Nets Are Scorching

Last updated: Thursday, June 15, 2011

Below is the list of every prospect the Nets have invited in for a workout. An asterisk next to a player’s name means that he did not participate in physical workouts due to injury.

Chaisson Allen (Northeastern)
Lavoy Allen (Temple)*
Rashad Bishop (Cincinnati)
Bojan Bogdanovic (International)
Marshon Brooks (Providence)*
Jimmy Bulter (Marquette)
Norris Cole (Cleveland State)
Jon Diebler (Ohio State)
LaceDarius Dunn (Baylor)*
Diante Garrett (Iowa State)
Andrew Goudelock (College of Charleston)
Justin Harper (Richmond)
Jeremy Hazell (Seton Hall)
Tyler Honeycutt (UCLA)
Delroy James (Rhode Island)
Derwin Kitchen (Florida State)
Sean Kowal (Northern Illinois)
Malcolm Lee (UCLA)
Jon Leuer (Wisconsin)
David Lighty (Ohio State)
Shelvin Mack (Butler)
Vernon Macklin (Florida)
Jamel McLean (Xavier)
Jonathan Mitchell (Rutgers)
E’Twaun Moore (Purdue)
Darius Morris (Michigan)
Chandler Parsons (Florida)
Eniel Polynice (Seton Hall)
Willie Reed (St. Louis)
Carleton Scott (Notre Dame)
Josh Selby (Kansas)
Marcus Simmons (USC)
Kyle Singler (Duke)
Jamie Skeen (VCU)
Greg Smith (Fresno State)
Nolan Smith (Duke)
Corey Stokes (Villanova)
Mychel Thompson (Washington State)
Mike Tisdale (Illinois)
Trey Tompkins (Georgia)
Nikola Vucevic (USC)
Brian Williams (Tennessee)
Chris Wright (Dayton)

Steven Kyritz is a new writer here at NetsareScorching.com.

Upon hearing the totally unsuspecting news that the Nets had traded for Deron Williams, my first thought was of the past. Well technically, my first thought was, “thank God they didn’t give up that package for Carmelo.” But my next thought was of the past: summer 2001, when the Nets acquired another stud PG in (duh) Jason Kidd.

That trade was the key to turning around the Nets franchise, taking them from afterthought to back-to-back Finals appearances in ’02 and ’03. Okay, so you probably knew that. It was still worth repeating, if only to set up the inevitable question: can trading for Deron Williams have the same effect on the Nets?

Short answer? Probably not. It’s a huge step in the right direction (assuming D-Will re-signs; if not, the Kidd trade comparisons stop and the Dr. J trade comparisons start) and could end with a title or appearance in the Finals, but that’s not likely with the roster they have now.

It’s not entirely the Nets’ fault. Through no fault of their own, the newly Kidd’d Nets of 2001 found themselves in an advantageous position, in a mediocre Eastern Conference. The year before, the East’s sacrificial lamb against the powerhouse Lakers had pretty much been one guy who could score (Allen Iverson) and a bunch of other guys who could do everything but (Mutombo, Ratliff, Tyrone Hill, Snow, McKie, et al).

In 2002, the East was probably even less impressive. I was trying to figure out a fun and interesting way to quantify this, but I’ll let the numbers speak for themselves: the Nets were the #1 seed with 52 wins, and Detroit at 50-32 was the only other 50 win team (the West had four teams win at least 57 games). Four of the Eastern Conference All-Star starters were good-but-not-quite-greats Mutombo, Antoine Walker, Vince Carter, and of course the Wizards’ Michael Jordan, not to be confused with, you know, Michael Jordan. (The fifth starter was Allen Iverson.) The West had Steve Nash, Gary Payton, Chris Webber, Karl Malone, and Dirk Nowitzki…on the bench behind starters Kobe Bryant, Shaquille O’Neal, Kevin Garnett, Tim Duncan, and contest-winner (not really) Steve Francis.

