i wish we never signed malik

[Jizzy]

i am indifferent on frank. i do beleive he has to work on a LOT of things on his coaching ability but i think hes decent. but his obsession with stiffs isnt helping. swift should be ahead of malik, whop has done nothing but showed us an inconsistent jumpshot, he sux at rebounding, defending and blocking. swift gives us another athletic freak who is not a plodder like mags and mark jax and collins. at the very least, he'll block some shots and dunk.

honestly, what does frank see in malik. i'd really like to know that, what makes malik so special, even is he isnt hitting his jumper? what else does he provide? i dont understand what little franks obsession with scrubs is. anyone else notice that when malik comes in, the other team just starts winning?


i beleive ghoti made a thread

 

[Universe]

I remember being so excited when I heard he was close to being a starter comming in for that cheap. Then he actually started and pooped on us.

 

[Jizzy]

oh yeah!, remember in training camp, "malik has been the most impressive player" what BS. last time i beelive in anything of this team until they prove it on the court

 

[downunderwonder]

"I dont want no scrub/scrub is a guy who cant get no love from me"

 

[jtballa2o1]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (downunderwonder @ Feb 8 2008, 10:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>"I dont want no scrub/scrub is a guy who cant get no love from me"</div>
"hanging on the end of the bench, hollarin for pt"

 

[Dumpy]

frank wants a big on the court who can make jump shots, all else be damned. Malik was Krstic insurance.

To be quite honest, Swift is just repetitive of Sean Williams, and to a certain extent Boone. I can't imagine ever seeing Swift on the court with Sean, and with Krstic now a starter with Boone, what happens? Either Sean or Swift won't play.

 

[downunderwonder]

My thoughts exactly Dumpy. Why have a roster full of guys we dont play if they arent projects or minimum wagers? It strikes me as odd that we have extremely similar big men, that are all to an extent one dimentional. Good post.

oh and jtballa...

 

[Netted]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Feb 8 2008, 11:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>frank wants a big on the court who can make jump shots, all else be damned. Malik was Krstic insurance.

To be quite honest, Swift is just repetitive of Sean Williams, and to a certain extent Boone. I can't imagine ever seeing Swift on the court with Sean, and with Krstic now a starter with Boone, what happens? Either Sean or Swift won't play.</div>
I think the rotation will be Boone and Krstic starting with Sean and some Swift off the bench. Once Krstic gets his stroke back we won't see Allen anymore. Will also see less small ball since Swift and Sean have the athleticism to keep up with teams smaller line-ups.

 

[jtballa2o1]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (downunderwonder @ Feb 8 2008, 11:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>My thoughts exactly Dumpy. Why have a roster full of guys we dont play if they arent projects or minimum wagers? It strikes me as odd that we have extremely similar big men, that are all to an extent one dimentional. Good post.

oh and jtballa...

</div>
my pleasure

 

[Denny Crane]

Malik is fine, you just can't count on him as a regular. He's a situational player. If you're going to be playing a "defensive" player like Collins, it's nice to have potential offense from a big when the situation demands it.

 

[Astral]

Allen makes vet's min. Krstic was coming off a major surgery. They did everything perfectly, actually they exceeded expectations. For less than a million they have a decent jump shooting big man. How many other teams can say that they have a solid roleplayer for a vet's min?

If you want to blame someone, blame Frank for playing him so much (barking up the Collins tree here).
And why is Swift in the picture? You're comparing two different kinds of players. As long as #51 plays well, Swift wont play much; until Nenad starts playing like his old self, Allen will get plenty of minutes.

 

[bling890]

That's bull, I'm sure Frank wouldve found at least a few minutes for collins even with krstic comin back, even if that meant benching malik. who cares if swift cant shoot like malik? he does almost everything else better, and he does have about a 17 foot jumper, not bad at all.

 

[ghoti]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Feb 9 2008, 12:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Allen makes vet's min. Krstic was coming off a major surgery. They did everything perfectly, actually they exceeded expectations. For less than a million they have a decent jump shooting big man. How many other teams can say that they have a solid roleplayer for a vet's min?</div>

Vet's minimum is a waste of money for this guy.

Rookie minimum is more like it. Would you rather have Carl Landry or Malik Allen?

I don't understand anyone who defends the bench Thorn put together. It's abysmal.

