Brooklyn is going to be terrible- We really could get a top 5 pick this year...

[Eddie20]

guys this is seriously getting ridiculous. I cant find a single sportsbook that has the nets at over 33 wins. If you really think they will 35-40 games go place a huge bet and rub the money in our face. Otherwise, you kind of just come off like a jerk. If i say I think the Patriots are going to make the playoffs i don't really need to give much of an explanation. Everyone expects and agrees they most likely will. On the opposite end of that, if I said I thought the Jets would make the playoffs i would need a hell of a lot of advanced statistics and reasoning to make an argument that was compelling against all other predictions and statistics. In the case of the nets backers here, you are the jets fans. Every sports site has the Nets bottom of the east. You feel differently, burden is on you. Dont call people homers for agreeing with the general consensus.

THis is year 4 of people expecting the Nets to bottom out.  People have been writing them off since KG and Pierce had a slow start.  Whatever.  There's no incentive for them to be bad.  You're more likely to see Boston change gears and tank than you are to see Brooklyn end up at the bottom of the standings.

Actually, I'd say it's year 2, not year 4.  people expected the addition of KG and PP to put them into contention for the most part.

They may have no incentive to be bad but they can still be bad even if they're trying to win. 

- Their top 5 to close out a game will be Jack, Johnson, Young, Lopez and either Bargnani or Bogdonovic (?).   that's not the worst 5 players that can be put on the floor in the league but that lineup is a defensive sieve.  if the game is close in the final few minutes and they're not playing a top team, they may win a few games down the stretch. not many though

- The rest of the game they'll have to rely on weak bench.  this is when I expect them to get killed in games by teams with better benches or have their starters playing longer minutes against weaker opposition to press the advantage.  Also, should the Nets top 5/6 suffer injury and miss games, they have no quality depth on their bench so the production dropoff will be significant from the starters.

- Also, the rest of the East improved.  Sure, one could argue if Detroit or Charlotte really improved with their offseason moves but IMHO, I think they did somewhat.  Certainly shouldn't be easy marks for the Nets in terms of picking up wins. 

- Nets finished 8th last year and did not improve.  The 7 teams that finished better than them should do so again.  Miami and Indy are getting back top players from injury and made other offseason moves to further improve.  They will finish better than the Nets as well.  That makes the Nets as 10th best tops right there.  NY will be better -- Melo/Afflalo/Lopez isn't all that worse off than the Nets -- could even argue that with Melo being superior to anyone on the Nets, the Knicks could finish better in the end.  Charlotte and Detroit have more overall talent so they could (and I think should) finish better than the Nets.  Orlando has some up-and-coming talent.  I would not be surprised to see them pass the Nets either (tbh, I'm anticipating that to happen).

- can only really say the Philly is certain to finish with a worse record.

Still expect the Brooklyn pick to end up in the 12-17 range.  The majority of arguments made to explain why they will bottom out can also be applied to the Boston Celtics.  "The East got better... their late season success isn't sustainable... lack of talent", etc.

The problem with that line of thinking is that the Celtics are a younger team and will likely improve from last season. The C's have also improved their roster, while the Nets have regressed. There is also talk that Joe Johnson, who averaged 35 minutes last season, will have his minutes reduced.

Players that will get playing time and excluding end of bench guys/D-league bound guys

* 14-15 minutes per game in parentheses

Cs in
Johnson
Lee

Cs out
Bass (23.5)
Datome (10.7)



Nets in
Larkin
Robinson
Ellington
Bargnani


Nets out
Williams (34.9)
Teletovic (22.3)
Anderson (23.6)
Plumlee (21.3)

The Nets have a pretty bad roster when analyzed objectively (cough, cough) and not just trying to argue for the sake of argument. Also, in a league that is so PG dominant the Nets not only have the worst PG duo in the league (Jack/Larkin), but one of the worst duos of the last several seasons.

[celticsclay]

guys this is seriously getting ridiculous. I cant find a single sportsbook that has the nets at over 33 wins. If you really think they will 35-40 games go place a huge bet and rub the money in our face. Otherwise, you kind of just come off like a jerk. If i say I think the Patriots are going to make the playoffs i don't really need to give much of an explanation. Everyone expects and agrees they most likely will. On the opposite end of that, if I said I thought the Jets would make the playoffs i would need a hell of a lot of advanced statistics and reasoning to make an argument that was compelling against all other predictions and statistics. In the case of the nets backers here, you are the jets fans. Every sports site has the Nets bottom of the east. You feel differently, burden is on you. Dont call people homers for agreeing with the general consensus.

THis is year 4 of people expecting the Nets to bottom out.  People have been writing them off since KG and Pierce had a slow start.  Whatever.  There's no incentive for them to be bad.  You're more likely to see Boston change gears and tank than you are to see Brooklyn end up at the bottom of the standings.

Actually, I'd say it's year 2, not year 4.  people expected the addition of KG and PP to put them into contention for the most part.

They may have no incentive to be bad but they can still be bad even if they're trying to win. 

- Their top 5 to close out a game will be Jack, Johnson, Young, Lopez and either Bargnani or Bogdonovic (?).   that's not the worst 5 players that can be put on the floor in the league but that lineup is a defensive sieve.  if the game is close in the final few minutes and they're not playing a top team, they may win a few games down the stretch. not many though

- The rest of the game they'll have to rely on weak bench.  this is when I expect them to get killed in games by teams with better benches or have their starters playing longer minutes against weaker opposition to press the advantage.  Also, should the Nets top 5/6 suffer injury and miss games, they have no quality depth on their bench so the production dropoff will be significant from the starters.

