Official 2015-16 Brooklyn Nets Season Watch Thread (21-59, 3rd slot as of 4/12)

[mef730]

You guys are missing the point. The problem with playing Jack too many minutes isn't that he's 32. The problem is that he's terrible.

Here here. Jack has played about as well as he's ever played at times this year, but he's still not a very good player. It's hard to play Jarrett Jack 35 mpg and expect to win more games than you lose. Especially when Shane Larkin is your back up.

TP to you two.

And Tazz is pretty much spot on. Players start deteriorating but it's not really a stamina thing, it's an athleticism thing. That's why the best marathon runners can be 40 years old.

These NBA grandpas can still play a load of minutes, just not as effectively or as efficiently because they can't get past defenders, jump as high, or get as much strength/lift under their jumpshot.

Jarrett Jack is AWFUL and him playing more minutes is going to:
-lose them more games
-he get's injured and their D League back up PG loses them even more games.

That's a different argument.  I wouldn't call Jack awful but he shouldn't be a starting PG playing 32+ mpg.  If I'm the Nets, I'm watching Jennings recovery with great interest.  If he looks like he can contribute this year, I'd try to trade for him now.  He's on the last year of his contract coming off a major injury so he shouldn't be too expensive.  Even so, they might need to get a 3rd team involved to entice Detroit.  The Nets have lost quite a few close games recently so if they could pick up a few more wins if they make a modest improvement.

If they wait until the off season, Jennings, Conley and Rondo will all be available.   Adding one of those three plus a decent shooting SG to RHJ, Young and Lopez is not too bad.   

What are they going to possibly offer Detroit, or a third team for that matter, to get Jennings?  The Pistons have no reason to trade him -- they're playing well enough and getting a solid player like Jennings back will only be a boon.  2nd round picks won't cut it.

The only trades the Nets should make this season are those to acquire draft picks.

I think that last point is a perfectly logical response and absolutely what they should do. But when was the last time this team was logical? They're still hoping for a big score in FA over the summer.

Mike

[mef730]

It's a quiet Friday, so I decided to take a peek at BKN's remaining games. Everything I assume is based on how things stand now. Obviously, as the season goes on and BKN's starters play that many more minutes, chances of injuries go up and the season will turn out quite differently. Also, teams like New Orleans looked awful to start the year but are a better team when healthy. And others, like Washington, could be worse than assumed.

I've got 12 games where BKN has a reasonable chance of winning: 2XMN, 3XPhilly, Orlando, Portland, Utah, Detroit, Sac, Denver, Milwaukee (all home except one each of the MN and Philly games)

I've got 18 with a pretty good chance of losing (mostly away games against good teams or home games against top talent): 2X@Indy, 2X@Chi, 2X@Mia, @Bos, SA, 2X@Tor,2XCle, OKC, 2XIndy, @LAC, @Cle, @Char

I've got 27 that I define as "winnable," which are home games against mid-range teams and away against less than mid-range. They are less likely to win these games, but not out of the question.

I had it all in a neat little spreadsheet that I can't figure out how to upload.

If they win 60% of group one, 10% of group two and 40% of group three, that's about another 20 wins, which is a 35% winning percentage over their last 57. So where does that put us, around 27? Since I tend to model conservatively (i.e., pro-Brooklyn), I feel pretty good at about 25 wins overall. Again, since we're doing this based on what I see now, it looks like the East, which is where they play 6 of their last 7, is going to be pretty competitive, so there may be minimal opportunity for playoff-bound teams to rest players.

I've said that they could end up with the 4th-8th worst record, but it's looking pretty good now.

Mike

[KeepRondo]

The Nets are slumping right now. I'm back to being surprised if they win.

[The One]

It's a quiet Friday, so I decided to take a peek at BKN's remaining games. Everything I assume is based on how things stand now. Obviously, as the season goes on and BKN's starters play that many more minutes, chances of injuries go up and the season will turn out quite differently. Also, teams like New Orleans looked awful to start the year but are a better team when healthy. And others, like Washington, could be worse than assumed.

I've got 12 games where BKN has a reasonable chance of winning: 2XMN, 3XPhilly, Orlando, Portland, Utah, Detroit, Sac, Denver, Milwaukee (all home except one each of the MN and Philly games)

I've got 18 with a pretty good chance of losing (mostly away games against good teams or home games against top talent): 2X@Indy, 2X@Chi, 2X@Mia, @Bos, SA, 2X@Tor,2XCle, OKC, 2XIndy, @LAC, @Cle, @Char

I've got 27 that I define as "winnable," which are home games against mid-range teams and away against less than mid-range. They are less likely to win these games, but not out of the question.

I had it all in a neat little spreadsheet that I can't figure out how to upload.

If they win 60% of group one, 10% of group two and 40% of group three, that's about another 20 wins, which is a 35% winning percentage over their last 57. So where does that put us, around 27? Since I tend to model conservatively (i.e., pro-Brooklyn), I feel pretty good at about 25 wins overall. Again, since we're doing this based on what I see now, it looks like the East, which is where they play 6 of their last 7, is going to be pretty competitive, so there may be minimal opportunity for playoff-bound teams to rest players.

I've said that they could end up with the 4th-8th worst record, but it's looking pretty good now.

Mike

Thank you man for all that hard work!

And I'm liking what you're saying!!

[celticsclay]

You guys do realize Rondo is 29 and not 32? This is pretty significant. Think about KG at 29 versus him at 32.

