As is, are the Nets a title contender?

[Vermont Green]

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

Of course the "As Is" part of the original title is now obsolete but this is a good start for them to add some veteran size.  I don't see Markieff Morris and Watanabe getting them there but it is a start.

Still not enough defense, particularly at the big positions.  Durant and Warren as your PFs?  Morris as your back up C?  This is the start of a very good team but they still need a couple of pieces which they probably can find in time.

[Moranis]

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

Of course the "As Is" part of the original title is now obsolete but this is a good start for them to add some veteran size.  I don't see Markieff Morris and Watanabe getting them there but it is a start.

Still not enough defense, particularly at the big positions.  Durant and Warren as your PFs?  Morris as your back up C?  This is the start of a very good team but they still need a couple of pieces which they probably can find in time.

Someone like Dwight would be great for them if he was willing to come off the bench behind Claxton (I think they need Claxton's youth in the starting lineup).

[td450]

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?

On a team with toughness issues, losing Brown is a pretty big deal. He took a lot of responsibility on both sides of the ball in the series against us.

They also lost Dragic, Drummond and Griffin too. Simmons and Harris, and/or Warren is going to have to play pretty well for them to be as good as they were last year.

Durant played at a pretty elite level last year, and its pretty hard to believe he doesn't slip just a bit each year from here. That matters a lot too.

[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?

On a team with toughness issues, losing Brown is a pretty big deal. He took a lot of responsibility on both sides of the ball in the series against us.

They also lost Dragic, Drummond and Griffin too. Simmons and Harris, and/or Warren is going to have to play pretty well for them to be as good as they were last year.

Durant played at a pretty elite level last year, and its pretty hard to believe he doesn't slip just a bit each year from here. That matters a lot too.

You don't think that Simmons + Harris + Warren + O'Neale is an upgrade over Brown + Drummond + Griffin + Dragic?

Ben Simmons, despite some clearly apparent faults, is an All-NBA First Team defender (twice), a 3x All-Star, an made the 3rd-team All-NBA team once.  He's a 16 / 8 / 8 type player.  Joe Harris is an elite shooter, leading the NBA in 3PT% two of the past four seasons (and he was on pace to lead it last year, prior to injuries.)

[Birdman]

I say 4-6 range in East..bench not looking good & who knows where Kyrie & Ben heads will be at

[td450]

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?

On a team with toughness issues, losing Brown is a pretty big deal. He took a lot of responsibility on both sides of the ball in the series against us.

They also lost Dragic, Drummond and Griffin too. Simmons and Harris, and/or Warren is going to have to play pretty well for them to be as good as they were last year.

Durant played at a pretty elite level last year, and its pretty hard to believe he doesn't slip just a bit each year from here. That matters a lot too.

You don't think that Simmons + Harris + Warren + O'Neale is an upgrade over Brown + Drummond + Griffin + Dragic?

Ben Simmons, despite some clearly apparent faults, is an All-NBA First Team defender (twice), a 3x All-Star, an made the 3rd-team All-NBA team once.  He's a 16 / 8 / 8 type player.  Joe Harris is an elite shooter, leading the NBA in 3PT% two of the past four seasons (and he was on pace to lead it last year, prior to injuries.)

I think they could be an upgrade, but they will have to fully come back as players to do so, and the coaching will have to become much smarter to make this work. Its a fragile bunch, and the guys who left are better than you implied.

Is a different team. They have to start and play heavy minutes to Simmons and Claxton, and you can leave those two completely alone at the foul line and above without consequence. Under that situation, their 3rd option shooters (Harris/Curry and Mills) won't be getting any easy looks.

And when Simmons and or/Claxton leaves, better offensive players come in, but they have no defense. O'Neal can defend, but he's barely an offensive player. Drummond, Aldridge and Griffin weren't great, but they provided some physicality. They have no depth up front at all.

They only have one two-way player on the team in Durant, and he's going to be 34. A lot would have to go right for them to be top tier.

[Goldstar88]

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?

On a team with toughness issues, losing Brown is a pretty big deal. He took a lot of responsibility on both sides of the ball in the series against us.

They also lost Dragic, Drummond and Griffin too. Simmons and Harris, and/or Warren is going to have to play pretty well for them to be as good as they were last year.

Durant played at a pretty elite level last year, and its pretty hard to believe he doesn't slip just a bit each year from here. That matters a lot too.

