Nets Net

The Magic Number is 10

2011-01-12T20:39:00.000-08:00

No, I'm not talking about wins (altho, even at this late date, the Nets have only 10 wins) or the number of players involved in the Quixotic and fictive Carmelo Anthony trade.

I'm talking points. Specifically, the number of points when you call a time out.

With 10 minutes (sic) remaining in the game, the Nets are leading 90-75, a 15 point lead. Good teams make plays, bad teams make mistakes, but even a bad quarter would still result in a win.

Unless you mismanage it, of course.

My biggest gripe about Frank was that he had no idea how to use time outs judiciously. It seemed I never wondered about the timing of an opponent's coach's use of time outs, and always wondered about Frank's. His timeout calls were frankly (sic, or not) tone deaf to the game.

AJ is better; I haven't questioned his time out calls, until tonite.

I don't get why Nets coaches don't know what virtually every other NBA coach of note does - don't let your double digit lead dwindle to single digits without doing something about it. The time to call a time out is when your lead is 10 or more, NOT when it is less than 10.

A 15 point lead can duck under 10 with 3 buckets in a row, or two threes. Either string will wake up a team, but not give them hope. Hope comes when the opponent chops a double digit lead to single digits. Every announcer on the planet, every fan in the stands, every coach in history, every player on the floor, will say, Now it's a game...

Phoenix cuts the lead to 10, 92-82. They are starting to get into it. AJ calls time out. Sets up a play. The Nets score. 94-82. Run over. Hope fades.

But no. AJ does NOT call a timeout. AJ "let's them play". Who is he letting play?

The Phoenix Suns, is who.

With poetic justice, former Net-for-life Vince Carter drains a 3. It's now 92-85 with more than a half a quarter left. NOW AJ calls time. NOW the house is rockin'. NOW the Suns are pumped.

It's more than a 5 point swing. It's a game swing. The Nets somehow force overtime, after trailing for most of the last 2 mins. Even after taking a brief OT lead, they wind up losing. That 3 was the only points they score in OT.

YOU CAN'T CONSERVE YOUR TIME OUTS FOR LATE IN THE GAME. If you use them judiciously, YOU WON'T NEED THEM. If you conserve them, barring a miracle, their only effect will be to draw out the humiliation of your team as they watch a winnable - a won! - game dribble down the drain.

Instead, he lets the Suns back in, lets his team take their feet of the Suns' throat. Yet again, for the 100th time, the Nets lose the first game on a difficult Western swing in OT, due solely to poor coaching.

It amazes me how so many obviously flawed coaches are allowed to malpractice in the pros of every sport. A coach needs not only to have a great work ethic for preparation, not only has to know his players and their strengths and limitations, not only has to be a viable strategist but HAS TO KNOW HOW TO MANAGE SITUATIONS IN-GAME.

AJ failed that test miserably tonite.

Nets lose in OT by 9. By NINE.

All because the jerk on the bench doesn't understand when to call a lousy time out.

The Last Two Minutes of Every Period

2010-12-01T19:30:00.000-08:00

As is known, I have been watching this team for decades. I am also a Jets fan, and if there's one epithet that Jets fans are known for - other than Fireman Ed's J-E-T-S cheer - it's "same old Jets".

What that epithet describes is the truth everybody but Jets coaches seem to grasp: Their team has a persona, a way of losing, letting go of the rope, doing it the same way year after year after year, regardless the players, the coaches, even the owners.

Most of the current Jets have only been on the team a few years, but even they fear the "same old Jets" call. Even if they have themselves never experienced the collapses - of the same type - of years past, they are well aware of them. This makes them tighter than they normally would be, irrespective of their past experiences.

Coaches minimize personae. I don't know why. One would think that they'd be conscious of it - especially Jets coaches.

Especially Nets coaches...

Tonite the Nets lost in triple overtime, 123-120. They had, in the first two overtimes, innumerable chances to win. Yet they lost.

And how did they lose?

Well, to hear AJ talk about it, it has to do with youth and inexperience.

BS, AJ.

Cynics might say, Good teams make plays, bad teams make mistakes. And that is true.

But it's more than that.

The Nets have this persona - they lose almost every period in the last 2 minutes.

The lose in the last 2 minutes of almost every period.

Consider tonite's game.

Here are the results of all 7 periods in the last two minutes:

1. +2
2. Even
3. -1
4. +1
5. -4
6. +1
7. -2

This comes to a net (sic) -3. How much did they lose by? 3.

I do not carefully keep stats. For my own mental health, I don't watch every single game (altho this year I may have).

After a good start, where the Nets in fact did start winning these all important segments of games, they are falling back to their old persona.

NOTE TO COACH JOHNSON: If you want a simple, effective way to improve this team - FOCUS ON TEACHING THEM HOW TO PLAY THE LAST 2 MINUTES OF A PERIOD.

Example: In the first OT, if they win the last 2 minutes of JUST THAT PERIOD, they win. If they break even, they win!

The Nets play tight in the last 2 minutes of nearly every period. Every single one. Do you want your young team to develop confidence? TEACH THEM HOW TO MANAGE THE LAST 2 MINUTES.

For example...

POUND IT INTO THEIR HEAD - YOU DON'T FOUL ON A 3 POINT SHOT WITH A 3 POINT LEAD.

YOU CANNOT AFFORD 24 SECOND VIOLATIONS.

YOUR BIGS MUST GO INSIDE. YOUR 3S MUST DRIVE THE LANE. ONLY YOUR GUARDS TAKE OUTSIDE SHOTS, AND ONLY WITH BIGS UNDERNEATH FOR REBOUNDS.

These are basic things. A young team starts winning those mini-periods, they gain confidence, even if they lose, because they prove they can come back. And they will WIN some of those game, anyway.

AJ, word up - FOCUS ON THE LAST 2 MINUTES!

Years later...

2010-12-01T17:58:00.000-08:00

So here we are, Game 19, in the year of our lord 2010...

I sat out (with respect to this blog) the 2008-9 season and, most especially, the phenomenon that was 2009-2010.

I confess - I could not watch many games last year, it was that bad. The highlight, such as it was, was Frank FINALLY getting fired. There was a website, www.firefrank.com, that some other fan had put up in the 2008-9 season. I was relieved it went up, contributed a little, let things ride. Once the marionette was finally canned, the site was taken down. The Nets, of course - with the worst owner in the history of the NBA - typically put in a total buffoon to replace him - Kiki Vanderweghe, with a total of ZERO games coached in the NBA, ZERO in college, ZERO at any traceable level (maybe he was a rec coach... once...).

The result? Well, you know the result...

New year, new owner, new arena, new coach.

The arena upgrade is a slam dunk, and long in coming. Even if the Nets go to Bklyn two seasons from now, it was just good to get our of the Meadowlands.

And ANY owner would have been an upgrade from Ratner, who never intended to be a team owner anyway. Nice that this new guy has bucks, however obtained originally.

That brings us to Avery. I was not wild about this choice, despite his background. But again, ANY coach would have been an upgrade.

After a handful of games, I thought, hey, know what? I DON'T EVEN NOTICE WHEN HE'S CALLING TIME OUTS! That's because he takes them in normal situations. What a concept!

And altho there've been several close games, most of which they've lost, Johnson does not force his team to suffer thru the humiliation of Frank's never successful foul, foul, foul excruciating drawing out of an endgame. Good!

And he called out players, particularly Lopez. Good good!

But now he's showing the classic flaw of mediocre coaches, no matter what sport - He does not take seriously the persona of the franchise.

More next entry...

Game 82 - It is finished...

2008-04-16T19:41:00.000-07:00

Nets lose to the Cs on the road. Not on TV (at least not Verizon, that I can tell). It was sorta kinda close, in a schoolyard kinda way. The Cs are the #1 Eastern seed. The Nets are going home.

Are the Celtics 32 games better than the Nets?

I wonder - Pierce has won 0 titles, Ray 0, KG 0. I'm not convinced that they can even win the East, much less the title. Then again, if this is the street ball league, who's gonna stop them?

It's funny - we talk NFL, we think coaches - Parcells, Bellichick, Landry, Lombardi... We talk baseball, we think managers - Lasorda, Pinella, Torre, Sparky... We talk hockey - Bowman, Arbour...

We talk NBA and the only coach we talk about is Phil, and maybe Pop, but mostly we talk talent. And not smart talent, not fundamentally sound talent - not, say, Steve Nash - but raw talent. Shaq. Kobe. Lebron.

Not that Shaq, Kobe or Lebron CAN'T be fundamentally sound, they certainly can. We see flashes. But mostly we see flashy.

Can the talent in the NBA be coached? Is the Lakers' success this year all about Pau Gasol?

In 1967 the 76ers got a new coach, Alex Hannum. He took his best player, one Wilt Chamberlain, aside and told him, look - you have all the records in the book. You've done amazing, gargantuan things. Yet you lack a championship ring. I have an idea that if, when the ball comes to you, instead of fighting off the double- and triple teams they throw up against you and shooting, you find the open man, or men!, they'll have easy shots, undefended shots, and we'll be unstoppable.

That's coaching. Imagine telling the league's greatest offensive player to stop scoring and start making assists. What was he, nuts?

Funny thing - Wilt listened. He led the team in assists and was 3rd in the NBA (a center!). The Sixers won 69 games and, most importantly, won the NBA - the only team to break the Celtics' stranglehold on the NBA championship in the 60s.

Tim Duncan is a great and heady player, and fundamentally sound. But I also have to think that he listens to Greg. And by listening to Greg, he sets the example, and then the rest of the team listens to Greg. The result? 4 championships.

I like watching San Antonio like I liked watching the Nets from 2002 thru 2006. Now we seem to have a street ball team.

I'm not interested in circus shots and flashy dunks. Championships are not garnered with circus shots and flashy dunks. A circus shot or a flashy dunk is worth no more points on the scoreboard than a dorky but fundamentally sound lay up.

I like people getting open. I like defense. I like boxing out. I like looking for the open man.

The basketball season for the Nets ended on that disastrous 0-9 stretch in January. Since then it's been street ball.

I don't like street ball.

If that's what the Nets have become, they've lost a season ticket holder.

Game 81 - Street Ball

2008-04-16T19:18:00.000-07:00

Perhaps this is what bothers me about the contemporary NBA. I have railed pretty much all season against the poor quality in-game coaching of one Lawrence Frank. He has made strategic blunder after tactical blunder, he's tone deaf to his team's struggles and mechanistic in his substitution patterns.

Nonetheless, I watched tonite's game in amazement. Nets up early, go to sleep, down nearly 20 at the half, come back to take a late lead, make bonehead decisions, wind up going into overtime, go up by 8 within a minute left, win by 4.

Through it all, NEITHER coach has any impact on the game. Granted, both teams are done for the year, what incentive do they have. So it becomes a schoolyard game.

I was reading about Golden State's latest loss, something like coming back from down 16 to take a 15 point lead, and then losing. And I am struck - I don't remember this happening in the 60s, or the Magic/Bird/Dr J era, or even the Jordan era. I remember close games involving, at least, playoff teams, 2 point, 4 point, 6 point leads going back and forth. I remember good passing, even on breaks, boxing out, and above all, defense.

Not always. The mid-70s were fairly run and gun, as the ABA players and style were digested into the league. I remember strategy. I remember intelligent play - Oscar, Bradley, Lucas, West, Kareem, Russell, McHale, the Chief, etc.

I remember Kidd, as well, when he came here in 2002. It was a pleasure to watch because he imposed on the team a disciplined style of smart play. Maybe it was Eddie Jordan's Princeton like offense, on steroids with the athleticism of KMart, Kittles and RJ. It featured a lot of running, sure. But it was heady. With defense.

You see this now from one team - San Antonio. Is it the coach? Is it Duncan? Is it luck?

It ain't luck.

It's a commitment to fundamental basketball within the framework of today's incredible athletic talent.

Today's talent is clearly superior to any other era. I don't think that's debatable. Unfortunately, the NBA has become, as I have noted earlier, the Nothing But Ability league. No defense. No strategy. No in-game tactical soundness. Ability.

Brilliant moves, flashy dunks, great looking alley oops, incredible shots.

But for every flashy dunk is a missed foul shot, for every great looking alley oop is a bad decision, for every incredible shot is an "ill-advised" shot. I put that in quotes since I hear it most from Walt Frazier.

Walt Frazier... I was not a Knicks fan then - I was a Lakers fan. I couldn't stand him, as an opponent. But you had to respect his play - his intelligent play.

Frazier probably wouldn't have the size or talent to play in today's NBA. This is an amazing thing. Because Clyde could make nearly every current team a contender. Through sheer intelligence.

I digress (boy, do I digress)...

The point is, who listens to coaches today, anyway? Again, I can think of only one team, and it's the same one.

Frank had nothing to do with this victory, and would have had nothing to do with a loss, either. This was a street ball game.

Where's the Professor?

Wanting the Team to Lose

2008-04-13T04:52:00.000-07:00

A reader wondered aloud why any fan would purposely want their team to lose. I want to address that. Consider this cautionary tale:

From 1984-1989 the San Antonio Spurs had been quite like the Nets - a bad team that occasionally made the playoffs, only to be bounced out in the first round. (They actually made the playoffs with losing records twice, once with only 31 wins, the other with 35 - the latter after having made it at 41-41. sound familiar?)

After an abysmal 21 win season in 89, they got David Robinson in the draft, and immediately became contenders. Over the next 7 seasons they won 56, 55, 47, 49, 55, 62 and 59 games. Altho they made it to the Western Conference finals in 95, they never made it to the Finals. Then the Admiral got injured, out for the 97 season.

Had he not been injured, the Spurs very likely would have won at least 50 games in 97, probably 55, their average with him the previous 7 seasons. Still, without him they probably could have won at least 30 or 35. They were not that bad of a team.

Instead they went into the tank. A deep funk that cost their coach, Bob Hill, who had taken them to their only Western Conference Finals appearance, his job, even tho he did not have his star player for all but 6 games of the year.

This abysmal losing, this embarrassment of an underachieving team, gave the Spurs the first pick in the draft. They got one Tim Duncan. And Greg Popovich.

Since then the Spurs continued their regular season winning ways - winning high 50s or low 60s games a season (except for the strike shortened 99 season, when they won a league high 37 games. And winning 4 NBA titles.

How did the Celtics get Larry Bird? Going 29-53. That's how.

Now, if you were a Spurs fan on the eve of Game 77, in 1997, with your team at 20-57, and you had a crystal ball that showed the glory to come with Pop and Tim, but in order to get Tim you'd need to lose your last six, would you be rooting for your team to lose?

Or better - if you were 3-15 on the eve of Game 19, and your coach, who had just lead your to 62 and 59 wins, your first trip to the Conference finals, and probably more shots at it once the Admiral was healed, was to be fired, would you think that was high handed and unnecessary? Now, suppose you had that crystal ball and it said, look, there is a coach out there who will lead you to 4 titles in the next decade, but you have to flush the most successful coach you've ever had, even tho he's struggling this year in the absence of your best player, would you still think it was high handed and unnecessary?

Tuesday is the last home game of the season. I am going, bringing the family and I also have two other tickets. They're playing the Bobcats. They should win easily. I want them to win easily. I want to have fun.

I got these tickets, my first full season tickets for any sport, for a song this year. The same deal is available for next year. If they were still in playoff mode, it would be a slam dunk. If they had poor talent, I still would probably do it.

Right now, I am probably not gonna do it. And for one reason. The head coach, Lawrence Frank.

I'm sorry, but altho I don't like losing, I really hate it when games are lost unnecessarily. I get aggravated when I and most other fans in the stands are screaming for timeouts that never get called, timeouts that do get called when they are irrelevant or even counter productive. I get upset and angry when talented players that could help the team like Sean Williams sit on the bench and clear duds like Trenton Hassell get non-trivial playing time. In crucial situations. And then don't come thru.

My family has told me several times they don't like going to the games with me. I brood. I scowl. They are like I used to be - they cheer the team on, they try to give the team support late in games. They, to their credit, rarely want to leave early.

But they are sick of me and my negative attitude.

Know what? I'M sick of me and my negative attitude.

I don't want to be that way. Perhaps if the Nets decided to unload RJ and let Nenad go via free agency, perhaps if Devin Harris went down with an injury in the summer, or Josh Boone had to get a knee job that required him to miss the season, you know, the things that happened in 99 and 2000, my expectations would be set low, and Frank's stupidity wouldn't bother me. Perhaps his clutching onto timeouts like Gollum does the ring might actually come in handy on those rare nights when the Nets find themselves in the game with 2 minutes to go and needing a rare victory. Perhaps then.

This isn't fantasy. I remember the year 2000 when (I counted) 20 games came down to the last 2 minutes with them in the lead or down by 2 or less and they lost. That was hard to take. But the Nets were decimated with injuries. I had no expectations for the team to win more than the 31 they did win. They had a guy who never should have been coach. The owners pushed him into it. He left the NBA for good after that season. Marbury showed great heart in trying to lift that team single handedly.

I hated the losing but I wasn't negative. I wasn't, oh brother, here they go again. Or rather, here HE goes again.

This wasn't 20 years ago when the Nets had no talent, when they had traded away a potential Hall of Famer for a sure fire Hall of Shamer. This wasn't the days of the empty RAC. This wasn't the days of the Butch Beard embarrassment or the screaming John C. This was less than a decade ago. I was positive.

As recently as 2006 I had been positive. I laid the blame for their collapse to the eventual NBA Champion Heat at Cliff Robinson's doorstep. The Nets had nearly swept the Heat in the regular season, but nearly got swept out of the postseason by them. The Heat had a hot hand. They had Shaq. They had a hot Duane Wade playing way over his head, a game he had not evinced since. Okay. Retool and try again in 2007.

At the beginning of the 2007 season I told the guy who eventually sold me season tix this year that I "had a good feeling" about the upcoming season. But by mid-season I was getting disturbed by an unsettling trend. The Nets were losing a lot of games due to questionable coaching decisions.

In 2003 when the Nets cruised to the Finals and were about to face the Spurs, I was jubilant. For the first time in their NBA history they had a great shot at winning it all. The 2002 season had been miraculous, but they did not match up well with the Lakers. I had little expectation that they could win. But in 2003 it seem that things were set up for them.

In my opinion, then and now, Byron Scott single handedly squandered that chance for them. With bafflingly abysmal coaching decisions.

A team plays well. It's a close game. Your best player has the ball in his hands to take the last shot but misses, and you lose by 1. That's basketball.

A team comes out for the championship game and is just cold as Iceland. They lose in a romp. That's basketball.

At the end of a close game that can go either way, a player tries to call a timeout when you have none left, the other team gets a technical and the ball, and you lose. That's basketball.

A team is in the finals, Game 7, on the road, and a player who has been doing it all season for you goes unbelievably cold. Time and again he takes shots and misses while the other team capitalizes. You lose the championship. The coach says, He's done it for us all year - I wasn't about to take it out of his hands this late in the season. It was his to win or lose. We win or lose with him. Ok, maybe. That one hurts and is questionable, but at least he leaves it up to the guy who brought them there. That's basketball.

But a coach that allows big leads to be squandered while his team is clearly floundering, a coach who clutches onto his timeouts so that he can have them at the end of the game when it is too late and using them only humiliates the team further, a coach that sits a red hot player when you have a 9 point lead going into the last quarter of a Game Six after having defaulted on at least 2 earlier games by not playing your only 7 footer against a team with 2 talented ones, those are not basketball inevitabilites - they are reversible, avoidable bad decisions. Unforgivable mental coaching errors. Stubbornness. Unwillingness to coach the game in front of their eyes. Those coaches are not basketball coaches. They are liabilities.

The Nets lost 30 games this year when they had considerable leads deep in the game. 30. And in those 30, Lawrence Frank acted in ways that virtually ensured those would be losses. He did NOTHING to stop them. In fact, he did everything to make the inevitable. And if that were not bad enough, forced his team to play foul ball, doing nothing but elongating the sting and increasing the humiliation.

He did a similar thing last year, before the trading deadline. The team had struggled in the beginning when finally they got to 20-20 before going on the road for a West Coast swing. The history of the team on those swings, even in the glory years of 2002 and 2003, had not been good. Yet there they were, with the lead with under a minute, 3 games in a row. They lost all 3.

I'm sorry, you can't tell me the coach was not involved in those losses. He was. All 3.

Kidd had seen enough. He wanted out. Thorn could not pull the trigger on a deal. After the trading deadline Kidd willed the team to the playoffs. Ok, one bad.

But here we were again, for the 4th consecutive season, a surprisingly bad start, a team "searching for an identity". A good coach establishes an identity. A team does not have to search for one.

Especially a team loaded with talent.

I began to see, in that dismal 2007 season, that Frank was costing the team several victories. Despite that, their talent dispatched the overrated Raptors with some ease and had a shot at making it past the vastly overrated Cavs to reach at least the Conference Finals. Talent did that. But Frank undermined it. They bowed out in 6, with two of those 4 losses easily avoidable and winnable. They should have won that series in 6, not lose it in 6.

Perhaps they could come together again with a healthy Krstic and a new season. But the 2008 season began just as the previous 3 - a surprisingly bad start, and this time against poor struggling teams at home. Once again, the talk was about searching for an identity. 30 games into the season, still searching for an identity.

Mark my words - if Frank stays, as he is likely to do, the Nets will start the year just as they have the past 4, unaccountably struggling against teams with lesser talent, losing in blowouts to good teams. Someone, probably RJ if he is not traded, will say "We're still trying to discover our identity as a team".

A pattern has been established, and by then, what would the only common denominator be?

Not JKidd. Not Vince Carter. Not RJ (remember, he was injured most of 2005 after picking up the slack for the injured JKidd at the beginning of 2005).

The common denomiator is Lawrence Frank.

This is not just statistical. If you watch all the games, like I do, it's easy to see the patterns. The announcers see all the games as well, and altho they are trained and compensated not to call out players and coaches, you could hear the mystification about why certain players are sitting, why timeouts were not called, why the team should not have an identity deep into the season.

Players make mistakes. In the heat of the battle, physical mistakes are made. Occassionally mental mistakes are made. If mental mistakes are made with frequency the coach is very quick to sit the player. That's basketball.

Coaches make mistakes, but none of them are physical. They are all mental. Sure, sometimes you gotta roll the dice and things don't pan out. Sometimes you make errors in judgement and you deal with the consequences.

But when mental mistakes are made not just with frequency but in a predictable pattern, that coach needs to sit.

This coach needs to sit. He is not helping the team; he's hurting it. In the standings, in the locker room, in the handling of its talent, in its prospects. He is not learning from his mistakes. He is not helping his players learn, because he himself does not learn.

I know the realities - I've written about them at length. The owner does not care. The president cannot act on his own. The coach has 2 more years on his contract and the owner doesn't want to pay him for nothing. His grandiose development scheme, of which the team is just a pawn, is floundering, and he is in no mood for basketball, except to get them in that goddam arena in the hope that that might put things back over the top. The last thing he wants to do in that atmosphere is part with money and get nothing in return.

But having a hamstrung team be deconstructed and embarrassed in an empty building is not something. Losing $30 million a year (per the NYT) is getting less than nothing.

There is talent here. A starting five of Carter, RJ, Harris, Boone and a healthy Nenad, with Boki, Swift, Sean Williams and Marcus Williams in the wings is quite a good and deep team. With decent, not great, but decent, coaching, this is a 50 win team, especially in a weak East. That might fill the building more. That will get you to the playoffs. If nothing else, that will make the team much more attractive when you sell the team in 3 years, 2 if your project collapses.

