I hope San Antonio wins!

[Yuma]

I hope San Antonio wins:

A) I'm a Western Conference guy over the East!

B) Jason Kidd and the rest of the New Jersey team are acting arrogantly like they WILL win this year no matter who the West sends since they were there last year.

C) That would mean we lost to the eventual World Champs, which would be better than losing to just any other team. I still wonder what if Marbury wasn't injured in game 4? If we did get past SA, could we have gone any further?

D) I WANT to see Joumana cry!!!

E) Steve Kerrrrrrrr!

F) I want the Eastern Conference to feel as if they are The Western Conference's b!tches!

 

[arthurracoon]

EXACTLY!!!

 

[Joe Mama]

There are some people in the media who have been saying that the disparity between the two conferences isn't really that great. This is the best Finals match up they could have hoped for. I would like San Antonio to win in 4-5 games showing that the best team from the Eastern conference was their weakest competition.

Joe Mama

 

[notakiddfan1]

B) Jason Kidd and the rest of the New Jersey team are acting arrogantly like they WILL win this year no matter who the West sends since they were there last year.

Yeah! I mean, if I was a player on the Nets, I'd probably say, "We aren't going to win. We're lucky to be here because the other Eastern Conference teams suck, and if we get a game, we'll be happy."

They're acting arrogant saying they'll win?? What!? This is sports, not a kindergarden tea party. I remember when both Frank Johnson and Stephon Marbury came right out before game 6 and said, "We will win this game." They didn't win, but was it arrogant of them to act like they were going to?

The fact is, you guys are bitter of how Jason Kidd left this team 2 years ago. You guys are upset that everybody on this board that bashed Jason Kidd for his on-court play was wrong. And now you're just hoping that Kidd doesn't help you guys put your foot in your mouth a little deeper by making the whole world know that his team, the New Jersey Nets, are actually the best team in basketball.

I remember last year when Jason would talk about this franchise and how they mistreated him and what not. People would say "let it go!" acting like Kidd was a baby for not letting the situation go. Now, however, after Kidd has moved on, you guys are still bitter. So who is the baby now?

I have news for you guys, and I know you're not gonna want to hear it, but.... the Nets are going to win the Finals this year.

 

[Billythekid]

"The nets are going to win the nba finals" - Thats a brave call, You been drinking tonight there Notakidd fan? Smoking the dope?




Who knows you could be right. We'll see. I do think it's closer than last year but think the Spurs will win in 5 or 6.

 

[PhiLLmattiC]

I want the nets to win. Too bad the suns didn't make it this far. it would have been hot to have a suns versus nets final.

 

[S_Nash]

Jesus, how many times do you want to bring up this bitterness bullsh!t?

People are allowed to dislike teams. I don't like New Jersey for many reasons.

Kenyon Martin got in my bad books ever since he tried to punk Rodney Rogers after Rogers committed a professional foul. His attitude thereafter doesn't help either.

I don't like Richard Jefferson because of his comments made earlier this season about Amare Stoudemire and the Phoenix Suns not being any better.

I don't like Jason Kidd because of HIS bitterness towards the Phoenix organisation. He's the one that can't keep his gob shut. And there's all the media attention his family gets. It's pathetic.

I'll admit he's worked on his game and is a much better player in Jersey than he ever was here with us. But the fact remains, BC made an executive decision and Kidd was traded. He was the unprofessional one that started bitching and moaning about our organisation to anyone who would listen.

I also don't like New Jersey for the simple fact that you want them to win the finals aswell.

 

[Joe Mama]

Originally posted by notakiddfan1
The fact is, you guys are bitter of how Jason Kidd left this team 2 years ago. You guys are upset that everybody on this board that bashed Jason Kidd for his on-court play was wrong. And now you're just hoping that Kidd doesn't help you guys put your foot in your mouth a little deeper by making the whole world know that his team, the New Jersey Nets, are actually the best team in basketball.

First of all, most of us were not wrong about Jason Kidd's on the court play. What most of us were saying was absolutely true. He was a poor shooter who had trouble running a half-court offense. Jason Kidd and the New Jersey Nets are still not very good in a half-court set. However the personnel around him and the motion offense they run does make him a better player in New Jersey.

