Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets

Moderators: bwgood77, zimpy27, BombsquadSammy, GeorgeMarcus, PockyCandy, Prez, Yuri Vaultin, ken6199, Dirk, Domejandro

HotelVitale
General Manager
Posts: 8,161
And1: 4,078
Joined: Sep 14, 2007
Location: West Philly, PA

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#301 » by HotelVitale » Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:00 pm

DarkXaero wrote: You're crazy if you truly believe that team would struggle this much. It's a massively improved version of this year's 42 wins Nets team, and that's not considering the improvements to Nets' young players.

No disrespect to this year's Nets' team, but there's a lot of danger in the logic of 'the team won 40-some games so adding Y talent means 50-some wins.' Every year we see that a team with okay talent can claw their way to around .500 by being scrappy, well-coached, and hungry. Those type of teams can beat weaker teams and sometimes steal games against better ones, but it's a hard road from there to being a team that can genuinely challenge any team and make some noise in the PO.

Last year Nets are actually a good example. I just glanced at the Nets' wins this year and about 11 of their 42 wins came against the top half of the league and the rest came against the likes of the Hawks and Cavs and Hornets etc. They had some nice wins in there (TOR, MIL, DEN, etc) but overall they lost like 23-25 games to those top-14 teams; to get to 50 wins you have to start being able to play .500 ball against the top half of the league, and that's a bigger hump than just adding a little more talent.

Those scrappy teams also tend to be ensembles that spread out credit for their surprise success. For example, Ed Davis and Dinwiddie were top-5 on the team in win shares (Davis was #2), and even meh guys like Napier, Dudley, and Demarre Carroll were all positive contributors who outplayed their opponents (they had surprisingly good advanced stats this year and at least a couple win shares each). Same thing with last year's surprisingly good Lakers, or this year's surprisingly good Kings. But if Tobias Harris and Kyrie come, all of those guys have to be gone for salary reasons. I know it doesn't look like much to lose Davis and Carroll and Dudley, but it's just like the Lakers losing Randle and B Lopez and Nance--they're not great players but they were all parts of the team being able to beat bad teams consistently, and challenge other teams when they were clicking. Losing them wipes half the team's win shares away, and also threatens the chemistry that allowed the team to surprise.
StojkoVrankovic
General Manager
Posts: 8,996
And1: 6,462
Joined: Nov 29, 2011
 

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#302 » by StojkoVrankovic » Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:08 pm

HotelVitale wrote:
DarkXaero wrote: You're crazy if you truly believe that team would struggle this much. It's a massively improved version of this year's 42 wins Nets team, and that's not considering the improvements to Nets' young players.

No disrespect to this year's Nets' team, but there's a lot of danger in the logic of 'the team won 40-some games so adding Y talent means 50-some wins.' Every year we see that a team with okay talent can claw their way to around .500 by being scrappy, well-coached, and hungry. Those type of teams can beat weaker teams and sometimes steal games against better ones, but it's a hard road from there to being a team that can genuinely challenge any team and make some noise in the PO.

Last year Nets are actually a good example. I just glanced at the Nets' wins this year and about 11 of their 42 wins came against the top half of the league and the rest came against the likes of the Hawks and Cavs and Hornets etc. They had some nice wins in there (TOR, MIL, DEN, etc) but they lost like 23-25 games to those better teams; to get to 50 wins you have to start being able to play .500 ball against the top half of the league, and that's a bigger hump than just adding a little more talent.

Those scrappy teams also tend to be ensembles that spread spread out for their surprise success. For example, Ed Davis and Dinwiddie were top-5 on the team in win shares (Davis was #2), and even meh guys like Napier, Dudley, and Demarre Carroll were all positive contributors who outplayed their opponents (they have surprisingly good advanced stats and at least a couple win shares each). Same thing with last year's surprisingly good Lakers, or this year's surprisingly good Kings. But if Tobias Harris and Kyrie come, all of those guys have to be gone for salary reasons. I know it doesn't look like much to lose Davis and Carroll and Dudley, but it's just like the Lakers losing Randle and B Lopez and Nance--they're not great players but they were all parts of the team being able to beat bad teams consistently and challenge other teams when they were clicking. Losing them wipes half the team's win shares away, and also threatens that chemistry that allowed the team to surprise.

