<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The New Jersey Nets have offered the Indiana Pacers Nenad Krstic and Richard Jefferson for Jermaine O'Neal. For now, though, Indiana is holding off on it.</div>-DraftexpressJersey offered this??? Nets are getting ripped off.
If this is true, very stupid by the Nets. I am happy of trading either one of these guys, and maybe even another role player, but not our 2 brightest young players.
Richard Jefferson isn't that young he is 27 years old right now, but anyways I think that the Pacers would get the better part of this deal.
Pacers would probably get better end of this deal...but thats not what the Nets would be thinking in this scenario. The trio of Kidd/Carter/O'Neal could do wonders in the East. It would hurt giving up Krstic after all the promise he has shown in his young career, but I can understand the Nets wanting to do this with their "win now" mentality.
Nets get the better end of the deal..however this puts NJ as a possible favorite in the East. If you gotta overpay to contend...you overpay...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Combs @ Jun 28 2007, 12:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Nets get the better end of the deal..however this puts NJ as a possible favorite in the East. If you gotta overpay to contend...you overpay...</div>They are already contenders. 50 wint eam 2 years back when they had absolutely no bench (and lost their 6th man in 2nd round of playoffs), and last year they had no big man basically the whole year, including the playoffs, yet should have at the very least brought Cavs to 7 (remember the the games number 2 and 4 collapses). JO would be a huge step forward, but not if it means giving up BOTH RJ (a 20/7 guy) and Krstic (16/7 before injury).
I'd hate this deal. It doesn't help the Pacers, just delays Granger's development and totally ignores our need for a pg
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Jun 28 2007, 10:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'd hate this deal. It doesn't help the Pacers, just delays Granger's development and totally ignores our need for a pg</div>Granger would prob take over as the starting 4 in this case.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DRob-50-Forever @ Jun 28 2007, 04:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Granger would prob take over as the starting 4 in this case.</div>No, that would hinger Ike Diogu
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Jun 28 2007, 03:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>No, that would hinger Ike Diogu</div>Like Jermaine O'Neal is already doing....In any circumstance, someone's development will be hindered. It's just the way it works.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GrizzFanTaylor @ Jun 28 2007, 04:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Like Jermaine O'Neal is already doing....In any circumstance, someone's development will be hindered. It's just the way it works.</div>no, but we'd be trading JO in the tradeOn the Pacers you can dinder anyone's development except Danny Granger's and Ike Diogu's. THose are the future of the Pacers, along with Shawne Williams who isn't ready to start
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Jun 28 2007, 03:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>no, but we'd be trading JO in the tradeOn the Pacers you can dinder anyone's development except Danny Granger's and Ike Diogu's. THose are the future of the Pacers, along with Shawne Williams who isn't ready to start</div>You don't get what I'm saying.If JO is traded for Jefferson, then Granger or Diogu's development will be hindered, but if you keep JO, won't be still be hindering Diogu's development?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GrizzFanTaylor @ Jun 28 2007, 05:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You don't get what I'm saying.If JO is traded for Jefferson, then Granger or Diogu's development will be hindered, but if you keep JO, won't be still be hindering Diogu's development?</div>Yes, but I'd rather have one player's development being hingered than 2. And I think Granger has more potential than Ike. Besides, I'm pretty cofident JO will be gone at the start of the season in a fair and helpful deal.
If I'm NJ do this, RJ might be a nice small forward but you can find more of those especially with the 17th pick or whatever. Krstic is good but isn't as good as Jermaine O'neal and with Kidd and Carter they could so some damage. Nachbar (sp) proved last season he can step up and like I said, its not hard finding small forwards who can do what RJ can but it is finding good bigs like JO. Probably could even offer their MLE to someone like Kapono or something.Kidd Carter Kapono Moore O'neal looks nice to me.
JO is injury-prone and inconsistent. Krstic is on the rise and RJ is a solid player. I wouldn't do this if I was the Nets. Krstic was a beast before he got hurt. Unless there's a serious injury that lingers for Krstic, they shouldn't trade him. If the Nets considered this, I'm thinking they think Krstic's injury was serious and could last throughout his career. But then Rod Thorn HAS been slipping in recent years.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Let Em Hear This @ Jun 30 2007, 03:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>JO is injury-prone and inconsistent. Krstic is on the rise and RJ is a solid player. I wouldn't do this if I was the Nets. Krstic was a beast before he got hurt. Unless there's a serious injury that lingers for Krstic, they shouldn't trade him. If the Nets considered this, I'm thinking they think Krstic's injury was serious and could last throughout his career. But then Rod Thorn HAS been slipping in recent years.</div>I agree. Don't do it. Another star wouldn't go well with Carter/Kidd IMO.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MaRdYC26 @ Jun 30 2007, 03:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I agree. Don't do it. Another star wouldn't go well with Carter/Kidd IMO.</div>Kidd is the type of player that can play with any star. They need another star player, preferebly a big man, if they want to make a title run before Kidd and Carter are out of New Jersey, which won't be too much longer.