The next season was more of the same. The Nets won 49 games, just one game behind the conference-leading Pistons and good for an Atlantic Division title. In the West, it would have earned them the #7 seed. I bring this up not to cheapen what the Nets accomplished (I’ll let their play in the Finals do that. Zing! Seriously though, that series almost turned me off the NBA forever), just to demonstrate that Jason Kidd walked into an East ripe for the picking.

Now contrast that with the landscape facing the Nets next year. While it’s way too early to anticipate how teams will look next year, the Bulls, Heat, Celtics, Magic and Hawks all enter the offseason as contenders, while the Pacers and Sixers both boast young and talented rosters.

On a more individual level, you could make a strong argument that Jason Kidd was the best player in the Eastern Conference and a legit MVP candidate in his first full season with the Nets. Could Deron Williams do the same next season? Of course, provided he out-plays Messrs. James, Wade, Rose, Howard, Pierce, Stoudemire, Anthony, et al.

Speaking of players (they are fairly important, after all), it’s worth looking at how exactly the Nets team that Jason Kidd joined compares with what currently surrounds D-Will. As with the conference, Kidd walked into a roster that was tailor-made for instant success. The 2000-01 Nets were not without talent, but pretty much none of it stayed healthy.

(How bad was it, you ask? Evan Eschmeyer started 51 games.)

Kenyon Martin, Stephon Marbury, and Keith Van Horn missed 14, 15, and 33 games respectively. Kerry Kittles sat the entire season following knee surgery. The three who remained were healthy in 2001-02. Add in a rookie Richard Jefferson and Kenyon Martin (a rookie in 2000-01) having a year’s experience under his belt, and you have a team that was perfectly positioned for a huge leap forward. Kidd was the perfect match to light the Nets’ fuse.

And what about this Nets team? On the one hand, it is definitely a roster that is primed for improvement, particularly if Comrade Prokhorov can add the right bold name. Brook Lopez has legit star potential and there are a lot of interesting pieces (assuming everyone is re-signed) in Anthony Morrow, Kris Humphries, Sasha Vujacic, Jordan Farmar, and Brandan Wright.

There are two main differences between this team and the one Kidd took over, though. Among the players who remain, there’s no reason to expect a huge one-season jump. No one’s really coming back from any major injuries, and no major contributors were rookies last season. It pains me to say this, but pending offseason acquisitions, this team just isn’t as good. I’ll call Kidd and Williams a push, and Lopez is definitely an improvement over Todd MacCulloch, but I just don’t see the equal of the Martin/Van Horn/Kittles/Jefferson quartet on this roster.

All in all, Jason Kidd came into a perfect situation for an immediate Finals run and that it will be much, much, more difficult for Deron Williams to lift these Nets anywhere near those heights. That said, the opportunity is there for a big step forward, and the Finals are only really being mentioned because of what Kidd accomplished in 2001-02. Forty-plus wins and a playoff berth are not out of the question, and would be an impressive achievement for Williams and the Nets.

So a superstar has toiled in a second-tier market for a second-tier franchise his entire career. After years of early playoff exits with no ring to show for it, the superstar’s contract starts coming to a close. When asked by reporters what his next move will be, the superstar in question gives circuitous answers: he loves the franchise, he’s at home in his city, he’s happy.

But (there’s always a but)… The superstar in question has made his intentions clear. He’s becoming a free agent at the end of his contract. He would like to stay, but if the team doesn’t improve, he’ll skip town or demand a trade.

Huh. This all seems vaguely familiar.

I’d love to have Dwight Howard on the Nets. I would. I think Dwight and Deron makes the Nets instant contenders. One more decent wing scorer with a focus on the team concept – the Jason Terry, if you will – and the Nets are almost set. Surround that core with the right mix of role players who are willing to sacrifice to win a championship, and they’re competing with any team in the Eastern Conference.

Looking back at history, there’s a good chance we’re in store for a painful few months of commentary. “Will he?” “Won’t he?” “Dwight Howard to LA!” “Dwight’s throwing games, he wants out!” “Dwight loves Boston!” “Dwight’s leaning towards staying!” “Dwight Howard said the word Brooklyn!” “But he was just talking about Brooklyn Decker!”