The Celtics team he is leaving is the perfect example.
RIP texas celtic, 12/10/14 - 12/10/14
Paradise
Nets Forum: Asst. To The RM
Posts: 33,992
And1: 8,314
Joined: Aug 16, 2012
Location: NYC
     

Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#303 » by Paradise » Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:24 pm

Some of these posts are cringeworthy. I do recall when Kyrie signed that extension just before Lebron signed back to Cleveland, everyone knew he wanted to be his own man eventually. This is the first time he will enter free agency as an unrestricted free agent in his professional career.

You all do realize Kyrie Irving NEVER forced himself to Boston? He simply wanted out of Cleveland. I do think he wanted to embrace the Celtics brand but I think this situation has more to do with Heyward/Stevens/Ainge than a bunch of arrogant young players.

The Cavs turned into a mess WITHOUT him in the same season while he was thriving in Boston (without Heyward) at one point.

Kyrie Irving doesn’t have to explain to anyone why he wants to be in Brooklyn instead of Boston. He could’ve went to the Lakers if it was such a personal vendetta against the Boston Celtics OR he could go to the LA Clippers if he wants to be a big star and in a big LA market. Yet, he is likely coming to Brooklyn because he wants to be...home.

Why is Kawhi given the pass of “ he is a lock to join the Clippers because he wants to be home!” after making the Finals in Toronto, San Antonio but Kyrie is in such desperation to land anywhere other than his hometown team? Lol

I love what we have going here and I’m hesitant to mess with it too but let’s not act like he’s Deron freakin’ Williams because it’s unfathomable for a legitimate superstar to have a failed relationship as a Boston Celtic.

His IG posts indicate he wants to settle down soon and he’s going through a bit of a personal evolution. Is Kyrie a bad person for wanting to play for the team he grew up rooting for while having close family living in the tri-states area?

Oh, wait. It’s because we’re the Nets?

Well, I’ll tell you right now, If we do not land anyone in this class and miss out. We will still be building organically and will be pushing hard for Karl Anthony Towns in 2023 to pair with D’Lo. So, the whole “he grew up a Nets fan” narrative will not be going anywhere for the foreseeable future.

Finding reasons as to why a FA likes the Nets isn’t exactly making us look bad anymore these days. That’s on the average fan to figure out. We know our infrastructure is being laid out for sustainable growth for the next 8-10 years.
Synciere
Analyst
Posts: 3,367
And1: 757
Joined: Jun 08, 2004
Contact:
     

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#304 » by Synciere » Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:58 pm

Bird4Three wrote:LMAO at people thinking the Celtics are getting screwed or even care if Kyrie leaves.

Newsflash-they don’t!!!

They gave away not very much to give him a chance, it didn’t work out, and now he’s gonna go elsewhere. They still have the young talent, still have picks, and still have options. It doesn’t matter. They also did better without him, just in case you have forgotten.


They should care. At the very least he's a valuable asset. Very valuable.

The Celtics aren't better without him either. They just had a tougher matchup this year. It's like the people who said last year the Trailblazers needed to blow it up, only for the them to look like a contender this year until the Conference Finals, where they got swept. Again.

You can't/shouldn't be prisoner to the moment. The Celtics' problems go past Kyrie, and thinking him leaving is somehow a step forward seems shortsighted.
BudenFerry
Pro Prospect
Posts: 828
And1: 1,323
Joined: Mar 18, 2015
 

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#305 » by BudenFerry » Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:01 pm

Synciere wrote:
Bird4Three wrote:LMAO at people thinking the Celtics are getting screwed or even care if Kyrie leaves.

Newsflash-they don’t!!!

They gave away not very much to give him a chance, it didn’t work out, and now he’s gonna go elsewhere. They still have the young talent, still have picks, and still have options. It doesn’t matter. They also did better without him, just in case you have forgotten.


