robj55
Posts: 9,511
Jun 28, 2013 8:20pm
They are trying to win now, they traded their future(picks) for veterans who are proven winners and have one of the best lineups in the league for the next few years. The owner is willing to spend the money.Pick6;1465442 wrote:Let me know how that deal works out for Brooklyn when PP and KG retire in one or two years. They got shafted by Boston.
robj55
Posts: 9,511
Jun 28, 2013 8:22pm
Aren't the picks they got from the Nets unprotected picks as well?
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jun 28, 2013 8:58pm
But do you not understand that Brooklyn is a free agent destination? If KG and Pierce call it quits, they'll just replace them with a good FA(s).Pick6;1465451 wrote:Guess we'll have to wait and see. I mean the Nets do have a history of great management. Joe Johnson, DW, Lopez, and Wallace sure worked out well for them. The Celtics know exactly what they're doing. They are done competing and are going into rebuild mode.
clueless* by the way.
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Jun 28, 2013 9:16pm
Are they? Well whatever they've been doing in FA obviously hasnt been working for it being such a hot spot. Before last year, they Nets havent had a winning record since the 05-06 season. None of the Nets core from this season were acquired through FA, and none will be (obviously) after this trade.SportsAndLady;1465478 wrote:But do you not understand that Brooklyn is a free agent destination? If KG and Pierce call it quits, they'll just replace them with a good FA(s).
You'd think we are discussing the Lakers or something...
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Jun 28, 2013 9:19pm
I THINK top 3 protected. Dont quote me on it, though. Ainge earned his paycheck, especially when the Cavs were talking about giving up only two second rounders for Pierce (what he is really worth, at his age, IMO)robj55;1465461 wrote:Aren't the picks they got from the Nets unprotected picks as well?
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jun 28, 2013 10:39pm
They were the New Jersey Nets LOLPick6;1465497 wrote:Are they? Well whatever they've been doing in FA obviously hasnt been working for it being such a hot spot. Before last year, they Nets havent had a winning record since the 05-06 season. None of the Nets core from this season were acquired through FA, and none will be (obviously) after this trade.
You'd think we are discussing the Lakers or something...
They are now in Brooklyn, AKA the #1 TV market in the country (NYC). They are owned by a billionaire, and have Jay Z as a minority owner, too.
I mean they basically have Joe Johnson and D Williams because they're the Brooklyn Nets, not the New Jersey Nets.
ohiobucks1
Posts: 4,915
Jun 28, 2013 10:47pm
He's getting rid of his ownershipSportsAndLady;1465540 wrote: and have Jay Z as a minority owner, too.
Automatik
Posts: 14,632
Jun 29, 2013 7:25am
Yeah, Jay-Z bounced from the Nets.
He's a player agent now.
He's a player agent now.
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Jun 29, 2013 9:44am
Haha. You think the Nets werent in the NYC market before? Newark where they played from 2010-2012 is a whole 10 miles from downtown NYC, and before that, East Rutherford, which is a whole 13 miles from downtown NYC, and also happens to be the same place the Giants and Jets play.SportsAndLady;1465540 wrote:They were the New Jersey Nets LOL
They are now in Brooklyn, AKA the #1 TV market in the country (NYC).
G
gport_tennis
Posts: 1,796
Jun 29, 2013 9:46am
Between the new owner and the name / city change Brooklyn is a much more attractive franchise to play for now
BigAppleBuckeye
Posts: 2,935
Jun 29, 2013 10:01am
No offense, but you are dead wrong here. Yes, Newark is close to New York, but NO ONE wanted to play in Newark. The move to Brooklyn immediately transported this franchise into a highly desirable destination. Newark might as well be Beirut!Pick6;1465638 wrote:Haha. You think the Nets werent in the NYC market before? Newark where they played from 2010-2012 is a whole 10 miles from downtown NYC, and before that, East Rutherford, which is a whole 13 miles from downtown NYC, and also happens to be the same place the Giants and Jets play.
And, again, what hasn't been working? The Nets went to 2 NBA Finals a decade ago, then struggled, and in the past year went from horrible team to #4 seed in the East. The fact that we are talking about the Nets on a Ohio message board speaks volumes regarding the direction of their franchise.
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Jun 29, 2013 10:03am
What was I wrong about in my post? We are talking about the Nets because of the blockbuster trade, not because we think they are going to be winning titles.BigAppleBuckeye;1465646 wrote:No offense, but you are dead wrong here. Yes, Newark is close to New York, but NO ONE wanted to play in Newark. The move to Brooklyn immediately transported this franchise into a highly desirable destination. Newark might as well be Beirut!
