The Official Should We Have Signed Thad Thread

[MrDollarBills]

Hello Brooklyn must have forgotten the hot burning sting that hit this fanbase following the 12-70 season when the Nets tanked and ended up with the 3rd overall pick for their troubles.

Your memory is either short, or you've erased the misery of that period of time from your memory.

Even if we had landed the 2nd pick and kept it, chances are the Nets would have whiffed and taken Evan Turner, a D tier player, over Cousins(A Tier player), Favors(who is about C Tier) and Paul George (A Tier Player, who was drafted 10th).

No way do I want to endure that nonsense again. Your best bet via your strategy is to either somehow land the #1 pick each time or pray to god that one of the crapshoots in the top ten turns into an A or B tier player.

lol what if we won that draft and got John Wall? Or what if we never traded for Deron and took Lillard? Or what if we won fewer games without Deron and drafted Davis?

I'd rather endure that nonsense than be stuck in mediocrity forever.

lol @ playing what ifs. You go right on ahead. History shows your plan never works...especially for the NETS.

[MrDollarBills]

Hello Brooklyn must have forgotten the hot burning sting that hit this fanbase following the 12-70 season when the Nets tanked and ended up with the 3rd overall pick for their troubles.

Your memory is either short, or you've erased the misery of that period of time from your memory.

Even if we had landed the 2nd pick and kept it, chances are the Nets would have whiffed and taken Evan Turner, a D tier player, over Cousins(A Tier player), Favors(who is about C Tier) and Paul George (A Tier Player, who was drafted 10th).

No way do I want to endure that nonsense again. Your best bet via your strategy is to either somehow land the #1 pick each time or pray to god that one of the crapshoots in the top ten turns into an A or B tier player.

lol what if we won that draft and got John Wall? Or what if we never traded for Deron and took Lillard? Or what if we won fewer games without Deron and drafted Davis?

I'd rather endure that nonsense than be stuck in mediocrity forever.

See you say that, but look at teams stuck in the losing cycle because they followed that mentality. You really think Kings fans are super happy with the trajectory of things?

It's all a big trade off, and obviously no one is shooting down the idea that drafting a star is wonderful and probably a key to a championship... But it's just unrealistic to be like, "lose, find star, win, get more players, win championship" rarely does that ever pan out, if one part of that cycle breaks it all falls apart. In the mean time if we focus on staying relevant and building slowly through the picks we have and can acquire, the signings we can make and a steady stream of smart trades... I think we become a more respectable team and a more enjoyable team.

I'd rather be the Griz than the Kings

Yes drafting is important, but so is everything else. So you can't just say, "you're doing it all wrong!" ,"Lose for a star! Then we'll be a great team"

There's a lot more to team building than just drafting the "star"


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Speaking of the Kings, remember when they were for a time a Western Conference powerhouse?

Do you know how many of the core players of that team were drafted in the top 10? NONE. Peja, Hedo, Gerald Wallace were picked 14th, 16th, and 25th. Webber, Bibby, Divac and Christie were all acquired via trades. Yet, they were a legit contender. They've been bottom feeding since then and have little to show for it out of DMC...who is going to BOLT.

The fallacy of the "tank for a superstar" argument assumes that 1st rd picks carry immense value. In reality, they are all crap shoots. This isn't the NFL where the likelihood of drafting STUD players within the first 32 picks are extremely high. No brainer, franchise changing, "best player in the world" guys like Lebron and Davis aren't in every draft. They are rare. Nets have had several lottery picks over the last 20 years and the best players in modern franchise history, outside of K-Mart and Lopez, were all acquired via trade.

[MrDollarBills]

MDB's NBA Grading System:

A Tier: Franchise players and Superstars. Once in a lifetime talents or absolute superstar ballers. More than likely can be hall of famers if their career path stays the course. Past or Present Net examples: Jason Kidd.

B Tier: All star level studs. Not necessarily guys that can carry a team to a title, but paired together with other A and B tier players will make your team great. Past or Present Net examples: Vince Carter.