With Jason Kidd, the Phoenix Suns were a 45-55 win team that could not make it out of the first round. It wasn't necessarily his fault. He was the best player on the team and really it's only tradable commodity other than Shawn Marion. The Suns had to do something and they did before Kidd had a chance to take off as a free agent.

I remember last year when Jason would talk about this franchise and how they mistreated him and what not. People would say "let it go!" acting like Kidd was a baby for not letting the situation go. Now, however, after Kidd has moved on, you guys are still bitter. So who is the baby now?

you know, looking back I think Jason Kidd had the biggest problem with Scott Skiles. I don't blame him. Skiles was a jerk. I don't blame Kidd for lashing out at Skiles and the negativity that filled the locker room with.

Last year Jason Kidd was my least favorite player in the NBA... including Karl Malone. Part of it was the way he lashed out at the organization, but most of it was the way the national media bagged on the Suns for the trade after only one season. Now I really don't care about Jason Kidd. He still is not a good shooter, but he is the most amazing open court player I've ever watched.

Mostly I want the San Antonio Spurs to destroy the New Jersey Nets because I've been saying all season long that the Eastern conference is pathetic. I've said many times that the New Jersey Nets would not have made it out of the first round in the Western Conference. In fact I think they would have been a seventh or eighth seed at best. The same goes for last year's New Jersey Nets.

If New Jersey can somehow pull off the upset now have to admit I was wrong. I don't like to do that.

I think San Antonio will win it in 5 or 6 games.

Joe Mama

 

[notakiddfan1]

Alright, that's fair enough. I think this is going to be a very close played series. There are a couple reasons I think New Jersey will pull this out though:

1) New Jersey has been playing some really good basketball. They're peaking at the right time. Now, they certainly come from a weaker conference, but it's not like they struggled to get to the Finals. If they slipped by 3 weak Eastern Conference teams and now find themselves luckily to be in a series for what pretty much is the Basketball World Championship, then I'd agree that they have little shot. However, they steamrolled through the East, they've won their last 10 playoff games, and are looking mighty good at this point of the season.

2) I'm just not that impressed with San Antonio. They really shouldn't be allowed to win an NBA championship. I mean, for younger basketball fans growing up around the world, you always hear about the best, championship-caliber teams having this intangible "killer instinct". The Spurs have nothing even remotely close to it. Sure, they made it to the Finals through a very tough conference, but look at their first round series. They played the 8th seed and struggled mightily. They play an all-around team game which seems good, but also seems to fail whenever the opposing team makes a run. In game 4, we came back from 19 points down in about 4 minutes and got it to within 6. We were down by 13, 14+ every single game in that series and still managed to make it a very competitive contest every time.

3) The Nets do seem to have that killer instinct that is very important. It's extremely hard to close out a sweep, and the Nets did that twice. It doesn't matter who they're playing, the teams they did play were pretty talented, and getting the game 4's against Boston and then Detroit was pretty commendable. They have the ferocity, they have the mentality, but maybe most importantly, they have the talent that's necesary to win the NBA Finals.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Originally posted by notakiddfan1
Alright, that's fair enough. I think this is going to be a very close played series. There are a couple reasons I think New Jersey will pull this out though:

1) New Jersey has been playing some really good basketball. They're peaking at the right time. Now, they certainly come from a weaker conference, but it's not like they struggled to get to the Finals. If they slipped by 3 weak Eastern Conference teams and now find themselves luckily to be in a series for what pretty much is the Basketball World Championship, then I'd agree that they have little shot. However, they steamrolled through the East, they've won their last 10 playoff games, and are looking mighty good at this point of the season.

2) I'm just not that impressed with San Antonio. They really shouldn't be allowed to win an NBA championship. I mean, for younger basketball fans growing up around the world, you always hear about the best, championship-caliber teams having this intangible "killer instinct". The Spurs have nothing even remotely close to it. Sure, they made it to the Finals through a very tough conference, but look at their first round series. They played the 8th seed and struggled mightily. They play an all-around team game which seems good, but also seems to fail whenever the opposing team makes a run. In game 4, we came back from 19 points down in about 4 minutes and got it to within 6. We were down by 13, 14+ every single game in that series and still managed to make it a very competitive contest every time.

3) The Nets do seem to have that killer instinct that is very important. It's extremely hard to close out a sweep, and the Nets did that twice. It doesn't matter who they're playing, the teams they did play were pretty talented, and getting the game 4's against Boston and then Detroit was pretty commendable. They have the ferocity, they have the mentality, but maybe most importantly, they have the talent that's necesary to win the NBA Finals.

