As is, are the Nets a title contender?

[MarcusSmartFanClub]

I don’t know how to project production for Ben Simmons and Kyrie. They are big time gambles at this point.

KD is not in the same boat, but I think it’s hard to predict how many games he will play. We already have an injury prone player in Rob Williams to worry about.

Bad trade- don’t do it!

[Vermont Green]

I interpreted the question to be relative to as is, how good are the Nets:

It is unclear to me exactly what BNK has to work with.  I guess the starters might be:

Kyrie
Harris
Durant
Simmons
Claxton

With ONeale, Curry, Mills, Warren, Thomas

That is a pretty good team but to me, lacks that kind of blue collar size that is needed.  Someone mentioned that Myles Turner might be a good add.  I agree with that.  He could add a lot to their big rotation.  Dwight Howard might be helpful too.

But as they stand now, I don't think they are a final 4 type of team, which to me is a title contender.  Simmons is such a wild card though.  If they are able to get some bigs and Simmons does play to his full potential, this team no doubt could be a threat.  I just don't think they will.

[pokeKingCurtis]

member when Ben Simmons and Embiid were a threat?

[Cman]

member when Ben Simmons and Embiid were a threat?

 

[Phantom255x]

I mean sure, they could be. But how can anyone say for sure when no one knows what Kyrie and Simmons are thinking and how "available" they'll even be. Simmons hasn't played for nearly 1.5 years now. Kyrie is a mental case already. And I'm not even sure they have the coach who can help (Nash)

[Celtics2021]

They’re a very loose contender.  Most lineups are going to feature two or three bad defenders.  Not below average, but bad, in Kyrie, Harris, Curry, and Mills.  On top of that, injuries are going to be a major concern, both throughout the regular season and postseason. Kevin Durant played 55 games last year, and that was the most of anyone in that proposed starting lineup.  (Yes, Kyrie’s absences were somewhat self-inflicted, but he’s played more than 60 games once in the last 5 seasons, so the point remains).

So yeah, while we always caveat “if a team can stay healthy”, it’s a much more relevant caveat with the Nets, and it extends to their bench, with a key reserve in TJ Warren having not played in two years.  They can score points, a lot of them, and perhaps that could be enough, especially if they also have a miraculous season in terms of health.  But between the high potential for simultaneous unavailability for several key players and the significant defensive shortcomings up and down their rotation, I don’t think they’re in the top 10 of potential contenders.

[Roy H.]

They’re a very loose contender.  Most lineups are going to feature two or three bad defenders.  Not below average, but bad, in Kyrie, Harris, Curry, and Mills.  On top of that, injuries are going to be a major concern, both throughout the regular season and postseason. Kevin Durant played 55 games last year, and that was the most of anyone in that proposed starting lineup.  (Yes, Kyrie’s absences were somewhat self-inflicted, but he’s played more than 60 games once in the last 5 seasons, so the point remains).

So yeah, while we always caveat “if a team can stay healthy”, it’s a much more relevant caveat with the Nets, and it extends to their bench, with a key reserve in TJ Warren having not played in two years.  They can score points, a lot of them, and perhaps that could be enough, especially if they also have a miraculous season in terms of health.  But between the high potential for simultaneous unavailability for several key players and the significant defensive shortcomings up and down their rotation, I don’t think they’re in the top 10 of potential contenders.

Devil's advocate:  we beat the Nets by a total of 18 points over four games, including Game 1 at home that required a buzzer beater.  They've lost Bruce Brown from that team, but have added Simmons, Harris, O'Neale and Warren.

Outside of the Top 10 might be overselling things if the team gets focused?

[Celtics2021]

They’re a very loose contender.  Most lineups are going to feature two or three bad defenders.  Not below average, but bad, in Kyrie, Harris, Curry, and Mills.  On top of that, injuries are going to be a major concern, both throughout the regular season and postseason. Kevin Durant played 55 games last year, and that was the most of anyone in that proposed starting lineup.  (Yes, Kyrie’s absences were somewhat self-inflicted, but he’s played more than 60 games once in the last 5 seasons, so the point remains).