- Also, the rest of the East improved.  Sure, one could argue if Detroit or Charlotte really improved with their offseason moves but IMHO, I think they did somewhat.  Certainly shouldn't be easy marks for the Nets in terms of picking up wins. 

- Nets finished 8th last year and did not improve.  The 7 teams that finished better than them should do so again.  Miami and Indy are getting back top players from injury and made other offseason moves to further improve.  They will finish better than the Nets as well.  That makes the Nets as 10th best tops right there.  NY will be better -- Melo/Afflalo/Lopez isn't all that worse off than the Nets -- could even argue that with Melo being superior to anyone on the Nets, the Knicks could finish better in the end.  Charlotte and Detroit have more overall talent so they could (and I think should) finish better than the Nets.  Orlando has some up-and-coming talent.  I would not be surprised to see them pass the Nets either (tbh, I'm anticipating that to happen).

- can only really say the Philly is certain to finish with a worse record.

Still expect the Brooklyn pick to end up in the 12-17 range.  The majority of arguments made to explain why they will bottom out can also be applied to the Boston Celtics.  "The East got better... their late season success isn't sustainable... lack of talent", etc.

The arguments really only apply if you ignore pretty basic facts.

The Celtics are a young team that added a few veterans over the offseason that more than offset their only rotation loss (Bass)

It is perfectly reasonable to expect internal improvement from the celtics young players
especially considering a few of them are lottery picks or near lottery picks

The nets lost multiple key players this offseason (Williams, Anderson, Plumlee)
and best offseason addition is Barg at the NBA minimum

The nets have very few young players that are even first round picks, one only one lottery pick who will be a rookie

The teams really couldn't be more different in makeup, depth or what they did this offseason and these rebuttals are lazy and embarassing.

[celticsclay]

guys this is seriously getting ridiculous. I cant find a single sportsbook that has the nets at over 33 wins. If you really think they will 35-40 games go place a huge bet and rub the money in our face. Otherwise, you kind of just come off like a jerk. If i say I think the Patriots are going to make the playoffs i don't really need to give much of an explanation. Everyone expects and agrees they most likely will. On the opposite end of that, if I said I thought the Jets would make the playoffs i would need a hell of a lot of advanced statistics and reasoning to make an argument that was compelling against all other predictions and statistics. In the case of the nets backers here, you are the jets fans. Every sports site has the Nets bottom of the east. You feel differently, burden is on you. Dont call people homers for agreeing with the general consensus.

THis is year 4 of people expecting the Nets to bottom out.  People have been writing them off since KG and Pierce had a slow start.  Whatever.  There's no incentive for them to be bad.  You're more likely to see Boston change gears and tank than you are to see Brooklyn end up at the bottom of the standings.

Actually, I'd say it's year 2, not year 4.  people expected the addition of KG and PP to put them into contention for the most part.

They may have no incentive to be bad but they can still be bad even if they're trying to win. 

- Their top 5 to close out a game will be Jack, Johnson, Young, Lopez and either Bargnani or Bogdonovic (?).   that's not the worst 5 players that can be put on the floor in the league but that lineup is a defensive sieve.  if the game is close in the final few minutes and they're not playing a top team, they may win a few games down the stretch. not many though

- The rest of the game they'll have to rely on weak bench.  this is when I expect them to get killed in games by teams with better benches or have their starters playing longer minutes against weaker opposition to press the advantage.  Also, should the Nets top 5/6 suffer injury and miss games, they have no quality depth on their bench so the production dropoff will be significant from the starters.

- Also, the rest of the East improved.  Sure, one could argue if Detroit or Charlotte really improved with their offseason moves but IMHO, I think they did somewhat.  Certainly shouldn't be easy marks for the Nets in terms of picking up wins. 

- Nets finished 8th last year and did not improve.  The 7 teams that finished better than them should do so again.  Miami and Indy are getting back top players from injury and made other offseason moves to further improve.  They will finish better than the Nets as well.  That makes the Nets as 10th best tops right there.  NY will be better -- Melo/Afflalo/Lopez isn't all that worse off than the Nets -- could even argue that with Melo being superior to anyone on the Nets, the Knicks could finish better in the end.  Charlotte and Detroit have more overall talent so they could (and I think should) finish better than the Nets.  Orlando has some up-and-coming talent.  I would not be surprised to see them pass the Nets either (tbh, I'm anticipating that to happen).

- can only really say the Philly is certain to finish with a worse record.

Still expect the Brooklyn pick to end up in the 12-17 range.  The majority of arguments made to explain why they will bottom out can also be applied to the Boston Celtics.  "The East got better... their late season success isn't sustainable... lack of talent", etc.

The problem with that line of thinking is that the Celtics are a younger team and will likely improve from last season. The C's have also improved their roster, while the Nets have regressed. There is also talk that Joe Johnson, who averaged 35 minutes last season, will have his minutes reduced.

Players that will get playing time and excluding end of bench guys/D-league bound guys

* 14-15 minutes per game in parentheses

Cs in
Johnson
Lee

Cs out
Bass (23.5)
Datome (10.7)



Nets in
Larkin
Robinson
Ellington
Bargnani


Nets out
Williams (34.9)
Teletovic (22.3)
Anderson (23.6)
Plumlee (21.3)

The Nets have a pretty bad roster when analyzed objectively (cough, cough) and not just trying to argue for the sake of argument. Also, in a league that is so PG dominant the Nets not only have the worst PG duo in the league (Jack/Larkin), but one of the worst duos of the last several seasons.