Beating the crap out of the defending Champs in the 4th Quarter on the road to knok them out of the playoffs when everyone was doubting you is Killer Instinct.

Beating an inspired team, being down 19 points and outscoring them 34-9 on the road, in the fourth quarter to win a conferenc Title is killer instinct.

Beating the most pathetic collection of playoff teams ever in the East says nothing to me about the Nets, but this, THEY PLAY IN THE EAST. San Antonio may not be one of the greatest champs in league history, and I actually think they will beo one of the wekaer in recent memory - but The Nets ain't gonna beat them.

 

[Dback Jon]

Spurs in 5.

Nets are not that good - one of the weaker teams to make it to the finals.

 

[Errntknght]

I think the Nets will be a stronger opponent than most WC fans expect. The Spurs haven't demonstrated a consistently strong mentality in any series so all the Nets have to do is keep the pressure on them - and they've shown a lot of toughness so far in closing out games. I do think the Spurs are the better team but not by a large margin, and not under pressure.


I have to agree with Notakiddfan about the Jason Kidd deal - many people here forget that just prior to the trade the Colangeli were publicly saying how they didn't like watching the team play because they had no fire and that a malais had pervaded the team. The implication was that it was the leadership among the players that was at fault because at the same time they said they along with coach Skiles were searching for a new direction. This infuriated me at the time because I thought anyone who paid any attention at all could see that Skiles was a malignancy, undermining all the players confidence. Right on the heels of that they traded Kdd - doesn't that look for all the world like they thought Jason was the problem? Looking back from this vantage point almost anyone would have to admit that the C's had their heads in the sand regarding Skiles but everyone still blames Kidd for being pissed about the trade and the way he was dealt with. I don't blame him at all. And I think it's fair to say that he's shown that he is a positive leader on the court. Moreover, he's shown how dumb the Suns were not to put together a team that could take full advantage of his tremendous open court play - something that drove me nuts for years.

I've been a Suns fan since day 1 and to me, the Kidd era was the most excruciating period of all - the Suns could have been the most exciting team in basketball and in centention for the title had the Cs built around Jason's strengths and hired a merely average NBA coach - with a style that matched the team.

The Marbury-Marion-Stoudemire era is probably going to be just as painful if not moreso. We're just a head coach away from being a team that can contend for the title but the real question is can we get another player or two so that we can win it all iin spite of FJ? It sort of reminds me of the year in which Manning went down midseason when it looked, before that, like the team had depth enough to overcome Westfall's tendency to run his top players into the ground during the regular season.

 

[Joe Mama]

Originally posted by Errntknght
I have to agree with Notakiddfan about the Jason Kidd deal - many people here forget that just prior to the trade the Colangeli were publicly saying how they didn't like watching the team play because they had no fire and that a malais had pervaded the team. The implication was that it was the leadership among the players that was at fault because at the same time they said they along with coach Skiles were searching for a new direction. This infuriated me at the time because I thought anyone who paid any attention at all could see that Skiles was a malignancy, undermining all the players confidence. Right on the heels of that they traded Kdd - doesn't that look for all the world like they thought Jason was the problem? Looking back from this vantage point almost anyone would have to admit that the C's had their heads in the sand regarding Skiles but everyone still blames Kidd for being pissed about the trade and the way he was dealt with. I don't blame him at all.

I don't remember the Colangeli saying the team did not play with fire. What they said was that it was a boring team to watch. It absolutely was. I had a much, much better time watching the Phoenix Suns lose in 2001-02 than watching the Jason Kidd led team the year before. That team would have about five minutes per game of exciting open court play, and the rest of their offense was boring-ass, waste the entire shot clock passing the ball around the perimeter basketball. It sucked.

The Phoenix Suns traded Jason Kidd for several reasons.

1) his marketability here in the valley was shot after his arrest.

2) the Phoenix Suns were stuck in a loop of having good teams, playoff appearances, and first-round exits. In other words Jason Kidd was good enough to get them 50 wins during the regular season but not good enough to take THAT team past the first round in the Western Conference.

