If the Nets steamroll through the playoffs are we better than we thought?

[kraidstar]

Let's say the Nets go 10-2 the rest of the way and easily claim the title, which right now looks plausible. And let's say a lot of those victories are laughers.

Does that make our 4-1 loss with a decimated roster look much better? IMO if we were healthy we push that series to six games, which might be better than any other team will do. Does it affect our approach to this offseason?

Maybe we are very close to the other top teams. I think the Jays' solo style works better in the playoffs than in the regular season. Watching the Sixers I feel a healthy C's roster could challenge or beat theirs. Same with Milwaukee, the Jazz, and the Clippers. Suns look great, but outside of that I am not impressed by anyone except the Nets. maybe we're closer than we thought?

With that being said, if the Nets are this dominant without Harden, then what hope do we have? How do we build a roster that challenges theirs? Do we just hope the Jays and other young players improve, do we use our picks for a trade to win now, or do we wait until the Nets' stars get old? We saw with the Warriors how they fell off a cliff so quickly. Will the same happen here?

[Ogaju]

Let's say the Nets go 10-2 the rest of the way and easily claim the title, which right now looks plausible. And let's say a lot of those victories are laughers.

Does that make our 4-1 loss with a decimated roster look much better? Does it affect our approach to this offseason?

Maybe we are very close to the other top teams. I think the Jays' solo style works better in the playoffs than in the regular season. Watching the Sixers I feel a healthy C's roster could challenge or beat theirs. Same with Milwaukee, the Jazz, and the Clippers. Suns look great, but outside of that I am not impressed by anyone except the Nets. maybe we're closer than we thought?

With that being said, if the Nets are this dominant without Harden, then what hope do we have? How do we build a roster that challenges theirs? Do we just hope the Jays and other young players improve, do we use our picks for a trade to win now, or do we wait until the Nets' stars get old? We saw with the Warriors how they fell off a cliff so quickly. Will the same happen here?

Nets just toyed with Boston. Besides, Nets are better with a big two than big three as long as Durant is one of the two.

[Smartacus]

Let's say the Nets go 10-2 the rest of the way and easily claim the title, which right now looks plausible. And let's say a lot of those victories are laughers.

Does that make our 4-1 loss with a decimated roster look much better? Does it affect our approach to this offseason?

Maybe we are very close to the other top teams. I think the Jays' solo style works better in the playoffs than in the regular season. Watching the Sixers I feel a healthy C's roster could challenge or beat theirs. Same with Milwaukee, the Jazz, and the Clippers. Suns look great, but outside of that I am not impressed by anyone except the Nets. maybe we're closer than we thought?

With that being said, if the Nets are this dominant without Harden, then what hope do we have? How do we build a roster that challenges theirs? Do we just hope the Jays and other young players improve, do we use our picks for a trade to win now, or do we wait until the Nets' stars get old? We saw with the Warriors how they fell off a cliff so quickly. Will the same happen here?

Nets just toyed with Boston. Besides, Nets are better with a big two than big three as long as Durant is one of the two.

TP great point.

They play well when Harden runs the team alone or Durant has plays with either Harden or Kyrie. Kyrie also deserves some credit for figuring out the PG/SG dynamic with Harden when it was just the 2 of them early on.

When all 3 play it's a bit awkward but it seems like Harden defers until Durant and Kyrie are be subbed out and he can have free reign with the second unit. It's similar to how Pierce used to operate and Hayward when he was healthy.

When it's just Durant and 1 of the other 2 they just try to bury you all game which is what's happening to the Bucks.

[PhoSita]

It makes what Tatum did all the more impressive.

Don't think it says all that much about the rest of the roster.


As for how do you challenge the Nets?


You need a team that defends the three super well, that can handle isolation matchups without fouling, and on the other end I think you need to physically punish Kyrie / Durant by making them fight through screens and trying to get them into foul trouble with drives, post-ups etc.

You're never going to outgun the Nets, but you need enough firepower to keep up and occasionally have bursts of scoring to close gaps or build leads. 

Finding ways to pick on Kyrie, Blake, and Joe Harris seems important, as well.


I would also say that you need to be able to play a slower paced half-court game, because if you get out running that's playing into the Nets hands.  You need to force the Nets to rely almost exclusively on outside jumpers and then hope they go cold.


