Moderators: Rich Rane, NyCeEvO
Rockice_24 wrote: D-Lo is not a winning player with his poor shot selection, poor awareness and awful defense.
We should look to move him ASAP along with RHJ if the offer is right.
the "OKC! OKC!" chant was loud AFMrDollarBills wrote:SpeedyG wrote:I don't get the attendance of the thunder fans there. WTF? I'm pretty sure there aren't Thunder fans in NY metro area, so I'm thinking they travelled there for the game?MrDollarBills wrote:
a team that plays in OKLAHOMA, **** ing west bumble **** should NOT have more fans in attendance than the Nets.
we are the worst fanbase in professional sports. this team gets no support and yet people think Kevin Durant is going to come here? LOL.
But they were loud, louder than the Nets fans.
The fans will come in time. It takes time to build tradition. The Nets had the right idea to build a contender ASAP because trying to build a fan base with a losing team doesn't quite work.
It also needs stars that will get people to tune in and we have never had that in Brooklyn.
Sent from my SM-G925T using RealGM mobile app
I saw people on TV with OKC jerseys on.
I mean I can understand The Sixers and Knicks, or the Warriors. But the Thunder???
goddamn I hate this
MrDollarBills wrote:Papi_swav wrote:MrDollarBills wrote:
Our fanbase as a collective is garbage. I include myself in this assessment because I don't go to enough games. But I at least root for the players. You have Nets fans who legit hate players on this team and call for them to be traded for..........nothing, because they can't come up with anything that will bring back value.
This fanbase has an odd sense of entitlement that other fanbases don't have, and it really doesn't support the team at all. Dudes take shots at the players on social media and dog Russell, RHJ, etc out every chance that they get.
This fanbase is ass as ****. we are the worst fanbase in the league. I feel sorry for whoever gets drafted by this team in July.
I mean who would want to spend their hard earned money to watch this Nets team? I was planning on going to a few games this year but now that Levert is gone and the way this team is playing, why would I spend money that I work hard for to watch this pathetic-ness, if that's a word. Not to mention how expensive it is for this crappy team just cause it's NYC. NYC is a bandwagon city now, half the city is full of out of towners and we have thousands of tourists everyday. We also didn't start off on a good foot. This was already a Knicks town before Nets got here, only real Nets fans are ppl that were fans of NJN and some Brooklyn people. Deron Williams and the old washed up "stars" we had didn't do any justice.
If we get Zion and Zion specifically we will have some band wagoners here because all the hype that's around him. I think you already know that once we have a star or 2 the fans will come. Look at the Warriors, I don't even think Bay Area people were fans of them before Steph Curry came in. They probably were all Laker fans. Who was a Cavs fan before LeBron was drafted? Are there even Pelican fans out there with AD there? I mean look at it like this, if u was 8 years old just starting to watch ball would u really watch this team? or the Knicks? I think you would like to watch a team that's fun and exciting, neither teams are either or and have not been for yearsssss. This city has way too much bad luck.
I would spend money to watch this team, they play hard and compete in pretty much every game win or lose. I already have and plan to do so again. The only reason I don't go as much as I could is because of the logistics, I work sometimes til 6:30pm or 7pm based on my job's demands, there is no way I can make weeknight games in Brooklyn coming from New Jersey.
and FFS, LeVert is not Jesus Christ. He was awesome yes, but we were losing close games with him on the floor too and he was doing dumb **** just like the rest of the young guys on the team. Yall really are placing horrific and unrealistic expectations on this dude.
I think this team is fun to watch every night since Marks and Kenny took over. Some nights we get destroyed here and there, but most nights the games are competitive. Last night was fun to watch, it just so happens that we aren't good enough to close games. I accept that as part of the rebuilding process, because I'm not some entitled fan who thinks that this team should go from zero to 100 without any growth in between it.
Papi_swav wrote:MrDollarBills wrote:Papi_swav wrote:I mean who would want to spend their hard earned money to watch this Nets team? I was planning on going to a few games this year but now that Levert is gone and the way this team is playing, why would I spend money that I work hard for to watch this pathetic-ness, if that's a word. Not to mention how expensive it is for this crappy team just cause it's NYC. NYC is a bandwagon city now, half the city is full of out of towners and we have thousands of tourists everyday. We also didn't start off on a good foot. This was already a Knicks town before Nets got here, only real Nets fans are ppl that were fans of NJN and some Brooklyn people. Deron Williams and the old washed up "stars" we had didn't do any justice.