3) at that point there was only earlier one way to even attempt to build a team around Jason Kidd that really fit his style. They would have had to blow up the team trading anyone with the value except Jason Kidd and perhaps Shawn Marion. The problem with that plan was the Jason Kidd could become a free agent before the Suns would be close to having a good team around him.

And I think it's fair to say that he's shown that he is a positive leader on the court. Moreover, he's shown how dumb the Suns were not to put together a team that could take full advantage of his tremendous open court play - something that drove me nuts for years.

Sure he is a positive leader on the court and in the locker room in New Jersey. But that was one of the problems here in Phoenix. He was not a leader. Since the trade he has made it a point to try to be a leader.

The Phoenix Suns tried to build a team around Jason Kidd, but they made something mistakes. The first problem, of course, was Antonio McDyess leaving. Then they compounded that problem by signing Tom Gugliotta who really did not fit Jason Kidd's style of play. But their biggest mistake may have been signing Penny Hardaway to a maximum contract. I should point out that it was Jason Kidd who really pushed for the Suns to acquire Hardaway.

Actually that team was very, very good when they were healthy. They were probably one of the top 2-3 teams in the NBA. Once Livingston took out Googs' knee, and Hardaway hurt his knee in the playoffs they had $25 million in annual dead weight salary, and it was downhill from there.

Don't forget also that the New Jersey Nets absolutely would not be in the finals and would not have been in the finals last season if they played in the Western Conference. They would have been lucky to make it out of the first round. Even if they somehow beat San Antonio (the best matchup they could have hoped for) I won't believe they could have made it all the way in the Western Conference. They simply are not that good, and the competition they faced in the Eastern conference was borderline pathetic.

I've been a Suns fan since day 1 and to me, the Kidd era was the most excruciating period of all - the Suns could have been the most exciting team in basketball and in centention for the title had the Cs built around Jason's strengths and hired a merely average NBA coach - with a style that matched the team.

The Marbury-Marion-Stoudemire era is probably going to be just as painful if not moreso. We're just a head coach away from being a team that can contend for the title but the real question is can we get another player or two so that we can win it all iin spite of FJ? It sort of reminds me of the year in which Manning went down midseason when it looked, before that, like the team had depth enough to overcome Westfall's tendency to run his top players into the ground during the regular season.

Let's not kid carried away. The Phoenix Suns are missing a few more things than a head coach. More than anything I believe they need depth. They get almost nothing from the bench. Much more than the coaching that was the difference against San Antonio. The San Antonio Spurs averaged just over 90 points per game against The Phoenix Suns in the first round. That was 9 points better than the Lakers did and almost 11 points better than the Mavericks. As much as I hate to admit it double teaming Tim Duncan worked. The problem was that the Phoenix Suns could not score enough points to win. They need someone who can come off the bench and give them some points.

Joe Mama

 

[notakiddfan1]

Actually that team was very, very good when they were healthy. They were probably one of the top 2-3 teams in the NBA. Once Livingston took out Googs' knee, and Hardaway hurt his knee in the playoffs they had $25 million in annual dead weight salary, and it was downhill from there.

That's a very true statement. I actually have to give the Colangeli credit for the team they put together. I mean, in that year Penny Hardaway missed 22 games, Tom Gugliota missed half the season and Jason Kidd missed the last month. Even then they still managed to win 53 games! And I'm not talking about Tom Gugliota of this year missing half the season - on that team, he was a 17 points, 10 rebounds guy and he certainly was an asset to have on the team. It doesn't really do us any good to look back now, but if Googs had never gotten injured, and Penny didn't go down in the playoffs, that team probably would've won a championship by now. That team was 1 guy away from a ring, and he ended up truly arriving in Phoenix as that guy the year after when everything really fell apart. In 2001-2002, the guy averaged 17.5 points and 10 rebounds, and his name happened to be Shawn Marion. Unfortunately, the whole backcourt 2000 team never materialized.

Maybe the Colangeli gave up on that team too quickly. I don't know. The first month of last season, Penny showed that he could still put up all-star numbers, but he had to do it competing with Stephon Marbury. Kidd would've been more than willing to pass the ball to Penny and anybody else who wanted the ball whenever they wanted, so maybe the team still could've been great. Luckily for us, the team we're about to become is going to make the memories of that team, promising as it was, fade quickly and easily into the past.

