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

[Rondo9]

They are building for the future regardless. They have no chance of making themselves into contenders in the next three years. So why not do everything they possibly can to set themselves up down the road? The Nets should be trading for future assets and future cap flexibility. What they do to keep themselves mildly competitive in the short-term is irrelevant.  Their fans will not be inspired by an 8th seed.

Of course they have a chance if they land a free agent.  They have Lopez, Young, and Johnson so it isn't like there isn't a base.  Granted Johnson is old, but Lopez and Young are not.  A couple of mid-tier free agents and they could easily be an Atlanta type team.  People also seem to forget Johnson expires next summer (it was Williams that did not), leaving just Young and Lopez as long term contracts of any size.  They could easily sign 2 max free agents next summer.  All of that is helped if they make the playoffs.  I mean that is what we keep saying about the Celtics, right?  It works for other teams as well.

You forgot the Cardinal Rule of Celticsblog.   Optimism that applies to the Celts doesn't apply to other teams, while pessimism that applies to other teams doesn't apply to the Celts.

Turn optimism and pessimism around and it is just as true.

[BDeCosta26]

I don't think the Nets will play B Lopez or Joe Johnson lots of minutes in a year they have no chance of competing.

they don't own their pick and Johnson is old.  They have no incentive to be bad at all, they have no incentive to shut down, etc.

They also have no incentive to drive their guys into the ground and risk injury in Lopez case, or to make any "win now" moves that will make them marginally better in the short term including not trading Johnson if they get a decent differ for him.

All the moves they made this off season say their biggest interest right now is re-establishing flexibility and acquiring assets that can make them better in the future. If trading Johnson can get them a 1st round pick in return, it seems like they'll do that. If someone makes a pretty good offer for Lopez involving young prospects and/or picks, they'll probably take that too. What they won't do is sacrifice what little flexibility and assets they have left, or turn down the chance to get more, just to give us the worst pick possible out of spite.

Besides, that team is so thin outside the starting 5 (which itself is pretty poor) I really don't see any way they land any higher than the top 10. With Miami healthy, Paul George back, Jefferson healthy in Charlotte, Melo back in NY, plus Orlando and Detroit looking a lot better I'd be surprised if they're even in the conversation for the 8th seed.

They don't need flexibility though with the cap increasing and not owning their next 3 first round picks.  Brooklyn has no incentive to be bad.  None at all.  Even if they aren't going to make the playoffs, they have no incentive to give Boston a better pick.  They will try to win every single game for the next 3 years.

But what's their incentive to be good? Just to tick Boston off?  I think they'll make decisions for the long term

when you don't own your next 3 picks, long term is 4 years, they aren't going to make decisions for 4 years down the road that negatively affect the win column now.  The incentive to be good is to make the playoffs, get extra money, and either entice a free agent or build enough trade value up that they can actually rebuild through the draft without actually owning their own pick.

What do you mean, they already have?  Getting out of D-Will's contract, using Plumlee to trade up in the 1st round, pretty heavily shopping Johnson, setting up their roster so that the likes of Bogy, RHJ, Brown get heavy minutes, you really don't think that negatively effects their win column in the interest of building a better future? Of course it does.

Do you also think they would turn down a halfway decent 1st round pick for Joe Johnson if someone offered it? No way, they'd take that deal in a second. Same applies to Lopez and Thad Young. Do you really think they'll turn down a decent package of prospects, picks and/or expirings just to get as close to the 8th seed as possible? No way. They re-signed those guys because no matter what way you look at it, resigning them is much better then losing them for nothing.

They're obviously not gonna "tank". But as I said before, they're trying to re-establish flexibility and gain assets. They're not gonna sacrifice what little they have to be a little more mediocre. Now, part of the reason they made the moves they did was to be in the best possible position to chase FA's but as for this year's team, they're obviously not just trying to maximize the amount of W's in the win column.

 I understand you and Pho are the kings of all things pessimism, but we have legit reasons to be excited about the Nets pick. They're not gonna try to lose but they're obviously not trying to give us the worst pick possible at all costs either. By most people's estimation, them giving us a pick in the 11-14 range is about their best possible scenario. Saying I expect it to be top 10 isn't overly optimistic by any means. And beyond the fact that this is a Celtics site and you 'd expect to see a fair amount of optimism, in my time here it's pretty clear there's more unwarranted pessimism than their is unwarranted optimism.