If we get Zion and Zion specifically we will have some band wagoners here because all the hype that's around him. I think you already know that once we have a star or 2 the fans will come. Look at the Warriors, I don't even think Bay Area people were fans of them before Steph Curry came in. They probably were all Laker fans. Who was a Cavs fan before LeBron was drafted? Are there even Pelican fans out there with AD there? I mean look at it like this, if u was 8 years old just starting to watch ball would u really watch this team? or the Knicks? I think you would like to watch a team that's fun and exciting, neither teams are either or and have not been for yearsssss. This city has way too much bad luck.
I would spend money to watch this team, they play hard and compete in pretty much every game win or lose. I already have and plan to do so again. The only reason I don't go as much as I could is because of the logistics, I work sometimes til 6:30pm or 7pm based on my job's demands, there is no way I can make weeknight games in Brooklyn coming from New Jersey.
and FFS, LeVert is not Jesus Christ. He was awesome yes, but we were losing close games with him on the floor too and he was doing dumb **** just like the rest of the young guys on the team. Yall really are placing horrific and unrealistic expectations on this dude.
I think this team is fun to watch every night since Marks and Kenny took over. Some nights we get destroyed here and there, but most nights the games are competitive. Last night was fun to watch, it just so happens that we aren't good enough to close games. I accept that as part of the rebuilding process, because I'm not some entitled fan who thinks that this team should go from zero to 100 without any growth in between it.
lol nobody calling Levert Jesus Christ but he had like 3 game winners in only like what 15 games in ? He knew how to close a game and it was fun watching him set the table for this team. I'm not going to the Barclays to watch Russell brick up 20 shots and Allen get murdered by the other centers. We do not have any exciting players. We're just a scrappy team that plays hard, we have no great dunkers, no crossovers , it's nothing exciting here. Also, Thunders don't have any other team or anything else to root for. They started with 2 legit Superstars so they got lucky. Clippers have been around for some decades and they still don't have a great fan base, it's all Lakers. We are in the same situation except alot of years younger. I'm telling you, if we get Zion and/or stars like Kyrie or Kawhi etc.. our fan base will be much bigger. But you have to understand, just to watch a crappy Nets game t the Barclays is expensive for no reason, nobody is spending that much to not watch something exciting.
It wasn't what lost us the game (many things led to it) but it was an awful decision by a young, but veteran player that is supposed to be our closer.TheNetsFan wrote:Should DLo have killed a couple more seconds if he knew he was going to hoist a 3? Yes. Let's not pretend like that is what cost us the game. PG scored, ball through the hoop & time stopped, in under 5 seconds. There was a 4 second shot to game clock differential. Do we really think he wouldn't have gotten as good a look if he had 4 less seconds? The only change is that you don't give OKC a chance for an offensive rebound, which they didn't need.
If he was going to try to drive & possibly dish, it makes sense to go a few seconds early. That may have been his initial intention, but:
1) He looked gassed.
2) That 3 was about as wide open as you can get in crunch time. The defender was low & hanging back, likely expecting him to burn a little more time or penetrate.
It was still a bad decision, but let's not point to that play and say it cost us the game.
MrDollarBills wrote:also while I'm in morning Trump rant mode, can we give Allen Crabbe some credit at least on offense? Last night he was cash money from downtown.
I will look past his atrocious defense on Paul George because RHJ should have been given the job to defend him, but hey. we were up big.
MrDollarBills wrote:Papi_swav wrote:MrDollarBills wrote:
I would spend money to watch this team, they play hard and compete in pretty much every game win or lose. I already have and plan to do so again. The only reason I don't go as much as I could is because of the logistics, I work sometimes til 6:30pm or 7pm based on my job's demands, there is no way I can make weeknight games in Brooklyn coming from New Jersey.
and FFS, LeVert is not Jesus Christ. He was awesome yes, but we were losing close games with him on the floor too and he was doing dumb **** just like the rest of the young guys on the team. Yall really are placing horrific and unrealistic expectations on this dude.