Unfortunately that is what this has dissolved to. You got people on one side of the "arguement" pointing out objective third party rankings, advanced statistics and some things that are common sense (35 year old players regress) while the other side is stomping their feet and saying "meh i dont care about any stats, facts or arguments and i'm taking my bad and ball and going home."

[LarBrd33]

guys this is seriously getting ridiculous. I cant find a single sportsbook that has the nets at over 33 wins. If you really think they will 35-40 games go place a huge bet and rub the money in our face. Otherwise, you kind of just come off like a jerk. If i say I think the Patriots are going to make the playoffs i don't really need to give much of an explanation. Everyone expects and agrees they most likely will. On the opposite end of that, if I said I thought the Jets would make the playoffs i would need a hell of a lot of advanced statistics and reasoning to make an argument that was compelling against all other predictions and statistics. In the case of the nets backers here, you are the jets fans. Every sports site has the Nets bottom of the east. You feel differently, burden is on you. Dont call people homers for agreeing with the general consensus.

THis is year 4 of people expecting the Nets to bottom out.  People have been writing them off since KG and Pierce had a slow start.  Whatever.  There's no incentive for them to be bad.  You're more likely to see Boston change gears and tank than you are to see Brooklyn end up at the bottom of the standings.

Actually, I'd say it's year 2, not year 4.  people expected the addition of KG and PP to put them into contention for the most part.

They may have no incentive to be bad but they can still be bad even if they're trying to win. 

- Their top 5 to close out a game will be Jack, Johnson, Young, Lopez and either Bargnani or Bogdonovic (?).   that's not the worst 5 players that can be put on the floor in the league but that lineup is a defensive sieve.  if the game is close in the final few minutes and they're not playing a top team, they may win a few games down the stretch. not many though

- The rest of the game they'll have to rely on weak bench.  this is when I expect them to get killed in games by teams with better benches or have their starters playing longer minutes against weaker opposition to press the advantage.  Also, should the Nets top 5/6 suffer injury and miss games, they have no quality depth on their bench so the production dropoff will be significant from the starters.

- Also, the rest of the East improved.  Sure, one could argue if Detroit or Charlotte really improved with their offseason moves but IMHO, I think they did somewhat.  Certainly shouldn't be easy marks for the Nets in terms of picking up wins. 

- Nets finished 8th last year and did not improve.  The 7 teams that finished better than them should do so again.  Miami and Indy are getting back top players from injury and made other offseason moves to further improve.  They will finish better than the Nets as well.  That makes the Nets as 10th best tops right there.  NY will be better -- Melo/Afflalo/Lopez isn't all that worse off than the Nets -- could even argue that with Melo being superior to anyone on the Nets, the Knicks could finish better in the end.  Charlotte and Detroit have more overall talent so they could (and I think should) finish better than the Nets.  Orlando has some up-and-coming talent.  I would not be surprised to see them pass the Nets either (tbh, I'm anticipating that to happen).

- can only really say the Philly is certain to finish with a worse record.

Still expect the Brooklyn pick to end up in the 12-17 range.  The majority of arguments made to explain why they will bottom out can also be applied to the Boston Celtics.  "The East got better... their late season success isn't sustainable... lack of talent", etc.

The problem with that line of thinking is that the Celtics are a younger team and will likely improve from last season. The C's have also improved their roster, while the Nets have regressed. There is also talk that Joe Johnson, who averaged 35 minutes last season, will have his minutes reduced.

Players that will get playing time and excluding end of bench guys/D-league bound guys

* 14-15 minutes per game in parentheses

Cs in
Johnson
Lee

Cs out
Bass (23.5)
Datome (10.7)



Nets in
Larkin
Robinson
Ellington
Bargnani


Nets out
Williams (34.9)
Teletovic (22.3)
Anderson (23.6)
Plumlee (21.3)

The Nets have a pretty bad roster when analyzed objectively (cough, cough) and not just trying to argue for the sake of argument. Also, in a league that is so PG dominant the Nets not only have the worst PG duo in the league (Jack/Larkin), but one of the worst duos of the last several seasons.

Unfortunately that is what this has dissolved to. You got people on one side of the "arguement" pointing out objective third party rankings, advanced statistics and some things that are common sense (35 year old players regress) while the other side is stomping their feet and saying "meh i dont care about any stats, facts or arguments and i'm taking my bad and ball and going home."

No "argument" to be made.  They still have their franchise players.   I'd be shocked to see Brooklyn finish in the bottom 5.  There's no way to "win" an argument that is purely a prediction.  Just have to see how the season plays out.  Diving into this deeply is a waste of effort.  I've seen Joe Johnson effectively run point in the past.  Lopez is still a beast when healthy.   Should be plenty mediocre this year.

[Vermont Green]

It is a tough prediction to make.  Lopez is very injury prone so he could go down very easily.  The odds of a season ending injury is what 40%, 60%?  Who knows.  And if you don't know that, it is hard to handicap the Nets.

I think the 2016 pick will be lottery but baked into that prediction is that Lopez and/or Johnson will miss significant time.  I don't think the Celtics make the playoffs either so maybe I am just a pessimist.

[kraidstar]

nets lost 4 rotation players and replaced them with nobody

depth matters, especially in the 82-game regular season.

their mediocre, unathletic, defensively-challenged starting lineup will be further undercut by their brutally bad bench.

and jarrett jack will butcher that offense with his poor shot selection - there's a reason he's now on his 7th NBA team.

[slamtheking]

THis is year 4 of people expecting the Nets to bottom out.  People have been writing them off since KG and Pierce had a slow start.  Whatever.  There's no incentive for them to be bad.  You're more likely to see Boston change gears and tank than you are to see Brooklyn end up at the bottom of the standings.