That is, you eat $5 million but lose only $20 a year. That's a net (sic) savings of $5 million.

I don't get Sean Williams sitting. I don't get Trent Hassell playing. And I don't get Thorn thinking that Frank is a good coach. All I do get is that the owner doesn't give a Ratner's ass about basketball. He cares about real estate development.

So Bruce - look, man, your project is dangling by a thread. You're losing $30 mil a year. You can save conservatively $5 mil of that just by doing the right thing - lose the coach.

I don't want the Nets to lose, per se. I want them to lose the coach. Losing might give them a better draft status, but if Frank remains that talent will just be squandered, wasted. However, if losing meaningless games at the end of a mean season results in losing a losing coach and giving a talented team a better shot at winning, who wouldn't want that?

Game 80 - Seven

2008-04-13T03:57:00.000-07:00

The Nets beat the even more pathetic and shorthanded Bucks tonight, 111-98. In a way, it's a pity - perhaps if the Nets had completely let go of the rope for the season, Thorn might be convinced to "go in another direction" with respect to the coach.

He continued his baffling exile of Sean Williams, a player who could really help out the team, in favor of Trent Hassell, a player who cannot and does not. SWill was the only non-phantom (Van Horn) non-injured (Boone) player not to get out on the court despite the obvious blow out last night in Toronto. He played exactly 1 minute in a game in Cleveland where his presence, energy and shot blocking might have made up for Frank's bonehead coaching. Last night he was again the only non-injured, non-phantom player not to play, even when Frank emptied the bench at the end. I think it's safe to say that one of those two will not be here next year. Regrettably, the Nets will probably keep Frank and flush Williams, one of the very, very few bright spots in this Franked up season.

Nonetheless, Frank gets props for the Rule of Seven - If your team has a double digit lead, and it gets cut to 7, call time out. Stop the bleeding. Stop the momentum. Set up a play. End their hope.

Imagine if he had done that vs Cleveland... Or over 20 other games in this travesty of a season...

After a close first half they had built up a 15 point lead with 10 to go in the 4th. But by 8:27 it was down to 89-80. Marcus (I'm the One Who Gets to Play) Williams took an ill-advised 3 pointer (which, btw, the Nets do a lot when they are losing leads - instead of slowing the game down and working it in, looking for a high percentage shot, they seem to want the heroic dagger, which nearly never comes - a mark of a poorly coached team), the Bucks get the rebound. I'm saying to the TV, Call timeout. Call timeout.... The Bucks score. Lead down to 7 with just under 8 to play. Call timeout. Call timeout!

Devin Harris brings the ball up. Call timeout! CALL TIMEOUT!

Then what to my wondering eyes does appear but a TIMEOUT on the court of the tiny reindeer!

Good. That's the right thing to do.

And it was the right thing to do. The Nets set up a play. Get RJ an open rhythm jumper. 9 point lead, momentum broken. Back and forth a little 7-9, 7-10, 7-8, but before you know it 3 minutes have been burned off the clock. When the Nets go up by 13 at the 5 minute mark, everyone knows that this game is over.

It wasn't that the Bucks had run out of gas trying to catch up, as the coach's excuse goes - it's just that Frank didn't give them the gasoline can as he has so frequently this season. His team had amassed a good sized lead fairly late in the game and then started to struggle. Okay, so PRESERVE AS MUCH OF IT AS YOU CAN without calling an unnecessary time out. The best last place to do that is the 7 point mark. (Nine is better, but seven is the limit.)

This is not a secret or a big discovery on my part. Most coaches have a feel for this. That's why you don't notice them coaching.

You notice brain boy coaching because of his incredible tone deafness to this obvious fact as he clutches his timeouts for that magical last minute so he can demoralize his team even more. (How many games did we see this year when he did just that? 30? See below!)

But tonite he calls a timeout immediately when the lead shrinks to 7 and winds up winning a laugher. On the road.

He could have won 10 more games like this this year, very conservatively. A 10 victory swing and the Nets are 43-37 and the 4 seed in the East. Very conservatively. If he won half of those games where his stunningly stupid coaching did not come into play they are 48-32, with two shots at winning 50. That's how much Frank has cost this team this year.

He is responsible for at least 10-15 losses with poor in game coaching. He -not a disaffected Kidd (and exactly why was he disaffected?), nor an injured Carter, nor a disappearing Jefferson, nor a major trade - is the reason the Nets will finish with their worst record since 2001. He is.

He came in with a 14 game winning streak. After that his record is 176-176. And that's with The Big Three. And that's with a 49 win season, ie, a +16 win season in the middle.

The Nets have a talented roster, with potentially a deep bench, minus Hassell and plus Sean Williams. Even without Kidd this is at least a 47-55 win team. They are 25th in the league in offense, 23rd in defense.

He should be gone after this season. He brings nothing.

Rod Thorn knows that. The question is, does Bruce Ratner know?

And does he even care?

Game 79 - Goodbye Postseason

2008-04-13T03:32:00.000-07:00

In 2002 the Nets had visited the postseason only briefly a few times before. Their longest NBA postseason run had been 5 seasons in a row, back in the "glory" years of the early 80s, when they lost in the first round every time except 84, when they bowed out in the second. (They did make the postseason 7 times in a row in the ABA, winning it twice.)

Their last post season run had been 92-94, when they lost in the first round all 3 times (Cleveland twice and the Knicks). Their last post season appearance had been in 98 against the Bulls, with the predictable and by now traditional first round exit.

In comes Kidd into a group of demoralized, injury prone but very talented young players and BOOM (thanks John Madden) - two Finals appearances in a row, one which they could well have won, four in a row after that, during which they made it past the first round twice.

This will go down as the first Golden Era of the Nets. The Jason Kidd Era.

Kidd is gone. So are the Nets.

Before he came the Nets were an embarrassment. As if to verify and drive home that point, the Nets were an embarrassment tonite.

Tonite, after amassing an 11 point lead in the 2nd, just let go of the rope, as the selfsame Jkidd opined earlier in the season.

That made it official - no postseason for the Nets.

Despite an incredibly weak East, despite the fact that .500 (like last year) would give you the
7 seed and 2 over (like 2005) would give you the 6, this team had underperformed and been miscoached so badly that even that was not possible. Atlanta will make the playoffs with under 40 wins. The Nets could not even manage 40. With this roster, JKidd notwithstanding.

Despite just being cannon fodder for the carpetbagger Celtics, even that modest goal could not be reached.

A fitting end to a bad season.

Game 78 - This Jerk

2008-04-09T18:01:00.000-07:00

The banner came on the screen - $299 Season Tickets. That's what I have. I was enjoying this game. The Cavs are a very flawed team with a very good player. Not great. Not yet. But very good.

The Nets have been playing well. Up by 4 at the half. Last 2 minutes is a wash. Fine. Middle of the third now and the Nets are up 14. I call the kids into the room.

Hey guys, have you had fun with us having season tix? Yeah! they both say in unison. Do you think I should get them for next year?

Only one of them has an objection - the older one says "it's a long commute...". I'm surprised that the younger one hasn't said "They stink!" the way he has been saying quite a bit lately. So should I guys? Yeah!

"But they need to get a new coach!" the younger one opines.

Granted, he reflects what I say, since he's 10....

Cavs begin to whittle away, but with 2 minutes left in the third, the nnets are up by 9. Nine. N-I-N-E.

With 49 seconds left in the qtr, the score is TIED. THEN AND ONLY THEN DOES BRAIN BOY CALL TIME OUT.

He does NOT know how to in game coach. A breeze turns into a rout. IN ONE MINUTE.

Right at the moment its six minutes into the quarter. SIX MINUTES. The Nets have scored exactly 3 points. THREE. And are now down by 8, a 24-5 run. 24-5!!!!!!!!!!!!

AND THIS JERK HAS NOT CALLED A TIME OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HEY ROD - THIS TEAM HAS NO HOPE WITH THIS JERK AS ITS COACH!!!!!!!!!!!

New graphic - Second chance points 11-11. It had been 11-3 Nets.

The Nets are now down 10 with 5:25 left to play. Time out. I don't know who called it but for the Nets it's WAY TOO LATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU CAN'T EXPECT A STRUGGLING TEAM TO MAKE UP A 10 POINT DEFICIT WITH 5:25 LEFT IN THE GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He does EVERYTHING to undermine the confidence of this team. He does NOTHING to help it.

He is a complete in-game failure, a lost soul, a dufus, a jerk.

(Another graphic splashed across the screen - the Nets are shooting 8% in the 4th... Why do the Nets have timeouts left? Why aren't other players out there?? Nevermind, the Nets are down 14 now and just gave the Cavs their second straight old fashioned 3 point play. There's 3:40 left. God, jerk, aren't you tired of this? When are you gonna figure out it's YOU, not "we" - YOU YOU YOU YOU YOU YOU.)

Another graphic - the Nets are shooting, right now, with less than 2 minutes to go, 1-15. ONE FOR FIFTEEN. Do you thing maybe their confidence is shot? They're now down by 17, as another graphic shows they've missed their last 17 shots.

AND FRANK CALLS TIMEOUT! CAN YOU EFFING BELIEVE IT??????

WHAT GAME IS THIS BUFFOON WATCHING???????????????????

Final - 104-83, a 21 point loss. It was once 67-53. Since that point they were outscored 51-16. FIFTY FREAKING ONE TO SIXTEEN.

There is no way, NO EFFING WAY, this dunce of a supposed coach should be allowed even to finish the season.

FIRE HIM NOW!

Game 77 - A surprising win

2008-04-05T20:33:00.001-07:00

So I went. Next to last home game. Last one isn't for 10 days. I was tired. But I had the tickets and decided to go. My youngest son would rather go to a birthday party that wasn't going to be fun than watch the Nets lose again. My wife stayed home with him. My other son Jeff went with me.

Before I left I decided to try and find positive things and focus on them. I was gonna write that in this blog before I went so that it was documented. But when I tried to envision what could possibly be positive, I lost momentum.

The Nets started the game well, which is always a treat, but usually the light before the storm. And sure enough, after having built up an 8 point lead, they started to falter. Then Frank did something unaccountable - he made reasonable coaching decisions. Like calling time out.

And he did it not once, not twice but 3 times. In the first half. Each time the team responded and stopped the bleeding. That's why you do that - to stop the other team's momentum and refocus your team to start some of your own. When he coaches like that, against a team fighting for playoff positioning without sitting anyone, you can actually envision some hope.

But I have no confidence that he is changing his ways.

On the other hand, Al Iannazone hinted that if the Nets finish poorly, he could be gone, despite what Rod Thorn has said. So in a way I wanted them to collapse.

I don't believe the Nets have a future with this guy as coach. But if he would just in-game coach like tonite, you could imagine the talent on this team coming out.

He did play Hassell unaccountably long, and at weird moments. He did sit Sean Williams too long as well. But eventually he put in Sean and left him in even as SWill picked up two quick fouls.

The Nets let it get close and actually fell behind by a point in the third, closing it with a 2 point lead. Then they took off at the beginning of the fourth, and before you knew it they had an 11 point lead with 5 minutes to go.

A well coached team would have made it a laugher, but as it was it got a little dicey, letting Toto get to 8 down. Some sloppy back and forth coupled with a great block by Williams and a great charge take by Trent Hassell from Bosh allowed the Nets to maintain a 9 point margin at the buzzer.

Wouldn't it be a blast if the Nets could play well for the rest of the season, 5 nice efforts? It might take the sting out of a really abysmal and bitterly disappointing season...

We'll see...

Game 76 - Mail call!

2008-04-05T13:03:00.000-07:00

VC sat out. They played in Detroit.

They mailed it in. Down 16-6 just 7 minutes in, and they were done.

And they are done.

Game 75 - Another Loss

2008-04-05T12:51:00.000-07:00

I had donate these tickets to a charity silent auction back in February, when JKidd was still on the team. At the time the 76ers were struggling near the bottom of the standings. I expected the Nets to rally after the All-Star break and make the playoffs, and I saw this game as being an easy and uninteresting win for them.

Didn't quite work out that way. Kidd was gone in a couple of days. The Nets tanked on the Texas Swing. The 76ers realized that it was indeed Iverson who had been holding them back all those years and were among the hottest teams in the NBA. The Sixers are now the FIVE seed in the East, two games over .500. I didn't even think the Nets could make it over .500 back then!

So now the Nets have accepted their role as a lousy team. They were tied at the half and only down 5, altho they ended the quarter on a patented 4-7 run by the Sixers to put them in that hole. They got it to 93-91 with 4:15 to go, when Philly did a remarkable, un-Frank-like thing - they called timeout.

From that point, the 76ers cruised, immediately burying a 3 and finishing 15-8.

Now End The Season.

Musing About the Future, Part II

2008-03-29T22:48:00.000-07:00

Thus spake Thorn:

"I don't have any thoughts or ideas of replacing him at all," Thorn said yesterday. "He's done a good job for us, and I'm sure he'll continue to do so in the future."

So Frank stays, and with two years left on his contract, he gets another shot at turning the team around.

Yes, even if they don't make the playoffs.

"I don't see anything that can transpire that would change my mind," Thorn said. "I got a call from a writer the other day who said he's writing a column that the coach should be fired. So I know it's out there in the media, and from fan e-mails. But that's not going to influence me one way or the other. I know the job Lawrence does for us."

Okay, Rod. So, they vastly underperform, with our without Jason Kidd. So they don't make the playoffs for the first time in 7 years, even when 10 games under .500 in the East will guarantee you a playoff spot. So they have a losing record for the first time in 7 years.

Yeah, keep the coach, that's the ticket...

So, what if the Nets are 12-20 in December for the 3rd time in 4 years?

Aah, we knew this. We've said it in this very blog a couple of times. Ratner doesn't want a new coach. Even if he did, who'd take this lame duck job?

What changes can be made? Trade RJ? Dump Sean Williams so some other team can reap his considerable upside? Force Boone to shoot 500 foul shots a day in the off season? Dangle Marcus Williams to get a shooter?

Anything that happens, the Nets will be a young team looking for guidance. Can Frank provide it?

I don't see any hope if he remains coach, and according to Rod Thorn, he will remain coach.

His contract is up in 2 years, ie, at the end of the 2009-2010 season. That's supposed to be the last season in NJ.

Ratner is saying the bad economy means an indefinite delay in the Atlantic Yards project, except that is for the arena.

This is a team set adrift...

Game 73 - Ho hum.

2008-03-29T22:45:00.000-07:00

As expected, a road loss.

Followed the script. Started falling apart in the 4th. Frank won't call time out. Game got away.

They lost.

Ho hum.

Game 74 - Don't know what to say...

2008-03-29T22:34:00.000-07:00

Candidates:

1. Season in a nutshell. Coulda won, but made too many mistakes: missing 5 of 7 free throws in the last 2 minutes, shooting 3s on fast breaks when those possessions could have brought them within 2. And how many times are we gonna see 4 Nets standing around flat footed while THE ONE opponent gets the rebound?

2. Fire Frank. He waited too long to call time out in the beginning of the third. Weird subs.

3. Losing teams never get calls vs winning teams.

By losing, the Nets not only do mortal harm to their playoff "hopes", they ensure the first losing season since 2001.

They played well, but not well enough, or smart enough to contend.

The Nets have eliminated themselves. They have their excuses - RJ says JKidd checked out in training camp. Rod Thorn thinks it was all about the JKidd turmoil. Frank says it's all the new players joining a team seeking its "identity".

If this loss happened in December, we'd say, okay, not bad. Even now, even with all the disappointment, we still say, okay, not bad.

Our expectations have been lowered. No one wants to make the playoffs anymore. No one wants to win. Avoiding embarrassing losses are the highest virtue. That and glimpses of what the team might be next year.

What can one say?

Game 71 - Oops! Forgot!

2008-03-26T19:21:00.001-07:00

The Nets dominate the embarrassing Knicks. It wasn't close. This is the way the Nets should have handled the Knicks all season. If they had won 2 of the 3 they lost to them...

Oh well. Atlanta was idle. The Nets pick up half a game.

How's THIS for a short blog entry, Steve?

Game 72 - A Win...

2008-03-26T18:57:00.000-07:00

I turn on the TV (didn't go tonite) and RJ sinks two free throws to make it 68-52 with 1:45 left in the half. 68 for a half is their season high, made just recently. There's 1:45 to go in the half...

Marv and Jim patter about the bulge. Spanarkel opines that if Indiana can get to to within 10 by the end of the half it'll be a lift for them. Marv observes, well they have a 14 point lead....

Score at the half - 68-60.

Number of timeouts called by Frank during that run - 0.

Wait! It gets better.

To open the third the Nets get the ball. No matter. Indiana scored the first 6 points of the half to cut the lead to 2, 68-66. With just under 5 minutes to go in the quarter, it's all tied. To be fair, the Genius calls a timeout at the 8 minute mark. Of course, the Pacers are down only one at that time...

Here's the kicker - the Nets are shooting 54%! And it's tied!

I've never seen a coach do less with more. I can't stand to look at him. Even if they make the playoffs he should be fired. He's that bad.

And it ruins my enjoyment of the game. I watch in dread as they commit stupid fouls, giving Dunleavy, of all people, a 4 point play. A 4 point play!

Then with about 4 1/2 minutes left, Indiana, intelligently, starts the hack-a-Boone strategy. Boone misses both. Hack again. 1 for 2. Hack again. 1 for 2 again!

God, boob! Substitute him out! Any fool rec coach knows that! Put in Sean Williams. Put Diop back in. IT ELIMINATES THE PACERS STRATEGY, YOU BLITHERING JERK!

Luckily, and I do mean luckily, Indiana can't buy a shot, and with 2 minutes left, Frank can determine who shoots if Boone is hacked again.

No harm, but still foul coaching.

I give a lot of credit to VC - 14 rebounds, but the best part was watching him do what no other Net does - BOX OUT. It was a pleasure to watch him exert his will on the game.

I also like the fact that 4 guys scored 20 or more, with Boki contributing 18. Good balance. Like to see that.

On the other hand (another hammer of the coach), why didn't Sean Williams play? Where was Swift? And why did Hassell get minutes? 1-2 with 2 rebounds and 2 points in 15 minutes is not exactly what I would call a quality outing... You mean to tell me that SWill or Swift couldn't do better? I just don't get this fool...

OK, they're 1/2 game behind Atlanta, which cruised and crushed the Bucks. Saturday the Nets play Phoenix, so, as Spanarkel just said on the post game, winning in Indiana is crucial.

I'm sorry. I just have no faith in Frank's ability to get the team up and focussed, and we all know he can't coach in the game.

This stinks.

And we freaking WON!

Musing About the Future, Part I

2008-03-23T21:59:00.000-07:00

The Nets are not going to the playoffs, of this I am thoroughly convinced. Thus, on a night when I am not particularly angry about their most recent loss, I thought it would be constructive to begin speculating about the future of the team...

1. Forget draft position. Since they won't make the playoffs they will be a lottery team. But what do they need?

At every position they have either youth with rough talent or stardom. 1 is Devin Harris and Marcus Williams. There is not a 1 out there of NBA calliber sufficient to leapfrog ahead of both of them. 2 is VC, who is a star. They might get some strength there, but it is not apparent who that would be. 3 is RJ, a star, and Boki, as good as anything outside of Beasley, but why would you get Beasley just to sit him behind RJ? 4 is Boone and SWill, youth and talent, and I might add, intelligence. 5 is Krstic, who is coming back to form, if slowly (he had a creditable game last night), Stromile who is serviceable and Diop who is a question mark. Ager might surprise if given the chance. Hassell is expendable.

So what is really weak that any of the current crop of players can fix?

Whatever, whoever they get is not gonna turn a franchise around like a Magic or Duncan or Ewing or Olajuwon, LeBron or MJ or Bird. It would at best be more young talent.

With Kidd gone, RJ and VC are the leaders, and likely to be the only leaders, as Armstrong is almost definitely gone. Any trade of those two stars would just make the Nets even less able to mold their suddenly youthful roster. There are not blockbuster trades in the offing involving those two.

Even if the Nets get #1, don't expect much to come from it.

2. Fire the coach. Right at this moment, Frank is 186-170 with the Nets (which is to say all time). If they do indeed go 2-10 to finish the season, or even 5-7, aside from the 14 game winning streak he got as his honeymoon in 2004, he would be dead even. And that includes the 49-33 season of 2006. His last two seasons would put him somewhere between 15 and 20 games under .500.

He is not great at molding or inspiring talent, and aside from RJ and VC, this team will be nothing but young talent next year. Frank is not a great in-game coach, and does not show signs of great preparation either. Read this blog for a litany of his foibles. I'm tired repeating them.

Young players today respond to those coaches who played - the Mo Cheeks of the world. The Eddie Jordans of the world. The experienced teams like guys like Popovich, guys who have deep benches and know how to handle them. The Nets, however, are not going to be an experienced team next year.

More than Jason Kidd's supposed bad attitude, Frank has run this team out of contention and into the ground. A month into the post-Kidd world and it is clear that JKidd's "checking out" was not the source of the Nets' woes.

So Frank must go.

The problems, then, are twofold:
- Who'd wanna come an replace him in limbo?
- Would the apathetic owner expend the effort needed to find, woo and hire a new coach at this juncture?

3. The owner. My wife used to be a big Knick fan. The Dolans made sure that that ain't gonna happen any more.

I used to feel for Knick fans - bad coaching, bad player personnel decisions, but no change possible because the owners were that clueless.

Now, however, I feel almost as bad for myself. At this point, we still have Rod Thorn, thanks be to god! Were he to leave, all bets would be off.

I firmly believe the Nets have as much or better young talent than any team in the league. All they need is a decent in-game coach. At least, that's all they DID need. Now they need a good in-game coach who knows how to teach and motivate and integrate young players.

Problem is, Frank still has a year on his contract. No one is gonna pick him up, so there is no motivation to re-up him this summer to avoid him being a lame duck. Until very recently, I didn't see Ratner parting with the $1 million or less that he would have to eat to fire Frank.

But with the recent admission by Ratner that the larger Atlantic Yards project having to be postponed due to economic conditions, but still keeping to the plan to build the arena "on schedule" (ie, meaning just one year late), he should be more motivated than ever to keep the Nets as cogent and competitive a team as possible.

If he truly (and who really knows?) thinks that building the arena and moving the Nets is the best way to keep his wet dream alive, then it will become crystal clear that he needs to keep the Nets a happening thing - return them to being a perennial playoff contender. And Rod Thorn has already made sure that there is a nucleus of young talent to make that happen. All that would be needed is a better coach.

The idea of that coach bring his playoff team into a sparkling new arena as a conquering hero would be a tasty morsel to drop on the lap of someone. He could turn it into a selling point.

Assuming, of course, that he is serious about keeping to his plan to build the arena...

If not, if he sees that even with the arena already in situ, his larger project is doomed or delayed beyond all reckoning, he will sell the team. Post haste.

Imagine the potential wreckage from that!

Even if Ratner did decide to fire Frank and get the next guy, whom indeed would he get?

One could envisage Larry Brown being the conquering hero coming back to NY, this time with a decent roster and a great GM. But two years in limbo is a lot to ask of a Larry Brown.

