BOSS: Kiki Won't Be Back, Thorn Retained

[Shapecity]

NEW YORK (AP)—New Jersey Nets owner Mikhail Prokhorov says general manager Kiki Vandeweghe will be let go when his contract expires this summer.

“I wish him well,” says Prokhorov.

NBA owners approved the sale of the Nets to the Russian billionaire last week.

Prokhorov says Wednesday he does plan to retain team president Rod Thorn.

New Jersey finished 12-70, the franchise’s worst record and only the fifth 70-loss season in league history. Vandeweghe was the interim coach after the Nets fired Lawrence Frank during their 0-18 start, but was only expected to coach until the season ended.

On Tuesday, the Nets were forced to settle for the third pick in next month’s draft despite having the best chance to win the lottery.

Source: Y! Sports

 

[CelticKing]

I saw someone make a post somewhere (in another site) saying going 12-70 and not getting 1st pick is big FAIL.

That really sucks when you think about it, they didn't get the pick, might not get LeBron, or any other good free agent (wade, bosh) and continue to suck for another season. I feel bad for their fans.

 

[Shapecity]

Well it's not a one man draft and the Nets have a capable PG already in Harris. This just makes their decision easier. It will be interesting to see who they wind up with this summer, but at least the fans can look forward to their new owner.

 

[CelticKing]

The owner is the only positive coming for the Nets fans for 10/11 season. Dude will spend hard cash to make Nets a winner. (will take few years IMO)

 

[Mr. J]

The owner is the only positive coming for the Nets fans for 10/11 season. Dude will spend hard cash to make Nets a winner. (will take few years IMO)

James Dolan has spent a lot of cash on the Knicks, but that hasn't exactly translated into wins. The owner is indeed likable, but what evidence suggests he will be successful on the NBA level?

 

[CelticKing]

James Dolan has spent a lot of cash on the Knicks, but that hasn't exactly translated into wins. The owner is indeed likable, but what evidence suggests he will be successful on the NBA level?

The fact that he's a billionaire like Cuban and a sports addict. We'll find out how he does in the next 2 years, with free agency and the draft.

 

[Mr. J]

The fact that he's a billionaire like Cuban and a sports addict. We'll find out how he does in the next 2 years, with free agency and the draft.

Dolan, too, is a billionaire and a passionate sports fan, but again, that doesn't translate into wins. What basketball knowledge does he have that makes him any more capable of running the team? He's just a tall, funny guy with a lot of money. He's bugging if he thinks he's winning a championship next year. I hope that was a joke.

 

[NJNetz]

Dolan is an idiot.

 

[Mr. J]

And Prokhorov is unproven. You are excited about an unproven owner.

 

[NJNetz]

Soviets are engineered to perfection. Don't forget that.

 

[Mr. J]

Good point - I totally forgot about that.

 

[CelticKing]

Look what Abramovich has done at Chelsea, they just won the English Premier League as well as the FA Cup. Having an owner who is not afraid to spend is always good for your team. (unless his name is Dolan of course)

 

[Mr. J]

Look what Abramovich has done at Chelsea, they just won the English Premier League as well as the FA Cup. Having an owner who is not afraid to spend is always good for your team. (unless his name is Dolan of course)

It's a double-edged sword. If Prokhorov spends a lot of money on the wrong players, the Nets won't improve enough. There's no indication that he has any type of basketball knowledge to discern between wise and foolish spending.

 

[CelticKing]

It's a double-edged sword. If Prokhorov spends a lot of money on the wrong players, the Nets won't improve enough. There's no indication that he has any type of basketball knowledge to discern between wise and foolish spending.

This is why he's keeping Thorn, and I really wouldn't be worried about if he has any bball knowledge or not, he's going to hire top staff and will make Nets a winner down the road. (lets say 5 yrs from now, once they're in brooklyn)

 

[Mr. J]

This is why he's keeping Thorn, and I really wouldn't be worried about if he has any bball knowledge or not, he's going to hire top staff and will make Nets a winner down the road. (lets say 5 yrs from now, once they're in brooklyn)

Under Rod Thorn the team had the worst 50-game start in the history of professional sports. That team needs a lot of work and won't become a contender overnight like many are suggesting, regardless of who is running the team.

Saying that Prokhorov is going to hire top staff is an unwarranted assumption. How do we know this?

 

[NJNetz]

Under Rod Thorn the team had the worst 50-game start in the history of professional sports. That team needs a lot of work and won't become a contender overnight like many are suggesting, regardless of who is running the team.

Saying that Prokhorov is going to hire top staff is an unwarranted assumption. How do we know this?

You're just being difficult for no reason now. The Nets need as much work as the Knicks do.