[positivitize]

Brooke Lopez is Greg Monroe with more injury problems and worse defense.
Thad Young is an older Tobias Harris without the star potential.
Andrea Bargnani is a older, slower Kelley Olynyk without the playmaking.
Joe Johnson is a rapidly aging former All-Star who hasn't been good for a few seasons.
Jarrett Jack is a solid backup point guard / poor man's Isaiah Thomas.

Replace their bench with our summer league team(minus Smart) and there wouldn't be much of a negative impact.

These are the guys that are going to make the playoffs in a east that's improved from last year?
I don't buy it.

Let's go ahead and say that Lionel Hollins works magic on the offensive end and all these offence first, ball dominant players magically mesh perfectly. The Nets score 110-115 a night with a back up point guard running the show. Who on their team is going to lift their hands or move their feet and stop every other team from scoring 120? In a best case scenario, the Nets have a proficient team on one half of the ball. Even in the lEastern conference, that will not get you into the playoffs.

Personally, I doubt the ability of a group of aging ball dominant has-beens to gel cohesively, even in an environment as historically stellar as the Nets', and even under the coaching mastermind Hollins.

I predict our pick falling into the 4-8 range. Even better if injuries happen to older players.

[Vox_Populi]

Unless the East is even worse than originally thought, and it usually finds ways to do so, I think Brooklyn will be lucky to win 30+ games. They lost key rotation players in Williams, Teletovic, and Anderson and added players who played decent minutes on incredibly bad teams or who barely played at all: Bargnani, Ellington, Larkin, Quincy Miller and Robinson.

I did a rudimentary win estimation using minute projection weighted BPM and the results were ugly. I have them winning about 23 games. Seven of their fifteen players were below replacement level last season - i.e. worth a minimum contract - only three guys on their team had a positive BPM. Johnson is getting older. Lopez barely played over 50% of his potential minutes last season. It's very likely the Celtics get at least a top 10 pick from them next season.

[LarBrd33]

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.

[crimson_stallion]

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.

Brook Lopez still can't be counted on to play, Deron Williams is gone leaving them with Jarret Jack (who is really a 6th man calibre guy) starting at PG.  Joe Johnson dropped off in a massive way last year and will only get worse, and their bench is absolutely horrendous.

Last year it was a VERY tight finish for positions 7-10, with Boston, Miami, Brooklyn and Indiana all pretty much tied over the final stretch, and the final standings not really decided until the final game or two. 

Out of those four teams Brooklyn is really the only team that didn't add anything significant.

* Indiana gets George back, but lost Hibbert and West
* Boston added Lee and Johnson, added some intriguing rookies, and will see youth develop
* Miami get a Healthy Wade and Bosh back and a full season with Dragic

Indiana could potentially be as bad as Brooklyn (or worse) but as long as they have Paul George and a decent supporting case they have some chance of being decent.  A lineup of George Hill, Monta Ellis, Paul George, Jodan Hill and Ian Mahinmi is better than what the Nets have, IMHO.  Paul George is far better than Brook Lopez, and Monta Ellis is better than Thad Young.  George Hill is probably substantially better than Joe Johnson at this point too.  I think Indiana will be better than Brooklyn, personally.

Pistons?  They will likely start Jennings, Jackson, Ilyasova, Morris and Drummond - that's a pretty decent starting five.  Their bench isn't great, but they do have Meeks, Blake, Caldwell-Pope and Stanley Johnson so I've seen worse.   They also finally added a quality coach in Van Gundy.  I think they'll improve, and I think they'll be better than the Nets.

I think the Hornets will be above the Nets too, and while they are pretty close .   

Philly should be the worst team in the NBA - hands down.  I can't see any possible way they couldn't be, since Embiid is out and that basically leaves them resting their entire hopes on two bigs (Noel and Okafor) who have combined one year of experience.   