Don't forget also that the New Jersey Nets absolutely would not be in the finals and would not have been in the finals last season if they played in the Western Conference. They would have been lucky to make it out of the first round. Even if they somehow beat San Antonio (the best matchup they could have hoped for) I won't believe they could have made it all the way in the Western Conference.

Now this is simply a false statement. It is hard to compare a team from the East with a team from the West, so there obviously is a question. But that doesn't mean by any stretch that the Nets wouldn't fare well in the West. The Nets would have to be lucky to make it to the Western Conference Finals, but it's not like the Spurs or Mavericks were locks to get there either. The Kings didn't have Webber, so doesn't that make Dallas lucky? The Lakers didn't have a healthy roster, so are the Spurs lucky? Shoot, the Suns basically lost Marbury after game 4, so the Spurs were lucky to make it out of the first round.

The Nets are not definately a better team than the Spurs, Lakers, Kings, or Marvericks, but they can certainly compete with them. And to say that a team like the Utah Jazz, Portland Trailblazers, Minnesota Timberwolves, or Phoenix Suns are clear-cut better than the Nets would be a completely misguided statement. It is difficult to compare those 5 teams because they don't play in the same conference, I'll give you that. But that only means that you simply don't compare them. You guys are saying that because you cannot accurately compare the teams, the Nets must then fall below the teams in the West just because you say so? How does that work?

The truth is, we're all lucky. We're lucky because we don't have to argue about this. Starting tomorrow night the New Jersey Nets are going to be in San Antonio playing the Spurs in what I believe is going to be a very competitive series, and once it starts, it doesn't matter what any of us believe. If the Nets end up winning, I'm gonna come on these boards and rub it in every one of your faces and laugh at the excuses you all give for why the Spurs got ripped off and what-not. I'm sure that if San Antonio sweeps, you'll all do the same to me. Regardless, everything we say until then is just heresay.

 

[Joe Mama]

I said two weeks ago that if it ended up being New Jersey and San Antonio in the finals he was going to be competitive. In fact I said there was a good possibility New Jersey would win. I just hope it doesn't happen because then I'll have to admit I was wrong about the Nets.

Joe Mama

 

[elindholm]

If the Nets end up winning, I'm gonna come on these boards and rub it in every one of your faces

So you're a Nets fan now? I thought you were a big Hardaway supporter. "These boards"?

The first month of last season, Penny showed that he could still put up all-star numbers, but he had to do it competing with Stephon Marbury. Kidd would've been more than willing to pass the ball to Penny and anybody else who wanted the ball whenever they wanted, so maybe the team still could've been great.

"Kidd would've been more than willing to pass." Cry me a river. Kidd averaged 0.8 assists more per game than Marbury this season. And for all of his "pass-first" mentality, he still shoots way too much. Kenyon Martin leads the Nets in FGA so far in this postseason, but just barely: Kidd trails by only four total attempts over the 14 games.

You're still overlooking the basic flaw in Jason Kidd's game, which is that he cannot run a half-court offense. Western Conference teams are more disciplined than Eastern Conference ones. Kidd can run ragged in the East, because most of his opponents are too lazy to defend properly.

Detroit, admittedly, is a counterexample. They defended the Nets well, allowing them only 87 points per game in the first three before throwing in the towel in Game Four. But Detroit was even more offensively inept than New Jersey was, so giving up 87 points was too much.

Do you really think the Nets will average better than 90 points against the Spurs, the West's top defensive team? And do you really think the Spurs will struggle to score 90 points on their own?

Kidd's success in New Jersey, compared to Phoenix, is an illusion caused by the weaker opposition he faces. Of course he is an excellent point guard. Everyone knows that. He was an excellent point guard in Phoenix, and his teams in Phoenix were quite good. But they weren't great.

This year's Suns did better against the league's elite than any of the Kidd-era Suns teams did. The Kidd-led Suns did just fine against weak opponents, but cracked against the tough ones. The Kidd-led Nets will do the same when they face their first tough opponent of these playoffs.

I don't think this year's Nets are any better than the best Kidd-Hardaway years in Phoenix. The difference is that these Nets are healthy and have had a red carpet to the Finals. That's about it.

But hey, believe whatever you want. I've never found you to be susceptible to reason anyway.

 

[notakiddfan1]

So you're a Nets fan now? I thought you were a big Hardaway supporter.