Prokhorov said he wants to make the Nets winners. Why the hell wouldn't he hire top staff?

 

[Mr. J]

You're just being difficult for no reason now. The Nets need as much work as the Knicks do.

Prokhorov said he wants to make the Nets winners. Why the hell wouldn't he hire top staff?

You are absolutely right. Since Prokhorov wants to make the Nets winners - like the other 29 owners in the league - he will do so successfully. Do you see how backwards that logic is? Hiring top staff is far from a certainty. What top staff are available right now? Why will they specifically decide to sign with the Nets over any other team? Why assume that he will sign top staff and do so in a matter of only a few years?

This doesn't have anything to do with the Knicks, but since you mentioned them, the Knicks have never lost 70 games. I seriously doubt we need just as much work.

 

[NJNetz]

You are absolutely right. Since Prokhorov wants to make the Nets winners - like the other 29 owners in the league - he will do so successfully. Do you see how backwards that logic is? Hiring top staff is far from a certainty. What top staff are available right now? Why will they specifically decide to sign with the Nets over any other team?

You were questioning whether Proky will go through with his word and hire top staff, not whether the staff will join the Nets. And why wouldn't they want? With Prokorov at the helm, the staff jobs are far more attractive.

This doesn't have anything to do with the Knicks, but since you mentioned them, the Knicks have never lost 70 games. I seriously doubt we need just as much work.

So what if the Knicks haven't lost 70 games? They have been garbage the past 10 seasons.

 

[Mr. J]

You were questioning whether Proky will go through with his word and hire top staff, not whether the staff will join the Nets. And why wouldn't they want? With Prokorov at the helm, the staff jobs are far more attractive.

His word on whether he will sign top staff or not is only true if the staff is available and willing to sign. What top staff do you expect to sign anyway?

So what if the Knicks haven't lost 70 games? They have been garbage the past 10 seasons.

What we did in the past decade is irrelevant. What matter is now, and we have the most cap space in the league, a good coach, and tons of free agents available.

 

[NJNetz]

His word on whether he will sign top staff or not is only true if the staff is available and willing to sign. What top staff do you expect to sign anyway?

Well, Avery Johnson seems to be a logical choice. But I think that's both a good and bad move.

What we did in the past decade is irrelevant. What matter is now, and we have the most cap space in the league, a good coach, and tons of free agents available.

But Nets losing 70 games is also in the past, but yet that is somehow still relevant.

 

[Mr. J]

Well, Avery Johnson seems to be a logical choice. But I think that's both a good and bad move.

I believe Chicago, Atlanta, and Philly are also interested. Because he's available does not mean the Nets can sign him. Further, it will take way more than Avery Johnson to improve this team.

But Nets losing 70 games is also in the past, but yet that is somehow still relevant.

You are playing with words now. The Nets losing 70 games is very relevant since it was their last record and some upcoming free agents will decide to sign with the team or not based on their most recent record. The Knicks being terrible the past 10 years is irrelevant since what happened during that time will not affect whether a player signs with us or not.

 

[NJNetz]

I believe Chicago, Atlanta, and Philly are also interested. Because he's available does not mean the Nets can sign him. Further, it will take way more than Avery Johnson to improve this team.

Avery is actually interested in the Nets, as well. Of course it will take more than a coach to improve the team, but it's certainly a start considering the type of coach we had last season.

You are playing with words now. The Nets losing 70 games is very relevant since it was their last record and some upcoming free agents will decide to sign with the team or not based on their most recent record. The Knicks being terrible the past 10 years is irrelevant since what happened during that time will not affect whether a player signs with us or not.

The Knicks won 29 games last season. It's not terrible as 12 games, but it's a pretty bad record.

And for the record, I remember several players mention that the Nets record wouldn't affect their decision to sign with the Nets. I believe David Lee and Amare were among those two players.

 

[Mr. J]

Avery is actually interested in the Nets, as well. Of course it will take more than a coach to improve the team, but it's certainly a start considering the type of coach we had last season.

But as you see, the competition is intense. You can't just say he will hire top staff when there are other teams bidding for the same people. This is why it is an unwarranted assumption.

The Knicks won 29 games last season. It's not terrible as 12 games, but it's a pretty bad record.

And for the record, I remember several players mention that the Nets record wouldn't affect their decision to sign with the Nets. I believe David Lee and Amare were among those two players.

If 29-53 is a terrible record, how much more terrible is 17 additional losses? While Amar'e and Lee might be willing to sign, many other players like LeBron, Wade, and Bosh, who expressed a desire to win, might be less likely to sign with the Nets instead of a team like the Knicks. The Nets need more work than the Knicks because we have more assets than you, including more cap space, a better, more likable coach, and intangibles like MSG, NYC, etc.