The Knicks should be not far off Philly, since they really only have three NBA players on their roster in Melo / Lopez / Afflalo.  They have O'Quinn and Seraphin but neither of those guys is close to starting caliber.  Good as Melo is, this team really should be fighiting Philly for the wooden spoon.

Orlando have sucked the last few years, but I think they should improve this time around.  The young Trio of Payton, Oladipo and Gordon give them a solid defensive base that should improve - while 

[mef730]

I don't think the Nets will play B Lopez or Joe Johnson lots of minutes in a year they have no chance of competing.

they don't own their pick and Johnson is old.  They have no incentive to be bad at all, they have no incentive to shut down, etc.

They also have no incentive to drive their guys into the ground and risk injury in Lopez case, or to make any "win now" moves that will make them marginally better in the short term including not trading Johnson if they get a decent differ for him.

All the moves they made this off season say their biggest interest right now is re-establishing flexibility and acquiring assets that can make them better in the future. If trading Johnson can get them a 1st round pick in return, it seems like they'll do that. If someone makes a pretty good offer for Lopez involving young prospects and/or picks, they'll probably take that too. What they won't do is sacrifice what little flexibility and assets they have left, or turn down the chance to get more, just to give us the worst pick possible out of spite.

Besides, that team is so thin outside the starting 5 (which itself is pretty poor) I really don't see any way they land any higher than the top 10. With Miami healthy, Paul George back, Jefferson healthy in Charlotte, Melo back in NY, plus Orlando and Detroit looking a lot better I'd be surprised if they're even in the conversation for the 8th seed.

They don't need flexibility though with the cap increasing and not owning their next 3 first round picks.  Brooklyn has no incentive to be bad.  None at all.  Even if they aren't going to make the playoffs, they have no incentive to give Boston a better pick.  They will try to win every single game for the next 3 years.

But what's their incentive to be good? Just to tick Boston off?  I think they'll make decisions for the long term

Maybe we should rephrase. They have no incentive to be good but, unlike other teams with their own draft picks, they have no incentive to be bad, either.

Mike

[Eja117]

I think they have one incentive to be "bad". Play the young guys to develop them and keep minutes off Lopez and Johnson.

Maybe not "bad" but worse than they maybe otherwise would be

[LarBrd33]

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.

Brook Lopez still can't be counted on to play, Deron Williams is gone leaving them with Jarret Jack (who is really a 6th man calibre guy) starting at PG.  Joe Johnson dropped off in a massive way last year and will only get worse, and their bench is absolutely horrendous.

Last year it was a VERY tight finish for positions 7-10, with Boston, Miami, Brooklyn and Indiana all pretty much tied over the final stretch, and the final standings not really decided until the final game or two. 

Out of those four teams Brooklyn is really the only team that didn't add anything significant.

* Indiana gets George back, but lost Hibbert and West
* Boston added Lee and Johnson, added some intriguing rookies, and will see youth develop
* Miami get a Healthy Wade and Bosh back and a full season with Dragic

Indiana could potentially be as bad as Brooklyn (or worse) but as long as they have Paul George and a decent supporting case they have some chance of being decent.  A lineup of George Hill, Monta Ellis, Paul George, Jodan Hill and Ian Mahinmi is better than what the Nets have, IMHO.  Paul George is far better than Brook Lopez, and Monta Ellis is better than Thad Young.  George Hill is probably substantially better than Joe Johnson at this point too.  I think Indiana will be better than Brooklyn, personally.

Pistons?  They will likely start Jennings, Jackson, Ilyasova, Morris and Drummond - that's a pretty decent starting five.  Their bench isn't great, but they do have Meeks, Blake, Caldwell-Pope and Stanley Johnson so I've seen worse.   They also finally added a quality coach in Van Gundy.  I think they'll improve, and I think they'll be better than the Nets.

I think the Hornets will be above the Nets too, and while they are pretty close .   

Philly should be the worst team in the NBA - hands down.  I can't see any possible way they couldn't be, since Embiid is out and that basically leaves them resting their entire hopes on two bigs (Noel and Okafor) who have combined one year of experience.   

The Knicks should be not far off Philly, since they really only have three NBA players on their roster in Melo / Lopez / Afflalo.  They have O'Quinn and Seraphin but neither of those guys is close to starting caliber.  Good as Melo is, this team really should be fighiting Philly for the wooden spoon.

