Official BKN-DAL-MIN pick watch Thread 2015-16 season

Cornbread · Post #1821 » by **Cornbread** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 4:04 pm

Don't lose perspective - it's a lottery. The third worst team has just under a 47% chance of a top 3 pick. The fifth worst team has just over a 33% chance of drafting top three.

That isn't nearly a big enough difference to go from wanting to keep the pick to wanting to trade it. Just cross your fingers and hope they pick the C's ball!

The real key for me is having another guy jump into the top tier. Ingram's improvement is huge. We need one more guy to take the leap.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Green89 · Post #1822 » by **Green89** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 4:39 pm

Deron Williams injured his hamstring again on Saturday.

Mr Puddles · Post #1823 » by **Mr Puddles** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 4:46 pm

I hope you guys don't mind an outsider infiltrating, but I was looking this up today and am I understanding correctly that the Celtics could potentially have 3 unprotected Nets picks over the next three drafts (the second one being a swap)? I thought teams weren't allowed to trade picks in consecutive year (although I guess there might be an exemption here because of the swap).

If I'm understanding the deal correctly, the Garnett/Pierce/ Terry trade was an absolute steal - and could potentially go down as one of the most lopsided ever.

Chris4Vikes · Post #1824 » by **Chris4Vikes** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 4:51 pm

Mr Puddles wrote:I hope you guys don't mind an outsider infiltrating, but I was looking this up today and am I understanding correctly that the Celtics could potentially have 3 unprotected Nets picks over the next three drafts (the second one being a swap)? I thought teams weren't allowed to trade picks in consecutive year (although I guess there might be an exemption here because of the swap).

If I'm understanding the deal correctly, the Garnett/Pierce/ Terry trade was an absolute steal - and could potentially go down as one of the most lopsided ever.

Thanks for visiting and giving us an outsider's perspective. Helpful. But in order for the trade to go down as one of the most lopsided ever, one of these picks has to be top 3. As a Celtics fan, we don't know what it's like to see a ping ball bounce our way. Expecting no help that way. And the Nets will win just enough games to keep the pick outside of the premium picks.

Andrew McCeltic · Post #1825 » by **Andrew McCeltic** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 5:02 pm

Chris4Vikes wrote:
Mr Puddles wrote:I hope you guys don't mind an outsider infiltrating, but I was looking this up today and am I understanding correctly that the Celtics could potentially have 3 unprotected Nets picks over the next three drafts (the second one being a swap)? I thought teams weren't allowed to trade picks in consecutive year (although I guess there might be an exemption here because of the swap).

If I'm understanding the deal correctly, the Garnett/Pierce/ Terry trade was an absolute steal - and could potentially go down as one of the most lopsided ever.

Thanks for visiting and giving us an outsider's perspective. Helpful. But in order for the trade to go down as one of the most lopsided ever, one of these picks has to be top 3. As a Celtics fan, we don't know what it's like to see a ping ball bounce our way. Expecting no help that way. And the Nets will win just enough games to keep the pick outside of the premium picks.

Yup, the swap rights are a way around the rule about trading consecutive picks. Getting 2-3 first rounders for Pierce, Garnett, Terry, and taking on Wallace's contract wasn't outrageous- a pick for Pierce, a pick for Garnett, a pick for Wallace is undoubtedly how Ainge talked the Nets into it- but having all of them unprotected was absolutely unprecedented.

Andrew McCeltic · Post #1826 » by **Andrew McCeltic** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 5:06 pm

Bar Fight wrote:Yeah, Brooklyn isn't finishing as a bottom 3 team. They will be competing every night, while the Pels, Suns, Lakers, etc. will be going for ping pong balls by no later than March. We're gonna need the basketball gods to bless us on lottery night. But this organization has absolutely no luck whatsoever, so I'm not counting on it.

We don't really know until after the trade deadline how the race for the bottom 3 will play out. Brooklyn could get better or worse, the Pelicans and Suns likewise.. And LA, like Minnesota, could surge in the standings with internal development.

ddb · Post #1827 » by **ddb** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 5:06 pm

Mr Puddles wrote:I hope you guys don't mind an outsider infiltrating, but I was looking this up today and am I understanding correctly that the Celtics could potentially have 3 unprotected Nets picks over the next three drafts (the second one being a swap)? I thought teams weren't allowed to trade picks in consecutive year (although I guess there might be an exemption here because of the swap).

If I'm understanding the deal correctly, the Garnett/Pierce/ Terry trade was an absolute steal - and could potentially go down as one of the most lopsided ever.

Yeah, this trade is trending towards being a historically good trade for the Cs, and bad deal for the Nets.

