<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pinetar @ Apr 14 2008, 12:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Hey, if you really want to save money, have zero players on your roster making zero dollars each. Such a deal! And I'm impressed by this management philosophy of not adding any good (i.e. expensive) players to your roster until you're ready to win a championship. Good luck with that one! Some of you seem to think the formula for winning championships is to get rid of all your good players and just accumulate lottery picks for as many years as it takes. I doubt anyone who says this was a Net fan before the Jason Kidd era. Do you think the Coleman/Anderson team was worth the wait? How about the Van Horn/Cassell team? If only a championship is acceptable, 96% percent of the league is a total failure every year. So therefore the best players of 29 teams are garbage? Just about every great player in the league has been on losing teams: Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Dwyane Wade, etc. It's stupid to hold the team's best player accountable for that. It shouldn't be that hard to figure out that basketball is a team game. Carter is a flawed player, and he's not going to single handedly bring the team a championship. But such a player does not exist, or at best is extremely rare. If you can tolerate nothing less than a championship, then do us all a favor and go be a bandwagon fan. Root for the Celtics or the Lakers or whoever this year. Leave this forum for us Nets fans, fans who understand that wins are not guaranteed and that team success is something to be appreciated.</div> If you are happy watching a crappy team, good for you. You can watch your mismanaged mess and post glowing monologues about how great a fan you are. I would prefer if Nets management made winning their only priority and had some kind of clue about how to accomplish that. Right now, the only move they've made that indicates either of those things is bringing in a GM that's proven he knows how to do a proper rebuilding job. Too bad they made his job so much harder with their previous incompetence.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jirohkanzaki @ Apr 14 2008, 01:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>so wade isn't worth $13m because they have the worst record in the nba?</div> You are comparing Vince Carter(no rings, older, inconsistent, only was wanted by the nets, only has showed up for twenty games this season) to Dwyane Wade(1 ring right before he got the huge deal, younger, more marketable, loved by refs, arguably better than Carter). Hmmm.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Charles @ Apr 14 2008, 01:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Right now I see the Nets building around Devin Harris, Josh Boone, their two first round picks, and possibly SWAT, Krstic, Diop, Marcus, maybe even Ager. All YOUNG players. Carter doesn't really fit in that mold.</div> That core of young players is pathetic. If it doesn't improve quickly, the Nets have a bleak future. I don't think the man who could only manage to accumulate those players is the guy who should be making decisions about what to do next.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (L @ Apr 14 2008, 01:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jirohkanzaki @ Apr 14 2008, 01:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>so wade isn't worth $13m because they have the worst record in the nba?</div> You are comparing Vince Carter(no rings, older, inconsistent, only was wanted by the nets, only has showed up for twenty games this season) to Dwyane Wade(1 ring right before he got the huge deal, younger, more marketable, loved by refs, arguably better than Carter). Hmmm. </div> Hahahaha. Arguably??
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Apr 14 2008, 01:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (L @ Apr 14 2008, 01:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jirohkanzaki @ Apr 14 2008, 01:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>so wade isn't worth $13m because they have the worst record in the nba?</div> You are comparing Vince Carter(no rings, older, inconsistent, only was wanted by the nets, only has showed up for twenty games this season) to Dwyane Wade(1 ring right before he got the huge deal, younger, more marketable, loved by refs, arguably better than Carter). Hmmm. </div> Hahahaha. Arguably?? </div> Some actually try to argue about it.......(Remembers BBB.net days). I didnt say it would turn out for an intelligent argument did I!?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (L @ Apr 14 2008, 12:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (logik15 @ Apr 14 2008, 01:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Charles @ Apr 14 2008, 12:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Right now I see the Nets building around Devin Harris, Josh Boone, their two first round picks, and possibly SWAT, Krstic, Diop, Marcus, maybe even Ager. All YOUNG players. Carter doesn't really fit in that mold. I'm not advocating tossing him to the street and having four players on the court at a time. I'm not saying trade him for Stephon Marbury. I just don't understand how he fits in w/ this team and what Kiki and Thorn are doing. I realize he scores a ton of points for this team, and that before he joined the franchise they were constantly struggling to score points. But what is he adding to the team right now if they are rebuilding?