BRIGGS wrote:John Collins was a great draft pick and hes easily one of the top 5 rookies so far. At an athletic 6-10 I dont see that taking a detour anytime soon.

He gets limited mins for some reason but produces starting numbers. Don't know what holding the coach back from starting him. But is def making his case.

newyorknewyork wrote:Spurs guard Dejounte Murray is a good player.

Hes going to be a star at some point soon. Murray is what the Knicks hope Frank will be. I think Murray is actually longer with higher end to end speed with upper tier agility.

CrushAlot wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:If Joel Embiid could stay healthy--he could end up a top 5 player in this league. Simmons also has transformational skills

I agree. I think Simmons gets ROY. Both guys look amazing tonight.

Agreed. If I were a Philly fan I’d be a bit worried about fultz

Also okafor and Anderson (ie Noel’s trade return) were DNPs. Is that because of their poor play or because of play of the guys in front of them?

BRIGGS wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

NYKBocker wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

NYKBocker wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

franco12 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Nets ended up with a really nice player in Russell. They gave up a lot--but they got an essential piece back.

What did they really give up? They essentially took Russell as payment for taking on Mozgov. Did Lopez have a future in Brooklyn?

I wish the Knicks had been in a position to make that deal.

The pick that they lost was Kuzma--who could be an NBA star--hes darn good already and Lopez--thats a big price. If ytou want to look at it as pick 27 and Lopez--maybe not bad--but they have Kuzma and no rookie Ive seen has looked better. But the Nets got paid with Russell and Allen Crabbe looks like the 2nd coming of H2O.

Did the Nets pick Kuzma or did the Lakers pick Kuzma?

Lakers got that pick before draft night.

Then its not so bad. Lakers just made a great pick.

Both teams did well--thats always good. Man the Nets--even with losing Lin(which is not chump chnage right?) look very much improved. They space the floor and pass the ball very well. They could be building Golden State east there.

They have looked great. I really like what Marks has done there. He and Atkinson have a good thing going.

The impressive part is they are doing it without top draft picks or major free agent signing--their course is much harder than the Knicks but have already passed them with much less. Its not about luck its about management skills.

I agree. They had cap space to mop up others mistakes and while perhaps over paid, inflation will adjust and if some live up to the contracts they are tradable assets if desired. Bottom line is not what they paid but they got good talent. The system worked for the Nets. They take on salary, take a short cut to aquire talent, not an embarrassment on the road in other teams arenas (like Philly was a few years back) and they save other owners tax money. Redistribution sort of.
One asset they had in BroPez was able to get a good young player in return.

Nalod wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

NYKBocker wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

NYKBocker wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

franco12 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Nets ended up with a really nice player in Russell. They gave up a lot--but they got an essential piece back.

What did they really give up? They essentially took Russell as payment for taking on Mozgov. Did Lopez have a future in Brooklyn?

I wish the Knicks had been in a position to make that deal.

The pick that they lost was Kuzma--who could be an NBA star--hes darn good already and Lopez--thats a big price. If ytou want to look at it as pick 27 and Lopez--maybe not bad--but they have Kuzma and no rookie Ive seen has looked better. But the Nets got paid with Russell and Allen Crabbe looks like the 2nd coming of H2O.

Did the Nets pick Kuzma or did the Lakers pick Kuzma?

Lakers got that pick before draft night.

Then its not so bad. Lakers just made a great pick.

Both teams did well--thats always good. Man the Nets--even with losing Lin(which is not chump chnage right?) look very much improved. They space the floor and pass the ball very well. They could be building Golden State east there.

They have looked great. I really like what Marks has done there. He and Atkinson have a good thing going.

The impressive part is they are doing it without top draft picks or major free agent signing--their course is much harder than the Knicks but have already passed them with much less. Its not about luck its about management skills.

I agree. They had cap space to mop up others mistakes and while perhaps over paid, inflation will adjust and if some live up to the contracts they are tradable assets if desired. Bottom line is not what they paid but they got good talent. The system worked for the Nets. They take on salary, take a short cut to aquire talent, not an embarrassment on the road in other teams arenas (like Philly was a few years back) and they save other owners tax money. Redistribution sort of.
One asset they had in BroPez was able to get a good young player in return.

franco12 wrote:The Nets pick this year is not going to be a top pick! They are going to be better than us, and honest, I would this moment trade everything with them - front office, players, picks or lack there of.

They are building a team, and they are well on their way.

And who exactly is their star?