Which team was better: 2011 Knicks (pre-carmelo trade) or 2014 Nets (Pierce and Garnett) or 2013 Lakers (Howard and Nash

mo2thewillyo · Post #1 » by **mo2thewillyo** » Thu Aug 25, 2016 4:56 am

between these two teams compare them and tell which team you would pick and why.

2011 Knicks (before carmelo trade. Stoudemire for half a season was playing like an MVP)
2013 Lakers (assuming Nash and Howard dont get injured)
2014 Nets (old garnett and pierce. for one season they were good, but that was it)

Saaddzz · Post #2 » by **Saaddzz** » Thu Aug 25, 2016 5:36 am

Well 2014 Nets were better because they got further in the playoffs and didn't get swept in the first round lol.

2011 Knicks were one of the top offensive teams but one of the worst defense teams.

2014 Nets were a below average offensive team and above average at defense.

Also 2014 Nets had Jason Kidd as the rookie head coach.

2011 Knicks and 2014 Nets both had high expectations and were expected to give a challenge to the Big 3 in Miami, but failed.

But it ain't fair to judge the 2011 Knicks since Carmelo came to the Knicks after the half-way mark of the season. And 2014 Nets had many injuries.

rasta_marley · Post #3 » by **rasta_marley** » Thu Aug 25, 2016 5:43 am

I loved watching the knicks led by stoudemire such a fun team. Second melo showed up bam amare went downhill.

Sent from my LG-K373 using RealGM mobile app

BigtimeNBAfan · Post #4 » by **BigtimeNBAfan** » Thu Aug 25, 2016 6:40 am

2014 Nets easily. People highly overrate the Amare Knicks pre Melo. They were 2 games over .500. Hardly an elite team by any stretch. With Melo and Chauncey they finished 2 games above .500 and Melo was the best Knick in the playoffs singlehandily almost beating Boston in Game 2.

Melo's time in New York has been a letdown because of the past 3 years, but people forget the 2012-2013 season where the Knicks won 54 games and Melo led the league in scoring. Far more impressive than anything Amare did with the Knicks or that he was capable of.

DaGawd · Post #5 » by **DaGawd** » Thu Aug 25, 2016 6:44 am

Odd you picked the 2011 team for the Knicks and not the 2013 team that won 54 games

justicewinslow · Post #6 » by **justicewinslow** » Thu Aug 25, 2016 7:12 am

The 2011 knicks seemed less depressing...

Sent from my SGH-I747M using RealGM mobile app

gavran · Post #7 » by **gavran** » Thu Aug 25, 2016 12:55 pm

Saaddzz wrote:Well 2014 Nets were better because they got further in the playoffs and didn't get swept in the first round lol.

When did the pre-Carmelo trade 2011 Knicks get swept in the first round?

Post #8 » by **Froob** » Thu Aug 25, 2016 1:05 pm

Derailing/Baiting

mo2thewillyo · Post #9 » by **mo2thewillyo** » Thu Aug 25, 2016 10:48 pm

What about the 2013 Lakers with Nash and Howard (healthy)

j-ragg · Post #10 » by **j-ragg** » Thu Aug 25, 2016 11:11 pm

Lakers easily.

nbafan38 · Post #11 » by **nbafan38** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 2:18 am

The 2014 Nets were the best of those teams, they lost in 5 to Lebrons heat in a series that was actually much closer than a 5 game series.

koogiking · Post #12 » by **koogiking** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 3:25 am

2011 Knicks were 26-24 at the half time break before Melo came. They weren't that good

Stanq · Post #13 » by **Stanq** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 12:34 pm

nbafan38 wrote:The 2014 Nets were the best of those teams, they lost in 5 to Lebrons heat in a series that was actually much closer than a 5 game series.

This! Just watch game 4 and see LeBron having to drop 49 on them for the Heat to win, or game 5 that ended 96-94. They were really good and that series was Finals material.

PKABOOICU · Post #14 » by **PKABOOICU** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 12:42 pm

Ill go with my home team and say the Lakers. A Healthy Nash/Kobe/Artest/Pau/Dwight is just a nasty lineup; and to say the Lakers followed up with that type of lineup even after being botched in the Chris Paul deal, in the SAME offseason, makes it even nastier. Too bad they couldnt come together on the court, especially Dwight. And Nash got injured within his 2nd or 3rd game of the regular season against the Blazers.
The 2014 Nets looked like the team to beat when they were assembled too, even more-so than the Lakers team. Even I had them making the finals in their first year. KG started hobbling in his last 2 seasons in Boston, but I didnt know he would deteriorate that much and that fast once he got to Brooklyn. Pierce was still a very good player when he left Boston, he just didnt find his niché. DWill hasn't been elite since Utah, and Brook Lopez has had knee problems almost his whole career. Joe Johnson was the only real piece that had something to give at that point. But they would have been an amazing team to watch.

Post #15 » by **King of Canada** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 1:40 pm

That is a very random question lol

wallsfamily · Post #16 » by **wallsfamily** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 3:26 pm

TheBigSlow wrote:Ill go with my home team and say the Lakers. A Healthy Nash/Kobe/Artest/Pau/Dwight is just a nasty lineup; and to say the Lakers followed up with that type of lineup even after being botched in the Chris Paul deal, in the SAME offseason, makes it even nastier. Too bad they couldnt come together on the court, especially Dwight. And Nash got injured within his 2nd or 3rd game of the regular season against the Blazers.
The 2014 Nets looked like the team to beat when they were assembled too, even more-so than the Lakers team. Even I had them making the finals in their first year. KG started hobbling in his last 2 seasons in Boston, but I didnt know he would deteriorate that much and that fast once he got to Brooklyn. Pierce was still a very good player when he left Boston, he just didnt find his niché. DWill hasn't been elite since Utah, and Brook Lopez has had knee problems almost his whole career. Joe Johnson was the only real piece that had something to give at that point. But they would have been an amazing team to watch.