</div> I see your point of view, but our management still believes with one or two moves we can still compete for a championship. I believe the same in acquiring someone like Brand. With that team you just mentioned, all young players, there is NO way we can even come close to winning a championship with that team. All we would have is a bunch of unproven players, besides harris. Frank is also a coach that plays proven players, surrounding him with a bunch of rookies, sophomores is not a smart idea. Harris is someone who wants to win, if we put that team around him... trust me i wouldn't be surprised if he demanded a trade himself. </div> I see what you mean but obtaining such players in order to make a good team will be impossible with the position the Nets organization have put themselves in. Acquiring someone like Brand will mean the team would have to give up a lot. Adding someone like Brand to the current team would probably make them contenders but the issue is that it is impossible to acquire such a player without giving up much. Once you acquire this player, the team is left with other big holes to fill. Honestly, they should began rebuilding once Kmart left, because back then they had much more flexibility. And when Carter was ready for a new contract, management stupidly believed that the Big 3 could work. Who in their right mind thinks a team with mediocre perimeter shooting, no interior presence, mediocre defense, a young inexperienced coach, little depth, an allstar, a point guard who is great at everything but defense and shooting, and a borderline allstar with deteriorating defense can win? THRON! THAT'S WHO! Management in the past couple of years has been incompetent for the most part. When you have a front office that blindly thinks such a team would contend, the team will actually be stuck in the middle of the pack. not good enough to win, not bad enough for making enough capspace to rebuild. </div> Not to get off topic, but I completely agree with your assessment about how our management played things the past couple of years. I understand to get someone like Brand we have to give up a lot... but I still think we should give up whatever it takes to get brand. I'd rather build around Brand, than the 10th and 21st draft picks of this years draft. I'd honestly give up RJ, Krstic, marcus williams and both draft picks for brand and then sign free agents like fred jones to compensate for shooting. I wouldn't mind giving a lot right now because we do have a lot to give. We have too many young bigs and players that just need playing time, which Frank doesn't give them so they are just as good as useless. a team with harris, carter and brand with fillers i believe is a no-brainer to be a team that would actually intimidate opponents. we right now lack veterans in our lineup being one of the youngest teams in the NBA now, with 3 draft picks it wouldn't be much better... so lets get a vetaran proven big like Brand into the mix.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (logik15 @ Apr 14 2008, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (L @ Apr 14 2008, 12:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (logik15 @ Apr 14 2008, 01:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Charles @ Apr 14 2008, 12:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Right now I see the Nets building around Devin Harris, Josh Boone, their two first round picks, and possibly SWAT, Krstic, Diop, Marcus, maybe even Ager. All YOUNG players. Carter doesn't really fit in that mold. I'm not advocating tossing him to the street and having four players on the court at a time. I'm not saying trade him for Stephon Marbury. I just don't understand how he fits in w/ this team and what Kiki and Thorn are doing. I realize he scores a ton of points for this team, and that before he joined the franchise they were constantly struggling to score points. But what is he adding to the team right now if they are rebuilding?</div> I see your point of view, but our management still believes with one or two moves we can still compete for a championship. I believe the same in acquiring someone like Brand. With that team you just mentioned, all young players, there is NO way we can even come close to winning a championship with that team. All we would have is a bunch of unproven players, besides harris. Frank is also a coach that plays proven players, surrounding him with a bunch of rookies, sophomores is not a smart idea. Harris is someone who wants to win, if we put that team around him... trust me i wouldn't be surprised if he demanded a trade himself. </div> I see what you mean but obtaining such players in order to make a good team will be impossible with the position the Nets organization have put themselves in. Acquiring someone like Brand will mean the team would have to give up a lot. Adding someone like Brand to the current team would probably make them contenders but the issue is that it is impossible to acquire such a player without giving up much. Once you acquire this player, the team is left with other big holes to fill. Honestly, they should began rebuilding once Kmart left, because back then they had much more flexibility. And when Carter was ready for a new contract, management stupidly believed that the Big 3 could work. Who in their right mind thinks a team with mediocre perimeter shooting, no interior presence, mediocre defense, a young inexperienced coach, little depth, an allstar, a point guard who is great at everything but defense and shooting, and a borderline allstar with deteriorating defense can win? THRON! THAT'S WHO! Management in the past couple of years has been incompetent for the most part. When you have a front office that blindly thinks such a team would contend, the team will actually be stuck in the middle of the pack. not good enough to win, not bad enough for making enough capspace to rebuild. </div> Not to get off topic, but I completely agree with your assessment about how our management played things the past couple of years. I understand to get someone like Brand we have to give up a lot... but I still think we should give up whatever it takes to get brand. I'd rather build around Brand, than the 10th and 21st draft picks of this years draft. I'd honestly give up RJ, Krstic, marcus williams and both draft picks for brand and then sign free agents like fred jones to compensate for shooting. I wouldn't mind giving a lot right now because we do have a lot to give. We have too many young bigs and players that just need playing time, which Frank doesn't give them so they are just as good as useless. a team with harris, carter and brand with fillers i believe is a no-brainer to be a team that would actually intimidate opponents. we right now lack veterans in our lineup being one of the youngest teams in the NBA now, with 3 draft picks it wouldn't be much better... so lets get a vetaran proven big like Brand into the mix. </div> Hey, no problem to me. At least you are thinking of possibilities to try to solve this mess(better than me because I dont know where to start with this team aside from kicking THRONTRON's ass). Whether or not those possibilities succeed or not depends on the team as a whole.