Orlando have sucked the last few years, but I think they should improve this time around.  The young Trio of Payton, Oladipo and Gordon give them a solid defensive base that should improve - while

Imo the unprotected 2016 Celtics pick is more valuable than the unprotected 2016 Brooklyn pick.

[Csfan1984]

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.

Brook Lopez still can't be counted on to play, Deron Williams is gone leaving them with Jarret Jack (who is really a 6th man calibre guy) starting at PG.  Joe Johnson dropped off in a massive way last year and will only get worse, and their bench is absolutely horrendous.

Last year it was a VERY tight finish for positions 7-10, with Boston, Miami, Brooklyn and Indiana all pretty much tied over the final stretch, and the final standings not really decided until the final game or two. 

Out of those four teams Brooklyn is really the only team that didn't add anything significant.

* Indiana gets George back, but lost Hibbert and West
* Boston added Lee and Johnson, added some intriguing rookies, and will see youth develop
* Miami get a Healthy Wade and Bosh back and a full season with Dragic

Indiana could potentially be as bad as Brooklyn (or worse) but as long as they have Paul George and a decent supporting case they have some chance of being decent.  A lineup of George Hill, Monta Ellis, Paul George, Jodan Hill and Ian Mahinmi is better than what the Nets have, IMHO.  Paul George is far better than Brook Lopez, and Monta Ellis is better than Thad Young.  George Hill is probably substantially better than Joe Johnson at this point too.  I think Indiana will be better than Brooklyn, personally.

Pistons?  They will likely start Jennings, Jackson, Ilyasova, Morris and Drummond - that's a pretty decent starting five.  Their bench isn't great, but they do have Meeks, Blake, Caldwell-Pope and Stanley Johnson so I've seen worse.   They also finally added a quality coach in Van Gundy.  I think they'll improve, and I think they'll be better than the Nets.

I think the Hornets will be above the Nets too, and while they are pretty close .   

Philly should be the worst team in the NBA - hands down.  I can't see any possible way they couldn't be, since Embiid is out and that basically leaves them resting their entire hopes on two bigs (Noel and Okafor) who have combined one year of experience.   

The Knicks should be not far off Philly, since they really only have three NBA players on their roster in Melo / Lopez / Afflalo.  They have O'Quinn and Seraphin but neither of those guys is close to starting caliber.  Good as Melo is, this team really should be fighiting Philly for the wooden spoon.

Orlando have sucked the last few years, but I think they should improve this time around.  The young Trio of Payton, Oladipo and Gordon give them a solid defensive base that should improve - while

Imo the unprotected 2016 Celtics pick is more valuable than the unprotected 2016 Brooklyn pick.

Straight trolling them lol

[SHAQATTACK]

Lopez will make the all star team,  lead them to the play offs ,   lead the NBA stats for big men....


Why?


Because WE need for them to be extra rotten this year... What else



Celtics luck ....

[crimson_stallion]

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.

Brook Lopez still can't be counted on to play, Deron Williams is gone leaving them with Jarret Jack (who is really a 6th man calibre guy) starting at PG.  Joe Johnson dropped off in a massive way last year and will only get worse, and their bench is absolutely horrendous.

Last year it was a VERY tight finish for positions 7-10, with Boston, Miami, Brooklyn and Indiana all pretty much tied over the final stretch, and the final standings not really decided until the final game or two. 

Out of those four teams Brooklyn is really the only team that didn't add anything significant.

* Indiana gets George back, but lost Hibbert and West
* Boston added Lee and Johnson, added some intriguing rookies, and will see youth develop
* Miami get a Healthy Wade and Bosh back and a full season with Dragic

Indiana could potentially be as bad as Brooklyn (or worse) but as long as they have Paul George and a decent supporting case they have some chance of being decent.  A lineup of George Hill, Monta Ellis, Paul George, Jodan Hill and Ian Mahinmi is better than what the Nets have, IMHO.  Paul George is far better than Brook Lopez, and Monta Ellis is better than Thad Young.  George Hill is probably substantially better than Joe Johnson at this point too.  I think Indiana will be better than Brooklyn, personally.