I think this team is fun to watch every night since Marks and Kenny took over. Some nights we get destroyed here and there, but most nights the games are competitive. Last night was fun to watch, it just so happens that we aren't good enough to close games. I accept that as part of the rebuilding process, because I'm not some entitled fan who thinks that this team should go from zero to 100 without any growth in between it.
lol nobody calling Levert Jesus Christ but he had like 3 game winners in only like what 15 games in ? He knew how to close a game and it was fun watching him set the table for this team. I'm not going to the Barclays to watch Russell brick up 20 shots and Allen get murdered by the other centers. We do not have any exciting players. We're just a scrappy team that plays hard, we have no great dunkers, no crossovers , it's nothing exciting here. Also, Thunders don't have any other team or anything else to root for. They started with 2 legit Superstars so they got lucky. Clippers have been around for some decades and they still don't have a great fan base, it's all Lakers. We are in the same situation except alot of years younger. I'm telling you, if we get Zion and/or stars like Kyrie or Kawhi etc.. our fan base will be much bigger. But you have to understand, just to watch a crappy Nets game t the Barclays is expensive for no reason, nobody is spending that much to not watch something exciting.
So if LeVert is there getting his 18 to 20, you would pay to see the Nets play?
Because I can guarantee you we would still be losing most of these games. LeVert isn't going to stop 4th quarter defensive collapses. That is not a one man issue.
I mean, I find competitive basketball games to be exciting but each to his own.
MrDollarBills wrote:Papi_swav wrote:MrDollarBills wrote:
I would spend money to watch this team, they play hard and compete in pretty much every game win or lose. I already have and plan to do so again. The only reason I don't go as much as I could is because of the logistics, I work sometimes til 6:30pm or 7pm based on my job's demands, there is no way I can make weeknight games in Brooklyn coming from New Jersey.
and FFS, LeVert is not Jesus Christ. He was awesome yes, but we were losing close games with him on the floor too and he was doing dumb **** just like the rest of the young guys on the team. Yall really are placing horrific and unrealistic expectations on this dude.
I think this team is fun to watch every night since Marks and Kenny took over. Some nights we get destroyed here and there, but most nights the games are competitive. Last night was fun to watch, it just so happens that we aren't good enough to close games. I accept that as part of the rebuilding process, because I'm not some entitled fan who thinks that this team should go from zero to 100 without any growth in between it.
lol nobody calling Levert Jesus Christ but he had like 3 game winners in only like what 15 games in ? He knew how to close a game and it was fun watching him set the table for this team. I'm not going to the Barclays to watch Russell brick up 20 shots and Allen get murdered by the other centers. We do not have any exciting players. We're just a scrappy team that plays hard, we have no great dunkers, no crossovers , it's nothing exciting here. Also, Thunders don't have any other team or anything else to root for. They started with 2 legit Superstars so they got lucky. Clippers have been around for some decades and they still don't have a great fan base, it's all Lakers. We are in the same situation except alot of years younger. I'm telling you, if we get Zion and/or stars like Kyrie or Kawhi etc.. our fan base will be much bigger. But you have to understand, just to watch a crappy Nets game t the Barclays is expensive for no reason, nobody is spending that much to not watch something exciting.
So if LeVert is there getting his 18 to 20, you would pay to see the Nets play?
Because I can guarantee you we would still be losing most of these games. LeVert isn't going to stop 4th quarter defensive collapses. That is not a one man issue.
I mean, I find competitive basketball games to be exciting but each to his own.
MGrand15 wrote:MrDollarBills wrote:Papi_swav wrote:lol nobody calling Levert Jesus Christ but he had like 3 game winners in only like what 15 games in ? He knew how to close a game and it was fun watching him set the table for this team. I'm not going to the Barclays to watch Russell brick up 20 shots and Allen get murdered by the other centers. We do not have any exciting players. We're just a scrappy team that plays hard, we have no great dunkers, no crossovers , it's nothing exciting here. Also, Thunders don't have any other team or anything else to root for. They started with 2 legit Superstars so they got lucky. Clippers have been around for some decades and they still don't have a great fan base, it's all Lakers. We are in the same situation except alot of years younger. I'm telling you, if we get Zion and/or stars like Kyrie or Kawhi etc.. our fan base will be much bigger. But you have to understand, just to watch a crappy Nets game t the Barclays is expensive for no reason, nobody is spending that much to not watch something exciting.