They should care. At the very least he's a valuable asset. Very valuable.

The Celtics aren't better without him either. They just had a tougher matchup this year. It's like the people who said last year the Trailblazers needed to blow it up, only for the them to look like a contender this year until the Conference Finals, where they got swept. Again.

You can't/shouldn't be prisoner to the moment. The Celtics' problems go past Kyrie, and thinking him leaving is somehow a step forward seems shortsighted.
The trailblazers weren't considered a contender for a single second this year.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using RealGM mobile app
demcanes26
Pro Prospect
Posts: 805
And1: 122
Joined: Jun 01, 2007

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#306 » by demcanes26 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:12 pm

BudenFerry wrote:
Synciere wrote:
Bird4Three wrote:LMAO at people thinking the Celtics are getting screwed or even care if Kyrie leaves.

Newsflash-they don’t!!!

They gave away not very much to give him a chance, it didn’t work out, and now he’s gonna go elsewhere. They still have the young talent, still have picks, and still have options. It doesn’t matter. They also did better without him, just in case you have forgotten.


They should care. At the very least he's a valuable asset. Very valuable.

The Celtics aren't better without him either. They just had a tougher matchup this year. It's like the people who said last year the Trailblazers needed to blow it up, only for the them to look like a contender this year until the Conference Finals, where they got swept. Again.

You can't/shouldn't be prisoner to the moment. The Celtics' problems go past Kyrie, and thinking him leaving is somehow a step forward seems shortsighted.
The trailblazers weren't considered a contender for a single second this year.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using RealGM mobile app


So true, and if Kyrie signs there, they would be considered Portland East. You don't win big with 6'3 point guards being your best player. Yeah, you can win a series here, and there, but for the most part you have a limited ceiling.
User avatar
SpeedyG
RealGM
Posts: 15,496
And1: 1,303
Joined: Mar 07, 2003

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#307 » by SpeedyG » Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:14 pm

HotelVitale wrote:
DarkXaero wrote: You're crazy if you truly believe that team would struggle this much. It's a massively improved version of this year's 42 wins Nets team, and that's not considering the improvements to Nets' young players.

No disrespect to this year's Nets' team, but there's a lot of danger in the logic of 'the team won 40-some games so adding Y talent means 50-some wins.' Every year we see that a team with okay talent can claw their way to around .500 by being scrappy, well-coached, and hungry. Those type of teams can beat weaker teams and sometimes steal games against better ones, but it's a hard road from there to being a team that can genuinely challenge any team and make some noise in the PO.

Last year Nets are actually a good example. I just glanced at the Nets' wins this year and about 11 of their 42 wins came against the top half of the league and the rest came against the likes of the Hawks and Cavs and Hornets etc. They had some nice wins in there (TOR, MIL, DEN, etc) but they lost like 23-25 games to those better teams; to get to 50 wins you have to start being able to play .500 ball against the top half of the league, and that's a bigger hump than just adding a little more talent.

Those scrappy teams also tend to be ensembles that spread spread out for their surprise success. For example, Ed Davis and Dinwiddie were top-5 on the team in win shares (Davis was #2), and even meh guys like Napier, Dudley, and Demarre Carroll were all positive contributors who outplayed their opponents (they have surprisingly good advanced stats and at least a couple win shares each). Same thing with last year's surprisingly good Lakers, or this year's surprisingly good Kings. But if Tobias Harris and Kyrie come, all of those guys have to be gone for salary reasons. I know it doesn't look like much to lose Davis and Carroll and Dudley, but it's just like the Lakers losing Randle and B Lopez and Nance--they're not great players but they were all parts of the team being able to beat bad teams consistently and challenge other teams when they were clicking. Losing them wipes half the team's win shares away, and also threatens that chemistry that allowed the team to surprise.


It's kind of both. The Nets did scrap their way to 42 wins...and yes Dudley Carroll and Davis are FA. I think Davis will be back. Carroll has his replacement already in Prince. So yeah they won a bunch of close games. But they also lost a bunch of close games.