Brian Hill could take over. Enh. He's actually coached in the finals. Of course, he had Shaq. Without Shaq he has not done very well. Especially in developing young talent.

What about a Mike O'Koren, or some other ex-Net, willing to take a chance on romance? Or (gulp) Mark Jackson..?

Whoever it might be, they would be consigned to 2 years in purgatory, with no guarantees that they would ever get out. The arena could be further delayed. Ratner might decide to cut losses and sell the team. The new ownership might be wooed by the NJSEA to stay in the swamp. It could be a mess for a decade to come.

Bad basketball and back to being the East Coast Joke (along with the West Coast Joke Clippers) of the NBA...

Without Ratner punting and selling the team, without him giving up the ghost of Atlantic Yards, Lawrence Frank is safe, simply by default.

And we can look forward to two or more years of bad basketball...

Game 70 - A Loss, Just a Loss

2008-03-23T21:28:00.000-07:00

I have seen almost every game this season. I suspect there is one, but tonite's game at Philadelphia is the only one that comes to mind as a regular loss. Nothing more.

The Nets lost tonite, not because of bad defense (they held the red hot Sixers to 91 points at home), not because they gave up (they came back from 10 down and took the lead going into the 4th), not because of dufus coaching (Frank was essentially invisible, which coaches should be if they are coaching well), not because of a hangover, or injury, or disgruntled players or what all. They shot 25% in the fourth, and lost the game.

And that's perfectly fine. They shot over 60% in the third to take the lead, then could not buy a shot in the fourth. They lost by a mere 4 points. They had their shot, but their shots didn't drop.

There were a lot of hard fouls that were not called, but unless you're the Spurs, the visiting team, especially a sub-mediocre team, is not gonna get calls in a close game. Devin Harris cost the Nets a point, which Kidd never would have done.

But that's not why they lost. They did not lose heart, they did not mail it in, they did not show signs of a team collapsing, as they did in Chicago. They did not look beat before they stepped onto the court, as they did on the Southwest swing. They lost because they could not buy a shot down the stretch.

And that's ok.

It happens. It happens to the best and worst teams. A truly bad team (like the 99 and 2001 Nets) has it happen a lot. Those teams barely averaged 40% for the season. This team is not bad. They just had a cold shooting night.

True, they dropped a game and a half behind Atlanta, a team they manhandled just two games ago, and into a tie with mighty Indiana, a true bottom feeder. But not because of last night.

Every team is gonna lose games. Every team is just gonna get beat - not clobbered or destroyed, just defeated - during the course of the season. The team usually that beats itself the least generally winds up on top.

The Nets are in bad playoff shape at this point because they are the leading team in the NBA at beating themselves. This blog has been a chronicle about all those malaises itemized above - bad coaching, bad defense, "letting go of the rope", disgruntled star, key injury (the six game skid in mid-November when Carter went down), mistake after mistake, mailing it in. The Nets lost the vast majority of their losses this year to one or another or combination of those reasons.

Perhaps as high as 40. But last night was a genuine L. No shame in that.

Their record, unfortuately, bears the shame of those other 40 losses. It is those 40 that puts them in their current disadvantageous position. Ironically, last night's loss, which put them now more than a schedule quirk behind the truly bad Hawks, might do more to hurt them psychologically than all those abysmal no-shows and Frank-ensteins.

The remaining schedule is unkind. They play 5 at home, 7 on the road. I don't expect to see another road win all season. Of their 5 home games, two are against Phoenix and Toronto, teams the Nets have shown they just can't beat. Another is against these self-same 76ers.

2-10. That would bring them to 31-51, worst record since... Well, you all know the end of that sentence....

At this point, the best we can reasonably hope for is losses like tonite. Just losses - not routs, embarrassments or mail-ins. Good, honest hard-fought losses.

Game 69 - The "F" Bomb

2008-03-22T05:24:00.000-07:00

Y'know, the NBA nowadays is run like the old Soviet Union, in this respect: You can't get the truth, you can only get the acceptable party line.

Here's a few of those studied myths that passes for "analysis" nowadays:
- "We spent so much energy catching up that we had nothing left in the tank"
- "Well, you gotta give him a blow at some time..."

The Nets were down 12 at the half. Vs Utah they were down 10. Vs Atlanta they were down 7. In the latter two games they came back, took the lead, and kept on going, winning easily. Last night they did not.

So, does party line 1 above make any sense? Didn't the Nets expend, ostensibly, just as much energy if not more coming back and winning those two games, rather handily?

And last night - what about Denver? Didn't they expend as much energy if not more building up an 18 point lead?

No folks, this is just plausible deniability.

The Nets came roaring back in the third last night, just as they have in their two recent good looking wins at home (which is redundant, since they haven't won, or even tried to win, on the road since early February...). Here's the difference:

Vince Carter spent the first several minutes of the 4th quarter on the bench.

Which leads us to plausibly deniable myth number 2, above. Well, you gotta give him a blow some time...

Okay. How about at the end of the game, when it's out of reach, one way or the other? How about at the end of the season? How about next game, you know, the one you're gonna throw in the towel in the 2nd quarter, on the road?

Lawrence Frank happened last night. That's the difference. The F-bomb. Period. Space space.

The Nets took the lead, 88-86, after being down 18, in the very same 3rd quarter, and there was still 2 mins to go in the quarter. VC was the reason, pure and simple. And not just scoring - defense, passing, leadership. They (as is their wont in the Frank error) didn't finish well in the last 2 minutes, but they're only down 93-90.

So what does F-boy do?

In the 45 years I've been watching the NBA, I have only seen one other coach be so tone deaf to the game at hand. His name was Byron Scott. F-twerp was his ass-istant.

As I have repeatedly mentioned here, Scott took an on-fire Kerry Kittles and a 9 point lead and benched them both to start the 4th quarter in Game 6 in San Antonio in 2003, the Nets best chance to win it all. He personally hamstrung his own team by being tone deaf to the game at hand. Any fool (or, as Kidd said, "my own son" (who was like 5 at the time)) could coach that game better. This is not even to mention Scott's inexplicable non-use of Dikembe Mutumbo during much of the series.

F-brain took a page right out of that storied history, benching Vince at the very time he was hottest, at the very time he was in the flow, at the very time the young players on the court needed his leadership. Benched him.

Result? The Nets are down, once again, by 13 with 9 minutes left. Game the F over.

What game was the screaming marionette watching? Why does he bother showing up? Print out the game plan, the sub plan, the timeout plan, and stay in your office and watch tape.

When it got to 97-90, you have to know - Hey, if they score again, unanswered, they're up by 9 and (listen now, Larry, you might learn something here) IT'S THE FREAKING FOURTH QUARTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's the game that's happening on the floor, Fool. Coach THAT game, not the one in your robotic brain. COACH THE GAME IN FRONT OF YOUR EYES.

Call time. Put Vince back in, pronto. Set up a play. Get fouled. Chances are, it's 97-92. Five points is nothing with 10 or 9 to go.

Nope. Vince sits. The lead goes up to 9. Frank watches. Tim Capstraw, the agitprop mouthpiece, I presume under constraints not to criticize the obvious, tries to mollify a 10 year old fan in the post game by saying, well, YOU GOTTA GIVE HIM A BLOW SOME TIME, and besides, VC was kneeling at the scorers table before F-jerk called a time out, he says, contradicting himself like the guilty criminal - I don't beat my wife, and besides, she likes it. Sometimes you got to call a time out just to get a guy in the game.

Well, Tim, of course, you and I both know that you wouldn't have to call the time out IF THE HOTTEST PLAYER ON THE COURT IN THE THIRD STARTED THE FOURTH AS HE SHOULD HAVE.

What Jason Kidd did not like the most about Byron Scott was exactly this - he was tone deaf to the game at hand. I saw Kidd seething in 2003-2004, sitting on the pine to start the 4th as the team unraveled. The leader of the team, sitting on the pine at that juncture. Seething.

Last night, for perhaps the 30th or 40th time this season, the leader of the team sat on the bench as the game slipped away in the beginning of the 4th.

Imagine - VC starts the 4th. The Nets keep close and win. Vs Denver. Third quality win at home. Something to build on.

Or, they keep it close but lose in the last minute. Still, okay.

Instead, the F-bomb is dropped on the Nets. MVP for the Nuggets? The Nets clueless and complicit coach.

Had Vince started the 4th and played its entirety, he would have played 42 minutes. That would not have led all players. AI played 45.

Wilt Chamberlain AVERAGED 49 minutes one year. 49! And there's only 48 in regulation!

This was game sixty F-ing nine, not game 10!

Which leads to another myth that F-clown subscribes to:

- This is just one of 82 games.

If you believe that, F-dolt, with 13 games left in the season and your team fighting for the last playoff spot, you belong elsewhere.

Like, on the F-ing unemployment line.

"Slow Economy Likely to Stall Atlantic Yards"

2008-03-21T04:44:00.000-07:00

So pronounced the NYT today, Good Friday, as the lead story on the front page:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/nyregion/21yards.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

"The slowing economy, weighed down by a widening credit crisis, is likely to delay the signature office tower and three residential buildings at the heart of the $4 billion Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, the developer said.

“It may hold up the office building,” the developer, Bruce C. Ratner, said in a recent interview. “And the bond market may slow the pace of the residential buildings.”

Mr. Ratner, chief executive of Forest City Ratner, did not specify the kinds of delays possible, but suggested that construction could be put off for years. His comments are his first public indication that the darkening economy has slowed the ambitious project, spanning 22 acres at the intersection of Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues.

The developer did say he was confident about starting construction on a $950 million basketball arena for the Nets by the end of the year...

Atlantic Yards began with Mr. Ratner’s purchase of the Nets in 2004 and the idea of moving the team, which currently plays in New Jersey and loses about $30 million a year, to the railroad yard."

Back in 2004, right after Ratner, and old client of mine, bought the team, I predicted that the Nets would never play a single game in Brooklyn. It was crystal clear that buying the Nets was a move that Ratner needed to get his project done. He had been planning it for at least 10 years before - a cardboard mockup of it's early conception lay in a glass case in his foyer in the 90s. But it was met with a great amount of resistance.

Getting a pro sports team to come into Brooklyn, stirring the borough's odd singularism and civic pride, might be just the trick to overwhelm the annoying indigenous resistance to the monument to his outsized ego. Jay-Z was just the most prominent of Brooklynites to lend support to the idea.

And it looked like it was working. Challenge after challenge, which previously had hamstrung the project, were now batted away by an abetting court system emboldened to use eminent domain in support of the oligarchist du jour, which in this case was our boy Bruce.

Yet, at around the same time that the most serious legal challenge was quashed last fall, the team announced that, well, they weren't gonna be opening the 2009 season in Brooklyn after all - it would be 2010.

That would make 6 seasons in limbo. No wonder Jason Kidd, when asked about the deal back when it was first done, said it didn't matter to him because he would be retired before they played a game in Brooklyn.

New Jersey constantly trades places with Connecticut as having the wealthiest residents in the nation. The Garden State routinely supplies many of the best basketball players in the world. It has one of the largest percentages of African-Americans as residents. Its largest city, Newark, conveniently placed at the crossroads of several modes of public transportation, now sports what is being hailed as the finest new arena in the country, two blocks from a major train station that serves a population area of 10 million souls. And Newark, which has had a black mayor since 1968, would be a natural location for a basketball team.

So why is it that the Nets are a team that "loses about $30 million a year"?

Can you spell A-t-l-a-n-t-i-c...?

The history of this franchise has always been about how to shoot yourself in the head while aiming at your foot. While in the ABA in the Nassau Mausoleum the Nets somehow grab Rick Barry from the NBA and win a championship, then pluck the greatest talent of his day in Dr J, the man who most revolutionized the game outside of Wilt Chamberlain, and win another. The league collapses, but the new owners, probably looking at the same demographics as I noted above, decide to move the surviving franchise to NJ, and Central NJ at that. The 76ers freak out, as do the Knicks, and to mollify them, the J is given to Philadelphia.

Funny thing is, it is soon revealed that the team will not be playing in CNJ (at the RAC) but in North Jersey, no threat to the 76ers market at all! However, the State of NJ builds their arena far, far away from any part of one of the largest public transportation system in the country. It's one thing to drive out in the middle of nowhere to watch a football game, given the tailgaiting that surrounds the spectacle and does not lend itself to using public transportation. But nobody's gonna tailgate in January before a night time basketball game (or hockey game, for that matter).

Nonetheless, in 8 years the Nets upset the defending NBA Champion Sixers (with Dr J, no less) in the playoffs and look like they are the up and coming team in the league. But substance abuse and a revolving coaching carousel kill the team again. The trade of Buck Williams for the oft injured flameout Sam Bowie did not help...

After another 8 years of abysmal play, the Nets at least get some very good young players because their draft position is so low, and also get the first European player of any note in Drazin Petrovic, and before you know it they have Chuck Daly as coach. They win 45 games and get into the playoffs 3 times in a row, not being able to get past Cleveland two of the three times. Still, the future looks bright...

But management instability and a literal haggle of owners force Daly into "retirement" (which lasts exactly two years). His replacement? Butch Beard...

Then they get John Calipari in a Rick Pitino copy cat move. The team essentially swaps rosters with Philadelphia, but somehow they end up with Sam Cassell, and they make a creditable showing, returning to the playoffs to be sacrificed to the Bulls, altho they lose three close games. People are talking about coming to play for the young talented Nets and their high profile coach, altho some are worried about Calipari's "yelling"...

Coach C lasts 20 games the next year before being fired on a plane flight back from a game...

The Don Casey era (error?) begins...

But all that bad play gets the Nets 3 quality draft picks, yet again - Kerry Kittles, Keith Van Horn, Kenyon Martin. Jayson "Shotgun" Williams is one of two premier rebounders in the NBA, and has an outsized attractive personality. And soon we learn that Stephon Marbury is homesick, and since the Knicks can't take him, he comes to the Nets. Looking pretty good.

Three broken legs and a bad knee later, the Nets have endured three consecutive .300 seasons, keeping the Swamp dismal yet again.

Then comes THE TRADE. Finals back to back. Byron Scott miscoaches away the Nets best chance at a title, but "the Nets' future is bright" says JKidd, even as Scott is replaced by Lawrence (Seriously, I'm Not Jeff Van Gundy's Evil Twin) Frank and Kidd's knee needs major repair, as he refused to join San Antonio for a slam dunk shot at a ring.

Then comes the Ratner deal. Kenyon and Kittles are flushed. Kidd gets mad but gets Thorn to take a chance on romance with Zo Mourning. We all know how THAT worked out.

Somehow it results in getting Vince Carter, Mr Vinsanity himself, to come to the Meadowlands. The Big Three is coined. They win 49 in 2006, and despite a mediocre (exactly) 2007 season, get to the second round for the 5th time in 7 years, pushing the eventual NBA Finals representative from the East in a hard fought series that they could have won. (In those 5 seasons, they lost to the eventual NBA championship team 4 times, the other losing to a finals team and runner up.)

Then it falls apart again, as it becomes clear that Ratner really doesn't care and then Kidd really doesn't want to play in limbo any more.

I want to see Ratner fail. I want to see the team play in Newark, where they belong. I want to have an owner who will let Rod Thorn do his thing. I want Rod Thorn to stay, to become the Lou Lamoriello of basketball. I want to see these young players blossom.

I'm tired of this team being played like a pawn in some egotistical game of development chess.

And I want a new coach.

And I'm sticking with my prediction - this team will not play a single game in Brooklyn.

Which leads to this irony: Rumor has it (Selena Roberts in Sports Illustrated, no less) that Jay-Z and LeBron are very close, and that IF the Nets actually DO make it to Brooklyn, LeBron will come to the Nets:

http://fannation.com/blogs/post/167195

Wouldn't it be just like the Nets to NOT move to Brooklyn, thereby undermining their best chance to grab the best young player in the league, and maybe, just maybe, win it all??

Game 68 - Dr Jekyll Doesn't Hide

2008-03-21T03:54:00.000-07:00

This is the most schizophrenic professional sports team I have ever followed. I just don't get it.

After the Nets refused to get off the plane in Chicago, squandering a chance to put some distance between themselves and the sub-par teams it is fighting for the chance to be ritually sacrificed to the juggernaut that is Boston, after showing no heart whatsoever, here they come home, a house of horrific play, where they are dead (and I mean dead) even 17-17, and take apart Atlanta, winning the season series against the nearly as schizo Hawks, and looking very good doing it.

I mean, VC exerted his will on the game. RJ gave 100%, at the very least in the 2nd half. And LFrank coached the kind of game you expect from an NBA coach - ie, you wouldn't have to talk about how is lost-ness contributed to the loss-ness.

Tonite and vs Utah they looked like the team they have always looked like on paper - when you have VC and RJ going full bore, this is a hard team to defend, a hard team to beat. A team that's never out of it. When VC and RJ lead, the young guys feed off of it. Sean (Remember Me, Coach?) Williams and Josh (The Big Upside) Boone all elevated their games, caught in the tail wind envelope of the Big Two. Devin Harris is never gonna be JKidd, but that's because Devin Harris is gonna be Devin Harris - a different kind of player, one who can score and altho he cannot yet exert his will on a game like Kidd can (or on an entire season, as Kidd thrice did), he doesn't have to if VC and RJ decide they will. He, too, can be swept up in their jet trails as well, and when he does, you have another Big Three.

Commentators complained that not much defense was played, but I disagree. Sean Williams continues to shine in my estimation, with several key blocks. RJ shut down his man. VC got key rebounds and contributed to several key stops, keeping things from being worse than a 10 point deficit at the half.

Let's not lie - the Meadowlands cum Brendan Byrne cum Continental Airlines cum Izod Arena is barely half full most nights, and that half is not exactly enthusiastic basketball afficionados. Most nights the actual crowd would barely pack the RAC, and half the time most of the fans are there to see the opposition, be it LeBron or KG or even Hedo Turkoglu. It's hard to attribute the play of the Nets last night and vs Utah to the crowd lifting the team. And that's not to mention those ugly, ugly wins the Nets have on either side.

Last night, this Jekyll/Hyde team was solidly Jekyll and a pleasure to watch. So, why doesn't the good doctor show up more often?

I don't think anybody knows. I don't think VC knows why his play has been so bipolar, why it took til Game 68 for him to score near 40. I don't think RJ knows why he has been disappearing in the 4ths of late, only to catch fire the last couple of homestands, only to disappear in between on the road.

And I don't think the estimable Lawrence Frank knows why he steps outside his box to coach like a real coach some games, only to recede to his robotic substitutions and timeout patterns most other games.

I've seen some really, really bad Nets basketball over the years - the Butch Beard Embarrassment, Sam Boo-ie, Yinko Dare, Don Casey's not even walking wounded. Bad, bad basketball. Those teams didn't have games where they put it all together and you said, There - that's what we expected to see all season. No, how they played in those years was what we expected to see - cager crap.

But this team... Vince Carter, Jason Kidd, Richard Jefferson, Nenad Krstic... So much talent you could afford to start Jason Collins as your 5th man, to take an occasional charge and to launch an occasional flat footed three. Two years ago this team won 49 games and had to collapse at the end of the year in order not to exceed the franchise record 52. They spit the bit (or the roach, as it were) vs Miami, the eventual NBA Champs, but still, they looked like a team that could contend for years to come.

Instead, for two years now, we've had nothing but underperformance.

Some of that, as I have documented this season, is attributable squarely on the slight shoulders of Frank, whom I hold responsible for at least 10 losses this year. Nets win them and they're 39-29 and 4th seed in the East, exactly where the Celtics players said they should be after their last meeting with the Nets. And that only assumes them winning 50% of games they lost at the end. They could be 49-19 at this point, with a little luck.

But some of those 20 losses are attributable to a lack of heart, or initiative, or what? On the FAN today, Benigno and Roberts were talking about Isiah and what a crappy coach he's been, about which they expressed some surprise, given how great not just a player but a field general and example he was in the Pistons' glory years. How come he can't seem to get that across to his players as a coach? Joe pointed out that it might be because Isiah as a player was a self starter - he needed little coaching, and thus lacks the ability to identify what it is that motivates those who are not by nature self-starters.

JKidd was a self starter. VC, when he first came over from Toto, was a self starter. RJ can be a self starter. Devin Harris can be a self starter. And some nights you can see it. VC took the team on his extravagantly talented shoulders last night, and so did RJ, and so did Harris. And you can't blame it on Atlanta not being that great, because they proved it against Utah a few nights earlier.

But then you have a game like the one vs the Bulls... "Game"?? No one on the Nets showed any game that night. I expected to see Armond Gilliam coming off the bench...

These guys are pros. VC and RJ have been around long enough to know the value of consistent professional play. Especially when you have so much young talent that is looking to you for their cues.

The Nets are showing that they can actually be better with Devin Harris than they were the last couple of years with JKidd.

The problem is, we never know if they're gonna show us they ARE better on any given night... Or just plain good, for that matter.

Game 67 - No

2008-03-18T20:00:00.000-07:00

Listless, careless, diffident basketball. When I turned it on, the Nets were down 37-30 in the second. When I switched back to PBS (yeah, it's that bad), they were down by 10 and shooting over 50%. When I turned back, it was halftime and they were not displaying the score, but soon it was mentioned that the Bulls had gone on a 16-0 run to end the quarter.

Game over.

Even if the Nets had the character to come back from something like that (why don't the Nets ever have 16-0 runs?), their coach doesn't know how to help them.

They lose by (you guessed it) 16.

Up down up down up down down down down down down up up down.

Now End The Season...

Game 66 - Finally, a quality win!

2008-03-18T19:54:00.000-07:00

So, 66 games into the season, count 'em, 66, and the Nets finally get a quality win!

Utah had just beaten the vaunted (and overrated) Celtics in Boston and had come down to play a diffident Nets team. The expectations were, hey, let's just have a competitive game.

Up by 3 after 1 (and scoring 32 points), they were down by 7 at the half, and 5 after 3. Usually they would pack it in.

Instead this time they showed grit, selflessness and one had a view of what the team could be like if it tried.

There is enough talent on this team to win 50+ games, easily. Even without Kidd.

Can they keep it up?

This week coming up is key - Chicago on the road, Atlanta at home, the two teams they are competing with for the 8th spot.

We'll see...

Game 65 - A Needlessly Shaky Win

2008-03-18T19:41:00.000-07:00

Cleveland is a mediocre team, but in the anaemic East they qualify as a good team, even if they swapped 1/3 of their roster with the Bulls. Even still, Ben Wallace did not play, nor did Ziggy.

So it should be an easy Nets win, right?

Looked like it would be - 38-20 after 1. Ok, I've seen many teams cough up a 1st qtr bulge like that before. But 58-47 at the half, looking pretty good.

Well, of course, "teams in the NBA go on runs", the Magnificent Frank has intoned, excepting of course his own club, and so here we are, with 5 1/2 to play, and the Nets are ahead by 1. ONE! Cleveland goes on a 22-10 run, and Frank calls one time out, has a TV timeout, but still hoards them.

I'm sick of such coaching. Just sick of it. I can't even enjoy a gutty win at the end.

Please fire him...

Game 64 - Houston, we don't have liftoff

2008-03-10T18:43:00.000-07:00

Same things continue to apply:

Last two minutes of 1st: 2-7

Last two minutes of the half: 1-5

Shooting pct 1st half: 22%

3pt pct in 1st half: 0%

28 points total in the half. That's LESS THAN 50% of the point total when they beat the Bucks and scored 68 in one half. They got only 2 points more than that in the ENTIRE GAME vs San Antonio. And the Nets would need 42 points in the second half just to make that humiliating total...

