.
The only players on the roster who could obtain any medal would be Favors and Brook.
I’d say Brook is a fringe bronze-player, but I could make a case for him not being able to reach Bronze.
I’d say Favors peak would be Silver, but he’ll most likely be bronze and it’s very possible he won’t even reach medal caliber.
I thought the comparison to McDyess was a good one.
A very explosive player. And when he got hurt he was beginning to be in Bronze level, finally. If not injured he really would have continued on, and solidified the metal. But it took SIX years to even get to the beginning of that. That means when people are thinking of the future for Favors they have to have their eyes much further down the road than they seem to be. Its not 1 year, or 2 years. Its is likely 4-6 years before he even gets close to being this Bronze level. IF he even develops as fast as McDyess, who was a pretty good player early on.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Jul 31, 2010 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Yea I know...
Read my post…I said they should be a minimum 30-win team, did I say anything about competing for a title anytime soon?
by ZR on Aug 1, 2010 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I hope one day the McDyess comparison is laughable...
Don’t know for certain, who does, but I would guess he’s better than McDyess long-term AND short. There’s just no way to tell. Speculation that he could be the next Howard has been flying around, CYA style, with all of the front office after coming up short of their own expectations in FAcy. But- what if they’re right? It is possible. Just not likely. Platinum level players come from somewhere, and as was pointed out, he could develop into a top 101. Probably not Platinum. But, he could. I think you take the chance on that. Kobe didn’t go top ten.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_NBA_Draft
I think that says it all. 7 players from that 1996 draft went to the Finals. Plug that into the Superstar Equation! I mean fact is BLo could EXPLODE this season!!! We don’t know. Maybe he is the next Duncan?!? How do any of us know?
Duncan never averaged better than 25.5 ppg, 12 rgp, and 3 asts with 2.5 blocks.
He had 21, 11, and 2, with 2.5 blocks in his second season.
And in his 3rd season (not his best), 23, 12, and 4 with 2.2 blocks.
Look at BLo 18, 8, and 2 with 1.7 blocks last year.
Do you really not believe its possible for BLo to add 5 points, 4 rbnds, and 2 asts over the next season or two with a better team, a real coach, with scouts (dare to dream), and better player cohesion on both sides of the floor? If he does improve his game that much, given his feel/finesse around the rim, excellent foot work, multi-faceted, and annually expanding repertoire of offensive moves in the post and passing skills do you really not think that he has tremendous potential?
And thats just BLo. Who knows what we are going to get out of Favors, DJ, Harris with a coach, Morrow, Outlaw, TWill…
We are a young team with talent and leadership. Why would we not expect the best outcome!
GONETS!
Yeah, Brook Lopez is on the edge of becoming one of the great players in the league. Keep telling yourself that.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 1, 2010 2:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Never said that...
Just said that it could possibly happen. Trying not to be so pessimistic. Why not.
See me and KV get vilified a lot for being “pessimistic,” but sometimes you guys gotta step back and survey the situation from an objective point of view.
The line bewteen realism and pessimism is larger than many think, but it is often blurred by so-called “fandom.”
you are leaning way more to a pessimistic side than a realistic side, because in all realism devin harris is 1 year removed from an all star season, brook lopez was considered and was questionable as to why he wasnt an all star ( only due to the teams record), Favors can be a beast with all the physical aspects he have that you cant teach and the coaches that he is surrounded by, and say what you would like about TWill, but during the end of the season last year he was playing at a high level, dont judge him by his intents in summer league, which it honestly doesnt matter what the record is in the end. So in all realism for any of us to judge would be premature as to either being pessimistic or optimistic, atleast let us positive people post our opinion without some argument to try and ruin the mood
So in all realism for any of us to judge would be premature as to either being pessimistic or optimistic,
Exactly.
And then…
atleast let us positive people post our opinion without some argument to try and ruin the mood
We took a step back.
No, I get it...
I mean look, I am certainly not ringing the Dynasty bell over here. I am just saying, as I have many many times in the past (while everyone was crying about LBJ), that championship caliber clubs develop from within/through the draft. All of the mighty 101 had to come from something, had to develop from some starting point. Why then would I, as yes a FAN, not hope, with some reasonable evidence to suggest potential, that we might be able to grow some of our own talent?
I think that’s really my main point. I am very much a fan. So, when I see something worth hoping for- I do.
“Realism” (and the supposedly wide margin between it and Pessimism), as you used to define your stance, is the actually the gray area that is Relativism.
You elect to assume that the club will not truly advance, but merely become a middling playoff contender and then fade into the nothing without another Superstar. I elect to hold out hope, as a biased FAN, that BLo and Co. may show more growth than expected.
In truth, you have NO IDEA what WILL happen. Neither do I. No one does. We will interpret the data as we please until it is damning or beyond conjecture; currently it is neither. That is Relativism.
You claiming the mantle of “Realist” in no way legitimates your perspective. It just makes you sound more reasonable to yourself, and appear to have a credible perspective to others.
Evidence suggests that BLo’s numbers are trending nicely. His goal this season should be 20/10. If he makes that average, particularly before the All-Star break of his 3rd season I will be happy and continue to hold out hope for significant gains going forward.
I am not opposed to anything you said except:
You elect to assume that the club will not truly advance, but merely become a middling playoff contender and then fade into the nothing without another Superstar. I elect to hold out hope, as a biased FAN, that BLo and Co. may show more growth than expected.