Yeah, you're right. What was I thinking? I therefore change what I've said so far in this thread. Now, I am back to being a Penny fan above all else. So, I think Penny is gonna outplay all of the Spurs players combined in this series. And being a Suns fan, I really hope they win. Man do I love the NBA Finals!

That is what you wanted me to say, right?

"Kidd would've been more than willing to pass." Cry me a river. Kidd averaged 0.8 assists more per game than Marbury this season. And for all of his "pass-first" mentality, he still shoots way too much. Kenyon Martin leads the Nets in FGA so far in this postseason, but just barely: Kidd trails by only four total attempts over the 14 games.

I'm not crying anybody a river. Kidd is a more willing passer than Stephon Marbury. Does that make Stephon Marbury a bad player? No. It doesn't even make him selfish. But the fact of the matter is that Stephon is a shoot-first point guard, and Jason is a pass-first.

Even with that, I'm not about to say that Stephon's "light bulb went off" this year and made him an all-team guy, because he played pretty much the same way this year as he did his first year as a Sun more or less. I love Stephon Marbury, the way he plays basketball, and most of all, I love to see him win because you can just tell how much it means to him. But that doesn't change the fact that last year him and Penny bumped heads because both of them wanted to be the team's go-to guy. Stephon and Penny have both talked about it publically, how they've made up, and how STEPHON APPOLOGIZED TO PENNY. Really, it's a non-issue tho, and i'm not sure why I'm even talking about it. The point I was trying to make was that maybe the Colangeli gave up on that Backcourt 2000 team too early just because they weren't healthy for a year. I never once tried to make it into a Jason Kidd - Stephon Marbury battle.

You're still overlooking the basic flaw in Jason Kidd's game, which is that he cannot run a half-court offense.

The New Jersey Nets half-court offense was very good this year. Is that because Jason Kidd is a great half-court offense specialist? No, not at all. It's mostly because Byron Scott instituted an offense in New Jersey that works for New Jersey. See, now we're talking about coaching though, not Jason Kidd. It's hard when you bring up other variables such as a coach into the equation. For you, elindholm, basketball seems to be only about the point guard. The Nets offense, if it was bad, must therefore be because of Jason Kidd. But why then, I'd like to know, do the Nets get more layups than most basketball teams in the league? Be careful now, because I don't mean just against Eastern conference teams.

Western Conference teams are more disciplined than Eastern Conference ones. Kidd can run ragged in the East, because most of his opponents are too lazy to defend properly.

Ahhh, that makes perfect sense. Eastern Conference teams are lazy.

When someone said to me that your mother made a good decision having sex with a ******** hobo in conceiving you, that was rediculous - so believe me, I've heard some dumb statements in my day. But your theory that Eastern Conference teams are just lazier than teams in the West really takes the cake. I gotta hand it to you elindholm, you really are a moron.

This year's Suns did better against the league's elite than any of the Kidd-era Suns teams did. The Kidd-led Suns did just fine against weak opponents, but cracked against the tough ones. The Kidd-led Nets will do the same when they face their first tough opponent of these playoffs.

You didn't watch the second round of the 2000 playoffs did you? That was when the Phoenix Suns were playing the eventual champion Los Angeles Lakers. They lost game 2 by an extremely difficult jumper with 2.1 seconds left by Kobe Bryant, lost game 3 when the Lakers made an amazing fourth-quarter run after Phoenix had lost the whole game, and beat LA by 19 in game four. Very easily that Phoenix Suns team could've ened up on the other end of a 3-1 edge that the Lakers had going into game five, and the Suns might've found themselves in the Western Conference Finals. Anybody who still remembers that series would disagree with your statement.

But hey, believe whatever you want. I've never found you to be susceptible to reason anyway.

You know what, thanks for permission to not be an ignorant turd like yourself. I'm gonna be honest with you, if I were you and I actually knew how stupid I really was, I'd shoot myself and let somebody else who is deserving in the world eat the food I waste everyday by digesting it.

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

It is Eddie Jordan's half court offense, not Byron Scott. Scott may actually be more of a puppet than FJ come to think of it......

 

[Chaplin]

Originally posted by notakiddfan1

When someone said to me that your mother made a good decision having sex with a ******** hobo in conceiving you, that was rediculous - so believe me, I've heard some dumb statements in my day. But your theory that Eastern Conference teams are just lazier than teams in the West really takes the cake. I gotta hand it to you elindholm, you really are a moron.

