# Are We Making the Playoffs?



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

The title pretty much sums up the point of this post. I think it is kind of apprioprate since we've managed to get a look at our rookies and signed all the free agents we will have for this season. Please state your opinion with reasons.


----------



## Zuca (Dec 4, 2003)

I believe that it's too early to give an opinion for this next season. You better wait and see what kind of moves Walsh will do to with this roster. Maybe one trade can change a lot of opinions, for better or for worse. The only things I can say actually is that Knicks are in a best shape that they were in last season, but I still think that with this roster Knicks won't make the playoffs. With two or three moves, maybe. I'll share some of them later.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

I don't see us making the playoffs either and don't really want to. I do think we'll be a fringe lottery team (a few games out of the playoffs) but not healthy enough or have enough of the right personnel to work for D'Antoni. I predict that the Bobcats will have a big turn around (if they resign Okafor), with the Sixers becoming a powerhouse, and the Bucks being a mid-seed playoff team; we can't discount the Pacers who will be in the playoffs if they stay healthy. 3 of the 4 teams I just mentioned missed the playoffs last season and I do not believe any team that made the playoffs last year will regress. This is why I feel that we likely will miss the playoffs. 

I can't say that I would be upset about this. Contenders generally are built through drafts and trades, so I'm hoping we could land some pretty good draft picks and raise the value of a few of our players in the process to trade. I do not believe we're far off, like you mentioned, because we have assets to put in play.


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

I don't see the Knicks making the playoffs this year or next year. This will be the year where the Knicks clean house and next year would be the year they begin putting the main pieces down. After that if things work out perhaps they will be back into the mix of things, but I just don't think the current group of players will ever mount to anything with or without Isiah Thomas.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Ask me after one month of playing D'Antoni ball*

Gotta see who's healthy and how they fit first. There is some talent here. The second half will be better than the first. We will suprise and win 38-43 games. Good enough? I don't know.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

I agree with that assessment. I do think we got a good shot (from our percieved position) of making it but I wouldn't want to. I still doubt we will with the way the East has improved and the given that we'll have several injuries to several key players like there seems to be every year.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

In the east I think the rankings (based off of best records) will look something like this (barring any significant trades and major free agents resign with their teams):

1.)*Boston Celtics*-Their not going to fall off with the kind of season they just had.
2.)*Philadelphia Sixers*- Andre Igoudala makes them a playoff team. Elton Brand makes them a contender
3.)*Detriot Pistons*-Their getting older and won't be getting any better. The decline begins this season IMO. 
4.)*Orlando Magic*- Their too good not to make the playoffs.
5.)*Milwaukee Bucks*- Skiles and Jefferson make them a legit team. Ramon Sessions is also coming into his own
6.)*Washington Wizards*- Injuries are always a problem with them and likely will hurt another promising season.
7.)*Charlotte Bobcats*- Larry Brown with a defensive team that has been on the brink of the playoffs before. Nuff said.
8.)*Cleveland Cavs*- Overrated. I don't think James can help this team that's older, slower, less talented and less athletic. It can only help the LBJ to NYC campaign. I guess the question is which team.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

You're not getting anywhere until Randolph, Curry, and Marbury are off the team.

Here's how the east goes for me:

1. Boston
2. Detroit
3. Orlando (Rashard meshes more, Dwight gets closer to his prime)
4. Sixers (Growing pains)
5. Washington
6. Toronto (Though Jermaine O'Neal really hurts their chances)
7. Cavs (LBJ is still LBJ. They might go ahead of Toronto)
8. Chicago (If Larry ever gets over his brother's death, and starts loving basketball again, look out. They could go as a high as 5).

Bucks are still going to suck. After watching RJ last year, I've noticed a drop in passing and defense. He can still drive, but his shooting is a bit worse too. They already have chuckers in Mo and Redd


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

just in our conference

Celts
Raps
sixers

are already better than us


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

mynetsforlife said:


> You're not getting anywhere until Randolph, Curry, and Marbury are off the team.
> 
> Here's how the east goes for me:
> 
> ...


Yeah and even with him not passing as well or playing as good of defense, he is still an all-star. The past couple of years he has been hurt and seems to have been strongly motivated to make the all-star team; maybe that's the cause of him focusing more on offense than anything else. Adding him to the Bucks still make them a big threat considering they already have 2 other all-stars in the wings at the SG and C positions. If they avoid injuries, which has been the only thing that has derailed them from making the playoffs in the past, they'll be alright.

P.S., how is Redd a chucker when he's getting 4apg at the 2 guard spot? Williams is also a pretty good passing PG but just a scorer and very turnover prone. And how do the Bulls make the playoffs when neither Deng or Gordon are resigned and Del ***** having no coaching experience?


----------



## nets1fan102290 (Apr 16, 2007)

nope if the knicks make the playoffs then dantoni must be some good coach


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

*This is a JOKE Question right? 

The Knicks will be at the bottom of the Atlantic Division next season.*


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

I could see us being at the bottom of the Atlantic but definately not worse than the Nets. Everything else though from 5-14th in the East is pretty close to being even.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Yeah and even with him not passing as well or playing as good of defense, he is still an all-star. The past couple of years he has been hurt and seems to have been strongly motivated to make the all-star team; maybe that's the cause of him focusing more on offense than anything else. Adding him to the Bucks still make them a big threat considering they already have 2 other all-stars in the wings at the SG and C positions. If they avoid injuries, which has been the only thing that has derailed them from making the playoffs in the past, they'll be alright.
> 
> P.S., how is Redd a chucker when he's getting 4apg at the 2 guard spot? Williams is also a pretty good passing PG but just a scorer and very turnover prone. And how do the Bulls make the playoffs when neither Deng or Gordon are resigned and Del ***** having no coaching experience?


Congrats, now PG, SG, SF are filled with terrible defenders. RJ was a better overall player a few years ago, when he was a solid (not lockdown) player, who could move the damn ball. Now, all he is is a scorer. You already have two scorers. 

You honestly think the Nets will be worse than the Knicks? The Nets won't be great, but they'll surely be better than the Knicks. Danilo isn't _that _good.

So the Knicks will be at the bottom of their division, but still better than one team in their division? lolwut?