Not only did Ainge net 3 unprotected picks (14((James Young)), 16, 18) but he also negotiated the 17 pick swap which essentially could end up being huge as well. AND Ainge used the trade exeption on Zeller/Thornton and flipped Thornton and a seperate 1st acquired in a different deal for Isaiah Thomas.
Meanwhile, BK got 1 up and down season out of Pierce, and a washed up KG & Terry. Just awful for BK. No clue how Billy King still has a job. And its not like this was the first bad trade King made...he also traded his lottery pick #6 overall (Dame) for an againg Gerald Wallace. He also traded Favors and other assets to Utah for DWill.

klemen4 · Post #1828 » by **klemen4** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 6:00 pm

I was come and relaxed until the difference to 5th worst was 3-4 wins...now Im getting worried

3. 10 BRK
4.-6. 12 PHO, DEN, MIN
7. 14 POR

Im not worried about NOP(11), SAC(13) and MIL(14).

7th worst looks worst case and imo realistic. Lopez may be 2nd best offensive C, Young is solid and the fact that other teams have injuries and will also tank in last 10-15 games...it does not look good!

freddiebutch · Post #1829 » by **freddiebutch** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 7:05 pm

Never want to see any player go down to injury. Nets just got a lot thinner at PG:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/SpearsNBAYahoo/status/683724920862277632[/tweet]

mloyko · Post #1830 » by **mloyko** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 7:07 pm

Jarrett Jack Torn ACL, done for the year.

freddiebutch · Post #1831 » by **freddiebutch** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 7:08 pm

Not sure this makes them much worse. Jack was one of the deceptively worst starting PG's in basketball.

mwhis21 · Post #1832 » by **mwhis21** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 7:09 pm

freddiebutch wrote:Never want to see any player go down to injury. Nets just got a lot thinner at PG:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/SpearsNBAYahoo/status/683724920862277632[/tweet]

Jack was the butt of some jokes here so I hope he comes back healthy...that said, I think he's been the second most important player behind Lopez. He has kept a lot of games close. This hurts the Nets.

Homerclease · Post #1833 » by **Homerclease** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 7:14 pm

Tough break for Jack he was having a decent year for them. Sucks to see anyone blow a knee out like that

mloyko · Post #1834 » by **mloyko** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 7:16 pm

freddiebutch wrote:Not sure this makes them much worse. Jack was one of the deceptively worst starting PG's in basketball.

He played 32 minutes a game and was one of the only players on the team that could score. This just makes the Nets' bench even shallower.

truth18 · Post #1835 » by **truth18** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 7:16 pm

mloyko wrote:Jarrett Jack Torn ACL, done for the year.

Man. That game really was **** all around. Hope he has a full recovery.

klemen4 · Post #1836 » by **klemen4** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 7:17 pm

I think Jack going down makes them better...at least based on stats - when he played, they were worst. At least I remember I was reading this somewhere.

Well...better than nothing

BTW. anyone knows how long nets rookie wing (forgot his name) will be out

Murta · Post #1837 » by **Murta** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 7:19 pm

mloyko wrote:
freddiebutch wrote:Not sure this makes them much worse. Jack was one of the deceptively worst starting PG's in basketball.

He played 32 minutes a game and was one of the only players on the team that could score. This just makes the Nets' bench even shallower.

Jack is bad, but their bench PGs are awful (Larkin and Sloan). ACL tear is unsurprising news, his reaction was horrifying.

BleedGreen1989 · Post #1838 » by **BleedGreen1989** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 8:08 pm

klemen4 wrote:I think Jack going down makes them better...at least based on stats - when he played, they were worst. At least I remember I was reading this somewhere.

Well...better than nothing

BTW. anyone knows how long nets rookie wing (forgot his name) will be out

Rondae should be out until at least mid Feb.

rmal8852 · Post #1839 » by **rmal8852** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 8:30 pm

Sad to see Jack go down. He has been one of my favorite players since he was the only NBA player to have the stones to publicly call out Ray Allen for leaving the Cs. Called him a "traitor."

However, this has to hugely benefit us. To me, Jack was the leader of that team. Defensively, the Nets will suffer substantially. Jack's 6'3" 200 lb. frame and his aggression will be replaced by a 5'11" (that's generous) 175 lb. (that might be generous, too) Larkin.

shawn unkempt · Post #1840 » by **shawn unkempt** » Sun Jan 3, 2016 8:36 pm

Larkin has been a bit of a bright spot for the Nets, but I doubt he's going to be able to carry the load for them in an increased role. I think this will mean more weight on Iso Joe's shoulders, and he's been really terrible so far.