KV and I have given circumstantial evidence which displays the lack of a true superstar player will inhibit said team from taking that next step and becoming a championship contender. The Nets will never get past the second round of the playoffs without adding another superstar caliber player, be it through the draft, trade or free agency (IMO).
Now of course none of us know what will really happen. The experts that are paid to analyze the sport and make educated guesses based on their knowledge and the available resources don’t know. No one knows. That’s what makes sports so intriguing.
I should add: I also have “hope” that the Nets will grow more than expected and become a competitive team, but I find it illogical to share my hopes because I’m sure we all have the same hopes for the Nets franchise and its players.
I hope Lopez can be a top-3 center.
I hope Harris can run this team.
I hope T-Will can find his niche and fit in Avery’s system.
I hope Outlaw will perform at a high-level now that he is getting significant minutes.
I hope Damion James is the steal of the draft.
I hope Favors can develop into a dominating player.
I hope this team can compete for a championsip within the next 3 years.
I’m just sure those things will happen, and so I express my views for why they will/will not happen.
That's fine
I think we agree more than you realize, I “hope” a lot of things as well. But overall, we are all reading tea leaves, and I am suggesting that I would interpret BLo’s numbers as trending nicely toward a break out season.
If he has one, we may have a true “Franchise Center” as people like to throw around. He’ll still have to live up to that, but the numbers suggest that all things remain possible.
For example, I think Favors has big upside. I wouldn’t say anything about he could be this, he could be that until we see him in the season. Front office has lots of faith and Avery seems to think he can be a Howard- but apparently Washington and Phili thought otherwise. Guess we’ll find out. But, if he were a Howard caliber player, he would be very much worth developing and could, in the right environment, produce big wins.
I want to see some reasons why I shouldn’t believe that we might be able to develop a 101 level player from within. The team is SO young right now that I just don’t see how you can argue essentially that we may have an OK playoff contender, but that no-one can carry the team from within.
Its not like BLo is in his 5th season and I am saying he’s gonna hit his stride any time now. Favors is 18!!! He’s never played a single NBA game!!!! He could be a TOTAL BUST or he could make Amare look like a school girl with bad knees.
I agree.
But, you need to have a dominant perimeter scorer to compete with the elite teams.
As you said, we agree for the most part, all I’m saying is that the Nets as currently constructed will not compete for a championship. But, that’s just it. The Nets won’t remain as currently constructed the players will develop and they will bring in more talent to bolster the roster whether it be through trades and free-agency with all the cap space that remains or through the draft.
Gun to my head, I would say the Nets will be in the Eastern Conference Finals within 4 years. But, who knows, they could end up with Barnes next year or Melo, so whatever happens — happens.
It is more than that. It is as they are constructed, as their record gets better, as their own players become more loved despite their flaws, their chances of getting the TWO (let’s be honest here) or even 1 player that everyone else needs as well, dramatically decrease. Cap space goes away, draft position falls, moderate success lulls the fans into thinking they really have a chance.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 1, 2010 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, I don’t think the Nets are too far away from being a championship contender.
I think one great/elite perimeter scorer could really put this team over the top. I think what’s best for the Nets next year is to develop the young players and whatever happens-happens. Preferably, the Nets have moderate success and get lucky with the draft (alah the Bulls of ‘08) and obtain that perimeter scorer. Realistically, this team will need to find a way to get Melo or they’re gonna have to go through 2-3 years of growing pains.
Also, I’m not sure the Nets will be able to get out the East for the next 4-6 years with the super-friends down in South Beach.
I just hope on June 28 next year we hear Harrison Barnes say: Next year, I’ll be taking my talents to Newark.
he was a bench player, a 6th man
TWill could become him in a heartbeat
I agree. He could become him. If T-Will can improve his shot enough that it parallels Ginobli’s then we have our perimeter scorer. But, I doubt that.
Ive said the nets need to surround him with the shooting coaches help improve his shot to be more consistent (which i can see as very probable if he puts in the work), if so he would be better than Manu due to his ability to pass, mind you manu had Tim Duncan getting double teamed most of the time he shot from deep, most of his play was at the basket
Come on now. Twill=Ginobili???
He is our 3rd strong SG. Third string on a team that was horrible last year.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions
sigh
first off, forget last year’s team being horrible, it has NOTHING to do with this year’s team. Actually, if it weren’t for TWill that team would have been the WORST in NBA history. There’s evidence for this, as I’ve already pointed out.
I’ll post it again since you have refused to address it:
- The Nets won 5 of their last 12 games (OK, not impressive, but given how bad the team was and how little games we had won before that, you have to give TWillhis props for helping the team become more competititve). During that stretch TWill averaged nearly 15 pts, 7 rebs and 6 assists. The Nets had collected a 7-63 in the previous 70 games.
- The Nets got HALF their total wins (6) between March and April, which is when TWill broke out, averaging 14.1 ppg, 6.8 rpg and 5.4 apg over those 2 months.
Coincidence, riiiiiiiiiiight???? Now, those are FACTS and that is ACTUAL evidence that backs up what I’m saying. People need to cut the crap about the 12 win team.
And no, he isn’t 3rd string. That is your opinion, and that is you making ridiculous assumptions based on your BIASED judgement.
still waiting for an answer to this
This is the only post here that contains ACTUAL EVIDENCE that backs up a statement.
What statement? What’s your point?
What does last season have to do with this season and a completely new coaching staff?
Andres, you and I are on the same page in terms of how good T-Will will (or can) be. If you read my long post above you’ll see that, but KV and I are just reiterating what Avery has said so far this off-season.
did you read the post?