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

TwinkieFoot said:


> P.S., how is Redd a chucker when he's getting 4apg at the 2 guard spot? Williams is also a pretty good passing PG but just a scorer and very turnover prone.


Watch their games or get yourself acquainted with Andrew Bogut. They are both chuckers and the Bucks will be better off by trading the 2 of them.


----------



## nets1fan102290 (Apr 16, 2007)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I could see us being at the bottom of the Atlantic but definately not worse than the Nets. Everything else though from 5-14th in the East is pretty close to being even.


why say that? when was the last time the knicks had a better record then the nets? the knicks are a mess we have a great point and shooting guard while you guys have stephon marbury who is turrible and jammal crawford who is nothing compared to vc. i have no clue who the sf is i think its qrich but he is washed up. plus randolph and curry are not going to do well with dantonis offense


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

Randolph is an overpaid jumpshooter who can't defend or pass. Jason Collins makes Curry cry. Neither is a chemistry player. D'Antoni's offense needs chemistry.

The Nets bench will be amazing next year. I can honestly see that keeping us at about 500. If Anderson or Brook pan out this year, we could be even better.


----------



## VCHighFly (May 7, 2004)

mynetsforlife said:


> Randolph is an overpaid jumpshooter who can't defend or pass. Jason Collins makes Curry cry. Neither is a chemistry player. D'Antoni's offense needs chemistry.


I think Randolph can definitely fit the system. He's a good shooter with inside presense and a good rebounder. You don't have to play defense to play for D'Antoni. I agree that Curry needs to go, though.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

Inside presence? Nah. Rebounder, sure. However, to really fit in to his system, you must be willing to pass the ball, and not try to crossover guards and chuck up 3s with 6 seconds left on the shot clock.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

seifer0406 said:


> Watch their games or get yourself acquainted with Andrew Bogut. They are both chuckers and the Bucks will be better off by trading the 2 of them.


Oh, well when you put it that way, it makes perfect sense. Of course the best player on the team isn't suppose to take the most shots, especially when he's one of the best converters of them in the league.


----------



## VCHighFly (May 7, 2004)

mynetsforlife said:


> Inside presence? Nah.


I know he's not a defensive presence inside, but he does have a nice post game. He just doesn't get to display that game much playing with Curry.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

mynetsforlife said:


> Congrats, now PG, SG, SF are filled with terrible defenders. RJ was a better overall player a few years ago, when he was a solid (not lockdown) player, who could move the damn ball. Now, all he is is a scorer. You already have two scorers.
> 
> You honestly think the Nets will be worse than the Knicks? The Nets won't be great, but they'll surely be better than the Knicks. Danilo isn't _that _good.
> 
> So the Knicks will be at the bottom of their division, but still better than one team in their division? lolwut?


When did Richard Jefferson become a terrible defender. Seriously, even when he's not as defensively inclined as he's been in years past he's still good at it. He became a scorer in recent years because outside of Carter, no one on the Nets was a serious scoring threat. You ain't winning games unless your putting points up on the board.

The Nets have not become a better team. They've put themselves in a great position to be pretty good in the future but no way is Bobby Simmons and Eduardo Najera going to replace a Richard Jefferson. The only all-star your left with is Vince Carter and he's hardly the kind of player that can carry a team; Toronto Raptors anyone? The Knicks on the other hand just hired D'Antoni who is an offensive wiz. We're still likely to suck but definately not as bad considering we are a scoring team whose strength will be magnified and just added a distributor that enhances that ability. Danilo probably will be a non-factor and I was not considering him to be.

And yes, the Knicks will likely be at the bottom of the Atlantic. Generally 2nd to last is considered bottom but I guess some have different interpretations of what "bottom" means.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

nets1fan102290 said:


> why say that? when was the last time the knicks had a better record then the nets? the knicks are a mess we have a great point and shooting guard while you guys have stephon marbury who is turrible and jammal crawford who is nothing compared to vc. i have no clue who the sf is i think its qrich but he is washed up. plus randolph and curry are not going to do well with dantonis offense


What does the history of their winning records have to do with anything? Last time I checked, if you took the history of the teams, the Knicks clearly have had the more success. Clearly, the history of these things don't matter and the persent body of work does. 

The Nets ARE in a pretty good situation. I personally like what they did in the offseason not because of what it means now but what it will mean in the future. You have the opportunity to be a serious team come playoff team once the core is refined and developed. This doesn't mean you'll be good right now. You just lost the best distributor in the league in Jason Kidd, one of the better swingmen in the league in Richard Jefferson and replaced them with Devin Harris (good albeit not Kidd good), Eduardo Najera and Bobby Simmons. You still have the same mediocre coach you've had the past couple of years and added nothing but inexperienced rookies. Your not going to be good, plain and simple. Vince Carter sucks donkey balls carrying a team, which is how he ended up on the Nets in the first place. He's still an all-star but certainly not the kind of guy that is going to lead you to a .500 record; neither is Lawrence.

The Knicks are coached by D'Antoni. As much as we don't have the proper personnel in place for what is considered ideal for him, we have scorers. We also added Duhon who isn't a stud but will do what we need and that's keep the ball moving. A moving ball on a team of scorers will get you a couple wins...at least more than the Nets. At this point, we're deeper, more talented and experienced. Those 3 things combined generally define a better team.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

mynetsforlife said:


> Randolph is an overpaid jumpshooter who can't defend or pass. Jason Collins makes Curry cry. Neither is a chemistry player. D'Antoni's offense needs chemistry.
> 
> The Nets bench will be amazing next year. I can honestly see that keeping us at about 500. If Anderson or Brook pan out this year, we could be even better.


Overpaid jump shooter. He must have been one hell of a jump shooter to put up nearly 20 ppg out West against some of the best big men in the world. In either case, he's not a jump shooter obviously and much more. The Knicks forced him out on the perimeter more than usual because of the fact that we had Curry in the post. Without Curry, he's one of the most dangerous inside presences in the league.

The only person "cry(ing)" between Collins and Curry must be Collins because he might not even be in the league much longer with bigger guys getting more talented and servicable center's becoming more available. That and the game speeding up likely will expediate Jason's exit from the league. Curry still will have a job for at least another 3 years and likely more because he actually has talent.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> When did Richard Jefferson become a terrible defender. Seriously, even when he's not as defensively inclined as he's been in years past he's still good at it. He became a scorer in recent years because outside of Carter, no one on the Nets was a serious scoring threat. You ain't winning games unless your putting points up on the board.


