<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ May 29 2008, 12:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I want a player that is at worst a solid rotation guy whose current upside is a solid starter. I don't want a guy who's upside is potential superstar and at worst not even in the league in 2 or 3 years. Those solid guys can always be combined and get you a superstar (like the Celtics did). I also wouldn't mind a team with all solid guys like the Pistons. Trying to hit homeruns with draft picks only puts you in a bad place when they don't work out. Can't trade them and you're left with nothing. DeAndre Jordan has way to much downside to risk the upside. And the Nets don't have that kind of freedom right now.</div> I disagree.. the Pistons don't have solid rotation guys, they have very good starters. Even then, winning without a stud is an exception, not a rule. I would take a risk for a stud big man - especially since we're not close to contending next year. Now is the time to take that chance.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NattaNerNuttaMan @ May 29 2008, 01:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#1_Yinka_Dare_Fan @ May 28 2008, 11:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He can DUNK! Like the stroshow!</div> He is starting to sound rather similar to Stro. Extremely high upside, super athletic, but very raw and doesn't show passion....hmmmm...I'd stay clear too </div> And Stro was a high-flyer in NBA Live 2006! Can you imagine adding another superstar player to this already stacked team?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 29 2008, 06:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ May 29 2008, 12:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I want a player that is at worst a solid rotation guy whose current upside is a solid starter. I don't want a guy who's upside is potential superstar and at worst not even in the league in 2 or 3 years. Those solid guys can always be combined and get you a superstar (like the Celtics did). I also wouldn't mind a team with all solid guys like the Pistons. Trying to hit homeruns with draft picks only puts you in a bad place when they don't work out. Can't trade them and you're left with nothing. DeAndre Jordan has way to much downside to risk the upside. And the Nets don't have that kind of freedom right now.</div> I disagree.. the Pistons don't have solid rotation guys, they have very good starters. Even then, winning without a stud is an exception, not a rule. I would take a risk for a stud big man - especially since we're not close to contending next year. Now is the time to take that chance. </div> I disagree with this assessment. The pistons have good starters and a solid bench. No team in the NBA today can win without a bench to backup its starters. The year they won, they had Okur, Mike James, Lindsey Hunter, and Corliss Williamson who are all solid players in their own aspects. This year they have Maxiell, Stuckey, Hunter again who are all solid bench players. At this point of time, I'd rather get solid players that have proved that they belong in the NBA. We still have too many developing players to risk taking on 3 more. If we get DeAndre Jordan, he will just be fighting for minutes for people who need minutes to still prove themselves. If we can't get any veterans that fill our needs I'd rather draft our needs then take on a risk. Love has shown that he can play effectively producing solid numbers, where DeAndre has not. We have also seen Love's passion for the game. I do not want another season of unmotivated players such as Swift and Marcus Williams... worst of all possibly adding to it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (logik15 @ May 29 2008, 07:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 29 2008, 06:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ May 29 2008, 12:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I want a player that is at worst a solid rotation guy whose current upside is a solid starter. I don't want a guy who's upside is potential superstar and at worst not even in the league in 2 or 3 years. Those solid guys can always be combined and get you a superstar (like the Celtics did). I also wouldn't mind a team with all solid guys like the Pistons. Trying to hit homeruns with draft picks only puts you in a bad place when they don't work out. Can't trade them and you're left with nothing. DeAndre Jordan has way to much downside to risk the upside. And the Nets don't have that kind of freedom right now.