<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (d-blockrep2 @ Apr 21 2008, 07:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>My argument is if the coach can not develop young players then what the hell are you doing coaching a team. Not every draft pick is going to be great but look at coaches like Sam Mitchell, Eddie Jordan, shit even Flip Saunders, their young guys are making significant impact in the game. As a coach with the inabilty to develop guys you must be doing something wrong. Also trading the picks and adding veteran presence to the bench brings us back the problem we had in the 2005-2006 season, Jacque Vaughn, Scott Padgett, Zoran Planinic and Lamond Murray yea... its funny how quick do we forget that mess.</div> Frank has been presented with a mismatched roster for years and been forced to MacGyver his way to wins because of it. You can't make prime rib from spam, but Frank does his best to make something out that spam. What young guys does Sam Mitchell have making a significant impact? What have Joey Graham and Bargnani done? Flip Saunders has the luxury of Joe Dumars making good draft picks for him. Darko aside, Joe D identifies players that fit what he wants and that can play. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I'm all for drafting guys within the 10-20, we have stars we need solid role players, guys like Rush, CDR and Courtney Lee within the right system can the solid</div> What stars do you think the Nets have that they only need add role players?
Saying that Frank can't coach the young kids makes trading up even more likely to me. It's a lot easier to coach a guy with all world talent like Rose (or Gordon, whoever they would get) then to try and get a guy like Buddinger or CDR to find a spot in the rotation and contribute to the team. Utah gave up two firsts and a conditional first the next year to move from six to three back in 2005 when they drafted Deron Williams. So maybe the Nets give up both firsts to move up two, three spots, and even then they might have to give up a future first.
This is the deepest draft I've seen in a long time. If we trade our picks it better be for a future superstar. I hope Kiki knows what he's doin
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J-HoAgZ @ Apr 22 2008, 09:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This is the deepest draft I've seen in a long time. If we trade our picks it better be for a future superstar. I hope Kiki knows what he's doin</div> People have been saying that for the past 3 years. Future superstar? Teams with top 3 pick usually sit with their fingers crossed hoping they get a future superstar. I'd be more than satisfied with a solid starter on a top10 pick. Too many of them are plain busts.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Apr 22 2008, 11:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J-HoAgZ @ Apr 22 2008, 09:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This is the deepest draft I've seen in a long time. If we trade our picks it better be for a future superstar. I hope Kiki knows what he's doin</div> People have been saying that for the past 3 years. Future superstar? Teams with top 3 pick usually sit with their fingers crossed hoping they get a future superstar. I'd be more than satisfied with a solid starter on a top10 pick. Too many of them are plain busts. </div> I agree. I don't see much difference between #5 and #10 in this draft. The one thing I would like to see the Nets do this year is get a guy with great work ethic and who is serious about the game of basketball. We have 2 guys (Sean and Marcus Williams) that would be so much better if they weren't so slow between the ears. I guess what I'm saying is I want mature players. That's what Dumars does. Maxiell, Stuckey, Afflalo all solid guys. You don't see any immature guys on Utah, Boston, San Antonio. That would be my #1 priority for any prospect I look at. Mature, good defender with either some post moves or a jump shot. If you don't have that don't bother applying.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 22 2008, 08:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Apr 22 2008, 11:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J-HoAgZ @ Apr 22 2008, 09:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This is the deepest draft I've seen in a long time. If we trade our picks it better be for a future superstar. I hope Kiki knows what he's doin</div> People have been saying that for the past 3 years. Future superstar? Teams with top 3 pick usually sit with their fingers crossed hoping they get a future superstar. I'd be more than satisfied with a solid starter on a top10 pick. Too many of them are plain busts. </div> I agree. I don't see much difference between #5 and #10 in this draft. The one thing I would like to see the Nets do this year is get a guy with great work ethic and who is serious about the game of basketball. We have 2 guys (Sean and Marcus Williams) that would be so much better if they weren't so slow between the ears. I guess what I'm saying is I want mature players. That's what Dumars does. Maxiell, Stuckey, Afflalo all solid guys. You don't see any immature guys on Utah, Boston, San Antonio. That would be my #1 priority for any prospect I look at. Mature, good defender with either some post moves or a jump shot. If you don't have that don't bother applying. </div> Well Thorn HAD that logic in the 2001 draft, and we ended up passing on Arenas mainly because of that.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (infinet @ Apr 22 2008, 12:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 22 2008, 08:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Apr 22 2008, 11:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J-HoAgZ @ Apr 22 2008, 09:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This is the deepest draft I've seen in a long time. If we trade our picks it better be for a future superstar. I hope Kiki knows what he's doin</div> People have been saying that for the past 3 years. Future superstar? Teams with top 3 pick usually sit with their fingers crossed hoping they get a future superstar. I'd be more than satisfied with a solid starter on a top10 pick. Too many of them are plain busts. </div> I agree. I don't see much difference between #5 and #10 in this draft. The one thing I would like to see the Nets do this year is get a guy with great work ethic and who is serious about the game of basketball. We have 2 guys (Sean and Marcus Williams) that would be so much better if they weren't so slow between the ears. I guess what I'm saying is I want mature players. That's what Dumars does. Maxiell, Stuckey, Afflalo all solid guys. You don't see any immature guys on Utah, Boston, San Antonio. That would be my #1 priority for any prospect I look at. Mature, good defender with either some post moves or a jump shot. If you don't have that don't bother applying. </div> Well Thorn HAD that logic in the 2001 draft, and we ended up passing on Arenas mainly because of that. </div> All drafts are gambles and you have to be lucky to win something.