When? After he was hurt. He stopped trying. No, he's not good at it. He's below average, at best. You also ain't winning games if the opposing SF is burning your best defensive small, which is what RJ would be on the Bucks.


> The Nets have not become a better team. They've put themselves in a great position to be pretty good in the future but no way is Bobby Simmons and Eduardo Najera going to replace a Richard Jefferson. The only all-star your left with is Vince Carter and he's hardly the kind of player that can carry a team; Toronto Raptors anyone? The Knicks on the other hand just hired D'Antoni who is an offensive wiz. We're still likely to suck but definately not as bad considering we are a scoring team whose strength will be magnified and just added a distributor that enhances that ability. Danilo probably will be a non-factor and I was not considering him to be.


Are you joking? They got rid of Jason "Migraine" Kidd, who wasn't giving it his all, Richard "D-Up What?" Jefferson, and Laptop. 3 defensive liabilities. Gone. Replaced by Harris, who Tony Parker calls one of the best defensive PGs in the league, Najera, Simmons, Dooling, and CDR. 


> And yes, the Knicks will likely be at the bottom of the Atlantic. Generally 2nd to last is considered bottom but I guess some have different interpretations of what "bottom" means.


Bottom- the *lowest *part or place 
Superlatives, buddy. Learn what they are.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Oh, well when you put it that way, it makes perfect sense. Of course the best player on the team isn't suppose to take the most shots, especially when he's one of the best converters of them in the league.


Bogut is the best player on the team. Redd has the highest salary.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> The Nets ARE in a pretty good situation. I personally like what they did in the offseason not because of what it means now but what it will mean in the future. You have the opportunity to be a serious team come playoff team once the core is refined and developed. This doesn't mean you'll be good right now. You just lost the best distributor in the league in Jason Kidd, one of the better swingmen in the league in Richard Jefferson and replaced them with Devin Harris (good albeit not Kidd good), Eduardo Najera and Bobby Simmons. You still have the same mediocre coach you've had the past couple of years and added nothing but inexperienced rookies. Your not going to be good, plain and simple. Vince Carter sucks donkey balls carrying a team, which is how he ended up on the Nets in the first place. He's still an all-star but certainly not the kind of guy that is going to lead you to a .500 record; neither is Lawrence.


You're overrating Jefferon. Vince showed last year, after the Kidd trade, that when properly motivated, he can lead a team. 


> The Knicks are coached by D'Antoni. As much as we don't have the proper personnel in place for what is considered ideal for him, we have scorers. We also added Duhon who isn't a stud but will do what we need and that's keep the ball moving. A moving ball on a team of scorers will get you a couple wins...at least more than the Nets. At this point, we're deeper, more talented and experienced. Those 3 things combined generally define a better team.


Duhon is actually pretty damn good, but you're overrating your depth. Who, on your bench, would you consider good? The Nets are probably one of the deeper teams in the league, with all these acquisitions.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Overpaid jump shooter. He must have been one hell of a jump shooter to put up nearly 20 ppg out West against some of the best big men in the world. In either case, he's not a jump shooter obviously and much more. The Knicks forced him out on the perimeter more than usual because of the fact that we had Curry in the post. Without Curry, he's one of the most dangerous inside presences in the league.


He must have been one hell of a piece of **** to be traded for Steve Francis, who was instantly bought out. Randolph shot 46.7% IN HIS BEST YEAR. That's terrible, for a "scoring inside presence"! The year before that, he shot 43%, in 6 more games.


> The only person "cry(ing)" between Collins and Curry must be Collins because he might not even be in the league much longer with bigger guys getting more talented and servicable center's becoming more available. That and the game speeding up likely will expediate Jason's exit from the league. Curry still will have a job for at least another 3 years and likely more because he actually has talent.


You obviously have no idea of what incident I'm talking about. If you don't know, don't pretend you do.

And next time, can you put it all in one post?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

mynetsforlife said:


> You're overrating Jefferon. Vince showed last year, after the Kidd trade, that when properly motivated, he can lead a team.
> 
> Duhon is actually pretty damn good, but you're overrating your depth. Who, on your bench, would you consider good? The Nets are probably one of the deeper teams in the league, with all these acquisitions.



the nets are not any deeper than last season.

you are overrating your depth.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

Who did we get rid of that weakened our depth? Because I can list many players who have improved it.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

mynetsforlife said:


> Who did we get rid of that weakened our depth? Because I can list many players who have improved it.


lost diop and krstic at center , got lopez
RJ and nashbar at forward got simmons and yi
williams and antione wright at guard got dooling and cdr

they didn't improve anywhere.

they lost at least 2 starter caliber player possibly 3 in diop, they didn't get a starter quality player in return, its a bad offseason as far as 2008-09 after that maybe their rooks become something but none of them project as an impact player immediately.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

Williams and Antoine Wright? Have you seen a Nets game? They're nothing to write home about. Dooling, CDR, and Hodge are all tenacious defenders, who really bump us up at the Guard position

Nachbar and RJ sucked last year. Both were huge defensive liabilities. We got Anderson, Yi, Simmons, Hayes, and Najera. Can't say I'm displeased there.

We took a hit at Center, sure. But we still retain Nenad's rights, so I think a year in Russia will do him so good. Diop got the full MLE, no way we should have matched that. Besides, we still have Boone at Center, and we'll probably go small a lot anyway, so going 2 deep isn't bad.


----------



## Guest (Jul 31, 2008)

You guys are cracking me up! 

Richard Jefferson? Defense? HA! The last time he actually played defense was, what, 2004?

We lost Diop, who had no offense at all, lost Krstic, who played worse than Malik Allen last season...and picked up Brook Lopez and Eddy Najera. Hell, losing the two other guys is an upgrade in itself.

Oh, and losing RJ was like godsend. His shot selection was ****, he isn't that great a shooter, and his defense was literally non-existent. He really didn't wanna be here, as much as he said he did. You could tell.

Nashbar? HA. A chair is better than Nachbar was last season. I'd rather have a chair on the court, playing defense. Maybe someone would trip over it, and it would stop someone. Maybe you could bounce the ball off of it and make a shot. I don't know, but it'd be better than Nachbar.