</div> I disagree.. the Pistons don't have solid rotation guys, they have very good starters. Even then, winning without a stud is an exception, not a rule. I would take a risk for a stud big man - especially since we're not close to contending next year. Now is the time to take that chance. </div> I disagree with this assessment. The pistons have good starters and a solid bench. No team in the NBA today can win without a bench to backup its starters. The year they won, they had Okur, Mike James, Lindsey Hunter, and Corliss Williamson who are all solid players in their own aspects. This year they have Maxiell, Stuckey, Hunter again who are all solid bench players. At this point of time, I'd rather get solid players that have proved that they belong in the NBA. We still have too many developing players to risk taking on 3 more. If we get DeAndre Jordan, he will just be fighting for minutes for people who need minutes to still prove themselves. If we can't get any veterans that fill our needs I'd rather draft our needs then take on a risk. Love has shown that he can play effectively producing solid numbers, where DeAndre has not. We have also seen Love's passion for the game. I do not want another season of unmotivated players such as Swift and Marcus Williams... worst of all possibly adding to it. </div> If you have a stud, the role players are more open and look a whole lot better. I know one thing for sure, 1 team out of the past 25 years has won a title without a top 10 player. You can take the odds that we'll end up like the Pistons with a less risk, less reward move. I'd rather hope for the stud. You find your stud big man and it's much easier to fit the pieces around him. Drafting at 10, I don't think about rotation players, I think about impact starters. I can get rotation players with low 1st, 2nds, and shrewd free agency moves. And again, the Nets are in a prime position to take this risk. If the pick flames out, what did we lose out on? We're still mediocre. Dare to be great. Roll the dice.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 29 2008, 08:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (logik15 @ May 29 2008, 07:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 29 2008, 06:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ May 29 2008, 12:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I want a player that is at worst a solid rotation guy whose current upside is a solid starter. I don't want a guy who's upside is potential superstar and at worst not even in the league in 2 or 3 years. Those solid guys can always be combined and get you a superstar (like the Celtics did). I also wouldn't mind a team with all solid guys like the Pistons. Trying to hit homeruns with draft picks only puts you in a bad place when they don't work out. Can't trade them and you're left with nothing. DeAndre Jordan has way to much downside to risk the upside. And the Nets don't have that kind of freedom right now.</div> I disagree.. the Pistons don't have solid rotation guys, they have very good starters. Even then, winning without a stud is an exception, not a rule. I would take a risk for a stud big man - especially since we're not close to contending next year. Now is the time to take that chance. </div> I disagree with this assessment. The pistons have good starters and a solid bench. No team in the NBA today can win without a bench to backup its starters. The year they won, they had Okur, Mike James, Lindsey Hunter, and Corliss Williamson who are all solid players in their own aspects. This year they have Maxiell, Stuckey, Hunter again who are all solid bench players. At this point of time, I'd rather get solid players that have proved that they belong in the NBA. We still have too many developing players to risk taking on 3 more. If we get DeAndre Jordan, he will just be fighting for minutes for people who need minutes to still prove themselves. If we can't get any veterans that fill our needs I'd rather draft our needs then take on a risk. Love has shown that he can play effectively producing solid numbers, where DeAndre has not. We have also seen Love's passion for the game. I do not want another season of unmotivated players such as Swift and Marcus Williams... worst of all possibly adding to it. </div> If you have a stud, the role players are more open and look a whole lot better. I know one thing for sure, 1 team out of the past 25 years has won a title without a top 10 player. You can take the odds that we'll end up like the Pistons with a less risk, less reward move. I'd rather hope for the stud. You find your stud big man and it's much easier to fit the pieces around him. Drafting at 10, I don't think about rotation players, I think about impact starters. I can get rotation players with low 1st, 2nds, and shrewd free agency moves. And again, the Nets are in a prime position to take this risk. If the pick flames out, what did we lose out on? We're still mediocre. Dare to be great. Roll the dice. </div> Drafting at #10 has slim odds of us actually landing a stud. How many big man studs have actually went at #10 or over... only ones that come off the top of my head is david west. There's a great possibility that he won't develop into the stud big man that we are all looking for. And even if we do draft him, do you really believe lawrence frank will give him that much time in his rookie season? There has been many occassions of frank limiting a rookies time and we all know he isn't the best at actually developing them. Stud big mans with upside go earlier than #10... if teams actually think they have a really good chance of being good in this league. There's a reason why there's so much speculation as where DeAndre Jordan will go. I'm also curious as to why u think Jordan would be better than Love... Love has a better chance of developing into a impact player. I agree we need a stud big man... but I'd rather trade our assets to acquire a proven stud than rather take a low percentage chance of someone developing into one under Franks system. In a sense, the Pistons have top 10 players... as 3 of them has been voted to the all star team the past couple of years. If we dare to be great... i'd rather trade our assets for players with high reward high risk players that have proven themselves... such as ron artest and jermaine oneal.