Welcome to the Nets debate. Today we are going to have "MrJ" face of against "Bobcats". This debate will begin once the first reply is submitted and will last approximately 48 hours. If you are interested in being in the next debate, be sure to send a private messege to "vcwannabe15". Here is the rules I stole from the Bulls debate. 1. Only the two people participating should post in this thread after the debate is over there will be a thread for discussion and voting. 2. You can only have a debate if the people involved disagree so please try to take opposing views on the topic. 3. Keep it to clean, no personal shots Now here is the question Was the K-Mart transaction bad or good for the Nets?
As a coach, Lawrence Frank is doing a great job. I think considering the team the Nets had last year, they went as far as they could go. Defensively, the Nets are a very good overall allowing their opponents to shoot only 92.42 points per game, which is good enough for sixth best in the league. Opposing teams shoot just 43.9% from the field when they play Jersey, which is good enough for seventh best. So obviously, on the defensive side of things, the Nets are getting the job done. Offensively, yes they only average 93.79 points per game, however, they rely heavily upon the scoring of their big three: Carter, Kidd, and Jefferson. This isn’t the fault of Lawrence Frank, but rather Rod Thorn for assembling a team with non-balanced scoring. Despite this, Frank has managed to take the Nets to the playoffs every year he’s coached and was a win shy from reaching 50 wins last season. It’s not like they choke in the playoffs either; whenever they were eliminated in the playoffs, it came in the hands of a worthy opponent.
At the request of Bobcats and MrJ, this is the new question. Was the K-Mart transaction bad or good for the Nets?
IMO, I think it was a good move by Thorn. First of all, the Nuggets signed Martin to a 94 million dollar offer sheet for 7 years, which was way overpaying for someone like Kenyon. Second, the draft picks were a key part in helping complete the Vince Carter trade. Babcock was looking for young players, short-term contracts, and draft picks. The 2 first rounders were what convinced Babcock to do the trade. And now as we see in Denver, without Jason Kidd, Kenyon has struggled a lot without him. Add to the fact that he has developed some injury problems, and at 5 years/69+ million dollars left on his contract, he is one of the most untradeable players in the league. Basically what the Nets did was trade an overpaid and an eventual injury prone PF for a revived superstar in Vince Carter. Now the Nets are back in contention while the Nuggets are trying desperately to find a team that will take Martin.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Bobcats:</div><div class="quote_post">IMO, I think it was a good move by Thorn. First of all, the Nuggets signed Martin to a 94 million dollar offer sheet for 7 years, which was way overpaying for someone like Kenyon. Second, the draft picks were a key part in helping complete the Vince Carter trade. Babcock was looking for young players, short-term contracts, and draft picks. The 2 first rounders were what convinced Babcock to do the trade. And now as we see in Denver, without Jason Kidd, Kenyon has struggled a lot without him. Add to the fact that he has developed some injury problems, and at 5 years/69+ million dollars left on his contract, he is one of the most untradeable players in the league. Basically what the Nets did was trade an overpaid and an eventual injury prone PF for a revived superstar in Vince Carter. Now the Nets are back in contention while the Nuggets are trying desperately to find a team that will take Martin.</div> Prior to trading Kenyon Martin, the Nets were contenders and were actually the only team who gave the eventual NBA champion Pistons competition, taking them to a decisive Game 7. The Nets did manage to get Vince Carter with their draft picks from the Martin deal, but what does that matter? The fact of the matter is with Vince Carter, the Nets haven't gone anywhere. During Carter's first year with the Nets, they got swept by the Heat. The second year with Carter, an injury-riddled Pacers team gave the Nets a run for their money, while the Heat easily took them apart in five games. Martin isn't worth the $90 million contract Denver gave to him, but New Jersey would be in a better position to contend than with Carter. With Carter, the Nets are a perimeter-oriented jump shooting team. Carter is a good scorer, but he has actually weakened the Nets, making them too reliant upon him. In losses, Carter only shoots 40.6% from the field and 31% from downtown. This means the team who beat the Nets did a good job shutting down Carter. With Martin, the Nets won more with their defense and