Kidd Sees Toronto, Not Boston, as Atlantic Division Favorite

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kidd)</div><div class='quotemain'>Knicks are going to finish above the Pacers, Sixers, and Bucks. I just don't think they can screw it up that bad, and become a 20-win team again. If you think about it, they are a very talented team, so if they play together, they could be deadly in the Atlantic Division. I still have much faith in my Nets, though.</div>

i'm not so sure about better than the bucks...all depends on how mo+redd+simmons+mason goes. if they're good, the bucks are good. if not, the bucks are shit.</p>

but ya, knicks are more than a 20-win team. but far from a 40-win team.</p>
 
The Knicks are worse than the Bucks. Milwaukee should be sniffing the playoffs at the very least, while the Knicks are on schedule to begin imploding by January, and then completely fall apart towards the end of the season.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>all depends on how mo+redd+simmons+mason goes.</div></p>

I'm predicating the Knicks to be the better team this season. Assuming both teams play on a high level, Knicks still seem to have that advantage over the Bucks, imo.</p>

</p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>but far from a 40-win team.</div></p>

Not necessarily, you're really underrating them. Yes, they have a lot to prove, but winning at least 40-games shouldn't be a huge problem, with their roster. Like I said before, they have a lot of talented players, but they need to play as a whole. A consistent one. That will lead to wins.</p>
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kidd)</div><div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>all depends on how mo+redd+simmons+mason goes.</div></p>

I'm predicating the Knicks to be the better team this season. Assuming both teams play on a high level, Knicks still seem to have that advantage over the Bucks, imo.</p>

</p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>but far from a 40-win team.</div></p>

Not necessarily, you're really underrating them. Yes, they have a lot to prove, but winning at least 40-games shouldn't be a huge problem, with their roster. Like I said before, they have a lot of talented players, but they need to play as a whole. A consistent one. That will lead to wins.</p></div>

</p>

and i don't think that will happen...which is why i say they couldn't win 40 games. maybe 30.</p>

playing as a team is good with players like jamal crawford(IMO he throws the best alleys) and david lee on the team, but with other players like starbury, nate, curry(sometimes), and randolph, i don't see all that great teamwork going on on-court.</p>

and their defense sucks. just my opinion, tho.</p>
 
Toronto are the favorites. They are a contender in the East. With Chris Bosh, Andrea Bargnani, Anthony Parker, T.J. Ford, Jose Calderon,Garbajosa, and the additions of Delfino and Kapono, combine that with the fact they are no longer playoff virgins, they are dangerous.</p>

Boston is at this point a great regular season without the neccesary depth to win the NBA Championship. If I'm an opposing team the only players I'm scared of off the bench are James Posey, Eddie House, and Tony Allen. Suspect at PG and C as well, but if Rondo can have a big year it will be a tremendous boost for this team. This is a team that depending on the matchups could definetly come out of the East.</p>

I just want to see this Net team play 82 games without a major injury. If Jamaal Magloire can play well and Nenad Krstic can return successfully, then the Nets could be on paper a contender in the Atlantic and the East.</p>
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Real)</div><div class='quotemain'>

Toronto are the favorites.</div></p>

Well, I mean, they should be. They have so much depth and great chemistry. They are easily a 50 win team, and are in contention for an ECF title. </p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Boston is at this point a great regular season without the necessary depth to win the NBA Championship.</div></p>

Well, during the season, depth is a problem. With KG, Pierce and Allen playing almost 43 minutes per, by the playoffs, they will be fatigued. However, with Posey, House running the 8 man rotation, they can still win. Look at Cleveland, they didn't have a deep bench in the playoffs, but will shall see.</p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I just want to see this Net team play 82 games without a major injury. If Jamaal Magloire can play well and Nenad Krstic can return successfully, then the Nets could be on paper a contender in the Atlantic and the East.</div> </p>

The Nets can always be a contender, but their inside game is slowly improving. With Magloire, Boone and my one of my favorite upcoming young players Sean Williams. I think that the Nets PF future is with Williams, and he should be able to help the Nets a lot.</p>
 
I really have no idea how the division will end up. The one thing the Raptors (and the Nets kind of as well) have in their favour though, is continuity. Last year, they had their renovation over the offseason and it took a 2-3 months for all the players to mesh and the team to start playing well together. I expect Boston and New York to go through a similar phase early on, while Toronto and New Jersey build on last year's postseason success and the chemistry they've already built together.
 
