We're just gonna have to agree to disagree here. I think this statement's false, and it's kind of the lynchpin for everything else we're discussing, so may as well move on.
2015-16 Brooklyn Nets (caretakers of the Ben Simmons pick)
- Thread starter bowiac
- Start date
I'm not certain what sort of upside there is in an unathletic big man that shoots well. Unless he suddenly gets athleticism, he's a roleplayer. He may be a good roleplayer or a bad one, but that's not a "swing for the fences" move, it's the "hit a solid single" move.
Worth noting that for every "swing for the fences" move that turns out to be Rudy Gobert, there are ten that end up like Fab Melo.
You understand that the only thing Kelly Olynyk has in common with those guys is skin color, right? I mean it took KO until his junior year, in a second tier college conference, to match Love's freshman year numbers in an iron conference. At the same age Nowitzki was equaling those numbers... in the NBA. Bird was a 30/13/5 player at the college level. Put another way, Bird would similar in that he too fell into the "what you see is what you get" category. Only what we were seeing was one of the greatest players in NBA history.
Oh, I agree with this. Fab Melo was a complete swing for the fences move that didn't work out. I'm not even being overly critical of Ainge for making the obviously safe pick in the 2013 draft. I'm just saying that safety picks aren't swing for the fences move.
Of course I don't think Olynyk is on the same level as those guys. I'm just pointing out that big men that can shoot can be far more than role players, even those who are unathletic.
Yes, Olynyk was a safe pick. Undoubtedly part of Ainge's reasoning in taking him. But, no, he was not a "swing for the fences" move because there simply was no upside there. He was about as skilled as he was going to get, and there was no physical upside. Bird was, yes, about as skilled as he was going to get. Only those skills put him in the all time greats category. And he was a little more than a big man that could shoot.
Taking a quick look back on wingspans (which are a much greater measurement for a big than height) Olynyk's 6-9.75 is less than an inch longer than Wall, Rondo, and Oladipo while it is shorter than Harden, Tony Snell, and James Young. The top of his head can be 7 feet from the ground but in the game of basketball when your fingertips reach roughly the same standing height as guards, and much less when you factor in leaping ability, the height measurement really is misleading.
I think the big difference between Olynyk and these guys is his ability to create. Dirk, Love and Bird could/can create in isolation, draw double teams and make things easier on their teammates. I see Kelly as a great team player but not a guy who is ever going to demand a double team in an isolation situation and thats why, in my eyes, he has the ceiling that he does offensively. I just havent seen him anything from him at the NBA level that makes me think Brad will ever call a 'give the ball to Kelly and just get out of his way' play.
True, I don't think Olynyk will ever be much of a shot creator, but he's shown flashes of being more than just a spot up shooter on offense. He's made a couple one-legged fadeaways this season straight out of the Old Man Dirk arsenal, he's a very capable passer, and he can actually put the ball on the floor once in a while and make a play. Those things won't make him Dirk or Kevin Love, but they might make him a more interesting player than Mehmet Okur or Channing Frye.
Lopez sitting out practice today because of back spasms. Foot soreness and back spasms...is that concerning for a 7 footer?
Well, its the same right foot that has been a problem for a few seasons now so even if its just sore then its not good at all for the Nets but great for us.
More than just a problem.....I believe Bropez has already had 3 surgeries on that same foot. From the day the trade was made with Brroklyn there isn't anything that hasn't gone perfect thus far. I mean.....even the frickin collapse of the Russian currency for Petes sake!!
"Five years ago, Prokhorov, through his Onexim Sports & Entertainment, paid $223 million for his 80 percent of the team and 45 percent of the arena."
I wonder if the "arena" include all the land and buildings around it? Quit the bump in valuation in five years. This makes it easier for him to sell the team, and keep the "arena."
Now, what billionaire wants his own basketball team this year? And what NBA player(s) will be the face of the ownership team?
I wonder if the "arena" include all the land and buildings around it? Quit the bump in valuation in five years. This makes it easier for him to sell the team, and keep the "arena."
Now, what billionaire wants his own basketball team this year? And what NBA player(s) will be the face of the ownership team?
Agreed. If the Clippers (who don't even own Staples Center) are 2bn, the Nets should fetch more than 1bn before the arena is considered. The prices must be after existing debt, and that debt is prodigious. I also wonder if the arena is overvalued while club is undervalued (for tax purposes or whatever rich people figure out).
Given Prokhorov owns Onexim, I'm not really sure what this deal is. Looks like he's just buying out the remaining 20% of the team and 55% of the arena possibly.
Oh. I totally missed the Onexim/Prokhorov connection. Ok. Makes sense. Now I'm certain I think the arena is overvalued - that means it's valued ~2Bn on its own?
Much less harmful loss in a vacuum than RHJ, but this was already a bad and woefully thin backcourt. Now down to Larkin/Sloan/NBDL guy plus extra ball handling for JJ. Larkin has been shooting better than Jack in a small sample so we'll see what happens in an expanded role, but his change of pace style doesn't really mesh with the offense the Nets play.
Adrian Wojnarowski @WojVerticalNBA 29s30 seconds ago
Billy King and Lionel Hollins out with the Nets, team says.
Billy King and Lionel Hollins out with the Nets, team says.
Marc J. Spears @SpearsNBAYahoo 12m12 minutes ago
Nets say they have fired coach Lionel Hollins & reassigned GM Billy King. Asst. coach Tony Brown is interim head coach for rest of season.