Simmons plays defense, that's pretty awesome. He can hit a shot, too. And Yi's an above average shooter, at the level of possible Krstic a couple years ago. Jarvis Hayes is a good scorer, too. Way better than Nachbar, at least.

Oh, and Williams and Wright sucked ***. Anything is better than those two. One of them played no defense, the other played no offense. Combine them together, and improve upon everything just a bit, and you've got Keyon Dooling. Yes, Keyon Dooling is better than those 2 combined. Wow. 

It doesn't even matter if the rookies don't produce much (but come on, at least 1 out of 3 has to contribute something good), losing those players helped us more than they hurt us. 

By the way, it's glaringly obvious nobody, with the exception of MNFL, obviously, has really watched or paid attention to the Nets last season. You all fail.


----------



## Guest (Jul 31, 2008)

Oh, and I'll double post to say this: To answer the original question, no, there is no way in hell "you" are making the playoffs.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

mynetsforlife said:


> Williams and Antoine Wright? Have you seen a Nets game? They're nothing to write home about. Dooling, CDR, and Hodge are all tenacious defenders, who really bump us up at the Guard position
> 
> Nachbar and RJ sucked last year. Both were huge defensive liabilities. We got Anderson, Yi, Simmons, Hayes, and Najera. Can't say I'm displeased there.
> 
> We took a hit at Center, sure. But we still retain Nenad's rights, so I think a year in Russia will do him so good. Diop got the full MLE, no way we should have matched that. Besides, we still have Boone at Center, and we'll probably go small a lot anyway, so going 2 deep isn't bad.


By CDR I suppose you mean Chris Douglas Roberts. If so, I got to laugh. How the hell do you know that that "tenacious defense (which earned him a 2nd round selection)" is going to translate into where it matters most, against an actual NBA team and not JV? And who is Hodge? 

I first assumed you meant Julius Hodge but I never knew the Nets signed him. I actually paid a trip to your website to see if I missed something and apparently didn't. You already have a 15 man roster (contracts gauranteed) and don't even have a Hodge on it. Before you start talking about another fans team, make sure you know what's up with yours. K? K. Glad we could clear that up.

Could you also explain to me that despite being the great defender he is, how Keyon Dooling couldn't demand much more than $3 million on the open market that his own team (who has little guard depth) didn't want to pay?

As much as you THINK Nachbar and RJ "sucked" on defense last year, rookies are not likely going to be lighting it up on that end of the floor to begin with. They give you depth but certainly don't match the level of overall play those two provided given the fact that RJ's a borderline all-star. Besides, aside from Simmons (who has hardly been anything spectacular the past couple of years even in spite of injuries) who is known as a defender amongst the aforementioned group you named that is supposedly better than what you lost?


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

> When? After he was hurt. He stopped trying. No, he's not good at it. He's below average, at best. You also ain't winning games if the opposing SF is burning your best defensive small, which is what RJ would be on the Bucks.


Great defense there; he's not good at it because you say so. Funny how you seem to agree that he was a good defender when he was younger and somehow can't be that same defender under similar circumstances. Newsflash, scoring 20ppg ain't easy in this league especially at the 47% clip he does. It takes a lot out of you especially when your team is neither good at scoring or defending the ball. Alleviate him of his scoring responsibilities and he'd have a lot more energy to dedicate to defense as he's proven to do once before.

And funny that you "ain't winning games if the opposing SF is burn your best defensive small," like Richard Jefferson. I just find it interesting that your top 3 winning lineups from last season all included RJ. I think that might say something.




> Are you joking? They got rid of Jason "Migraine" Kidd, who wasn't giving it his all, Richard "D-Up What?" Jefferson, and Laptop. 3 defensive liabilities. Gone. Replaced by Harris, who Tony Parker calls one of the best defensive PGs in the league, Najera, Simmons, Dooling, and CDR.


Jason "Migraine" Kidd actually took your team to the Finals twice and kept you a contender for several years. I find it oddly convenient that all of a sudden now that he was the problem with your team. In either case, the Nets won a greater percentage of games (42%) than with Harris at point (36%).


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

mynetsforlife said:


> Bogut is the best player on the team. Redd has the highest salary.


When has Bogut proven that? When he does, then maybe you can say that but Redd has and is the man in charge of that team.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

> You're overrating Jefferon. Vince showed last year, after the Kidd trade, that when properly motivated, he can lead a team.


...Oh, then how did the playoffs work out for you? 



> Duhon is actually pretty damn good, but you're overrating your depth. Who, on your bench, would you consider good? The Nets are probably one of the deeper teams in the league, with all these acquisitions.


The Knicks have been one of the deepest teams in the league the past few years and have not made the playoffs in any of those years. The Pistons up until fairly recently have been one the shallowiest teams in the league and been contenders every year. How good you are is determined moreso by your starting 5 than your roster of 15. I'm not saying that a bench does not play the role in the success but your bench is not what is going to put you into the playoffs. It is, however, what will take you further into the postseason.

P.S., every player on our bench (save Jerome James) is almost starter capable. Even the bottom tier players on our bench like Jared Jefferies (and even Jerome James) have started for other teams. The one's that haven't, certainly are capable of playing solid basketball but have not been able to prove themselves due to the glut of similar players we have at each of those positions. The only problem with the guys on our bench is the fact that they are either overpaid or have several years on their contracts that make them unattractive. Once you get rid of that issue, they become pretty attractive on the open market. I recall that we had the same situation when Isiah took over and ironically all the guys we either traded or released played in the rotation of a championship team, a team in the finals, or contender: Shandon Anderson and Michael Doleac with the Heat, Othella Harrington with the Bulls, Kurt Thomas with the Suns, Antonio McDyess with the Pistons, etc.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

mynetsforlife said:


> He must have been one hell of a piece of **** to be traded for Steve Francis, who was instantly bought out. Randolph shot 46.7% IN HIS BEST YEAR. That's terrible, for a "scoring inside presence"! The year before that, he shot 43%, in 6 more games.


Francis saved them $30 million in the process. You also seem to forget that Channing Frye was included in the deal and is actually better than anything you currently have to offer in your front court (aside from Yi who I think is awesome).