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (logik15 @ May 29 2008, 08:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 29 2008, 08:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (logik15 @ May 29 2008, 07:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 29 2008, 06:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ May 29 2008, 12:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I want a player that is at worst a solid rotation guy whose current upside is a solid starter. I don't want a guy who's upside is potential superstar and at worst not even in the league in 2 or 3 years. Those solid guys can always be combined and get you a superstar (like the Celtics did). I also wouldn't mind a team with all solid guys like the Pistons. Trying to hit homeruns with draft picks only puts you in a bad place when they don't work out. Can't trade them and you're left with nothing. DeAndre Jordan has way to much downside to risk the upside. And the Nets don't have that kind of freedom right now.</div> I disagree.. the Pistons don't have solid rotation guys, they have very good starters. Even then, winning without a stud is an exception, not a rule. I would take a risk for a stud big man - especially since we're not close to contending next year. Now is the time to take that chance. </div> I disagree with this assessment. The pistons have good starters and a solid bench. No team in the NBA today can win without a bench to backup its starters. The year they won, they had Okur, Mike James, Lindsey Hunter, and Corliss Williamson who are all solid players in their own aspects. This year they have Maxiell, Stuckey, Hunter again who are all solid bench players. At this point of time, I'd rather get solid players that have proved that they belong in the NBA. We still have too many developing players to risk taking on 3 more. If we get DeAndre Jordan, he will just be fighting for minutes for people who need minutes to still prove themselves. If we can't get any veterans that fill our needs I'd rather draft our needs then take on a risk. Love has shown that he can play effectively producing solid numbers, where DeAndre has not. We have also seen Love's passion for the game. I do not want another season of unmotivated players such as Swift and Marcus Williams... worst of all possibly adding to it. </div> If you have a stud, the role players are more open and look a whole lot better. I know one thing for sure, 1 team out of the past 25 years has won a title without a top 10 player. You can take the odds that we'll end up like the Pistons with a less risk, less reward move. I'd rather hope for the stud. You find your stud big man and it's much easier to fit the pieces around him. Drafting at 10, I don't think about rotation players, I think about impact starters. I can get rotation players with low 1st, 2nds, and shrewd free agency moves. And again, the Nets are in a prime position to take this risk. If the pick flames out, what did we lose out on? We're still mediocre. Dare to be great. Roll the dice. </div> Drafting at #10 has slim odds of us actually landing a stud. How many big man studs have actually went at #10 or over... only ones that come off the top of my head is david west. There's a great possibility that he won't develop into the stud big man that we are all looking for. And even if we do draft him, do you really believe lawrence frank will give him that much time in his rookie season? There has been many occassions of frank limiting a rookies time and we all know he isn't the best at actually developing them. Stud big mans with upside go earlier than #10... if teams actually think they have a really good chance of being good in this league. There's a reason why there's so much speculation as where DeAndre Jordan will go. I'm also curious as to why u think Jordan would be better than Love... Love has a better chance of developing into a impact player. I agree we need a stud big man... but I'd rather trade our assets to acquire a proven stud than rather take a low percentage chance of someone developing into one under Franks system. In a sense, the Pistons have top 10 players... as 3 of them has been voted to the all star team the past couple of years. If we dare to be great... i'd rather trade our assets for players with high reward high risk players that have proven themselves... such as ron artest and jermaine oneal. </div> This Pistons era has never had a top 10 player, not even close. If you need me to list the top 10 of each year, I can do so. Amare went at #9. DeAndre has more upside than Love, do you see Love developing into a dominant big man? I don't. I'd rather swing for the fences and hope to get a stud than try to acquire several very good starters through the draft. I think that has a lesser probability of happening, actually. The Nets are in a prime position to take some risk here. If Frank doesn't adjust his gameplan to incorporate a young talent, then he needs to be told to do so from above.