Actually, I'd say it's year 2, not year 4.  people expected the addition of KG and PP to put them into contention for the most part.

They may have no incentive to be bad but they can still be bad even if they're trying to win. 

- Their top 5 to close out a game will be Jack, Johnson, Young, Lopez and either Bargnani or Bogdonovic (?).   that's not the worst 5 players that can be put on the floor in the league but that lineup is a defensive sieve.  if the game is close in the final few minutes and they're not playing a top team, they may win a few games down the stretch. not many though

- The rest of the game they'll have to rely on weak bench.  this is when I expect them to get killed in games by teams with better benches or have their starters playing longer minutes against weaker opposition to press the advantage.  Also, should the Nets top 5/6 suffer injury and miss games, they have no quality depth on their bench so the production dropoff will be significant from the starters.

- Also, the rest of the East improved.  Sure, one could argue if Detroit or Charlotte really improved with their offseason moves but IMHO, I think they did somewhat.  Certainly shouldn't be easy marks for the Nets in terms of picking up wins. 

- Nets finished 8th last year and did not improve.  The 7 teams that finished better than them should do so again.  Miami and Indy are getting back top players from injury and made other offseason moves to further improve.  They will finish better than the Nets as well.  That makes the Nets as 10th best tops right there.  NY will be better -- Melo/Afflalo/Lopez isn't all that worse off than the Nets -- could even argue that with Melo being superior to anyone on the Nets, the Knicks could finish better in the end.  Charlotte and Detroit have more overall talent so they could (and I think should) finish better than the Nets.  Orlando has some up-and-coming talent.  I would not be surprised to see them pass the Nets either (tbh, I'm anticipating that to happen).

- can only really say the Philly is certain to finish with a worse record.

Still expect the Brooklyn pick to end up in the 12-17 range.  The majority of arguments made to explain why they will bottom out can also be applied to the Boston Celtics.  "The East got better... their late season success isn't sustainable... lack of talent", etc.

No "argument" to be made.  They still have their franchise players.   I'd be shocked to see Brooklyn finish in the bottom 5.  There's no way to "win" an argument that is purely a prediction.  Just have to see how the season plays out.  Diving into this deeply is a waste of effort.  I've seen Joe Johnson effectively run point in the past.  Lopez is still a beast when healthy.   Should be plenty mediocre this year.

to get back to your response to my post, I agree that the same could be said of the C's in terms of their talent not really improving and that other teams in the East improved.  in fact, I HAVE been saying that very thing and predicting the C's to also miss the playoffs (but barely).

we'll see how the season plays out.  I think the Nets will be far worse than you're proposing

[chambers]

guys this is seriously getting ridiculous. I cant find a single sportsbook that has the nets at over 33 wins. If you really think they will 35-40 games go place a huge bet and rub the money in our face. Otherwise, you kind of just come off like a jerk. If i say I think the Patriots are going to make the playoffs i don't really need to give much of an explanation. Everyone expects and agrees they most likely will. On the opposite end of that, if I said I thought the Jets would make the playoffs i would need a hell of a lot of advanced statistics and reasoning to make an argument that was compelling against all other predictions and statistics. In the case of the nets backers here, you are the jets fans. Every sports site has the Nets bottom of the east. You feel differently, burden is on you. Dont call people homers for agreeing with the general consensus.

THis is year 4 of people expecting the Nets to bottom out.  People have been writing them off since KG and Pierce had a slow start.  Whatever.  There's no incentive for them to be bad.  You're more likely to see Boston change gears and tank than you are to see Brooklyn end up at the bottom of the standings.

Actually, I'd say it's year 2, not year 4.  people expected the addition of KG and PP to put them into contention for the most part.

They may have no incentive to be bad but they can still be bad even if they're trying to win. 

- Their top 5 to close out a game will be Jack, Johnson, Young, Lopez and either Bargnani or Bogdonovic (?).   that's not the worst 5 players that can be put on the floor in the league but that lineup is a defensive sieve.  if the game is close in the final few minutes and they're not playing a top team, they may win a few games down the stretch. not many though

- The rest of the game they'll have to rely on weak bench.  this is when I expect them to get killed in games by teams with better benches or have their starters playing longer minutes against weaker opposition to press the advantage.  Also, should the Nets top 5/6 suffer injury and miss games, they have no quality depth on their bench so the production dropoff will be significant from the starters.

- Also, the rest of the East improved.  Sure, one could argue if Detroit or Charlotte really improved with their offseason moves but IMHO, I think they did somewhat.  Certainly shouldn't be easy marks for the Nets in terms of picking up wins. 

- Nets finished 8th last year and did not improve.  The 7 teams that finished better than them should do so again.  Miami and Indy are getting back top players from injury and made other offseason moves to further improve.  They will finish better than the Nets as well.  That makes the Nets as 10th best tops right there.  NY will be better -- Melo/Afflalo/Lopez isn't all that worse off than the Nets -- could even argue that with Melo being superior to anyone on the Nets, the Knicks could finish better in the end.  Charlotte and Detroit have more overall talent so they could (and I think should) finish better than the Nets.  Orlando has some up-and-coming talent.  I would not be surprised to see them pass the Nets either (tbh, I'm anticipating that to happen).

- can only really say the Philly is certain to finish with a worse record.

Still expect the Brooklyn pick to end up in the 12-17 range.  The majority of arguments made to explain why they will bottom out can also be applied to the Boston Celtics.  "The East got better... their late season success isn't sustainable... lack of talent", etc.

The problem with that line of thinking is that the Celtics are a younger team and will likely improve from last season. The C's have also improved their roster, while the Nets have regressed. There is also talk that Joe Johnson, who averaged 35 minutes last season, will have his minutes reduced.