 

[ly_yng]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Feb 9 2008, 12:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>To be quite honest, Swift is just repetitive of Sean Williams, and to a certain extent Boone. I can't imagine ever seeing Swift on the court with Sean, and with Krstic now a starter with Boone, what happens? Either Sean or Swift won't play.</div>

Banging. Head. Into. Desk. Repeatedly.

 

[pegs]

I hate Malik Allen so much. Much, much more than I ever hated any other player on this Nets team, and only second to Bruce Bowen in most hated players in the NBA.

 

[killa kadafi191]

I can see the purpose of Malik. Malik is a player who can consistently hit an open jumper. Krstic was still a question mark and Mikki went to Sac Town so they figure Malik can do the same thing Mikki did but didn't work out that way.


As long as he is not starting it's good. The problem with the Nets they do not know how to take advantage of a player strengths. Eddie House anyone?? People were so happy to hear him go and laughing at Boston when they sign him and now that laughing has turn to crying "why we give up house".

Boki will be next.

 

[Jizzy]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Feb 8 2008, 11:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Malik is fine, you just can't count on him as a regular. He's a situational player. If you're going to be playing a "defensive" player like Collins, it's nice to have potential offense from a big when the situation demands it.</div>
when he's not making that jumpshot, he's useless

 

[Dark Defender]

Would you guys please stop comparing Swift to Williams, its depressing me.

 

[Dumpy]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (killa kadafi191 @ Feb 9 2008, 06:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I can see the purpose of Malik. Malik is a player who can consistently hit an open jumper. Krstic was still a question mark and Mikki went to Sac Town so they figure Malik can do the same thing Mikki did but didn't work out that way.


As long as he is not starting it's good. The problem with the Nets they do not know how to take advantage of a player strengths. Eddie House anyone?? People were so happy to hear him go and laughing at Boston when they sign him and now that laughing has turn to crying "why we give up house".

Boki will be next.</div>

who was happy to see him go? He had a reputation of not being strong defensively, but as a number of people pointed out (including Ghoti, which I remember clearly), he always tried hard (which actaully made him one of the more consistent defensders on the team). He also was good at making the quick skip pass, which we really miss. The only drawback to House was his injuries. For some reason management labelled him as having just one skill and decided he should go.

 

[Jizzy]

i LOVED house. i kept mentioning that he averaged nearly 10 ppg while shooting a greta 42% from three, when was the last time we had anyone shoot over 40% from three? he was great running the pick and roll and most important of all, he was a willing shooter. he never shyed away from shooting the ball, whenever VC struggled, house always came in and upped the tempo. biggest mistake was keeping wright, what a POS he is, and letting house sign for the vets min to boston.

honestly, im happy for house, happy that he and mikki lft the hellhole which is this poorly run team

 

[Jizzy]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Feb 9 2008, 10:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (killa kadafi191 @ Feb 9 2008, 06:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I can see the purpose of Malik. Malik is a player who can consistently hit an open jumper. Krstic was still a question mark and Mikki went to Sac Town so they figure Malik can do the same thing Mikki did but didn't work out that way.


As long as he is not starting it's good. The problem with the Nets they do not know how to take advantage of a player strengths. Eddie House anyone“ People were so happy to hear him go and laughing at Boston when they sign him and now that laughing has turn to crying "why we give up house".

Boki will be next.</div>

who was happy to see him go? He had a reputation of not being strong defensively, but as a number of people pointed out (including Ghoti, which I remember clearly), he always tried hard (which actaully made him one of the more consistent defensders on the team). He also was good at making the quick skip pass, which we really miss. The only drawback to House was his injuries. For some reason management labelled him as having just one skill and decided he should go.
</div>
Thorn: Eddie is not a PG

wtf, we need a shooter, we already have a PG in marcus. god, words cannot describe houw much i have grown to hate thorn

 

[unstop]

Frank is anti-athletic players. (Someone on here made a great point once that Frank would rather play the world's most useless players as long as they could get into good boxing out position instead of a guy who could jump over 5 guys and damn near kill a mother fucker dunking it on the way back down.)

Thorn is anti-shooters. (As evident by the fact that, you know, we never have any.)

Kidd is pro-both.

Nets fever... catch it!