I stated that TWill made the team more competitive and that him breaking out and playing so exceptionally well helped the team get more wins. And I backed that coment with actual evidence.
Reading what you want into Avery’s words (again, the ones kv cherry picks) or the team moves is not a fact nor an evidence. it’s your OPINION.
The Golden Rule in the pursuit of Championships is “Do not overvalue your own players”. Unfortunately this goes against the Golden Rule of Fandom, which is think the very, very best of your players, which is why fans don’t run teams, or at least shouldn’t.
Blogs and forums are a curious blend of Fandom (Hey, my team is the best!), and pretend GMing (Hey, what serious and sober things can my team do to better?). They clash. For some the fun of it is doing the GMish thing without falling to the problems of being a Fan.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 1, 2010 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
just a whole bunch of people “acting” like fans, and playing GM, yea you dont overevaluate while trading for players or signing guys, but moving forward i think it is considered inspiration and hope, you are not a GM, you are one of the most negative fans, and hesitant to give a player credit due to your fear of possibly being wrong, Even Kobe came into the league with a question mark (ie being traded by the hornets), Dwight howard was huge bust potential, ooo and Rajon Rondo was a mere shadow to the rest of his team, but somehow they are on the top of your lists, believe it or not, hard work and dedication a lot of our players can become superstars within, but youre not about that, you have no reasoning, only prejudgement with no ability to see talent, so I wouldn’t expect you to change your mind
I think that praising highly flawed players is not only failing to be a fan, its failing to use your eyes.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Agree with all these hopes.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 1, 2010 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
How are you to post things that “Twill has Hall of Fame potential” in public (which you have said), and not expect an argument?
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 1, 2010 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
never said he was a mini Lebron, i just said he was a good player. See how all the small minded people just follow KV
nets are young, building and improving coming off a season with no leadership
TWill can speak for himself, and if you cant hear, just look at the plays or the stats, from a rookie who was given barely any playing time all season
???
I wrote a whole article about how T-Will was the best rookie in the league for the last 2 months of the season.
You’re preaching to the choir.
You’re preaching to the choir.
Since when does “best rookie for two months” = Hall of Fame Potential, or even “the potential to be a Ginobili”.
The thing is, he’s got skillz, or even game, but he is undersized and can’t shoot, and though he has a decent handle for a SG, it isn’t game transforming. It is just the kind of player that if he found the right spot he could do pretty good in the league, but definitely there are tons of wrong spots for this kind of player, and the Nets are likely one of those. This is not a Ginobili (Bronze level) or Hall of Fame type player, especially not in the context of the Nets, and the Nets seem to agree.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Disagree.
I think T-Will has the potential to be a Bronze level player, but my gut tells me he won’t reach it.
The comparison to Ginobli doesn’t even make sense, I was being tongue-in-cheek in reference to Ben.
But, as I said you and I differ on T-Will’s ability and potential. I really think he can be a fringe all-star type of player. T-Will is undersized height-wise (I’d say he’s 6’3-6’4), but he definitely has an NBA body in terms of muscle-mass.
Golden Rule, Do not overvalue your own players.
As an aside…Muscle mass? What SGs do you know that become dominant due to muscle mass?
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Don’t think it’s overvaluing T-Will to say that he can be a fringe all-star.
The muscle mass comment was in reference to you claiming T-Will was undersized.
I understand. To say that he can be a fringe allstar is different than saying he can be a Bronze level player. A bronze level player is:
Bronze Medal Superstar – These players all got recognition annually of being among the 15 best players in the game during a majority of their careers.
He debateably isn’t even the third best player at his position on his own team, as of now. I realize that you have said that it is not likely that he becomes a Bronze, but it seems even more than unlikely.
I will perfectly admit that he could become a fringe Allstar, which suggests maybe two appearances, but this is top, top end in my book, and probably not with the Nets.
As far as muscle mass, the reason why I asked you to name a SG who dominated DUE to his muscle mass, is that SG is the position where muscle mass seems to have the least impact. There have even been PGs (Tim Hardaway, Byron Davis, etc) who have abused defenses due to muscle mass, but at SG I can hardly think of any. And it certainly isn’t anything that can make up for lack of an outside shot.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions
If we’re talking about “top, top end” for T-Will I would say it’s higher than a fringe all-star. If we’re talking “top, top end” for a player with his athleticism, court vision, ability to penetrate a defense and BBIQ I would say the “top, top end” for Terrence would be a top 25 player in the league.
Now, don’t say I’m committing the cardinal sin that is, overvaluing your own players, because we’re speaking “top, top end” not what he will most likely become.
Well, KV you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth. I wasn’t using “musle mass” as a reason why T-Will can excel in the league, I was using it to counter your claim that he is “undersized.” You can’t criticize him for being undersized and then question why size matters.
It should also be noted that: T-Will is the same height as Wade and the same weight, so to argue that T-Will will be inhibited by his size isn’t a sufficient argument.
You also constantly argue that he isn’t even the best player at his own position on his own team, but I beg to differ. If you ask any GM in the league which one they would prefer of the three (Lee, Williams and Morrow) I think it is more than likely that all of them would pick T-Will. Now you can argue that this is because of potential and not based on merit, I can’t argue that, but I can tell you that you can teach a player to shoot. You can’t teach athleticism, court vision and a strong-core.
Remember: We are assuming that Avery won’t start T-Will and that he won’t be getting the majority of the minutes at the 2, but as the word implies we are going off an assumption, we don’t know what Avery plans to do with T-Will. So to claim that he is relegated to a third-string SG isn’t fair.