C Tier: Slightly Below all star level players, but very good players nonetheless that produce consistently and have a decent skill set. 3 and D wings and top shelf roleplayers populate this tier. Past or Present Net examples: Richard Jefferson.

D Tier: Very flawed roleplayer types. Good at some basic things, but not very good at anything else. Past or Present Net examples: Too many to count....think Jarrett Jack.

F Tier: Near D League level talent, 12th men. Past or Present Net examples: Sergey Karasev, Markel Brown, Antione Wright, Terrence Williams, Sean Williams, Deron Williams..

Now lets see how our team has done in the lottery in the last 20 years.

Net Lottery picks since 1995:

Ed O'Bannon (F Tier player)

Kerry Kittles (C-Tier player)

Tim Thomas(C Tier player), traded for Keith Van Horn(C-Tier Player)

Kenyon Martin (C Tier player)

Eddie Griffin (F-Tier player), traded for Richard Jefferson (C-Tier player) and Jason Collins (D Tier player).

Brook Lopez (B Tier player, and this is debatable due to Brook's injury history and inconsistent aggressiveness over the years)

Terrence Williams (F Tier player and a complete jackass of a human being)

Derrick Favors(C Tier player)

That's not very encouraging. 1 Borderline B tier player, a crapload of C Tier players, and two absolute busts.

[Prokorov]

lol yea. Drafting a superstar is such a bad plan. Its just the way 99.7% of NBA champions have done it. You right.

I still think it is mislead to say all the championship teams drafted stars. most of them also traded for or signed stars. i.e. lakers drafted kobe but aquired shaq and pau. very few teams won titles by just drafting a star.

also, drafting a star is the hardest thing to do in the entire sport. look at cleveland. how many #1 overall picks and top 5 lotto picks and 0 stars. how many stars for philly? how many stars have we drafted when we have had a top 3 pick.

the odds of drafting a superstar are extremely low. they are even low if you have the #1 pick. signing a superstar, or trying to team up multiple stars is a much better plan. which a much lower downside. nothing submarines a franchise more then tanking to draft a star and missing.

Nobody is saying that just drafting a star is enough to win a championship. But it is the foundation you need to build a championship team.

The odds are low, but its the only way to do it.

i disagree i think you can sign or trade for a superstar and have that foundation as well. it doesnt matter how you get the susperstars, just how you get them. and now it seems guys like to team up. drafting a star is probably the hardest thing to do in the NBA. you could have the #1 pick 3 years in a row and be unlikely to land a superstar

[Prokorov]

Hello Brooklyn must have forgotten the hot burning sting that hit this fanbase following the 12-70 season when the Nets tanked and ended up with the 3rd overall pick for their troubles.

Your memory is either short, or you've erased the misery of that period of time from your memory.

Even if we had landed the 2nd pick and kept it, chances are the Nets would have whiffed and taken Evan Turner, a D tier player, over Cousins(A Tier player), Favors(who is about C Tier) and Paul George (A Tier Player, who was drafted 10th).

No way do I want to endure that nonsense again. Your best bet via your strategy is to either somehow land the #1 pick each time or pray to god that one of the crapshoots in the top ten turns into an A or B tier player.

lol what if we won that draft and got John Wall? Or what if we never traded for Deron and took Lillard? Or what if we won fewer games without Deron and drafted Davis?

I'd rather endure that nonsense than be stuck in mediocrity forever.

but we didnt get the #1 pick, inspite of 70 losses. which is part of the problem. being bad doesnt gaurantee you the #1 pick. and even if it did, the odds of their being a stud player are low, and even if there is, there are huge chances for it to bust or injury. also of note is alot of superstars where not the #1 pick. curry, durant, harden, etc...

if we never traded for wallace we would have taken Zeller which was confirmed. if we got into the top 3 it was going to be thomas robinson who busted so bad he is now here on a minimum deal.

I'm fine building through the draft if you are young and bad. but tanking to get bad and get high picks has never worked IMO outside of the scenario i outlined earlier. you are a good team, suffer an injury to a star, and tank for that year once the season is lost.