 

[killa kadafi191]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Feb 9 2008, 10:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (killa kadafi191 @ Feb 9 2008, 06:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I can see the purpose of Malik. Malik is a player who can consistently hit an open jumper. Krstic was still a question mark and Mikki went to Sac Town so they figure Malik can do the same thing Mikki did but didn't work out that way.


As long as he is not starting it's good. The problem with the Nets they do not know how to take advantage of a player strengths. Eddie House anyone?? People were so happy to hear him go and laughing at Boston when they sign him and now that laughing has turn to crying "why we give up house".

Boki will be next.</div>

who was happy to see him go? He had a reputation of not being strong defensively, but as a number of people pointed out (including Ghoti, which I remember clearly), he always tried hard (which actaully made him one of the more consistent defensders on the team). He also was good at making the quick skip pass, which we really miss. The only drawback to House was his injuries. For some reason management labelled him as having just one skill and decided he should go.
</div>


talking about all the post from basketballboard website. Also the response once he signed with Boston.

 

[ghoti]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Feb 9 2008, 10:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (killa kadafi191 @ Feb 9 2008, 06:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I can see the purpose of Malik. Malik is a player who can consistently hit an open jumper. Krstic was still a question mark and Mikki went to Sac Town so they figure Malik can do the same thing Mikki did but didn't work out that way.


As long as he is not starting it's good. The problem with the Nets they do not know how to take advantage of a player strengths. Eddie House anyone?? People were so happy to hear him go and laughing at Boston when they sign him and now that laughing has turn to crying "why we give up house".

Boki will be next.</div>

who was happy to see him go? He had a reputation of not being strong defensively, but as a number of people pointed out (including Ghoti, which I remember clearly), he always tried hard (which actaully made him one of the more consistent defensders on the team). He also was good at making the quick skip pass, which we really miss. The only drawback to House was his injuries. For some reason management labelled him as having just one skill and decided he should go.
</div>

I don't understand that House thing fully. He actually showed more point guard skills than advertised and even played passable defense.

I think it was a personality clash more than anything else. Maybe he didn't get along with Ratner. He was the one who called House "one-dimensional".

 

[Jizzy]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Feb 9 2008, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Feb 9 2008, 10:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (killa kadafi191 @ Feb 9 2008, 06:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I can see the purpose of Malik. Malik is a player who can consistently hit an open jumper. Krstic was still a question mark and Mikki went to Sac Town so they figure Malik can do the same thing Mikki did but didn't work out that way.


As long as he is not starting it's good. The problem with the Nets they do not know how to take advantage of a player strengths. Eddie House anyone?? People were so happy to hear him go and laughing at Boston when they sign him and now that laughing has turn to crying "why we give up house".

Boki will be next.</div>

who was happy to see him go? He had a reputation of not being strong defensively, but as a number of people pointed out (including Ghoti, which I remember clearly), he always tried hard (which actaully made him one of the more consistent defensders on the team). He also was good at making the quick skip pass, which we really miss. The only drawback to House was his injuries. For some reason management labelled him as having just one skill and decided he should go.
</div>

I don't understand that House thing fully. He actually showed more point guard skills than advertised and even played passable defense.

I think it was a personality clash more than anything else. Maybe he didn't get along with Ratner. He was the one who called House "one-dimensional".
</div>
there was def. more to the House non signing then anythign else. my guess is frank and eddie clashed on some issue, such as shooting and defense.

 

[pegs]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (killa kadafi191 @ Feb 9 2008, 11:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>talking about all the post from basketballboard website. Also the response once he signed with Boston.</div>

I'll be honest, I figured they didn't need him. I figured that with Ray Allen, Paul Peirce, and Kevin Garnett, they didn't need a shooter like House off the bench, and were better off with a distributor such as Brevin Knight.

Then, it turned out Rondo, Peirce, and Allen played good enough as playmakers, that it might have made a player such as Knight redundant.

Of course, we needed House. Other than Boki, we didn't have another shooter off the bench, or a point guard period, since Marcus was injured.

 

[Astral]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Feb 9 2008, 01:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Feb 9 2008, 12:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Allen makes vet's min. Krstic was coming off a major surgery. They did everything perfectly, actually they exceeded expectations. For less than a million they have a decent jump shooting big man. How many other teams can say that they have a solid roleplayer for a vet's min?</div>

Vet's minimum is a waste of money for this guy.