So yeah, while we always caveat “if a team can stay healthy”, it’s a much more relevant caveat with the Nets, and it extends to their bench, with a key reserve in TJ Warren having not played in two years.  They can score points, a lot of them, and perhaps that could be enough, especially if they also have a miraculous season in terms of health.  But between the high potential for simultaneous unavailability for several key players and the significant defensive shortcomings up and down their rotation, I don’t think they’re in the top 10 of potential contenders.

Devil's advocate:  we beat the Nets by a total of 18 points over four games, including Game 1 at home that required a buzzer beater.  They've lost Bruce Brown from that team, but have added Simmons, Harris, O'Neale and Warren.

Outside of the Top 10 might be overselling things if the team gets focused?

I get what you’re saying, but the playoffs are a grueling two months, and I don’t think that collection of players can make it through four rounds.  One round, against anyone, sure.  But not four rounds.

[MarcusSmartFanClub]

They’re a very loose contender.  Most lineups are going to feature two or three bad defenders.  Not below average, but bad, in Kyrie, Harris, Curry, and Mills.  On top of that, injuries are going to be a major concern, both throughout the regular season and postseason. Kevin Durant played 55 games last year, and that was the most of anyone in that proposed starting lineup.  (Yes, Kyrie’s absences were somewhat self-inflicted, but he’s played more than 60 games once in the last 5 seasons, so the point remains).

So yeah, while we always caveat “if a team can stay healthy”, it’s a much more relevant caveat with the Nets, and it extends to their bench, with a key reserve in TJ Warren having not played in two years.  They can score points, a lot of them, and perhaps that could be enough, especially if they also have a miraculous season in terms of health.  But between the high potential for simultaneous unavailability for several key players and the significant defensive shortcomings up and down their rotation, I don’t think they’re in the top 10 of potential contenders.

Devil's advocate:  we beat the Nets by a total of 18 points over four games, including Game 1 at home that required a buzzer beater.  They've lost Bruce Brown from that team, but have added Simmons, Harris, O'Neale and Warren.

Outside of the Top 10 might be overselling things if the team gets focused?

1) We pounded the Nets. If we played 10 games, the Celtics would have won 9.

2) TJ Warren, Harris, and O'neale are additions for sure. Why are we to assume that Ben Simmons is going to add value to the Nets?

3) Steve Nash still isn't a good coach.

4) Their best player (KD) has requested a trade.

5) They are relying on Kyrie Irving. Combined with Simmons, they have the two least reliable players in the NBA.

[SHAQATTACK]

They’re a very loose contender.  Most lineups are going to feature two or three bad defenders.  Not below average, but bad, in Kyrie, Harris, Curry, and Mills.  On top of that, injuries are going to be a major concern, both throughout the regular season and postseason. Kevin Durant played 55 games last year, and that was the most of anyone in that proposed starting lineup.  (Yes, Kyrie’s absences were somewhat self-inflicted, but he’s played more than 60 games once in the last 5 seasons, so the point remains).

So yeah, while we always caveat “if a team can stay healthy”, it’s a much more relevant caveat with the Nets, and it extends to their bench, with a key reserve in TJ Warren having not played in two years.  They can score points, a lot of them, and perhaps that could be enough, especially if they also have a miraculous season in terms of health.  But between the high potential for simultaneous unavailability for several key players and the significant defensive shortcomings up and down their rotation, I don’t think they’re in the top 10 of potential contenders.

Devil's advocate:  we beat the Nets by a total of 18 points over four games, including Game 1 at home that required a buzzer beater.  They've lost Bruce Brown from that team, but have added Simmons, Harris, O'Neale and Warren.

Outside of the Top 10 might be overselling things if the team gets focused?