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 29 2008, 08:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (logik15 @ May 29 2008, 08:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 29 2008, 08:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (logik15 @ May 29 2008, 07:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 29 2008, 06:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ May 29 2008, 12:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I want a player that is at worst a solid rotation guy whose current upside is a solid starter. I don't want a guy who's upside is potential superstar and at worst not even in the league in 2 or 3 years. Those solid guys can always be combined and get you a superstar (like the Celtics did). I also wouldn't mind a team with all solid guys like the Pistons. Trying to hit homeruns with draft picks only puts you in a bad place when they don't work out. Can't trade them and you're left with nothing. DeAndre Jordan has way to much downside to risk the upside. And the Nets don't have that kind of freedom right now.</div> I disagree.. the Pistons don't have solid rotation guys, they have very good starters. Even then, winning without a stud is an exception, not a rule. I would take a risk for a stud big man - especially since we're not close to contending next year. Now is the time to take that chance. </div> I disagree with this assessment. The pistons have good starters and a solid bench. No team in the NBA today can win without a bench to backup its starters. The year they won, they had Okur, Mike James, Lindsey Hunter, and Corliss Williamson who are all solid players in their own aspects. This year they have Maxiell, Stuckey, Hunter again who are all solid bench players. At this point of time, I'd rather get solid players that have proved that they belong in the NBA. We still have too many developing players to risk taking on 3 more. If we get DeAndre Jordan, he will just be fighting for minutes for people who need minutes to still prove themselves. If we can't get any veterans that fill our needs I'd rather draft our needs then take on a risk. Love has shown that he can play effectively producing solid numbers, where DeAndre has not. We have also seen Love's passion for the game. I do not want another season of unmotivated players such as Swift and Marcus Williams... worst of all possibly adding to it. </div> If you have a stud, the role players are more open and look a whole lot better. I know one thing for sure, 1 team out of the past 25 years has won a title without a top 10 player. You can take the odds that we'll end up like the Pistons with a less risk, less reward move. I'd rather hope for the stud. You find your stud big man and it's much easier to fit the pieces around him. Drafting at 10, I don't think about rotation players, I think about impact starters. I can get rotation players with low 1st, 2nds, and shrewd free agency moves. And again, the Nets are in a prime position to take this risk. If the pick flames out, what did we lose out on? We're still mediocre. Dare to be great. Roll the dice. </div> Drafting at #10 has slim odds of us actually landing a stud. How many big man studs have actually went at #10 or over... only ones that come off the top of my head is david west. There's a great possibility that he won't develop into the stud big man that we are all looking for. And even if we do draft him, do you really believe lawrence frank will give him that much time in his rookie season? There has been many occassions of frank limiting a rookies time and we all know he isn't the best at actually developing them. Stud big mans with upside go earlier than #10... if teams actually think they have a really good chance of being good in this league. There's a reason why there's so much speculation as where DeAndre Jordan will go. I'm also curious as to why u think Jordan would be better than Love... Love has a better chance of developing into a impact player. I agree we need a stud big man... but I'd rather trade our assets to acquire a proven stud than rather take a low percentage chance of someone developing into one under Franks system. In a sense, the Pistons have top 10 players... as 3 of them has been voted to the all star team the past couple of years. If we dare to be great... i'd rather trade our assets for players with high reward high risk players that have proven themselves... such as ron artest and jermaine oneal. </div> This Pistons era has never had a top 10 player, not even close. If you need me to list the top 10 of each year, I can do so. Amare went at #9. DeAndre has more upside than Love, do you see Love developing into a dominant big man? I don't. I'd rather swing for the fences and hope to get a stud than try to acquire several very good starters through the draft. I think that has a lesser probability of happening, actually. The Nets are in a prime position to take some risk here. If Frank doesn't adjust his gameplan to incorporate a young talent, then he needs to be told to do so from above. </div> how can you say whose a top 10 player every year... can't you just base it on the all stars of each year? according to the coaches, the