Would ya'll take Joe Johnson on this team if we could dump crash?

[Beat LA]

I still think Joe is pretty good player even at his age. He impressed me a lot when he was clutch in that playoff series against Toronto last year; basically him and Pierce were the only ones who kept the Nets in those games.

Now if we had acquired Love or Melo or a legit All-Star back in the offseason, I could see the push for adding Joe next to Rondo and hoping for a deep playoff run this year. But as of now, I just don't see any reason for wanting Joe Johnson on this team.

His game will age very well because, like Pierce, he's never relied on speed or athleticism, and he's easily one of my favorite players.  He's an outstanding ball handler, especially for a guy his size, and he'll likely play as a sf for the rest of his career.  The guy is an assassin.  He reminds me a lot of Reggie Lewis and Joe Dumars in terms of their temperament on the court - he never says anything, he just goes out there and kicks your ass lol .  I'm making a thread about him now haha.

[1dude]

joe Johnson would look like an all star playing with Rondo.  where do we sign up?

[crimson_stallion]

No, and for a couple of reasons.

1) Hes a good player, but hasn't shown that he's good enough to lead a team anywhere of much significance.  Brooklyn were stacked last year and he never got then that far,  and his former hawks were famous for being permanently stuck in second round limbo,   despite also being pretty stacked a few of those years.

2) If we take that contact of Brooklyn it increases the chance that they might be able to make a move to improve their team as s result of the improved financial flexibility.   That means more chance that our draft picks will lose value.

[Monkhouse]

No, and for a couple of reasons.

1) Hes a good player, but hasn't shown that he's good enough to lead a team anywhere of much significance.  Brooklyn were stacked last year and he never got then that far,  and his former hawks were famous for being permanently stuck in second round limbo,   despite also being pretty stacked a few of those years.

2) If we take that contact of Brooklyn it increases the chance that they might be able to make a move to improve their team as s result of the improved financial flexibility.   That means more chance that our draft picks will lose value.

This.

[kraidstar]

No, and for a couple of reasons.

1) Hes a good player, but hasn't shown that he's good enough to lead a team anywhere of much significance.  Brooklyn were stacked last year and he never got then that far,  and his former hawks were famous for being permanently stuck in second round limbo,   despite also being pretty stacked a few of those years.

2) If we take that contact of Brooklyn it increases the chance that they might be able to make a move to improve their team as s result of the improved financial flexibility.   That means more chance that our draft picks will lose value.

This.

no way JJ makes us a contender. not even close, he might, however, artificially boost our win total (i say artificially as he isn't  going to be on future teams with our young guys, once they're developed), hurting our chances at getting a better pick in the draft.
this would be the sort of short-sighted move that keeps badly managed teams like the knicks mire in mediocrity year after year.
in fact, the nets using cap space on JJ is one of the prime reasons they aren't a true contender to begin with, they've had no flexibility for several years now, and they traded young talent/picks for a team that isn't good enough to win it all.
us getting JJ would be duplicating the same mistake that sunk both the nets and hawks.