The circuitous chain of curiosity will drag on, because this decision isn’t an immediate one. I’m not complaining, though. Patience is a virtue, and the last time the Nets did this, they ended up with the biggest payoff of all. I just hope Billy King can go two-for-two.

Now that Mark Jackson’s tenure broadcasting NBA games for ESPN and ABC is now officially over following the conclusion of the 2011 NBA Finals Sunday night, it seems appropriate to comment on what he has gone through and what he will be going through in the future.

My first experiences with Mark Jackson were not watching him play. Instead, my introduction to him was watching Nets games on YES for which he provided color commentary. I was fairly young at the time I started listening to him call these games at first — I was about 14 years old, and my basketball knowledge was just starting to bud, for I had not grown up in a basketball household; it was an interest I developed myself.

I’ll always recall his comments, ones that always fit well with Ian Eagle’s legendary play-by-play, because he’d make me laugh routinely with his jokes and anecdotes. He truly improved my viewing experience and made me love to tune in when ever he was on the call.

When he left YES after the 2008 season, it was a bittersweet moment: I was sad to see him leave the Nets, but I was happy that he was getting an opportunity to work with some of the best in the business for the best NBA games.

Over the last two three seasons, the Mike Breen-Jeff Van Gundy-Jackson trio has garnered a lot of notoriety: some of it positive, some of it not. For the most part, viewers are happy with Breen’s play-by-play capabilities and Van Gundy’s knowledge of the game and hare-brained opinions. Over the last few months, though, it seems there’s a growing animosity for Jackson.

I’ll be the first to say that Jackson has his quirks (the most notable of which, for me, is his routine use of “If I’m [insert player/coach/other figure here], I [do whatever].”), but is his unconventional approach to broadcasting enough reason to hate him? Jackson knows the game — there’s no doubt about that — and he keeps things entertaining for fans: there was precious little funnier than midgame banter between Jackson and Van Gundy, whose relationship dates back to Jackson’s playing days.

But more and more, it appears that the people who so often criticize Jackson’s color commentary are those people so attached to NBA basketball that they would still watch the game if James Joyce and Aldous Huxley were on the call. Quite frankly, what’s the point of complaining if the relevant decision-makers already have your guaranteed viewership?

The benefit of Mark Jackson is that he makes the game more relatable and more interesting for the fringe viewer — the ever-elusive casual fan that could go either way on the sport. That sounds like me when I started watching the Nets.

What basketball lovers have to understand is that these broadcasts must cater to a wide range of viewers: not just those who could spout off the winner and loser of every NBA Finals for the last 40 years. That’s why Jackson was part of ESPN’s primary crew and why Hubie Brown is second string. Brown is fantastic, of course: you’d be hard-pressed not to learn something about basketball after watching or listening to a game that he and Mike Tirico call. Simply stated, though, he won’t attract the casual fan.

So Jackson has finished his broadcasting run (for now, at least) and will take the Warriors coaching job next season (whenever that is). I find myself feeling similar to how I felt after the end of the Nets’ 2008 campaign. Jackson’s going to be a good coach, and hopefully he’ll find a way to instill a defensive mindset in that team and turn it into a contender. Nevertheless, I’m sad to see him drop the mic, for I’ll never forget the way he cultivated my basketball interest several years ago.

And for those who didn’t need him to get into basketball, understand that there are a lot more people like I was who tune in to basketball games than there are people like you.

Obviously we’ve been dealing with some unexpected site issues today. Thanks for your patience while we get things back up and running. We’ll be back Sunday morning.

UPDATE: Outside of a few behind-the-scenes kinks to work out, we’re essentially back up and running with a new format. Thanks again for your patience. -D.K.

Set to Mos Def’s “Mathematics,” uncensored.