Players that will get playing time and excluding end of bench guys/D-league bound guys

* 14-15 minutes per game in parentheses

Cs in
Johnson
Lee

Cs out
Bass (23.5)
Datome (10.7)



Nets in
Larkin
Robinson
Ellington
Bargnani


Nets out
Williams (34.9)
Teletovic (22.3)
Anderson (23.6)
Plumlee (21.3)

The Nets have a pretty bad roster when analyzed objectively (cough, cough) and not just trying to argue for the sake of argument. Also, in a league that is so PG dominant the Nets not only have the worst PG duo in the league (Jack/Larkin), but one of the worst duos of the last several seasons.

Unfortunately that is what this has dissolved to. You got people on one side of the "arguement" pointing out objective third party rankings, advanced statistics and some things that are common sense (35 year old players regress) while the other side is stomping their feet and saying "meh i dont care about any stats, facts or arguments and i'm taking my bad and ball and going home."

No "argument" to be made.  They still have their franchise players.   I'd be shocked to see Brooklyn finish in the bottom 5.  There's no way to "win" an argument that is purely a prediction.  Just have to see how the season plays out.  Diving into this deeply is a waste of effort.  I've seen Joe Johnson effectively run point in the past.  Lopez is still a beast when healthy.   Should be plenty mediocre this year.

Well basically you're saying that this 'perennial playoff contender' with 'franchise players' ends up somewhere between the 12th and 17th pick. The Jazz finished 12th last year, so you've left yourself a wiiiiide margin for being right haha.

The majority consensus here is that they end up 10th-13th in the East, with a pick inside the top 10 for us. But if they have a major injury (reasonably possible) then they'll really crash hard.
Thin bench+ (as you describe) injury prone/aging 'franchise' players ain't the recipe for success.

So even if Lopez goes down, or Johnson goes down, you think the worst they can do is finish with the 12th pick?

Lol if either of those guys was on our team you'd probably be calling them scrubs- but that's what I like about your input to the board- you're not afraid to make people question their conclusions- it's just very hard to get you to question yours.

[LarBrd33]

guys this is seriously getting ridiculous. I cant find a single sportsbook that has the nets at over 33 wins. If you really think they will 35-40 games go place a huge bet and rub the money in our face. Otherwise, you kind of just come off like a jerk. If i say I think the Patriots are going to make the playoffs i don't really need to give much of an explanation. Everyone expects and agrees they most likely will. On the opposite end of that, if I said I thought the Jets would make the playoffs i would need a hell of a lot of advanced statistics and reasoning to make an argument that was compelling against all other predictions and statistics. In the case of the nets backers here, you are the jets fans. Every sports site has the Nets bottom of the east. You feel differently, burden is on you. Dont call people homers for agreeing with the general consensus.

THis is year 4 of people expecting the Nets to bottom out.  People have been writing them off since KG and Pierce had a slow start.  Whatever.  There's no incentive for them to be bad.  You're more likely to see Boston change gears and tank than you are to see Brooklyn end up at the bottom of the standings.

Actually, I'd say it's year 2, not year 4.  people expected the addition of KG and PP to put them into contention for the most part.

They may have no incentive to be bad but they can still be bad even if they're trying to win. 

- Their top 5 to close out a game will be Jack, Johnson, Young, Lopez and either Bargnani or Bogdonovic (?).   that's not the worst 5 players that can be put on the floor in the league but that lineup is a defensive sieve.  if the game is close in the final few minutes and they're not playing a top team, they may win a few games down the stretch. not many though

- The rest of the game they'll have to rely on weak bench.  this is when I expect them to get killed in games by teams with better benches or have their starters playing longer minutes against weaker opposition to press the advantage.  Also, should the Nets top 5/6 suffer injury and miss games, they have no quality depth on their bench so the production dropoff will be significant from the starters.

- Also, the rest of the East improved.  Sure, one could argue if Detroit or Charlotte really improved with their offseason moves but IMHO, I think they did somewhat.  Certainly shouldn't be easy marks for the Nets in terms of picking up wins. 

- Nets finished 8th last year and did not improve.  The 7 teams that finished better than them should do so again.  Miami and Indy are getting back top players from injury and made other offseason moves to further improve.  They will finish better than the Nets as well.  That makes the Nets as 10th best tops right there.  NY will be better -- Melo/Afflalo/Lopez isn't all that worse off than the Nets -- could even argue that with Melo being superior to anyone on the Nets, the Knicks could finish better in the end.  Charlotte and Detroit have more overall talent so they could (and I think should) finish better than the Nets.  Orlando has some up-and-coming talent.  I would not be surprised to see them pass the Nets either (tbh, I'm anticipating that to happen).

- can only really say the Philly is certain to finish with a worse record.

Still expect the Brooklyn pick to end up in the 12-17 range.  The majority of arguments made to explain why they will bottom out can also be applied to the Boston Celtics.  "The East got better... their late season success isn't sustainable... lack of talent", etc.

The problem with that line of thinking is that the Celtics are a younger team and will likely improve from last season. The C's have also improved their roster, while the Nets have regressed. There is also talk that Joe Johnson, who averaged 35 minutes last season, will have his minutes reduced.

Players that will get playing time and excluding end of bench guys/D-league bound guys

* 14-15 minutes per game in parentheses

Cs in
Johnson
Lee

Cs out
Bass (23.5)
Datome (10.7)



Nets in
Larkin
Robinson
Ellington
Bargnani


Nets out
Williams (34.9)
Teletovic (22.3)
Anderson (23.6)
Plumlee (21.3)

The Nets have a pretty bad roster when analyzed objectively (cough, cough) and not just trying to argue for the sake of argument. Also, in a league that is so PG dominant the Nets not only have the worst PG duo in the league (Jack/Larkin), but one of the worst duos of the last several seasons.