When did 47% become "terrible?" Yao Ming shot 50% from the field last year and is considered a top tier low post scorer. All of a sudden now 3% makes a world of difference between all-star and hopeless bum? This sort of reasoning is nearly moronic. The fact of the matter is that your a good scorer if you can covert in the ballpark of half your shots.




mynetsforlife said:


> You obviously have no idea of what incident I'm talking about. If you don't know, don't pretend you do.
> 
> And next time, can you put it all in one post?


Apparently you don't either because you haven't explain yourself. It doesn't matter either way because Jason Collins is going nowhere but to the unemployment line in a few years.

Could I post everything in one post? Yeah. Will I? No. Nice chatting with you though.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

peg182 said:


> You guys are cracking me up!
> 
> Richard Jefferson? Defense? HA! The last time he actually played defense was, what, 2004?
> 
> We lost Diop, who had no offense at all, lost Krstic, who played worse than Malik Allen last season...and picked up Brook Lopez and Eddy Najera. Hell, losing the two other guys is an upgrade in itself.


Based on what? The guys you brought in are unproven rookies that have done little to distinguish themselves. Don't get me wrong, I like what you guys are doing but don't let the potential tag fool you into thinking your on a fast-track to being contender. It's really kind of sad when a big man that's projected to be a role player and a role player like Eduardo Najera can get you hype enough to talk ****. That's the real joke here.



peg182 said:


> Oh, and losing RJ was like godsend. His shot selection was ****, he isn't that great a shooter, and his defense was literally non-existent. He really didn't wanna be here, as much as he said he did. You could tell.


That's interesting because the SF spot had the best player efficiency rating of any other position on your team last season. Must be a real godsend getting rid of the player that basically was responsible for that. 



peg182 said:


> Nashbar? HA. A chair is better than Nachbar was last season. I'd rather have a chair on the court, playing defense. Maybe someone would trip over it, and it would stop someone. Maybe you could bounce the ball off of it and make a shot. I don't know, but it'd be better than Nachbar.
> 
> Simmons plays defense, that's pretty awesome. He can hit a shot, too. And Yi's an above average shooter, at the level of possible Krstic a couple years ago. Jarvis Hayes is a good scorer, too. Way better than Nachbar, at least.


LOL, Simmons has been so spectacular for the Bucks that he's been on the trade block ever since he signed that deal with them. He's been so bad that they've brought in two small-forwards (Desmond Mason and eventually Richard Jefferson) to replace him. I'll give you Hayes being a good scorer because I really do like him but if your *****ing about the defensive play of individuals, your going to have a problem with Hayes. There's a reason why the Wizards and Pistons let him go for nothing.




peg182 said:


> Oh, and Williams and Wright sucked ***. Anything is better than those two. One of them played no defense, the other played no offense. Combine them together, and improve upon everything just a bit, and you've got Keyon Dooling. Yes, Keyon Dooling is better than those 2 combined. Wow.


Again, Dooling was let go by his team for nothing and when he was a member, hardly got much playing time. When did he all of a sudden become the second coming? When he signed with the Nets? He's capable of putting the ball in the basket albiet not well and creates very little for teammates. Defensively, he's good but that makes him nothing more than a bench role player.



peg182 said:


> It doesn't even matter if the rookies don't produce much (but come on, at least 1 out of 3 has to contribute something good), losing those players helped us more than they hurt us.
> 
> By the way, it's glaringly obvious nobody, with the exception of MNFL, obviously, has really watched or paid attention to the Nets last season. You all fail.


How do you figure? How do you know that the players your currently have are going to be relevant in the future? Marcus Williams when he was first drafted was ordained the successor to Kidd and where is he now? Exactly.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Great defense there; he's not good at it because you say so. Funny how you seem to agree that he was a good defender when he was younger and somehow can't be that same defender under similar circumstances. Newsflash, scoring 20ppg ain't easy in this league especially at the 47% clip he does. It takes a lot out of you especially when your team is neither good at scoring or defending the ball. Alleviate him of his scoring responsibilities and he'd have a lot more energy to dedicate to defense as he's proven to do once before.
> 
> And funny that you "ain't winning games if the opposing SF is burn your best defensive small," like Richard Jefferson. I just find it interesting that your top 3 winning lineups from last season all included RJ. I think that might say something.
> 
> ...


Yup, and Shaq was the center piece of championship teams back then too. And Kerry Kittles was playing. And Kobe had hair. Things change. 

What motivates RJ to be better on the Bucks? He wants to be a scorer now, and get recognition. It's not the scoring that's taken it out of him, it's a lack of effort on defense, because he just doesn't care.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> When has Bogut proven that? When he does, then maybe you can say that but Redd has and is the man in charge of that team.


Bogut put up 14/10/2 in his 3rd season. He's a beast down low. 14 points, on 11 shots per game. That's impressive. Very much so.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Francis saved them $30 million in the process. You also seem to forget that Channing Frye was included in the deal and is actually better than anything you currently have to offer in your front court (aside from Yi who I think is awesome).


Frye is better than Boone? Seriously? Anderson will be better this year, and if Brook puts it together so will he. 


> When did 47% become "terrible?" Yao Ming shot 50% from the field last year and is considered a top tier low post scorer. All of a sudden now 3% makes a world of difference between all-star and hopeless bum? This sort of reasoning is nearly moronic. The fact of the matter is that your a good scorer if you can covert in the ballpark of half your shots.


46%, in his BEST season. He shot 43 the year before.


> Apparently you don't either because you haven't explain yourself. It doesn't matter either way because Jason Collins is going nowhere but to the unemployment line in a few years.
> 
> Could I post everything in one post? Yeah. Will I? No. Nice chatting with you though.


I obviously do, since I brought it up. Whenever the Nets played the Knicks,
Collins would be on Curry. And Curry would always argue with the refs, about Collins D. He was near tears once.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Based on what? The guys you brought in are unproven rookies that have done little to distinguish themselves. Don't get me wrong, I like what you guys are doing but don't let the potential tag fool you into thinking your on a fast-track to being contender. It's really kind of sad when a big man that's projected to be a role player and a role player like Eduardo Najera can get you hype enough to talk ****. That's the real joke here.


When did we say the Nets will be contenders? They'll just be better than the Knicks



> That's interesting because the SF spot had the best player efficiency rating of any other position on your team last season. Must be a real godsend getting rid of the player that basically was responsible for that.


