<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Brian Scalabrine knows he's not in New Jersey anymore. And not just because the air is less pungent in these parts. Having left the Nets to sign with the Celtics as a free agent, he's adapting to a different pace. ``The biggest difference is I think they play about 10 times harder here than the Nets play in training camp,'' Scalabrine said after going through his morning paces. ``I mean, they play a hard, physical game here - and that's important if you want to be successful. It's a much different environment than what I've been used to.'' </div> I feel that Brian is calling us out. I can't wait till we beat his new team. http://celtics.bostonherald.com/celtics/vi...rticleid=106108
Scalabrine shouldn't even be allowed to talk. The Nets are going to be better than Boston this year so I don't tyink he should be calling us out.
You guys are joking, right? He said that they play harder in camp....so what? Do you realize that the only player in Boston that's guaranteed a starting role is Paul Pierce? Of course they are going to be playing harder in training camp, they're actually playing for something. I mean, think about it...do you think guys like Kidd and Jefferson are going to go all out in training camp, risking an injury? Why would they? There's nothing to gain by doing it because they already own a starting role no matter what happens in camp.
Exactly. With Boston having all these young players, and with a majority of them playing the 1 or the 5 spot, there is going to be a lot of competition for minutes. Meanwhile the Nets starters are a no brainer, and there really isn't much potential in the bench anyway, with the exception of Wright.
I dont see this as a call out. So what if the Celtics run more sprints, work harder on d, and play more agressive in training camp? They do that because they most likely need more work, no biggy. The Celtics wanna be good so there workin to there goal.
There is a saying that I have heard from Brittish Soccer professional: Never should you over work in practice. It is better if you underwork in practice than over work. I think that this is the right way to go. Boston can work as hard as they want in practice, but whether they can work as hard in practice in a game is what is questionable. I noticed from myself when I used to train; the harder I worked the worst I played. When I would take training more easy, not shoot as many practice shots, and not run full speed all the time, I had very good games. The fact of the matter is, that energy should be spent in the game, not in practice. Practice should prepare you to spend you energy in the games not waste it.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting playmaker15:</div><div class="quote_post">Scalabrine shouldn't even be allowed to talk. The Nets are going to be better than Boston this year so I don't tyink he should be calling us out.</div> Not so sure about that buddy. The Nets have a deep squad, and got RJ back but their frontcourt aint the best and aint nothing compared to Boston's frontcourt. The Nets dont have a go to guy, well my choice is Vince Carter but Richard Jefferson is also a go to guy so the Nets have a problem there. The Celtics could easily get Pierce the ball and let him take the shot. I think the Nets wont have a better record than the Celtics.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I think the Nets wont have a better record than the Celtics.</div> Ok that i really doubt. Celtics will not have a better record than the Nets. I feel that overall the Nets are a better team.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Trueplaya4real:</div><div class="quote_post"> but their frontcourt aint the best and aint nothing compared to Boston's frontcourt</div> How is Boston's frontcourt so much better than the Nets'? Al Jefferson is gonna be great one day, but Krstic is more solid right now. And right now, I'd pick Krstic over Jefferson for my frontcourt. LaFrentz sucks, he's soft and all he can do is shoot from outside, which isn't a huge trait for a big man. Collins is great at fundamentals, and he's solid, unlike LaFrentz. Once again, I'd take Collins over Raef. And Marc Jackson beats Scaly and Blount anyday. So I don't see how the Nets' frontcourt is nothing compared to Boston's. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Trueplaya4real:</div><div class="quote_post">The Nets dont have a go to guy, well my choice is Vince Carter but Richard Jefferson is also a go to guy so the Nets have a problem there</div> I don't see what the problem is with having two go-to-guys. If the other team doubles up on one of them, then the other guy has a clear shot. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Trueplaya4real:</div><div class="quote_post">The Celtics could easily get Pierce the ball and let him take the shot.</div> Easily? Teams will be putting their best defenders on Pierce, and he isn't going to have anybody to pass to, really, except from Ricky Davis when he plays. With the Nets, teams have to choose between Carter and Jefferson on who to try and shut down. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Trueplaya4real:</div><div class="quote_post">I think the Nets wont have a better record than the Celtics.</div> Not gonna happen. The Celtics are don't have much other than Pierce and sometimes Davis and Jefferson. The Nets have a very deep team, and have a legend point guard to get the ball to two other stars.