The Lakers and Nets went for fool's gold. Lakers had two hall of famers Kobe and Pau. All they needed was to turn Bynum into pieces that fit and adapted to the new power the Heat. Here is the trade they should have made. Bynum to 76ers for Iguodola Vujacek Harkless and a pick. Lakers start Gasol, vujacek or Clark, Iguodola, Kobe and Sessions or Fisher Resign him Small ball to match heat is Gasol Artest Iguodola Kobe Sessions. That team would work. plus still have trade exception and still have the three picks for Nash.

Pedro · Post #17 » by **Pedro** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 4:00 pm

mo2thewillyo wrote:between these two teams compare them and tell which team you would pick and why.

2011 Knicks (before carmelo trade. Stoudemire for half a season was playing like an MVP)
2013 Lakers (assuming Nash and Howard dont get injured)
2014 Nets (old garnett and pierce. for one season they were good, but that was it)

I totally rule out the '13 Lakers as they had atrocious chemistry. All that talent means nothing if chemistry is absent, as they proved. Nash was too unselfish, Kobe was too selfish, Howard was too mentally weak, and Artest was overrated and just crazy. People thought I was crazy before the season when I said they'd be lucky to land a 6th seed and could miss the playoffs. Oh, that was funny in the end, but I digress...

Saaddzz wrote:Well 2014 Nets were better because they got further in the playoffs and didn't get swept in the first round lol.

2011 Knicks were one of the top offensive teams but one of the worst defense teams.
2014 Nets were a below average offensive team and above average at defense.
Also 2014 Nets had Jason Kidd as the rookie head coach.
...
But it ain't fair to judge the 2011 Knicks since Carmelo came to the Knicks after the half-way mark of the season. And 2014 Nets had many injuries.

I agree with Saaddz comments for the most part. I feel its unfair to judge a team for half a season because then we're only comparing roster talent. If that's the case then I still feel the '14 Nets were the best team of the 3 because they had better leadership, played better overall defense and played tougher in important games and moments despite their regular lack of cohesion.

PKABOOICU · Post #18 » by **PKABOOICU** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 4:25 pm

wallsfamily wrote:
TheBigSlow wrote:Ill go with my home team and say the Lakers. A Healthy Nash/Kobe/Artest/Pau/Dwight is just a nasty lineup; and to say the Lakers followed up with that type of lineup even after being botched in the Chris Paul deal, in the SAME offseason, makes it even nastier. Too bad they couldnt come together on the court, especially Dwight. And Nash got injured within his 2nd or 3rd game of the regular season against the Blazers.
The 2014 Nets looked like the team to beat when they were assembled too, even more-so than the Lakers team. Even I had them making the finals in their first year. KG started hobbling in his last 2 seasons in Boston, but I didnt know he would deteriorate that much and that fast once he got to Brooklyn. Pierce was still a very good player when he left Boston, he just didnt find his niché. DWill hasn't been elite since Utah, and Brook Lopez has had knee problems almost his whole career. Joe Johnson was the only real piece that had something to give at that point. But they would have been an amazing team to watch.

The Lakers and Nets went for fool's gold. Lakers had two hall of famers Kobe and Pau. All they needed was to turn Bynum into pieces that fit and adapted to the new power the Heat. Here is the trade they should have made. Bynum to 76ers for Iguodola Vujacek Harkless and a pick. Lakers start Gasol, vujacek or Clark, Iguodola, Kobe and Sessions or Fisher Resign him Small ball to match heat is Gasol Artest Iguodola Kobe Sessions. That team would work. plus still have trade exception and still have the three picks for Nash.

Not a bad trade considering the Lakers land Iggy. It probably wouldnt be enough to dethrone Miami but it would have actually been better than headache Dwight. But things are prettier in hindsight. Dont forget, Steve Nash was coming off a pretty good 13/10/3 season while Dwight had a monstrous 20/13/2/1/2 season. Dwight was only 26 and just ready to enter the peak of his prime if it wasn't for his back injury. Any one of us would have made that those trades/signings 10 out of 10 times if it meant pairing those guys up with Kobe and Pau. The Lakers were too concerned about Bynum's knee his lack of drive. (He could have been the best center in the League BY FAR at this point in his career btw)
Kobe and Dwight just never clicked like Kobe and Pau did. As a matter of fact, Nash and Dwight never clicked either. Here's a look to sum up that season in 1 video- Clearly nobody clicked that year and it lead to the downfall of the Lakers franchise.

Watch on YouTube

and heres the infamous Kobe/Dwight splatter which clearly shows how much that group of players just didnt like playing with each other. Kobe even said he found to appreciate Shaq a lot more after playing with Dwight.

Watch on YouTube

JellosJigglin · Post #19 » by **JellosJigglin** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 9:43 pm

Yuck... That Laker team might've been the most dysfunctional I've ever witnessed, and that's saying a lot. Such an odd mix of players and even the damn coach was a terrible fit. I feel icky just thinking about that team. Get it off me ewww

mcmurphy · Post #20 » by **mcmurphy** » Sat Aug 27, 2016 7:18 am

BigtimeNBAfan wrote:2014 Nets easily. People highly overrate the Amare Knicks pre Melo. They were 2 games over .500.

Up to start the rumors of Melo trade the Knicks lead by Amare was 21-14 (in-line for a 50 season wins) with 17 games play at home and 18 on the road.
That team had ton of cape space.
Signign Melo and Tyson Chandler in free agency mantain the assets used in the Melo trade I believe the Knicks could be a better team.