What's the point?

ADDENDUM:

Okay, game over. The lost by effectively 20. They scored 45, count 'em, 45 in the second half to finish with 73. They broke 20 only in the last quarter. They shot 30% for the game, and ZERO from 3pt land. ZERO!

They let a 41 year old Dikembe Mutumbo (remember him, Byron?) dominate them inside. RJ and VC combined for a whopping 25 points. They should be AVERAGING 25 a game, EACH of them.

Frank's postgame comments were worthless, as were Carter's.

This is a sad, sorry team.

I made a prediction that the Nets would be 28-36 at this point, and even that proved to be optimistic.

Fire Frank, please, Rod.

Game 63 - Mailing it in

2008-03-08T20:28:00.000-08:00

No, I'm not talking about the Nets, altho they, too, mailed it in.

I watched the Devils, then UNC vs Duke, and only at the end did I flip over to the Nets g(sh)ame. 100-81 with 5:00 to go in the 4th. I checked Sportsline to see the box score. Down by 9 after 1, 18 after 2, 22 after 3...

I'm not very interested in this blog any more, playing out the string, just like the Nets. I have nothing new to add or say. Frank can't coach in game. The team has stopped listening. They don't care. Thorn has done his job. The owner could give a Ratner's ass.

BTW - the lowly Hawks picked up a game and a half on the Nets tonite, to bump them out of the 8th ("and final") playoff spot. The Nets have yet to lose to Houston on this "brutal" road trip.

The only thing brutal about it is the level of play of the Nets.

Game 62 - Alley...Oops!

2008-03-07T19:49:00.000-08:00

This is flat out no fun any more. This is drudgery...

That's how the Nets must feel.

I watched the Devils tonite, then Bill Moyers. By the time I turned it on it was the 4th quarter and they were down 15. Ho hum.

They had a 3 point lead at the half. NO opens up the 3rd with a 16-2 run. The Talented Mr Frank didn't call timeout until it was a 12-2 run. He was actually challenged by a reporter in the post game - why didn't you call another one. Well, you wanna have a few in the bank, at least one, for the last 20 seconds of the game... Brilliant...

I watched the highlights on the postgame. Alley oop! Alley oop! Alley oop! Nets standing flat footed... Alley oop! Alley oop!

Remember 2002, 2003? It was the NETS who were the running team, the fast break team, the JKidd to Kmart alley oop! team. Now the Nets are the Washington Generals of the NBA.

Alley oop!

At one point as they break for commercial they show Tyson Chandler running off the court laughing at the Nets.

I can't imagine this team winning another game all season. Frank is depressed and dejected - he has no solutions, won't change his rigid approach, and the team is not listening. They are incapable of playing a full 48 minutes. Alley oop!

Frank's postgame assessment was right on and very perceptive - they got a lot of fast breaks off our long perimeter jumpshots. Profound, really. So, brain boy, WHY CAN'T YOU COME UP WITH A WAY TO STOP THAT???????????

Ratner doesn't care. Thorn has done his job in the best way that can be expected. Frank cares but is incompetent. The team senses all this and doesn't care anymore.

I don't care any more.

Game 61 - Two vignettes

2008-03-05T20:43:00.000-08:00

At one point in the 3rd, the Nets are up 71-63. You got the sense that they were beginning to pull away from this decimated 14 point win.

The Griz hit a three. 71-66.

Then this:

- Memphis misses a layup, but gets an offensive board.
- Kickout for another 3. Hits. 71-69.
- Lawrence "the marionette" Frank is signalling for a timeout.
- Krstic has the ball out of bounds. It looks like the refs have called time. He steps on the line while throwing it in. Doh! The refs do not recognize the timeout. Turnover on the Nets!
- Griz miss a shot but loose ball foul on the Nets.
- Memphis inbounds it. Swatted out of bounds by Memphis, but refs say, no, Memphis ball.
- Foul on Nets. Two shots drained. 71 all.
- Timeout Nets.

I have seen the inbounding team turn it over by stepping on the line called in the NBA exactly twice - both this season, within a week of each other, both on the Nets.

Vignette two - Nets down 4 (of course) with a little over a minute left (of course). Miraculously Devin Harris steals the ball! He throws it down court where he anticipates VC will be, but the ball is just too long and winds up going back over to Memphis.

On the replay, there is Frank, jumping up and down, waving his hands and even legs wildly. He looks like a marionette on crack.

Mark Jackson mentions this stat as the seconds bleed away. The Nets are about to be swept for the season by the 14 win Grizzlies. They were swept in the season series by the 19 win Clippers. They have lost 3 so far to the 18 win Knicks. They are 0-7 against 3 teams that have not won 20 games. And this is not to mention their losses to Minnesota and Miami.

At 9:52 in the 4th, as Hakim Warrick finishes a 3 point play with a foul shot, I tell my son, they are going to lose again. He says, there is 9:52 left in the game. I told him, unless Frank calls a timeout right here, right now, they will lose.

He did not. They lost.

My rather dour prediction for the next several games had the Nets be 2-1 at this point.

They are 0-3.

Can we please just fire this guy??

How much can Lawrence Frank be making?

2008-03-04T19:58:00.000-08:00

You've got a team here with Vince Carter on it, a guy who was a premier shooter, a guy capable of taking over a game and scoring 40 points. You've got Richard Jefferson who is capable of driving the lane and scoring 30+ on any given night. You had a point guard who was in the same class with Oscar Robertson and Magic Johnson in triple doubles.

You've got talented young big men, talented young guards. You've got depth at every position.

Yet if this team gets down 10, even in the first quarter, it's over.

I've never seen anything like it. Never in my 45 or so years of watching basketball.

The Nets make the same mistakes over and over. The coach coaches every game the same way, and does not make adjustments. For the last 2 years the Nets have played the same way, except for when Jason Kidd decided to exert his considerable personal will to win, which apparently VC and RJ do not have.

And neither does Lawrence Frank. Have you ever heard him take responsibility in other than a pro forma way? He does not. I don't think it's because he's egotistical. I think it's because he's lost.

The Nets do not come back from a 10 point deficit because they know they will not get help from the bench, and I'm not talking substitutes.

Why not just fire him? How much can he be making? A mil? Half a mil? Two mil? Why not fire his sorry butt and buy him out?

Really, I'm serious. He doesn't know how to coach in game. Rebounding woes continue. Their offense is a joke. They allow the opponent to have extended multiple runs, while they have 5, 6, 7 minute scoring droughts. Game after game after game.

Doesn't the red headed wonder get tired of Groundhog Day? Doesn't he ever tire of it?

Doesn't he ever tire of poor finish to quarters? Doesn't he ever tire of watching his team pull to 8 and get the ball, only to launch an ill advised three with 20 seconds left on the shot clock? Does he ever call a timeout, put his face in RJ's or VC's and say, DRIVE THE BASKET!?

If he is not, he should be fired for being incompetent. If he is, then his team has tuned him out, and thus he should be fired.

And it's not like there isn't talent out there - I bet Jeff van Gundy, who is from the NY area, would take the job, especially if it meant being the man who goes to Brooklyn...

Bruce Ratner - I know you don't give a crap about basketball. I know the Nets are just a pawn in your real estate development scheme. But hey - doesn't it make sense to try and make something of the last 2 or 3 years before the move to Brooklyn? And if it only costs you a mil or two, why not? You just locked up VC for several years at $15 million per. What's a couple of mil in a buyout?

THIS TEAM CANNOT IMPROVE WITH LAWRENCE FRANK AS COACH. They cannot grow, they cannot improve. They can only get worse.

How much can he be making?

Just fire his sorry ass...

Game 60 - Deja vu, only less

2008-03-04T19:34:00.000-08:00

At the end of the 3rd quarter, the Nets were losing to a team shooting 35%. By 12.

Funny enough, the Nets were shooting 40%. And losing. By 12.

At one point in the second quarter it was 37-37. The Nets got their 38th point 5 minutes into the SECOND HALF.

So many times in these past two games the Nets got it to 8 and had the ball, but every time they could not close the gap. Turnover, needless 3 with 17 left on the shot clock, offensive foul, jumper with nobody under.

Once the Nets get down 10, AT ANY POINT IN THE GAME, they are done for. First quarter, fourth quarter, any point in between.

The Nets give off an aura of patsy, from the coach on down. The refs pick up on this. With 6 minutes left in the game the Nets have taken just 8 foul shots. SA has taken 24. A difference of 16. At 75%, the NBA average, that adds up to 12 points. Sound familiar?

Tim Duncan scored on a play where he took 4 steps. Ginobili made an assist where he tucked in the ball, "like Ahmad Bradshaw", Marv Albert helpfully added, ran four steps, then passed it. No whistle.

I am sorry, then an NBA game has such a differential in foul shot opportunities, you're not calling a fair game. Three times as many proves bias, period. Space space.

Stat just went up - Nets scored 29 points in the first 15 minutes, 27 points since. Their shooting pcts, by quarter:
1 - 67%
2 - 26%
3 - 33%
4 - 17%

At this moment, with less than 3 minutes left, the Nets are losing to a team shooting 33% - by 17! I have never seen anything like it.

Frank can't help this team. The refs sense the kill and abet it.

What's the point?

Game 59 - Oh well...

2008-03-02T19:38:00.000-08:00

The good news is that from the 6:00 mark of the first quarter on, the teams played dead even.

The bad news is, they were down 10 at the time, 16-6. That proved to be the margin of loss.

Here's some more bad news:
- 35% shooting
- 27 field goals, only 8 assists. For the entire team.
- Out rebounded 51-42

The Nets fell in love the the jumper a couple of games ago. Last game they shot 68% in the first quarter, twice the rate as tonite. They finished at 51% last game, 17 points higher than tonite.

The Nets pulled with 4 a few times, but couldn't make it stick.

And then there's the old standbys - end of quarters:
Last 2 mins of 2nd: outscored 4-9, -5

Here's their record since the trade:
W
L
W
L
W
L

My prediction thus has to be revised down - 28-39 at the end of the trip.

The Nets cannot move forward with this coach. .500 is the best expected outcome.

.500 ain't gonna cut it.

The Upcoming Road Trip - Predictions and Results

2008-03-02T08:00:00.001-08:00

So here we are again - 6 games under .500, with the "Texas swing" in the offing. Here are the next several games for the Nets:

Tonite - Spurs
3/4 - @ Spurs
3/5 - @ Memphis
3/7 - @ New Orleans
3/8 - @ Dallas
3/10 - @ Houston
3/12 - Cavs
3/15 - Utah
3/18 - @ Bulls

The Spurs have now won 8 in a row. They play tonite at the Meadowlands. Let's say the juju of the new team make-up, and Tony Parker's relief at Harris getting out of the division is real, and perhaps the Nets win that one. 27-32.

Then they play the Spurs in San Antonio. The probability of the Nets winning there, based on recent history, is essentially nil, but if we have given that the Nets just beat them in NJ, this probability decreases further. 27-33.

At Memphis. The Grizzlies have been decimated, but the Nets will be coming in one night off a bad loss in SA. However, so will the Griz. Tight, losable, but let's say they prevail, narrowly. 28-33.

At New Orleans. Hornets have the one of the best records in the NBA, have just beaten the new look Suns and Utah, and will have tuned up against the sub .500 Wizards, Knicks and Hawks. No chance. 28-34.

At Dallas. Kidd faces his old team, who, when not auditioning him, crush the Nets, especially in Dallas. 28-35.

At Houston. Houston is the hottest team in the NBA. 28-36.

Cleveland is now stacked to win, even on the road. 28-37.

Utah. Best team in the Northwest. 28-38.

At Chicago. The Bulls are way too decimated to contend with a demoralized Nets team, now certainly out of the playoffs, but it will be close, maybe OT. 29-38.

Nets net: Two more weeks down, three more games in the hole.

I just saw the Sixers beat the Suns, and have now passed the Nets as the 7th seed. Just behind the Nets are now the Hawks, Bulls and Indiana. That game on the 18th in Chicago could be for the 8th and final spot, even tho the Bulls have been dismantled. The Hawks could turn it around during the next two and a half weeks, playing as well if not better than the Nets and with an easier schedule during that span, featuring games against the Knicks, Heat, Wizards and Clippers. And guess who the Nets play right after the Bulls - Atlanta.

It is possible that the Nets could catch fire, but with San Antonio in a playoff race for the first time in years, and with an 8 game win streak, the best that can be hoped for is a split. Not exactly the best way to catch fire. The games are set up not to be conducive to streaks, at least not win streaks. They could get demoralized and swoon again and come back from Chicago with less than 28 wins. I'm being optimistic and predicting 2 road wins and a triumph over SA tonite. But wild optimism might have them win 2 more games than that, which would only put them at 31-36, a net increase of just one little game in the standings.

The Nets, with Kidd, with Frank, with the other Big Two, have dug themselves an inconvenient hole. After March 18 they will have only 15 games left, during which they will have to go 11-4 just to make .500. 11-4 while having to play Denver, Phoenix, at Detroit, Toronto, at Cleveland, at Toronto and at Boston. They will need to win at least 3 of those games and sweep the rest, including resurging Atlanta and at Philadelphia, just to break .500. Some of those games against the tougher teams might be easier since they would have clinched their playoff spots. But then some of the games against the "second division" teams might be tougher as they all claw for the privilege of getting destroyed by Boston or Detroit in the first round.

Things look bleak.

I can't possibly expect the playoffs this year. All I can hope for is for this team to play creditably and for Frank to learn some things, and hope for the best in what looks like several years of rebuilding.

Hack a Whomever - Why It Never Works

2008-03-02T05:37:00.001-08:00

I hammer my boy Lawrence Frank for his poor in game coaching a lot, it's no secret. He can be a good coach in the NBA if he would leave his Byron Scott ideas about substitution and timeouts behind and just coach the in game situations as they arise.

So this little post is yet another attempt to dissuade him from the error of his ways. This time, however, I wish to appeal to his obvious respect for statistics and computing. This time, I have proof that what he is doing is essentially futile.

Frank, like Scott, is inordinately fond of hoarding timeouts for use at the end of the game in case he has to micro-manage it to erase a moderate lead late, say 7 points or less. This is essentially a self fulfilling strategy - IF you thus hoard, then you are almost ENSURING that you will need to use them, because your failure to use them earlier, to throw water on the other teams' runs or to settle down your own team when it is in disarray, guarantees that your leads will evaporate or close games will widen against you by the time the crunch arrives.

Frank does not see this. His strategy is akin to the Invasion of Iraq - there were no terrorists there, but your invasion gave them the opportunity to be there, and so they are there now. Similarly, the game was not close, but your coaching as if it would inevitably be close forced you to make it close, and thus it was.

There are a lot of time worn strategies in baseball that have never been challenged, such as playing the infield in. In this case, however, it occurred to me that we could indeed mathematically test the validity of the Hack a Whomever strategy at the end of the game. This blog is the results of that study.

Let's set the stage:

The Hack a Whomever strategy is one where one finds his team down by more than one score with less than 2 minutes remaining in the game. The idea is to foul the other team right away when they get possession, put them on the line, hope that they miss occasionally, and score as quickly as you can when you have the ball. If you get enough possessions, and the other team misses enough foul shots, you can narrow the gap to one score. Then "it's anybody's game".

Frank (and other coaches) further refine this strategy by relying on 2 point baskets, gambling that they can drive to the hoop and score 2 with greater percentage than 3s because the other team is not going to foul them.

There are various fallacies of this strategy, such as the unwillingness of the other team to foul you and make you earn it at the stripe. But without going there, I posed the simple question - Given this strategy, what is a reasonable expectation of points differential by using it?

I broke down the strategy into 6 identifiable and quantifiable variables:
SLG - Number of seconds left in the game
SYP - Number of seconds of your possessions
SFO - Number of seconds before you foul your opponent
YSP - Your shooting pct
OFP - Your opponent's free throw pct
COS - Whether you shoot 3s or 2s

Clearly, by the way, shooting pct varies with your choice of shooting 3s or 2s.

I began by constructing the formula. Given so many seconds left in the game (SLG), and given the amount of time in seconds it takes you to score (SYP) as well as how many seconds it takes you to foul the other team (SFO), the number of opportunities that both teams together within the time remaining will be:

SLG/(SYP+SFO)

For example, if there is 90 seconds left in the game, and it takes you 20 seconds to score and 10 seconds to foul, there will be at most 3 such exchanges of possession. If you can get your possessions down to 10 and can foul on average at 5, you can get 6 such exchanges.

Clearly, the number of possessions will not be an integer, so I modified the expression to take that into account, using the Greatest Integer Less Than function, or FLOOR:

FLOOR(SLG/(SYP+SFO),1)

So if we plug in 12 seconds to score and 7 seconds to foul, say, we'll get an integral value for the number of possessions.

Now, how many points can we expect to score? Take the number of possessions, take the kind of shot, and take a shooting pct for that kind of shot. Thus:

YSP*COS*FLOOR(SLG/(SYP+SFO),1)

So, if we're gonna shoot 2s, and we have 3 possessions, and we shoot 67%, we'll should expect to score 4 points. If we shoot 3s, have 6 possessions and shoot 50%, we should expect to score 9 points.

Of course, the other team is not standing still. They're getting fouled (btw, it is assumed that you are over the limit, which, in this scenario, is the best case - otherwise more time will have to tick down as you foul repeatedly with the other team not having to shoot free throws) and sinking some shots. Remember, they shoot 2 shots. Thus they are scoring:

2*OFP*FLOOR(SLG/(SYP+SFO),1)

Given the NBA average of FT pct of 75%, and given those 3 possessions, the other team will score at least 4 points. If they have 6 possessions, they will score 9.

The expectation, therefore, of the strategy, is the difference between these two scoring expectations:

YSP*COS*FLOOR(SLG/(SYP+SFO),1) - 2*OFP*FLOOR(SLG/(SYP+SFO),1)

or, distributing out, we get:

(YSP*COS - 2*OFP)*FLOOR(SLG/(SYP+SFO),1)

This is mathematically the expectation for the net points you will get from such a strategy. Like it or not, this is the formula.

All that remains is to plug some values in.

As we can see in our above examples, their net scoring is 0. That is, nothing is gained from this strategy.

Well, a coach might argue, that assumes an NBA average for free throw shooting. But at the end of the game there is more pressure, especially if the team you're facing is on the road (ie, you're at home) and if you foul the right person, ie, one who's a bad foul shooter.

Okay, lets use these numbers, then:

SLG - 90
SYP - 15
SFO - 10
YSP - .500
COS - 3
OFP - .400

This says there's a minute and a half left in the game, it takes you 15 seconds on average in a possession during which you score half the time and when you do it's a three, while it takes you 10 seconds to foul the duffer at the line who only shoots 40%.

Expectation? +2 points.

That's it? That's all I can expect?

That's it. So if you're down 3, you can expect to lose. You're far better off letting your team play.

Of course, no coach is gonna go into the Hack-a-Whomever down by 3 with 90 seconds left. They'd more likely use it if they were down, say 5. But if your expectation is net +2, why in the world would you do it?

Even more to the point, this scenario assumes you shoot 3s. LFrank, and many other coaches, would say, well, we don't have to shoot 3s. Oh no? Clearly, given 50% shooting, and shooting 2s, our expectation should be LESS. Ie, we'll lose by a larger deficit!

Even if we crank up our shooting pct to 75% shooting 2s, our expectation in the same situation with the duffer and the time allotted yields:

Expectation? +2 points!

See? Altho the 2, given matador D due to a reluctance of the other team to foul, has a much higher percentage of success, the net comes out EXACTLY THE SAME because the 3 pointer COUNTS AS MORE POINTS!

This only makes sense, after all. The other team is shooting foul shots and will sink some of them. You're making up the difference, but at a rate so slow it can't possibly ever shrink to zero within the allotted time, ie, the time that's left when you elected to use the strategy.

Thus Frank's strategy of Foul-and-go-for-2 is just as futile as if he let his guys bomb away from downtown.

Wait - the coach might say - we don't use this because it is guaranteed to work, or even likely to work. We use it in the hope we get lucky.

Fair point. So then, exactly how lucky do we have to get?

Let's be generous and very optimistic with our luck, and reasonable about when we're gonna use it.

Let's say we're down by 7 with 2 minutes left. This is the earliest we would use the strategy, and we would have to be awfully alert to decide to use it with that much time left. Let's further say that we're gonna go on a roll and shoot 75% from 3, only take 10 seconds off the clock, and foul a 40% duffer (say, like Josh Boone) from the line with 5 seconds EVERY time.

Expectation? +11.6

So this WOULD work - BUT there are other considerations.

For example, not only would you need to be lottery lucky, the lead will evaporate long before the 2 minutes is up. In fact, you will tie it in 0:40, and take the lead with 30 seconds left. Will you continue with the strategy after then?

And what if the other coach, sensing your use of the strategy early, puts all guards out there, all of whom are at least 65% free throw shooters? The best you can hope for is a tie. And that's assuming you have the perspicacity to start using the strategy with 2 minutes left. If you waited until only a minute and a half left, you lose.

I did see this strategy work exactly once, and it was at the college level. Stanford used it with a little over 1 minute left vs Rhode Island in the 98 NCAAs to advance to the Final Four. But they were even luckier than the improbable scenario posed above. And again, they were young college players, not professionals used to playing tight games on the road in packed houses.

Frank, however, does not get this. He robotically uses it, uses the version less inclined to success, and uses it so often without positive results that he actually undermines his authority by demoralizing a team that sees what every other person in the building sees - IT NEVER WORKS. WHAT'S THE POINT??

Take Tuesday's game vs Orlando. With 1:31 left the Nets foul, down 8. They are shooting 43% for the game, 42% from 3 land. Orlando is shooting 67% from the line.

Let's be optimistic and hope that we can score in 10 and foul in 5.

Now, I have, at this moment, not figured out what the expectation should be. Let's plug in these numbers and see what our expectation should be, both shooting 2s and 3s.

Expectation shooting 2s: -2.88
Expectation shooting 3s: -0.48

Either way, and anything in between, the Nets should expect their deficit to WIDEN, not close. In fact, they lost by 10, an increase in the deficit by 2 points, EXACTLY AS PREDICTED.

In fact, in order to have won, the following numbers would have had to apply:

SLG - 90 (fixed)
SYP - 10 (optimistic)
SFO - 5 (very optimistic)
YSP - .750 (wildly optimistic)
COS - 3 (which Frank would never do)
OFP - .400 (wildly optimistic)

and EVEN THEN all they would have done is FORCED OVERTIME!

Even if they just played it out, held Orlando scoreless, kept them to 20 seconds per possession and scored a 3 every time down, they'd win by just 1. BUT AT LEAST THEY'D WIN. And how improbable is that scenario compared with the wildly optimistic Hack-a-whomever scenario above?

Of course, the best scenario is to NEVER HAVE LET THE DEFICIT GET TO 8 WITH 1:30 TO GO IN THE FIRST PLACE. The score had seesawed all game with no team having a lead bigger than 6 until the very end, when Frank's inability to call a well placed timeout let it get out of hand.

The bottom line, then, is this:
- The Hack-a-Whomever strategy is theoretically set up for failure in almost all circumstances when it would be used.
- The Foul-and-Go-For-2 variant is EVEN LESS LIKELY to succeed.

