Who here still thinks it was a good idea to re-sign VC?
- Thread starter furnace
- Start date
Welcome to our community
Be a part of something great, join today!
FOMW
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2007
- Messages
- 898
- Likes
- 7
- Points
- 18
Furnace you really should try to be more accurate. Vince was born in January of 1977. He will be 33, not 35, when the 2010 season starts. He is a far better player than RJ right now, and, barring a major injury, he will still be a better player than RJ in 2010. So, whether it's to anchor the offense for the next two years to keep the team afloat or to serve as a major trading piece in 2010, Vince is the more valuable (and less overpaid) player to keep on the roster.
allnet5-21
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2008
- Messages
- 29
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 1
ehh it would but no one wanted vince and even if they did get offers for him, they werent substantially good enough to consider. in all honesty i wouldnt trade vince for szcerbiak everr
cpawfan
Monsters do exist
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2007
- Messages
- 8,703
- Likes
- 12
- Points
- 38
RJ played his way off the team. His contract has no bearing on looking back at Vince's contract and it all it does is muddy the waters of any productive discussion.
Vince's primary measuring stick is ticket sales and Brooklyn luxury boxes.
Vince's primary measuring stick is ticket sales and Brooklyn luxury boxes.
MaxaMillion711
...?
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2004
- Messages
- 814
- Likes
- 18
- Points
- 18
at the time, it was the right thing to do. we had kidd, rj and kristic WAS really good untill he got injured. VC just came off of his healthiest season since 2000 and he wanted to be back.
jason kidd said himself, it was the most talented team hed ever played on before the season started. so things looked good
but once kidd said "there is no light at the end of the tunnel" on the teams 1st west trip....you knew it was all downhill..
so its hard to say if it was or not....looking back, yes, it was.
jason kidd said himself, it was the most talented team hed ever played on before the season started. so things looked good
but once kidd said "there is no light at the end of the tunnel" on the teams 1st west trip....you knew it was all downhill..
so its hard to say if it was or not....looking back, yes, it was.
danxcr
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,710
- Likes
- 1
- Points
- 38
umm VC got 60 million for 4 years with a 5 th year as an option... antawn got 4 years for 50 million... and baron got 5 years 65 million... i for one believe carter deserves the contract.... i kno a lot of people are goin to hang me for this.... but i love VC... and i kno now he is the leader.. and hes been an ironman since being on the team... and he has produced...
everybody knows last year he was hurt and he played through it... i expect a lot from VC next season... he will show us he was worth the contract.
everybody knows last year he was hurt and he played through it... i expect a lot from VC next season... he will show us he was worth the contract.
Black Republican
MOB
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 1,571
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 36
I want the Cavs to step up their offer, i wanna see VC and Bron 2gether.
coolman
Suspended
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2008
- Messages
- 10
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 0
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (go nets @ Jul 2 2008, 03:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>VC isnt going anywhere</div>
tru who is gonna fill up the seats if vc i traded
we cant expect to see 20k Chinese fill up the swamp every game
tru who is gonna fill up the seats if vc i traded
we cant expect to see 20k Chinese fill up the swamp every game
ghoti
A PhD in Horribleness
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2007
- Messages
- 5,516
- Likes
- 14
- Points
- 38
I've been as critical of this contract as anyone, but at this point it doesn't really matter.
1. Carter.is now the player who will be traded for LeBron (or whatever major FA the Nets trade for). Before they foolishly signed him, it could have just been RJ.
2. Carter is a better player than RJ.
3. RJ brought back more in return than Carter would have.
They had the option to keep one. I think they chose wisely.
1. Carter.is now the player who will be traded for LeBron (or whatever major FA the Nets trade for). Before they foolishly signed him, it could have just been RJ.
2. Carter is a better player than RJ.
3. RJ brought back more in return than Carter would have.
They had the option to keep one. I think they chose wisely.
netsking
Member
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2008
- Messages
- 97
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 6
When we resigned him i thought it was good, but with his performance last year and the money hes making id rather have another player with an expiring contract. And he can be replaced but we need a energy booster and a scorer, thats why i love JR Smith. Future star at only 22.
infinet
Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2008
- Messages
- 145
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 16
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Jul 2 2008, 01:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I've been as critical of this contract as anyone, but at this point it doesn't really matter.
1. Carter.is now the player who will be traded for LeBron (or whatever major FA the Nets trade for). Before they foolishly signed him, it could have just been RJ.
2. Carter is a better player than RJ.
3. RJ brought back more in return than Carter would have.
They had the option to keep one. I think they chose wisely.</div>
I would HIGHLY disagree. We got robbed by the Bucks
1. Carter.is now the player who will be traded for LeBron (or whatever major FA the Nets trade for). Before they foolishly signed him, it could have just been RJ.