Can I ask why you’re so critical of T-Will and not of Lee?
If we’re talking "top, top end" for a player with his athleticism, court vision, ability to penetrate a defense and BBIQ I would say the "top, top end" for Terrence would be a top 25 player in the league.
You convenient leave out his flaws (size, shot). And this is STILL not Bronze, which is top 15, and regularly.
Now, don’t say I’m committing the cardinal sin that is, overvaluing your own players, because we’re speaking "top, top end" not what he will most likely become.
You can also overvalue the top, top end. In fact this usually is who teams end up overvaluing players. The overestimate their TTE, and hold onto them too long, hoping.
Well, KV you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth. I wasn’t using "musle mass" as a reason why T-Will can excel in the league, I was using it to counter your claim that he is "undersized." You can’t criticize him for being undersized and then question why size matters.
I’m talking through ONE side of my mouth, the middle side. The criticism of his height was key to understanding why he is not going to become a dominant SG, at that height. Saying he has “muscle mass” then calls up the question, What SG do you know dominates through his muscle mass?
It should also be noted that: T-Will is the same height as Wade and the same weight, so to argue that T-Will will be inhibited by his size isn’t a sufficient argument.
Wade is a once or twice in a generation player, and he isn’t such because of his “muscle mass”. Twill is not D Wade.
If you ask any GM in the league which one they would prefer of the three (Lee, Williams and Morrow) I think it is more than likely that all of them would pick T-Will. Now you can argue that this is because of potential and not based on merit, I can’t argue that, but I can tell you that you can teach a player to shoot. You can’t teach athleticism, court vision and a strong-core.
I guess I can ask the GM of the Nets, the team that went out an spent money on a player who plays his position…(Hello?) And surely understands that Lee is starting.
Remember: We are assuming that Avery won’t start T-Will and that he won’t be getting the majority of the minutes at the 2, but as the word implies we are going off an assumption, we don’t know what Avery plans to do with T-Will. So to claim that he is relegated to a third-string SG isn’t fair.
We know what Avery has said. He has claimed that Twill is a 1-2, 2-1, but in the next breathe puts Uzoh as the 3rd string PG in camp. We know what Avery values: defense, organized ball movement within a system, and outside shooting, three of the main weaknesses of Twill’s, and three things that Lee does better, not to mention question of attitude (known as strike four). Sure, if you are bent on overvaluing your players you can claim that Twill will play the majority of the minutes, but then what will you say when reality sets in?
But the larger point is that even if he squeaks out good minutes at the SG, the team brought in a player to play his position (not the sign of the belief in him), and the very battle on one of the worst teams in the league suggests that NONE of them are really headed toward “Bronze” level play.
I’m not say that Twill is a bad player, he’s a bad player for this team, and that those that LOVE him in the fanbase are overvaluing his top, top end.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 7:47 PM EDT up reply actions
The bottom line is, if he isn’t going to be a Bronze Level guy, he is not a major component of a path to the championship.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions
We know what Avery values: defense, organized ball movement within a system, and outside shooting, three of the main weaknesses of Twill’s, and three things that Lee does better, not to mention question of attitude (known as strike four).
TWill helps ball movement, come on now. He is the only player on this roster than Harris who can create for others. And stop saying outside shooting is one of TWill’s weaknesses and that that could one of the reason why Lee will be ahead of him bc Lee didn’t shoot all that much better at all last season. Just check the numbers. TWill plays D too, and he can become better at it. Avery said he made defensive strides during the SL. And again, you just want to focus on TWill’s flaws while COMPLETELY ignoring his tremendous sttrengths, which make him a SPECIAL player. His skill set is UNIQUE and NECESSARY for this team. We have no other player, NO ONE, who can bring to the table what TWill does. Lee’s abilities to rebound, handle and pass the basket ball are nonexistent. You just compare what you want to, and again there is isn’t such a significant difference between TWill’s and Lee’s shooting and defense to make up for the other aspects of the game TWill is a far superior player at.
Ball movement is not “create for others”. This is basketball 101.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
he is undersized and can’t shoot
Don’t know why you don’t criticize Lee as much as you do TWill, then. Lee is an undersized 2 guard. TWill is not undersized for the 2 and he’s way stronger than Lee. As for shooting, Lee is very inconsistent. He shot .338 from 3 pt territory last season. TWill shot .310.
Also, you only focus on TWill’s flaws while ignoring his strengths. It’s his tremendous ability to rebound and pass the basketball, that are not very common among wing players, which makes him special. Not to mention his great versatility to play the 3 perimeter positions.
Save the: T-Will is 6’6, everywhere I look he’s listed at 6’6. Draft express says he’s 6’6. He’s not 6’6, he’s 6’4 at most.
I am taking your word on this.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Well I’m 6’2, maybe 6’3 in Timbs and I was pretty much eye-to-eye with him. But, even if you look at T-Will at the game or if you watch on TV, you’ll see that he’s an inch taller than Harris and about the same height as Lee.
I agree.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
He's not 6-4.
He’s 6-5 wthout shoes, and 6-6.25 with shoes.
http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/?page=&year=2009&source=All&sort2=DESC&draft=0&pos=0&sort=
That is a FACT you cannot refute. This, not your or kv’s assumptions, guesses from Avery’s words, is a fact. It’s funny how you want to pass your opinion on Avery’s words as a fact, yet you refuse to admit an EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. Yeah, we should trust your eye over the official measures. Hey, TWill may have got smaller, who knows!