You don't think that Simmons + Harris + Warren + O'Neale is an upgrade over Brown + Drummond + Griffin + Dragic?

Ben Simmons, despite some clearly apparent faults, is an All-NBA First Team defender (twice), a 3x All-Star, an made the 3rd-team All-NBA team once.  He's a 16 / 8 / 8 type player.  Joe Harris is an elite shooter, leading the NBA in 3PT% two of the past four seasons (and he was on pace to lead it last year, prior to injuries.)

They definitely are. Nets are as talented as any team in the league  on paper and I’m interested to see how they look. With a trio of Durant/Irving/Simmons they are most unlikable team in the NBA, IMO. It’s good for the NBA and I look forward to rooting against them.

[Moranis]

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?

On a team with toughness issues, losing Brown is a pretty big deal. He took a lot of responsibility on both sides of the ball in the series against us.

They also lost Dragic, Drummond and Griffin too. Simmons and Harris, and/or Warren is going to have to play pretty well for them to be as good as they were last year.

Durant played at a pretty elite level last year, and its pretty hard to believe he doesn't slip just a bit each year from here. That matters a lot too.

You don't think that Simmons + Harris + Warren + O'Neale is an upgrade over Brown + Drummond + Griffin + Dragic?

Ben Simmons, despite some clearly apparent faults, is an All-NBA First Team defender (twice), a 3x All-Star, an made the 3rd-team All-NBA team once.  He's a 16 / 8 / 8 type player.  Joe Harris is an elite shooter, leading the NBA in 3PT% two of the past four seasons (and he was on pace to lead it last year, prior to injuries.)

I think they could be an upgrade, but they will have to fully come back as players to do so, and the coaching will have to become much smarter to make this work. Its a fragile bunch, and the guys who left are better than you implied.

Is a different team. They have to start and play heavy minutes to Simmons and Claxton, and you can leave those two completely alone at the foul line and above without consequence. Under that situation, their 3rd option shooters (Harris/Curry and Mills) won't be getting any easy looks.

And when Simmons and or/Claxton leaves, better offensive players come in, but they have no defense. O'Neal can defend, but he's barely an offensive player. Drummond, Aldridge and Griffin weren't great, but they provided some physicality. They have no depth up front at all.

They only have one two-way player on the team in Durant, and he's going to be 34. A lot would have to go right for them to be top tier.

I mean teams can basically leave Rob and Marcus alone past the foul line.  I mean I'm mostly kidding about Marcus, but any shot he takes is a good one for the defense.  The notion that having 2 non-shooters on the floor is somehow wholly unique to the Sixers is a strange one.  Heck the Warriors start Looney and Green, they both can't hit the broad side of a barn either, and they just won the title. 

[td450]

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?

On a team with toughness issues, losing Brown is a pretty big deal. He took a lot of responsibility on both sides of the ball in the series against us.

They also lost Dragic, Drummond and Griffin too. Simmons and Harris, and/or Warren is going to have to play pretty well for them to be as good as they were last year.

Durant played at a pretty elite level last year, and its pretty hard to believe he doesn't slip just a bit each year from here. That matters a lot too.

You don't think that Simmons + Harris + Warren + O'Neale is an upgrade over Brown + Drummond + Griffin + Dragic?

Ben Simmons, despite some clearly apparent faults, is an All-NBA First Team defender (twice), a 3x All-Star, an made the 3rd-team All-NBA team once.  He's a 16 / 8 / 8 type player.  Joe Harris is an elite shooter, leading the NBA in 3PT% two of the past four seasons (and he was on pace to lead it last year, prior to injuries.)

I think they could be an upgrade, but they will have to fully come back as players to do so, and the coaching will have to become much smarter to make this work. Its a fragile bunch, and the guys who left are better than you implied.

Is a different team. They have to start and play heavy minutes to Simmons and Claxton, and you can leave those two completely alone at the foul line and above without consequence. Under that situation, their 3rd option shooters (Harris/Curry and Mills) won't be getting any easy looks.

And when Simmons and or/Claxton leaves, better offensive players come in, but they have no defense. O'Neal can defend, but he's barely an offensive player. Drummond, Aldridge and Griffin weren't great, but they provided some physicality. They have no depth up front at all.

They only have one two-way player on the team in Durant, and he's going to be 34. A lot would have to go right for them to be top tier.