And, again, what hasn't been working? The Nets went to 2 NBA Finals a decade ago, then struggled, and in the past year went from horrible team to #4 seed in the East. The fact that we are talking about the Nets on a Ohio message board speaks volumes regarding the direction of their franchise.
If location made a franchise good, the Clippers wouldnt be a historically shitty franchise. Maybe it can buy you a few good years, but at some point, management is going to come into play.
Fly4Fun
Posts: 7,730
Jun 29, 2013 12:52pm
I would take the wait and see approach for the Nets. I wouldn't call them a destination team yet as there are very few of those in the NBA. Historically you have LA then Boston. Right now Miami is a destination team mainly because it's a place to go win a championship if you are late in your career and haven't yet as LeBron is undeniably the best player currently in the game.
And as far as trying to say that a #4 seed was good? They lost their opening series to a team that was without their best player, who will make the team much better next year. And as Pick6 pointed out, people are only talking about the Nets because of their recent acquisition.
I'm not saying the Nets can't become a great franchise, but 1 year as a 4 seed does not make them one. Right now they do have a good location and an owner willing to spend, but that doesn't always translate to success.
And as far as trying to say that a #4 seed was good? They lost their opening series to a team that was without their best player, who will make the team much better next year. And as Pick6 pointed out, people are only talking about the Nets because of their recent acquisition.
I'm not saying the Nets can't become a great franchise, but 1 year as a 4 seed does not make them one. Right now they do have a good location and an owner willing to spend, but that doesn't always translate to success.
Midstate01
Posts: 14,766
Jun 29, 2013 1:39pm
I could be wrong since we only made the drive a few times, but im guessing the nets old arena was just as far from nyc as newark. Not like it sat inside newark. Newark is the scariest place ive ever been. I never wanna step foot in that city again. We were at the hospital there and walked across the street to an ihop. We were the only white ppl and were just STARED at the whole time. A cop came over sat at our table and asked us why we were there and we told him we walked from the hospital, he literally said dont ever do that agin and walked us back over and all the way to the room in the hospital. He told us the safer place to go was the mexican part...lol
End cool story bro...
But point is my guess is even if the nets were IN Brooklyn its noy like the players had to live there. They probably all lived in nyc or some suburb
End cool story bro...
But point is my guess is even if the nets were IN Brooklyn its noy like the players had to live there. They probably all lived in nyc or some suburb
Automatik
Posts: 14,632
Jun 30, 2013 9:29am
The Barclays isn't very far from midtown Manhattan. Maybe 25-30 min by subway.
Yes, Newark is a scary place lol. I always hear of athletes living up north in White Plains, or Hoboken, NJ.
IMO, the Nets will always be 2nd fiddle to the Knicks. MSG is the "destination" if there is one.
Yes, Newark is a scary place lol. I always hear of athletes living up north in White Plains, or Hoboken, NJ.
IMO, the Nets will always be 2nd fiddle to the Knicks. MSG is the "destination" if there is one.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jun 30, 2013 10:39am
WEll of course the Knicks will be THE team in NYC. Just saying there is a HUGE difference in the Nets now and 4 years ago, from a Free Agency destination standpoint.
Pick6 doesn't seem to understand that
Pick6 doesn't seem to understand that
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Jun 30, 2013 11:06am
yeah, im the only one who disagrees with you. I'll believe the Nets are a "free agent destination" when it happens.SportsAndLady;1466004 wrote:WEll of course the Knicks will be THE team in NYC. Just saying there is a HUGE difference in the Nets now and 4 years ago, from a Free Agency destination standpoint.
Pick6 doesn't seem to understand that
BigAppleBuckeye
Posts: 2,935
Jun 30, 2013 11:24am
Wasn't signing DWill and Lopez to big deals a good start? Both could have bailed, yet stayed and continue to be among the best at their respective positions. Dwight Howard would KILL to be in Brooklyn right now but the cap won't let it happen. I know it was a trade, but Kevin Garnett had a no-trade clause and waived it because he was dealt to Brooklyn. I think all of this is clear evidence that Brooklyn is a hot destination.Pick6;1466007 wrote:yeah, im the only one who disagrees with you. I'll believe the Nets are a "free agent destination" when it happens.
PS, the Barclays Center is at the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush Avenues, and is near some of Brooklyn's most affluent neighborhoods (including Park Slope, where many celebrities live). I think people hear "Brooklyn" and they think of Spike Lee and Coney Island, when most of west Brooklyn is VERY upper crust and is home to some of the most gorgeous real estate in NYC.