Thus it would appear, to any rational coach with a desire to win, to NOT HOARD TIMEOUTS for this eventuality and JUST KEEP PLAYING THE GAME.

I will try to communicate this to Frank and Rod Thorn, in the hope that perhaps, just maybe, if the facts are laid out for him, he will change his approach and COACH THE GAME THAT PRESENTS ITSELF, not the game he has a priori decided on.

Game 58 - A New (if odd) Hope

2008-03-02T04:31:00.000-08:00

There is this idea, described most recently in "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein, that when people are in shock they are more likely to suggestion. Despite the dark tone of her work, it seems to be just what the Nets need...

The Nets beat a bad, but hungry and recently successful Milwaukee team by 14 (!) points, just the 6th time ALL SEASON that they've won by double digits, albeit the second of three since Kidd left, and the other was an 8 point win. (Contrast that with their largest win skein of the season, when they won 7 of 8 in December with an average margin of victory less than 2 points...) The only time it got a little dicey was at the end of 3 when they led by a mere 6. The Nets then went on a spurt in the mid 4th to put it out of the realm of question.

They scored 68 points in the first half, easily a season high, on 64% shooting, also easily a season high. Still, with Milwaukee shooting only 45%, the lead was only 13. One would expect at the very least that the Nets shooting pct would come down from the stratosphere, leaving us with a tight game, and at the end of the third it looked exactly that. In fact, the Bucks were outshooting the Nets 51.7% to 51.3%. (They tied for the game at just over 50%.) And from the middle of the second to the end of the third, the Nets got only 5 stops, 4 of them in the third, with the Bucks driving the lane seemingly at will. Luckily, altho Milwaukee's shots were mostly layups and dunks, the Nets shot incredibly well from the outside, and managed a double digit lead that proved insurmountable.

(One yearns for the kinds of wins they had in the 2002-2006 era, when fast breaks and back doors led to solid leads that did not depend on one or another jump shooter being hot, but at 26-32, we'll take what we can get.)

The entirety of the media gave credit almost exclusively to Devin Harris (CBS Sportline headline - "Jason Who?"), who was playing his first game as a Net, but closer inspection reveals another story.

In the first game after Kidd officially left (because the first game without Kidd was in Toronto with him in streets as the Raptors blew their socks off; we're not counting that one...) the Nets similarly cruised to a victory over a team in a similar position in the playoff race - the Bulls. There was no Devin Harris then.

What both victories had in common, and what the two losses and the squeaker win that intervened did not have, was this - Lawrence Frank did not coach the game in his usual robotic fashion.

I remarked within this blog about that first game back that Frank did not substitute according to plan (and anyone who watches all the games knows it's a predetermined plan and that he NEVER wavers from it) and used up all his timeouts with more than a minute left in a close game. Remarkably - and since I have predicted it all season and longer, predictably - he did not need them. The Nets won comfortably. Marcus Williams shined without the Damocles' Sword of LFrank's rigid substitution pattern.

Frank then went back to his old ways, and so did the Nets, losing 2 out of 3 with the team having to suffer thru the inane and never successful (see the more recent post about this strategy above) hack-a-whomever strategy at the end.

What do these two impressive victories, last night and vs Chicago, have in common? Conditions presented themselves wherein Frank was not in his comfort zone and was forced to coach the game within the context the game, NOT according to some predetermined plan. That is, he was shocked out of his automatic responses and actually had to think on his feet.

The result? Two victories that really weren't close. Two victories where the team's deep talent shone. Two victories with balanced scoring. Two victories where the team felt good about itself.

This is no coincidence. Despite his impressive record this year, Byron Scott clearly was not an effective big game coach in the NBA when he was with the Nets. Commentators noticed this in 2003, questioning his substitution patterns and bizarre use of timeouts (sound familiar?), chalking it up at the time to Jason Kidd's putative demands to play less time than the previous year, even tho his average minutes played wound up being essentially identical. Scott's failings became painfully obvious when he benched an on fire Kerry Kittles to start the fourth in Game Six in 2003 and failed to use timeouts properly to preserve the 11 point lead his team had during a Spurs 19 point run. Kidd sardonically joked about this abysmal coaching performance, and by the middle of the next season, Scott was gone.

In his place stepped Lawrence Frank, and despite his fine job to finish the 2004 season (in which only Kidd's lame leg prevented them from finishing off the Pistons and probably moving to their third straight NBA finals appearance), he soon revealed himself to be a Byron Scott disciple in the two areas where Scott was weakest - substitutions and timeouts.

The media are respectful of coaches, more than players, more than they should be. There are loads of reasons for this (race, respect for authority and age, pressure from team management, the prevalent (and I claim mistaken) belief that only talent matters in the Nothing But Ability NBA, flat out lack of sophistication, etc) but commentators spend a great deal of time making excuses and using explanations for odd coaching that stretch credulity. So for 4 years LFrank has been given copious passes regarding his rigid substitution patterns, with most speculation centering on the "contract demands" of one Jason Kidd.

Well, Kidd's gone. What's the excuse now?

Five games is really not enough time to assess what Frank has learned or how he might or might not have been freed from the presumably self-centered and pernicious demands of Number 5, but the early results are in: When Frank deviates from his preconceived notions, the team plays very well and wins handily. When he does not deviate, the best outcome is a squeaker.

The shock of no Kidd forced Frank into a situation where Williams had to play a lot of minutes and where Frank had to keep his team in it because of a reduced roster and no obvious method of coaching to that. Williams, along with the Big 2 out of 3, responded. Frank used timeouts early to preserve a big lead. Easy Nets win. Well, relatively, for them.

With Devin Harris sidelined, Frank settled into his old ways, and the team lost embarrassingly to Indiana, shakily won over mediocre Indiana in the second leg of a "home and home", and lost to Orlando, with Frank allowing the Magic to go on a run with little time left in the game, then subjecting his team to the humiliation of the foul and two strategy (again, see an analysis of this strategy above).

Then Harris is ready. Now Frank can't merely designate one of them as the Kidd-heir-apparent, so he cannot revert to his mechanical substitutions. Result? Comfortable Nets win.

Frank even called a key timeout when he needed to, in the first half, when his team was dissembling with bad shots, stupid fouls and even sillier turnovers, like Swift stepping on the line during an unchallenged in bounds pass. It took a while, but with a 5 point lead (down from 9) and the potential of it becoming a 3 or even 2 point lead, he did call a timeout and settled the team down. Nets then went on a 12-0 run and essentially put the game away.

Lawrence Frank - Are you listening? Are you paying attention?

You CAN coach in this league if you can get over being Byron Scott the Younger. You DO have enough talent to make some noise this year and even contend next year if you can get over being Mr. Roboto, thank you (ie, domo arigato). Your team CAN find the same level of success as with Jason Kidd if you would only TRUST YOUR FEELINGS.

In summary, there is hope for the Nets, as long as Lawrence Frank is shocked out of relying on unsuccessful and mechanical modes of in game coaching. It's an odd hope, but their best hope. Byron Scott is not your Obi-wan, Frank - not your only hope. Use the force, Lawrence.

And leave the computer at home.

Game 57 - We now know it wasn't Kidd

2008-02-28T15:01:00.000-08:00

All the talk about Jason Kidd mentally abandoning the team, then physically doing so, is now officially bunk.

The Nets are as mediocre as they were before. And they are losing EXACTLY like they lost before.

Here is my claim - these men are professionals, yes, but they are human beings first. When you lose time after time in the same way, then, if a new game is evolving in the same way, there is going to be trepidation and a lack of confidence. An expectation of bad things. A lack of belief that the team has what it takes to get over these humps.

This, more than anything else, is what makes Lawrence Frank a deficient coach at this level. He does not respect this at all.

As I have written before, there have been perhaps 20 games this season that the Nets have lost by their coach not knowing when to call timeouts to douse an opponent's runs, or by sticking to robotic substitution patterns when some real coaching insight would have made a difference. If Frank had won half of them, JKidd is not a Mav and the Nets are the #4 seed.

If Kidd was so crucial to the team, then one might expect to see very different games now that he's gone. And in fact, the first game was such a game. Frank coached it entirely differently. And won.

But then he went back to the same old same old...

In a seesaw game, the Nets start the 4th down 3. Neither team has been able to muster a lead of more than 6 at any point in the game. This is clearly a game when coaching can make the difference, if not in a positive way then in a way such that the team does not hurt itself.

At that magical 9 minute mark of the 4th, the Nets go up 75-70, their biggest lead since the first quarter. Stan Van Gundy, like any reasonable coach, immediately calls time. A minute later the Magic is down 2. See, this is how coaches can help their team.

With 6 minutes to go, the game is tied at 78. Darryl Armstrong has been playing for 8 straight minutes. The guy behind me, another season ticket holder, has been calling for Marcus to get back in the game since 2 minutes into the quarter. Why, Lawrence, is Darryl still in there?

Finally Frank calls timeout. Okay. Williams comes back in. Okay... Why did it take so long? And why a timeout now?

With 4:30 to go, exactly half of what was left in the game, the game is tied at 83, but then Turkoglu (who had his own rabid cheering section of young Turks, excuse the expression, in the stands, replete with the red crescent moon flag), drives the lane unaccosted to put Orlando up 2.

Frank calls timeout. Why?

What follows is a Turkoglu trey, an offensive on RJ, a personal on RJ, and suddenly the Nets are down 7 with 3 to go. An official timeout is called.

The Nets come back and score, but then RJ gets his 3rd foul in one minute (to put him at 5). HELLO? Your team is stuggling. CALL EFFING TIME! SET UP A PLAY!

Nope. The Nets miss a shot, get a rebound, miss a layup, foul. On RJ. He's gone. Orlando calls time and makes one of two. Eight point lead with 1:43 to go, the largest lead of the game.

Then the estimable Lawrence Frank breaks out the old foul and go for 2 strategy. DUDE - YOU'RE DOWN BY 8 - LAUNCH 3S!!!

Nope.

Pretty soon VC fouls out, because, after all, that's the strategy. Instead of losing by 8, or 6 or anything less than 8, they lose by 10. They never had a chance because of the embarrassing and stupidly futile "strategy" of Frank to foul to "extend the game". Fans file dejectedly out of the arena. The Nets players look stunned and depressed. Yeah, the best thing at this point, extend the futility.

Frank doesn't get how demoralizing this is, and I don't want to hear about professionals. Human beings with no hope don't perform. Period. Get that thru your thick head, Lawrence.

A coach is there to help a team win. There are big games and not so big games. There are must wins, watershed wins, turn the corner wins. And there are games that slip away.

But when 20 games slip away because your coach doesn't get it, he's hurting the team, demoralizing the team.

That's what's unprofessional, Lawrence.

Game 56 - "Let's not overreact."

2008-02-28T14:56:00.000-08:00

Thus spaketh the great Lawrence Frank. Yeah, the last thing we want to do is get pumped up and try to make some noise with the rest of this Frankly squandered season...

Nets win 102-91, essentially a reversal of the previous night's 113-103 loss.

I could not watch the game in person, since I was at a function, but I saw most of the 3rd on Sling.

Marcus Williams was great again. The Nets are now 2-1 sans Kidd.

What will the next game be like? They play Orlando, a team they can beat. Will they take a step up and go 3-1, with a victory over a team they might play and beat in the playoffs? Will they take another embarrassing rout? Will Frank be able to navigate them thru a close game to a home victory?

Or will he just soil himself yet again?

Game 55 - Back to old Frank

2008-02-28T14:32:00.000-08:00

Setting the scene - the Nets play a home and home (a stupid moniker if I ever heard one, but nonetheless...) vs Indiana, a team just out of the playoffs, looking to make a move. Sweep both games and the Nets really help themselves and hurt Indiana, with 26 to go.

So here we are - about 3 mins into the 2nd half, and the Nets are up 5, 63-58. By the 6 minute mark, Indiana is up by 6, 73-67, a 15-4 swing. LFrank belatedly calls timeout, after his team has just allowed several drives while launching futile 3s on O. Okay. I would have called time a possession or two earlier (as I believe most coaches would), but being down by 6 with 18 minutes of basketball left is not insurmountable.

Unfortunately, the timeout call is ill placed for another reason - RJ is shooting foul shots. No way to call a play in the huddle, because most probably the other team will get the ball. This little fine point of in game strategy seems to always go over Frank's head.

RJ makes the second one of two, and the deficit is 5. Again Indiana slashes thru and makes a layup, and goes up by 7.

Now, this team has not been able to come back well from giving up two digit leads in the second half. If the Nets fall behind by 9, it's time to call a LONG timeout, set up a play, throw some water on the home teams OBVIOUS momentum and give a boost to your own team's OBVIOUS struggling play.

Bad shot by Nachbar (2nd in a row) and then he fouls (as my wife has noticed is often the case after a bad shot). Pacers sink 2. Nets down by 9.

Aha! Now we have the situation where coaching makes a difference, what we just identified above. The Nets are the road team. They have been outscored at this point 19-5 over the last 5 minutes. You can't get down double digits and expect to close the quarter under 10. And this team cannot win being down 10 on the road, largely because Lawrence Frank has no clue how to help them. You have to call timeout here. I know, it's been only a minute since the last one (which was called in an inauspicious situation, foolishly), but it is not a mortal sin to do so. You have to call timeout here.

Frank wants to hoard as many timeouts as he can for his patented foul and go for 2 desperation strategy which has NEVER worked in the last several years. But there won't be an opportunity to exhibit such brilliance if you're already out of the game by the mid 4th...

You have to call timeout here.

Frank doesn't.

End of three. Nets down 13.

End of game - Nets lose by 10.

Closest Nets get in the 4th - 9.

Frank doesn't get the opportunity to use those precious timeouts. The Nets are outscored from that 9 minute mark in the third 26-9.

What galls me is that this boy wonder has not figured out some very, very important things:
- The endgame of foul and go for 2 NEVER WORKS.
- Some games are WAY more important than others, standings be damned.
- A coach who knows what he's doing coaches each game to that game, NOT to some predetermined master plan.

Can he learn?

Uh oh... Just when you thought it was safe to jump back in the water...

2008-02-21T22:02:00.000-08:00

One of the ancillary benefits of Kidd's departure is we no longer have to care about his off court life, particularly the nasty accusations brought against him regarding a sexual harassment in a NY bar.

I thought, Whew! No more Joumana, no more bad accusations... Maybe the team can focus on basketball for a change...

Nope. One day. That's all we got.

Seems the Minneapolis police are looking into contentions by a Minnesota man who claims RJ throttled him to the point where the guy had to seed medical attention, all because he refused to let the uninvited Jefferson attend a private party.

I've always liked RJ, thought he was a solid citizen. An Andy Pettitte of basketball.

And maybe he is. Of course, Pettitte recently had to fess up to a mess... So maybe RJ's persona is also subject to doubt.

Man! And here I was hoping all the psychodrama had taken a plane for Dallas...

Let's see how this one plays out. And how we wind up feeling about Richard Jefferson when all is said and done...

It's interesting and fun - if only for one day...

2008-02-21T21:40:00.000-08:00

I came into this season full of hope and expectation. The Big Three are signed. Curly's back. They added some legit height with Magloire. Boone and Williams should be better. This kid Sean Williams is supposed to be the real deal. Kidd's domestic stuff is in the past.

I had a good feeling...

Five games in it looked good. 4-1. Clutch victory against a quality team in the Bulls. Favorable schedule featuring a lot of home games against teams they should beat. This team could win 50 or even more.

By Thanksgiving this season looked a lot like last season - underperformance, listlessness, a coach who could not help his team in game. After a 7-1 spurt to get them back over .500, they nosedived in 9 ugly losses followed by some ugly wins, then more ugly losses. In the middle of that, on January 16, I pronounced the season as "done".

I didn't go to many home games. I had to drag myself to those I did go to. It was a broken record. More of the same. Underperformance. Listlessness. Lack of passion. And no end was in sight.

I didn't want to see Jason Kidd go. I wanted him to rally the troops and make a charge at the playoffs. But on the last day of the road trip he had checked out. A miserable loss to a miserable team. Predictable misery lay ahead. My only hope was having Frank let go, and it was clear that wasn't gonna happen. My hope lay in the possibility that Ratner would face more delays and relent, allowing the team to be sold to someone who would bring them to where they belong - Newark.

Now Kidd is gone. Frank's still here. The Brooklyn thing is still on.

Yet ironically I now feel like I have something to get excited about! It was not the move I wanted to see happen, but the Kidd trade broke the logjam.

Now we will see if LFrank can coach.

Now we will see if RJ or VC have what it takes to be leaders, and mentors.

Now we'll see if all that Net young talent can rise to the fore and deliver.

The first venturing out last night answered a resounding Yes! to all those questions.

I'm interested to see how Frank's coaching style changes. He did a creditable job of in-game coaching. Does he have it in him after all?

Could it be that he was handcuffed by Kidd, that it was JKidd's demands that forced him into his formulaic substitution patterns? I often remarked to my wife, even when Byron was coach - It's like Kidd has it written into his contract - I'll only play 35 minutes, I have to be taken out of every first quarter with 2 minutes to go, I have to sit the first 5 minutes of the 4th, no matter the score... Perhaps I was right and didn't know it...

I'm interested to see if RJ can now get out from under Kidd's shadow. I want to see if Carter can lead and mentor young players. I want to see if Jefferson and VC can in fact play complementary basketball together. I want to see what kind of talent we actually do have.

I want to see if that youth and new found leadership, both on the court and of the coach, can carry the Nets to the playoffs, in the 5th or 6th seed. I want to see how many games over .500 they can finish. I want to see if these men have pride, or if they're just gonna let the franchise seep back into the industrial Xanadu swamp.

Yesterday was seductive, I tell no lie.

Let's see what we've got here - in talent, heart and intelligence.

This will be interesting - and it could wind up being fun after all...

Game 54 - Or is it Studio 54...?

2008-02-21T21:11:00.000-08:00

Have you even been in a rough situation for a long time, then been given the opportunity to get away from it and observe it from afar, feel the relief and indulge in the feeling that it's a whole new ballgame for you?

Altho the result of the trade was... well, I have no idea if it was positive, negative or lateral, really. So I guess I should say, altho the trade was not a debacle on its face, Thorn's timing of Round One of the trade really sucked. And thus so did the Nets, losing to the middling Raptors in a blowout again. A dispiriting blowout.

Now 1/3 of the roster before the All Star Break is gone (Kidd, Malik Allen, Antoine "Wrong" and Twin) and there are 4 new guys - Harris, Diop, Hassell, Ager. And Van Horn. Of course. How could I forget Keith Van Horn?

Kidd's departure leaves some really big questions:
- If Kidd was the leader of this team (and the Charlotte and Dallas games proved that), now that he's gone, who is gonna step up, if anyone, to be the new leader(s)?
- If Kidd was the mentor of Sean Williams, Boone, Marcus Williams, Bokie, Curly and RJ, now that he's gone, who's gonna mentor these young phenoms?
- What the hell kinda team do we have now?
- Can Lawrence Frank actually coach?

My well documented theory is that Frank cost the Nets about 10 wins. With Jason Kidd gone we will now have the opportunity to see how he handles that. We will have the opportunity to see if he can tutor his young club. If he can identify and inspire new leadership to step up. If he can be a bit less formulaic with his substitution patterns and timeouts.

Tonite, to quote the great Frank's lexicon of trite aphorisms, was "just one game". The team was well rested. They were at home (altho that hasn't seemed to matter this year...). They had something to prove. They were playing the lowly Bulls.

Nonetheless, the Nets won, albeit in OT, but what was most amazing was that all those questions were answered favorably.

Marcus Williams played quite well, even with young player mistakes. RJ and Vince BOTH stepped up as leaders. The energy level was quite high.

Perhaps most surprisingly, Frank's substitution patterns made sense, and seemed to be game-at-hand centered, not formulaic at all. And, if you can believe it, the Nets played in the final minute in a very close game without a single timeout. They had all been used, and at times when I myself (and any half decent coach) would have called them!

Frank never let his team suffer those ridiculous runs or offensive dry spells because he used his timeouts wisely to stop them. And lo and behold, he didn't have to use any in the final minute in yet another futile foul and fling debacle. It worked out okay, and it looked like he actually BELIEVED it was a good thing.

Yeah, the game had to go into OT and yeah the Bulls were in position to win on the last possession of regulation. But his team didn't need to be spoon fed in a timeout - they're professionals, they know they have to play good D on that last possession and come up with a stop. And so they did.

Because RJ and VC exuded leadership and confidence, that's why.

Marcus Williams showed what he had only flashes of last year and didn't exhibit at all this year - heart, stamina, intelligence and a pretty good shot. He looked like a guy who could lead an NBA team at the point. I can't imagine Harris playing better. Makes ya wonder why that trade went down the way it did...

Boy - good coaching, great leadership, young talent, clutch play in the crunch. When have we seen THAT all year? Makes you hopeful about the rest of the season. Makes you hopeful for the future...

But, in reality, we'll just have to see. Was this just a "I'll show you I can do just fine without you" game? Will they return back to listless, sloppy, uninspired play? Will it be 2:00 left in the first and here's Frank yanking Harris/Williams irrespective of the game situation, just because that's what the computer says?

I never thought I'd ever agree with something Lawrence Frank said in a postgame, but... It was just one game. Flashes of brilliance, rays of hope, talent resplendant.

We'll see.

After all, it was just one game...

Godot showed up - and promptly left

2008-02-21T20:35:00.000-08:00

So the deal looked dead. Thus spake Rod Thorn on Tuesday 2/19 with Mike Francesa and Chris Russo. Looked dead at 7pm on Monday in Atlanta as Thorn attempted to make his way back from New Orleans.

Then Cuban called.

Now Kidd is corporeally gone as well as mentally gone.

The Nets get Devin Harris, DeSagana Diop, Maurice Ager, as before. But now Trenton Hassell is thrown in, and, if things were not surreal enough, the Nets also get Keith Van Horn.

Now, it would be weird enough if Van Horn, the guy that Kidd and Kmart sent packing after the 2002 finals, made the deal possible for Kidd to get his ticket out of here. Weird enough that he would come full circle - back to NJ without Kidd, like it was for his first 3 seasons. Weird enough that what the Nets need the most right now - a pure shooter - would fall into their lap.

But what makes it all the more bizarre is that Keith Van Horn is RETIRED. That is, mentally if not corporeally. Altho he didn't play last year, and didn't care to play this year, seems he never actually officially retired, so technically he still was a Mav. Thus the Mavs could trade him. And thus they did.

Of course, in our little dadaist play, nothing is as it seems. Ol' Keith would have to decide that he would come out of unofficial 18-month retirement, go to the Meadowlands and at the very least take a physical. And probably make like he was making a comeback. And then after some amount of time, get waived, and then go back to Colorado and back to his retirement, this time (I presume) officially.

Why in the world would KVH wanna do that to help JKidd try to chase his championship dream? Why would he make all that effort just to wind up right where he is right now?

I'll tell you why - $4.3 million for that effort, that's why!

This is truly the theater of the absurd. Van Horn gets to play the role of the long awaited Godot, who finally shows up - then promptly leaves.

I want the NBA to explain to me why this is any better than Stackhouse being traded, only to be put on waivers, clear them and return whence he came.