their balanced scoring, but Carter has made the Nets too reliant upon him. And Martin struggling in Denver is irrelevent because he didn't in New Jersey. It just means Kidd's presence made Martin successful and since Kidd is still around, Martin would continue to be successful. On the Nets, Martin was an all-star who gave them an inside presence both offensively and defensively making him more valuable than Carter who only plays offense. It's no coincidence why the Nets have always been soft upfront after Martin's departure. They have tried all types of replacements; newest is Mikki Moore, but he won't compensate for Martin. He had some injury problems, but calling him "injury prone" is a bit premature. Because, if memory serves me correct, Vince Carter has been injured quite a few times in his career. That label has been taken off since Vince proved he can stay healthy. Now all Martin has to do is stay healthy for a full season and the label will be taken off, just like Carter. <u>So here is a recap of my key points:</u> - With Martin, the Nets were contenders making it to the Finals twice and being the only team to take the NBA champion Pistons to Game 7. Carter has only taken the team to Game 5 of the second round. Had Peja been healthy for the entire series, the Pacers could have very well eliminated the Nets. - With Carter the Nets a worse off as they are too reliant upon his scoring, while Martin would have made the Nets a more balanced team. Bottomline: Don't deny the facts: with Martin, the Nets have more wins and have been more successful than with Carter.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Prior to trading Kenyon Martin, the Nets were contenders and were actually the only team who gave the eventual NBA champion Pistons competition, taking them to a decisive Game 7.</div> The Nets wern't the only team that gave Detroit some competition. Indiana gave them a tough 6 game series too in the ECF that year. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The Nets did manage to get Vince Carter with their draft picks from the Martin deal, but what does that matter? The fact of the matter is with Vince Carter, the Nets haven't gone anywhere. During Carter's first year with the Nets, they got swept by the Heat. The second year with Carter, an injury-riddled Pacers team gave the Nets a run for their money, while the Heat easily took them apart in five games.</div> The Nets wouldn't have been able to beat the Heat in either series' with Martin instead of Carter. The Heats roster in both years were stacked and had depth. (moreso in 05-06). Even with Martin, once the Heat added Shaq and with an improving Wade, the Nets were going to be no match for the Heat or the Pistons. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Martin isn't worth the $90 million contract Denver gave to him, but New Jersey would be in a better position to contend than with Carter. With Carter, the Nets are a perimeter-oriented jump shooting team. Carter is a good scorer, but he has actually weakened the Nets</div> Again, with the Heat becoming championship contenders, the Nets would've had a slim chance at getting past the second round anyway, with or without Martin. And Carter hasn't weakened the Nets, he put the Nets on his back in 04-05 and got them into the playoffs (of course with the help of Kidd). He was even more important when the Nets lost Richard Jefferson for the entire season. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">making them too reliant upon him. In losses, Carter only shoots 40.6% from the field and 31% from downtown.</div> And in wins, he scores 26 PPG on 44% shooting and 35% on 3 pointers along with 6.5 RPG and 4.7 APG. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">This means the team who beat the Nets did a good job shutting down Carter. With Martin, the Nets won more with their defense and their balanced scoring, but Carter has made the Nets too reliant upon him.</div> The Nets still do have balanced scoring. Carter averaged 24 PPG, Jefferson averaged 19.5 PPG, Kidd averaged 13.3 PPG, and Nenad Krstic averaged 13.5 PPG. All this, while the Nets still played solid team defense with opponents averaging only 92 PPG on 43% shooting. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">And Martin struggling in Denver is irrelevent because he didn't in New Jersey. It just means Kidd's presence made Martin successful and since Kidd is still around, Martin would continue to be successful. On the Nets, Martin was an all-star who gave them an inside presence both offensively and defensively making him more valuable than Carter who only plays offense.</div> Carter isn't that good of a defender, but it's not like he's a liability either. Sometimes he looks bad, and other times, he looks like a good defender. BTW, Martin was only an All-Star, becase the East lacked a frontcourt. I don't think he would make it over the likes of Bosh, O'Neal, Shaq, Howard, Wallace etc. even with Kidd. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">It's no coincidence why the Nets have always been soft upfront after Martin's departure. They have tried all types of replacements; newest is Mikki Moore, but he won't compensate for Martin.</div> It's because they lack a lot of depth. They found a solid player in Krstic, but after him and Collins, who's in the frontcourt? Cliff Robinson is the only legit big man they have after those 2. It would help if Alonzo was still in Jersey, but that's another story. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">He had some injury problems, but calling him "injury prone" is a bit premature. Because, if memory serves me correct, Vince Carter has been injured quite a few times in his career. That label has been taken off since Vince proved he can stay healthy. Now all Martin has to do is stay healthy for a full season and the label will be taken off, just like Carter.</div> Well, he missed 14 games in his rookie season, 17 in 03-04, 12 in 04-05, and this past season missed a career high 26 games. He's never played more than 77 games in a season. His knee problems are only going to get worse as he gets older. Also, it won't take one season of 75-78 games to take the label off, Carter hasn't missed more than 9 games in 3 seasons, and the only reason he missed 9 games in 03-04 was because Bruce Bowen was up to his usual dirty tricks and put his foot under Carters. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post"><u>So here is a recap of my key points:</u> - With Martin, the Nets were contenders making it to the Finals twice and being the only team to take the NBA champion Pistons to Game 7. Carter has only taken the team to Game 5 of the second round. Had Peja been healthy for the entire series, the Pacers could have very well eliminated the Nets.</div> Again, with Martin and without Carter, the Nets wouldn't have beat the Heat in either 04-05 or 05-06. The Heat were simply too strong, and could've won the East had it not been for Shaq and Wade's injuries. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">- With Carter the Nets a worse off as they are too reliant upon his scoring, while Martin would have made the Nets a more balanced team.</div> The Nets are still good defensively, and they still have balanced scoring with 4 players averaging over 13 PPG. Carter of course leading the way with 24 PPG. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Bottomline: Don't deny the facts: with Martin, the Nets have more wins and have been more successful than with Carter.</div> I'm not denying facts, I know that Martin was good and the Nets were a strong team, but simply put, when the Heat aquired Shaq, the Nets were no longer going to be the team that was Detroits biggest challenge.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Bobcats:</div><div class="quote_post">The Nets wern't the only team that gave Detroit some competition. Indiana gave them a tough 6 game series too in the ECF that year.</div> The Nets took them to the brink of elimination, while the Pacers took them to Game 7. It really is a big difference, especially when you consider New Jersey almost eliminated them in game 6; they just choked in the final minute--something very uncharacteristic of them. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The Nets wouldn't have been able to beat the Heat in either series' with Martin instead of Carter. The Heats roster in both years were stacked and had depth. (moreso in 05-06). Even with Martin, once the Heat added Shaq and with an improving Wade, the Nets were going to be no match for the Heat or the Pistons.</div> If the Nets never traded Martin, they would have won their division, meaning they wouldn't even play Miami in the first round of the playoffs. After they beat Indiana (without Artest and an injured Jermaine O'Neal), they would have had a rematch with Detroit. Who knows, maybe this time they could have won. If they did win, Miami, having both Wade and Shaq injured, might not have been good enough for the Nets. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Again, with the Heat becoming championship contenders, the Nets would've had a slim chance at getting past the second round anyway, with or without Martin. And Carter hasn't weakened the Nets, he put the Nets on his back in 04-05 and got them into the playoffs (of course with the help of Kidd). He was even more important when the Nets lost Richard Jefferson for the entire season.</div> I don't know about that. The Nets with Martin were championship contenders and two-time NBA finalists. Obviously his presence was value. Even if the Nets did lose to the Heat, it would have been closer than Game 5. Carter didn't really put the team on his back. He certainly helped, but Kidd was more valuable to the Nets than Carter was. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">And in wins, he scores 26 PPG on 44% shooting and 35% on 3 pointers along with 6.5 RPG and 4.7 APG.</div> That pretty much means the Nets need Carter to score 26 points and shoot a decent percentage to win. That means they are too reliant on one person to score. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The Nets still do have balanced scoring. Carter averaged 24 PPG, Jefferson averaged 19.5 PPG, Kidd averaged 13.3 PPG, and Nenad Krstic averaged 13.5 PPG. All this, while the Nets still played solid team defense with opponents averaging only 92 PPG on 43% shooting.</div> With Kenyon Martin, the Nets didn't score as much, but were much better defensively. The Nets didn't need for Martin to average 26 points per win, things were more balanced. If Carter has an off night, usually the Nets lose. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Carter isn't that good of a defender, but it's not like he's a liability either. Sometimes he looks bad, and other times, he looks like a good defender. BTW, Martin was only an All-Star, becase the East lacked a frontcourt. I don't think he would make it over the likes of Bosh, O'Neal, Shaq, Howard, Wallace etc. even with Kidd.</div> Carter is an inconsistent defender. He only plays defense when he wants to. Martin always played defense and was always amongst the Eastern Conference's best defenders. The tough interior defense he played is sorely missed now. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">It's because they lack a lot of depth. They found a solid player in Krstic, but after him and Collins, who's in the frontcourt? Cliff Robinson is the only legit big man they have after those 2. It would help if Alonzo was still in Jersey, but that's another story.</div> With Martin logging the majority of the minutes the Nets wouldn't be in constant search for "depth". They have no one who can log 35 minutes like Martin could. Krstic is getting there, but he's not at the level yet. Besides, he's not the defender or rebounder Martin was. He can shoot though; but that's not really needed. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Well, he missed 14 games in his rookie season, 17 in 03-04, 12 in 04-05, and this past season missed a career high 26 games. He's never played more than 77 games in a season. His knee problems are only going to get worse as he gets older. Also, it won't take one season of 75-78 games to take the label off, Carter hasn't missed more than 9 games in 3 seasons, and the only reason he missed 9 games in 03-04 was because Bruce Bowen was up to his usual dirty tricks and put his foot under Carters. </div> You also have to consider the times Martin got suspended. Those weren't injuries. The injury issues aren't that serious either. Carter a much more serious history of injury than Martin. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Again, with Martin and without Carter, the Nets wouldn't have beat the Heat in either 04-05 or 05-06. The Heat were simply too strong, and could've won the East had it not been for Shaq and Wade's injuries. </div> With Martin, the Nets wouldn't have faced the Heat in the first round and could have beaten them considering the injuries to Wade and Shaq towards the end of the postseason. In 05-06, the Nets, with Martin, would have given the Heat a run for their money. They have add another dimmension to their team with Martin. Carter just gives them scoring and some defense here and there. Martin adds someone who can score in the post, someone who can stop penetration, and has the toughness the Nets lacked. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The Nets are still good defensively, and they still have balanced scoring with 4 players averaging over 13 PPG. Carter of course leading the way with 24 PPG.</div> The Nets are good defensively, but with Martin they would have been that much better. Most of the time when Carter isn't scoring his 26 points, the Nets lose. That means they are too reliant on him. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I'm not denying facts, I know that Martin was good and the Nets were a strong team, but simply put, when the Heat aquired Shaq, the Nets were no longer going to be the team that was Detroits biggest challenge.</div> If Detroit was good enough to beat the Heat and the Nets were good enough to contend with Detroit, that means the Nets could contend with the Heat as well. Even if they weren't able to beat the Heat with Martin, they would have come closer. I would want as much wins as I can.
Ok, I gave you guys some more time but now the debate is over. Please wait for vcwannabe15 to post the voting thread.
