Willing to trade Lopez?

[Jersey Generals]

^Well, like I said, I'm not really interested in trading him, especially not if we have to give up the fourth pick, but that doesn't mean I'm not willing to open up a dialogue and discuss it.

[demens]

NO, I dont think Lopez is going to be duncan. What I do know is if you have a good PG, SG, SF, PF and C you can win.

When the NETS went to back to back Finals, did we have a dominant player? No. We had a balanced team that lacked a half court game. Lopez is the ideal second option. Why would you want to lose that option in the post? Thorn always says it, There are two positions that are necessary to win. PG and C. Why would you want to get rid of one to get the other.

Thats where you are wrong. 1 of the 5 has to be a GREAT player, i dont see Lopez being the one. When we went to the finals we had 1 of the best point guards in this leagues history, i'd say we had a pretty dominating player. And also dont forget that WE LOST.

If Thorn says this then he is a moron.

[vincecarter4pres]

It's basically been proven time and time again. You need a dominating interior presence and an elite wing player to win the whole enchilada. One of these players basically has to be a top 10 player in the league, if not two of them. Detroit is the sole example of the opposite, they were an anamoly.

[60cent]

I dont care how good ONE player is if you dont have a solid team around them YOU CANT WIN.

NO, I dont think Lopez is going to be duncan. What I do know is if you have a good PG, SG, SF, PF and C you can win.

When the NETS went to back to back Finals, did we have a dominant player? No. We had a balanced team that lacked a half court game. Lopez is the ideal second option. Why would you want to lose that option in the post? Thorn always says it, There are two positions that are necessary to win. PG and C. Why would you want to get rid of one to get the other.

I think this thread is about "what if we dont get the number 1 pick"... Nobody wants to get rid of one to get the other because if that's the case i dont we have much to talk about. It's Brook and Wall all the way.

However, im still a Turner guy. But if we get Wall, i'd still be happy.

[demens]

It's basically been proven time and time again. You need a dominating interior presence and an elite wing player to win the whole enchilada. One of these players basically has to be a top 10 player in the league, if not two of them. Detroit is the sole example of the opposite, they were an anamoly.

I agree. Once in a while there is a team of good players that really complement each other and mesh well together, possible lead by a good coach that can win it all. But its very rare. As for the magic formula i still dont think there is one. Elite perimeter guy and a dominating interior force is as close as it comes but even thats not perfect. Jordan didn't really have a dominant big man did he? But more so there is absolutely no reason to label those elements as a PG and C.

[Talentfull]

No way in hell I do a trade like that. It's practically Lopez and the #4 pick..for Wall? Now I don't think Lopez is gonna be the next Shaq or Duncan but he can be a legit big man on a contender, kinda like Gasol. He's still got a lot to work on..primarily his defense but it's something he should definitely improve in.

Lopez by himself right now is worth more to me than Wall..who has yet to show anything in the NBA other than hype. Then you add in the 4th pick which practically makes this trade a no go. I think we can get a really good player with that 4th pick. I'm pretty high on Favors...and Cousins to a lesser degree because of his fit with Lopez but it's something I wouldn't mind experimenting with.

[Morthello]

It's basically been proven time and time again. You need a dominating interior presence and an elite wing player to win the whole enchilada. One of these players basically has to be a top 10 player in the league, if not two of them. Detroit is the sole example of the opposite, they were an anamoly.

This. In a league where good big big men are scarce you dont give away Lopez for a gaurd that hasn't played one game in the league. Lopez may not be the next Duncan but look around the league; what other young big man besides Howard can you say is clearly head and shoulders above Lopez in talent level and bb iq? The league is full of ball dominant gaurds and as impressive as Wall looks I wouldnt take the chance of giveing away the one reliable player we have for him. If we get the number one we take Wall but the nets arent in that big a need for a pg. Harris is still a good player when healthy and Twill showed flashes of being a playermaker at the one as well. If we end up with the 2nd pick and get Turner we would be have 3 positions filled.

[Preludepunk27]

NO, I dont think Lopez is going to be duncan. What I do know is if you have a good PG, SG, SF, PF and C you can win.

When the NETS went to back to back Finals, did we have a dominant player? No. We had a balanced team that lacked a half court game. Lopez is the ideal second option. Why would you want to lose that option in the post? Thorn always says it, There are two positions that are necessary to win. PG and C. Why would you want to get rid of one to get the other.

Thats where you are wrong. 1 of the 5 has to be a GREAT player, i dont see Lopez being the one. When we went to the finals we had 1 of the best point guards in this leagues history, i'd say we had a pretty dominating player. And also dont forget that WE LOST.

If Thorn says this then he is a moron.

No offense dude because, although i disagree with you on the potential of Brook, this is the dumbest thing you've ever written. Name 1 team in the last 25 years that won a title that basically had 1 great player and a bunch of random dudes. You need a great team, and that involves having multiple players in various positions being able to step up. Look at the champions of the last decade at least, every single one of them had multiple all-stars in their line up. You need multiple great players to win a title. I view Brook as this potential. Do I think he can become "THE GREAT PLAYER" on our team? That remains to be seen, but centers with his potential don't grow on trees. He can be a strong cornerstone of the franchise. Maybe not "THE CORNERSTONE" but one that has relative equal importance.

By your logic, AI should have like 10 titles basically.

[demens]

Should i have put at least 1 great player? 2 great players have taken a bunch of random dudes to championships plenty of times. Plus you're talking about of context here, my comment was a reply to...

What I do know is if you have a good PG, SG, SF, PF and C you can win.

Saying that thats not gonna win you anything, you need 1 of those guys to be great. You're saying thats not enough either, thats fine, my point about the initial comment being wrong still stands.

[TheNetsFan]

You can't move Lopez for Wall, because we already have Harris in the fold. If we had a huge need at PG, you consider it briefly. However, good centers are much harder to come by than PGs, and a trade for Wall would necessitate trading Harris likely at a discount as well.

If a team wanted Harris + #4 for #1, then I'd probably make that deal. We can't trade our only big guy for another PG.