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (infinet @ Apr 22 2008, 01:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Apr 22 2008, 08:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I agree. I don't see much difference between #5 and #10 in this draft. The one thing I would like to see the Nets do this year is get a guy with great work ethic and who is serious about the game of basketball. We have 2 guys (Sean and Marcus Williams) that would be so much better if they weren't so slow between the ears. I guess what I'm saying is I want mature players. That's what Dumars does. Maxiell, Stuckey, Afflalo all solid guys. You don't see any immature guys on Utah, Boston, San Antonio. That would be my #1 priority for any prospect I look at. Mature, good defender with either some post moves or a jump shot. If you don't have that don't bother applying.</div> Well Thorn HAD that logic in the 2001 draft, and we ended up passing on Arenas mainly because of that. </div> Him and 30 other teams. I don't recall maturity being the issue that detered Thorn from taking Arenas. If so, it's not going to work with everyone. Every draft you can throw out a risk that was passed over by a bunch of teams and panned out.
Seriously, your argument is Gilbert Arenas? One of the most successful 2nd round draft pick ever? Dude, he wasn't even the first pick for the team that DID draft him. He's an anomaly. An outliner. But back to your original point about 2001 draft, they didn't draft what Netted suggested. They took Eddie Griffin. Guess where he is now and why? On the other hand, if you mean trading Griffin for RJ, look how that panned out?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Apr 22 2008, 02:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Seriously, your argument is Gilbert Arenas? One of the most successful 2nd round draft pick ever? Dude, he wasn't even the first pick for the team that DID draft him. He's an anomaly. An outliner. But back to your original point about 2001 draft, they didn't draft what Netted suggested. They took Eddie Griffin. Guess where he is now and why? On the other hand, if you mean trading Griffin for RJ, look how that panned out? </div> I believe the trade was in the works when they selected Griffin. And that is a prime example of what I'm talking about. If someone mentioned selecting Jefferson at #7 they would have been laughed at, but he would have been a way better selection at #7 than Griffin who was projected to go in that area. Maybe it's better to reach a little on a solid guy that fits what you are trying to build than to select the best talent on the board regardless of other issues. We did that the past 2 years with both Williamses and while they may turn into solid pros it is obvious that those players take a lot more work and time. It's not even known how great the reward will be.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Apr 22 2008, 02:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Seriously, your argument is Gilbert Arenas? One of the most successful 2nd round draft pick ever? Dude, he wasn't even the first pick for the team that DID draft him. He's an anomaly. An outliner. But back to your original point about 2001 draft, they didn't draft what Netted suggested. They took Eddie Griffin. Guess where he is now and why? On the other hand, if you mean trading Griffin for RJ, look how that panned out? </div> The Nets picked Griffin for Houston and Houston picked the 3 first rounders based upon what the Nets wanted. The 2001 first round picks were RJ, Twin and the guy Jerry West told Thorn was better than Arenas.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (d-blockrep2 @ Apr 21 2008, 06:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>My argument is if the coach can not develop young players then what the hell are you doing coaching a team. Not every draft pick is going to be great but look at coaches like Sam Mitchell, Eddie Jordan, shit even Flip Saunders, their young guys are making significant impact in the game. As a coach with the inabilty to develop guys you must be doing something wrong. Also trading the picks and adding veteran presence to the bench brings us back the problem we had in the 2005-2006 season, Jacque Vaughn, Scott Padgett, Zoran Planinic and Lamond Murray yea... its funny how quick do we forget that mess. I'm all for drafting guys within the 10-20, we have stars we need solid role players, guys like Rush, CDR and Courtney Lee within the right system can the solid</div> in 2004-05, Nenad Krstic (taken at #24) played 1,965 minutes, averaging 10 ppg in regular season and 18 in the playoffs. in 2005-06, Antoine Wright (taken at #15) played 370 minutes and didnt even average 2 ppg. in 2006-07, Marcus Williams (#22), Josh Boone (#23) and Hassan Adams (#54) played 2,375 minutes between them, meaning a rookie was on the floor 30 minutes per game on average. Williams who was out of shape still was second in the NBA in assists among back up point guards. Boone was coming off shoulder surgery but on occasion showed flashes of what we have seen this year. Adams, drafted at #54, started 8 games (Nets were 1-7) six more than any other player picked in the second half of the second round of the 2006 draft. in 2007-08, Sean Williams (#17) played 1,262 minutes and started 29 games. Those two numbers are greater than any player drafted after him and greater than half the players drafted ahead of him (8 out of 16). Boone made great strides, leading the 2006 rookie class in double doubles. Yet, we are continually treated to this drivel that Frank doesn't play rookies. He didnt play Wright, who is a certified bust...not on him...and Ilic, who was a bust at #43...also not on him. I defy you to find a coach who has played non-lottery draft picks more over the past four years. You might want to consider that Marcus and Sean Williams often don't play well, miss defensive assignments and may have on occasion a lousy attitude.