<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NetsDaily)</div><div class='quotemain'>Barring a trade–and Fred Kerber hinted again that the Nets “might trade back a few spots”–the Nets expect to take the best player available at both #10 and #21, and if that means two bigs or two shooters, so be it. But the team does like a few players: Danilo Gallinari and the Lopez twins up top and NC State’s J.J. Hickson at #21. ”We like him,” Rod Thorn said of the 6′-9″ power forward. “He has got potential.”</div> Nets in hunt for big man - Fred Kerber - New York Post Lowe raises assessment of Hickson - Chip Alexander - Raleigh News & Observer That's good, Hickson would be really nice. I hope that he actually goes with this BPA thing. Also, I'm starting to get weary of what BPA actually means to Rod - thinking back to Antoine and Marcus, would that mean he'd take a player projected to go higher, but that has fallen into our laps? Should we trust taking players like that any more, after Antoine and Marcus?
bullshit. bpa is just a way to justify your decisions post hoc. There is no way in hell the Nets will take two bigs.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pegs @ Jun 22 2008, 01:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Also, I'm starting to get weary of what BPA actually means to Rod - thinking back to Antoine and Marcus, would that mean he'd take a player projected to go higher, but that has fallen into our laps? Should we trust taking players like that any more, after Antoine and Marcus?</div> Sean is one of those too. Jury still out there. I think players 9 through 20-something are all pretty similar. I don't think it should be considered a "reach" or a "fallen player" no matter who you take in that area. As far as BPA goes I think taking Shan Foster at #21 is a reach. Taking Brandon Rush at #10 I don't think is a reach. He's been rated as high as #13 to the Trailblazers in some mocks. Is it a reach to take the player you want because you can't trade down a few spots? I don't think so.