Hey, if the Nets bring in a true centerpiece like Brand, then maybe Carter has some value! I'd sure rather have Brand and rebuild from there than be in the Nets' current situation. Of course, I have no idea how that's going to happen. I don't think the Nets have the assets to get that done.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Apr 14 2008, 01:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pinetar @ Apr 14 2008, 12:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Hey, if you really want to save money, have zero players on your roster making zero dollars each. Such a deal! And I'm impressed by this management philosophy of not adding any good (i.e. expensive) players to your roster until you're ready to win a championship. Good luck with that one! Some of you seem to think the formula for winning championships is to get rid of all your good players and just accumulate lottery picks for as many years as it takes. I doubt anyone who says this was a Net fan before the Jason Kidd era. Do you think the Coleman/Anderson team was worth the wait? How about the Van Horn/Cassell team? If only a championship is acceptable, 96% percent of the league is a total failure every year. So therefore the best players of 29 teams are garbage? Just about every great player in the league has been on losing teams: Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Dwyane Wade, etc. It's stupid to hold the team's best player accountable for that. It shouldn't be that hard to figure out that basketball is a team game. Carter is a flawed player, and he's not going to single handedly bring the team a championship. But such a player does not exist, or at best is extremely rare. If you can tolerate nothing less than a championship, then do us all a favor and go be a bandwagon fan. Root for the Celtics or the Lakers or whoever this year. Leave this forum for us Nets fans, fans who understand that wins are not guaranteed and that team success is something to be appreciated.</div> If you are happy watching a crappy team, good for you. You can watch your mismanaged mess and post glowing monologues about how great a fan you are. I would prefer if Nets management made winning their only priority and had some kind of clue about how to accomplish that. Right now, the only move they've made that indicates either of those things is bringing in a GM that's proven he knows how to do a proper rebuilding job. Too bad they made his job so much harder with their previous incompetence. </div> Weren't you one of the ones that was convinced the Nets were title bound if they got SAR that fateful summer?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Apr 14 2008, 01:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pinetar @ Apr 14 2008, 12:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Hey, if you really want to save money, have zero players on your roster making zero dollars each. Such a deal! And I'm impressed by this management philosophy of not adding any good (i.e. expensive) players to your roster until you're ready to win a championship. Good luck with that one! Some of you seem to think the formula for winning championships is to get rid of all your good players and just accumulate lottery picks for as many years as it takes. I doubt anyone who says this was a Net fan before the Jason Kidd era. Do you think the Coleman/Anderson team was worth the wait? How about the Van Horn/Cassell team? If only a championship is acceptable, 96% percent of the league is a total failure every year. So therefore the best players of 29 teams are garbage? Just about every great player in the league has been on losing teams: Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Dwyane Wade, etc. It's stupid to hold the team's best player accountable for that. It shouldn't be that hard to figure out that basketball is a team game. Carter is a flawed player, and he's not going to single handedly bring the team a championship. But such a player does not exist, or at best is extremely rare. If you can tolerate nothing less than a championship, then do us all a favor and go be a bandwagon fan. Root for the Celtics or the Lakers or whoever this year. Leave this forum for us Nets fans, fans who understand that wins are not guaranteed and that team success is something to be appreciated.</div> If you are happy watching a crappy team, good for you. You can watch your mismanaged mess and post glowing monologues about how great a fan you are. I would prefer if Nets management made winning their only priority and had some kind of clue about how to accomplish that. Right now, the only move they've made that indicates either of those things is bringing in a GM that's proven he knows how to do a proper rebuilding job. Too bad they made his job so much harder with their previous incompetence. </div> No, I want to see the Nets win. And I think their chances of winning are much better with Vince Carter than without him, even if he's overpaid by a few million per year.