And keep in mind that the Nets played 3 months without Levert and 1 month without Dinwiddie.

So you add those healthy two players, add a Kyrie to the mix, the internal growth of 20 yr olds in Allen, Kurucs, and Musa.

It would be disappointing if that team doesn't hit 50 wins.

Sent from my SM-G925T using RealGM mobile app
Bless the man if his heart and his land are one ~ FrancisM, R.I.P. 3/6/09
HotelVitale
General Manager
Posts: 8,161
And1: 4,078
Joined: Sep 14, 2007
Location: West Philly, PA

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#308 » by HotelVitale » Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:20 pm

StojkoVrankovic wrote: The Celtics team he is leaving is the perfect example.

There's a little more going on with that, but yeah the Celtics illustrate some key parts of it. Last year's playoff Celtics executed a simple and effective drive and kick offense and everyone played super hard and precise on both ends of the court; Kyrie didn't kill that or cause it to break down, but he also didn't exactly improve it as much as you might expect an all-NBA guy to do. I think the idea of Kyrie 'stealing' shots from other guys is overblown, but it's true that the Celtics were already getting good looks within their system and Kyrie taking those system shots instead of other guys just didn't make the team better. (I also think Kyrie just played poorly in the playoffs, wasn't fated to have a bad couple of weeks but happened to; ish happens.)

If you're adding a superstar/MVP types to your team then those guys will definitely improve everything, but adding a very good scorer only tends to hugely elevate teams that need exactly that. Think about how adding IT2 pushed the Celtics up 10+ wins, but wouldn't have been a major major factor for some other pretty good teams.

A counter-example of how good but not elite talent can help a team is Jimmy Butler and the Sixers: Butler didn't really improve the team's regular season much if at all, Sixers were already a good-not-great team that had won 50+ the year before. But Butler did allow the team to challenge legitimately good teams more by giving them other options when the defense got tougher, and helping the Sixers' defense and physicality.
Synciere
Analyst
Posts: 3,367
And1: 757
Joined: Jun 08, 2004
Contact:
     

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#309 » by Synciere » Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:26 pm

BudenFerry wrote:
Synciere wrote:
Bird4Three wrote:LMAO at people thinking the Celtics are getting screwed or even care if Kyrie leaves.

Newsflash-they don’t!!!

They gave away not very much to give him a chance, it didn’t work out, and now he’s gonna go elsewhere. They still have the young talent, still have picks, and still have options. It doesn’t matter. They also did better without him, just in case you have forgotten.


They should care. At the very least he's a valuable asset. Very valuable.

The Celtics aren't better without him either. They just had a tougher matchup this year. It's like the people who said last year the Trailblazers needed to blow it up, only for the them to look like a contender this year until the Conference Finals, where they got swept. Again.

You can't/shouldn't be prisoner to the moment. The Celtics' problems go past Kyrie, and thinking him leaving is somehow a step forward seems shortsighted.
The trailblazers weren't considered a contender for a single second this year.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using RealGM mobile app


In the playoffs? Once you get to the Conference Finals, you're a contender IMO. It doesn't matter the probability, which was higher this year because of KD's injury, but the point stands: a bad matchup or series or even year isn't the end-all be-all of a team's ceiling or floor.
Synciere
Analyst
Posts: 3,367
And1: 757
Joined: Jun 08, 2004
Contact:
     

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#310 » by Synciere » Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:29 pm

demcanes26 wrote:
BudenFerry wrote:
Synciere wrote:
They should care. At the very least he's a valuable asset. Very valuable.

The Celtics aren't better without him either. They just had a tougher matchup this year. It's like the people who said last year the Trailblazers needed to blow it up, only for the them to look like a contender this year until the Conference Finals, where they got swept. Again.