bench for the all star teams are the top players in the league who make the most impact. I can say richard hamilton is one of the best shooters in the league... and they don't call billups mr.big shot for nothing. According to Thron, we want to be back in the playoffs next season... so we aren't in a prime position to take some risk but rather address our needs. As i said multiple times before, Love fills our needs more than DeAndre. We all know Frank doesn't trust rookies, and is a purely veteran-based coach. He just stopped playing Williams in the second half of the season and no one is going to tell him otherwise. Right now i see Williams / Boone getting more playing time than Jordan would for the whole season... and the only reason Love would get playing time is because he gives us something we don't have. Enthusiasm, low post threat/defender, and wide set picks.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (logik15 @ May 29 2008, 08:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 29 2008, 08:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (logik15 @ May 29 2008, 08:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 29 2008, 08:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (logik15 @ May 29 2008, 07:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 29 2008, 06:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ May 29 2008, 12:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I want a player that is at worst a solid rotation guy whose current upside is a solid starter. I don't want a guy who's upside is potential superstar and at worst not even in the league in 2 or 3 years. Those solid guys can always be combined and get you a superstar (like the Celtics did). I also wouldn't mind a team with all solid guys like the Pistons. Trying to hit homeruns with draft picks only puts you in a bad place when they don't work out. Can't trade them and you're left with nothing. DeAndre Jordan has way to much downside to risk the upside. And the Nets don't have that kind of freedom right now.</div> I disagree.. the Pistons don't have solid rotation guys, they have very good starters. Even then, winning without a stud is an exception, not a rule. I would take a risk for a stud big man - especially since we're not close to contending next year. Now is the time to take that chance. </div> I disagree with this assessment. The pistons have good starters and a solid bench. No team in the NBA today can win without a bench to backup its starters. The year they won, they had Okur, Mike James, Lindsey Hunter, and Corliss Williamson who are all solid players in their own aspects. This year they have Maxiell, Stuckey, Hunter again who are all solid bench players. At this point of time, I'd rather get solid players that have proved that they belong in the NBA. We still have too many developing players to risk taking on 3 more. If we get DeAndre Jordan, he will just be fighting for minutes for people who need minutes to still prove themselves. If we can't get any veterans that fill our needs I'd rather draft our needs then take on a risk. Love has shown that he can play effectively producing solid numbers, where DeAndre has not. We have also seen Love's passion for the game. I do not want another season of unmotivated players such as Swift and Marcus Williams... worst of all possibly adding to it. </div> If you have a stud, the role players are more open and look a whole lot better. I know one thing for sure, 1 team out of the past 25 years has won a title without a top 10 player. You can take the odds that we'll end up like the Pistons with a less risk, less reward move. I'd rather hope for the stud. You find your stud big man and it's much easier to fit the pieces around him. Drafting at 10, I don't think about rotation players, I think about impact starters. I can get rotation players with low 1st, 2nds, and shrewd free agency moves. And again, the Nets are in a prime position to take this risk. If the pick flames out, what did we lose out on? We're still mediocre. Dare to be great. Roll the dice. </div> Drafting at #10 has slim odds of us actually landing a stud. How many big man studs have actually went at #10 or over... only ones that come off the top of my head is david west. There's a great possibility that he won't develop into the stud big man that we are all looking for. And even if we do draft him, do you really believe lawrence frank will give him that much time in his rookie season? There has been many occassions of frank limiting a rookies time and we all know he isn't the best at actually developing them. Stud big mans with upside go earlier than #10... if teams actually think they have a really good chance of being good in this league. There's a reason why there's so much speculation as where DeAndre Jordan will go. I'm also curious as to why u think Jordan would be better than Love... Love has a better chance of developing into a impact player. I agree we need a stud big man... but I'd rather trade our assets to acquire a proven stud than rather take a low percentage chance of someone developing into one under Franks system. In a sense, the Pistons have top 10 players... as 3 of them has been voted to the all star team the past couple of years. If we dare to be