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 14 2008, 02:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Apr 14 2008, 01:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pinetar @ Apr 14 2008, 12:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Hey, if you really want to save money, have zero players on your roster making zero dollars each. Such a deal! And I'm impressed by this management philosophy of not adding any good (i.e. expensive) players to your roster until you're ready to win a championship. Good luck with that one! Some of you seem to think the formula for winning championships is to get rid of all your good players and just accumulate lottery picks for as many years as it takes. I doubt anyone who says this was a Net fan before the Jason Kidd era. Do you think the Coleman/Anderson team was worth the wait? How about the Van Horn/Cassell team? If only a championship is acceptable, 96% percent of the league is a total failure every year. So therefore the best players of 29 teams are garbage? Just about every great player in the league has been on losing teams: Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Dwyane Wade, etc. It's stupid to hold the team's best player accountable for that. It shouldn't be that hard to figure out that basketball is a team game. Carter is a flawed player, and he's not going to single handedly bring the team a championship. But such a player does not exist, or at best is extremely rare. If you can tolerate nothing less than a championship, then do us all a favor and go be a bandwagon fan. Root for the Celtics or the Lakers or whoever this year. Leave this forum for us Nets fans, fans who understand that wins are not guaranteed and that team success is something to be appreciated.</div> If you are happy watching a crappy team, good for you. You can watch your mismanaged mess and post glowing monologues about how great a fan you are. I would prefer if Nets management made winning their only priority and had some kind of clue about how to accomplish that. Right now, the only move they've made that indicates either of those things is bringing in a GM that's proven he knows how to do a proper rebuilding job. Too bad they made his job so much harder with their previous incompetence. </div> Weren't you one of the ones that was convinced the Nets were title bound if they got SAR that fateful summer? </div> Just being a homer.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pinetar @ Apr 14 2008, 02:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Apr 14 2008, 01:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pinetar @ Apr 14 2008, 12:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Hey, if you really want to save money, have zero players on your roster making zero dollars each. Such a deal! And I'm impressed by this management philosophy of not adding any good (i.e. expensive) players to your roster until you're ready to win a championship. Good luck with that one! Some of you seem to think the formula for winning championships is to get rid of all your good players and just accumulate lottery picks for as many years as it takes. I doubt anyone who says this was a Net fan before the Jason Kidd era. Do you think the Coleman/Anderson team was worth the wait? How about the Van Horn/Cassell team? If only a championship is acceptable, 96% percent of the league is a total failure every year. So therefore the best players of 29 teams are garbage? Just about every great player in the league has been on losing teams: Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Dwyane Wade, etc. It's stupid to hold the team's best player accountable for that. It shouldn't be that hard to figure out that basketball is a team game. Carter is a flawed player, and he's not going to single handedly bring the team a championship. But such a player does not exist, or at best is extremely rare. If you can tolerate nothing less than a championship, then do us all a favor and go be a bandwagon fan. Root for the Celtics or the Lakers or whoever this year. Leave this forum for us Nets fans, fans who understand that wins are not guaranteed and that team success is something to be appreciated.</div> If you are happy watching a crappy team, good for you. You can watch your mismanaged mess and post glowing monologues about how great a fan you are. I would prefer if Nets management made winning their only priority and had some kind of clue about how to accomplish that. Right now, the only move they've made that indicates either of those things is bringing in a GM that's proven he knows how to do a proper rebuilding job. Too bad they made his job so much harder with their previous incompetence. </div> No, I want to see the Nets win. And I think their chances of winning are much better with Vince Carter than without him, even if he's overpaid by a few million per year. </div> Winning what? 33 games? Much better with Carter and his contract. An eventual championship? Only possible with at least two all-star players not including Vince.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Apr 14 2008, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pinetar @ Apr 14 2008, 02:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Apr 14 2008, 01:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pinetar @ Apr 14 2008, 12:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Hey, if you really want to save money, have zero players on your roster making zero dollars each. Such a deal! And I'm impressed by this management philosophy of not adding any good (i.e. expensive) players to your roster until you're ready to win a championship. Good luck with that one! Some of you seem to think the formula for winning championships is to get rid of all your good players and just accumulate lottery picks for as many years as it takes. I doubt anyone who says this was a Net fan before the Jason Kidd era. Do you think the Coleman/Anderson team was worth the wait? How about the Van Horn/Cassell team? If only a championship is acceptable, 96% percent of the league is a total failure every year. So therefore the best players of 29 teams are garbage? Just about every great player in the league has been on losing teams: Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Dwyane Wade, etc. It's stupid to hold the team's best player accountable for that. It shouldn't be that hard to figure out that basketball is a team game. Carter is a flawed player, and he's not going to single handedly bring the team a championship. But such a player does not exist, or at best is extremely rare. If you can tolerate nothing less than a championship, then do us all a favor and go be a bandwagon fan. Root for the Celtics or the Lakers or whoever this year. Leave this forum for us Nets fans, fans who understand that wins are not guaranteed and that team success is something to be appreciated.