You can't/shouldn't be prisoner to the moment. The Celtics' problems go past Kyrie, and thinking him leaving is somehow a step forward seems shortsighted.
The trailblazers weren't considered a contender for a single second this year.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using RealGM mobile app


So true, and if Kyrie signs there, they would be considered Portland East. You don't win big with 6'3 point guards being your best player. Yeah, you can win a series here, and there, but for the most part you have a limited ceiling.


Except you do win with 6'3" guards being your best player. Isiah Thomas and Steph Curry say hi. Regardless, teams win, not individual players, and the Nets are building a pretty strong core, but I'm not sure Kyrie is what's needed for them. That said, he's too good to pass up.
BudenFerry
Pro Prospect
Posts: 828
And1: 1,323
Joined: Mar 18, 2015
 

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#311 » by BudenFerry » Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:33 pm

Synciere wrote:
BudenFerry wrote:
Synciere wrote:
They should care. At the very least he's a valuable asset. Very valuable.

The Celtics aren't better without him either. They just had a tougher matchup this year. It's like the people who said last year the Trailblazers needed to blow it up, only for the them to look like a contender this year until the Conference Finals, where they got swept. Again.

You can't/shouldn't be prisoner to the moment. The Celtics' problems go past Kyrie, and thinking him leaving is somehow a step forward seems shortsighted.
The trailblazers weren't considered a contender for a single second this year.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using RealGM mobile app


In the playoffs? Once you get to the Conference Finals, you're a contender IMO. It doesn't matter the probability, which was higher this year because of KD's injury, but the point stands: a bad matchup or series or even year isn't the end-all be-all of a team's ceiling or floor.
They were never a contender and that was proven in the conference finals. Everyone knew the west was between golden St and houston

Sent from my Pixel 3 using RealGM mobile app
HotelVitale
General Manager
Posts: 8,161
And1: 4,078
Joined: Sep 14, 2007
Location: West Philly, PA

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#312 » by HotelVitale » Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:37 pm

SpeedyG wrote:
HotelVitale wrote: No disrespect to this year's Nets' team, but there's a lot of danger in the logic of 'the team won 40-some games so adding Y talent means 50-some wins.' Every year we see that a team with okay talent can claw their way to around .500 by being scrappy, well-coached, and hungry. Those type of teams can beat weaker teams and sometimes steal games against better ones, but it's a hard road from there to being a team that can genuinely challenge any team and make some noise in the PO. Last year Nets are actually a good example. I just glanced at the Nets' wins this year and about 11 of their 42 wins came against the top half of the league and the rest came against the likes of the Hawks and Cavs and Hornets etc. They had some nice wins in there (TOR, MIL, DEN, etc) but they lost like 23-25 games to those better teams; to get to 50 wins you have to start being able to play .500 ball against the top half of the league, and that's a bigger hump than just adding a little more talent. Those scrappy teams also tend to be ensembles that spread spread out for their surprise success. For example, Ed Davis and Dinwiddie were top-5 on the team in win shares (Davis was #2), and even meh guys like Napier, Dudley, and Demarre Carroll were all positive contributors who outplayed their opponents (they have surprisingly good advanced stats and at least a couple win shares each). Same thing with last year's surprisingly good Lakers, or this year's surprisingly good Kings. But if Tobias Harris and Kyrie come, all of those guys have to be gone for salary reasons. I know it doesn't look like much to lose Davis and Carroll and Dudley, but it's just like the Lakers losing Randle and B Lopez and Nance--they're not great players but they were all parts of the team being able to beat bad teams consistently and challenge other teams when they were clicking. Losing them wipes half the team's win shares away, and also threatens that chemistry that allowed the team to surprise.
It's kind of both. The Nets did scrap their way to 42 wins...and yes Dudley Carroll and Davis are FA. I think Davis will be back. Carroll has his replacement already in Prince. So yeah they won a bunch of close games. But they also lost a bunch of close games. And keep in mind that the Nets played 3 months without Levert and 1 month without Dinwiddie. So you add those healthy two players, add a Kyrie to the mix, the internal growth of 20 yr olds in Allen, Kurucs, and Musa. It would be disappointing if that team doesn't hit 50 wins.