[Prokorov]

Hello Brooklyn must have forgotten the hot burning sting that hit this fanbase following the 12-70 season when the Nets tanked and ended up with the 3rd overall pick for their troubles.

Your memory is either short, or you've erased the misery of that period of time from your memory.

Even if we had landed the 2nd pick and kept it, chances are the Nets would have whiffed and taken Evan Turner, a D tier player, over Cousins(A Tier player), Favors(who is about C Tier) and Paul George (A Tier Player, who was drafted 10th).

No way do I want to endure that nonsense again. Your best bet via your strategy is to either somehow land the #1 pick each time or pray to god that one of the crapshoots in the top ten turns into an A or B tier player.

lol what if we won that draft and got John Wall? Or what if we never traded for Deron and took Lillard? Or what if we won fewer games without Deron and drafted Davis?

I'd rather endure that nonsense than be stuck in mediocrity forever.

See you say that, but look at teams stuck in the losing cycle because they followed that mentality. You really think Kings fans are super happy with the trajectory of things?

It's all a big trade off, and obviously no one is shooting down the idea that drafting a star is wonderful and probably a key to a championship... But it's just unrealistic to be like, "lose, find star, win, get more players, win championship" rarely does that ever pan out, if one part of that cycle breaks it all falls apart. In the mean time if we focus on staying relevant and building slowly through the picks we have and can acquire, the signings we can make and a steady stream of smart trades... I think we become a more respectable team and a more enjoyable team.

I'd rather be the Griz than the Kings

Yes drafting is important, but so is everything else. So you can't just say, "you're doing it all wrong!" ,"Lose for a star! Then we'll be a great team"

There's a lot more to team building than just drafting the "star"


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

im with you overall... but id much rather be the kings then Grizzlies. griz are on the downside of their window and are about to max out guys like conley to keep whats turning into an older core.

the kigns where a joke for a while and its still a circus with karl but they now have cousins who has become a top 12 player and add Cauley-Stein next to him. thats a pretty sick defensive duo up front with an elite scorer in cousins. if that team can find a point gaurd they are going to be on the rise.

[Prokorov]

What cycle are we stuck in? We barely made the playoffs last year. It doesn't look like we will this year. Is this "cycle" we have going really better than sucking and having good young player to look forward to?

Drafting is the only way that works. So if I'm going to build a team for the future that what I'm gonna focus on. There is a lot of team building but it has to start somewhere.

Yes this cycle is better, because I can be happy we're putting a product on the floor that will try and win, be fun and give it there all. Yes this cycle were in is important because come next offseason or the following one we can be a destination for quality players to come to. We can get excited about sure fire players than playing the guessing game of draft picks.

If we're talking percentages here. I'd rather we get a player I know 99% what they can do than a shot in the dark with a draft pick.

That's why I enjoy our plan now, we can keep being in the conversation of teams in the east, and grow, acquire more talent and win. We did what was needed to shed the mistake of the DWill era, but I'm not ready to lose just for a shot at a pick. I'm ready to win and keep winning. Like Prok always brings up, we want to aim to get a shot with a guy like Durant next summer. Even if it's a 0.01% chance he signs with us...

If it's between a chance at signing Durant or a chance at a "star" in the draft, I take the option that gives me the talent I know about each time. Then we don't have to spend years figuring out how to build the right winning team around our "star" (given that said "star" even pans out).

I don't know how short a period of time you've been watching basketball, but this championship or bust mentality is childish. I want a team that's fun, competitive, and lays it's all on the court. I want a team to win, with players I can enjoy seeing succeed. Sure if losing is what's the immediate best option, like the Spurs back in the day, I see it... But just saying "we won't win without a drafted star" and expect us to just keep digging until we find one is sad and boring. If you want that, go watch the Sixers, Kings or any of those other franchises.

But alas, you only see one way to win in this league, and thus no one will be able to reason with you. It's the same cyclical argument being had, some here are being rational and seeing the value in ALL sides of how to build a team, and all you see is one.






Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Youre delusional. Quality players are going to come here why? Because we missed the playoffs and because we have Brook Lopez?

Theyre not. We'll overpay for 2nd tier players at best. I don't see how you acquire the type of talent you need to win a championship merely through free agency.Its not gonna happen.

We don't have a snowballs chance in Hell of signing Durant. This delusional type of thinking is the problem. Its what we wanted to do in 2010. Lebron will def come here. He didn't. And no Durant is not giving up OKC or WAS to come play with **** Brook Lopez. Sorry.

I've watched basketball for a long time. And maybe you and I value different things. But Ive never seen the Nets win a championship and I want to see them build towards it. I could care less if were "fun" and we don't have realistic chance of winning a title.

I see one way of building a team because thats the way that work. Your ideas don't.

while all of that is pretty accurate, you fail to mention that your plan requires like 3-8 years of losing, and still doesnt gaurantee a star. to me the odds of signing or trading for a star, as low as they might be, are about 2-10 times more likely then drafting one

[Prokorov]

lol what if we won that draft and got John Wall? Or what if we never traded for Deron and took Lillard? Or what if we won fewer games without Deron and drafted Davis?

I'd rather endure that nonsense than be stuck in mediocrity forever.

See you say that, but look at teams stuck in the losing cycle because they followed that mentality. You really think Kings fans are super happy with the trajectory of things?

It's all a big trade off, and obviously no one is shooting down the idea that drafting a star is wonderful and probably a key to a championship... But it's just unrealistic to be like, "lose, find star, win, get more players, win championship" rarely does that ever pan out, if one part of that cycle breaks it all falls apart. In the mean time if we focus on staying relevant and building slowly through the picks we have and can acquire, the signings we can make and a steady stream of smart trades... I think we become a more respectable team and a more enjoyable team.

I'd rather be the Griz than the Kings

Yes drafting is important, but so is everything else. So you can't just say, "you're doing it all wrong!" ,"Lose for a star! Then we'll be a great team"

There's a lot more to team building than just drafting the "star"


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Speaking of the Kings, remember when they were for a time a Western Conference powerhouse?

Do you know how many of the core players of that team were drafted in the top 10? NONE. Peja, Hedo, Gerald Wallace were picked 14th, 16th, and 25th. Webber, Bibby, Divac and Christie were all acquired via trades. Yet, they were a legit contender. They've been bottom feeding since then and have little to show for it out of DMC...who is going to BOLT.

The fallacy of the "tank for a superstar" argument assumes that 1st rd picks carry immense value. In reality, they are all crap shoots. This isn't the NFL where the likelihood of drafting STUD players within the first 32 picks are extremely high. No brainer, franchise changing, "best player in the world" guys like Lebron and Davis aren't in every draft. They are rare. Nets have had several lottery picks over the last 20 years and the best players in modern franchise history, outside of K-Mart and Lopez, were all acquired via trade.

the kings have more then DMC. they have Cauley-Stein now as well. they have some solid vets. they are on the upswing as long as they dont let Karl run cousins out of town. they'd be smart to chase calipari or a brad stevens like coach who can work with young egos.

the kings didnt tank though, they are just young and lacked talent. they added vets to their young players (gay, thompson, collison, etc) and have made trades geared towards being better, not worse. they are doing the slow build the right way. unfortunetly ownership/front office there has been so unstable

[Net Sentence]

This is like arguing with an 8 year old.

So the plan is to just draft the next MJ or LeBron. That makes sooooooo much sense except that

1. Those guys come around once a decade

2. You cant guarantee by tanking that you can get the #1 pick.

So outside of this make believe world Hello Brooklyn lives in, can we get back to serious discussions.

[MrDollarBills]

See you say that, but look at teams stuck in the losing cycle because they followed that mentality. You really think Kings fans are super happy with the trajectory of things?