Interesting bit from Kidd. Probably looking at Toronto's 1-9 vs boston's 1-9, plus the need for chemistry. Rondo's a 2nd year point, that's probably where kidd is looking at to devour.
 
[quote name='Master Shake'][quote name='Real']

Boston is at this point a great regular season without the necessary depth to win the NBA Championship.
Click to expand...
</p>

Well, during the season, depth is a problem. With KG, Pierce and Allen playing almost 43 minutes per, by the playoffs, they will be fatigued. However, with Posey, House running the 8 man rotation, they can still win. Look at Cleveland, they didn't have a deep bench in the playoffs, but will shall see.</p>

I just want to see this Net team play 82 games without a major injury. If Jamaal Magloire can play well and Nenad Krstic can return successfully, then the Nets could be on paper a contender in the Atlantic and the East.
Click to expand...
</p>

The Nets can always be a contender, but their inside game is slowly improving. With Magloire, Boone and my one of my favorite upcoming young players Sean Williams. I think that the Nets PF future is with Williams, and he should be able to help the Nets a lot.</p>

[/QUOTE] </p>

Boston can come out of the East now depending on the matchups. I don't think they can beat the top teams in the West in a seven-game series.</p>

And I don't expect much from Sean Williams this year.</p>

</p>
 
Garnett, Pierce, and Allen will not play more than 38 minutes per game during the regular season. I expect the Celtics to win the Atlantic and finish with the third seed, only to step it up in the playoffs. I'm fairly sure that they have a great shot at making it to the ECFs, but it's foolish to say anything for certain. I think the problems with their depth is rather overrated, as they won't use a second unit in which none of the three main players are on the bench, save for the last twenty seconds of the first three quarters.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Premier)</div><div class='quotemain'>Garnett, Pierce, and Allen will not play more than 38 minutes per game during the regular season. I expect the Celtics to win the Atlantic and finish with the third seed, only to step it up in the playoffs. I'm fairly sure that they have a great shot at making it to the ECFs, but it's foolish to say anything for certain. I think the problems with their depth is rather overrated, as they won't use a second unit in which none of the three main players are on the bench, save for the last twenty seconds of the first three quarters.</div></p>

It does affect those 3 players as the season progresses, though. The Pistons relied far too much on their starters 2 seasons ago and it messed them up when it came to the playoffs. They just didn't have as much left in the tank. Not to mention, the precarious position they'd be put in if anyone gets injured.</p>

</p>
 
I realize that. I stated that the Celtics would be best served being cautious with the playing times of Garnett, Pierce, and Allen and only allocating 36-38 minutes to each per night so that the are able to play 40-42 come playoff time.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Premier)</div><div class='quotemain'>I realize that. I stated that the Celtics would be best served being cautious with the playing times of Garnett, Pierce, and Allen and only allocating 36-38 minutes to each per night so that the are able to play 40-42 come playoff time.</div></p>

Sound plan but take it from a Nets fan, it won't work out that way.</p>

</p>

</p>
 
Injuries are tough to predict, though I would imagine that Rivers' ability to mess with the lineup will be limited. Regardless, the Celtics, next season, will have a better coach, a better bench, and better chemistry. That is the plan.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Master Shake)</div><div class='quotemain'>They could go at the 8th or 7th spot if they can keep teams like the Bucks, Bobcats, 76ers down while playing above .500 basketball all year.</div>

Not only that, but I figure they could go at the first or second spot if they can keep teams like the Celtics, Pistons, Bulls, Raptors, Heat, Cavs, Nets, Wizards, Magic, Pacers, Bucks, Bobcats, 76ers, and Hawks down while playing above .700 basketball all year.</p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Master Shake)</div><div class='quotemain'>They have mental problems mostly and just need a shot in the back to get them going.</div></p>

THAT explains it.</p>
 
Overall I see the Atlantic like this in the end: Nets, Celtics, Raptors, Knicks, Sixers.</p>