It also stretches the definition of the term "retired". Sure, guys retire and un-retire all the time. Ask #23 (or is it 45...?). But at least THEY want to play.

I am told Keith doesn't want to play. So he's coming out of retirement NOT to play. He's coming out of retirement to... retire!

Just as I somewhat stupidly thought that Kidd really meant it when he said he was not asking for a trade, I allowed myself to daydream a bit. Imagine - Van Horn comes back to where it all started for him, has to suit up and play in some games, makes a contribution, wins back some of the accolades of the crowd that once loved him, helps get his team to the playoffs, maybe to later rounds, and then retires in an official ceremony where he acknowledges the fans and they acknowledge him....

Right...

Those farewell tours died out 20 years ago. The last credible one was Kareem's. Remember Roger B-12 Clemens' farewell tour in 2003? Used to be a great player from the past might get traded back to where it all began to close out his career, no matter how degraded his game might have become. Mays on the 73 Mets comes to mind.

Then there were those "paper trades" where a guy would get traded back to his original team just so he could retire as a member of that team.

We don't even have that pretense any more.

The name Keith Van Horn, who those 10 seasons ago lit up the Meadowlands with such promise and hope, will now forever be a Trivial Pursuit answer - What retired player allowed Jason Kidd to finally rejoin the team he started with?

Kidd goes back to where it all started for him as a highly touted rookie, in search of a championship.

Van Horn goes back to where it all started for him as a highly touted rookie, in search of a ticket back home - a meal ticket worth $4.3 million.

For one brief shining moment these two men crossed paths - and it led to the NBA Finals.

Then one stayed east, one flew west.

Now the franchise that they played together on is flying over the cuckoo's nest.

Once again.

Yet again.

All Star Break - And the Theater of the Absurd

2008-02-16T05:07:00.000-08:00

Ok, the facts appear to be these:

- A trade sending Kidd to the Mavericks, where he started, was announced on Wednesday afternoon. Rod Thorn is praised for putting together such a great deal.
- Wednesday night he sits out of the Raptor's game, the last one before the break, as the Nets, stunned in shock, sleepwalk thru a blistering loss.
- During the game the announcers, having nothing better to do as the Nets fall behind by 30 in the third, speculate about the confusion such a trade presented - Would Kidd, now playing for a Western Conference team, suit up in the All Star game as an Eastern player?
- Wednesday night Jerry Stackhouse, part of the trade, says publicly, Don't worry - the Nets are gonna buy me out, I'll sit 30 days and I'll be right back here.
- On the postgame show Ian Eagle keeps qualifying all his valedictory comments about Jason with "and once again, the trade is not yet official". Finally, at the very end, mentions that Devean George is "perhaps" resisting being traded.
- Thursday early AM the NY Times reports on its website that in fact Devean George is exercising his "early Bird" rights, by which he can veto any trade. Seems not only would he be going from a contender to a moribund franchise, but after the season, when he becomes a free agent, he'd actually be able to ask LESS than if he were NOT traded.
- Friday the league office says Stackhouse can't be part of the deal because such deals as acquring a player only to buy him out and put him on waivers so the team that traded him could reacquire him are a violation of league rules.

So, here we sit - Jason Kidd is still a Net.

A disgruntled Net. A Net who has alienated and hurt several people in the locker room. A Net who was a leader who was obviously, in retrospect, not leading the team. A Net who, if the deal is not ultimately done, will have to go back to NJ and try to lead his team out of the morass that he himself largely created and try to make the playoffs.

To say nothing of how Stack and George are gonna be received by the Dallas fans...

I think Jason Kidd is the best all around BASKETBALL player (as opposed to shooter, hot dog, scorer, or streetball player) in the NBA today, bar none. As I have written, I always felt he "respected the game" so much that even when the team was letting him down he would play 100%, and his 100% was a team 100%. If JKidd willed to win, it was by willing his TEAM to win. He was not like Michael Jordan or Kobe or AI - when they will to win, they take the ball and they become a one man show. When Kidd wills to win, OTHER people score.

The media made a big deal about the pre-Knick game "migraine" event, speculating that he would never let something like a migraine stop him from playing. But I thought about 2004 when he had a chance to sign with San Antonio but instead stayed with the Nets.

Now everyone is blaming the surprisingly bad season the Nets are having on him. As you, dear readers of this blog, are aware, I have been blaming Lawrence Frank. I go to the games, I know about in-game tactics. I think there have been literally about 20 games he has mismanaged that they have lost, maybe more. Take half of them, put them in the win column, and you have a 33-19 team. Would Kidd have gotten his extension? Would he still be asking for a trade?

The NY Media do not like Kidd, and the rest of the country's media take their cues from NY. As I said in my "appreciation" blog, off the court he has not been a prince. Not the worst, not a Kobe, not even an MJ, but not a Tim Duncan or Akeem either.

Steve Politi in the Star Ledger wrote a retrospective of Kidd's tenure in NJ, and it was balancing his absolutely miraculous on court job with the Nets, a stellar example especially to young players, a true role model in that regard, with the migraine and overnight flip flopping about whether he wanted a trade or not. He also threw in his domestic ugliness with Joumana for good measure. As if MJ or Magic or Bird did not have worse ugliness in their personal lives.

He also mentioned, no, highlighted, how Kidd had "stabbed in the back" Byron Scott, who happens to be working miracles in New Orleans, to hear him tell it. We'll see what happens to New Orleans in the end, but it must be remembered that Scott single handedly gave away the Nets' best chance for a championship in 2003 by not playing Mutumbo consistently and making unbelievably bone headed substitution moves, particularly in Game Six. That was among the worst coached games I have ever seen. And then he follows that with coaching the same team to a 22-20 record the following year, including an embarrassing 40+ point loss to Memphis, a game during which he show no passion at all. He gets let go and the Nets go on a 14 game winning streak. And Kidd is to be blamed for "stabbing him in the back"??

It was clear that the Nets needed an impact big man, and Kidd, not Thorn or anyone else, got Zo to sign on. People forget that before he went down with his kidney deal the Nets looked like they had gotten over the hump. It was the injuries, particularly to RJ, after the 2005 season began (and Kidd was out as well with his knee microsurgery, after playing in the playoffs on essentially one leg) that got Alonzo moaning. Politi forgets that.

There. I've defended Kidd.

But now let's look at the last two seasons. The Nets, given their talent, vastly underperform. Kidd is being shopped and almost sent to the Lakers last year (if we are to believe the NY media) and the Mavs this year. Then, last year, after the trade deadline passes, the Nets play up to their talent and make the playoffs, blow by Toronto, and with a better in-game coach, could have eliminated Cleveland as well.

Suppose they pass the deadline again this year... And rally and make the playoffs again, and go past the first round again...

We all know last year JKidd was involved in a messy divorce with someone who acted, er, rather unstably. Point taken. Could that have been a factor?

Vince Carter played like a superstar in 2005 with the Nets, and 2006 as well, as the Nets won 49 games, and had to lose 3 out of 4 at the end, after they'd clinched and could gain nothing by winning 50 to keep it at 49. But in 2007 he played very bipolarly. Was it his ankle? Was it his attitude? What about HIS marital problems?

And speaking of bipolar, Frank starts out winning his first 14 games, then going .500 the rest of the way. In 2005 the Nets go 10 games under .500, then rally (after the VC acquisition and JKidd's return) to make the playoffs, two games over .500. Then in 2006 they go 49-33 but fall apart in the second round to an inferior Miami team (that ultimately wins the NBA, tho). Then in 2007, the Nets have to scramble at the end of the year to make .500 again. Curly, who had made such a difference in 2006, was out for most of the year. But before he went down the Nets were struggling to make .500. And when RJ went down, they had just gotten back to .500. Then came 3 last second losses after 4th quarter collapses in a row on a West Coast swing.

I think about this and ask myself, was all that Kidd?

I think Kidd is quite intelligent. I think he knows what any intelligent informed fan in the stands knows, and that's this - with Byron Scott as head coach, the Nets could never get over the top. And now, after several years to show his stuff, as it were, Lawrence Frank isn't much better.

So since he caught holy hell about "engineering" Scott's dismissal, would you think he'd try the same thing with Frank?

He realized last year that Frank doesn't have it. He also realizes that Bruce "I want my project built at all costs" Ratner doesn't care. His one reason to stay in this area, Joumana, is out of the picture. If you weren't born and raised there, would you want to stay in an area where you've stayed largely for her benefit when she is out of the picture?

Thorn has done about as much as one can do, and yet they are still tantalizingly close without the wherewithal to go all the way. And now Boston, a miserable morass in the Doc Rivers era, out Thorns Thorn and has way leap frogged the Nets, being serious contenders now.

He knows he's 34, 35 by the end of the season. He knows the Nets chances, given ownership, are slim to none. He knows only a contender in mid season needing that one piece would ever take him and his high salary. He's known this for two years now. So we have these mid-season follies.

If Kidd stays with the Nets, it will be weird. If he goes, it will be weird.

I'm a Nets fan. The facts are these - they can't rebuild as long as they are not in Brooklyn. They are now condemned to the Meadowlands for two more years, years of decreasing crowds and interest. How hard is Devon Harris gonna play? How good are his spirits gonna be, traded from a contender to the Washington Generals of the NBA?

Rod Thorn cannot be blamed for this. And neither can Jason Kidd.

Lawrence Frank is over his head and responsible, personally, for 10 or more Net losses this year alone. If the Nets were 33-19 it would be a very different story. Granted.

But the real problem is, as it has been since they entered the NBA, incredibly inept and stupid or craven ownership. If the Nets were playing in the new Prudential Arena in Newark we wouldn't be here.

Instead, for the last 3 years, and at least 2 more to come, we have limbo. We have, once again, the Siberia of the NBA.

Who wants to play in Siberia?

Game 53 - What a difference a day makes...

2008-02-15T21:27:00.000-08:00

Well, I wrote my paean to JKidd on Tuesday, and lo and behold, on Wednesday the trade is announced. It looks like Kidd is gone.

And so are the Nets. And they proved it tonite.

I have never seen a game be over so early. This game was over when it was 6-2 Raptors. It was clear the Nets were devastated and demoralized. RJ and VC looked angry, and Boki was in red eyed tears. Teammates talked like they were at a wake, and then they played like it, too - except they were the deceased!

There was no aspect of this game that was even professional. It was a total embarrassment. Guys! You're professionals! Pull up your socks, huh?

I said this season was over, what, a month ago? And I don't back off that. They will not make the playoffs.

But JKidd's departure does not mean the end of everything. VC and RJ can play. Armstrong can play point. Boone and Sean can still get better and better.

Apparently Kidd had been sulking all season, at least since the Nets' refusal to extend his contract. Right around then VC went down for 6 games, and so did our boys. If Kidd was gonna sulk all year, the Nets were toast.

I presume all the young players - Sean and Boone, Marcus and Wright - all were being hand raised by Kidd personally, since they all looked very very lost out there. If that's so, the Nets are still toast.

I don't see how the Nets can "rebuild" since they won't even have their new building for two years now. Who's gonna wanna come help them? Who's gonna wanna come watch them?

Thorn is being lauded for the trade, but JKidd was the only thing keeping this motley squad together, or so one would conclude from tonite's lack of performance.

But that is the reality. No Kidd.

And now I, the season ticket holder, who could always find some enjoyment watching this guy play, has virtually nothing to look at but some sad guys, licking their sorry wounds...

Jason Kidd - An Appreciation

2008-02-12T19:40:00.001-08:00

JKidd wants to be traded. It's out in public so there is no doubt.

He played inspired basketball in Charlotte, reminiscent of 2001-2004, the three seasons when the Nets were bona fide contenders. Actually, he played and has played that well until about a month ago. Yeah, he got his tri-dubs, but you could see, he was not "exerting his will" as the brilliant Lawrence Frank would say.

This is a guy who apparently punched his wife, and is accused of groping some other woman in NYC last month. Some think he tries to undermine coaches he does not like.

Whatever.

I don't care about all that. I don't blame him for maybe not playing as well as he can, EMOTIONALLY, every night.

What Jason Kidd accomplished I have never seen in sport, in any sport whatsoever.

When he came to the Nets in 2001, it was seen as being exiled to Siberia to work in anonymity to atone for his sins. It was a second chance, like being sent down to the minors to work on the holes in his swing. He was replacing a popular local talent who, whatever else you might say about Stephon Marbury, played with the heart of a lion. He single handedly turned around the East team in the All Star game, with his estimable heart.

That was the situation for Kidd when he came to the Nets. And that's the good news!

He was coming to a bad franchise, a weak sister in its media market, a franchise that had been moribund for 25 years. The Nets had never won 50 games in the NBA; and had only won 40 or more 8 times during that 25 year stretch. The Nets had won exactly one playoff series since they had been in the NBA. One. In the other 9 times they went to the playoffs (including 3 times when they qualified with sub-.500 records) they were one and done.

After making 3 tremendous drafts, when they picked up Keith Van Horn, Kerry Kittles and Kenyon Martin, and after making the playoffs in 98 (and out in one series against the soon to be champion Bulls and Michael Jordan, altho all 3 games were very close), they completely fell apart in 99, suffering not one, not two, but 3 broken legs in the same season. Kittles, by 2001, had spent 2 1/2 years of his 5 years with the team sitting on the bench in streets with a bad knee, including ALL of the 2000-2001 season. Kenyon Martin, who had broken his leg in his senior year in college, was hobbled again the previous season with a broken leg.

The team had been mired in losing under the very unpopular and untalented Butch Beard, mired in losing under the misfit John Calipari, despite the Sam Cassell engineered 98 season, and mired in losing under the unqualified and uninspiring political operative cum miraculously appointed NBA coach, Don Casey.

Keith Van Horn had gone from being "the savior" in his rookie year, scoring nearly 20 points a game and 7 rebounds to Stephon Marbury's favorite whipping boy.

Into this mess walks Jason Kidd. He could have had a bad attitude, like Marbury when he left, and in both cases it would have been understandable. Inept ownership, joke coaching, listless play, uncaring fans, a media presence comparable to a police blotter, a bad building with no mass transit. And a multiyear stranger than fiction injury skein.

And what is the first thing he says?

The losing stops now. The losing attitude stops now.

He tells the bored media, this team can easily win 40 games.

You kidding?

Apparently not, because what followed was two straight appearances in the NBA Finals. A 52 win season. Inspired play by Van Horn, Kittles, Kenyon. He even got rookies (RJ, Collins and the redoubtable Scallabrini) going. Anthony Johnson caught fire. Todd MacCulloch caught fire. Even perennial journeyman Aaron Williams caught fire.

The Nets had a 26 game swing, going from 26-56 to 52-30.

Yes, Rod Thorn gets a great deal of the credit. Still I have absolutely never seen a non-first round can't miss rookie turn around a franchise so much in so little time. Kidd had been in the league 7 years, SEVEN YEARS, before he came. If he was a sure fire can't miss rookie, he sure was hiding it well.

JKidd was clearly the MVP that year, 2002, both on the court and off. Had he played somewhere else, anywhere else, he would have easily been the slam dunk MVP.

Sure, Magic Johnson came to the Lakers and they won the crown in his first year. And Bird went to the Celtics and they won the following year. Sure fire can't miss rookies.

But guys - we're talking the Lakers and the Celtics! And they already had Kareem, Worthy, McHale and the Chief on those teams. And they had both won the title only a few years before. And they were the No 1 and 2 teams in terms of most titles won, anyway. They had spent most of the 60s playing each other in the finals.

And what about Duncan? Didn't the Spurs come from 20-62 to 56-26 in one season? And didn't they win it all in his second year?

Yeah, but remember - he was the No 1 Can't Miss pick in 98. (Van Horn was No 2). And look at San Antonio's records BEFORE 97: 59, 62, 55, 49, 47, 55 and 56 wins in the 7 seasons preceding the Duncan theft. (I say theft because the only reason the Spurs had only won 20 games was because the Admiral was out all year. Had he played, the Nets would have had the first pick, taken Duncan, and the history of the NBA since 98 would have been very, very different.) Each one of those season, EXCEPT 2, the Spurs won more games than the Nets had ever won in their history, and one of them (49 wins in 93) was tied with it (the Nets had had 49 wins exactly once, in 1983, when they lost in the playoffs, of course, in the first round).

So Duncan actually walked onto a team that was close, very close, tantalizingly close, to winning it all anyway. Big deal.

Only the Clippers can rival the Nets in perennial ineptitude, and in 2001, they had also never won 49 games once, never 50, but had at least gotten to the conference finals 3 years in a row (as the Buffalo Braves). Now the Clippers are the only team, except for the young Raptors and the brand new Bobcats, never to have won 50 games and unlike the Nets have never been to the NBA finals.

Why? Two reasons: Rod Thorn. And Jason Kidd.

We few, we lucky few fans who followed the Nets in the Jason Kidd era, have seen basketball played at the highest level by a player, which only a few other fans have been lucky enough to see - the Cincinnati Royals fans, who saw the Big O, the Laker fans who saw Magic, and perhaps the Celtic fans who saw Bird.

That is the rarified company we are in. That is the rarified company Jason Kidd is in.

Very soon Jason Kidd will surpass the aforementioned Magic as Number 2 on the all time triple double list. He has 99 so far, 61 in a Nets uniform. We are exceedingly lucky indeed.

I have seen inumerable no-looks, surprise alley oops, and even some bowling passes, replete with spin. All for scores.

I have seen him play after a brutal collision in Charlotte in the playoffs, when it looked like he might be done for the season, much less the game.

I have seen him never give up, to play to the end, even when Lawrence Frank's and Byron Scott's "coaching" had long before lost the game for them.

Maybe he juked up his effort in Charlotte and against the Mavs the last two games. Can you blame him? He has given his all and more for this stupidly run franchise, this runt of the litter franchise, this New Jersey franchise continually ignored and bad mouthed by the New York media. He has been undermined by stupid coaching, stupid ownership, slacking teammates.

And he gave up his best chance to win it all, to go to San Antonio in 2004, and put the crown on his Hall of Fame career. Yet he bypassed it. Maybe it was Joumana. Whatever. He stayed. And gave his all, even on one leg.

Jason Kidd has not been traded yet, and the way it looks, he won't be, at least this year. But when he goes, I will salute him. He owes nothing to the Nets. If anything, they owe him. We owe him.

We owe him.

WE, us, Nets fans, NBA fans - we all owe him.

Game 52 - A Scrappy Win...

2008-02-12T19:04:00.000-08:00

...minus the "s".

They just beat a 10-39 team, shooting 37% (their high water mark, btw), shooting barely over 70% from the line, while they shot 43% and 86% from the line, by FOUR POINTS. AT HOME.

I don't want to believe it, but I have to admit - the last two games were Jason Kidd auditioning.

How else to explain such a crappy effort?

Granted, Frank's continuing bafflement at his job does not help, altho I will grant that he called timeouts at the right times, if to little effect.

But here we were again, a close ugly game against a very bad team, and a 10 point margin at the end of 3. Then stupid, uninspired, clumsy play. Both 4th quarters of this brutally bad season series, the Nets allow the lowly, and I mean VERY lowly, Wolves to score well over 30 points.

The only good news is they managed, barely, to score enough to hang on.

Here are two little vignettes:

To open the 4th quarter, the Nets were shooting 2 of 12 from 3 point land. Up by 9, after they scored twice on layups, indicating how weak the Twolves defense is, this is what they do on 6, count 'em, SIX consecutive trips:
- RJ misses a 3
- Nachbar misses a 3
- Frank calls time. Think he tells them, Guys - we stink from the arc tonite and they can't defend the paint so pound it inside? You tell me...
- Nachbar misses a 3 (HE certainly learned from his mistakes...)
- Armstrong misses a 3
- Armstrong misses yet ANOTHER 3, on the same possession, for good measure!
- Carter SCORES on a SLAM DUNK
- RJ misses a 3
- Sean Williams SCORES on a SLAM DUNK.

Sensing a pattern?

During that time, the score goes from 70-59 to 70-65, at which point the two SLAM DUNKS reopened the lead to 9, 74-65.

Now, imagine if the Nets had not tried to have a World B Free 3 Point Contest and instead pounded it in. A 15 point lead with 6:48 to go. (Of course, in Minneapolis, at the same point in the game they were up by 10 and still managed to lose by 3...)

Frank doesn't mention this in his post game, primarily because he DOESN'T GET IT.

But, in fairness, neither, or rather ESPECIALLY neither did his team. Or does his team.

Meanwhile, the Twolves are doing the opposite - can't hit a shot inside the arc, and Telfair is dropping threes all over the place.

But even still, as bad as the Twolves were shooting, repeatedly, as the Wolves missed ugly midrange jumpers, there was Al Jefferson, standing among 4 Nets, getting the rebound and scoring.

Doesn't anyone on the Nets staff see this? Doesn't Bill Cartwright see this? Why, year after year, do the Nets stink at pounding it inside? Why, year after year, do they have no clue about rebounding?

Here was a prime example as to how coaching, in-game coaching, can make a difference - point out how badly they're shooting from the arc and impress upon them to pound it inside. It really is that simple.

But beyond the Nets' coaches.

Here's the second vignette. 94-85, Wolves out of timeouts. Nets get a rebound with 18 seconds left. The Wolves don't foul. They don't exert any pressure. The Nets can just run down the clock.

RJ has the ball. Why him? Anyway, he barely gets over the midcourt line (why so long without serious pressure?). Now there's 8 seconds left. Unbelievably, yes, only the Nets, Jefferson flubs the ball and dribbles it out of bounds. With 5 seconds left.

Why didn't he call timeout? Take a shot? Dribble and get fouled?

Oh well. So Telfair gets the ball and is able to shoot a WIDE OPEN THREE. And drains it. Game over. Nets win but only by 4. Because of sheer lackadaisical play. Sheer lack of care.

23-29. Whoopee-damn-do.

Game 51 - This is what I thought I was gonna get

2008-02-11T13:17:00.000-08:00

I'm not gonna kid (sic) ya - I got season tickets this year because I was taking advantage of the untenable situation Nets ownership has made for itself. Who's gonna come see a team that is gonna pack up and leave in two (now three!) years? They need to pack the house, and to do that there are gonna be deals galore. The Nets never have been a well attended team, and now, with the announcement that after 30 years of marriage, they've begun an affair with another venue and will ultimately leave you for her in 5 or 6 years, it's a wonder anyone shows up.

But I am a true Nets fan, and will be one even when they move to Brooklyn, even when Ratner sells the team after one season there because, after all, he never did give a hoot about the team or basketball in general except as a pawn in his real estate development scheme.

So I took advantage and got 4 season seats. Cheap.

But this is a team which two seasons ago won 49 games and, with a decent coach, could have won 55-60. Last year I "had a good feeling" about the team, but Curly went down and the team figured out Frank couldn't coach his way out of cotton candy. Nonetheless, the second half of the year they looked for real, getting to the second round yet again, and being competitive in it, and with a decent coach, might have gotten to the conference finals, and who knows? After all, they certainly have the talent.

So I ponied up. I honestly expected to see several games this year, live, where the Nets dominated. I expected them to win close to 50 games and perhaps lose 10-15 home games all year. VC reupped, Curly coming back, RJ getting better and better, JKidd over his ugly divorce and playing stellar basketball for the US of A. Yeah, the Celtics got Jesus Shuttlesworth and KG to play with Pierce, but I would put up Kidd against Allen, RJ against Pierce anyday, and let KG and VC duke it out and see what the benches have. I thought the Nets bench was FAR superior.