You did say that he had Hall of Fame potential.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I can only assume that you are implying that I believe that
“TWill has HOF Potential”? I have not said this. I think he’s a damn good player and a kid w/ a lot of skills and potential. HOF Potential? That I don’t know…
The response was to Ben, who has said this.
He is your third string SG.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 2:05 AM EDT up reply actions
Says team moves and what the coach values.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions
just because avery doesnt know how to use him so effectively doesnt make him any less of a player
Avery has a system, and while Devin Harris is there who he has already focused his system around, he will continue to play that system, which is put the ball in your pg’s hands and let him distribute, so the shooting of Morrow and the Defense of CLee might make TWill the less efficient in this system, but run the second unit through him, give him the ball and he will break down any teams defense, not many players can do that and do it as dominant as he can. Again you are basing everything off of someone else (ie avery speaking highly of Morrow and Lee) Do me a favor, for a week just watch basketball, dont start quoting people, and come in here with your own opinion, not a plagiarist one
just because avery doesnt know how to use him so effectively doesnt make him any less of a player
I don’t really care what he is as “player”. He is not a player in a video game, we are not playing fantasy basketball. He’s a player on a TEAM. And so what the coach thinks of him directly affects his VALUE.
All my comments are in regard to his value to the Nets. Not what he can do in pick up games, or even on another team.
He is the NETS third string SG.
So one of the worst teams in the league have somehow found 2 guys they think are more valuable than Twill. As a player though, he is not the next Ginobili.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions
OK their big guy, i think we have heard the argument many a times before, like a broken record with some of the most useless comments, just because avery is looking at the team and putting Morrow and Clee in front of TWill now, doesnt mean that wont change, like i have stated the nets will be throwing out a bunch of different line ups, expect terrance to find his way into one of the top7 man rotation spot. By the way he can come in off the bench and break defenses down just like Ginobli, he might not be able to shoot it as well, but he rebounds and moves the ball way better. but whatever it doesnt matter, youre just waiting for the nets to start winning, then you will be jumping all on the band wagon. mid season get at me, we will have the cousins, TWill, whatever debate ya want
Sooooooo.
This super elite player to be IS their 3rd string SG, but “things might change” and he will suddenly become a huge player in the league?
Yeah.
He is the 3rd string SG on one of the worst teams in the League! Hello?
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions
And the Nets mind, and Avery’s mind.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
No. I read and understand their words:
“Early on, Devin, Courtney Lee, Outlaw…not sure about the four…Brook Lopez. Anthony Morrow could come in beat everyone out at the 2. There will be a lot of trial and error. Maybe we don’t get there (a set starting lineup) til the All Star break”.
Twill is behind, let me say it again, BEHIND a 2nd string SG who Avery thinks has the possibility of starting. That means that he is BEHIND two starting level SGs. No matter how much you want to twist and turn, these are the facts.
You can go ahead and say that Avery is crazy, but it is pretty benumbed to not see that Avery is making a pretty clear expression of his judgment, and that judgment is that Twill, coming off his 1st year and summer league, is the 3rd string SG.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions
NO
Avery doesn’t say that there. You read what you want to. Avery said Morrow can beat EVERYONE at the 2. Why are you assuming he doesn’t include TWIll in that “everyone”? It’s ridiculous. It’s YOU the one who twists and spins.
Also, Avery also said that everything could change. He says that early on Lee will start but that there will be a lot of trial. He didn’t even have the chance to practice with those guys and you’re assumign TWill is 3rd string SG. Do you realize how RIDICULOUS that sounds? AJ himself admits nothing is set ion stone, and, again, he has said NOTHING about TWill being 3rd string SG, it’s you reading what you want into those words. I already replied to NBRITM yesterday when he posted that quote. You can read into those words whatever you WANT to, but that doesn’t prove anything, sorry.
Do you want me to quote Avery’ words when he said TWill showed MATURITY and LEADERSHIP in Orlando, which he believes bodes well for the future? Of course not, because that disses the ridiculous assumption you made about the Nets not believing in his future.And you have the nerve to talk about twists. That’s hypocrisy at its BEST. You read what you want to and only from the quotes you cherry pick.
Why are you assuming he doesn’t include TWIll in that "everyone"?
Because Avery is listing the starters. Morrow has already “beaten” Twill at least to begin with, as Twill does not come to Avery’s mind as a prominent player.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 4, 2010 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
LMAOOOOOOOOO
Morrow has already "beaten" Twill at least to begin with
’Nuff said.
Do you realize that he hasn’t even practiced with those guys, do you? Come on. EVERYONE at the 2 include more than just one player. It’s common sense. If he was referring just to Lee, he’d have said Lee, not EVERYONE.
I don't mean to talk for KV, but Andres...
at least to begin with
This is what KV said. He didn’t say Morrow has beat T-Will for the whole season or even after training camp.
But, all indications from Avery’s quotes are that he considers Lee and Morrow the top 2 candidates to play the 2. Come on Andres, you’re better than that.
I like T-Will’s skillset, possibly even more than you, but you have to be logical. You’re hearing what you want to hear, not what Avery is really saying.
all indications from Avery’s quotes are that he considers Lee and Morrow the top 2 candidates to play the 2
that is your opinion or the way you interpret Avery’s words (obviously ignoring when he praises TWill). That’s OK, I respect your and kv’s opinion (even tho I strongly disagree with it) when it comes down to it, just don’t act as if it’s something irrefutable, because we don’t really know what Avery’s thinking. We can only make guesses from those words. I just don’t get why some of you try to read too much into some of his words and don’t give any importance to those that endorse TWill.