I get you but that's a little off from the point I was after. I think the Nets with Kyrie and some other FAs would be improved and could easily hit 50 wins, I just don't think we should think of the situation as 'they're already a playoff team, so adding an all star elevates them instantly one level, and adding another elevates them two.' We always make that mistake, and here's short versions of why we shouldn't:
--the point wasn't that the Nets won close games, it's that they mostly beat bad teams and only won like 30% of games vs the top half of the league; that's a good sign, but it ultimately only shows that your players can play league-average basketball if they're playing hard and executing well; to go from there to becoming one of the best 8-10 or so teams is a big big leap, more than winning a few more games usually looks like.
--Davis and probably Dinwiddie have to be gone if the team signs Kyrie and another max-ish guy, unless they're dropping Russell, and the other FAs will all have to be renounced.
--Teams that outperform their talent level tend to do so because the whole team is clicking together, and it's a shared effort; losing Carroll, Dudley, Davis, etc seems like it's whatever--those guys don't move the needle etc--but those guys together actually contributed as much as the couple of stars to the Nets surprising everyone. Replace them with random minimum players and scraps and it's very unlikely to be as good.
--The competition for talent that's better than league average is extremely tense; to go from a guy like Carroll who's okay to someone who's good-not-great at his position is very very hard to do, since the contenders and all-in teams are desperate for them; take a guy like Tobias Harris or Middleton--just an above average starter but teams are lining up to pay them maxes. The Nets got lucky this year in having a bunch of no names play average ball and having a handful of lesser stars take a step past that; but to field a roster that's not just average but in that top-10 is so tough, and the competition for guys that can help do that is fierce
facothomas22
Junior
Posts: 480
And1: 244
Joined: Jul 02, 2018
   

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#313 » by facothomas22 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:07 pm

Well this means that Anthony Davis will be traded to the Nets,instead of the Knicks. Sorry Knicks fans! Yall probably will be trash or atleast 1 more year,tho yall do have a good young core. with players like Kevin Knox,Mitchell Robinson,and RJ Barrett. A roster with Kyrie Irving,Anthony Davis,Jared Allen along with another star free agent could make the Nets one of the top teams in the NBA next year.
shtolky
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,998
And1: 4,478
Joined: Apr 15, 2005

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#314 » by shtolky » Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:12 pm

facothomas22 wrote:Well this means that Anthony Davis will be traded to the Nets,instead of the Knicks. Sorry Knicks fans! Yall probably will be trash or atleast 1 more year,tho yall do have a good young core. with players like Kevin Knox,Mitchell Robinson,and RJ Barrett. A roster with Kyrie Irving,Anthony Davis,Jared Allen along with another star free agent could make the Nets one of the top teams in the NBA next year.



And how exactly is Brooklyn trading for AD?
Soupman
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,955
And1: 749
Joined: Aug 28, 2010

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#315 » by Soupman » Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:19 pm

Nets just got a lot better.
The NFL should exempt one contract like the quarterback or left tackle from the salary cap.
User avatar
NO-KG-AI
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 36,729
And1: 7,856
Joined: Jul 19, 2005
Location: The city of witch doctors, and good ol' pickpockets

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#316 » by NO-KG-AI » Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:49 pm

I don’t think DeAngelo is that great either, but Kyrie seems so volatile at this point, I’m really not sure why a young team on the rise thinks he won’t nuke the locker room again.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
Doctor MJ wrote:I don't understand why people jump in a thread and say basically, "This thing you're all talking about. I'm too ignorant to know anything about it. Lollerskates!"
User avatar
TacoLord
Senior
Posts: 704
And1: 1,121
Joined: Jan 05, 2017
     

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#317 » by TacoLord » Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:56 pm

Member when all the Celtics fans assured us Ainge would re-sign Kyrie? I member...
DarkXaero
General Manager
Posts: 8,881
And1: 2,055
Joined: Mar 25, 2011
   

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#318 » by DarkXaero » Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:40 pm

HotelVitale wrote:
DarkXaero wrote: You're crazy if you truly believe that team would struggle this much. It's a massively improved version of this year's 42 wins Nets team, and that's not considering the improvements to Nets' young players.