great... i'd rather trade our assets for players with high reward high risk players that have proven themselves... such as ron artest and jermaine oneal. </div> This Pistons era has never had a top 10 player, not even close. If you need me to list the top 10 of each year, I can do so. Amare went at #9. DeAndre has more upside than Love, do you see Love developing into a dominant big man? I don't. I'd rather swing for the fences and hope to get a stud than try to acquire several very good starters through the draft. I think that has a lesser probability of happening, actually. The Nets are in a prime position to take some risk here. If Frank doesn't adjust his gameplan to incorporate a young talent, then he needs to be told to do so from above. </div> how can you say whose a top 10 player every year... can't you just base it on the all stars of each year? according to the coaches, the bench for the all star teams are the top players in the league who make the most impact. I can say richard hamilton is one of the best shooters in the league... and they don't call billups mr.big shot for nothing. According to Thron, we want to be back in the playoffs next season... so we aren't in a prime position to take some risk but rather address our needs. As i said multiple times before, Love fills our needs more than DeAndre. We all know Frank doesn't trust rookies, and is a purely veteran-based coach. He just stopped playing Williams in the second half of the season and no one is going to tell him otherwise. Right now i see Williams / Boone getting more playing time than Jordan would for the whole season... and the only reason Love would get playing time is because he gives us something we don't have. Enthusiasm, low post threat/defender, and wide set picks. </div> Obviously, my top 10 is opinion, but I can back it up. Hamilton is a great mid-range shooter, but his overall game does not have a top 10 impact. Same with Billups. If you have a top 10 player on your team, particularly a top 10 big man, your chances of winning an NBA championship go up dramatically. What is Thorn supposed to say? We don't want to make the playoffs? Every team does. However, grabbing a solid starter to go along with this team does not make us a contender. I could care less about making the playoffs if we get bounced in the 1st or 2nd round. Getting the stud big man is the best way to get us from mediocrity to contender status. I'm not as concerned about needs as I am upside. The Nets could fill needs and still not be contenders. The Pistons, Celtics, Spurs, Lakers, Suns, Hornets, Cavs need to fill needs. We need studs.
Subsitute "good" for "solid" and that's what I really meant. Just in case people have different ideas of what I meant by solid. So, I said the downside of a good rotation player and the upside of at least being a good starter. That's how the Celtics drafted and now they have players like Rondo, Perkins, Allen, and Powe complimenting their stars. They also used other solid picks in Jefferson, Gomes, and West to get get Garnett. That's how the Spurs were built (outside of Duncan), and the Lakers (outside of Kobe). The odds are really low that the Nets will get a stud out of a player who is so questionable that he could be out of the league in 3 years that it would be a wasted pick. Especially if a player has questionable interest in the sport and work ethic. I think the odds are better that a good rotation/potential starter exceeds expectations and becomes a stud. At worst you still have someone of value.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ May 30 2008, 09:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Subsitute "good" for "solid" and that's what I really meant. Just in case people have different ideas of what I meant by solid. So, I said the downside of a good rotation player and the upside of at least being a good starter. That's how the Celtics drafted and now they have players like Rondo, Perkins, Allen, and Powe complimenting their stars. They also used other solid picks in Jefferson, Gomes, and West to get get Garnett. That's how the Spurs were built (outside of Duncan), and the Lakers (outside of Kobe). The odds are really low that the Nets will get a stud out of a player who is so questionable that he could be out of the league in 3 years that it would be a wasted pick. Especially if a player has questionable interest in the sport and work ethic. I think the odds are better that a good rotation/potential starter exceeds expectations and becomes a stud. At worst you still have someone of value.</div> Ok, so you bring up the Celtics and Lakers. Jefferson is one of the best young low post players in the game. He’s the type of guy that could make us a contender in the future. Or traded for an established stud. He was taken with the 15th pick. And Perkins was also a high school player. Kobe = stud. Taken with the 13th pick. Both of these guys had a ton of risk assigned to them before the draft. Both teams were rewarded for taken the risk. Spurs had the luxury of finding role players after the had their stud. And they definitely took risks with Parker and Ginobli. If the Spurs adopted your philosophy, Parker and Ginobli would’ve been too risky for you. And I don’t think you can find players with downsides of a good rotation player. There might be less risk involved, but every drafted player has the potential to flame out. I think it’s less likely that you will consistently find very good starters year after year rather than striking it rich by taking risk. If the Nets were close to contending, I’d be more willing to take a safer bet. If our pick doesn’t work, we weren’t going anywhere anyway. If we get a nice player in the draft, we still need more to contend. History has shown that it’s rare to build a team like the Pistons. No one has ever done it before.