Pistons?  They will likely start Jennings, Jackson, Ilyasova, Morris and Drummond - that's a pretty decent starting five.  Their bench isn't great, but they do have Meeks, Blake, Caldwell-Pope and Stanley Johnson so I've seen worse.   They also finally added a quality coach in Van Gundy.  I think they'll improve, and I think they'll be better than the Nets.

I think the Hornets will be above the Nets too, and while they are pretty close .   

Philly should be the worst team in the NBA - hands down.  I can't see any possible way they couldn't be, since Embiid is out and that basically leaves them resting their entire hopes on two bigs (Noel and Okafor) who have combined one year of experience.   

The Knicks should be not far off Philly, since they really only have three NBA players on their roster in Melo / Lopez / Afflalo.  They have O'Quinn and Seraphin but neither of those guys is close to starting caliber.  Good as Melo is, this team really should be fighiting Philly for the wooden spoon.

Orlando have sucked the last few years, but I think they should improve this time around.  The young Trio of Payton, Oladipo and Gordon give them a solid defensive base that should improve - while

Imo the unprotected 2016 Celtics pick is more valuable than the unprotected 2016 Brooklyn pick.

Sorry, but I can't think of any rational explanation for this thought process.

Boston finished with a better record last year than Brooklyn did, so for all intents and purposes Boston was a better team than Brooklyn last year.

Now:

1) It's very hard to argue that Boston did not improve this year - we added two bigs who are both arguable upgrades over our current bigs, we didn't lose any players of note (unless you consider the loss of Bass as a move that makes us worse), with added some young rookies who may or may not have an impact, and a large portion of our roster is 25 or under (so chances are, at least somebody on our team will get better this year).  That's not even taking in to account Brad Stevens, who improved dramatically as a coach last year and is likely to only further improve as he gets more familiar with the game and gets more flexibility to mold the team to his liking.

2) It's very hard to argue that Brooklyn did improve this year.  The player who had the highest Real-Plus-Minus on the team (Deron) is gone, and the only pieces they added are Bargnani (who struggled to even make an impact on the wooden spoon Knicks last year) and a Rookie.  Also, they had a very rare healthy season from Brook Lopez last year, which is unlikely to be repeated.  Plus most of their key players are aged enough to the point where there is no real upside left in them - so the chance of the team improving from youth development is minimal.

The only way you could make a rational argument would be if you argue that Boston has gotten significant worse this year, that Brooklyn has gotten significantly better - i don't see a rationale for either argument.

[Moranis]

I don't think the Nets will play B Lopez or Joe Johnson lots of minutes in a year they have no chance of competing.

they don't own their pick and Johnson is old.  They have no incentive to be bad at all, they have no incentive to shut down, etc.

They also have no incentive to drive their guys into the ground and risk injury in Lopez case, or to make any "win now" moves that will make them marginally better in the short term including not trading Johnson if they get a decent differ for him.

All the moves they made this off season say their biggest interest right now is re-establishing flexibility and acquiring assets that can make them better in the future. If trading Johnson can get them a 1st round pick in return, it seems like they'll do that. If someone makes a pretty good offer for Lopez involving young prospects and/or picks, they'll probably take that too. What they won't do is sacrifice what little flexibility and assets they have left, or turn down the chance to get more, just to give us the worst pick possible out of spite.

Besides, that team is so thin outside the starting 5 (which itself is pretty poor) I really don't see any way they land any higher than the top 10. With Miami healthy, Paul George back, Jefferson healthy in Charlotte, Melo back in NY, plus Orlando and Detroit looking a lot better I'd be surprised if they're even in the conversation for the 8th seed.

They don't need flexibility though with the cap increasing and not owning their next 3 first round picks.  Brooklyn has no incentive to be bad.  None at all.  Even if they aren't going to make the playoffs, they have no incentive to give Boston a better pick.  They will try to win every single game for the next 3 years.

But what's their incentive to be good? Just to tick Boston off?  I think they'll make decisions for the long term

when you don't own your next 3 picks, long term is 4 years, they aren't going to make decisions for 4 years down the road that negatively affect the win column now.  The incentive to be good is to make the playoffs, get extra money, and either entice a free agent or build enough trade value up that they can actually rebuild through the draft without actually owning their own pick.

