<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (JCB)</div><div class='quotemain'>What makes you say that's the only reason LeBron would go to Brooklyn? Ever since he signed his new contract, the rumors about him becoming a Net once it expires have been well documented (and quite numerous). And I still don't get how it's more "beneficial" for him to play for the Knicks. And don't give me the it's "New York's" team crap. Brooklyn is as much a part of the city as Manhattan is and it's sports history is outstanding. Besides, my gut tells me LeBron would rather play for the Nets' front office than the Knicks'. After all, he does care about winning, you know.</div> It’s been the only reason brought up as to why he would want to go to the Nets. What relevance do rumors have? 99.9% of them don’t come to fruition. I didn’t say Brooklyn wasn’t a part of New York. I actually said the opposite: “a mere microcosm of New York City” (Mr. J, Post #29). And to top it off it isn’t the most recognized part of the city—Manhattan is. Therefore, if he played for the Nets he would be the King of Brooklyn. If he played for the Knicks he would be the King of New York. And if he truly cares about winning, why would he play for the Nets, who aren’t doing too much winning these days either? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real)</div><div class='quotemain'>Brooklyn is about two and a half seasons from now. In two and a half years the Nets will open their 2010-2011 campaign in the NBA's grandest arena, and in the Knicks own backyard. Are the Knicks really going to fix the mess they have right now in two and a half years? They've been struggling for the last seven. If the Nets are still winning and at least making the playoffs. They have a distinct advantage, in they can provide a team that is more capable of going farther in the playoffs than the Knicks. Talk about Jay-Z losing steam, what has the Knicks been losing the past seven years? And please, don't tell me how the Nets don't have a histroy. Dr. J and the ABA in the 70's was some of the most exciting basketball ever played. The Nets had the first international superstar in the 90's, among with several other great players. Sure it's not the Knicks history. But it certainly isn't limited to 2001-present. FWIW consider this. The Knicks won two championships in the 1970's, but so did the Nets. In fact, the Nets were the last New York area team to win a major basketball championship.</div> Not to be pedantic, but “grandest” is a misnomer for the Izod Center. Perhaps you meant “newest” because “grandest” is the title for Madison Square Garden. In two and a half years the Knicks will actually be under the cap. Besides, it’s hard to gauge the state of any team two and a half years from now. By that time Kidd will be 37, Carter will be 34, and Jefferson will be 31. By that time the “Big Three” could be in shambles. And the Knicks losing has nothing to do with Jay-Z. Even though the Knicks have been losing, players still have respect for the franchise. Kobe even said the Knicks were on his list of teams he would like to play for. Clearly, the Knicks have not lost as much steam as you think. I didn’t say the Nets don’t have history. I said it’s brief when you compare it to the Knicks. What they did in a defunct ABA does not compare to what the Knicks have meant to the NBA. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga)</div><div class='quotemain'>The NY Knicks are a storied franchise, but in the context of this issue their history is irrelevant unless Lebron buys himself a time machine before he signs his next contract. The rings, the monetary value, etc would be valuable in the past. However currently if I'm a Knick fan I wouldn't want to bring up the word 'championship' about a lottery team, and I wouldn't bring up their value since the team is piss poor in how they handle it (plus since when would Lebron care about the value of a franchise? He's going to play for one, not buy one).</div> One of the main reasons I brought up their history and their value was to dispel your boy Jizzy’s fallacious statement: “the Knicks are a joke to NBA history”. Nevertheless, the Knicks history is very important anyway. It means more support from the fans and more of a legacy left. MSG is the Mecca because of its history. The Knicks are first in New York and the Nets will be second. And please stop talking as if the Nets are a good team because they are in the same position as the Knicks. They have four additional wins (two of their losses actually coming from the lowly Knicks). Bottom line: LeBron probably will not leave Cleveland, but if he does, I doubt it is to go to Brooklyn. If anything, it will be to go to New York.
I say we move to Harlem, call ourselves the Globetrotters, and play an 82 game schedule against the Washington Generals.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid Chocolate @ Dec 25 2007, 11:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I say we move to Harlem, call ourselves the Globetrotters, and play an 82 game schedule against the Washington Generals.</div> Yup, the most famous neighborhood in the world.