I dont' get how ginobili can be assessed as a risk at pick 58 or 59 of the 2nd round in his draft class. I wouldn't call Perkins a "stud" yet... right now he is just a solid role player. He may or may not be done developing so we don't know. There are a lot of big men taken between 1 and 15 that havn't achieved this "stud" status. You are naming one of the exceptions in jefferson. We are basically saying instead of taking a risk and getting someone who probably won't make an immediate impact, why don't we get someone that fills our needs and would make an immediate impact because he fills those needs. And Parker was a solid pick, they knew of his upside so that doesn't fit our philosophy. Jordan's motivation has already been questioned. Frank is still going to start Boone over DeAndre Jordan. If diop re-signs which he probably won't, he will be the first center off the bench. I'm also pretty sure that Swift would still be over Jordan. With drafting Love, he can make an immediate impact at the PF position if Krstic fails to show glimpses of himself pre-injury and still fails to play defense. Kobe's draft class was one of the best... this draft class isn't. The Nets aren't too far off from contending. I admit we do need a dominant big man... but in the end I believe trading the pick would be more useful than taking a risk. Combining assets, if we would take a risk, i'd rather take a risk in someone like Jermaine O'neal than draft someone questionable like DeAndre Jordan. The upcoming team that resembles the pistons are the Hawks. They have no superstar either... yet they made noise playing against the Celtics. They did as well as the Cavs did against the Celtics. The greatest interest to the team right now is to fill needs than take risks, especially with our move to Brooklyn in 2010. I wouldn't want to waste these years taking high profile risks who may not be of value later on. Of course i'd like to see a trade instead... but if we were to draft, i'd draft a safer pick than a risky one. Whose to say that Love won't develop into a Stud. Some sites compare him to David West.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 30 2008, 11:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Kobe = stud. Taken with the 13th pick.</div> And you are overlooking why he dropped to the 13th pick. Kobe would have been drafted much sooner if not for his agent.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ May 3 2008, 09:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Sean was the first clear "project" pick Rod has taken, and that was in part due to where they were selecting . . . The Nets really tend to take players who are more likely to contribute NOW. I can't see the Nets taking a guy who is just ranked in "potential," not preformance. Yes, the Nets may rate prospects a little differently with Wiki on board, but I just can't see them with two project big men on the roster.</div> Nenad Krstic was a project. Zoran was a project. Rod has taken projects plenty of times. However, you're right more often than not Rod selected players who can contribute now. But that's the past. That's when we were fighting time with Kidd and wanting to contend. We have a young team now. Taking project players will not be a problem.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ May 30 2008, 12:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 30 2008, 11:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Kobe = stud. Taken with the 13th pick.</div> And you are overlooking why he dropped to the 13th pick. Kobe would have been drafted much sooner if not for his agent. </div> I'm not overlooking it. It's part of the reason why he dropped to 13 but he wasn't a Lebron type prospect, either. There was a ton of risk associated with taking the first guard coming out of HS.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (logik15 @ May 30 2008, 11:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I dont' get how ginobili can be assessed as a risk at pick 58 or 59 of the 2nd round in his draft class. I wouldn't call Perkins a "stud" yet... right now he is just a solid role player.</div> I never said he was a stud. I was using him as an example to show that the C's didn't use a safe pick on a role player. He may or may not be done developing so we don't know. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>There are a lot of big men taken between 1 and 15 that havn't achieved this "stud" status. You are naming one of the exceptions in jefferson.</div> Yes, and there are those risky big men who have achieved stud status. I just think the Nets are in a perfect position to take a high risk, high reward player. They don't have much to lose. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>We are basically saying instead of taking a risk and getting someone who probably won't make an immediate impact, why don't we get someone that fills our needs and would make an immediate impact because he fills those needs.</div> Because like I said, the main need we need to fill is the "stud player." We could fill role player/solid starter needs, but then we'd still be a mile away from contending. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>And Parker was a solid pick, they knew of his upside so that doesn't fit our philosophy. Jordan's motivation has already been questioned.</div> No one knows of upside. They take an educated gamble and hope it works out. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Frank is still going to start Boone over DeAndre Jordan. If diop re-signs which he probably won't, he will be the first center off the bench. I'm also pretty sure that Swift would still be over Jordan. With drafting Love, he can make an immediate impact at the PF position if Krstic fails to show glimpses of himself pre-injury and still fails to play defense.</div> I would hope that Boone could beat out Jordan next year. I'm not worried about next year. I want to win a title and I realize that aint gonna happen barring an unlikely blockbuster trade. It's not about next year. I'm willing to sacrifice short-term improvement for possible long-term improvement. And if Frank wouldn't groom our #10 pick with upside, he needs to be told to do so. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Kobe's draft class was one of the best... this draft class isn't.</div> Maybe not the best but who's to say it's not underrated? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The Nets aren't too far off from contending. I admit we do need a dominant big man... but in the end I believe trading the pick would be more useful than taking a risk. Combining assets, if we would take a risk, i'd rather take a risk in someone like Jermaine O'neal than draft someone questionable like DeAndre Jordan.</div>Not sure what would make you think that we're not far from contending. I would have to see the O'Neal proposal to make a decision. All else being equal, I would be fine with a Jordan pick. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The upcoming team that resembles the pistons are the Hawks. They have no superstar either... yet they made noise playing against the Celtics. They did as well as the Cavs did against the Celtics.</div> The Hawks are not contenders.. one team in 25 years has one a title with no stud. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The greatest interest to the team right now is to fill needs than take risks, especially with our move to Brooklyn in 2010. I wouldn't want to waste these years taking high profile risks who may not be of value later on. Of course i'd like to see a trade instead... but if we were to draft, i'd draft a safer pick than a risky one. Whose to say that Love won't develop into a Stud. Some sites compare him to David West.</div>If we have a stud big man we have a better chance of grabbing Lebron. If we're just better, I don't see it happening. I never said Love couldn't become a stud, I just don't think it's likely. People who compare him to West are neglecting the athleticism factor.
Chad Ford's mock draft version 4.0 has the Nets taking Deandre Jordan @ 10th once again... While the knicks are taking Anthony Randolph @ 6th. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/co...ockDraft-080609
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#1_Yinka_Dare_Fan @ May 29 2008, 07:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NattaNerNuttaMan @ May 29 2008, 01:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#1_Yinka_Dare_Fan @ May 28 2008, 11:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He can DUNK! Like the stroshow!</div> He is starting to sound rather similar to Stro. Extremely high upside, super athletic, but very raw and doesn't show passion....hmmmm...I'd stay clear too </div> And Stro was a high-flyer in NBA Live 2006! Can you imagine adding another superstar player to this already stacked team? </div> Isn't Stro's vert like 10" more than DeAndre Jordan's?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid Chocolate @ Jun 10 2008, 10:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>whose the dumbass who merged this and wrote "emerged"?</div> It wasn't me! GMJigger maybe
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NattaNerNuttaMan @ Jun 10 2008, 09:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#1_Yinka_Dare_Fan @ May 29 2008, 07:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NattaNerNuttaMan @ May 29 2008, 01:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#1_Yinka_Dare_Fan @ May 28 2008, 11:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He can DUNK! Like the stroshow!</div> He is starting to sound rather similar to Stro. Extremely high upside, super athletic, but very raw and doesn't show passion....hmmmm...I'd stay clear too </div> And Stro was a high-flyer in NBA Live 2006! Can you imagine adding another superstar player to this already stacked team? </div> Isn't Stro's vert like 10" more than DeAndre Jordan's? </div> Damn if its true.