It's all a big trade off, and obviously no one is shooting down the idea that drafting a star is wonderful and probably a key to a championship... But it's just unrealistic to be like, "lose, find star, win, get more players, win championship" rarely does that ever pan out, if one part of that cycle breaks it all falls apart. In the mean time if we focus on staying relevant and building slowly through the picks we have and can acquire, the signings we can make and a steady stream of smart trades... I think we become a more respectable team and a more enjoyable team.

I'd rather be the Griz than the Kings

Yes drafting is important, but so is everything else. So you can't just say, "you're doing it all wrong!" ,"Lose for a star! Then we'll be a great team"

There's a lot more to team building than just drafting the "star"


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Speaking of the Kings, remember when they were for a time a Western Conference powerhouse?

Do you know how many of the core players of that team were drafted in the top 10? NONE. Peja, Hedo, Gerald Wallace were picked 14th, 16th, and 25th. Webber, Bibby, Divac and Christie were all acquired via trades. Yet, they were a legit contender. They've been bottom feeding since then and have little to show for it out of DMC...who is going to BOLT.

The fallacy of the "tank for a superstar" argument assumes that 1st rd picks carry immense value. In reality, they are all crap shoots. This isn't the NFL where the likelihood of drafting STUD players within the first 32 picks are extremely high. No brainer, franchise changing, "best player in the world" guys like Lebron and Davis aren't in every draft. They are rare. Nets have had several lottery picks over the last 20 years and the best players in modern franchise history, outside of K-Mart and Lopez, were all acquired via trade.

the kings have more then DMC. they have Cauley-Stein now as well. they have some solid vets. they are on the upswing as long as they dont let Karl run cousins out of town. they'd be smart to chase calipari or a brad stevens like coach who can work with young egos.

the kings didnt tank though, they are just young and lacked talent. they added vets to their young players (gay, thompson, collison, etc) and have made trades geared towards being better, not worse. they are doing the slow build the right way. unfortunetly ownership/front office there has been so unstable

We'll see how they turn out but I think DMC gets run out of town. But my point about the Kings was really regarding how they built their team that was a western power for a few years. Trades, and supplementing their talent with the draft, not relying on top 3 picks to form the team.

[jbeachboy]

Speaking of the Kings, remember when they were for a time a Western Conference powerhouse?

Do you know how many of the core players of that team were drafted in the top 10? NONE. Peja, Hedo, Gerald Wallace were picked 14th, 16th, and 25th. Webber, Bibby, Divac and Christie were all acquired via trades. Yet, they were a legit contender. They've been bottom feeding since then and have little to show for it out of DMC...who is going to BOLT.

The fallacy of the "tank for a superstar" argument assumes that 1st rd picks carry immense value. In reality, they are all crap shoots. This isn't the NFL where the likelihood of drafting STUD players within the first 32 picks are extremely high. No brainer, franchise changing, "best player in the world" guys like Lebron and Davis aren't in every draft. They are rare. Nets have had several lottery picks over the last 20 years and the best players in modern franchise history, outside of K-Mart and Lopez, were all acquired via trade.

the kings have more then DMC. they have Cauley-Stein now as well. they have some solid vets. they are on the upswing as long as they dont let Karl run cousins out of town. they'd be smart to chase calipari or a brad stevens like coach who can work with young egos.

the kings didnt tank though, they are just young and lacked talent. they added vets to their young players (gay, thompson, collison, etc) and have made trades geared towards being better, not worse. they are doing the slow build the right way. unfortunetly ownership/front office there has been so unstable

We'll see how they turn out but I think DMC gets run out of town. But my point about the Kings was really regarding how they built their team that was a western power for a few years. Trades, and supplementing their talent with the draft, not relying on top 3 picks to form the team.

kings never emphasized defense as an organization until getting stein but they also let eric moreland go

[Hello Brooklyn]

Hello Brooklyn must have forgotten the hot burning sting that hit this fanbase following the 12-70 season when the Nets tanked and ended up with the 3rd overall pick for their troubles.

Your memory is either short, or you've erased the misery of that period of time from your memory.

Even if we had landed the 2nd pick and kept it, chances are the Nets would have whiffed and taken Evan Turner, a D tier player, over Cousins(A Tier player), Favors(who is about C Tier) and Paul George (A Tier Player, who was drafted 10th).

