Author Topic: If we strike out on lottery, trades, and free agents, let's go after Nets' bigs!  (Read 3380 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dino Pitino

  • NCE
  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1822
  • Tommy Points: 219
Quote
I especially enjoyed this little nugget: "Instead of relying on one guy to score the Nets would score as a team, which will be easier because they'll have better interior defense and better rebounding. They'll also have a legit PG prospect now. Yay." Hilarious! So taking away their top two scoring options (one a legit 20 point per game scorer) and replacing them with rookies, two other unproven players, a 7 ppg player, and an overweight 10 ppg player is going to make their offense better, huh? That's some good stuff right there!

Fast breaks are easier offense than low post isos. There'd be more fast breaks. An unproven super-athletic PG would feast on them. Somebody every night would wind up scoring 20 or thereabouts. Maybe even that overweight schmuck who scored 20 the other night. But all that'd matter is if the Nets would win more games, which they would. Especially if they cashed in all the lovely assets you just handed them. I understand that your premise includes that the Celtics would have struck out on trades, but does your premise also prevent the Nets from using the mid-lotto pick, the mid-1st, Rozier, Young, and Amir to acquire a player more valuable than Lopez like that package is actually worth?

If you want the '17 and '18 Nets picks to be at least as good as this year's will be, then you want them to keep Lopez. If you want the Celtics defense to be at least as good as it is this year, then you want Sully and Amir to stay. If you want the Nets picks to become even better, then you don't give them the starting frontcourt of a great defense, you don't give them a host of assets so they can be more flexible in trades, and you don't take away their biggest injury risk. If you want the Celtics to be more successful, then you don't pay a premium to screw up team chemistry in order to downgrade on defense.

I'm sorry, but you're so off-base that this is almost to the point of trolling. I see no benefit in substantially responding any further to this non-sense.

So, you got nothing. No need to apologize. For future reference, though, I don't think that merely declaring my objections "BS" and "non-sense" and incredulously repeating what I wrote qualifies as a substantive response. But okay, I give up, too.
"Young man, you have the question backwards." - Bill Russell

"My guess is that an aggregator of expert opinions would be close in terms of results to that of Danny." - Roy H.

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47948
  • Tommy Points: 2906
Quote
I especially enjoyed this little nugget: "Instead of relying on one guy to score the Nets would score as a team, which will be easier because they'll have better interior defense and better rebounding. They'll also have a legit PG prospect now. Yay." Hilarious! So taking away their top two scoring options (one a legit 20 point per game scorer) and replacing them with rookies, two other unproven players, a 7 ppg player, and an overweight 10 ppg player is going to make their offense better, huh? That's some good stuff right there!

Fast breaks are easier offense than low post isos. There'd be more fast breaks. An unproven super-athletic PG would feast on them. Somebody every night would wind up scoring 20 or thereabouts. Maybe even that overweight schmuck who scored 20 the other night. But all that'd matter is if the Nets would win more games, which they would. Especially if they cashed in all the lovely assets you just handed them. I understand that your premise includes that the Celtics would have struck out on trades, but does your premise also prevent the Nets from using the mid-lotto pick, the mid-1st, Rozier, Young, and Amir to acquire a player more valuable than Lopez like that package is actually worth?

If you want the '17 and '18 Nets picks to be at least as good as this year's will be, then you want them to keep Lopez. If you want the Celtics defense to be at least as good as it is this year, then you want Sully and Amir to stay. If you want the Nets picks to become even better, then you don't give them the starting frontcourt of a great defense, you don't give them a host of assets so they can be more flexible in trades, and you don't take away their biggest injury risk. If you want the Celtics to be more successful, then you don't pay a premium to screw up team chemistry in order to downgrade on defense.

I'm sorry, but you're so off-base that this is almost to the point of trolling. I see no benefit in substantially responding any further to this non-sense.

So, you got nothing. No need to apologize. For future reference, though, I don't think that merely declaring my objections "BS" and "non-sense" and incredulously repeating what I wrote qualifies as a substantive response. But okay, I give up, too.

I have already. You just seem too thick to give up your fantasy, which is something that has already been seemingly made known around here.

Further, you're the one making the ridiculous claims, i.e. 1) that the Nets after losing their top two scorers and adding rookies and two 7 ppg and 10 ppg scorers are going to somehow be better offensively, 2) that our defense is just as dependent upon a past-his-prime Johnson and an obese Sully as it is on our perimeter defense, which is laughable, and 3) that this move somehow makes them better in the present; thus, the burden of proof is on you. You've yet to offer any substantial, logical, or convincing argument for why any of these things would be true.

I can totally understand and accept if people don't want Lopez or Young. That's totally rational. I wouldn't want them unless we struck out on everything else. What's not rational, though, is making bogus claims that somehow they'll be better offensively and overall and better positioned in the next two years after the deal. That's complete "BS" and "non-sense."

Offline JSD

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12562
  • Tommy Points: 2155
The Celtics are giving up far too much in this deal. We are talking about a Nets team that let D-Will for nothing (outside of money).

The Celtics are better served not even having the Nets in their roledex for the foreseeable future. No sense in bidding their few remaining asserts up. Let them move Lopez and Young for as little as possible.
The only color that matters is GREEN

Offline PaulAllen

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1103
  • Tommy Points: 55
As much as I would love to add Lopez to this team the Nets got R'd so bad they will never trade with the Celtics again!!

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
I'd trade Dallas pick and C's own pick as well most the teams 2016 second rounders(minus Philly one) for Young and Lopez. No Nets picks and no future picks. That is about it. Young and Lopez replace Sully and Zeller.

How much for just young?
Probably just the C's 1st and last two seconds.