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Jun 30, 2013 11:39am
Good points about DWill and Lopez, I wasn't thinking of re-signing. Of course D-Howard would love to be here now...but what about last year when he was basically picking his team? Cant blame KG for waiving the no trade clause. Play for a competing team, or play for a rebuilding team with a new coach. Answer is obvious there.BigAppleBuckeye;1466010 wrote:Wasn't signing DWill and Lopez to big deals a good start? Both could have bailed, yet stayed and continue to be among the best at their respective positions. Dwight Howard would KILL to be in Brooklyn right now but the cap won't let it happen. I know it was a trade, but Kevin Garnett had a no-trade clause and waived it because he was dealt to Brooklyn. I think all of this is clear evidence that Brooklyn is a hot destination.
PS, the Barclays Center is at the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush Avenues, and is near some of Brooklyn's most affluent neighborhoods (including Park Slope, where many celebrities live). I think people hear "Brooklyn" and they think of Spike Lee and Coney Island, when most of west Brooklyn is VERY upper crust and is home to some of the most gorgeous real estate in NYC.
I just dont think its going to be an obvious "when PP and KG retire, the Nets will just bring in another big name FA and wont miss a beat". Obviously possible, though.
Sidenote: Saw Lopez just had his 3rd surgery on his foot.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jun 30, 2013 11:42am
Thank you. Someone who gets it.BigAppleBuckeye;1466010 wrote:Wasn't signing DWill and Lopez to big deals a good start? Both could have bailed, yet stayed and continue to be among the best at their respective positions. Dwight Howard would KILL to be in Brooklyn right now but the cap won't let it happen. I know it was a trade, but Kevin Garnett had a no-trade clause and waived it because he was dealt to Brooklyn. I think all of this is clear evidence that Brooklyn is a hot destination.
PS, the Barclays Center is at the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush Avenues, and is near some of Brooklyn's most affluent neighborhoods (including Park Slope, where many celebrities live). I think people hear "Brooklyn" and they think of Spike Lee and Coney Island, when most of west Brooklyn is VERY upper crust and is home to some of the most gorgeous real estate in NYC.
Pick6 just talking out his ass like usual.
Yeah, Brooklyn Nets aren't a free agent destination :rolleyes:
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Jun 30, 2013 12:04pm
Says the guy who thinks the Nets just moved into the NYC TV market.SportsAndLady;1466014 wrote:Thank you. Someone who gets it.
Pick6 just talking out his ass like usual.
Yeah, Brooklyn Nets aren't a free agent destination :rolleyes:
I'd rather be somebody who "talks out of my ass" on having an opinion that is yet TBD than be a retard.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jun 30, 2013 12:16pm
The Nets have always shared part of the NYC TV market. It isn't even that big of a deal in the NBA...I just threw it out there because it's a small positive. Way to harp on one small point I made over everything else.Pick6;1466017 wrote:Says the guy who thinks the Nets just moved into the NYC TV market.
I'd rather be somebody who "talks out of my ass" on having an opinion that is yet TBD than be a retard.
Is Brooklyn not in New York? :rolleyes:
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Jun 30, 2013 2:44pm
Not when you do it all the f*cking time, on a wide variety of topics. I've seen you called out for talking out of your ass more times than anyone else on this site.Pick6;1466017 wrote: I'd rather be somebody who "talks out of my ass"
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Jun 30, 2013 3:05pm
Link by anybody other than likethat, coa, and s&l? Didnt think so.lhslep134;1466047 wrote:Not when you do it all the f*cking time, on a wide variety of topics. I've seen you called out for talking out of your ass more times than anyone else on this site.
All I've stated is that I think it was a short-sighted move my the Nets, but apparently thats talking out of my fucking ass. Talking out of one's ass would be making statements such as "they will just sign FAs to replace Pierce and Garnett once they retire". Like there is solid sample data to support that statement.
Ironman92
Posts: 49,363
Jun 30, 2013 3:48pm
Pick6;1466055 wrote:Link by anybody other than likethat, coa, and s&l? Didnt think so.
All I've stated is that I think it was a short-sighted move my the Nets, but apparently thats talking out of my fucking ass. Talking out of one's ass would be making statements such as "they will just sign FAs to replace Pierce and Garnett once they retire". Like there is solid sample data to support that statement.
Those 3 are about 1/5th of the posting site.