2. Carter is a better player than RJ.
3. RJ brought back more in return than Carter would have.
They had the option to keep one. I think they chose wisely.</div>
I would HIGHLY disagree. We got robbed by the Bucks
Carter15Nets
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 619
- Likes
- 1
- Points
- 18
elton brand just got offered 5 years 103 million from warriors and hes 1 year younger when vc signed his deal
gilbert arenas is going to sign 6 years 127 mill after a few surgeries on his ankle
baron davis got 5 years 65 mill and his body is already breaking down
vc 4 years 61.8 mill is not that bad of a contract idk why people make it seem so bad...check his stats before he got that deal
gilbert arenas is going to sign 6 years 127 mill after a few surgeries on his ankle
baron davis got 5 years 65 mill and his body is already breaking down
vc 4 years 61.8 mill is not that bad of a contract idk why people make it seem so bad...check his stats before he got that deal
Dumpy
Yi-ha!!
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2007
- Messages
- 4,231
- Likes
- 24
- Points
- 38
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (infinet @ Jul 2 2008, 05:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Jul 2 2008, 01:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I've been as critical of this contract as anyone, but at this point it doesn't really matter.
1. Carter.is now the player who will be traded for LeBron (or whatever major FA the Nets trade for). Before they foolishly signed him, it could have just been RJ.
2. Carter is a better player than RJ.
3. RJ brought back more in return than Carter would have.
They had the option to keep one. I think they chose wisely.</div>
I would HIGHLY disagree. We got robbed by the Bucks
</div>
I kind of think it was relatively fair. You're just used to the Nets getting the better end of things.
I think of it this way: Yi's stats were relatively similar to RJ's when he was a rookie, from the minutes to the PPG to the FG attempts and percentage. The Nets traded KVH for a guy they later bought out to allow RJ to become a starter. The next year, of course, RJ blossomed, while KVH was soon done.
The same could happen here. With a year under his belt, and more minutes, Yi could conceivably become a 16-8 guy. RJ was at his peak value, is injury prone, and is reaching the age when he should be expected to decline. Similar? Maybe.
Here's another way. Seattle traded Ray Allen for a #5 pick and expiring contracts. The Nets traded RJ for a #6 pick and a rotation-quality player whiile reducing the team salary. Better than the Allen deal? Yes. Is RJ better than Allen? No way. Did Seattle get market value for Allen, or did they get ripped off? Who is to say?
Here's a final way: RJ wasn't playing defense, and a one-dimentional scorer at SF is a dime a dozen. Is RJ any better than James Jones? Pietrus? Matt Barnes? Or is the only difference between them opportunity and role in the team offense? Let's see what those guys command as free agents.
I like RJ; I know nothing about Yi; and I'm a little disgusted at what is going on; but that doesn't necessarily imply that it was a bad trade. Let's wait and see what Yi can do as a soph.
I'd rather the Nets traded RJ a year too early than a year too late, if you get me.
1. Carter.is now the player who will be traded for LeBron (or whatever major FA the Nets trade for). Before they foolishly signed him, it could have just been RJ.
2. Carter is a better player than RJ.
3. RJ brought back more in return than Carter would have.
They had the option to keep one. I think they chose wisely.</div>
I would HIGHLY disagree. We got robbed by the Bucks
</div>
I kind of think it was relatively fair. You're just used to the Nets getting the better end of things.
I think of it this way: Yi's stats were relatively similar to RJ's when he was a rookie, from the minutes to the PPG to the FG attempts and percentage. The Nets traded KVH for a guy they later bought out to allow RJ to become a starter. The next year, of course, RJ blossomed, while KVH was soon done.
The same could happen here. With a year under his belt, and more minutes, Yi could conceivably become a 16-8 guy. RJ was at his peak value, is injury prone, and is reaching the age when he should be expected to decline. Similar? Maybe.
Here's another way. Seattle traded Ray Allen for a #5 pick and expiring contracts. The Nets traded RJ for a #6 pick and a rotation-quality player whiile reducing the team salary. Better than the Allen deal? Yes. Is RJ better than Allen? No way. Did Seattle get market value for Allen, or did they get ripped off? Who is to say?
Here's a final way: RJ wasn't playing defense, and a one-dimentional scorer at SF is a dime a dozen. Is RJ any better than James Jones? Pietrus? Matt Barnes? Or is the only difference between them opportunity and role in the team offense? Let's see what those guys command as free agents.
I like RJ; I know nothing about Yi; and I'm a little disgusted at what is going on; but that doesn't necessarily imply that it was a bad trade. Let's wait and see what Yi can do as a soph.
I'd rather the Nets traded RJ a year too early than a year too late, if you get me.