Unfortunately that is what this has dissolved to. You got people on one side of the "arguement" pointing out objective third party rankings, advanced statistics and some things that are common sense (35 year old players regress) while the other side is stomping their feet and saying "meh i dont care about any stats, facts or arguments and i'm taking my bad and ball and going home."

No "argument" to be made.  They still have their franchise players.   I'd be shocked to see Brooklyn finish in the bottom 5.  There's no way to "win" an argument that is purely a prediction.  Just have to see how the season plays out.  Diving into this deeply is a waste of effort.  I've seen Joe Johnson effectively run point in the past.  Lopez is still a beast when healthy.   Should be plenty mediocre this year.

Well basically you're saying that this 'perennial playoff contender' with 'franchise players' ends up somewhere between the 12th and 17th pick. The Jazz finished 12th last year, so you've left yourself a wiiiiide margin for being right haha.

The majority consensus here is that they end up 10th-13th in the East, with a pick inside the top 10 for us. But if they have a major injury (reasonably possible) then they'll really crash hard.
Thin bench+ (as you describe) injury prone/aging 'franchise' players ain't the recipe for success.

So even if Lopez goes down, or Johnson goes down, you think the worst they can do is finish with the 12th pick?

Lol if either of those guys was on our team you'd probably be calling them scrubs- but that's what I like about your input to the board- you're not afraid to make people question their conclusions- it's just very hard to get you to question yours.

Welp let's hope the "consensus" ends up being worth more than the typical going rate of jack squat.  Boston was supposed to be a bottom 3 team last year.  It didn't work out.  Brooklyn will be fine.

And no... I call scrubs scrubs.  "Consensus" is that Boston didn't have a legitimate starter on their entire roster last season.   Lopez and Johnson are borderline all-stars.  Healthy Lopez might be the best low post player in the game right now.  Boston's best player is arguably David Lee.  I'm excited for the possibility of him returning to borderline all-star form, but he's coming off a season averaging 8 minutes in the playoffs. 

[colincb]

guys this is seriously getting ridiculous. I cant find a single sportsbook that has the nets at over 33 wins. If you really think they will 35-40 games go place a huge bet and rub the money in our face. Otherwise, you kind of just come off like a jerk. If i say I think the Patriots are going to make the playoffs i don't really need to give much of an explanation. Everyone expects and agrees they most likely will. On the opposite end of that, if I said I thought the Jets would make the playoffs i would need a hell of a lot of advanced statistics and reasoning to make an argument that was compelling against all other predictions and statistics. In the case of the nets backers here, you are the jets fans. Every sports site has the Nets bottom of the east. You feel differently, burden is on you. Dont call people homers for agreeing with the general consensus.

THis is year 4 of people expecting the Nets to bottom out.  People have been writing them off since KG and Pierce had a slow start.  Whatever.  There's no incentive for them to be bad.  You're more likely to see Boston change gears and tank than you are to see Brooklyn end up at the bottom of the standings.

2012 49 wins
2013 44 wins
2014 38 wins
2015 ? wins

Seems to be a trend there. Lost one of their better players in DWill and jettisoned some other useful pieces to save money. The Russian has made a huge profit on paper if he wants to sell.

Why do they need an incentive to be bad?

Lopez inexplicably spent the bulk of the season coming off the bench.  When he started next to Thad young they played at a 56 win pace.

11-9 when they started together in regular season, 13-13 including playoffs. Neither is a 56 game pace.

[LarBrd33]

guys this is seriously getting ridiculous. I cant find a single sportsbook that has the nets at over 33 wins. If you really think they will 35-40 games go place a huge bet and rub the money in our face. Otherwise, you kind of just come off like a jerk. If i say I think the Patriots are going to make the playoffs i don't really need to give much of an explanation. Everyone expects and agrees they most likely will. On the opposite end of that, if I said I thought the Jets would make the playoffs i would need a hell of a lot of advanced statistics and reasoning to make an argument that was compelling against all other predictions and statistics. In the case of the nets backers here, you are the jets fans. Every sports site has the Nets bottom of the east. You feel differently, burden is on you. Dont call people homers for agreeing with the general consensus.

THis is year 4 of people expecting the Nets to bottom out.  People have been writing them off since KG and Pierce had a slow start.  Whatever.  There's no incentive for them to be bad.  You're more likely to see Boston change gears and tank than you are to see Brooklyn end up at the bottom of the standings.

2012 49 wins
2013 44 wins
2014 38 wins
2015 ? wins

Seems to be a trend there. Lost one of their better players in DWill and jettisoned some other useful pieces to save money. The Russian has made a huge profit on paper if he wants to sell.

Why do they need an incentive to be bad?

Lopez inexplicably spent the bulk of the season coming off the bench.  When he started next to Thad young they played at a 56 win pace.

11-9 when they started together in regular season, 13-13 including playoffs. Neither is a 56 game pace.

Brooklyn finished the season 13-5.  My bad... that's a 59 win pace.  I was just going off memory from the last dozen times we've had threads on this wishful thinking topic.   

But nice point about the playoffs.  Based on playoffs, Boston will go 0-82 this season.