What do you mean, they already have?  Getting out of D-Will's contract, using Plumlee to trade up in the 1st round, pretty heavily shopping Johnson, setting up their roster so that the likes of Bogy, RHJ, Brown get heavy minutes, you really don't think that negatively effects their win column in the interest of building a better future? Of course it does.

Do you also think they would turn down a halfway decent 1st round pick for Joe Johnson if someone offered it? No way, they'd take that deal in a second. Same applies to Lopez and Thad Young. Do you really think they'll turn down a decent package of prospects, picks and/or expirings just to get as close to the 8th seed as possible? No way. They re-signed those guys because no matter what way you look at it, resigning them is much better then losing them for nothing.

They're obviously not gonna "tank". But as I said before, they're trying to re-establish flexibility and gain assets. They're not gonna sacrifice what little they have to be a little more mediocre. Now, part of the reason they made the moves they did was to be in the best possible position to chase FA's but as for this year's team, they're obviously not just trying to maximize the amount of W's in the win column.

 I understand you and Pho are the kings of all things pessimism, but we have legit reasons to be excited about the Nets pick. They're not gonna try to lose but they're obviously not trying to give us the worst pick possible at all costs either. By most people's estimation, them giving us a pick in the 11-14 range is about their best possible scenario. Saying I expect it to be top 10 isn't overly optimistic by any means. And beyond the fact that this is a Celtics site and you 'd expect to see a fair amount of optimism, in my time here it's pretty clear there's more unwarranted pessimism than their is unwarranted optimism.

I think they will be a mid 30 win team, which is probably a pick in the 11 to 14 range. 

I think acquiring RHJ for Plumlee might actually help the roster.  They need solid wing defense, which is absolutely what RHJ can bring.  As for Williams, he was a distraction who took far too many nights off.  They might actually be better without him, much like Boston was better without Rondo.  Doesn't make sense on its face, but addition by subtraction happens a lot more than one would expect. 

Brooklyn finished last year pretty well.  young and lopez had a very strong chemistry and looked good together.  Couple that with no incentive to lose games, and I truly believe the only way that Boston gets a top 5 pick from Brooklyn is hitting in the lottery.

[crimson_stallion]

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.

[MJohnnyboy]

I don't think the Nets will play B Lopez or Joe Johnson lots of minutes in a year they have no chance of competing.

they don't own their pick and Johnson is old.  They have no incentive to be bad at all, they have no incentive to shut down, etc.

They also have no incentive to drive their guys into the ground and risk injury in Lopez case, or to make any "win now" moves that will make them marginally better in the short term including not trading Johnson if they get a decent differ for him.

All the moves they made this off season say their biggest interest right now is re-establishing flexibility and acquiring assets that can make them better in the future. If trading Johnson can get them a 1st round pick in return, it seems like they'll do that. If someone makes a pretty good offer for Lopez involving young prospects and/or picks, they'll probably take that too. What they won't do is sacrifice what little flexibility and assets they have left, or turn down the chance to get more, just to give us the worst pick possible out of spite.

Besides, that team is so thin outside the starting 5 (which itself is pretty poor) I really don't see any way they land any higher than the top 10. With Miami healthy, Paul George back, Jefferson healthy in Charlotte, Melo back in NY, plus Orlando and Detroit looking a lot better I'd be surprised if they're even in the conversation for the 8th seed.

They don't need flexibility though with the cap increasing and not owning their next 3 first round picks.  Brooklyn has no incentive to be bad.  None at all.  Even if they aren't going to make the playoffs, they have no incentive to give Boston a better pick.  They will try to win every single game for the next 3 years.

But what's their incentive to be good? Just to tick Boston off?  I think they'll make decisions for the long term

when you don't own your next 3 picks, long term is 4 years, they aren't going to make decisions for 4 years down the road that negatively affect the win column now.  The incentive to be good is to make the playoffs, get extra money, and either entice a free agent or build enough trade value up that they can actually rebuild through the draft without actually owning their own pick.