Offline Dino Pitino

  • NCE
  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1822
  • Tommy Points: 219
Quote
I especially enjoyed this little nugget: "Instead of relying on one guy to score the Nets would score as a team, which will be easier because they'll have better interior defense and better rebounding. They'll also have a legit PG prospect now. Yay." Hilarious! So taking away their top two scoring options (one a legit 20 point per game scorer) and replacing them with rookies, two other unproven players, a 7 ppg player, and an overweight 10 ppg player is going to make their offense better, huh? That's some good stuff right there!

Fast breaks are easier offense than low post isos. There'd be more fast breaks. An unproven super-athletic PG would feast on them. Somebody every night would wind up scoring 20 or thereabouts. Maybe even that overweight schmuck who scored 20 the other night. But all that'd matter is if the Nets would win more games, which they would. Especially if they cashed in all the lovely assets you just handed them. I understand that your premise includes that the Celtics would have struck out on trades, but does your premise also prevent the Nets from using the mid-lotto pick, the mid-1st, Rozier, Young, and Amir to acquire a player more valuable than Lopez like that package is actually worth?

If you want the '17 and '18 Nets picks to be at least as good as this year's will be, then you want them to keep Lopez. If you want the Celtics defense to be at least as good as it is this year, then you want Sully and Amir to stay. If you want the Nets picks to become even better, then you don't give them the starting frontcourt of a great defense, you don't give them a host of assets so they can be more flexible in trades, and you don't take away their biggest injury risk. If you want the Celtics to be more successful, then you don't pay a premium to screw up team chemistry in order to downgrade on defense.

I'm sorry, but you're so off-base that this is almost to the point of trolling. I see no benefit in substantially responding any further to this non-sense.

So, you got nothing. No need to apologize. For future reference, though, I don't think that merely declaring my objections "BS" and "non-sense" and incredulously repeating what I wrote qualifies as a substantive response. But okay, I give up, too.

I have already. You just seem too thick to give up your fantasy, which is something that has already been seemingly made known around here.

Further, you're the one making the ridiculous claims, i.e. 1) that the Nets after losing their top two scorers and adding rookies and two 7 ppg and 10 ppg scorers are going to somehow be better offensively,

Yeah, so, about that...

"Instead of relying on one guy to score the Nets would score as a team, which will be easier because they'll have better interior defense and better rebounding."

...you misread it as me saying the Nets would be better offensively. You had asked who would score for them. I said they would score as a team (instead of relying on one go-to scorer) and the extra fast breaks are part of how they would score as a team, despite having lost their go-to scorer, because fast break offense is easier to pull off for an offensively raw team than low post iso ball which requires a lot of skill. I did not say that the Nets would be better offensively. They would probably be worse offensively, but not by much, because they'd actually have a legit PG prospect to handle the offense and because their improved defense would lead to easier fast break offense (and extra possessions) which would make up for a lot of what would be lost offensively in Lopez.

Quote
2) that our defense is just as dependent upon a past-his-prime Johnson and an obese Sully as it is on our perimeter defense, which is laughable,

Yes. It is way, way closer of a balance than you assume. People are shortchanging Sully and Amir. Partly because as fans they want to keep indulging in upgrade trade fantasies which all require moving/renouncing one or both them, partly because they don't want to feel any angst about Sully leaving so it's easier to categorize him as inessential, partly because hating on Sully has become a mindless habit over the last few years. (Obese, eh, lol?) Amir has been in the league forever, and he might be slightly less athletic than he used to be, but I think if a player's numbers are mostly in line with his career highs, some things a little worse, some things better than ever, then it's a little premature to call his prime over.

Quote
and 3) that this move somehow makes them better in the present; thus, the burden of proof is on you. You've yet to offer any substantial, logical, or convincing argument for why any of these things would be true.

It makes them better in the present because it improves their defense, improves their rebounding, improves their PG situation, and improves their freedom to upgrade even more next year through trades for immediate help because they'll now have a diverse collection of assets the parts of which will appeal to a much wider swath of the league instead of having all their trade capital sitting in one fragile player who only a fraction of NBA teams will be interested enough to seriously pursue. It also spreads out their catastrophic injury risk.

Quote
I can totally understand and accept if people don't want Lopez or Young. That's totally rational. I wouldn't want them unless we struck out on everything else. What's not rational, though, is making bogus claims that somehow they'll be better offensively and overall and better positioned in the next two years after the deal. That's complete "BS" and "non-sense."

As I established above, the claim that I made the bogus claim they'd be better offensively is itself bogus. But yes, they'd be better overall. They can hardly get any worse than they already are with Lopez. And they would definitely be better positioned to improve immediately over the next two years.
"Young man, you have the question backwards." - Bill Russell

"My guess is that an aggregator of expert opinions would be close in terms of results to that of Danny." - Roy H.

Offline KG Living Legend

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8635
  • Tommy Points: 1136

 My Idea to help the Nets, Let them wallow in their own self defacating  misery.

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34023
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
Way to much to give to them considering the players coming back are not worth that much and it gives them hope to rebuild.

Who do you propose to take out? Rozier?

And who cares if it gives them hope to rebuild, because they won't be amounting to anything for at least several years, meaning our picks are safe.



The Nets pick alone make it too much.   



If the Celtics didn't own two other Nets picks in the future, maybe.    But this trade has the chance of giving them a new center piece and a ton of cap room to rebuild around.   


That has to be a "no-no" for any Celtics/Nets trades for the next two years.   



On top of that, I still think Lopez's injury history and his contract makes him more of a minus then a plus in terms of trades. 



Finally, I don't see Lopez as a good fit next to Olynyk (who would be the other Celtic big)