You know what, thanks for permission to not be an ignorant turd like yourself. I'm gonna be honest with you, if I were you and I actually knew how stupid I really was, I'd shoot myself and let somebody else who is deserving in the world eat the food I waste everyday by digesting it.

This is extremely uncalled for, and you should either edit this post or be on the fast track to banning. This is ridiculous.

 

[elindholm]

Taking the gloves off, huh? Okay, it's your decision.

That is what you wanted me to say, right?

I'm trying to figure out what your problem is. It seems to me that you are down on the Suns because Hardaway has not been successful in Phoenix, and somehow that is the organization's fault. But I'm not sure. You could just be a spiteful, equal-opportunity whiner.

But the fact of the matter is that Stephon is a shoot-first point guard, and Jason is a pass-first.

It's not a "fact" at all. It is a stereotype. You cannot even define what "shoot-first" and "pass-first" mean in a way that is not completely subjective. Marbury shoots more than Kidd because he understands that sometimes his shooting is best for the team's offense. (That is not to say that Marbury doesn't force bad shots, because he does. So does Kidd.) Kidd avoids shooting because he knows that his shot is a last resort in his team's offensive scheme.

Stephon and Penny have both talked about it publically, how they've made up, and how STEPHON APPOLOGIZED TO PENNY.

Ah, now I get it. Your problem with Marbury is that he didn't immediately bow down to Hardaway in the proper fashion. I guess most of us are guilty of that, aren't we?

The New Jersey Nets half-court offense was very good this year.

It was? They scored 95.4 points per game and shot .441 from the field, both 14th in the league and below average among playoff teams. And that's in spite of having the best open-court offense in the league -- and, as you point out, having shot a lot of layups.

But why then, I'd like to know, do the Nets get more layups than most basketball teams in the league?

Uh, maybe because they run the best? Layups are the most common result of well executed fast breaks.

When someone said to me that your mother made a good decision having sex with a ******** hobo in conceiving you

Callous, adolescent, and disgraceful. As long as we're talking about mothers, do you think yours would be proud of you? Maybe you should send her your post and find out.

But your theory that Eastern Conference teams are just lazier than teams in the West really takes the cake.

I meant lazier defensively, and they are. Of the seven worst teams in field-goal percentage allowed, six were from the East. (The teams, from the bottom up, were Toronto, Memphis, Milwaukee, New York, Orlando, Cleveland, and Philadelphia.) Team defense has a lot to do with effort, and the East's team defense is poor.

The Nets were 15-13 against the West in the regular season. Barely over .500! Meanwhile, TEN West teams posted better records than that against the East -- all eight playoff teams, plus Houston and Golden State. There is absolutely no comparison between the strengths of the conferences. That has something to do with talent, but also something to do with effort.

I gotta hand it to you elindholm, you really are a moron.

Name-calling isn't going to get you anywhere. I'm laying out fact after fact to support my argument, and you have no answers.

You didn't watch the second round of the 2000 playoffs did you?

Of course I did. That team was led by Hardaway (who was terrific) and Clifford Robinson. Kidd was just coming back from injury and was not nearly as effective as usual.

Anybody who still remembers that series would disagree with your statement.

I guess it depends on the quality of their memory. That team was not "Kidd-led." It had Jason Kidd on it, but he was not leading it.

You know what, thanks for permission to not be an ignorant turd like yourself.

If you're going to insult my intelligence -- over and over -- at least get the language right. It's "like you," not "like yourself." Ask your English teacher.

if I were you and I actually knew how stupid I really was, I'd shoot myself

Thank goodness, then, that you aren't more self-aware. It would be a real pity for all of us to be deprived of your insight.

So ... any facts for me?

 

[PhiLLmattiC]

Sounds like you guys are getting personal. Well today is game one so we'll see who the moron is.

 

[notakiddfan1]

It's not a "fact" at all. It is a stereotype. You cannot even define what "shoot-first" and "pass-first" mean in a way that is not completely subjective. Marbury shoots more than Kidd because he understands that sometimes his shooting is best for the team's offense. (That is not to say that Marbury doesn't force bad shots, because he does. So does Kidd.) Kidd avoids shooting because he knows that his shot is a last resort in his team's offensive scheme.