Overall, the Nets' crappy defense should be their vulnerability, apart from the health of their main guys.  So far nobody has been able to truly punish them for it.

[footey]

Let's say the Nets go 10-2 the rest of the way and easily claim the title, which right now looks plausible. And let's say a lot of those victories are laughers.

Does that make our 4-1 loss with a decimated roster look much better? Does it affect our approach to this offseason?

Maybe we are very close to the other top teams. I think the Jays' solo style works better in the playoffs than in the regular season. Watching the Sixers I feel a healthy C's roster could challenge or beat theirs. Same with Milwaukee, the Jazz, and the Clippers. Suns look great, but outside of that I am not impressed by anyone except the Nets. maybe we're closer than we thought?

With that being said, if the Nets are this dominant without Harden, then what hope do we have? How do we build a roster that challenges theirs? Do we just hope the Jays and other young players improve, do we use our picks for a trade to win now, or do we wait until the Nets' stars get old? We saw with the Warriors how they fell off a cliff so quickly. Will the same happen here?

Nets just toyed with Boston. Besides, Nets are better with a big two than big three as long as Durant is one of the two.

TP great point.

They play well when Harden runs the team alone or Durant has plays with either Harden or Kyrie. Kyrie also deserves some credit for figuring out the PG/SG dynamic with Harden when it was just the 2 of them early on.

When all 3 play it's a bit awkward but it seems like Harden defers until Durant and Kyrie are be subbed out and he can have free reign with the second unit. It's similar to how Pierce used to operate and Hayward when he was healthy.

When it's just Durant and 1 of the other 2 they just try to bury you all game which is what's happening to the Bucks.

C'mon. The Nets were awesome when all 3 played together.  Against us in pre-season, early in season, and in play-offs. The fact that they continue to excel without Harden is commendable but doesn't take away from their superiority with him. 

I think our plight was made to look worse by how dominant they were against us. I thought we actually did well as a team absent 3 starters against them. The young guys really grew in confidence and ability, especially Romeo.  We would not beat them if fully healthy. Could we have stretched to 6 games?  maybe.  The Nets are just really good. I predicted at start of season (before the harden trade) that they would be a bear to deal with.  I think it predicted they would finish 1st in East. Most others on this board had them seeded 4-7 in the East. 

[gouki88]

Tatum > Giannis?

[ozgod]

Tatum > Giannis?

I think it depends on the situation...Giannis can overwhelm defenders in the paint in the regular season but over a 7 game series where defenses can be designed to stop him or deny him the ball inside he is less able to create his own shot because he can't shoot from outside. What makes Durant so dangerous is the fact that he can kill you inside, kill you posting up, kill you with fadeaways and kill you from the perimeter. I think Tatum is a lot more in that mold.

[ozgod]

Let's say the Nets go 10-2 the rest of the way and easily claim the title, which right now looks plausible. And let's say a lot of those victories are laughers.

Does that make our 4-1 loss with a decimated roster look much better? Does it affect our approach to this offseason?

Maybe we are very close to the other top teams. I think the Jays' solo style works better in the playoffs than in the regular season. Watching the Sixers I feel a healthy C's roster could challenge or beat theirs. Same with Milwaukee, the Jazz, and the Clippers. Suns look great, but outside of that I am not impressed by anyone except the Nets. maybe we're closer than we thought?

With that being said, if the Nets are this dominant without Harden, then what hope do we have? How do we build a roster that challenges theirs? Do we just hope the Jays and other young players improve, do we use our picks for a trade to win now, or do we wait until the Nets' stars get old? We saw with the Warriors how they fell off a cliff so quickly. Will the same happen here?

Nets just toyed with Boston. Besides, Nets are better with a big two than big three as long as Durant is one of the two.

TP great point.

They play well when Harden runs the team alone or Durant has plays with either Harden or Kyrie. Kyrie also deserves some credit for figuring out the PG/SG dynamic with Harden when it was just the 2 of them early on.

When all 3 play it's a bit awkward but it seems like Harden defers until Durant and Kyrie are be subbed out and he can have free reign with the second unit. It's similar to how Pierce used to operate and Hayward when he was healthy.

When it's just Durant and 1 of the other 2 they just try to bury you all game which is what's happening to the Bucks.

C'mon. The Nets were awesome when all 3 played together.  Against us in pre-season, early in season, and in play-offs. The fact that they continue to excel without Harden is commendable but doesn't take away from their superiority with him. 