What I have seen instead is bad game after bad game. Even the wins have been bad wins.

So tonite they're playing the Mavs. The Nets absolutely stink against the Mavs. The Nets had a much better chance to win the championship in 2003 vs the almighty Spurs than they would have vs the Mavs. (And I claim the Nets SHOULD have won in 2003, were it not for the stubbornness of Byron Scott and his stupid coaching moves.)

My youngest son wanted to stay home tonite and watch the Pro Bowl (he's a Giants fan and still wrapped up in football), and besides, he said, the Nets STINK and are just gonna lose again. So my wife had to stay home with him. My other son just got back from a Boy Scout winter camping adventure and had some catching up on homework to do. He still wanted to go, but could I wait until he got his homework done?

The point is, we got to the arena at the half.

Now, I have Slingbox. If you don't know what it is, you should get it. So I can watch my TV, all my 200 FIOS channels, on either of my two cell phones. So my son was watching it and I was listening as we drove up to the arena, during the first half. The Nets hung tough for a while, but then, here we go again, they were down 8 and it looked like VC was going to hang it up due to a blow to the face. RJ already had a big welt on his brow from the Laker debacle last week. So I expected the Nets to be down double digits at the half, fart around for the third, make a half hearted run in the fourth, and lose by 15, as the great Lawrence Frank, armed as he usually is with all his precious (my precious!) timeouts, played the foul-and-lose-worse-when-it's-too-late endgame that has made him the envy of NBA coaching circles.

When what to my wondering eyes did appear...

They actually made a comeback, within the very quarter that they had gone down double digits! And before you knew it, they were up by 6 at the half!

Of course, right? Jason Kidd. Auditioning for the Mavs.

NO - it was none other than Vince Bipolar Carter, exerting HIS will on the game. HE turned it around, not the Captain.

And guess what - the whole place was energized.

Fans, dancers, Mario, Sly, the media - everyone was as energized and into it as they were in 2002 when the lowly "swampdragons" rose from the muck to go to the finals. There was a BUZZ in the arena when we got there.

Most importantly, Carter's TEAM was energized.

If people were mad or disappointed or upset or sad about JKidd, you couldn't see it. This was a crowd, and a team, that was INTO IT. They came out for the second half and blew the pants of the Mavs, in a game that was not as close as the score. (The Nets missed at one point 5 foul shots in a row from the likes of Boki and RJ - this one should have been won by 25 or more.)

If Kidd was auditioning for anything, it was for central casting. VC, RJ and Sean Williams were the stars - they provided the energy, the scoring, the defense and the leadership. Kidd dropped a three or two, and tried a few pretty alley oops (Krstic watched one go by as if some taller dude was gonna run out of the stands and dunk it behind him; RJ took the other and looked like the second coming of Dominique). But you could not feel him "exerting his will" or doing anything at all to justify salivating on the part of the Mavs.

If anyone, VC looked like he was auditioning.

At one point, about midway thru the fourth, he put on some hellified defense and then stole the ball for an all alone one handed jam on the fast break. The place erupted as it has not all season. Later came some circus shots and more great defense. And leaping. Did I mention leaping? On those "shot knees" you guys were talking about, Magic and Chuck...

JKidd may go in the next two weeks. He may not go and decide, shoot, we've played like dog food all year and are still the #8 seed in the East - if we put on a mini run we'll be the 4th or 5th seed and then anything can happen.

Either way, basketball is still a 5 man game, and if the other 4, plus quite a deep bench, decide they want to play up to their salaries, this team ROCKS. With or without Jason Kidd and his indomitable will.

This is what I thought I was gonna see all year. Not ekey wins against the Bucks, not getting blown out by the Raptors, not stupid coaching game after game after game in a fashion that made you expect to see Bill Murray and Andie MacDowell walk out in warmups at any time.

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE TALENT ON THIS TEAM.

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE BENCH OF THIS TEAM.

Now that Jason Collins is gone, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE STARTERS ON THIS TEAM.

With or without Jason Kidd.

So, why 7 games under 500 with 30 left to play?

Let's see, who haven't we mentioned...?

Game 50 - Well, whattaya know - JKidd can play!

2008-02-11T12:55:00.000-08:00

I can see it all now - Jason Kidd is auditioning for the Mavericks. He just pulled off one of the best performances he's had in years, at least since 2006. The Nets play the Mavs next, at home. He wants to show them they would be wise to get him.

Ok.

But the other side of this is that the Nets SHOULD beat Charlotte by 14, even at Charlotte. The Bobcats are not a good team. They are a bottom feeder. They are an expansion team looking for a reason for existence in the land of the Tarheels and Blue Devils.

The Nets SHOULD be among the East's elite. They SHOULD be 35-15 - they certainly have the talent.

I know - it was the estimable Lawrence Frank's stirring post game tirade in Orlando that brought out the sleeping giant, right?

Story line - Kidd has been dogging it all year, in order to get traded to a REAL contender. He sees what Boston did - got 3 perennial all stars - and figures he's got not chance in the dead end Izod Center, with a dead end team whose dead end ownership and management has done everything possible to discourage a fan base from remaining.

Ok.

So, then, it was JKidd who put the Nets in the position they've been in time after time this season, coming down to the last two minutes, losing close games at home that never should have been close, much less lost.

And I guess he's done it mostly from the bench, like when he visits EVERY GAME at the end of the first and beginning of the fourth, WITHOUT EXCEPTION. I guess he exerted his svengali to jinx his teammates from the foul line all those games they shot under 65% from the line. I guess it was his idea not to call a time out to throw cold water on those constant opponents' runs, which the great Lawrence Frank will tell you every NBA team makes, except his Nets, for some reason.

I guess the fans voted him into the All-Star game because they appreciate a guy who's thrown it in for the year.

And Jason is so smart - he's hiding these intentions by cranking out 12 triple doubles! See? Who can accuse him of dogging it if he's getting a triple double? Brilliant!

The Nets played the Celtics well for 3 quarters a few weeks ago. I was there. They dominated.

When they faltered, no help was to come from Lawrence Frank. He did not and does not know what to do. They faltered, and he let them.

They then went on a swoon. A nine game swoon. Coulda won 4 of them, but when it came time for coaching, for someone to remind them what they are made of and to help them out with good in-game decision making, he was as absent as the energy they lacked.

Maybe Kidd was auditioning tonite. Maybe that's where the energy and leadership came from. Old Frank said his will was palpable out there tonite. Clearly, the team responded to his will.

Well, I'll tell you what - I bet the team would respond to ANY leader's will. And I bet that if they had a coach capable of exerting HIS will on a game, they might respond, whether JKidd is there or not.

The Nets have stunk against good teams. They have stunk against the west. They have stunk against the Mavs in the Jason Kidd Era, as it is called, having gone 1-13 against them. They have stunk at home.

So, they play the Mavs next, at home, in a couple of days. This is set up to be yet another bad, bad loss. Maybe JKidd will be auditioning again, with Mark Cuban in attendance.

Here's another thought - maybe JKidd has already figured out that if the Gasol and Shaq deals got done and he's still hanging in the breeze, he ain't goin' nowhere. Maybe he figured that out a while ago. Maybe he's trying to show the esteemed Lawrence Frank what his team could be if he would only learn to coach in-game.

Let's see what happens on Sunday...

Game 49 - Not since the days of Butch Beard...

2008-02-06T18:37:00.000-08:00

...have I seen such lousy, listless, dispirited basketball. Empty games in a cavernous arena.

Back then, the Nets had no players. Now we have uniforms.

I tuned into the game and the Nets were remarkably up, 30-22. They're outshooting the Magic 48-31%.

Not for long.

A 25-8 spurt dooms the Nets, who don't need much to roll over.

After the game, Frank says the team must defend the honor of the jersey, that that jersey has seen a lot of winning and proud moments, and the players need to honor that.

20-29 is not honor. It is a deep hole. Last year at this time, 22-27.

There is such sadness surrounding this team, I have not gone to the arena, nor have I tried to give away the tix.

I wish that if Kidd is to be traded that it happens sooner than later.

Game 48 - Starting to slide again

2008-02-06T18:21:00.000-08:00

The Nets are not the only team to have just concluded a trade with the Grizzlies. The Lakers also did, and got Pau Gasol for basically nothing, and guess who the Nets play tonite?

Nonetheless, the Nets play them tough and at the half it's tied at 47. But they flub rebounds continually, giving the Lakers perhaps 5 2nd and 3rd chances, all of which they capitalize on.

The Nets go down by 4 after 3, and you think maybe, just maybe. And what a big win it would be! Especially with Gasol playing with them. And Kobe gets hurt and his performance is minimized.

But the Nets are a dispirited team, and lost by 15.

They play Orlando tomorrow, a good team. They are 20-28 now. Another loss is likely...

Game 47 - Oh well

2008-02-06T18:16:00.000-08:00

The Nets just don't show up, down 7 after one and 17 at the half. They make a half hearted run in the 4th, getting to 9 under, but a bad call by the refs on what should have been a goal tending results in a 4 point swing, and before you know it, they're back down by 13.

It was a discouraging show, an indication that Kidd has given up on the team and the team has given up on him.

Word also has come that the Nets, belatedly, are trading Jason Collins to Memphis for the bust Stromile Swift. The estimable Lawrence Frank set up a play to start the game that resulted in an ally oop to Collins who stuffed it.

The only wonder is, why didn't you use that play earlier, genius?

Game 46 - Two in a row, and they break 20

2008-02-06T18:01:00.000-08:00

The Nets beat a Miami team without Shaq or Haslem. They almost have their ***third*** win of the season of 10 points or better, but fall short.

They're now 20-26. It's not impossible, and if Kidd keeps it up and winds up not being traded, and keeps a professional attitude, they have a shot, particularly in a weak East, where they are percentage points out of the playoffs at present.

But upcoming are some tough games against good teams...

The Nets cannot afford another protracted losing streak.

Game 45 - The streak is over. Yay.

2008-02-06T17:42:00.000-08:00

So the Nets come home and beat a bad Milwaukee team by 7. Y(awn)ay...

Even still, with 2 minutes to go, the game was tied.

A win is a win, and we'll take it.

Interlude - Knew it was coming, but didn't want to believe it.

2008-02-06T17:25:00.000-08:00

So before the Minnesota "game", as it were, the news was Jason Kidd's agent has requested that he be traded to a team with a chance at winning a championship.

Could this be true?

There were rumors last year that Thorn was trying to trade Kidd to LA (a place JKidd said he hated on Michael Kay's Centerstage back in 2002) but those talks broke down, the trade deadline came and went, Kidd was still with the Nets and they rallied to make .500 and the playoffs, then eliminated the vastly overrated Raptors and with a good coach could have bounced the vastly overrated Cavs.

This year started out with Kidd saying it was the most talented team he had ever been on, with VC resigned and Curley due to come back from injury. 4-1 after 5...

When they got to 18-17 off a 7-1 tear I dared thought that perhaps they could be the 50 win team their talent suggests.

Instead, they are on a 0-9 tear, and if the loss to the lowly Wolves didn't convince you, the statement by Jason the next day that he did indeed want to be traded just took the air out of the balloon of the season.

It is unlikely that Kidd will be traded because Thorn won't just let him go and no team can really provide anything near equal value. How can you get equal value for the entire franchise?

If you think, like I do, that the Nets are a listless team, imagine no JKidd, the one player who plays at a high level game in game out.

And if he doesn't get his trade wish, the best we can hope for is yet another late season run, but even last year they were 21-23 at this point, compared with 18-26. It would have to be even more of a run, and it would have to start pretty much now.

Jason Kidd did what no other player has ever done - he took a moribund, not just team, but entire franchise, and brought them to the NBA Finals two years in a row, and were it not for a bum knee, it very well might have been 3. A piss poor coaching job cost them the title in 2003.

JKidd is the best all around player I've seen since Magic and Bird, and the stats say since the Big O. The great Michael Jordan never did what JKidd has done, and continues to do, for a franchise whose ownership has been jaded and stupid.

I don't blame him for wanting to leave. He has nothing to leave on the court.

But I will miss him dearly.

Game 44 - We now know who the worst team in the NBA is

2008-01-27T18:09:00.001-08:00

It is Lawrence Frank's New Jersey Nets!

With 1:18 to go the Nets have a 7 point lead on the team with the worst record in the NBA.

Let me repeat that:

With 1:18 to go the Nets have a 7 point lead on the team with the worst record in the NBA.

My prediction for this road trip was 1-5. Coming into tonite they were 0-5.

They give up a three. They now have a 4 point lead.

Jason Collins is a Stanford alumnus. I went to Stanford. I want to like him. He took a charge at the end, to his credit, and it is THE only thing he can do.

Nets get the ball and Kidd finds a guy right under the basket. The guy is fouled with 58.6 seconds to go. Two free throws.

Unfortunately, that guy was Jason Collins.

Front rim. Air ball.

Question for the omniscient Lawrence Frank: Sirrah, you hoard all your precious timeouts for the end of the game so you can micromanage it. Why in THE world did you leave Mr. Collins in the game on the offensive end?

OK, so the Nets are back on defense. They just let Minnesota hit a 3. They just made it a 4 point game. One would think that the brilliant Lawrence Frank might somehow get his team to focus on guarding the 3.

TWolves hit a 3. One point game.

Timeout. Frank at least has the sense to take Jason Collins out of the game and not put in the other free throw embarrassment, Josh Boone. He puts in Sean Williams. Um, wouldn't it make more sense to put in a shooter?? Nets bring the ball down the court with 40 seconds left in the game. Carter takes a jumper which, of course, bounds off. Scramble for the ball, right in front of the ref. Clearly goes off the Twolves. Call?

You don't get calls when you are playing like crap.

So the Twolves bring the ball down, trailing by one. 21 seconds left. Nets play good defense, it seems. Wild shot. Rebound to... Al Jefferson and he is fouled!

Were it the Nets, they would have missed one of the pair, I swear...

Now we have 11 seconds left. Nets down one. The great and powerful Frank calls a play, bless him. Ball into RJ. Takes a shot. No one under. Front rims it. Twolves rebound. Who?

Al Jefferson drains both (of course) for his 39th and 40th point and the Twolves are up 3.

Timeout (of course). Nachbar put in for Williams. (Why wasn't he put in when he took Collins out?) Ball in to Carter. Attempted 3. Airball. Nets lose.

How many times have the Nets come up dry to end a game this season? How many times have they blown a lead with 2 minutes left? How come nothing changes?

I don't care how "well" the Twolves have been playing of late. They had 7 wins for the entire season. They outscored the Nets 10-0 to end the game, 34-21 for the 4th quarter.

This just in - Richard Jefferson is being interviewed on the postgame, and says "the game didn't come down to free throws" "free throws didn't factor in". I love RJ, but he is in serious denial. And what game was he watching??

I am tired of the Nets coming up short, blowing leads, missing free throws, failing to guard the three, failing to play defense. What has changed? Magic Johnson says it's Vince Carter's knees...

No. The problem is simply this, and everyone knows it but won't say it for some reason: The Nets are not listening, not reacting, not trusting their coaching.

They are thus now the worst team in the NBA. With Vince Carter, a scoring machine, Richard Jefferson, the fifth highest scorer in the league, and Jason Kidd, the best all around player in the game today, the Nets stink. How can that be?

How can every game play out like every other? How can a team time after time fail, irrespective of the competition, to finish a game? How can a team of professionals, against the worst fouling team in the NBA, not even break 70% from the line?

0-9 with none of the big 3 injured. 1-10 with none of the big 3 injured. The Nets have gone from a 9-6 team on the road to a 9-12 team on the road. Three blowouts, three collapses.

How does this clown keep his job?

How does this clown keep his job?

How does this clown keep his job?

Behold the shimmering brilliance of Lawrence Frank!

2008-01-25T20:33:00.000-08:00

So here we are, 57 seconds left in the 5th game of an abysmal road trip, and the Nets are down by 10, by TEN, and the Great and Powerful Lawrence Frank calls timeout.

What in the world is he possibly thinking?

Did he call a play? Did the Nets have a chance? No, of course not, but the formidable Frank was the only person in the arena or the viewing audience who didn't know that.

So he had them foul, which a) slowed down the game to a crawl, prolonging the agony, b) allowed the Nuggets to score from the foul line, and c) made things worse. And allowed a team, for the 6th game in a row, to score more than 100 points against you. While they were shooting 36%.

The Nets had 85 points at that point. When the final buzzer sounded, they had 85 points. What was accomplished?

The best thing that could have happened was to allow the Nets to get off the court as soon as absolutely possible, get them on the plane to Minneapolis, let them get some rest and get out of the building ASAP.

No. Use up your hoarded, precious (my precious!) timeouts, tell your humiliated troops to undergo more humiliation and dig the hole deeper.

If he is trying to make a point, what could it be?

No, he's way over his head. He relies on a formula, win or lose, irrespective of the deficit. OH! 57 seconds left! CALL TIME, CALL TIME! Foul them right away!

Hey brain boy - your team is dead. They stopped responding to you a couple of years ago. They don't respect you or your judgement. You have one ace in the hole - and owner who could give two whits about "his" team, "your" team. You think Rod actually believes that stuff about you as a coach?

Game 43 - 0-5, 0-8

2008-01-25T19:57:00.000-08:00

Score with 2 mins to go in 1st - 14-11 Denver.
Score at end of qtr - 19-11 Denver.

Nets down to a team shooting 29% at the half. By 16 points.

What does a guy gotta do in this leauge to get fired?

And the refs in the NBA are the worst in all of professional sports. Case in point: A technical is called on Darryl Armstrong. AI shoots. Misses. Pounds ball into the floor so hard it goes up 20 feet. Should be a technical right? If so, Iverson is gone for the game. The refs don't react, they don't even conference. They leave him in the game.

A coupla minutes later, Nachbar, who is not even dressed for the game, gets a technical for standing on the court.

C'mon, Stern. Now more than ever you need good refs...

Not that it would make any difference to this sleep walking team.

The Nets score 31 point in the entire 1st half, and needed a three in the last minute to get that high. Miraculously, at the end of 3 they're down only 6 points. But Denver is allowed to reel off the first 12 points of the quarter, and the game is over. The Nets don't score until there is only 7:10 left in the game. They're outshooting Denver 41-36% and they're losing by 16.

I have seen some bad Nets basketball over the years, some really, really awful basketball. But those teams had no talent, no chance, lots of injuries and legitimate teams like the Knicks, Celtics, 76ers and Bulls in their division and conference.

This team has no excuse. They are the worst team in the NBA, and they are about to prove it against Minnesota on Sunday.

Rod, either trade them all or fire Frank.

Or resign.

Game 42 - Warriors 121, Generals 119

2008-01-25T03:39:00.000-08:00

What? You didn't hear? The Nets are now the Washington Generals of the NBA.

Sure, they're based in Jersey, but to call them the New Jersey Generals would be an insult to the USFL team that at least was competitive.

Those Generals featured a star player who just recently admitted to having multiple personality disorder. At least the Nets don't have that problem. Despite their protestations every year under Frank that they "are searching for their personality", they need search no more. They have a single personality - they are the foil to every other team's feel good story. They are the team you play to break a losing streak, to turn your season around, to play that guy who has missed 6 weeks to injury. They are the team you play to get it going. They are the Washington Generals to everybody else's Harlem Globetrotters.

The Generals are not supposed to win. Their very purpose is to lose, and to allow the Globetrotters to make astounding plays, and to be the fall guys in all the Globetrotters zany, funny routines. They're the guys who always say "Who's there?" when the other guys say "Knock, knock".

"Knock, knock"

"Who's there?"

"Josh Boone."

"Josh Boone who?"

"Josh Boone who couldn't make a foul shot if his life depended on it. Josh Boone who we're gonna foul possession after possession to kill your rally and kill your momentum and kill your confidence. Josh Boone who your coach won't take out despite having at least 3 other options sitting on the bench."

"Knock, knock."

"Who's there?"

"Lawrence Frank"

"Lawrence Frank who?"

"Lawrence Frank who has a set script from which he will not vary. Lawrence Frank who could be replaced by a computer. Lawrence Frank who is the only man in the building who doesn't get that Don Nelson is going to exploit Frank's team's weak point all night, daring him to do something about it. Lawrence Frank who doesn't even get that he's being dared."

Cheryl Miller interviewed none other than Rod Thorn in the first half last night. So Rod, with your team struggling so bad, is Coach Frank in danger? No, he's doing a good job. Our players are just underperforming for some reason, but hey, despite how poorly we're playing, we're only percentage points out of a playoff berth. Ok, so what about a possible player move? Well, we've gotten a lot of calls and there's nothing that we're remotely interested in.

Rod Thorn, along with Jason Kidd, turned an absolutely moribund franchise into an NBA Finals team in one year. I have never seen anything like it in the history of pro sports that I have been watching. Sure, I've seen Tim Duncan and Magic Johnson help their teams turn around and go to the finals, and even win, but we're talking the Spurs, who, due to the Admiral being out, had exactly one losing season at that time after having just had seasons of 59, 62, 55, 49, 47, 55 and 56 wins; and the Lakers. Enough said. Rod Thorn, who was the GM of the Bulls during the Jordan years, who engineered the Jordan years.

Rod Thorn, who showed passion and intensity and intelligence during the Nets brief finals run, who pulled out the Vince Carter deal after the twin debacles of Alonzo Mourning and the bonehead decision by ownership to let Kenyon Martin walk. Rod Thorn, who knew enough to fire Byron Scott when he needed to be fired.

Thorn basically says to Miller, well, what can I do? I can't fire the coach, and I can't make a deal. What can I do?

The Nets, who until this year, dominated their cross river rivals in the Jason Kidd era, are now becoming them. The Dolans are not stupid; they're just not motivated. Ok, maybe they ARE stupid, but either way they clearly are not motivated. Every night, no matter how many actually show, the Garden is sold out. Perhaps if the World's Most Famous Arena were as empty as the Meadowlands, they might be motivated to fire Isiah, as the crowd chants. No, the Dolans aren't stupid.

And neither is Rod Thorn. He has an owner, a boss, who could CARE LESS about how that supposed basketball team in Jersey is doing. To him it's not a team, it's a big pawn in a real estate development scheme. Ratner was a client of mine in the 90s, and even 10 years ago Forest City Ratner had been trying to get the redevelopment of the Brooklyn rail yards for a decade, with no success and no momentum. Bringing Brooklyn its first professional sports franchise since the Dodgers left town in 1957 could be just the ticket to get the project going again, and done.

And so he buys the Nets who, for the first time in their ragged history, were catching fire, who, if it weren't for JKidd's bum knee, would have gone to the finals 3 years in a row and could well have knocked off a Laker team wracked with dissention. He buys them, in 2004, and says Hey - in 5 years I'm moving the team to Brooklyn.

Zo hears this and freaks. Kenyon is let go. Kittles is not re-upped. Kidd goes under the knife.

If the owner doesn't care about basketball, what can Thorn do? What leverage does he have with the coach? Can he go to Ratner, flush from the latter's courtroom victory against those who would stop the development project, and say, Hey boss, we need a new coach? What can he say to Ratner who would be on the hook for one and a half years' salary? Especially when they are a few percentage points out of a playoff berth? I mean, the owner has done everything but drive a stake thru the heart of this team, and yet they make the playoffs every year. What can Thorn say?