I'm not ashamed to say that the Nets have a better roster than the Celtics currently. They have great advantages in experience and star power, and because of that, they'll probably have a better team this season. However, I think people go way overboard when they try to make their points in these team vs. team debates. First off, Raef LaFrentz does not suck. He's a pretty consistent player who put up some decent numbers on bad knees last year. Him and Collins are two totally different players, and I don't think anybody can make a solid determination on which one is more valuable to their team. Collins is one of those guys that does all the dirty work, which is a great thing for a player to focus on. But think about why he's that kind of player...it's because he doesn't have the skills to do anything else. LaFrentz is different because he's a great shooter, and because of that, he tends to play outside more. I can tell you one thing, though, Raef LaFrentz is not soft. He gets in there and bangs when he has to. Sure, sometimes he doesn't pull down board after board, but that has nothing to do with effort. The other thing I don't understand is the quick write-off of Mark Blount. He's not Shaquille O'Neal, but he's at least an equal to Marc Jackson. If you take a look at last year's numbers, you'll see that Blount is much better at blocking shots and his FG% is almost 10% higher. All the other numbers are just about equal, including minutes, so I don't know how anybody could put one above the other without a second thought.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting xpehbamxyu:</div><div class="quote_post">There is a saying that I have heard from Brittish Soccer professional: Never should you over work in practice. It is better if you underwork in practice than over work. I think that this is the right way to go. Boston can work as hard as they want in practice, but whether they can work as hard in practice in a game is what is questionable. I noticed from myself when I used to train; the harder I worked the worst I played. When I would take training more easy, not shoot as many practice shots, and not run full speed all the time, I had very good games. The fact of the matter is, that energy should be spent in the game, not in practice. Practice should prepare you to spend you energy in the games not waste it.</div> I totally Disagree. I think Tiki Barber said, If you practice mediocre, then you're going 2 play mediocre. Boston wants to get better so theyre practicing more. There's nothing wrong with practicing alot. Thats how the team gets better. I agree with the position battles but Overall Boston wants to get better and you do that by practicing.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 44Thrilla:</div><div class="quote_post">I'm not ashamed to say that the Nets have a better roster than the Celtics currently. They have great advantages in experience and star power, and because of that, they'll probably have a better team this season. However, I think people go way overboard when they try to make their points in these team vs. team debates. First off, Raef LaFrentz does not suck. He's a pretty consistent player who put up some decent numbers on bad knees last year. Him and Collins are two totally different players, and I don't think anybody can make a solid determination on which one is more valuable to their team. Collins is one of those guys that does all the dirty work, which is a great thing for a player to focus on. But think about why he's that kind of player...it's because he doesn't have the skills to do anything else. LaFrentz is different because he's a great shooter, and because of that, he tends to play outside more. I can tell you one thing, though, Raef LaFrentz is not soft. He gets in there and bangs when he has to. Sure, sometimes he doesn't pull down board after board, but that has nothing to do with effort. The other thing I don't understand is the quick write-off of Mark Blount. He's not Shaquille O'Neal, but he's at least an equal to Marc Jackson. If you take a look at last year's numbers, you'll see that Blount is much better at blocking shots and his FG% is almost 10% higher. All the other numbers are just about equal, including minutes, so I don't know how anybody could put one above the other without a second thought.</div> I understand your point about LaFrentz and Collins being two different players, but I still would prefer Collins because he does the little things. And with the Nets being set outside with Kidd, Jefferson, Carter, Padgett, Murray, and Robinson all able to hit threes, they need Collins more than they would need a Raef LaFrentz type. I didn't have the courtesy of watching Raef last season, so I'll take your word about him being tougher than I thought. I may have gone a little overboard about him being soft, but I guess from the games I saw when he played for Dallas in 02-03 and for Boston in 03-04, when Dallas came to play in NJ, he wasn't able to grab a board. But him being matched up against Kenyon Martin, I guess I shouldn't have judged on that. On the Blount/Jackson argument, if you take a look at the stats, Marc, though shooting a worse percentage from the field, playing with more shot-happy players than Blount (AI, Webber, Korver, etc.), and playing nearly two minutes less, averaged nearly 3 more points than Blount last season. Also, Marc's free throw percentage is better than Mark's by more 11%, which is important and may be the reason for those extra points. On defense, I agree that Blount is better than Jackson, and he is a better shooter from the field. I would say they are about equal: Marc is better on offense, Mark is better on defense. But IMO, Jackson is a better overall player: he can rebound and shoot free throws better and is less turnover and foul prone than Blount, and is more versatile.