You’re hearing what you want to hear
This is funny. It’s you and kv reading what you want to hear to come to the conlusion you want to.
When you fail to hear Twill’s name, but hear the names of others listed ahead of him, in failing to hear Twill’s name, you ACTUALLY hear his name. Its a hallucination really.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 4, 2010 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions
also
since we’re talking about what Aveyr says, he said he’ll let the kids battle it out, so just let them fight for their minutes and stop making assumptions when Avery hasn’t even stepped on a court with those even for a practice. Dont you think so, guys? Avery himself has made clear NOTHING is written in stone and that there will be alot of trial and we may not get a set line up until mid season.
Grasping at straws. You fail to see that Twill’s name was not on his tongue.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 4, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
also
a player starting over another doesn’t necessarily mean he’s considered better or more important. Some players are just better coming off the bench. Or do you think Pop used to consider a 50 year old Michael Finley better than Ginobili? Not comparing TWill to Manu, just giving an example of what I’m trying to say. When TWill broke out, he was coming off the bench. Was Jarvis Hayes better than him? NO.
Avery is listing the prominent players on his team, as he sees them. That he lists TWO SGs that come to his mind does not bode well for Twill at all.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 4, 2010 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah
Because Avery never praised TWill’s passing skills, court vision, terrific athleticism, defensive strides and the leadership and maturity he says TWill showed in Orlando, which he believees bodes well for the future. I have yet to hear Avery praise Courtney Lee at all. All he’s said about him is that he’ll start EARLY ON, yet making it clear that could change and that they’ll be making trials, so Lee’s starting job is nothing set in stone at all.
I just find it funny
that some of you want to read too much into certain Avery’s words you cherry pick, yet ignore or try to downplay when Avery praises TWill. That’s all what I’m saying.
Just because you praise a player’s ability doesn’t mean that he’ll get significant PT.
I hope Avery does give T-Will significant PT because I think he is the second-most talented player on the team. I really think T-Will can be a player in this league.
But, conventional wisdom tells me that Avery doesn’t see T-Will in the rotation as much as I would have hoped for. Hopefully, Avery changes his mind, but based on everything I have heard regarding the rotation it sounds like Morrow and Lee will be ahead of T-Will.
Building up his confidence (good idea), building up his trade value (good idea), making Twill fans rabid and unable to see that he obviously is the 3rd string SG right now (bad idea).
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 4, 2010 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions
TFTI, AJ, LOL
those are your assumoptions, obviously. This what I’m saying. You cherry pick the quotes, read what you want into them, and then try to downplay or spin anything good he says about TWill. And then you have the nerve to talk about twists. LOL.
Just trying to wake you up to REALITY.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Thanks Twill’s agent!
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions
So one of the worst teams in the league have somehow found 2 guys they think are more valuable than Twill.
Sigh. You have ZERO evidence to back up this. I don’t care if they spent the money on those guys, you can’t just prove they think they are mor valuable than TWill, whom they drafted with a LOTTERY pick last year, which is an insigifcant thing you seem to forget when talking about “investments”. I’d say using the 11th pick on him is a more signifcant inestment than the money they gave any FA they signed.
They spent the money on Morrow AFTER they drafted Twill. Obviously they thought the draft was something of a bust for them. Its pretty easy to see that.
What are you going to say when the season starts and he IS the 3rd string SG????
Are you still going to claim that he is one of the best young players in the league? Probably. Reality doesn’t seem to be an issue here.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagain
What are you going to say when the season starts and he IS the 3rd string SG????
are you a fortune teller or what? Could you please tell me what the winning lottery numbers will be next week?
I refer to specific evidence. What Avery says, what the team has done.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions
no
you refer to the WAY YOU INTERPRET those moves and Avery’s words. I could sit here and quote Avery’s words on TWill and the way he praises him and I would get nothing from you because you only read what you want to. It’s like banging my head against a wall.
He praises him in vagueries.
If you look closely. He has excluded him from SF completely. And he has also excluded him from PG. And the team picked up a backup SG. Hello? Conclusion?
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions
oh so typical
now you try to downplay the way he praised him. Keep cherry picking. You just choose what interest you and try to use it to come to the conclusion you WANT to come to.
I don’t deny that he praised him. In fact he deserves praise for the things Avery says. Its a question of fitting on this team. Its a question of opportunity and reality.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
you try to downplay it
and cherry pick only the words that interest you to try to read into them that TWill has no place on this team.
They are skills that DON’T FIT into Avery’s approach. What don’t you understand about that?
Why praise endlessly a style of play that will not be part of the team offense?
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Andres, I have to agree with KV on this one. He and I obviously differ on how good T-Will is, but it is obvious that right now Avery looks at him as the third-string SG.
That is ALL that I am saying. On another team he could be a good player.
The fact that a very bad team doesn’t value him though, suggests that he probably isn’t a great player in the making.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions
NO
it is obvious that right now Avery looks at him as the third-string SG.
that is YOU OPINION. And nothing but YOUR opinion.
And Avery’s opinion, and the Nets opinion.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
so you're Avery, right?
Or Billy King? That’s all I can guess for you to state that YOUR opinion is Avery’s or the Nets’. You don’t know it. You just don’t. This is getting downright hilarious.
Of course KV doesn’t know. Just as you don’t know, just as I don’t know.
All he’s saying is that the early indication from Avery is that T-Will will be relegated to the bench.