Does efficiency take into account defense? No? Well then... 




> Again, Dooling was let go by his team for nothing and when he was a member, hardly got much playing time. When did he all of a sudden become the second coming? When he signed with the Nets? He's capable of putting the ball in the basket albiet not well and creates very little for teammates. Defensively, he's good but that makes him nothing more than a bench role player.


Which is exactly what we're asking him to be...



> How do you figure? How do you know that the players your currently have are going to be relevant in the future? Marcus Williams when he was first drafted was ordained the successor to Kidd and where is he now? Exactly.


Williams was taken with a pick in the 20s, and that draft around the time was shallow. Williams fell like a led balloon, in the draft, not that anyone taken directly infront of him or behind him turned into anything. And Williams will turn into something, albeit for the Warriors.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> It is, however, what will take you further into the postseason.


Check my first post in this thread. Do you see the Nets mentioned in the playoff predictions? No? Know why? Because I don't think they'll get in. I do, however, think they will be better than the Knicks.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

Oh, Julius Hodge has been offered a training camp invite.


----------



## Guest (Aug 1, 2008)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Based on what? The guys you brought in are unproven rookies that have done little to distinguish themselves. Don't get me wrong, I like what you guys are doing but don't let the potential tag fool you into thinking your on a fast-track to being contender. It's really kind of sad when a big man that's projected to be a role player and a role player like Eduardo Najera can get you hype enough to talk ****. That's the real joke here.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There you go. Proving to me, once again, that you barely watch the Nets and have no clue what the **** you are talking about. 

What does Marcus have to do with any of this? He was trade to the Warriors. Why does he matter at all? Do you know what you're talking about? Do you know what day it is?

I don't know how you can look at this team and not say it's a total improvement. I mean, really, how do teams win? Let me ask you that. 

Well, for one, scoring. We have multiple players who can score: Vince can drop 20+, Devin can drop 15+, Simmons can drop 15+, Yi can drop 10, Keyon can drop 10, Boone can drop 10, etc. The team is littered with shooters: Vince, Simmons, Yi, Najera, Hayes, Anderson, even CDR. Boone, Sean, Yi, and Brook can even score some in the post - prolly around 10 pts each, with consistent playing time.

Then, there's defense. One of the top defensive points in the league, Devin Harris. One of the top defensive backups in the league, Dooling. A hardworking defensive player in Simmons. Sean Williams is one of the top young shotblockers in the league. Boone is a good, solid defender and rebounder. Najera hustles his *** off and plays good, solid defense. Carter showed at the end of the year that when his team isn't diluted with crappy chemistry (stemming from a certain pg), he's willing to hustle and play defense. Definite improvement there.

Rebounding: Sean, Yi, Boone are all good rebounders, Vince ain't too shabby himself, Najera can hustle for rebounds, and Anderson was one of the top rebounders in the Pac-10.

Chemistry - without the crap that was hindering them last season - Kidd, RJ, Magloire, Marcus - there shouldn't be too much chemistry problems, with the exception of Swift, who will probably be traded.

I don't know how you can see at least some improvement from last year's team. We got rid of the ****ty players who didn't feel like trying, and replaced them with hardworking hustle players who will work their asses off for the betterment of the team.

And not surprisingly, you're making an *** out of yourself with your assumptions (and the ump will shun you). The only problems Bobby had in Milwaukee were injury problems that seem to be behind him and too big of a contract, which is not his fault...that's Milwaukee's fault. 

Oh yeah, and by the way, I'd love to know where the hell you got the idea anyone said the Nets were gonna be a contender? I didn't say they were gonna win a championship. I didn't even say they were gonna make the playoffs! I'm simply saying they'll be better. DER


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

I'm keeping an eye out for baiting, if it escalates into personal attacks I will edit and close this thread.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I could see us being at the bottom of the Atlantic but definately not worse than the Nets. Everything else though from 5-14th in the East is pretty close to being even.


You mean like that one?


----------



## Guest (Aug 1, 2008)

I agree, he baited us!


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

some points.

it does appear small forward on the nets was a poor position defensively , it wasn't the worse though .

power forward was and the center spot was the weakest on the team and it is even worse this year, essentially replacing Krstic and diop with a 20 year old rook, they may have the worst center/pf rotation in the league next year ...very young ,very inexperienced, it may have talent but it doesn't appear ready yet.

if williams is going to turn into anything , then the nets made a mistake , all dooling really is ...is just a bench guy , not really such a great one at that which is why the magic wanted him to take a pay cut,

and bogut really isn't that great a scorer , 14 points on 11 shots , in 35 minutes a game , is not a scorer ...merely competent, curry got 13.2 in 25.9 minutes in a horrible season .

Bogut has a good all around game , but he certainly doesn't stand out as a scorer...(heck curry is even a better free throw shooter , and 3 point shooter 2-2 vs. 1-15)...there is no way they should be trying to get him more shots instead of Redd,, he is not being ignored , Scorers tend to find a way even when they aren't being fed the ball...Bogut clearly does not, he scores at a rate similar to David Lee careerwise.


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

Actually, he was baiting nets1fan102290 and me


----------



## mynetsforlife (Dec 27, 2006)

Da Grinch said:


> some points.
> 
> it does appear small forward on the nets was a poor position defensively , it wasn't the worse though .
> 
> power forward was and the center spot was the weakest on the team and it is even worse this year, essentially replacing Krstic and diop with a 20 year old rook, they may have the worst center/pf rotation in the league next year ...very young ,very inexperienced, it may have talent but it doesn't appear ready yet.


Actually, we won't be terrible on defense at PF/C this year, which is why I'm excited. Sure, we'll have no post threats... 
Do you have numbers to back that up? I'm not doubting you, I'd just like to know your basis.


> if williams is going to turn into anything , then the nets made a mistake , all dooling really is ...is just a bench guy , not really such a great one at that which is why the magic wanted him to take a pay cut,


You might be right. But he wasn't going to prosper under Frank, and Thron-tron has Frank's back


> and bogut really isn't that great a scorer , 14 points on 11 shots , in 35 minutes a game , is not a scorer ...merely competent, curry got 13.2 in 25.9 minutes in a horrible season .
> 
> Bogut has a good all around game , but he certainly doesn't stand out as a scorer...(heck curry is even a better free throw shooter , and 3 point shooter 2-2 vs. 1-15)...there is no way they should be trying to get him more shots instead of Redd,, he is not being ignored , Scorers tend to find a way even when they aren't being fed the ball...Bogut clearly does not, he scores at a rate similar to David Lee careerwise.