What do you mean, they already have?  Getting out of D-Will's contract, using Plumlee to trade up in the 1st round, pretty heavily shopping Johnson, setting up their roster so that the likes of Bogy, RHJ, Brown get heavy minutes, you really don't think that negatively effects their win column in the interest of building a better future? Of course it does.

Do you also think they would turn down a halfway decent 1st round pick for Joe Johnson if someone offered it? No way, they'd take that deal in a second. Same applies to Lopez and Thad Young. Do you really think they'll turn down a decent package of prospects, picks and/or expirings just to get as close to the 8th seed as possible? No way. They re-signed those guys because no matter what way you look at it, resigning them is much better then losing them for nothing.

They're obviously not gonna "tank". But as I said before, they're trying to re-establish flexibility and gain assets. They're not gonna sacrifice what little they have to be a little more mediocre. Now, part of the reason they made the moves they did was to be in the best possible position to chase FA's but as for this year's team, they're obviously not just trying to maximize the amount of W's in the win column.

 I understand you and Pho are the kings of all things pessimism, but we have legit reasons to be excited about the Nets pick. They're not gonna try to lose but they're obviously not trying to give us the worst pick possible at all costs either. By most people's estimation, them giving us a pick in the 11-14 range is about their best possible scenario. Saying I expect it to be top 10 isn't overly optimistic by any means. And beyond the fact that this is a Celtics site and you 'd expect to see a fair amount of optimism, in my time here it's pretty clear there's more unwarranted pessimism than their is unwarranted optimism.

I think they will be a mid 30 win team, which is probably a pick in the 11 to 14 range. 

I think acquiring RHJ for Plumlee might actually help the roster.  They need solid wing defense, which is absolutely what RHJ can bring.  As for Williams, he was a distraction who took far too many nights off.  They might actually be better without him, much like Boston was better without Rondo.  Doesn't make sense on its face, but addition by subtraction happens a lot more than one would expect. 

Brooklyn finished last year pretty well.  young and lopez had a very strong chemistry and looked good together.  Couple that with no incentive to lose games, and I truly believe the only way that Boston gets a top 5 pick from Brooklyn is hitting in the lottery.

But you guys are missing the point. Nobody is disagreeing that Lopez and Young weren't good together. The real doubts stem from Lopez injury history. Lopez has missed 2 of the last 4 seasons with the same foot injury, and considering bigs with troublesome foots don't get that worked out and even have their careers ruined (Yao and Bill Walton come to mind), the odds are against Lopez staying on the court. Not to mention their backups for him are not ideal. Andrea Bargnani can't play defense or rebound and has not played more than half the season since 2011. New York and Toronto hated him by the time he was done playing for them. Thomas Robinson has been on 6 teams in 4 years and has failed to do anything substantial. If he did, he wouldn't have been available for the Nets. But going back to my original point, if Lopez gets hurt, their season is done.

Could RHJ be a good addition for them? Sure he could, but he's a rookie. A rookie's impact, especially a late 1st-rounder, shouldn't be very substantial or immediate. The odds of him making that big of an impact this year are minimal.

But what people are underestimating the most is the downgrade from Deron Williams to Jarrett Jack. As much as Nets fans hate Williams, they hate Jack more. Just ask them. It's not just that Jack is 32 and declining or that he's more a scoring punch than a starter. It's really the fact that he made the Nets worse last year. He was in the bottom 4 and 6 of the 7 least productive lineups for the Nets last season. The Nets played better when he wasn't on the floor playing hero ball for them, and yet the only person who couldn't see that was Lionel Hollins because he'd use Jack a lot despite the fact that the advanced metrics told him he shouldn't. Now Jack is the starter, and the Nets are going to rely on him even more especially since they don't have a proven back-up on the team. Yikes. You want to believe Williams' departure is addition by subtraction because he was a diva? Fine. I'm telling you, even if he's level-headed, Jack is worse.

And the east by all accounts should be better. Both the Nets (and the Celtics too) benefited from the east being wide open. Now Chris Bosh, Paul George, and Carmelo Anthony are all back and their teams are aiming for the playoffs. The Pistons, Hornets, and Magic should all be better than they were last year too. Not only did the east get better but the Nets lost guys that helped them on their playoff run. The Nets by all accounts, have gotten worse.