No way do I want to endure that nonsense again. Your best bet via your strategy is to either somehow land the #1 pick each time or pray to god that one of the crapshoots in the top ten turns into an A or B tier player.

lol what if we won that draft and got John Wall? Or what if we never traded for Deron and took Lillard? Or what if we won fewer games without Deron and drafted Davis?

I'd rather endure that nonsense than be stuck in mediocrity forever.

lol @ playing what ifs. You go right on ahead. History shows your plan never works...especially for the NETS.

Youre going back to scenario that didn't work and Im showing you how they could have worked if we didn't give it all up to make trades and build a **** team.

Yea my plan never works. That's why 99% of NBA Champions followed it. You right. Lets go with your joke of a plan of building around Brook Lopez and Young. Lebron is scared now!

[Hello Brooklyn]

lol what if we won that draft and got John Wall? Or what if we never traded for Deron and took Lillard? Or what if we won fewer games without Deron and drafted Davis?

I'd rather endure that nonsense than be stuck in mediocrity forever.

See you say that, but look at teams stuck in the losing cycle because they followed that mentality. You really think Kings fans are super happy with the trajectory of things?

It's all a big trade off, and obviously no one is shooting down the idea that drafting a star is wonderful and probably a key to a championship... But it's just unrealistic to be like, "lose, find star, win, get more players, win championship" rarely does that ever pan out, if one part of that cycle breaks it all falls apart. In the mean time if we focus on staying relevant and building slowly through the picks we have and can acquire, the signings we can make and a steady stream of smart trades... I think we become a more respectable team and a more enjoyable team.

I'd rather be the Griz than the Kings

Yes drafting is important, but so is everything else. So you can't just say, "you're doing it all wrong!" ,"Lose for a star! Then we'll be a great team"

There's a lot more to team building than just drafting the "star"


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Speaking of the Kings, remember when they were for a time a Western Conference powerhouse?

Do you know how many of the core players of that team were drafted in the top 10? NONE. Peja, Hedo, Gerald Wallace were picked 14th, 16th, and 25th. Webber, Bibby, Divac and Christie were all acquired via trades. Yet, they were a legit contender. They've been bottom feeding since then and have little to show for it out of DMC...who is going to BOLT.

The fallacy of the "tank for a superstar" argument assumes that 1st rd picks carry immense value. In reality, they are all crap shoots. This isn't the NFL where the likelihood of drafting STUD players within the first 32 picks are extremely high. No brainer, franchise changing, "best player in the world" guys like Lebron and Davis aren't in every draft. They are rare. Nets have had several lottery picks over the last 20 years and the best players in modern franchise history, outside of K-Mart and Lopez, were all acquired via trade.

But did they win a championship though?

[Hello Brooklyn]

I still think it is mislead to say all the championship teams drafted stars. most of them also traded for or signed stars. i.e. lakers drafted kobe but aquired shaq and pau. very few teams won titles by just drafting a star.

also, drafting a star is the hardest thing to do in the entire sport. look at cleveland. how many #1 overall picks and top 5 lotto picks and 0 stars. how many stars for philly? how many stars have we drafted when we have had a top 3 pick.

the odds of drafting a superstar are extremely low. they are even low if you have the #1 pick. signing a superstar, or trying to team up multiple stars is a much better plan. which a much lower downside. nothing submarines a franchise more then tanking to draft a star and missing.

Nobody is saying that just drafting a star is enough to win a championship. But it is the foundation you need to build a championship team.

The odds are low, but its the only way to do it.

i disagree i think you can sign or trade for a superstar and have that foundation as well. it doesnt matter how you get the susperstars, just how you get them. and now it seems guys like to team up. drafting a star is probably the hardest thing to do in the NBA. you could have the #1 pick 3 years in a row and be unlikely to land a superstar

Can you provide examples of NBA Championship teams doing this? Because I can't.