I meant overall, all things considered. I should have made that more clear, that one's my bad.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Remember folks he can talk smack about the Nets all he wants in the _*Knicks forum.*_ Just as long as he does not go in the Nets forum with the same type of post, that is when it is considered baiting. 

Disruption- *Posts that are meant to create confusion or sway the topic away from the intended Thread or conversation or news pertaining to a particular subject.* Disruption can include but not limited to post-padding, off-topic posting, or posting of content that intended to demean other posters rather than discuss appropriate topics. 

Harassment – Harassment is defined when a member attacks, disrespects and degrades another member anywhere on the board at any time. Personal attacks are never welcome and are never tolerated. The general nature of sports, fans will defend their favorite player and or team, but never will terms as “stupid, homer, idiot, moron” and the like ever be tolerated.* Continual harassment and or “baiting” of a member of the community, they’re favorite team or player and or members of the staff will also result in the above mentioned actions.*
Carry on:


----------



## Guest (Aug 1, 2008)

Da Grinch said:


> some points.
> 
> it does appear small forward on the nets was a poor position defensively , it wasn't the worse though .
> 
> ...


I don't know much about Bogut. I wish I did.

What I do know is that Redd and Williams aren't that great of passers. And that those poor teammates, along with their run of poor coaches since Stotts, has hindered Bogut's development just a liiiittle bit.


Oh, and if Marcus turns out to do anything, it'll more than likely prove that he wasn't a good fit for this team or this coach. Yes, that means the Nets did make a mistake in choosing them. Silly Nets.



And we know Dooling is just a bench guy. But ya see, that's exactly what we've needed. A bench guy, who can defend, score, maybe even run the offense. Those guys usually play a big role under Lawrence Frank, which will make Keyon important to the Nets. Like Eddie House. We miss Eddie House.

Do you remember how bad Krstic was last year? Pretty bad. He sucked. Couldn't do much. Not worried about losing him for 1-2 seasons. Hope he comes back alright, though.

And Diop wasn't a good fit for our team. He's better alongside Dirk, an offensive player. Diop's a good role player. He's good, but not for the Nets. Oh well.

And as for our bigs this year...meh, can't be any worse than last year, really. We had Sean as a rookie, Boone as a 2nd year player (without a training camp or injury-free summer under his belt). Krstic injured, Diop not a good fit. Stromile being Stromile. Collins having a null effect. Malik Allen being the worst player in the league. This year, at least Sean and Boone should have improved, somewhat. And Najera's better than what we had last year. Sadly.

Wow, I just responded to you backwards, sort of. Sweet.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

mynetsforlife said:


> Wait, so we have to be biased towards the team that the specific board is dedicated to? Fo' rizzle?


No one said you have to be bias, I'm just warning you if you bait, or insult a member you going to get an infraction. *Now stay on topic* and carry on with the debate. Anything else concerning about the rules posted in this thread will be edited out.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

The Knicks making the playoffs depends all on how the players respond to D'Antoni's coaching style and style of play. If they don't match with him, then the result will be the same for this season as it was for the last.


----------



## Kid Chocolate (Jun 17, 2005)

Take Bogut off the Bucks and put him on a team where the guards aren't selfish and actually feed him the ball, and he averages around 20 a game.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

mynetsforlife said:


> Check my first post in this thread. Do you see the Nets mentioned in the playoff predictions? No? Know why? Because I don't think they'll get in. I do, however, think they will be better than the Knicks.


They won't be better than the Knicks and I never implied you thought they were a playoff team. The way your acting, it would seem like they are. In either case, all I was explaining was my opinion of the function/role of a bench. Your bench is just that a bench and isn't going to be the measure of how good a team you'll be. Not everyone can obviously play so your really only as good as your rotation which is hardly impressive.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

mynetsforlife said:


> Frye is better than Boone? Seriously? Anderson will be better this year, and if Brook puts it together so will he.



You mean the same Josh Boone that couldn't get more than 25mpg on a team of no name big men? Yeah. 



mynetsforlife said:


> 46%, in his BEST season. He shot 43 the year before.


Once again, if you want to talk about another fans team, get to know your own. Jefferson shot 46% from the field during the 2006-2007 season and 49% the 2005-2006 season. In fact, the 2004-2005 season was the only season he shot below 45% (43%) and that was largely because Kidd was gone for a big chunk of the season, the team just lost Martin and you had nobody else on your team. Thanks for playing.





mynetsforlife said:


> I obviously do, since I brought it up. Whenever the Nets played the Knicks,
> Collins would be on Curry. And Curry would always argue with the refs, about Collins D. He was near tears once.


Funny because this season was arguably his worst as a Knick and he killed the Nets the two games he played in that Collins was still a Net. On December 15th, Curry scored 23 points on 9-16 shooting and grabbed 9 rebounds. On January 16th, he scored 17 points on 6-8 shooting. He was actually in foul trouble during that game, so who knows how much worse he would have killed the Nets. Come to think of it, Curry generally plays pretty well against the Nets so I got to ask once again, do you really know what your talking about?


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

mynetsforlife said:


> Does efficiency take into account defense? No? Well then... .


Actually it does. What exactly do you consider steals, blocks, low TO's and defensive rebounds to be?





mynetsforlife said:


> Which is exactly what we're asking him (Dooling) to be....


LOL, you've been hyping him up as a key to being a better team post-Jefferson and Nachbar. Clearly you have no idea what your talking about. 



mynetsforlife said:


> Williams was taken with a pick in the 20s, and that draft around the time was shallow. Williams fell like a led balloon, in the draft, not that anyone taken directly infront of him or behind him turned into anything. And Williams will turn into something, albeit for the Warriors.


LOL, I recall you guys acting like he was the next messiah and calling Isiah foolish for passing on him. And then all of a sudden the guy we drafted was proving to actually be a better selection than him...albeit for the Nuggets.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

mynetsforlife said:


> Oh, Julius Hodge has been offered a training camp invite.


