Astral
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 390
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 16
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Feb 10 2008, 03:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><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?
</div>
These amounts are negligible. Rookie costs 450, times that by 2 that's 900. If it was actually worth it, they'd do it. Especially since they can still unload salaries by trade dead line (as last year).
I'm sure you're a much better scout than what NJ have. So tell me, great one, who's the mystery big man with a pretty accurate jump and who plays great defense? (cough - I think the name you're looking for here is something like J. O'Neal, even though I always thought his defense was overrated)
How is it insulting and laughable? They're both good jump shooting big men with relatively poor rebounding skills and poor man to man defense. (P.S. I loved Krstic last year) Krstic is undoubtedly better, but if consider that before the injury people were HOPING to get him for $8M/Yr, then getting someone who has a matching skill set for 1/8th the price is not bad at all.
The whole board was high on the team. Everyone was salivating over Magloire's supposed impact and Krstic's return from surgery. Read some summer posts.
There's a difference between "not finding any takers", ala Marbury, and not getting what you want for the player. NJ could have gotten a 2nd tier big man anytime they wanted for either Carter OR Kidd. But they wanted a 1st tier.
Not just expectations, REALISTIC expectations. Almost NOONE who's still a free agent after the draft has any realistic expectations. People like Gilbert Arenas are pure dumb luck.
Thorn's bench IS a joke. Blaming a guy who's played well if you compare him to what he was brought in to do at what price is asinine. You want to blame someone? Blame Magloire. He makes more than 4 times that Malik does and hasn't had 1/10th the impact.
I'm defending Allen even though I think he's garbage. He's not Amare. He's a guy making vets minimum. Treat him as such. Blame Thorn for other stupid moves, blame Frank for not playing Magloire enough (or whatever you want), but blaming Allen is totally unfair.
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?
</div>
These amounts are negligible. Rookie costs 450, times that by 2 that's 900. If it was actually worth it, they'd do it. Especially since they can still unload salaries by trade dead line (as last year).
I'm sure you're a much better scout than what NJ have. So tell me, great one, who's the mystery big man with a pretty accurate jump and who plays great defense? (cough - I think the name you're looking for here is something like J. O'Neal, even though I always thought his defense was overrated)
How is it insulting and laughable? They're both good jump shooting big men with relatively poor rebounding skills and poor man to man defense. (P.S. I loved Krstic last year) Krstic is undoubtedly better, but if consider that before the injury people were HOPING to get him for $8M/Yr, then getting someone who has a matching skill set for 1/8th the price is not bad at all.
The whole board was high on the team. Everyone was salivating over Magloire's supposed impact and Krstic's return from surgery. Read some summer posts.
There's a difference between "not finding any takers", ala Marbury, and not getting what you want for the player. NJ could have gotten a 2nd tier big man anytime they wanted for either Carter OR Kidd. But they wanted a 1st tier.
Not just expectations, REALISTIC expectations. Almost NOONE who's still a free agent after the draft has any realistic expectations. People like Gilbert Arenas are pure dumb luck.
Thorn's bench IS a joke. Blaming a guy who's played well if you compare him to what he was brought in to do at what price is asinine. You want to blame someone? Blame Magloire. He makes more than 4 times that Malik does and hasn't had 1/10th the impact.
I'm defending Allen even though I think he's garbage. He's not Amare. He's a guy making vets minimum. Treat him as such. Blame Thorn for other stupid moves, blame Frank for not playing Magloire enough (or whatever you want), but blaming Allen is totally unfair.