First, why in the hell is the Izod center constantly mentioned when talking about Brooklyn? Izod is the piece of shit in the Meadowlands. Second, Jizzy is Jizzy. The sooner you learn that and don't take his ramblings for all Nets fans, the better off you'll be. Third, MSG does have history and name that still means something, but as far as amenities go, it is not a top NBA areana. Barclays will be world class inside and out. Fourth, the Nets have already demonstrated that they can push the Knicks out of the main focus on the New York media. Fifth, LBJ grew up in Akron, not Cleveland and there is a real difference
i don't understand the "king of brooklyn vs king of new york" argument. the knicks still only play in one borough, too, if lebron came to brooklyn, he wouldn't just be isolated to brooklyn...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Dec 25 2007, 11:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>First, why in the hell is the Izod center constantly mentioned when talking about Brooklyn? Izod is the piece of shit in the Meadowlands.</div> I didn't know about the new arena. Barclays is still a crappy name. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Second, Jizzy is Jizzy. The sooner you learn that and don't take his ramblings for all Nets fans, the better off you'll be.</div> I'll take that into consideration next time. I don't really know anyone except for Kidd. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Third, MSG does have history and name that still means something, but as far as amenities go, it is not a top NBA areana. Barclays will be world class inside and out.</div> So what will the new amenities mean? What will LeBron now be able to do? Regardless of how new their facilities are, it won't make it more appealing than the Mecca of hoops. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Fourth, the Nets have already demonstrated that they can push the Knicks out of the main focus on the New York media.</div> What? The Knicks are never not the main focus of the media. It's probably the opposite. They make a living off Isiah and his shenanigans. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Fifth, LBJ grew up in Akron, not Cleveland and there is a real difference</div> There is a real difference. Brooklyn represents a part of a city. The Knicks represent everything. Are you really suggesting the LeBron will garner as much media attention, recognition, hype, appeal, etc. playing in Brooklyn than the Knicks?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. J @ Dec 26 2007, 12:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Dec 25 2007, 11:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>First, why in the hell is the Izod center constantly mentioned when talking about Brooklyn? Izod is the piece of shit in the Meadowlands.</div> I didn't know about the new arena. Barclays is still a crappy name. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Second, Jizzy is Jizzy. The sooner you learn that and don't take his ramblings for all Nets fans, the better off you'll be.</div> I'll take that into consideration next time. I don't really know anyone except for Kidd. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Third, MSG does have history and name that still means something, but as far as amenities go, it is not a top NBA areana. Barclays will be world class inside and out.</div> So what will the new amenities mean? What will LeBron now be able to do? Regardless of how new their facilities are, it won't make it more appealing than the Mecca of hoops. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Fourth, the Nets have already demonstrated that they can push the Knicks out of the main focus on the New York media.</div> What? The Knicks are never not the main focus of the media. It's probably the opposite. They make a living off Isiah and his shenanigans. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Fifth, LBJ grew up in Akron, not Cleveland and there is a real difference</div> There is a real difference. Brooklyn represents a part of a city. The Knicks represent everything. Are you really suggesting the LeBron will garner as much media attention, recognition, hype, appeal, etc. playing in Brooklyn than the Knicks? </div> I'm going to work from the third point down. 1. The amenities will mean more skyboxes, which will/have been all sold out by 2010. The amenities of MSG will be incomporable to those of the Barclays Center in 2010, just as they are now compared to the brand new Prudential Center in Newark in 2007. And it's not just amenities. It's architecture. It's style. Anyone who's ever seen a Frank Gehry project up close or even on the internet knows it's something special. Now Gehry is designing an NBA arena. You don't have to have a degree in architecture, you can just look at the images and realize that this arena will be special. 2. When Kidd and his wife went through a nasty public divorce last January, who was on the front page of the Post, the Slime (Times), and the Daily News? 3. If they are still losing, absolutely. First of all what cpaw was trying to say was that Akron and Cleveland are not the same city. LeBron was drafted by the Cavaliers, in his home state, but that's not his hometown. He's connected to Ohio by birth, but he's a lot like Bruce, he was Born to Run. By that I mean if the money is right, he'll go to New York or Los Angeles. Dave D'Alessandro from the Star-Ledger said it himself that the folks in Cleveland are absolutely scared of LeBron leaving them, they'll do just about everything to keep him. Second of all, you make it seem like the Knicks being in Manhattan makes them represent the other three boroughs, Long Island, and Westchester exclusively, as if a team in Brooklyn couldn't do the same. Even if that was true, which it isn't, if removed from NYC, Brooklyn's population alone would make it the third largest city in America. Nets alone could draw fans from Brooklyn and do just fine. Brooklyn isn't exactly equal to Staten Island or Queens, and you know that. I know that, and I'm from North Jersey.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. J @ Dec 26 2007, 12:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Third, MSG does have history and name that still means something, but as far as amenities go, it is not a top NBA areana. Barclays will be world class inside and out.</div> So what will the new amenities mean? What will LeBron now be able to do? Regardless of how new their facilities are, it won't make it more appealing than the Mecca of hoops. </div> It is about where the people will want to go. The majority of the expensive tickets for Knicks games are purchased in season ticket packages by corporations that don't care about the Knicks. These same companies will be purchasing tickets in Brooklyn. Additionally, there will huge buzz surrounding the new arena that will drive people to it. I lived in LA when Staples opened and I know what a new arena can do. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Fourth, the Nets have already demonstrated that they can push the Knicks out of the main focus on the New York media.</div> What? The Knicks are never not the main focus of the media. It's probably the opposite. They make a living off Isiah and his shenanigans. </div> In 2001-2002 and 2002-2003, the Nets had pushed the Knicks out of the main focus of the media. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Fifth, LBJ grew up in Akron, not Cleveland and there is a real difference</div> There is a real difference. Brooklyn represents a part of a city. The Knicks represent everything. Are you really suggesting the LeBron will garner as much media attention, recognition, hype, appeal, etc. playing in Brooklyn than the Knicks? </div> Well, first my comment wasn't directed at you, but a post earlier in the thread that said LBJ grew up in Cleveland. Second, yes there will be absolutely no difference in the amount of media attention and hype that LBJ would receive playing in Brooklyn or in Manhattan. He is LBJ and the media will be there. Additionally, Nike and the NBA would have his picture all over Manhattan for all of the people that work in Manhattan but don't live there to see.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. J @ Dec 25 2007, 06:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jizzy @ Dec 25 2007, 03:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. J @ Dec 25 2007, 12:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The Nets being in Brooklyn won't make them a better team. Why would LeBron want to go to the Nets anyway? If anything he would rather play for the Knicks.</div> lmfao, no smiley at the end? were you serious? FYI, jayZ and LeBron and VERY close friends, Nike is pushing LBJ to play in the Ny area, the Knicks are a joke to NBA history </div> Please tell me you were just kidding. One of the NBA's original franchises a joke to NBA history? The most valuable franchise in the NBA a joke? A team with NBA championships a joke? The only 8th seeded team to advance to the Finals a joke? The team that is largely responsible for the NBA's ratings a joke? The team that plays in the world's most famous arena a joke? Please rethink that. Although the Knicks are struggling, do not confuse their current state to what they have meant to NBA history. </div> Have you been following the Knicks the past three seasons? THey are indeed a joke to the NBA and there former selves. They were once and still are a HISTORIC franchise BUT this current team under Isiah is a circus act. Dolan should demand these past years be removed from the history books
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid Chocolate @ Dec 26 2007, 12:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>fwiw, barclay's: </div> COmpare that to the Izod. god, whay a drop in value
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bynumite @ Dec 25 2007, 02:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>For some weird reason players would love to play in NY with the Knicks take for example Kobe and LeBron.</div> The reasons are probably 60% financial and 40% personal. NYC is probably one of the largest basketball markets in the US. It's been rumored (confirmed?) that big name players like LeBron and Kobe have clauses in their contracts that kick in should they play in major markets like NYC, LA, Chicago. Rumors notwithstanding, it's obvious that the stars gain even more visibility, from a marketing perspective, in large markets like NYC and LA, thus raising their overall income potential from endorsements and what not. Simply put, in smaller markets, there aren't as many business opportunities for sports stars to make money outside of their basketball salaries (granted, superstars like LeBron and Kobe transcend location and already make a huge portion of their incomes from the likes of Nike and Coca-Cola (Sprite)). From a personal perspective, few NBA cities have the nightlife, convenience, dining, luxuries, and activities even close to NYC - it's the ideal environment for young, rich, sports stars.
Anyone ever thought of it this way: Wouldn't it be nice if Lebron could bring the Nets their first ever NBA Championship? That'd be nice, if you ask me. And if Isiah is still in office in 2009(I'm crossing my fingers!), I very much doubt Lebron's going there.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Dec 25 2007, 02:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jtballa2o1 @ Dec 25 2007, 10:56 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>How were the Knicks able too kick the Nets out of New York?</div> The ABA was on the verge of folding and the NBA agreed to take in 4 teams: Indiana Pacers, San Antonio Spurs, New York Nets, and Denver Nuggets. The Knicks ownership objected to the Nets playing in New York because the Nets would compete with the Knicks for ticket sales, TV contracts, and so on. So the owners demanded that the Nets move out of New York or there'd be no deal. The Nets basically had no choice. The rest of the ABA teams folded and the players were drafted by the NBA teams. Notably, the Celtics didn't draft any ABA players while the 76ers ended up with two megastars in the draft: Dr. J and George McGinnis. The 76ers were immediate contenders for the title almost every season after that. </div> I thought Julius was traded to the Sixers for cash, because of an arguement he had with Nets' ownership? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The Nets, Denver Nuggets, Indiana Pacers and San Antonio Spurs joined the NBA for the 1976-77 season. With Erving and Nate Archibald (acquired in a trade with Kansas City), the Nets were poised to pick up right where they left off. However, the New York Knicks threw a monkey wrench into the Nets' plans when they demanded that the Nets pay them $4.8 million for "invading" the Knicks' NBA territory. Coming on the heels of the fees the Nets had to pay for joining the NBA, owner Roy Boe reneged on a promise to raise Erving's salary. Erving refused to play under these conditions and held out in training camp. Boe had little choice but to sell Erving's contract to the Philadelphia 76ers.</div> Julius_Erving Ya. The Nets were actually forced to pay the Knicks. Wow, I didn't know that part. Also, the Nets moved to New Jersey a year after the merge...didn't know that part either.