I mean teams can basically leave Rob and Marcus alone past the foul line.  I mean I'm mostly kidding about Marcus, but any shot he takes is a good one for the defense.  The notion that having 2 non-shooters on the floor is somehow wholly unique to the Sixers is a strange one.  Heck the Warriors start Looney and Green, they both can't hit the broad side of a barn either, and they just won the title.

Fine, but I didn't say that.

What I said was they were a different team than the prior year, and tried to explain how even though they have more talent, it will take considerable chemistry to make it work.

Bruce Brown was good enough offensively to make teams pay when they left him alone. He was someone who brought toughness. They had some bigs with some offensive skills. Dragić showed up in the playoffs.

The Warriors are indeed a model for how to make something like this work. You might notice, however, that they have a exactly what I said was needed. Draymond played through some bad games, but stayed tough and showed up when the team needed him. Will Simmons do that? Kerr can coach. Can Nash match that? Curry and Thompson provided consistent, positive leadership. Will Kyrie do that?

We'll see.

[celticsclay]

Has ben simmons been cleared to play mentally yet? It was actually mentioned that was part of the reason he didn’t come back in playoffs. Will be quite the comeback story if he comes back and plays well.

[GetLucky]

Yes, KD and Kyrie are 27-17 when they both play, and the Nets had a 36-19 record when KD played last year.

Harris, Curry, and Simmons being back will just be icing on the cake.

People forget, we were one (atypical) Celtics clutch game-winner away from losing home court in the first round while Kyrie flips off all our fans. By point differential, the Celtics-Nets series last year was the closest 4-game sweep in NBA history. I think the Nets series goes very differently last year if the C's indeed choke game one (Kyrie and KD don't shut down, C's do like they are prone to, etc.)

[celticsclay]

Yes, KD and Kyrie are 27-17 when they both play, and the Nets had a 36-19 record when KD played last year.

Harris, Curry, and Simmons being back will just be icing on the cake.

People forget, we were one (atypical) Celtics clutch game-winner away from losing home court in the first round while Kyrie flips off all our fans. By point differential, the Celtics-Nets series last year was the closest 4-game sweep in NBA history. I think the Nets series goes very differently last year if the C's indeed choke game one (Kyrie and KD don't shut down, C's do like they are prone to, etc.)

The better team usually wins the close games. We clearly also had a better coach.

[SHAQATTACK]

Yes, KD and Kyrie are 27-17 when they both play, and the Nets had a 36-19 record when KD played last year.

Harris, Curry, and Simmons being back will just be icing on the cake.

People forget, we were one (atypical) Celtics clutch game-winner away from losing home court in the first round while Kyrie flips off all our fans. By point differential, the Celtics-Nets series last year was the closest 4-game sweep in NBA history. I think the Nets series goes very differently last year if the C's indeed choke game one (Kyrie and KD don't shut down, C's do like they are prone to, etc.)

The better team usually wins the close games. We clearly also had a better coach.

Kyrie doesn’t take to being told what to do.   He gets offended …tis tis

[Muzzy66]

Based on raw talent alone, absolutely.  The team has two of the most dangerous scorers of this generation along with decent depth, and added defence and rebounding from Simmons. 

Unfortunately raw talent often doesn't determine these things though, and in this case this team that is filled with great talent also contains what may well be the three biggest headcases in the entire NBA - and to make matters worse those three guys happen to also be their three best players.  Durant doesn't want to be there, Kyrie wants to be there only when he feels like it, and Simmons seems to be scared to step on a court.

Then to add further to the list of problems, those top three guys are also in famous for being injury prone.  Kyrie and KD have both played <60 games for three straight seasons now, while Simmons has played < 60 games for his past two seasons. 

So if the best case scenario comes true and those three guys manage to come together as a team, listen to the coaching staff, build some actual legitimate chemistry AND manage to all stay healthy through most of the season and the playoffs...then they can definitely contend.  But that's a lot of ifs.

[celticsclay]

This will be an interesting year to see how many of these guys that have not played in a game in a year to year and a half like murray, Leonard and simmons look (if they can get on the court). I know people are kind of just penciling them to be like they were but I’m not sure that will be the reality. Obviously players have done this successfully include Durant and Embid. However there have also been guys like klay that really looked noticeably slower after returning. Ben, probably the most interesting variance case cause of both mental and physical challenges.