1) We pounded the Nets. If we played 10 games, the Celtics would have won 9.

2) TJ Warren, Harris, and O'neale are additions for sure. Why are we to assume that Ben Simmons is going to add value to the Nets?

3) Steve Nash still isn't a good coach.

4) Their best player (KD) has requested a trade.

5) They are relying on Kyrie Irving. Combined with Simmons, they have the two least reliable players in the NBA.

#5 is the killer …two fruitcakes on the same squad

[keevsnick]

They wouldn't be the favorite, probably behind both Bos and Mil odds wise in the east.

But it also wouldn't SHOCK me if they won it all. if Kyrie and Simmons just show up and play the whole year relatively healthy they could be very good.

[Surferdad]

They’re a very loose contender.  Most lineups are going to feature two or three bad defenders.  Not below average, but bad, in Kyrie, Harris, Curry, and Mills.  On top of that, injuries are going to be a major concern, both throughout the regular season and postseason. Kevin Durant played 55 games last year, and that was the most of anyone in that proposed starting lineup.  (Yes, Kyrie’s absences were somewhat self-inflicted, but he’s played more than 60 games once in the last 5 seasons, so the point remains).

So yeah, while we always caveat “if a team can stay healthy”, it’s a much more relevant caveat with the Nets, and it extends to their bench, with a key reserve in TJ Warren having not played in two years.  They can score points, a lot of them, and perhaps that could be enough, especially if they also have a miraculous season in terms of health.  But between the high potential for simultaneous unavailability for several key players and the significant defensive shortcomings up and down their rotation, I don’t think they’re in the top 10 of potential contenders.

Devil's advocate:  we beat the Nets by a total of 18 points over four games, including Game 1 at home that required a buzzer beater.  They've lost Bruce Brown from that team, but have added Simmons, Harris, O'Neale and Warren.

Outside of the Top 10 might be overselling things if the team gets focused?

1) We pounded the Nets. If we played 10 games, the Celtics would have won 9.

2) TJ Warren, Harris, and O'neale are additions for sure. Why are we to assume that Ben Simmons is going to add value to the Nets?

3) Steve Nash still isn't a good coach.

4) Their best player (KD) has requested a trade.

5) They are relying on Kyrie Irving. Combined with Simmons, they have the two least reliable players in the NBA.

#5 is the killer …two fruitcakes on the same squad

Yup, and #3 is really important too. It's more than Nash just being totally mediocre as an X's and O's guy, he also has not proven that he can manage this team and its varied personalities. Then add on that this team doesn't have much experience playing with each other. ZERO for Simmons, Warren, O'Neale with their superstars.

[Roy H.]

1) We pounded the Nets. If we played 10 games, the Celtics would have won 9.

I disagree.  If Game 1 goes differently, I don't know that we would have won the next nine.  A lot of those games were close.

[Surferdad]

1) We pounded the Nets. If we played 10 games, the Celtics would have won 9.

I disagree.  If Game 1 goes differently, I don't know that we would have won the next nine.  A lot of those games were close.

Hmmm...maybe. If the Nets can't win close games with Irving and Durant, then they are missing some fundamentals of a championship level squad, which is what this thread is all about. I see no reason why the C's could not have won that series in 5 if they lost the 1st game.

[Roy H.]

Marc Stein: Update: The Nets have moved into advanced discussions with free agent forward Markieff Morris as Brooklyn seeks to bolster its frontcourt, league sources say. My earlier around-the-league notes column: marcstein.substack.com/p/nba-notes-on… – via Twitter TheSteinLine

Michael Scotto: Sources: The Brooklyn Nets have signed forward Yuta Watanabe to a one-year, non-guaranteed deal @hoopshype has learned. – via Twitter MikeAScotto

Claxton / Markieff / Sharpe
Durant / Warren / Watanabe
Harris / O'Neale / Edwards
Kyrie / Curry / Thomas
Simmons / Mills / Sumner

2-way:  Duke