When David Stern and league officials actually expand the maximum roster spots to 16, then come back to me. Until then, Hodge isn't anymore a Net than I am with 15 contracts already guaranteed and the Nets known to be notoriously cheap when it comes to eating a contract.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

peg182 said:


> There you go. Proving to me, once again, that you barely watch the Nets and have no clue what the **** you are talking about.
> 
> What does Marcus have to do with any of this? He was trade to the Warriors. Why does he matter at all? Do you know what you're talking about? Do you know what day it is?


There YOU go. Proving to me, once again, that you barely have comprehension of the written English language. I provided Williams only as an example as a Net (albiet former Net since it strikes closer to home) that was hyped to be the next big thing as a rookie and ended up fizzling out. Your not a legit player just because you have the potential tag, and big school name to back it. IMO Brook Lopez would not have been nearly as touted as he was had he gone to a small no name school and falls into a similar category to Marcus in this sense. I think he's a career role player in the making because he does several things but nothing particularly great to distinguish him as a player. Granted, he's a hell of a supporting cast member but does that make a difference when the main cast has yet to be assembled? Yi and Harris are starts but that certainly won't mean much if you don't land a LeBron/Wade/Melo/Bosh during the summer of 2010 (which is what really makes you a team in a good situation).



peg182 said:


> *I don't know how you can look at this team and not say it's a total improvement*. I mean, really, how do teams win? Let me ask you that.


Cause I'm not a Nets fan and can view the team objectively. Teams win with centerpieces and a solid supporting cast. You got the supporting cast, you got no centerpieces. Reread the aforementioned paragraph to understand what I mean.



peg182 said:


> Well, for one, scoring. We have multiple players who can score: Vince can drop 20+, Devin can drop 15+, Simmons can drop 15+, Yi can drop 10, Keyon can drop 10, Boone can drop 10, etc. The team is littered with shooters: Vince, Simmons, Yi, Najera, Hayes, Anderson, even CDR. Boone, Sean, Yi, and Brook can even score some in the post - prolly around 10 pts each, with consistent playing time.


You have a team of guys who could score but no scorers. That's what makes you mediocre. Aside from Vince Carter, no guy on your team can create his own shot and shots for others. LOL, having a cast like that only qualifies you being a NBA team. You give any 8-9 players enough time in the league and they'll each put up similar numbers to the guys you just mentioned (see the pre-Melo Denver Nuggets). Unfortunately, those numbers are not enough to field a good team.



peg182 said:


> Then, there's defense. One of the top defensive points in the league, Devin Harris. One of the top defensive backups in the league, Dooling. A hardworking defensive player in Simmons. Sean Williams is one of the top young shotblockers in the league. Boone is a good, solid defender and rebounder. Najera hustles his *** off and plays good, solid defense. Carter showed at the end of the year that when his team isn't diluted with crappy chemistry (stemming from a certain pg), he's willing to hustle and play defense. Definite improvement there.


LOL, I love how you guys think Dooling is a key to you guys being a good team. Absolutely love it. The Magic thought so much of him that they went out and got a guy to replace him and eventually let him walk for nothing, like the Heat and Clippers before them.

Simmons has been largely irrelevant ever since his first season with the Bucks. Injuries have hurt him and I doubt he'll be the same player again. At this point, he's pretty mediocre. As much as he and several other additions play good defense, it does not mean you'll be a good defensive team. The championship Heat and Celtics have had active guys in their rotation that were terrible defender and were very good defensive teams. Others, like the Blazers of yesteryear (Sheed) have had a team of good defenders yet played mediocre defense. Really, defense is a team effort and unless Lawrence can harness the right team mentality and put in the proper system to allow them to perform on this end of the floor, it really doesn't matter who they have. Up until this point, Frank has not shown me any ability to do so so I remain skeptical about the liklihood of you being a good defensive team.



peg182 said:


> Rebounding: Sean, Yi, Boone are all good rebounders, Vince ain't too shabby himself, Najera can hustle for rebounds, and Anderson was one of the top rebounders in the Pac-10.


Yi was never considered a good rebounder even in the China league. Sean Williams is on the block and is a mediocre rebounder at best. In 18mpg, he grabbed 4rpg which means in roughly 36mpg he'll grab 8rpg, while sucking on offense. Anderson is a rookie and who know what he'll do. He's a perimeter shooter from what I've seen and those type of guys generally don't rebound particularly well like Horry and Rasheed Wallace.



peg182 said:


> Chemistry - without the crap that was hindering them last season - Kidd, RJ, Magloire, Marcus - there shouldn't be too much chemistry problems, with the exception of Swift, who will probably be traded.
> 
> I don't know how you can see at least some improvement from last year's team. We got rid of the ****ty players who didn't feel like trying, and replaced them with hardworking hustle players who will work their asses off for the betterment of the team.


Well, everybody on the Knicks loved each other for the most part before Zach Randolph and the sexual harrassment scandal. That didn't mean a damn thing for our record.



peg182 said:


> And not surprisingly, you're making an *** out of yourself with your assumptions (and the ump will shun you). The only problems Bobby had in Milwaukee were injury problems that seem to be behind him and too big of a contract, which is not his fault...that's Milwaukee's fault.
> 
> Oh yeah, and by the way, I'd love to know where the hell you got the idea anyone said the Nets were gonna be a contender? I didn't say they were gonna win a championship. I didn't even say they were gonna make the playoffs! I'm simply saying they'll be better. DER


I'm supposedly the ass? Your ranting and raving about guys like Bobby Simmons, Keyon Dooling and role playing rookies on a team without guys that make role players meaningful in the first place. Your also talking nonsense about how you didn't say they were going to make the playoffs, which I find ironic. You were a borderline playoff team last year so generally "total improvement" especially after losing two all-star caliber players like Kidd and Jefferson would leave the impression of making the playoffs at the very least. That's not an assumption, that's just common sense. It comes in handy from time to time.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Kiyaman said:


> *This is a JOKE Question right?
> 
> The Knicks will be at the bottom of the Atlantic Division next season.*


Apparently not my friend. Maybe not the playoffs but certainly not at the bottom of the Atlantic.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

mynetsforlife said:


> You honestly think the Nets will be worse than the Knicks? The Nets won't be great, but they'll surely be better than the Knicks. Danilo isn't _that _good.


Like I said, possibly not making the playoffs but definitely better than the Nets...


----------