I just don't think its feasible because superstar player usually don't sign with bad teams or ask for trades to bad teams unless they already have other superstars there.

And if they do, those teams are usually not very successful.

[Hello Brooklyn]

Hello Brooklyn must have forgotten the hot burning sting that hit this fanbase following the 12-70 season when the Nets tanked and ended up with the 3rd overall pick for their troubles.

Your memory is either short, or you've erased the misery of that period of time from your memory.

Even if we had landed the 2nd pick and kept it, chances are the Nets would have whiffed and taken Evan Turner, a D tier player, over Cousins(A Tier player), Favors(who is about C Tier) and Paul George (A Tier Player, who was drafted 10th).

No way do I want to endure that nonsense again. Your best bet via your strategy is to either somehow land the #1 pick each time or pray to god that one of the crapshoots in the top ten turns into an A or B tier player.

lol what if we won that draft and got John Wall? Or what if we never traded for Deron and took Lillard? Or what if we won fewer games without Deron and drafted Davis?

I'd rather endure that nonsense than be stuck in mediocrity forever.

but we didnt get the #1 pick, inspite of 70 losses. which is part of the problem. being bad doesnt gaurantee you the #1 pick. and even if it did, the odds of their being a stud player are low, and even if there is, there are huge chances for it to bust or injury. also of note is alot of superstars where not the #1 pick. curry, durant, harden, etc...

if we never traded for wallace we would have taken Zeller which was confirmed. if we got into the top 3 it was going to be thomas robinson who busted so bad he is now here on a minimum deal.

I'm fine building through the draft if you are young and bad. but tanking to get bad and get high picks has never worked IMO outside of the scenario i outlined earlier. you are a good team, suffer an injury to a star, and tank for that year once the season is lost.

I'm just saying we had a legitimate chance to do so. And if we kept going on that path then maybe in 2011 or 2012 we could have gotten that superstar player. Its definitely possible.

If we never traded for Wallace maybe. But what if we never traded for Deron. Then what?

We don't have to tank, I just want us to rebuild. The situation were in right know is pretty terrible. And I'd rather not see Lopez and Young lead us to 36 win seasons after we get our picks back.

[Hello Brooklyn]

This is like arguing with an 8 year old.

So the plan is to just draft the next MJ or LeBron. That makes sooooooo much sense except that

1. Those guys come around once a decade

2. You cant guarantee by tanking that you can get the #1 pick.

So outside of this make believe world Hello Brooklyn lives in, can we get back to serious discussions.

Doesn' have to be MJ or Lebron. Could be Steph Curry or Dirk Nowitzki or Paul Pierce.

If you can draft a superstar and surround him with talent, you have a legitimate chance to win a championship. No they don't come around once a decade.

But sure lets focus on your idea of pretending Brook Lopez is capable of leading us to a championship. Come back to reality man.

[Net Sentence]

This is like arguing with an 8 year old.

So the plan is to just draft the next MJ or LeBron. That makes sooooooo much sense except that

1. Those guys come around once a decade

2. You cant guarantee by tanking that you can get the #1 pick.

So outside of this make believe world Hello Brooklyn lives in, can we get back to serious discussions.

Doesn' have to be MJ or Lebron. Could be Steph Curry or Dirk Nowitzki or Paul Pierce.

If you can draft a superstar and surround him with talent, you have a legitimate chance to win a championship. No they don't come around once a decade.

But sure lets focus on your idea of pretending Brook Lopez is capable of leading us to a championship. Come back to reality man.

It was only a couple of years ago that Curry wasnt considered a franchise player. Dirk use to be called irk because he wasnt considered a difference maker.

You say lets get a superstar like its some original idea. What do you think the other 29 teams have in mind when building their teams?

How old are you? Im guessing you are late teens, early 20s tops. I bet you grew up a Yankees and GIants fan and think winning it all is some easy task. It takes years to build a championship team. Everything needs to go exactly right. OKC is still looking for their first championship and they drafted 3 superstars. Lebron and Bosh left two losing organizations. How did drafting Melo work out for Denver?