To improve in the future, the Nets will have to learn from the mistakes of the past. In this weekly series, Nets are Scorching writers Justin DeFeo and Devin Kharpertian take a look at how the Nets performed in different sets on both sides of the ball during the 2010-11 season.
Read more…

To improve in the future, the Nets will have to learn from the mistakes of the past. In this weekly series, Nets are Scorching writers Justin DeFeo and Devin Kharpertian take a look at how the Nets performed in different sets on both sides of the ball during the 2010-11 season.

In today’s Nets strategy I am going to be looking at some of the Nets’ break downs in their transition defense.

In transition opportunities, the defense is often outnumbered, back pedaling and generally at a disadvantage compared to the offense. Transition defense takes some sound principles and a lot of practice to become good at. In the following clips we’ll take a look at some of the areas the Nets need to improve on in order to play better transition defense.

Turnovers

There’s an old saying the best offense is a good defense and vice versa, the best defense is a good offense. The Nets finished last season tied for 12th in the league checking in at 14 turnovers per game. Live ball turnovers obviously put your defense in a bad spot, without proper floor balance and sometimes with no players back. Live ball turnovers often lead to baskets. Let’s take a look at how some of our sloppy ball handling affects our transition defense.

Not Stopping the Ball

The most dangerous player in any defensive transition situation is the player with the ball. Therefore the first priority in a retreating defense is finding the ball and stopping it. I relate it to a fire breaking out in a kitchen (the player with the ball) and someone grabbing a fire extinguisher (first on the ball defender) and just trying to control the flames until further help arrives. The objective being to wall off the paint and impede the ball handler or getting the player with the ball to make non-penetrating passes, therefore slowing the break and allowing for more defensive numbers to join the play. With the type of athletes that play in the NBA that is easier said then done, but here are some clips of the Nets doing a poor job of this.

Slow Back In Transition

After the ball is stopped, it’s up to the rest of the defense to get back to the paint and defend out. This requires first and foremost effort and primarily sprinting. This is an area where the Nets could have done better a better job. In the clips you’ll even see a transition opportunity created by the Knicks after a Nets made basket, which is pretty inexcusable. You’ll notice four of the Nets casually getting back on defense as Chauncey Billups fires the ball down the court to an open shooter. In the second clip, Nets reserve center Dan Gadzuric simply gets out-hustled down the floor by D.J. White causing a transition dunk.

Not Locating Shooters

Possibly the final aspect of the transition defense. After you have the ball stopped, after the rest of the team has sprinted back to the paint, it’s time to turn around and defend out. During the retreating process, the Nets should be communicating as to who has the ball and the other four should be making decisions based off that. In this clip, Sasha Vujacic is the culprit. As the last defender back in transition, he should be recovering furthest away from the ball. Instead, Vujacic is either confused as to if he should be guarding the ball or not, or he makes an ill fated decision to try and double-team and trap the ball. None of the other Net defenders really do a good job of seeing the floor, and thus the Knicks best player, Carmelo Anthony is left wide open to hoist and make a three pointer.

When Jason Kidd demanded a trade during the 06-07 season, most Nets fans saw it coming. However, we were also crestfallen at the fact that our team’s leader – arguably the greatest Nets player ever – was about to leave the franchise that he singlehandedly restored into relevance.

Now, Kidd is still in the news at the ripe age of 38. After Tuesday night’s soon-to-be-legendary Game 4, Kidd is just two games away from the elusive ring he couldn’t bring to New Jersey. In an interview with Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo! Sports, Kidd claims that he saw the deconstruction of the Nets coming (if you need a reminder, the Nets when 12-70 two seasons later). Any team owned by Bruce Ratner was doomed to fail, and Kidd knew it.

As a fan, I detested Kidd for a little while for demanding a trade. I always hoped that Kidd would retire a Net, as his jersey was put up into the rafters. I was hoping that Kidd would wear a Nets hat to his Hall of Fame inauguration; suddenly, it might be a Dallas hat. However, from an objective standpoint, Kidd tried his best in NJ. He worked his hardest, got the team to the best result the franchise has seen in its NBA history, and then left when the franchise wasn’t a winning organization. Who can blame him for that?