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Trueplaya4real:</div><div class="quote_post">Not so sure about that buddy. The Nets have a deep squad, and got RJ back but their frontcourt aint the best and aint nothing compared to Boston's frontcourt. The Nets dont have a go to guy, well my choice is Vince Carter but Richard Jefferson is also a go to guy so the Nets have a problem there. The Celtics could easily get Pierce the ball and let him take the shot. I think the Nets wont have a better record than the Celtics.</div> Jason Kidd solves the problem of having two go-to-guys on the team. Kidd manages the game better than any point guard in the league and will get both players their fair share of shot attempts. The Nets have the luxury of choosing Carter, Jefferson, or Kidd to close out a game depending on the match-up advantages. Teams defending the Nets are going to have more problems figuring out who to focus on during the end of a game because any of those three can create their own basket. I think the Nets made some shrewd moves to improve their frontcourt in the off-season. They added Marc Jackson, who can play either the 4 or the 5. The Nets can use him in the pick and roll because he can hit the mid-range jumper, and he's active on defense. Last year in the playoffs, as soon as Collins got in foul trouble, the Nets were forced to go small. This year they have Jackson coming off the bench. Cliff Robinson returns, and if he's struggling with his jumper, the Nets can now bring in Scott Padgett to extend a defense. He's a career 38.8% shooter from behind the arc. The depth has improved, plus Nend Kristic gained even more confidence by playing well in the FIBA tournament. He will provide the Nets with inside scoring and thrive off of the attention Carter and Jefferson attract when they drive to the rim. The Nets have improved the balance of this team without making any major changes to their roster. They should be the front-runner to win their division and get deep in the playoffs. As for Scalabrine, he should look in the mirror in regards to how he practices instead of pointing out the difference between New Jersey and Boston. It's up to him whether or not he wants to work extra hard and play physical, he shouldn't have to be told. I just remember him refusing to post up Dwayne Wade or Damon Jones in the playoffs last season even though he has 5 or 6 inches on them and outweighs either by at least 20lbs.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 44Thrilla:</div><div class="quote_post">I'm not ashamed to say that the Nets have a better roster than the Celtics currently. They have great advantages in experience and star power, and because of that, they'll probably have a better team this season. However, I think people go way overboard when they try to make their points in these team vs. team debates. First off, Raef LaFrentz does not suck. He's a pretty consistent player who put up some decent numbers on bad knees last year. Him and Collins are two totally different players, and I don't think anybody can make a solid determination on which one is more valuable to their team. Collins is one of those guys that does all the dirty work, which is a great thing for a player to focus on. But think about why he's that kind of player...it's because he doesn't have the skills to do anything else. LaFrentz is different because he's a great shooter, and because of that, he tends to play outside more. I can tell you one thing, though, Raef LaFrentz is not soft. He gets in there and bangs when he has to. Sure, sometimes he doesn't pull down board after board, but that has nothing to do with effort. The other thing I don't understand is the quick write-off of Mark Blount. He's not Shaquille O'Neal, but he's at least an equal to Marc Jackson. If you take a look at last year's numbers, you'll see that Blount is much better at blocking shots and his FG% is almost 10% higher. All the other numbers are just about equal, including minutes, so I don't know how anybody could put one above the other without a second thought.</div> Honestly, I dont care to debate who is better or rather what team is better between the Nets & Celtics because both teams have alot of questions that need to be answered. Nets need to see how all their parts will mix & gell chemistry wise with Carter & Jeff playing together for a full year...and throw in the personalities of guys like McInnis & Murray, that is alot of gelling that needs to take place. And of course we have frontcourt concerns, that have truely not been answered. So now the Nets are depending alot on guys like Nenad and Marc Jackson frontcourt wise. And the Celtics being a young team have plenty of questions as well...point guard concerns, experience etc.. So Iam definately aware that you realy cant deterimine one teams success compared to another teams success in Oct by looking at rosters. Iam more posting for the Collins/Lafrentz part of your post...in my opinion, no you really cant determine who is better because they are very different type of players. But I think you can determine, who has been more important to their teams success over the years. And that has to be my man JC. Collins has been the consistent big in our lineup since Kidd's arrivial.....every year...from Todd Mchullah going down in 01-02, Mutombo being pretty much a no show in 02-03 to the Alonzo Mourning situations the last two seasons...the lost of Martin...the continous rotation of bigmen in & out of the lineup last year Zo, Nenad, Jabari Smith, Cliff Robinson....Collins has been the one consistently in the lineup throwing his body around the best he can...so its easy for me to say that he has been more important to the Nets 4 straight playoff appereances then Lafrentz, a guy who arrived in Boston 2 years ago (missed the 1st year basically)..and has helped the Celtics to very little team success.No disrepect toward Celtics fans with that comment, but truthfully, you cant make a case for Lafrentz being more important then a key to 2 finals apperances, 3 atlantic division titles and four playoff trips.