[chambers]

guys this is seriously getting ridiculous. I cant find a single sportsbook that has the nets at over 33 wins. If you really think they will 35-40 games go place a huge bet and rub the money in our face. Otherwise, you kind of just come off like a jerk. If i say I think the Patriots are going to make the playoffs i don't really need to give much of an explanation. Everyone expects and agrees they most likely will. On the opposite end of that, if I said I thought the Jets would make the playoffs i would need a hell of a lot of advanced statistics and reasoning to make an argument that was compelling against all other predictions and statistics. In the case of the nets backers here, you are the jets fans. Every sports site has the Nets bottom of the east. You feel differently, burden is on you. Dont call people homers for agreeing with the general consensus.

THis is year 4 of people expecting the Nets to bottom out.  People have been writing them off since KG and Pierce had a slow start.  Whatever.  There's no incentive for them to be bad.  You're more likely to see Boston change gears and tank than you are to see Brooklyn end up at the bottom of the standings.

2012 49 wins
2013 44 wins
2014 38 wins
2015 ? wins

Seems to be a trend there. Lost one of their better players in DWill and jettisoned some other useful pieces to save money. The Russian has made a huge profit on paper if he wants to sell.

Why do they need an incentive to be bad?

Lopez inexplicably spent the bulk of the season coming off the bench.  When he started next to Thad young they played at a 56 win pace.

11-9 when they started together in regular season, 13-13 including playoffs. Neither is a 56 game pace.

Brooklyn finished the season 13-5.  My bad... that's a 59 win pace.  I was just going off memory from the last dozen times we've had threads on this wishful thinking topic.   

But nice point about the playoffs.  Based on playoffs, Boston will go 0-82 this season.

They finished 13-6, but they allowed a season worst 105 points per game. 
Would you agree the pick has a good chance at bottom 5 if Lopez or Jammin Joe go down for 30-40 games?

[mef730]

I wouldn't count on Brooklyn sucking.  They finished the season strong.  Brook Lopez and Thad Young made a difference.  I think our pick from them will end up in the 12-17 range.

So...

Boston made a ton of trades around the All-Star break, and then went on to finish the season as the second hottest team in the Eastern conference.  That was a total fluke, so that success will not carry over to next season. 

Brooklyn made a trade around the All-Star break, and then went on to finish the season strong.  That was because the trade made the team better, and so as a result that success full carry over to next season. 

Got it, sound logic.

From a talent standpoint, Brooklyn's late season success made a lot more sense than Boston's.  Brooklyn played well down the stretch because of allstar talent.  Boston played well down the stretch because of effort and execution driven by a wonder-coach.  Which is more sustainable?   I don't think either will be bottom 5 next year.  But if forced to guess which of the two is most likely to bottom out, it has to be the shakey Boston lineup.  Both picks probably end up 12-17.  Injuries can derail Brooklyn, but if they are healthy they should be a playoff team.  A lot has to go right for Boston to sneak into the playoffs again in spite of their blatant lack of talent, imo. 

On paper, Brooklyn looks solidly mediocre. Lopez is 20/10 impact player. Johnson is a borderline all star. There's talent there.  On paper, Boston sucks. Stevens proved last year he could MacGyver a .500 team out of paperclips and superglue, but it's hard to sustain quirk success.  I'll admit I'm a bit enthusiastic about the David Lee addition (though we already had a handful of borderline starter power forwards) , but how excited can you really get about a team when the best player is coming off a playoffs appearance where he averaged 8 minutes off the bench and had 8 coach decision DNP's?

Brook Lopez has never been a 20/10 player.  I don't expect him to become one this season.

Whatever.  The underrating of Brook Lopez is a key reason why people are incorrectly assuming Brooklyn is terrible.  He spent the last couple months of the season averaging 21, 9 and 2 on 54% shooting... the team played well.   They made the playoffs for the third year in a row. 

I get why people think they'll be terrible.  I get why people want them to be terrible.  I want them to be terrible too.  I'm not counting on it.  They should be in the playoff hunt.   Boston proved last year you can make the playoffs in the Eastern conference while arguably not having a single starter-caliber player.  This "Brooklyn = Top 5 pick" thing is just wishful thinking.

It is "wishful thinking," but it's very realistic wishful thinking.  Sure, Brook Lopez is a good player, but he has had significant trouble staying healthy, and he doesn't rebound or defend very well for his position.  Joe Johnson has been getting worse by the year over the course of the last few seasons. 
Those who are trying their hardest to look for negativity for the Celtics are reduced to making the claim that Thad Young is a high impact player.  Please, he's a nice, solid pro, but we've got about 8 or 9 players on our roster as good or better than Thad Young.

Beyond those three, the Nets are a complete mess.  Don't trust me or the rest of the "homers" on Celtics blog.  Look at the season predictions and betting odds that are out there on the internet. 

The idea that the Nets are going to stink this year is not one invented by Celtics fans to feel good about our upcoming draft pick.  Most observers, even those who aren't Celtics fans, seem to agree.

Welp here's hoping the Brooklyn pick ends up top 5.  Don't count on it.   

I still see it as finishing 12-17.  Our own pick should be 12-17 too.  And if we combine those two picks along with a handful of other 1st/2nd rounders, we might have a big enough package to fail to acquire a Top 10 pick with again.

Don't agree with anything else you said, but have to give you props for the (bolded) funny.

Mike

[Eddie20]

guys this is seriously getting ridiculous. I cant find a single sportsbook that has the nets at over 33 wins. If you really think they will 35-40 games go place a huge bet and rub the money in our face. Otherwise, you kind of just come off like a jerk. If i say I think the Patriots are going to make the playoffs i don't really need to give much of an explanation. Everyone expects and agrees they most likely will. On the opposite end of that, if I said I thought the Jets would make the playoffs i would need a hell of a lot of advanced statistics and reasoning to make an argument that was compelling against all other predictions and statistics. In the case of the nets backers here, you are the jets fans. Every sports site has the Nets bottom of the east. You feel differently, burden is on you. Dont call people homers for agreeing with the general consensus.