I think our plight was made to look worse by how dominant they were against us. I thought we actually did well as a team absent 3 starters against them. The young guys really grew in confidence and ability, especially Romeo.  We would not beat them if fully healthy. Could we have stretched to 6 games?  maybe.  The Nets are just really good. I predicted at start of season (before the harden trade) that they would be a bear to deal with.  I think it predicted they would finish 1st in East. Most others on this board had them seeded 4-7 in the East.

Everyone forgets this part...we were missing 3 starters, including 2 All Star caliber players. Not sure if we would have beaten them given we didn't beat them in the regular season but we would have given them a much more contested series.

[gouki88]

Tatum > Giannis?

I think it depends on the situation...Giannis can overwhelm defenders in the paint in the regular season but over a 7 game series where defenses can be designed to stop him or deny him the ball inside he is less able to create his own shot because he can't shoot from outside. What makes Durant so dangerous is the fact that he can kill you inside, kill you posting up, kill you with fadeaways and kill you from the perimeter. I think Tatum is a lot more in that mold.

I was just being silly really.

[CelticsBR]

Tatum did well against Durant. Smart and Brown can guard both Kyrie and Harden. I can't see Smart leaving because of this matchup next year against the Nets. A Smart, Brown, Hayward, Tatum, TL line up would match pretty well against their team.

[GreenlyGreeny]

Let's say the Nets go 10-2 the rest of the way and easily claim the title, which right now looks plausible. And let's say a lot of those victories are laughers.

Does that make our 4-1 loss with a decimated roster look much better? Does it affect our approach to this offseason?

Maybe we are very close to the other top teams. I think the Jays' solo style works better in the playoffs than in the regular season. Watching the Sixers I feel a healthy C's roster could challenge or beat theirs. Same with Milwaukee, the Jazz, and the Clippers. Suns look great, but outside of that I am not impressed by anyone except the Nets. maybe we're closer than we thought?

With that being said, if the Nets are this dominant without Harden, then what hope do we have? How do we build a roster that challenges theirs? Do we just hope the Jays and other young players improve, do we use our picks for a trade to win now, or do we wait until the Nets' stars get old? We saw with the Warriors how they fell off a cliff so quickly. Will the same happen here?

Nets just toyed with Boston. Besides, Nets are better with a big two than big three as long as Durant is one of the two.

Agree. Would be funny to see the Nets ship Kyrie to the Clippers with Leonard going elsewhere and elsewhere shipping pieces to the Nets. Or Kyrie to the Clippers for most of the Clippers’ supporting cast.

[#1P4P]

We are better than we thought regardless if they steamroll through the playoffs or not. The Nets are a juggernaut when healthy and we were down our 2nd best player for the entire series. Tatum is getting closer and closer to top 10 status and Brown to top 20 status. It raises our ceiling, significantly, to the point where we don’t need All Stars at every position, simply veteran role players playing their role.

KD understands what’s coming with Tatum. If our next coach is Championship caliber, we will be battling it out with them for the East next year.

[jambr380]

Let's say the Nets go 10-2 the rest of the way and easily claim the title, which right now looks plausible. And let's say a lot of those victories are laughers.

Does that make our 4-1 loss with a decimated roster look much better? Does it affect our approach to this offseason?

Maybe we are very close to the other top teams. I think the Jays' solo style works better in the playoffs than in the regular season. Watching the Sixers I feel a healthy C's roster could challenge or beat theirs. Same with Milwaukee, the Jazz, and the Clippers. Suns look great, but outside of that I am not impressed by anyone except the Nets. maybe we're closer than we thought?

With that being said, if the Nets are this dominant without Harden, then what hope do we have? How do we build a roster that challenges theirs? Do we just hope the Jays and other young players improve, do we use our picks for a trade to win now, or do we wait until the Nets' stars get old? We saw with the Warriors how they fell off a cliff so quickly. Will the same happen here?

Nets just toyed with Boston. Besides, Nets are better with a big two than big three as long as Durant is one of the two.

TP great point.

They play well when Harden runs the team alone or Durant has plays with either Harden or Kyrie. Kyrie also deserves some credit for figuring out the PG/SG dynamic with Harden when it was just the 2 of them early on.