That doesn’t mean that Avery can’t see T-Will in training camp and change his mind, or change his mind during the season. It just means from all indications given by Avery he will not be given significant minutes at the 2.
All he’s saying is that the early indication from Avery is that T-Will will be relegated to the bench.
That “indication” is what he WANTS to infer from Avery’s words (again, jsut those that interest him). You don’t know what is going thru Avery’s head, I don’t either and of course kv doesn’t, yet he keeps preteding he does.
They spent the money on Morrow AFTER they drafted Twill. Obviously they thought the draft was something of a bust for them. Its pretty easy to see that.
Sigh.
Obviously? Wow. Keep pretending your guesses, thoughts and opinions are facts. Geez. After the way he ended up the season, there is no way they can think he was a bust.
Who is Morrow? An AS in the making? He is a ROLE PLAYER. Please tell me how spending 12M on him means they believe TWill was a bust,… ROTFL!
He is a ROLE player taking the ROLE of 2nd string SG. In other word words, he is taking Twill’s bench minutes. The team did not want to rely on Twill as the 2nd string SG. He is now the 3rd string SG.
Its called a demotion.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Thank you Twill’s agent!
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Where teams put the money is where they express their beliefs. They do not believe in Twill. They got a guy who can replace him, and he will.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
They do not believe in Twill. They got a guy who can replace him, and he will.
you’re just in denial mode. Keep pretending YOUR OPINIONS are FACTS.
It is not my opinion that they signed a SG who CAN SHOOT (something Twill cannot) for 4 mill a year.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
As is yours. But my refers to facts in addition to opinion.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:46 PM EDT up reply actions
no
yours refers to the WAY YOU INTERPRET the moves the team made or Avery’s words (just the ones that interest you and those you can spin so you can come to the conslusion you want to).
Only a blind person would interpret the move to sign someone who plays the same position as a POSITIVE of Twill. Its not “spin”. Its obvious.
They signed his replacement. Hello?
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:48 PM EDT up reply actions
blind
you have the nerve to call others blind? Just stop pretending your opinion is an irrefutable evidence of something you can’t even come close to being able to back up with facts.
I refer to facts. What can I say? You ignore the Morrow signing. That is called blind.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions
you reading it means they don't believe in TWill is what you refer to as a fact
it’s just your opinion. Is this so hard to understand?
Because you cannot say ANYTHING about the Morrow signing shows that you willfully ignore important facts just to go on believing what you want.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
you can read into Morrow's signing whatever you want
but that’s your opinion, not a fact, yet you keep stating the Nets don’t believe in TWill’s future as if you were Billy King or Avery, and obviously you have no evidence, nothing, to back up that statement, it’s that simple.
The the girl you are dating starts seeing other guys, you can pretend that she is WAY into you, but you probably should open your eyes and see what’s up. The Nets not only started dating Morrow, they signed him.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Its called an analogy. Try one sometime. :)
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Andres all of your arguments regarding T-Will are based on speculation and what you believe Avery should do.
KV’s are based on Avery’s words.
I'm sorry whaaaaaaaat???????????
kv’s comments and arguments are nothing but a bunch of SPECULATION, BIASED GUESSES AND ASSUMPTIONS he made from Avery’s words (again, jsut the ones he cherry picks, while ignoring the ones that go against his arguments)
Early on, Devin, Courtney Lee, Outlaw…not sure about the four…Brook Lopez. Anthony Morrow could come in beat everyone out at the 2. There will be a lot of trial and error.
…
so what?
Does he say there that TWill is 3rd string? Or that he doesn’t believe in his future? I can come here and quote Avery saying he believes TWill showed great maturity and leadership in Orlando which he thinks bodes well for the future. Yet, you have some here who rip TWill because they say TWill just chuked all the time and perturbed Favors’ development.
Also, Avery himself admits NOTHING is set in stone and that the lineup could change, so what’s your point’ He actually says Morrow could beat EVERYONE. That everyone includes TWill, not only CLee, so he’s in the mix for the starting 2 job.
the most important words in this quote are the first 2
especially considering the time of year they were made(July)
And nothing, as far was we know, has changed.
What is key is that when this quote was made, Twill supporters were even THEN claiming that he was going to be big in the Net plans.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 4, 2010 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions
because he is that good, and has that much potential. and the fact that he is our 3rd string sg is just a bad move by avery, to fit his system better. Give him a big role and his averages would be up there, and mind you he does everything on the court, improving his shooting would only add to an already ridiculously loaded stat line, did i say he was a HOF’er yet? no but his ability to make plays and fill the stat sheet the way he does gives him a really good chance.
Believe me I think T-Will was a steal, I’ve said numerous times that he can be a fringe all-star, but HoF talent? Really?
i think with his athleticism and BBiq, he could be considered
i wouldnt count him off the list until he is closer to mid career because he just has a ton of potential ready to bust out
it might sound a little far fetched but possible and more so than most players in the league, How are you going to tell me no when the kid has played only one season? what if he starts averaging triple doubles? what then??
Ok.
How you gonna say Player X can’t be a Hall of Famer, he’s only played one season, he could average triple-doubles — then what?
Really? You’re better than that.
This
This is what I’m saying. kv just focus on TWill’s flaws (while exaggerating them) and refuses to talk about what makes him special.
I know
I just used Ben’s point as an example of TWill’s strengths that get ignored by kv, even if it has nothing to do with the discussion you two guys were having.