So if LeVert is there getting his 18 to 20, you would pay to see the Nets play?
Because I can guarantee you we would still be losing most of these games. LeVert isn't going to stop 4th quarter defensive collapses. That is not a one man issue.
I mean, I find competitive basketball games to be exciting but each to his own.
When Alpha Dog LeVert comes back and wills us to W after W, I'll be here waiting for your apologies
!!! Papi_swav wrote:MrDollarBills wrote:Papi_swav wrote:lol nobody calling Levert Jesus Christ but he had like 3 game winners in only like what 15 games in ? He knew how to close a game and it was fun watching him set the table for this team. I'm not going to the Barclays to watch Russell brick up 20 shots and Allen get murdered by the other centers. We do not have any exciting players. We're just a scrappy team that plays hard, we have no great dunkers, no crossovers , it's nothing exciting here. Also, Thunders don't have any other team or anything else to root for. They started with 2 legit Superstars so they got lucky. Clippers have been around for some decades and they still don't have a great fan base, it's all Lakers. We are in the same situation except alot of years younger. I'm telling you, if we get Zion and/or stars like Kyrie or Kawhi etc.. our fan base will be much bigger. But you have to understand, just to watch a crappy Nets game t the Barclays is expensive for no reason, nobody is spending that much to not watch something exciting.
So if LeVert is there getting his 18 to 20, you would pay to see the Nets play?
Because I can guarantee you we would still be losing most of these games. LeVert isn't going to stop 4th quarter defensive collapses. That is not a one man issue.
I mean, I find competitive basketball games to be exciting but each to his own.
It's not just Levert, it's the way we played when he was here. I felt like it was more fun and exciting the way he ran the offense. He made the right passes and plays at the right time which kept us in games. His presence was felt throughout the whole team when he was here. We would still have a losing record no doubt but we wouldn't of lost 8 games in a row like we had. We are horrible now, we won like what 1 game without him? It's not a free flowing offense any more, it's mostly Russell and Din chucking up shots most of the game.
iamworthy wrote:?s=21
I don't think it's that Caris is a one man wrecking all star. But what his presence does is pushes Spencer AND Crabbe to the bench.MrDollarBills wrote:Papi_swav wrote:MrDollarBills wrote:
So if LeVert is there getting his 18 to 20, you would pay to see the Nets play?
Because I can guarantee you we would still be losing most of these games. LeVert isn't going to stop 4th quarter defensive collapses. That is not a one man issue.
I mean, I find competitive basketball games to be exciting but each to his own.
It's not just Levert, it's the way we played when he was here. I felt like it was more fun and exciting the way he ran the offense. He made the right passes and plays at the right time which kept us in games. His presence was felt throughout the whole team when he was here. We would still have a losing record no doubt but we wouldn't of lost 8 games in a row like we had. We are horrible now, we won like what 1 game without him? It's not a free flowing offense any more, it's mostly Russell and Din chucking up shots most of the game.
All jokes aside I'm not downplaying LeVert, but there is a lot of romanticizing going on here where you're trying to paint this as a one man show. LeVert's primary focus was attacking defense. It's not like he was racking up a ton of assists, Russell was actually focused more on passing than he was (probably to keep himself from getting benched). LeVert had actually been starting to get a bit of tunnel vision (which I don't mind, he was the team's lead attacker/guard) and focusing more on his drives than moving the ball like he did last year. Either way, not much else has changed about the offense outside of not having two players that can attack the basket.
Russell and Dinwiddie are putting up the most shots because no one else can create their own shot. Jared Dudley is literally useless. Crabbe and Carroll have shot like crap (Crabbe is coming around though). Harris has been injured. RHJ is a mess. Teams know that the Nets are going to put up a lot of threes so they are staying home on the shooters and we have no one outside of Dinwiddie that can attack the lanes created by the space. Despite this, we STILL compete pretty much every night. Things suck right now but this team was never a one man show.