When all 3 play it's a bit awkward but it seems like Harden defers until Durant and Kyrie are be subbed out and he can have free reign with the second unit. It's similar to how Pierce used to operate and Hayward when he was healthy.

When it's just Durant and 1 of the other 2 they just try to bury you all game which is what's happening to the Bucks.

C'mon. The Nets were awesome when all 3 played together.  Against us in pre-season, early in season, and in play-offs. The fact that they continue to excel without Harden is commendable but doesn't take away from their superiority with him. 

I think our plight was made to look worse by how dominant they were against us. I thought we actually did well as a team absent 3 starters against them. The young guys really grew in confidence and ability, especially Romeo.  We would not beat them if fully healthy. Could we have stretched to 6 games?  maybe.  The Nets are just really good. I predicted at start of season (before the harden trade) that they would be a bear to deal with.  I think it predicted they would finish 1st in East. Most others on this board had them seeded 4-7 in the East.

Everyone forgets this part...we were missing 3 starters, including 2 All Star caliber players. Not sure if we would have beaten them given we didn't beat them in the regular season but we would have given them a much more contested series.

People are losing it all over the internet right now because we were the 7th seed and lost in the first round to the best team in the NBA. I am not saying there won't or shouldn't be some changes; but, if healthy, this is essentially the same team that went to game 6 of the ECF last year. Except now, we have Fournier and more experience from our young roster.

The tax is going to be killer if we keep Kemba, but there are ways to mitigate the damages. Fournier's contract is reportedly expected to come in lower than first thought and TT could be swapped out for a vet minimum center.

We had so many guys in and out of the line-up this season and then got hit with the injury bug at exactly the wrong time. I doubt a team like Denver is looking to blow it up, because they know they are without their 2nd best player. We just need to be careful of any major changes we make, because they might not be for the better.

[Rosco917]

Let's say the Nets go 10-2 the rest of the way and easily claim the title, which right now looks plausible. And let's say a lot of those victories are laughers.

Does that make our 4-1 loss with a decimated roster look much better? Does it affect our approach to this offseason?

Maybe we are very close to the other top teams. I think the Jays' solo style works better in the playoffs than in the regular season. Watching the Sixers I feel a healthy C's roster could challenge or beat theirs. Same with Milwaukee, the Jazz, and the Clippers. Suns look great, but outside of that I am not impressed by anyone except the Nets. maybe we're closer than we thought?

With that being said, if the Nets are this dominant without Harden, then what hope do we have? How do we build a roster that challenges theirs? Do we just hope the Jays and other young players improve, do we use our picks for a trade to win now, or do we wait until the Nets' stars get old? We saw with the Warriors how they fell off a cliff so quickly. Will the same happen here?

Nets just toyed with Boston. Besides, Nets are better with a big two than big three as long as Durant is one of the two.

TP great point.

They play well when Harden runs the team alone or Durant has plays with either Harden or Kyrie. Kyrie also deserves some credit for figuring out the PG/SG dynamic with Harden when it was just the 2 of them early on.

When all 3 play it's a bit awkward but it seems like Harden defers until Durant and Kyrie are be subbed out and he can have free reign with the second unit. It's similar to how Pierce used to operate and Hayward when he was healthy.

When it's just Durant and 1 of the other 2 they just try to bury you all game which is what's happening to the Bucks.

C'mon. The Nets were awesome when all 3 played together.  Against us in pre-season, early in season, and in play-offs. The fact that they continue to excel without Harden is commendable but doesn't take away from their superiority with him. 

I think our plight was made to look worse by how dominant they were against us. I thought we actually did well as a team absent 3 starters against them. The young guys really grew in confidence and ability, especially Romeo.  We would not beat them if fully healthy. Could we have stretched to 6 games?  maybe.  The Nets are just really good. I predicted at start of season (before the harden trade) that they would be a bear to deal with.  I think it predicted they would finish 1st in East. Most others on this board had them seeded 4-7 in the East.

Everyone forgets this part...we were missing 3 starters, including 2 All Star caliber players. Not sure if we would have beaten them given we didn't beat them in the regular season but we would have given them a much more contested series.

People are losing it all over the internet right now because we were the 7th seed and lost in the first round to the best team in the NBA. I am not saying there won't or shouldn't be some changes; but, if healthy, this is essentially the same team that went to game 6 of the ECF last year. Except now, we have Fournier and more experience from our young roster.