I don’t ignore his strengths, they just don’t fit on the team, as it is constructed. Or, to put it another way, the team ignores his strengths. He is their 3rd string SG.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions
He is the 3rd string SG on one of the WORST TEAMS in the league!
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 2, 2010 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Says the examination of reality. Why did they go out and spend on a SG if they have a HoF SG waiting in the wings?
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions
please
stop pretending YOUR OPINION is REALITY. You think TWill doesn’t fit or that he’s 3rd string SG, that’s OK, but that’s YOUR OPINION and the way you WANT to interpret the moves we made, stop acting if as you knew that is a fact.
It is my educated option. The reference is too REASONS why, facts which inferentially produce the conclusion.
Your opinion on the other hand seems to consists on IGNORING the facts, and just saying things like Twill is Great!
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
you have no evidence
but keep pretending that the way you interpret any signing or what Avery said is a fact. You read and interpret WHAT YOU WANT TO. Geez.
Its plain as day. The Nets do not believe in Twill’s great future.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
The Nets do not believe in Twill’s great future.
You obviously know this because you’re Billy King or Avery, I guess.
They signed Morrow. Hello? Its called “writing on the wall”.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 1:46 PM EDT up reply actions
This has me thinking about the 15 best players now
I think these 8 guys would be in most peoples top 10’s somewhere -
Lebron
Wade
Kobe
Durant
D.Howard
Paul
D.Will
Melo
Then who from 9-15 ?
Dirk , Bosh , and Gasol I guess. That makes 11.
We need 4 more! Who’s the last 4?
Nash (still), Duncan (still), Roy and maybe Rose (who I would take over Rondo).
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 3, 2010 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Cool. I think its a good question, in fact an important one, if we are going to take the top 15 as a benchmark.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 4, 2010 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions
You can’t build a title team by trying to be Detroit in 2004. Too many strange varaibles went into that. They were an anomaly that beat a team with huge chemistry problems (I honestly think the Lakers win that series easily if Phil/Shaq/Kobe/Malone were getting along).
Do I think Lopez, Favors and TWill can potentially be as valuable to a title team as Pau, Odom and Bynum? Yes. Hopefully Damion James can be as valuable as Ariza or Artest, too. I don’t see that as a stretch. The stretch is where that once-in-a-generation, HOF-level player is going to come from.
Agree.
They may be able to get that good.
The HOF may not be here yet; granted. But, if that HOF sees a very young PAU, ODOM, BYNUM situation developing with large market status, solid ownership with deep pockets, and a front office committed to winning, he’s gonna look very carefully if we try to bring him in.
Lets face it, (NOT THAT I EVER WANTED HIM HERE. EVER.) but if LBJ had really had a ready-to-go team with players of equal caliber as those you mentioned, he very likely would have come over or at least seriously considered it.
Shane I like your thoughts, but when people say things like:
Do I think Lopez, Favors and TWill can potentially be as valuable to a title team as Pau, Odom and Bynum?
You are talking about absurb probabilities. Bynum and Lopez is a good match, but Pau is an incredible instinctive, high-BBIQ player, a top three big man in the league. There is only a fragment of a percent that Favors becomes that. And Twill and Odom. I’m not a fan of Odom’s game, but he is a 6’10" nightmare of a match up problem. You are highly overvaluing your own players, assuming that as a plan of action ALL of your players are going to max out their skill levels and potentials, which never happens in the real world.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 1, 2010 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Again, I’m not saying lock it down or that that these things are definite. I’m saying POTENTIAL.
Who thought back in 2002 or 2003 that one day Pau would be the second best player on a title team? Anyone who isn’t from Spain or Memphis and says they did is probably lying. Even when he got to LA, it still took a year after getting beat up by Boston, publicly challenged by Phil/Kobe, and having real big market pressure on him that his mindset caught up to his talent.
I’m also not comparing Favors’ game to Pau’s. KG isn’t the passer Pau is. Pau isn’t the defender that KG was in his prime. Just because Favors isn’t throwing behind the back bounce passes doesn’t mean he can’t contribute at a high level.
Odom’s got legit skill but he’s super inconsistent and there are flaws in his game that keep him from being a true power at any one position. Facing the other team’s bench players is a perfect situation for him, because even on his bad days, he’s as good at the opposing teams best backup forward, and on his best, he embarasses them. That’s pretty much the TWill ceiling, if we’re being realistic.
Well, Jerry West did think that Pau was going to be something like that.
But this is the thing when you talk about potential. When you stack the potential of one player on top of the potential of another, and another, you are entering into fantasy land when you picture ALL of them coming through.
If you have 10%, and 10%, and 10%, you end up with 1/1000 chance.
"...where they don't play with a shot clock." - C. Sager
by kv on Aug 1, 2010 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Two Months Till Camp!
Talk about being all wound up with no where to go. I can’t believe we have to wait two months for camp to start. I don’t know what I am going to do with myself till the end of September. Maybe I will take a night adult ed course in brain surgery at the local high school. Maybe I will go off my meds and stalk someone? BORED BORED BORED.
Paul from Delray Beach
YepYep Yep
This is the model the Nets should follow in building a championship team. But this team couldve made a huge mistake this offseason by committing a ton of money on either Boozer or Scola. Developing Favors is essential. If Favors can live up to expectations, then we are only one superstar away from contention because we the supporting cast and role players are set.
But it takes bunch of luck to find that player…we may or we may never find it. Hopefully luck is on the nets side.
"I want to win, I want the team to win and I'm in complete control."
-Coach Avery Johnson.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