[MrDollarBills]

lol what if we won that draft and got John Wall? Or what if we never traded for Deron and took Lillard? Or what if we won fewer games without Deron and drafted Davis?

I'd rather endure that nonsense than be stuck in mediocrity forever.

lol @ playing what ifs. You go right on ahead. History shows your plan never works...especially for the NETS.

Youre going back to scenario that didn't work and Im showing you how they could have worked if we didn't give it all up to make trades and build a **** team.

Yea my plan never works. That's why 99% of NBA Champions followed it. You right. Lets go with your joke of a plan of building around Brook Lopez and Young. Lebron is scared now!

Oh for god's sake, 99% of NBA Champions are comprised of 8 Teams, if your method was that simple the parity in the NBA would be the stuff of legend are you nuts? The Clippers, Kings, and Nets, three of the league's historically worst franchises, haven't won jack **** and have had tons of lottery picks. Your argument is so flawed its laughable at this point.

And now you're starting to argue strawmen. No one said "build around" Brook and Thad. Build a roster with them on the team? Sure, why not. Pieces to a puzzle. Gotta try something...again, if the NBA's draft and draft order were on par with the NFL's where the worst team gets exactly the pick they deserve and there are studs sitting there for taking for damn near every pick of the round...sure, build through the draft. but that's not the case.

I also posted a list of our lottery picks over the last 20 years. Funny how not one of those picks were superstar players....but yet to you, its just that simple, right? Our franchise's best two players outside of Dr. J are Jason Kidd and Vince Carter...both acquired VIA TRADE.

[MrDollarBills]

Now lets see how our team has done in the lottery in the last 20 years.

Net Lottery picks since 1995:

Ed O'Bannon (F Tier player)

Kerry Kittles (C-Tier player)

Tim Thomas(C Tier player), traded for Keith Van Horn(C-Tier Player)

Kenyon Martin (C Tier player)

Eddie Griffin (F-Tier player), traded for Richard Jefferson (C-Tier player) and Jason Collins (D Tier player).

Brook Lopez (B Tier player, and this is debatable due to Brook's injury history and inconsistent aggressiveness over the years)

Terrence Williams (F Tier player and a complete jackass of a human being)

Derrick Favors(C Tier player)

That's not very encouraging. 1 Borderline B tier player, a crapload of C Tier players, and two absolute busts.

Again HB...how come those picks didn't land franchise superstars? What happened???

[Hello Brooklyn]

This is like arguing with an 8 year old.

So the plan is to just draft the next MJ or LeBron. That makes sooooooo much sense except that

1. Those guys come around once a decade

2. You cant guarantee by tanking that you can get the #1 pick.

So outside of this make believe world Hello Brooklyn lives in, can we get back to serious discussions.

Doesn' have to be MJ or Lebron. Could be Steph Curry or Dirk Nowitzki or Paul Pierce.

If you can draft a superstar and surround him with talent, you have a legitimate chance to win a championship. No they don't come around once a decade.

But sure lets focus on your idea of pretending Brook Lopez is capable of leading us to a championship. Come back to reality man.

It was only a couple of years ago that Curry wasnt considered a franchise player. Dirk use to be called irk because he wasnt considered a difference maker.

You say lets get a superstar like its some original idea. What do you think the other 29 teams have in mind when building their teams?

How old are you? Im guessing you are late teens, early 20s tops. I bet you grew up a Yankees and GIants fan and think winning it all is some easy task. It takes years to build a championship team. Everything needs to go exactly right. OKC is still looking for their first championship and they drafted 3 superstars. Lebron and Bosh left two losing organizations. How did drafting Melo work out for Denver?

That's a fair point. Do I think that means that Brook Lopez will be a franchise player?

Not at all. Because theres a world of difference to where Curry and Dirk were at this point in their careers and where Lopez is.

If you really wanna know how old I am, the answer is 22. No I'm actually a Ravens fan and I don't follow baseball. But no I don't think winning is some easy task.

It does take years to build a championship team. But the course were on will not result in one. I can promise you that.