SpeedyG wrote:I don't think it's that Caris is a one man wrecking all star. But what his presence does is pushes Spencer AND Crabbe to the bench.MrDollarBills wrote:Papi_swav wrote:It's not just Levert, it's the way we played when he was here. I felt like it was more fun and exciting the way he ran the offense. He made the right passes and plays at the right time which kept us in games. His presence was felt throughout the whole team when he was here. We would still have a losing record no doubt but we wouldn't of lost 8 games in a row like we had. We are horrible now, we won like what 1 game without him? It's not a free flowing offense any more, it's mostly Russell and Din chucking up shots most of the game.
All jokes aside I'm not downplaying LeVert, but there is a lot of romanticizing going on here where you're trying to paint this as a one man show. LeVert's primary focus was attacking defense. It's not like he was racking up a ton of assists, Russell was actually focused more on passing than he was (probably to keep himself from getting benched). LeVert had actually been starting to get a bit of tunnel vision (which I don't mind, he was the team's lead attacker/guard) and focusing more on his drives than moving the ball like he did last year. Either way, not much else has changed about the offense outside of not having two players that can attack the basket.
Russell and Dinwiddie are putting up the most shots because no one else can create their own shot. Jared Dudley is literally useless. Crabbe and Carroll have shot like crap (Crabbe is coming around though). Harris has been injured. RHJ is a mess. Teams know that the Nets are going to put up a lot of threes so they are staying home on the shooters and we have no one outside of Dinwiddie that can attack the lanes created by the space. Despite this, we STILL compete pretty much every night. Things suck right now but this team was never a one man show.
You maximize Dinwiddie's hero ball off the bench, maybe mask his defense a bit. If Crabbe eventually wakes up, that's another option for us especially if Rodi eventually gets minutes.
Caris is kind of a nice compromise between Spencer and Russell. And his presence turns Russell into more an off ball player where he can facilitate and shoot without overdribbling and pressing to make plays.
So basically, it's not that he's great (hes not yet). But him playing well kind of puts Russell and Spencer in their ideal roles.
ONE player, but basically fixes THREE positions.
Sent from my SM-G925T using RealGM mobile app
LKIRNets wrote:kamaze wrote:LKIRNets wrote:
Dinwiddie making dumb decisions on defense is what hurt us the most. Bruh check his RPM
Both he and Russell are bad defenders in the game the offense is dependent on them attacking the rim. The team was best earlier in the year with Levert being that ball handler but he's out now it might be a good idea to draft another ball handler or two depending on what they do in free agency.
Russell isn't a bad defender anymore. In 2017 he was. In 2018 he is middle tier on D. He's actually the Nets best on ball defender outside of Joe Harris. Go check his numbers.
Din is next to last in DRPMS.
Paradise wrote:kamaze wrote:MrDollarBills wrote:Dinwiddie is the worst defender on the team, why Russell is even being called a clown right now is beyond me but hey yall do you.
Eh he's a backup he shouldn't be playing in crunch time on the regular it's just that he's one of the better players on the team so he plays a bigger role. With better players he'd be used to run the bench. You misunderstood I didn't call Russell a clown I was talking about the team as a whole.
Don’t even try that cop out. He’s about to be paid like a starter by Saturday which definitely won’t happen now.
If he is logging near 30 minutes on the bench, off the bench, in between the bench. It’s the same really. Poor defense. Hero shots that hasn’t worked.
Harris just returned and Dinwiddie made the same mistakes and poor shot selection as a starter and this is after a candid interview about his contract.
“I think the Nets would very much like to keep him and keep him long term but again, it’s negotiation,” Wojnarowski said. “It will be at a number — I don’t know what the number is for Brooklyn — but I’m sure they have in their minds a sense of what they’re willing to do and then how does that measure up to what the other options are, what it does to their cap space, what they want to do with D’Angelo Russell.”
MrDollarBills wrote:LKIRNets wrote:kamaze wrote:
Both he and Russell are bad defenders in the game the offense is dependent on them attacking the rim. The team was best earlier in the year with Levert being that ball handler but he's out now it might be a good idea to draft another ball handler or two depending on what they do in free agency.
Russell isn't a bad defender anymore. In 2017 he was. In 2018 he is middle tier on D. He's actually the Nets best on ball defender outside of Joe Harris. Go check his numbers.
Din is next to last in DRPMS.
Spencer is the worst defender on the team. How anyone can remotely attack Russell over defense is not being honest.