I think the Celtics will be good, but unlike alot of people I still think that we could finish above them because we have a deeper bench and we don't have as many missing pieces as they do at the moment. If they sign a good point guard that could distripute the ball and make the flow run much smoother, I could see them as way higher than us. But I really think that Vince is going to have a breakout year bouncing back from his choke job in the playoffs last season. I also think that Krstic and Marcus Williams are going to both be surprisingly big factors for us too. Jason Kidd will be the same, if anything though I could see him coming back playing even better than he did last year with all this fun he has had with team USA this summer. To me, RichardJefferson will be the x-factor of this team this upcoming season.</p>
 
[quote name='Master Shake'][quote name='Real']

Toronto are the favorites.[/QUOTE]</p>

Well, I mean, they should be. They have so much depth and great chemistry. They are easily a 50 win team, and are in contention for an ECF title. </p>

Boston is at this point a great regular season without the necessary depth to win the NBA Championship.
Click to expand...
</p>

Well, during the season, depth is a problem. With KG, Pierce and Allen playing almost 43 minutes per, by the playoffs, they will be fatigued. However, with Posey, House running the 8 man rotation, they can still win. Look at Cleveland, they didn't have a deep bench in the playoffs, but will shall see.</p>

I just want to see this Net team play 82 games without a major injury. If Jamaal Magloire can play well and Nenad Krstic can return successfully, then the Nets could be on paper a contender in the Atlantic and the East.
Click to expand...
</p>

The Nets can always be a contender, but their inside game is slowly improving. With Magloire, Boone and my one of my favorite upcoming young players Sean Williams. I think that the Nets PF future is with Williams, and he should be able to help the Nets a lot.</p>[/QUOTE]

Are you sure you're not a Net fan? I agree with all of your points. Well, I think the Nets improved more than the Toronto, but its hard to transfer that to a concrete statement on which team has the better shot on winning the East, let alone the division. Looking at both teams now, I wanna say that the Nets are better, but they're also their own worst enemy. Look at last year's playoffs: The Nets proved that they were the better team, but Toronto won the division. </p>
 
[quote name='GMJigga'][quote name='Master Shake'][quote name='Real']

Toronto are the favorites.[/QUOTE]</p>

Well, I mean, they should be. They have so much depth and great chemistry. They are easily a 50 win team, and are in contention for an ECF title. </p>

Boston is at this point a great regular season without the necessary depth to win the NBA Championship.
Click to expand...
</p>

Well, during the season, depth is a problem. With KG, Pierce and Allen playing almost 43 minutes per, by the playoffs, they will be fatigued. However, with Posey, House running the 8 man rotation, they can still win. Look at Cleveland, they didn't have a deep bench in the playoffs, but will shall see.</p>

I just want to see this Net team play 82 games without a major injury. If Jamaal Magloire can play well and Nenad Krstic can return successfully, then the Nets could be on paper a contender in the Atlantic and the East.
Click to expand...
</p>

The Nets can always be a contender, but their inside game is slowly improving. With Magloire, Boone and my one of my favorite upcoming young players Sean Williams. I think that the Nets PF future is with Williams, and he should be able to help the Nets a lot.</p>[/QUOTE]

Are you sure you're not a Net fan? I agree with all of your points. Well, I think the Nets improved more than the Toronto, but its hard to transfer that to a concrete statement on which team has the better shot on winning the East, let alone the division. Looking at both teams now, I wanna say that the Nets are better, but they're also their own worst enemy. Look at last year's playoffs: The Nets proved that they were the better team, but Toronto won the division. </p>[/QUOTE]

Yup, I'm sure I'm not a Nets fan. Lol. I think the East and Atlantic is getting more open, but I'm still not sure anymore on who will win either. Kidd, makes the team. If the Nets had no injuries, it could of been closer in the Atlantic division, but this up coming year should be a lot more competitive.</p>
 