</div> If you are happy watching a crappy team, good for you. You can watch your mismanaged mess and post glowing monologues about how great a fan you are. I would prefer if Nets management made winning their only priority and had some kind of clue about how to accomplish that. Right now, the only move they've made that indicates either of those things is bringing in a GM that's proven he knows how to do a proper rebuilding job. Too bad they made his job so much harder with their previous incompetence. </div> No, I want to see the Nets win. And I think their chances of winning are much better with Vince Carter than without him, even if he's overpaid by a few million per year. </div> Winning what? 33 games? Much better with Carter and his contract. An eventual championship? Only possible with at least two all-star players not including Vince. </div> Okay...maybe your should hold your breath until the Nets get there.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Apr 14 2008, 01:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Charles @ Apr 14 2008, 01:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Right now I see the Nets building around Devin Harris, Josh Boone, their two first round picks, and possibly SWAT, Krstic, Diop, Marcus, maybe even Ager. All YOUNG players. Carter doesn't really fit in that mold.</div> That core of young players is pathetic. If it doesn't improve quickly, the Nets have a bleak future. I don't think the man who could only manage to accumulate those players is the guy who should be making decisions about what to do next. </div> Would you rather build around that for the future, or Vince in the present and the future? I don't think you can put the two together if you really want to be a championship contender.
I love Vince and I love the Nets. but right now, they dont fit. One is ready to win now, and one needs to build for the future. Trade VC, get cap space, he wins, nets win, all fans are happy
I'm tickled when people speak of players like Garnett and Brand as "true" building blocks for title teams and relegate Carter to being, at best, a "complimentary" player. How many deep playoff runs did Brand bring the Bulls and Clippers? That's right, zero. How many times did Garnett get the Wolves past the first round? Once? How many times have both players' teams failed to even make the playoffs? Answer: quite a few. The reality is that until Garnett was paired with two veteran, allstar perimeter talents, one of whom is versatile and clutch enough to create a shot for himself or a teammate at any point in the game at any place on the floor, Garnett was going nowhere. And that perimeter veteran (Pierce), who now compliments Garnett so well, hasn't tasted the playoffs in years and would not be doing so this year were it not for the trades that brought Garnett and Allen to Boston. ALL players on great teams are complimentary because a compliment of talents -- a melding where one player's strengths maximizes another's or mitigates his weaknesses -- is what's required to win. How did Wade look this year when Shaq showed up out of shape and unmotivated? How did Shaq look this year when Wade was not 100% physically? How did both of them look when the key role players from their title team were either gone or washed up? With Vince Carter, the Nets have a player whose age, talents, career statistics, and accomplishments compare well to Pierce's. They are functionally identical players, and there is absolutely no reason to think that Carter couldn't be just as important to a winning team as Pierce is to the team that this year has the NBA's best record. One place they do differ is in salary, where Pierce will earn about $10M more over the next three seasons than Vince will. Now tell me again how Boston would have been better off dumping Pierce for "young prospects" or "expiring contracts"? Yes, those young prospects like Gerald Green (now out of the league) and Al Jefferson, now anchoring one of the worst teams in the league. Oh, and isn't Minnesota following that philosophy now, getting young players and top draft picks like Randy Foye? How's that going? Then there's Jeff Green, who the Sonics acquired for Ray Allen. He's really made an immediate impact with Seattle, along with that other top rookie. Check back with me in 5 years, and the odds are still overwhelming that none of those "rebuilding" teams will be more than a 6th seed and first round exit in the playoffs, if that. You need a whole lot of luck, first and foremost, to be anything beyond that. And the one thing you can do to minimize the role of luck and maximize the role of expertise in putting it all together is to go with known quantities -- i.e., veteran players that earn a lot of money -- as opposed to the always hyped and almost always overvalued "young players". They're often called "prospects" for a reason and the reason is that their ultimate value is uncertain. If the Nets could trade Carter today for the number one 2008 draft pick, there's a good chance that that player would never end up as productive and offensively valuable as Vince is right now, bum ankle and all. Not every draft has a Dwight Howard or LeBron James. So, IF it can be done, I still think the soundest course of action for this team, which still has Vince playing at a very high level and a nice, young, two-way point guard in Devin Harris, is to trade Jefferson and some of the youth/picks for an all-star caliber big man. That has much better odds of getting the Nets deep in the playoffs than does repeated trips to the lottery.