Playing 35 minutes versus 32 minutes is not significant for a NBA player especially for just a few games. At 32, KG averaged over 30 minutes and Pierce averaged over 34 minutes.  Both of them had a lot more minutes played on their bodies at 32 than Jack has at 32.  Rondo may be 29 but he also has had ACL surgery.  He held up just fine playing 44, 48, 48, 44 and 43 minutes over that 5 games in 8 days stretch.

KG only played 57 games that season because he got injured from over use!

yea seriously this is an argument? It's not great to play 32 year olds or 35 years in joe Johnsons case 35+ minutes. Are you just arguing for the sake of it?

I'm arguing because your case holds no water.  NBA players don't become decrepit at 32.  In eras past, 32 was generally considered the end of a player's prime.  If you want to be amazed, look at what Karl Malone did even at age 39. 
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonka01.html

Look we could pick and choose all day players in history that had either high minutes per game averages in a season or players that got injured once they hit their 30's. If you want to highlight Garnett, he is a bad example for you because as you pointed out he missed between 10-20 games all of his seasons after his injury. I think a lot of Celtics fans, myself included, wish that Doc had been better managing his minutes and maybe we would have another title if he did. Your bringing up of Kobe seems equally misguided as he had season ending injuries the last 3 seasons and it has regularly been acknowledged there was an issue with how many minutes he played later in his career.

Another thing you have to realize is that minute monitoring and tracking is a relatively new development. The last few years Pop has routinely sat out his players for a game for extra rest when they were completely healthy. You have seen Kerr do this with his players the last few seasons as well. We are starting to see Lebron take occasional maintenance days for rest. Can you imagine mid-season 25 years ago if Larry Bird, Kevin Mchale and Parrish were all just sat for rest mid season? There would have been an investigation!

 From 23-31 Michael Jordan played close to 40 minutes with only 1 season below 39. Lebron James the ultimate warrior and ironman generation of this era is already down to 36 minutes a game at age 30 and 31 with occasional games missed for rest (he hasn't played over 40 since he was 23).

You are going to be in a very small minority if you think playing Joe Johnson 35 minutes a game at age 34 is not both old school, but at odds with the direction the NBA is moving in minutes management. In fact you don't have to even take my word for it, he is 23rd in the NBA in minutes played per game right now. There are only a few players in their 30's on that list and nobody close to Johnson's age. Do you think all the other teams in the NBA realize that playing guys in their mid 30's that much is a risk for injury and reduced effectiveness or do you think Hollins is running some vets into the ground?

Now to get back to Jack, I don't think his minutes played are outlandish, but I also do think playing a 32 year old guard 37 minutes a game for a few weeks increases his injury risk and also reduces his effectiveness.

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/minutes/sort/avgMinutes

None of them is within 3 years of Joe's age. 

[SCeltic34]

Brooklyn is completely unraveling in the 4th quarter.  Can't get stops, turning the ball over, struggling to score the ball.  Jordan Hill is slaughtering the Nets.  32-15 quarter for the Pacers with 2 minutes to go.

[Ogaju]

Good Job Brooklyn

Is it weird that I tend to look for Brooklyn score before I look for Boston score?

[SHAQATTACK]

Good Job Brooklyn

Is it weird that I tend to look for Brooklyn score before I look for Boston score?

I keep watching the scores for Lakers games ...hoping they can win a few and catch the nets.

No chance any time soon , next like six games for LA are UNWINABLE ....LoL.  ...

[mef730]

Good Job Brooklyn

Is it weird that I tend to look for Brooklyn score before I look for Boston score?

Around here? It would only be weird if you didn't look for Brooklyn and Dallas and Minnesota before looking for Boston.

BTW, I went to see Star Wars tonight. I had no interest in going and really am not a Star Wars fan, but it turned out to be a fantastic movie. Just really, really entertaining.

The reason I bring that up is because if I had been at home following the Brooklyn/Indy game and seen Brooklyn up by five heading into the fourth, well, it wouldn't have been pretty.

I know, trust the process.

Mike

[mef730]

Good Job Brooklyn

Is it weird that I tend to look for Brooklyn score before I look for Boston score?

I keep watching the scores for Lakers games ...hoping they can win a few and catch the nets.

No chance any time soon , next like six games for LA are UNWINABLE ....LoL.  ...

TP to take you into four digits. Congrats!

Mike

[Quetzalcoatl]

Speaking of round numbers, here is hoping to them getting to 30 losses before they get to 10 wins!

[SHAQATTACK]

Good Job Brooklyn

Is it weird that I tend to look for Brooklyn score before I look for Boston score?

I keep watching the scores for Lakers games ...hoping they can win a few and catch the nets.

No chance any time soon , next like six games for LA are UNWINABLE ....LoL.  ...

TP to take you into four digits. Congrats!

Mike

Wow ....LOL ......thanks ......I hadn't paid attention tonight .....LOL ......TP back at you for waking me up.     

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

only thing that makes me happy about my fan life these days.

Hear it here first, Bkn is about to lose at least 10 straight and Celts are about to win 4 out of 5 the rest of the way!

[trickybilly]

only thing that makes me happy about my fan life these days.

Hear it here first, Bkn is about to lose at least 10 straight and Celts are about to win 4 out of 5 the rest of the way!

Agreed. BKN still playing well. Collapse imminent.

[KeepRondo]

Cs and Nets keep losing. Is there some how a connection?