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome @ Apr 22 2008, 04:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yet, we are continually treated to this drivel that Frank doesn't play rookies.</div> To be fair, there is considerable difference between playing and developing. Additionally, Frank has grown as a coach. With Marcus, he gave him enough rope to hang himself before taking him out of the significant rotation. That is a quite a bit different from him playing Krstic because he was out of other options.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 22 2008, 03:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome @ Apr 22 2008, 04:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yet, we are continually treated to this drivel that Frank doesn't play rookies.</div> To be fair, there is considerable difference between playing and developing. Additionally, Frank has grown as a coach. With Marcus, he gave him enough rope to hang himself before taking him out of the significant rotation. That is a quite a bit different from him playing Krstic because he was out of other options. </div> Boone developed nicely under Frank. Krstic developed nicely under Frank. Marcus Williams and Sean Williams are about what you can expect from players drafted at #22 and #17. I hope for the best. Wright was and is a bust. If he had been a #25 pick, he would have been as disappointing. (As someone noted, Wright played 3 games while McInnis was with the team, 36 after he left...there were reports that Frank's biggest issue with Wright was his lack of focus on the game). Krstic didn't play the first few weeks of his rookie year for several reasons. He was a rookie. Mourning was playing (after a fashion). and he spoke little or no English. And no one ever mentions how well Devin Harris played after Frank told him the team was his. That counts as player development. Compare what he has done with Harris with what Johnson did. And should Boki Nachbar's development be added to the plus column?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 22 2008, 02:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Apr 22 2008, 02:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Seriously, your argument is Gilbert Arenas? One of the most successful 2nd round draft pick ever? Dude, he wasn't even the first pick for the team that DID draft him. He's an anomaly. An outliner. But back to your original point about 2001 draft, they didn't draft what Netted suggested. They took Eddie Griffin. Guess where he is now and why? On the other hand, if you mean trading Griffin for RJ, look how that panned out? </div> The Nets picked Griffin for Houston and Houston picked the 3 first rounders based upon what the Nets wanted. The 2001 first round picks were RJ, Twin and the guy Jerry West told Thorn was better than Arenas. </div> Not quite. West told Thorn Armstrong could play. Thorn wasn't enamored of Arenas' maturity (DUH!). And if you want a second round hand-wringing, try this: Stefanski told me that in 2005, the Nets tried desperately to get a pick at the top of the second round to take a high school player named Monta Ellis. They didnt try hard enough.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pegs @ Apr 21 2008, 08:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ Apr 21 2008, 09:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pegs @ Apr 21 2008, 08:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real @ Apr 21 2008, 09:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If you can package the lottery pick and the no. 21 for a shot at Beasley, Rose, Mayo, Gordon, Bayless, Gallinari, or Lopez, the question is why wouldn't you go for it?</div> Because half of those players are overrated. </div> What about the other half? </div> I highly doubt the teams in position to draft those players would trade away their pick. </div> Yea the top 4 prospects ( Lopez, Mayo, Beasley, and Rose) are the only sure things in this draft. Everybody else is a huge risk, and have a high chance of not living up to their draft pick. I'd package the picks for a good young player, that I know it gonna become something.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetIncome @ Apr 22 2008, 02:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Not quite. West told Thorn Armstrong could play. Thorn wasn't enamored of Arenas' maturity (DUH!). And if you want a second round hand-wringing, try this: Stefanski told me that in 2005, the Nets tried desperately to get a pick at the top of the second round to take a high school player named Monta Ellis. They didnt try hard enough.</div> My oh my... could you even imagine having a back court of Monta Ellis/Devin Harris or even Monta/Kidd. zoom zoom
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (o.iatlhawksfan @ Apr 22 2008, 06:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yea the top 4 prospects ( Lopez, Mayo, Beasley, and Rose) are the only sure things in this draft. Everybody else is a huge risk, and have a high chance of not living up to their draft pick. I'd package the picks for a good young player, that I know it gonna become something.</div> Is Lopez really a sure thing? I've never seen him play, but what I've read doesn't convince me that he is necessarily a guy that can help immediately or that will ever be more than a Greg Foster. Would anyone who's watched him closely care to chime in?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (o.iatlhawksfan @ Apr 22 2008, 03:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yea the top 4 prospects ( Lopez, Mayo, Beasley, and Rose) are the only sure things in this draft. Everybody else is a huge risk, and have a high chance of not living up to their draft pick. I'd package the picks for a good young player, that I know it gonna become something.</div> The Italian kid might turn out to be a good player. If not, at least he'd sell a few extra seats.