No disrespect to this year's Nets' team, but there's a lot of danger in the logic of 'the team won 40-some games so adding Y talent means 50-some wins.' Every year we see that a team with okay talent can claw their way to around .500 by being scrappy, well-coached, and hungry. Those type of teams can beat weaker teams and sometimes steal games against better ones, but it's a hard road from there to being a team that can genuinely challenge any team and make some noise in the PO.

Last year Nets are actually a good example. I just glanced at the Nets' wins this year and about 11 of their 42 wins came against the top half of the league and the rest came against the likes of the Hawks and Cavs and Hornets etc. They had some nice wins in there (TOR, MIL, DEN, etc) but overall they lost like 23-25 games to those top-14 teams; to get to 50 wins you have to start being able to play .500 ball against the top half of the league, and that's a bigger hump than just adding a little more talent.

Those scrappy teams also tend to be ensembles that spread out credit for their surprise success. For example, Ed Davis and Dinwiddie were top-5 on the team in win shares (Davis was #2), and even meh guys like Napier, Dudley, and Demarre Carroll were all positive contributors who outplayed their opponents (they had surprisingly good advanced stats this year and at least a couple win shares each). Same thing with last year's surprisingly good Lakers, or this year's surprisingly good Kings. But if Tobias Harris and Kyrie come, all of those guys have to be gone for salary reasons. I know it doesn't look like much to lose Davis and Carroll and Dudley, but it's just like the Lakers losing Randle and B Lopez and Nance--they're not great players but they were all parts of the team being able to beat bad teams consistently, and challenge other teams when they were clicking. Losing them wipes half the team's win shares away, and also threatens the chemistry that allowed the team to surprise.
You raise a good point, and I understand what you're trying to say. Obviously we saw what happened with the Celtics this past season. But I don't think it'd be a similar situation with the Nets. This Nets organization emphasizes a lot of culture and strong work ethics, and while that might sound like manufactured PR bs, its the truth. I don't think Celtics had that in their young players, and there was a clash of egos in that locker room. Obviously, if Kyrie comes here, he has to improve himself too, and blend in. But from what we've heard, Kyrie is a fan of Nets' culture, so that happens to be a good sign.Let's not discount how good Kyrie & Tobias are individually, especially Kyrie. People are fickle minded and suffer from recency bias, but Kyrie put together a great regular season before his poor postseason.

As for the players individually, Dinwiddie is still on the team unless he's traded. Ed Davis is a good possibility to return. Napier wasn't really part of our rotation for much of the season, and he's not really a decent player. Dudley is a good vet that we can bring back on a vet minimum, if he wants to come back. Carroll has been effectively replaced by Taurean Prince, a player with a higher ceiling imo. I'm not worried about that. The important thing for us is to add more size & strength at PF & C, which is our most glaring weakness on the roster.
User avatar
SpeedyG
RealGM
Posts: 15,496
And1: 1,303
Joined: Mar 07, 2003

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#319 » by SpeedyG » Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:41 pm