Carter isn't overpaid. He makes around the same as other comparable swingmen in the league. And Carter played WELL for much of the season even despite the injury troubles. He just didn't play GREAT to make up for all the other deficiencies on the team. Earlier in the season, Carter took a lot of flack from some in the media and fans. For example, take that Yahoo columnist Adrian Wojnarowski who gave Carter a LVP award when they were going through that season crippling 9 game losing streak where they were playing some TERRIBLE team defense. Yet, that douche columnist was blaming the losing streak primarily on Carter when the main problem was clearly their lack of any kind of team defense. If the Nets want to completely rebuild then it doesn't make sense to keep Carter around. If they could trade him for expiring contracts then the people who believe Carter is so overpaid should be very happy with a trade like that. However, if the Nets want to reload and stay competitive for next season (which is the route I hope they take) then Carter could definitely be a part of that.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FOMW @ Apr 14 2008, 02:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm tickled when people speak of players like Garnett and Brand as "true" building blocks for title teams and relegate Carter to being, at best, a "complimentary" player. How many deep playoff runs did Brand bring the Bulls and Clippers? That's right, zero. How many times did Garnett get the Wolves past the first round? Once? How many times have both players' teams failed to even make the playoffs? Answer: quite a few. The reality is that until Garnett was paired with two veteran, allstar perimeter talents, one of whom is versatile and clutch enough to create a shot for himself or a teammate at any point in the game at any place on the floor, Garnett was going nowhere. And that perimeter veteran (Pierce), who now compliments Garnett so well, hasn't tasted the playoffs in years and would not be doing so this year were it not for the trades that brought Garnett and Allen to Boston. ALL players on great teams are complimentary because a compliment of talents -- a melding where one player's strengths maximizes another's or mitigates his weaknesses -- is what's required to win. How did Wade look this year when Shaq showed up out of shape and unmotivated? How did Shaq look this year when Wade was not 100% physically? How did both of them look when the key role players from their title team were either gone or washed up? With Vince Carter, the Nets have a player whose age, talents, career statistics, and accomplishments compare well to Pierce's. They are functionally identical players, and there is absolutely no reason to think that Carter couldn't be just as important to a winning team as Pierce is to the team that this year has the NBA's best record. One place they do differ is in salary, where Pierce will earn about $10M more over the next three seasons than Vince will. Now tell me again how Boston would have been better off dumping Pierce for "young prospects" or "expiring contracts"? Yes, those young prospects like Gerald Green (now out of the league) and Al Jefferson, now anchoring one of the worst teams in the league. Oh, and isn't Minnesota following that philosophy now, getting young players and top draft picks like Randy Foye? How's that going? Then there's Jeff Green, who the Sonics acquired for Ray Allen. He's really made an immediate impact with Seattle, along with that other top rookie. Check back with me in 5 years, and the odds are still overwhelming that none of those "rebuilding" teams will be more than a 6th seed and first round exit in the playoffs, if that. You need a whole lot of luck, first and foremost, to be anything beyond that. And the one thing you can do to minimize the role of luck and maximize the role of expertise in putting it all together is to go with known quantities -- i.e., veteran players that earn a lot of money -- as opposed to the always hyped and almost always overvalued "young players". They're often called "prospects" for a reason and the reason is that their ultimate value is uncertain. If the Nets could trade Carter today for the number one 2008 draft pick, there's a good chance that that player would never end up as productive and offensively valuable as Vince is right now, bum ankle and all. Not every draft has a Dwight Howard or LeBron James. So, IF it can be done, I still think the soundest course of action for this team, which still has Vince playing at a very high level and a nice, young, two-way point guard in Devin Harris, is to trade Jefferson and some of the youth/picks for an all-star caliber big man. That has much better odds of getting the Nets deep in the playoffs than does repeated trips to the lottery.</div> I agree with the last 2 posts... surround vince with a big and we'd be a threat.
The Celtics tried like hell to trade Pierce. He made too much money, so it was damn lucky McHale gifted them a true superstar or they would be completely f'd.
Signing Vince to that contract was irresponsible and stupid, and nobody has given one good reason why that is not the case.