Stephon Marbury was brought to this team because of his scoring ability. Is it that simple? No, of course not. But the fact of the matter is the Colangeli went with Stephon over Jason Kidd because Marbury can score the basketball when the team needs it, and for the most part he has done that. Jason Kidd, although a great point guard, was not the scorer that Marbury is and he got a lot of the blame for our sometimes-stagnant offense. It wasn't always his fault, but I blamed him for it just as much as anybody else on this board. You're right, both Kidd and Marbury force shots. So did Michael Jordan. You gotta take big shots to make tough shots. So I agree with you there.

Ah, now I get it. Your problem with Marbury is that he didn't immediately bow down to Hardaway in the proper fashion. I guess most of us are guilty of that, aren't we?

I said Stephon appoligized to Penny. It may be painful for some of you to realize that but I cannot do anything about the facts. If you don't want to believe it, you don't have to. It's fine by me.

But that doesn't mean I have a problem with Marbury for it. I've said repetedly that I like Marbury, and you persist to argue with me about why I am wrong for disliking Marbury. So what am I to do? If I say the sky is blue, and you respond with, "The sky is blue whether you like it or not. Saying anything else is nonesense." then what am I supposed to do? Just as I don't have any problem with the color of the sky, I don't have any problem with Marbury. By saying that Penny and Stephon bumped heads last year and this summer Stephon appologized, I'm merely stating the facts.

I'm trying to figure out what your problem is. It seems to me that you are down on the Suns because Hardaway has not been successful in Phoenix, and somehow that is the organization's fault. But I'm not sure. You could just be a spiteful, equal-opportunity whiner.

Okay, I'm gonna need you to find me an instance in this thread that I voiced any problem of mine with the Phoenix Suns organization. I did pose a "what if" instance talking about the Kidd-Penny team, but I quickly reiterated the fact that I am growing to love this team and its possibilites for success just as much if not more than the Suns 3 years ago. I don't have any problem with Penny's role on this team. I think it's somewhat rediculous at times playing Joe Johnson when Penny should be in there, but that's simply because I don't like to watch the Suns lose, and 4 out of every 5 games, that's about all JJ helps the team do.

And as far as equal-opportunity, who am I equal-opportunity for? I think the players who contribute should play and the players that make shots should take shots. Marbury should take the most shots on the team, and maybe Penny should actually take more shots. Amare should also get more touches down-low and Shawn Marion should still get his fair share of shots. If that makes me an equal opportunity whiner, then I'm sorry.

 

[Joe Mama]

Okay guys I think we've had enough. Let's see what actually happens when the San Antonio Spurs and New Jersey Nets play.

And let's try to avoid the personal insults.

Thanks,
Joe Mama

 

[elindholm]

Let's see what actually happens when the San Antonio Spurs and New Jersey Nets play.

Thanks for the invitation, Joe Mama. The remaining quotations are from my earlier post:

And for all of his "pass-first" mentality, (Kidd) still shoots way too much.

Kidd had 17 shot attempts, second-most on his team and as many as any player on the Spurs. If he has a "pass-first mentality," why in the heck does he keep chucking it up, especially when he can't hit the broad side of a barn?

Kidd avoids shooting because he knows that his shot is a last resort in his team's offensive scheme.

Except for two teammates who were each 0-1, Kidd had the lowest shooting percentage of anyone on the Nets' roster.

You're still overlooking the basic flaw in Jason Kidd's game, which is that he cannot run a half-court offense.

In spite of a first quarter in which they caught the Spurs napping and got to run, the Nets finished the game shooting 37%.

Do you really think the Nets will average better than 90 points against the Spurs, the West's top defensive team? And do you really think the Spurs will struggle to score 90 points on their own?

We'll see if the Nets fare any better in other games, but I continue to think that they will struggle to score 90, while the Spurs will not.

I don't think this year's Nets are any better than the best Kidd-Hardaway years in Phoenix. The difference is that these Nets are healthy and have had a red carpet to the Finals. That's about it.

So far, it actually looks as though the Suns teams were better. Kenyon Martin is impressive, however.

 

[cly2tw]

To be fair, the reason that Kidd hoists up so many shots was not all his fault. The defense was to blame that he had to resort to the "last resort". Heheh. Or, is it equivalent to say that Kidd is the bad half-court player that this "last resort" situation repeats itself way too often?
I am ecstatic that we have Marbury instead of Kidd!