HotelVitale wrote:
SpeedyG wrote:
HotelVitale wrote: No disrespect to this year's Nets' team, but there's a lot of danger in the logic of 'the team won 40-some games so adding Y talent means 50-some wins.' Every year we see that a team with okay talent can claw their way to around .500 by being scrappy, well-coached, and hungry. Those type of teams can beat weaker teams and sometimes steal games against better ones, but it's a hard road from there to being a team that can genuinely challenge any team and make some noise in the PO. Last year Nets are actually a good example. I just glanced at the Nets' wins this year and about 11 of their 42 wins came against the top half of the league and the rest came against the likes of the Hawks and Cavs and Hornets etc. They had some nice wins in there (TOR, MIL, DEN, etc) but they lost like 23-25 games to those better teams; to get to 50 wins you have to start being able to play .500 ball against the top half of the league, and that's a bigger hump than just adding a little more talent. Those scrappy teams also tend to be ensembles that spread spread out for their surprise success. For example, Ed Davis and Dinwiddie were top-5 on the team in win shares (Davis was #2), and even meh guys like Napier, Dudley, and Demarre Carroll were all positive contributors who outplayed their opponents (they have surprisingly good advanced stats and at least a couple win shares each). Same thing with last year's surprisingly good Lakers, or this year's surprisingly good Kings. But if Tobias Harris and Kyrie come, all of those guys have to be gone for salary reasons. I know it doesn't look like much to lose Davis and Carroll and Dudley, but it's just like the Lakers losing Randle and B Lopez and Nance--they're not great players but they were all parts of the team being able to beat bad teams consistently and challenge other teams when they were clicking. Losing them wipes half the team's win shares away, and also threatens that chemistry that allowed the team to surprise.
It's kind of both. The Nets did scrap their way to 42 wins...and yes Dudley Carroll and Davis are FA. I think Davis will be back. Carroll has his replacement already in Prince. So yeah they won a bunch of close games. But they also lost a bunch of close games. And keep in mind that the Nets played 3 months without Levert and 1 month without Dinwiddie. So you add those healthy two players, add a Kyrie to the mix, the internal growth of 20 yr olds in Allen, Kurucs, and Musa. It would be disappointing if that team doesn't hit 50 wins.

I get you but that's a little off from the point I was after. I think the Nets with Kyrie and some other FAs would be improved and could easily hit 50 wins, I just don't think we should think of the situation as 'they're already a playoff team, so adding an all star elevates them instantly one level, and adding another elevates them two.' We always make that mistake, and here's short versions of why we shouldn't:
--the point wasn't that the Nets won close games, it's that they mostly beat bad teams and only won like 30% of games vs the top half of the league; that's a good sign, but it ultimately only shows that your players can play league-average basketball if they're playing hard and executing well; to go from there to becoming one of the best 8-10 or so teams is a big big leap, more than winning a few more games usually looks like.
--Davis and probably Dinwiddie have to be gone if the team signs Kyrie and another max-ish guy, unless they're dropping Russell, and the other FAs will all have to be renounced.
--Teams that outperform their talent level tend to do so because the whole team is clicking together, and it's a shared effort; losing Carroll, Dudley, Davis, etc seems like it's whatever--those guys don't move the needle etc--but those guys together actually contributed as much as the couple of stars to the Nets surprising everyone. Replace them with random minimum players and scraps and it's very unlikely to be as good.
--The competition for talent that's better than league average is extremely tense; to go from a guy like Carroll who's okay to someone who's good-not-great at his position is very very hard to do, since the contenders and all-in teams are desperate for them; take a guy like Tobias Harris or Middleton--just an above average starter but teams are lining up to pay them maxes. The Nets got lucky this year in having a bunch of no names play average ball and having a handful of lesser stars take a step past that; but to field a roster that's not just average but in that top-10 is so tough, and the competition for guys that can help do that is fierce


Obviously, every year is different. And the top of the East could be heavy if every one stays, but it could also be drastically different.

Bucks have almost everyone FA

Sixers have two potential max guys who could stay or bolt

Already Woj talking about Kawhi still wants Clips.

Celtics losing Kyrie to Brooklyn.

My point is that the Nets, had they been healthy all year, would have been better than 42 wins already. So adding a Kyrie isn't just a matter of taking a 42 win team and adding to that.





Sent from my SM-G925T using RealGM mobile app
Bless the man if his heart and his land are one ~ FrancisM, R.I.P. 3/6/09
User avatar
GoranTragic
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,779
And1: 3,467
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
     

Re: Update: Kyrie “Prepared” to Sign with Brooklyn Nets 

Post#320 » by GoranTragic » Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:46 pm

Except tomorrow he will change his mind.

Kyrie has been the ultimate troll :lol:
Image
Future Username: DraganBlunder
#THETIMELINE

Return to The General Board