In all seriousness, I usually don't buy into the method of comparing personnel to the prior year's team, and using that as a benchmark to predict a team's record. It might work in baseball, where the game is a series of one-on-one matchups, but not basketball. The Nets, for example, were a walking soap opera last season, and there were long stretches where the team just wasn't interested in playing. That they finished strong, made the playoffs, and won their first round matchup was a true testiment to the talent on the team, and the willpower of JKidd. TheCeltics, for instance, were decimated by injuries last year; I think there's no doubt that they were destined to be playoff bound until the players started dropping off. When they make the playoffs this year, their new "Big Three" will get a lot of credit,but really, they ahd some pretty good players last season. It's funny, but many sportswritersoriginally panned their acquisition of Ray Allen, but engaged in revisionist history once Garnett was added later. Every team has talented players; in the end it comes down to coaching, a common vision, how well the players mesh with each other, and injuries. When is the last time a team turned over 75% of its roster, and was an elite team the following season? I think the Celtics have a tough hill to climb. As for the Knicks, they have big names--as you'd expect with a payroll of $200 million--but they lack all the elements you need to compete. A collection of me-first players that don't play team defense is just not going to win many games. As for Toronto: ToparaphraseDodger manager Charlie Dressen: I'd like to see them do it again,
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Premier)</div><div class='quotemain'>Injuries are tough to predict, though I would imagine that Rivers' ability to mess with the lineup will be limited. Regardless, the Celtics, next season, will have a better coach, a better bench, and better chemistry. That is the plan.</div>

Very wishful thinking. Didn't Rivers just sign an extension? Having Doc coach this team is like giving Eddie Griffin the keys to your new Ferrarri.</p>
 
I hate when people say that Mitchell cant coach, and his plays are simplistic, but the championships over the past 10 years whom which the spurs have won 4 were based on fundamental play. Anchored by Tim Duncan, a.k.a BIG FUNDAMENTAL. you dont have to make a triangle offense to win in this league. But you have to perfect your fundamentals. Meaning, if were A+ at everything, and Mitchell runs a play, well still kill. Mitchell is a tough, good, and down to earth coach who ive been totally against trading from day 1. Why? Look at Bargnani, Chris Bosh, and now Jose Calderon. Players he brought up.
 
When people defend Sam Mitchell, why do they never talk about defense?
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy)</div><div class='quotemain'>In all seriousness, I usually don't buy into the method of comparing personnel to the prior year's team, and using that as a benchmark to predict a team's record. It might work in baseball, where the game is a series of one-on-one matchups, but not basketball. The Nets, for example, were a walking soap opera last season, and there were long stretches where the team just wasn't interested in playing. That they finished strong, made the playoffs, and won their first round matchup was a true testiment to the talent on the team, and the willpower of JKidd. The Celtics, for instance, were decimated by injuries last year; I think there's no doubt that they were destined to be playoff bound until the players started dropping off. When they make the playoffs this year, their new "Big Three" will get a lot of credit,but really, they ahd some pretty good players last season. It's funny, but many sportswriters originally panned their acquisition of Ray Allen, but engaged in revisionist history once Garnett was added later. Every team has talented players; in the end it comes down to coaching, a common vision, how well the players mesh with each other, and injuries. When is the last time a team turned over 75% of its roster, and was an elite team the following season? I think the Celtics have a tough hill to climb. As for the Knicks, they have big names--as you'd expect with a payroll of $200 million--but they lack all the elements you need to compete. A collection of me-first players that don't play team defense is just not going to win many games. As for Toronto: To paraphrase Dodger manager Charlie Dressen: I'd like to see them do it again,</div>

</p> didn't the heat do that, twice? they at least did it once. but...they got shaq, so they shouldn't count.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti)</div><div class='quotemain'>When people defend Sam Mitchell, why do they never talk about defense?</div>

</p>

for the same reason people say "fire frank he sucks DO IT THRON" </p>

<font size="1">(i'll admit, i did that a few times, but i've matured )</font></p>
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti)</div><div class='quotemain'>When people defend Sam Mitchell, why do they never talk about defense?</div>

Because most of the coaches in the NBA can't coach defense.</p>

I'm not a big fan of Sam Mitchell either (actually I bashed him for the majority of last season and kind of resigned myself to cautious optimism when it was evident he was coming back). The main problem I have with him is his inability to make timely in-game adjustments. Either, he doesn't recognize what's happening or he doesn't know how to counter it, but either way he often makes the players' jobs harder (on offense and defense). He's a great motivator and the team really seems to connect with him, but he gets absolutely owned on the strategical aspect over and over again.</p>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top