THis is year 4 of people expecting the Nets to bottom out.  People have been writing them off since KG and Pierce had a slow start.  Whatever.  There's no incentive for them to be bad.  You're more likely to see Boston change gears and tank than you are to see Brooklyn end up at the bottom of the standings.

Actually, I'd say it's year 2, not year 4.  people expected the addition of KG and PP to put them into contention for the most part.

They may have no incentive to be bad but they can still be bad even if they're trying to win. 

- Their top 5 to close out a game will be Jack, Johnson, Young, Lopez and either Bargnani or Bogdonovic (?).   that's not the worst 5 players that can be put on the floor in the league but that lineup is a defensive sieve.  if the game is close in the final few minutes and they're not playing a top team, they may win a few games down the stretch. not many though

- The rest of the game they'll have to rely on weak bench.  this is when I expect them to get killed in games by teams with better benches or have their starters playing longer minutes against weaker opposition to press the advantage.  Also, should the Nets top 5/6 suffer injury and miss games, they have no quality depth on their bench so the production dropoff will be significant from the starters.

- Also, the rest of the East improved.  Sure, one could argue if Detroit or Charlotte really improved with their offseason moves but IMHO, I think they did somewhat.  Certainly shouldn't be easy marks for the Nets in terms of picking up wins. 

- Nets finished 8th last year and did not improve.  The 7 teams that finished better than them should do so again.  Miami and Indy are getting back top players from injury and made other offseason moves to further improve.  They will finish better than the Nets as well.  That makes the Nets as 10th best tops right there.  NY will be better -- Melo/Afflalo/Lopez isn't all that worse off than the Nets -- could even argue that with Melo being superior to anyone on the Nets, the Knicks could finish better in the end.  Charlotte and Detroit have more overall talent so they could (and I think should) finish better than the Nets.  Orlando has some up-and-coming talent.  I would not be surprised to see them pass the Nets either (tbh, I'm anticipating that to happen).

- can only really say the Philly is certain to finish with a worse record.

Still expect the Brooklyn pick to end up in the 12-17 range.  The majority of arguments made to explain why they will bottom out can also be applied to the Boston Celtics.  "The East got better... their late season success isn't sustainable... lack of talent", etc.

The problem with that line of thinking is that the Celtics are a younger team and will likely improve from last season. The C's have also improved their roster, while the Nets have regressed. There is also talk that Joe Johnson, who averaged 35 minutes last season, will have his minutes reduced.

Players that will get playing time and excluding end of bench guys/D-league bound guys

* 14-15 minutes per game in parentheses

Cs in
Johnson
Lee

Cs out
Bass (23.5)
Datome (10.7)



Nets in
Larkin
Robinson
Ellington
Bargnani


Nets out
Williams (34.9)
Teletovic (22.3)
Anderson (23.6)
Plumlee (21.3)

The Nets have a pretty bad roster when analyzed objectively (cough, cough) and not just trying to argue for the sake of argument. Also, in a league that is so PG dominant the Nets not only have the worst PG duo in the league (Jack/Larkin), but one of the worst duos of the last several seasons.

Unfortunately that is what this has dissolved to. You got people on one side of the "arguement" pointing out objective third party rankings, advanced statistics and some things that are common sense (35 year old players regress) while the other side is stomping their feet and saying "meh i dont care about any stats, facts or arguments and i'm taking my bad and ball and going home."

No "argument" to be made.  They still have their franchise players.   I'd be shocked to see Brooklyn finish in the bottom 5.  There's no way to "win" an argument that is purely a prediction.  Just have to see how the season plays out.  Diving into this deeply is a waste of effort.  I've seen Joe Johnson effectively run point in the past.  Lopez is still a beast when healthy.   Should be plenty mediocre this year.

Well basically you're saying that this 'perennial playoff contender' with 'franchise players' ends up somewhere between the 12th and 17th pick. The Jazz finished 12th last year, so you've left yourself a wiiiiide margin for being right haha.

The majority consensus here is that they end up 10th-13th in the East, with a pick inside the top 10 for us. But if they have a major injury (reasonably possible) then they'll really crash hard.
Thin bench+ (as you describe) injury prone/aging 'franchise' players ain't the recipe for success.

So even if Lopez goes down, or Johnson goes down, you think the worst they can do is finish with the 12th pick?

Lol if either of those guys was on our team you'd probably be calling them scrubs- but that's what I like about your input to the board- you're not afraid to make people question their conclusions- it's just very hard to get you to question yours.

Welp let's hope the "consensus" ends up being worth more than the typical going rate of jack squat.  Boston was supposed to be a bottom 3 team last year.  It didn't work out.  Brooklyn will be fine.

I think that could be where you thought they would finish, but not an opinion of the masses. That said, given your impressive track record of Celtics preseason predictions I think it's actually a plus that you think they'll be bad.

Remember this C's 14-15 preseason prediction?

30 wins 12th seed

I mean you were only off by 25% in wins/losses and 5 seeds. You're the Ace Rothstein of Celtics blog.

[cb8883]

Brooklyn could contend for the National Championship with that roster. That team is beyond screwed. Brook Lopez if healthy has more talent than anyone on the Celtics roster but he's never going to be healthy. JJ is far too old to be a focal point. But I would still believe they finish just barely outside the playoff hunt. Probably around the same spot as Boston. Miami and Indiana will overtake them both. Maybe Orlando and Detroit too.