Rookie minimum is more like it. Would you rather have Carl Landry or Malik Allen?

I don't understand anyone who defends the bench Thorn put together. It's abysmal.
</div>
You're grasping at straws:
1) The difference between rookie minimum and vets minimum is negligible (964.5K-427K=537K)
2) No matter how you spin it, he's a vet. He's ineligible for rookie minimum salary. Thorn got him as cheap as he could have.
3) You're trying to give him a "fair" value, and that's just not how NBA works (cough Nene). The realistic question was: is there anyone else Thorn could have gotten for that money?

You can't even argue this from a roster spot standpoint: they already have free spots.

I hate Malik as much as you, but Thorn didn't mess up with the Malik signing. He did what any other great GM would have.

 

[ghoti]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Feb 10 2008, 02:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Feb 9 2008, 01:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Feb 9 2008, 12:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Allen makes vet's min. Krstic was coming off a major surgery. They did everything perfectly, actually they exceeded expectations. For less than a million they have a decent jump shooting big man. How many other teams can say that they have a solid roleplayer for a vet's min?</div>

Vet's minimum is a waste of money for this guy.

Rookie minimum is more like it. Would you rather have Carl Landry or Malik Allen?

I don't understand anyone who defends the bench Thorn put together. It's abysmal.
</div>
You're grasping at straws:
1) The difference between rookie minimum and vets minimum is negligible (964.5K-427K=537K)
2) No matter how you spin it, he's a vet. He's ineligible for rookie minimum salary. Thorn got him as cheap as he could have.
3) You're trying to give him a "fair" value, and that's just not how NBA works (cough Nene). The realistic question was: is there anyone else Thorn could have gotten for that money?

You can't even argue this from a roster spot standpoint: they already have free spots.

I hate Malik as much as you, but Thorn didn't mess up with the Malik signing. He did what any other great GM would have.
</div>

I'm not "grasping" at anything.

The point is this guy is not worth his roster spot and is twice as expensive as a rookie free agent, D-Leaguer or extra second round pick that might actually develop into something decent.

Just because the Nets never do this, it doesn't mean it isn't a smart thing to do.

And LOL @ "any other great GM".

 

[Astral]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Feb 10 2008, 02:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Feb 10 2008, 02:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Feb 9 2008, 01:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Feb 9 2008, 12:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Allen makes vet's min. Krstic was coming off a major surgery. They did everything perfectly, actually they exceeded expectations. For less than a million they have a decent jump shooting big man. How many other teams can say that they have a solid roleplayer for a vet's min?</div>

Vet's minimum is a waste of money for this guy.

Rookie minimum is more like it. Would you rather have Carl Landry or Malik Allen?

I don't understand anyone who defends the bench Thorn put together. It's abysmal.
</div>
You're grasping at straws:
1) The difference between rookie minimum and vets minimum is negligible (964.5K-427K=537K)
2) No matter how you spin it, he's a vet. He's ineligible for rookie minimum salary. Thorn got him as cheap as he could have.
3) You're trying to give him a "fair" value, and that's just not how NBA works (cough Nene). The realistic question was: is there anyone else Thorn could have gotten for that money?

You can't even argue this from a roster spot standpoint: they already have free spots.

I hate Malik as much as you, but Thorn didn't mess up with the Malik signing. He did what any other great GM would have.
</div>

I'm not "grasping" at anything.

The point is this guy is not worth his roster spot and is twice as expensive as a rookie free agent, D-Leaguer or extra second round pick that might actually develop into something decent.

Just because the Nets never do this, it doesn't mean it isn't a smart thing to do.

And LOL @ "any other great GM".
</div>
Why isn't he worth a roster spot? Technically speaking, a roster spot on NJN right now costs $0, because despite having Malik, we still have 2 free spots. He's not costing anything.

Yes - he's twice as expensive, but you KNOW what you're getting with him - that's why he's a vet who's still in the league. Do a statistical analysis to compare his realistic expectation per salary to how many rookie free agents, D-Leaguers or 2nd round players actually turn into something serviceable, and you'll realize that the failure rate with the mentioned ones is extremely high. Nets needed a cheap Krstic clone while he recovered from surgery. They accomplished their objective.
If they wanted to take a risk on two free agent rookies, they can still do that - but they're not.