Nets say they have fired coach Lionel Hollins & reassigned GM Billy King. Asst. coach Tony Brown is interim head coach for rest of season.
Don't worry. Russian is bringing in his boy from back home with zero NBA experience or connections. Party time for Boston!!
Amazing development. King's damage was already done, and this probably increases the odds of moving Lopez/Young and starting with a blank slate (and even worse roster).
It increases the variability a little, which might be bad given that the current trajectory of the team was to my liking, but it definitely increases the chance that they blow up what little they have, which would be spectacular.
I think it's much more likely they go the other way and move up a spot or two. LA will actively try(even harder than now) to lose games late in the season to keep their pick. I'd bet on a couple more West teams starting a free fall soon as well, specifically Phoenix with Bledsoe done for the year.
Anything that involves them winning at a much higher rate than they have been can't be considered likely. Not sure what this roster can do with 18 of 26 on the road to finish the season.
They also don't have the benefit of the bad teams out west that have to play each other a bunch. Someone has to win those games.
Russell, Clarkson, and Randle (and Nance) aren't going to be actively trying to lose games and those guys will be seeing major minutes the rest of the way.
The Nets guard rotation of Larkin, Bogdanelovich, and Sloan may be the worst in basketball. JJ quit trying last spring. The Nets aren't in danger of going on any runs anytime soon. They are in such disarray the players don't even know who is calling the shots on their careers with no GM in place.
The suns are the ones to watch they are going full tank. The bottom 4 of Lakers, nets, sixers and suns looks very likely in some order. I'm still sort of expecting the pelicans to improve but... Eventually there's it a lot of point and they could join in.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/john-calipari-s-unprecedented-asking-price-for-return-as-nets--savior-073022113.html
Please, oh please,let the Nets hire Cal.
Please, oh please,let the Nets hire Cal.
On the bright side Boston is benefitting from the conference reversal. The east has 12 teams that could legitimately finish at .500 or better, so the Nets basically get no nights off, whereas in the western conference Portland, a team on a 32 win pace, is only 2.5 games out of the eight spot. So those tanking teams in the west are going to be playing one another and will all get bit by the "Well someone has to win" virus.
I think I said this in another Nets thread, but take it from someone who has worked with Prokhorov and his management teams in a corporate environment: Mikhail Prokhorov is a terrible CEO and manager. He thinks he's a genius because he is so wealthy, but in reality he is a pretty pedestrian thinker and a bully. He runs organizations based on playing people off of one another, maintains a tense and somewhat dictatorial atmosphere in the office, is alternately hands-off then super detail-oriented according to his mood, can be laissez-faire then unreasonably demanding, etc. Not a good formula for working with the egos he has to work with in the NBA. I will be surprised if the Nets ever enjoy any long-term success under his ownership.
Is everyone assuming the Twolves will get better? We went from hoping to get their pick to them possibly being worse than the Nets, despite Towns/Wiggins. The Nuggets suck too.
I guess it falls under the category "someone has to win these games when they play each other." Honestly though, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Nets finish 2 or 7.
I guess it falls under the category "someone has to win these games when they play each other." Honestly though, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Nets finish 2 or 7.
Flip a coin? It's difficult to project how "bad" teams respond to the second half of the season when the results of the games hold less, if any, importance. Some teams come together, focus and take advantage of opponents taking them lightly while others completely pack it in and go on epic losing streaks (Celtics shutting down Pierce in 06-07 is an example of the latter).
How many minutes are the Coaches and GM going to be playing? What influence will they have in tanking from here on out unless you're implying the coaches will purposely be fixing games?
I'm not even sure the Celtics are a "good" team. There seems to be a lot of mediocrity out there. It's not out of the realm of possibility the C's pick ends up being 7th or 8th. I could see teams like the Kings, Bucks, Hornets, Knicks, Wiz and Wolves improving. The C's are 4 games from the 2nd seed in the conference and 4 games from being the 8th worst team in the NBA. Most likely they get into the playoffs or end with the 11th or 12th pick, but it's still close. A lot of the teams worse than them have better talent going forward too. Almost every team in the league has one player I'd rather have than anyone on the Celtics.
I was responding to the question of what to expect from Minnesota. I always had this Celtics team as the epitome fo mediocrity but they play hard which could, and does, offset their lack of overall talent. I thought we would fight for the 8-seed at the start of the year so our results are about what I expected. Top tier talent wins in this league and as you say we don't have those players which severely limit our upside.
To be fair they're about as close to the #2 seed as they are to the 12th. Once the rotations are shortened via trade I believe they'll be fine and slot in around the 5th or 6th seed.
I think you mean if. Shorter rotations aren't magic, they're what happens when you have star players, which Boston does not. So unless the trade is for an all star player going from a 12 man bench to an eight man rotation doesn't really help matters. The vast improvement of the Eastern Conference this year also hurts because there aren't a batch of six teams or so that you can beat up for free wins anymore.
Not only won't a shorter rotation help unless impact player(s) are acquired it is nearly certain to hurt us. You then have marginal starters having their minutes into the 30's every night causing them to pace their effort when it is their effort allowing us to have an identity defensively.
Short rotations don't simply happen by a decision to go with one. You need to have gaps in talent on your roster for one to make sense. Is anyone using less than a 9-man rotation in today's game anyway?
Especially during the regular season. Teams increasingly place a premium on reaching the playoffs healthy and rested. We went over this recently, there's something like ten guys in the NBA playing what used to be considered standard starter minutes.