The tax is going to be killer if we keep Kemba, but there are ways to mitigate the damages. Fournier's contract is reportedly expected to come in lower than first thought and TT could be swapped out for a vet minimum center.

We had so many guys in and out of the line-up this season and then got hit with the injury bug at exactly the wrong time. I doubt a team like Denver is looking to blow it up, because they know they are without their 2nd best player. We just need to be careful of any major changes we make, because they might not be for the better.

Even when healthy, with Kemba well rested, and in the starting lineup, this Celtic team struggled against most lower-level teams. The chemistry on this team is terribly suspect.

Every color analyst, on every national broadcast in the Country said the same thing. This Celtic team has poor ball movement and depends on ISO ball too much of the time. Now this year we've added a new wrinkle...poor defense.

Changes need to be made.

   

[slamtheking]

Let's say the Nets go 10-2 the rest of the way and easily claim the title, which right now looks plausible. And let's say a lot of those victories are laughers.

Does that make our 4-1 loss with a decimated roster look much better? Does it affect our approach to this offseason?

Maybe we are very close to the other top teams. I think the Jays' solo style works better in the playoffs than in the regular season. Watching the Sixers I feel a healthy C's roster could challenge or beat theirs. Same with Milwaukee, the Jazz, and the Clippers. Suns look great, but outside of that I am not impressed by anyone except the Nets. maybe we're closer than we thought?

With that being said, if the Nets are this dominant without Harden, then what hope do we have? How do we build a roster that challenges theirs? Do we just hope the Jays and other young players improve, do we use our picks for a trade to win now, or do we wait until the Nets' stars get old? We saw with the Warriors how they fell off a cliff so quickly. Will the same happen here?

Nets just toyed with Boston. Besides, Nets are better with a big two than big three as long as Durant is one of the two.

TP great point.

They play well when Harden runs the team alone or Durant has plays with either Harden or Kyrie. Kyrie also deserves some credit for figuring out the PG/SG dynamic with Harden when it was just the 2 of them early on.

When all 3 play it's a bit awkward but it seems like Harden defers until Durant and Kyrie are be subbed out and he can have free reign with the second unit. It's similar to how Pierce used to operate and Hayward when he was healthy.

When it's just Durant and 1 of the other 2 they just try to bury you all game which is what's happening to the Bucks.

C'mon. The Nets were awesome when all 3 played together.  Against us in pre-season, early in season, and in play-offs. The fact that they continue to excel without Harden is commendable but doesn't take away from their superiority with him. 

I think our plight was made to look worse by how dominant they were against us. I thought we actually did well as a team absent 3 starters against them. The young guys really grew in confidence and ability, especially Romeo.  We would not beat them if fully healthy. Could we have stretched to 6 games?  maybe.  The Nets are just really good. I predicted at start of season (before the harden trade) that they would be a bear to deal with.  I think it predicted they would finish 1st in East. Most others on this board had them seeded 4-7 in the East.

Everyone forgets this part...we were missing 3 starters, including 2 All Star caliber players. Not sure if we would have beaten them given we didn't beat them in the regular season but we would have given them a much more contested series.

People are losing it all over the internet right now because we were the 7th seed and lost in the first round to the best team in the NBA. I am not saying there won't or shouldn't be some changes; but, if healthy, this is essentially the same team that went to game 6 of the ECF last year. Except now, we have Fournier and more experience from our young roster.

The tax is going to be killer if we keep Kemba, but there are ways to mitigate the damages. Fournier's contract is reportedly expected to come in lower than first thought and TT could be swapped out for a vet minimum center.

We had so many guys in and out of the line-up this season and then got hit with the injury bug at exactly the wrong time. I doubt a team like Denver is looking to blow it up, because they know they are without their 2nd best player. We just need to be careful of any major changes we make, because they might not be for the better.

Even when healthy, with Kemba well rested, and in the starting lineup, this Celtic team struggled against most lower-level teams. The chemistry on this team is terribly suspect.

Every color analyst, on every national broadcast in the Country said the same thing. This Celtic team has poor ball movement and depends on ISO ball too much of the time. Now this year we've added a new wrinkle...poor defense.

Changes need to be made.

need a more reliable source than those bunch of hacks that have no familiarity with the franchise.

There's issues with the team to be sure.  I just wouldn't listen to a bunch of talking heads that don't follow the team or familiarize themselves with what's going on.