Plenty of 2nd rounders become great players, but compared to the amount of 2nd rounders who are out of the league in two years, they're a very, very tiny minority. Even if by some magic the Nets hit the lottery and got a gem in the free agent rookie market, that player would still need time to develop - and since NJ was in "Win Now" mode, that was not an option.

You can say that "well, they're obviously not winning now" -but hindsight is always 20/20. Remember how high you were on this team - NJ was the rage all around, and everyone expected them to go around 50-30. With those expectations, Malik signing was absolutely excellent and intelligent. NOW it doesn't look smart because NJ sucks and he's taking minutes from our young guys, but that's after an unexpected turn of events.

 

[ghoti]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Feb 10 2008, 03:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Feb 10 2008, 02:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Feb 10 2008, 02:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Feb 9 2008, 01:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Astral @ Feb 9 2008, 12:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Allen makes vet's min. Krstic was coming off a major surgery. They did everything perfectly, actually they exceeded expectations. For less than a million they have a decent jump shooting big man. How many other teams can say that they have a solid roleplayer for a vet's min?</div>

Vet's minimum is a waste of money for this guy.

Rookie minimum is more like it. Would you rather have Carl Landry or Malik Allen?

I don't understand anyone who defends the bench Thorn put together. It's abysmal.
</div>
You're grasping at straws:
1) The difference between rookie minimum and vets minimum is negligible (964.5K-427K=537K)
2) No matter how you spin it, he's a vet. He's ineligible for rookie minimum salary. Thorn got him as cheap as he could have.
3) You're trying to give him a "fair" value, and that's just not how NBA works (cough Nene). The realistic question was: is there anyone else Thorn could have gotten for that money?

You can't even argue this from a roster spot standpoint: they already have free spots.

I hate Malik as much as you, but Thorn didn't mess up with the Malik signing. He did what any other great GM would have.
</div>

I'm not "grasping" at anything.

The point is this guy is not worth his roster spot and is twice as expensive as a rookie free agent, D-Leaguer or extra second round pick that might actually develop into something decent.

Just because the Nets never do this, it doesn't mean it isn't a smart thing to do.

And LOL @ "any other great GM".
</div>
Why isn't he worth a roster spot? Technically speaking, a roster spot on NJN right now costs $0, because despite having Malik, we still have 2 free spots. He's not costing anything.

Yes - he's twice as expensive, but you KNOW what you're getting with him - that's why he's a vet who's still in the league. Do a statistical analysis to compare his realistic expectation per salary to how many rookie free agents, D-Leaguers or 2nd round players actually turn into something serviceable, and you'll realize that the failure rate with the mentioned ones is extremely high. Nets needed a cheap Krstic clone while he recovered from surgery. They accomplished their objective.
If they wanted to take a risk on two free agent rookies, they can still do that - but they're not.

Plenty of 2nd rounders become great players, but compared to the amount of 2nd rounders who are out of the league in two years, they're a very, very tiny minority. Even if by some magic the Nets hit the lottery and got a gem in the free agent rookie market, that player would still need time to develop - and since NJ was in "Win Now" mode, that was not an option.

You can say that "well, they're obviously not winning now" -but hindsight is always 20/20. Remember how high you were on this team - NJ was the rage all around, and everyone expected them to go around 50-30. With those expectations, Malik signing was absolutely excellent and intelligent. NOW it doesn't look smart because NJ sucks and he's taking minutes from our young guys, but that's after an unexpected turn of events.
</div>

1. The Nets won't sign any more players. They are bumping against the luxury tax.

2. If you want to "win now" you don't do it with a player who plays defense like Malik Allen. Do the Nets actually scout these players or do they just read the Hoopshype profiles?

3. Calling Allen a "Krstic clone" is insulting and just laughable.

4. Who was high on this team? The GM spent all last season trying to trade the entire roster. (And couldn't find any takers, BTW.)

5. Young players who have few expectations and need time to develop? What a novel idea! Perhaps that is something to try when your record of free agent signings is worse than peanut butter pizza.

6. Malik Allen is terrible. Thorn's bench is a joke. Why defend him? It's baffling to me that every Nets fan isn't calling for this guy's head. How many bad moves in a row does he have to make?