And do you think Frank doesn't know he's golden? What motivation does he have to change? Even if he had the creativity to do so, what motivation does he have?

So if the stubborn coach is not going anywhere, what motivation do the players have to play better?

Pride. That's it. And there is exactly one player who, night in and night out, plays with pride.

The Generals, when they play the Trotters, always have one guy who can play, who can drain a 3 or drive the basket and make it look a little like a basketball game. This team that "plays" in the Izod Center, they are the Generals.

Rod Thorn: Knock, Knock!

Cheryl Miller: Who's there?

Rod Thorn: Beats the heck outta me!

Game 41 - Um....

2008-01-23T04:23:00.000-08:00

...so much for the team that "plays much better on the road"...

Margin of loss on this road trip:
LAC - 13 (in OT!!)
PHX - 24
SAC - 34

The Nets have just lost 7 of 8 after winning 7 of 8.

Sum of point differential in winning 7 of 8:
+9 (Avg margin of victory - 1.2)

Sum of point differential in losing 7 of 8:
-117 (Avg margin of loss - 14.7)

Losing streaks in the JKidd era:

Lost 6 or more Longest losing streak Losing record?
2002 0 4 N
2003 0 4 N
2004 0 5 N
2005 1 9 (with Jkidd out) N
2006 0 4 N
2007 1 6 N (.500)
2008 2 6 (so far) ???

The Nets are now 9-9 on the road, facing Golden State (25-18, 11-8 at home, 6-4 last 10) and Denver (24-16, 17-5 at home, 6-4 last 10) next before Minnesota, a team that has managed only 6 victories all season, 4 of them at home, and now on a 2-8 skein.

They will come back for ONE game vs Milwaukee who, bad as they are playing, could have a better record than the Nets on that date.

OH - did I mention? ONE HALF OF THE SEASON IS OVER, and the Nets are 5 games UNDER .500.

2002 +15
2003 +15
2004 +1 (which got Scott fired that day)
2005 -11 (with JKidd out most of the first half, and this is with that 9 game losing streak)
2006 +3
2007 -1
2008 -5

Finally I heard an announcer on the radio (Tony Paige) speculate about Frank's job status.

Ya think?

Game 40 - Mailing it in

2008-01-21T18:55:00.000-08:00

I did not watch this game. I was watching the Giants game. I flicked to it a few times, particularly in the 1st Quarter.

It was getting away from them very early. End of one, and they're already down 15. They never recovered, as bad teams do not.

As I flicked back and forth I saw the Nets be down by 11 several times, but they never made a serious run at the Suns.

They mailed it in. They are now 18-22, and have ensured themselves a losing record by the mid point. They're 9-8 on the road, still miraculously over .500. Too bad their home record is an embarrassing 9-14.

They've lost 5 in a row. Sacramento is next, their best shot at a win before they play at Minnesota, with games at Golden State and Denver intervening, both several games over .500. The best they can realistically hope for is a split of those 4 games. That would put them at 20-24. However, it is more likely they'll be 19-25.

What did we say?

Game 39 - An L is an L

2008-01-21T18:52:00.000-08:00

I did not watch this game. My wife did.

Her report - the Nets had a 7 point lead and collapsed. A clutch 3 by Kidd sent a game that should never have gone into overtime into overtime.

Overtime scoring - Nets 6, Clippers 19.

According to my wife, LFrank once again used his timeouts too late.

18-21. Phoenix next. Great start to a long road trip.

Not.

Game 38 - This Season Is DONE

2008-01-16T19:08:00.000-08:00

Three bad losses in a row.

The Knicks are the laughing stock of the NBA no more. They have a 3-0 record against the vomitous Nets, including 2 at the Istink Center.

The Nets shot 52% for the game, had ALL starters in double figures, had a 15 point lead after one, and STILL LOSE, to an 11-26 team.

With two minutes to go in the 2nd they had an 8 point lead. End of quarter - 3 point lead. -5 net.

With two minutes to go in the 3rd they were down 3. End of quarter - down 10. -7 net.

With two minutes to go in the game they were down by 1. Lost by 6. -5 net.

Home record: 9-14.

Remember a few posts back? The Nets had a chance to go on the road 20-18, 21-17. Nope. 18-20.

The Nets are 9-6 on the road. Bodes well, right?

No, I don't think so. Prediction: 1-5 on the road trip. They'll come back for ONE game 19-25. Then off on the road for 4 out of the next 5. They'll go 2-4 over that stretch. 20-29.

Last year? 22-27.

Nine games under. That's my prediction for Feb 10 when they host Dallas, a team they couldn't beat when they were playing well years ago. And its a home game, remember that. 20-30.

The Nets well not make the playoffs this year. They are done.

Game 37 - Piteous and Hideous

2008-01-14T18:52:00.000-08:00

After the Celtic collapse, where the Nets looked, played and were coached very badly, I couldn't believe the commentary in the press the day after - to the effect of 'The Nets played well' and 'The Nets just ran out of gas'. The Star Ledger had an article where Paul Pierce gave the Nets credit for being one of the top four teams in the East.

I'm saying to myself, What planet are these guys from?

Apparently I was not alone. My wife tells me that even tho it was a technical circus, on the post game show on the radio more than one fan complained that the Nets could go nowhere without a new coach. My son called me up to tell me he thought the 4th quarter was coached "horribly" and began to agree with my sentiments regarding Frank.

But for me it was more than just yet another bonehead coaching job. The Nets looked lost again, in that 4th quarter, a team that had no clue and no outside force to help them. Like Bruce's river, the Nets flow where they flow, without levees, without purpose, without sense, and when they take a wrong turn they just keep going.

The Nets were down against Portland tonite, a team they beat IN PORTLAND, 24-10 in the first quarter, with a little less than 3 minutes to go. A minute later it's 25-10. There's two minutes to go or so. Your team is already down 15. Given your team's history this year, particularly at home, it's important to mitigate the damage as much as possible.

So what does Frank do?

Pulls the team's leader, the coach on the floor, the guy who makes things happen, out of the game... I give up.

And so did the team.

And so did the fans.

The Nets play the Knicks at home next, on Wednesday. The Knicks are having a worse season than the Nets, with a worse coach, and a worse ownership problem.

They are also 2-0 against the Nets this year.

And they are coming off a truly big win.

The Nets are in total disarray. I am sure they are not unaware of Frank's incompetance. But nor are they unaware of their ownership situation, that Bruce Ratner cares not one whit for this team qua basketball, and that the last thing he is going to do is fire the coach and be on the hook for a buyout. They must live with him.

How do you get up for games in that kind of atmosphere? What happens if you find yourself once again down in the 1st, knowing your history? One thing is certain - you will find no answer from the bench. And any help you might get on the floor, from your leader, who puts out 100%, 100% of the time, who does not give up and always fights, is now ON the bench.

Then you're down 8, 10, 12, 15 points after 1. The game is now a 36 minute game, and one that you need to win by 8-15 points JUST TO TIE. Game after game, night after night...

Marv Albert and his sidekick said over and over that Frank was "trying everything", but in fact he has tried nothing to stop the 1st quarter massacre, or to stop opponents runs or stop his own teams frequent dry spells. Same strategy every game, same tactics every game.

The Nets are back to under .500 again, and it doesn't look good for the rest of the month...

Game 36 - BIG Game, BAD Loss

2008-01-11T21:04:00.000-08:00

As the crowd was filing out of the Meadowlands Arena, the PA system played the rock anthem "Hold Your Head High".

The Nets had just lost, by 9 points, a game where they led going into the last quarter by 5. They had done it by scoring a mere 9 points for the ENTIRE quarter.

Hold your head high.

They scored the first goal of the final period six seconds in to lead 70-63. By the time they scored again, there were exactly 6 minutes left in the game and they TRAILED 76-73, a 13-3 run, altho a second earlier it had been a 13-0 run.

Hold your head high.

At one point in the fourth quarter the Nets were shooting better from the field than from the free throw line. And they were shooting 38% from the field.

Hold your head high.

If Jason Kidd, who well before the end of the 3rd was 8-9-8 but got only one more assist the entire game, didn't hit a 3, a THREE mind you, with 6 SECONDS left, the Nets would have scored only SIX POINTS in the entire fourth quarter and would have lost by double digits.

Hold your head high.

Lawrence Frank is a miserable in game coach. And if he actually believes the drivel he spews out to the media, he is a dolt as well.

Every fan who went to the game tonite knew it was a big game. All the players knew it was a big game. The refs, as embarrassing a job as they did tonite, knew it was a big game. Doc Rivers knew it was a big game. WFAN, who broadcast it, knew it was a big game. A cursory glance at the last few posts in this blog reveals how big this game was. A cursory glance at the schedule would reveal how big this game was.

Everyone, in short, knew how big this game was.

Everyone, of course, but the delusional Lawrence Frank.

This is just one of 82 on the schedule. Oh really? Well, coach, if you really believe that, you are so out of touch with reality it's not clear anything can reach you.

Your club has been scuffling FOR THE 4TH YEAR IN A ROW UNDER YOUR GUIDANCE the entire season. They needed to win 8 of the last 10 just to get a game over .500. They had already been embarrassed twice by a Celtics team that stole the phrase "Big Three" that your incompetence squandered. Your team faces a schedule that features 10 road games over the next 14, including a 6 game West Coast swing, and two of the home games are the next two. You next face one of the hottest teams in the NBA in Portland, a team you beat on the road who is itching to exact revenge, at home, which has been a house of horrors.

If you win you are 2 games over .500 for the first time since Nov 10, when you were similarly humiliated at home by these same Celtics. If you win your team had made a statement in humbling the team with the most buzz and best record in the NBA, to say nothing of your own division. If you win your team feels like Tuesday's thrashing by Charlotte was an aberration, that they are now coming into their own.

If you lose you are back to .500. You have lost the 3rd of 4 games to a division rival. If you lose badly all the old questions will arise, not just in the minds of the fans, of the media, but of your players themselves. They will take that doubt into a game against the buzzsaw that is Portland, against the Knicks who your own shoddy leadership has given them confidence against your team, and into a West Coast trip, the longest of the year.

A win and at the 41 game mark, the halfway point of the season, and you have a great shot to be 23-18 or 22-19, or back from the road at 28-19 or 27-20.

A loss, a bad loss, a characterless loss, and you are likely to go into a tailspin, be at 19-22 or 20-21 at the midpoint and 20-27 back from the road.

THAT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE.

Bear Bryant, who knew a thing or two about coaching, and that includes knowing how to coach in game, once said, When the team wins, it's 'they'. When the team loses, it's 'I'. But listening to your postgame pap one would swear you were the brother in law of the owner's estranged daughter. You put more distance between yourself and responsibility than the C's did from your team in the 4th.

If the Nets are irratic, it's because YOU haven't done what needs to be done to fix it. If they shoot 37% from the FOUL LINE it's because YOU haven't impressed on them how important it is. If they take bad shots and don't rebound when it counts, it's because YOU didn't have a sense of your team floundering. If your team experiences an 18-3 run by the other team TWICE in the same game, it's because you didn't have the brains enough to know when to call timeout to throw water on the run and set up a decent play.

Nobody, Lawrence, NOBODY I'VE EVER SEEN COACH IN THE NBA, has a substitution pattern like this:

4:33 Wright Substitution replaced by Nachbar
4:30 Jefferson Substitution replaced by Wright
3:21 Wright Substitution replaced by Jefferson

You hold onto your timeouts like they were gold, then call one when your team is down 10 with 1:36 to go.

THIS IS INANE! It is stupid. It is thrashing about. Full of sound and fury and signifying NOTHING.

You are responsible for a team that includes two sure fire hall of famers in Jason Kidd and Vince Carter and a budding superstar in Richard Jefferson. You've had them for nearly 4 years. Yet you've barely been able to guide them to more than a .500 record, in a pitifully weak Atlantic Division and Eastern Conference.

You are incompetent as an in-game coach. You make the same mistakes over and over. You are numb to the nuances of the game.

You have a 5 point lead and your team is surging going into the 4th. Your captain, your leader, your coach on the floor knows how big this game is, even if you don't, you dolt. Yet you eviscerate any chance at winning the game by sitting him for the first 3 minutes of the fourth, a period where your team is sputtering, fouling, fawning and failing and is in desperate need of leadership, leadership that you yourself cannot provide.

You won't call a timeout to throw water on the other teams' runs, but you sure as hell will douse those of your own team with your mechanistic, insensitive and rigidly inane subsitution pattern, the same one you use for the Celtics and Timberwolves alike, whether up 10 or down 20 or even or surging or falling apart.

Your teams routinely fall behind double digits in the first quarter, yet you have no solutions. "We're still trying to find our identity" is the crap you try to peddle. IDENTITIES ARE FORMED IN THE PRESEASON, JERK. Not in GAME 36!

Jason Kidd said, at the beginning of the season, that this team was the most talented he had ever been on. Given that he's been to the finals twice and you have yet to get out of Round Two, I'd trust his judgement way more than yours. When he started playing you were a grad assistant.

So why, Lawrence Frank, does this team stumble out of the blocks every year under your tutelage? Why do they have to claw and scratch just to reach mediocrity every year under your tutelage? Why are so many games so alike, game after game, year after year, under your tutelage?

It's because, truth be told, you have really no idea of what to do.

Any NBA team with a modicum of talent could go .500 without a coach. You've accomplished the feat of taking great talent and achieving .500 over a 4 year period.

Pray tell, share with us your wisdom - How DO you do it?

Oh, pay no attention to this blog. You have nothing to be ashamed of.

Hold your head high...

Game 35 - Pokin' Over .500 Again

2008-01-11T14:50:00.000-08:00

I was sick as a dog with the stomach bug, so I didn't go, and couldn't even watch TV, so I didn't see much of the game.

What I did see was a superior team exert its will on an inferior one, especially in the 2nd half. Good character win, especially one night after stepping in a hole.

Oddly enough, Charlotte went to Boston and beat the Celts at home!

18-17. Not where you want them to be after 35 games. A loss vs Boston makes them 18-18 with 2 more home games and then the longest road trip of the year, a West Coast swing, 6 games, with 4 of the subsequent 6 on the road as well.

They've been better on the road than at home, so that's the good news.

We'll see. The Boston game should tell us a lot.

Game 34 - All On the Players

2008-01-11T14:47:00.001-08:00

I have been hammering Lawrence Frank all blog long, but even tho the Nets, once again, let the weaker opposition get up big on them in the 1st (which Frank still shows no signs of figuring out how to stop), you can't in all conscience blame him.

This one is all on the players. After the first, down 8, they mailed it in.

Charlotte is "improving", but not good. A team trying to break from the pack of mediocrity in the East (Nets are still in the middle of the playoff group!) would find a way to win. Instead, they didn't even look like they were trying.

Back to .500.

Hopefully they can regain some character vs Seattle at home, then we'll see what happens vs Boston...

Game 33 - One Nostril Above Water

2008-01-11T14:40:00.000-08:00

I want to give credit where credit is due.

Atlanta has been hot, improving. The Nets had to go on the road. They won, Franks did not make any obvious coaching errors, has been sticking with the same starting rotation now for a while, bringing stability, JKidd racked up another 3-2. They came back from a 7 point half time deficit and 3 point deficit after 3 and won by 6. Character win.

They are now 17-16. Above water, but only by one nostril. Still, they have now won 5 in a row and 7 of 8.

Have they turned the corner?

They finish their mini-road trip at Charlotte, then come home to the House of Horrors to play Seattle.

Could they possibly have won 7 in a row, 9 of 10 by the time Boston rolls in?

Stay tuned...

Game 32 - Mediocrity Achieved!

2008-01-05T08:20:00.000-08:00

The Nets have now won 6 of 7. They have completed the second second half comeback victory in a row. They have an active rotation.

And they are 16-16. Mediocrity defined.

The two comeback victories are overshadowed by the fact that they were necessary. That they got down by double digits against Orlando on the road is understandable. That they got down to Charlotte at home is unforgivable.

31 points given up in the first quarter. Down 10. At home. During a streak. Ugh...

First half shooting - 33%. By my count, 11 missed layups. This is a game, ladies!

Second half shooting - 57%.

At least they are coming back in the second half. A month ago they would just stagnate.

6 of 7. And they needed that to get to .500...

Last year they finally got to .500 at 20-20. Then they went in the tank again.

Finished 41-41, and needed a 4 game season ending winning streak to get there.

Frank says, I think we're finally establishing our identity out there. Well, if 16-16 is their identity...

On to Atlanta. A road game. Whew! Away court advantage!

Game 31 - A character win

2008-01-02T21:19:00.000-08:00

I thought I might avoid the negatives today, even as the game was progressing and it looked like the 13 point lead built in by the Magic in the first quarter (yet another end of quarter debacle - oops! Negative!) would never be eliminated. I turned on the game. It was 15-15. Soon it was Orlando by 5. Frank calls time out. Fine. Good. Right thing to do. Nonetheless, it was 31-18 at the end of the quarter, and came very close to being 34-18 as a 3 pointer bounded just off the back of the rim of Orlando.

In the 3rd the Nets were shooting 60%, but the lead did not shrink that much, because the Magic were shooting 64%.

Even 4 minutes into the 4th it still looked like the Magic had a lock on this game. Then came the defense, and the play of Darryl Armstrong and, of course J Kidd. But also, great selfless hustle by Vince Carter, and tough defense all around.

By mid 4th I was saying to myself, even if this results in a loss, for the Nets to come back and get it close, especially on the road, is quite an achievement.

As it turned out, Kidd, Armstrong and Carter, as well as Malik Allen and even Twin, played smart, aggressive basketball and took the game.

Frank used his whole bench, including Magloire, believe it or not. He called relevant well timed timeouts. He minimized his slavish adherence to a substitution pattern.

It was yet another gut check game, and as in the others of late, the Nets prevailed.

They are now 1 game under .500. They just beat a quality team, on their home court. They've won 5 out of 6, with a home game they should win on the horizon, where they could get even. Game 32, yeah, I know, but even is even. They're now 8-5 on the road. Perhaps that could be the foundation from which they get to 10 over or even 20 over.

That's how a fan thinks.

Okay, so now for reality...

True, the Nets have won 5 out of 6. But they won the last 3 by a total of 6 points (an average margin of victory of 2 points) and the 5 by a total of 15, an average of just 3 points a game. By contrast, the one game they lost during that stretch was by 18, so even in winning 5 of 6 they have been out scored.

How long this season can the Nets continue eking out wins?

They are now 15-16. Last year, after game 31, they were 13-18. Year before: 19-12. Year before: 11-20 with no JKidd.

In 2003-04 they were 17-14, less than 10 games away from having that record get Byron Scott fired.

Last year they got to .500 at Game 40, only to go on a West Coast swing where they lost 3 games in the last possession by 3 points. They finished the year at exactly .500. Won the first round over an overrated Toronto team. Nearly put out an equally overrated Cleveland team, which somehow made it to the finals only to be embarrassed.

This is the contemporary NBA. I'm a little surprised San Antonio doesn't win it every year. With all the hoopla about Boston they are not even remotely in the same league as the teams which had great seasons before. I expect the Celtics not to win the championship this year, and would lay even money that they don't win the East.

Nothing But Ability - That's the NBA today. No discipline, no smart play, no tenacious defense, no coaching. Except for San Antonio, and that's largely because the star allows himself to be coached, and, insodoing, sets the tone for the team.

A talented person is by nature somewhat schizophrenic - you can't rely on spleen night in, night out. Some nights you're gonna go 3-18. What makes up for this is coaching, and the willingness to be coached.

Frank aside, what you have in the league nowadays is just the erraticness of talent without discipline. The Nets are probably the best example of this. But look at Boston - are you telling me that after a decade of mediocre results at best, Doc Rivers has become a genius?

KG, Ray Allen and Paul Pierce together have won nothing. Not even a conference championship. They should be easily defeatable. But in a talent only league, with almost all players having no mental toughness or discipline, opponents get weak in the knees just reading the roster. They are defeated before they step out on the court.

Detroit and San Antonio are not thus intimidated. I would expect either one to prevail.

As for our team, the Nets have the ability, but the coach lacks the experience and humility to do what it takes to actually coach a team. He cannot help them when their talent fails them. He seems to be doing better now, but one, two and three point victories which are well in doubt into the final minute are not indications of a team that is clicking.

Game 30 - Can the Nets play all their games away?

2007-12-29T21:21:00.000-08:00

Still in Orlando, and watching the Giants/Pats on tv, I was able to keep one eye on the Nets gratia beloved Slingbox, and this time, also gratia pdaNet - so I watched it on my laptop.

The Nets did get one very crucial, very lucky break - up 78-77 with the ball, Malik Allen appeared not to get a shot off before the 24 second buzzer, but it wasn't called. He missed, but Carter got the rebound, fed Kidd and he drained a 3. Nets up 4 with 5 mins to go.

Despite other miscues, the Nets made that margin stick.

At one point in the 4th the Nets were 8 of 17 from the line, less than 50%. Thanks to a Milwaukee strategy to foul to extend the game (sound familiar?), the Nets ended 12-23, for less than 50% for the game. They actually were better from the field than the line. That's just embarrassing.

2 in a row, 4 of 5. Can we get a streak going, guys?

Game 29 - Bowl me over!

2007-12-29T21:14:00.000-08:00

I did not attend the game tonite vs the Wizards, as I was at the Champs Sports Bowl, watching one of my alma maters, Michigan State, hand the game over to Boston College, with 5 turnovers, 24-21...

However, I do have Slingbox, so I watched it in between plays on my cell phone....

The Nets continue to play up or down to the level of their opponent. This time it was a rather hot Washington team who spanked them in their last meeting.

But the Nets play another solid 4 quarter game and win by 3.

A home win is good. They are now 7-11 at home, terrible but better. Now they play tomorrow night, in Milwaukee, who just got thrashed by Chicago. The last time the Nets played back to back night with the second on the road, it was vs the Knicks who got thrashed by Chicago. We all know how that wound up...

We'll see...

Game 28 - Piston in the wind

2007-12-29T20:46:00.000-08:00

So what you need to know:

The Nets are up 42-36 with 2 mins to go in the first half. They are shooting 58%. I'm saying to myself, jeez, shooting 58% and only up 6... That doesn't bode well.

Halftime score: Det 45-Nets 44. Nets are outshooting the Pistons 55-43% and LOSING.

Detroit comes out for the second half and go up by 5. Call time! No dice. The Nets take another embarassingly ill advised 3 point shot, miss, and Detroit goes up by 7. Then he calls time. Okay.

After the time out the Nets run a play and Josh Boone gets fouled. Misses both. Detroit gets rebound. Defensive 3 seconds. Pistons up 8. Then they score again. Detroit up 10.

At this point RJ gets the ball and looks over to Frank. RJ senses that the Nets are out of sync, in disarray and need to get coordinated again. You don't see this on tv, I'm sure. RJ asks Frank to call time. Frank turns his back on RJ and makes a motion, play on, play on.

This was the second time in a week that RJ has questioned the coaching.

Um, do you think the Nets, particularly RJ, are losing confidence in the coach?

By the end of the quarter it's 76-62 Detroit. Game over.

Frank made a big deal about how the first 3 minutes and last 3 minutes of every quarter are crucial to stopping the Pistons. Let's see how they did:

1st 1st 3 Det 11-4
1st last 3 Nets 6-5
2nd 1st 3 Nets 6-2
2nd last 3 Det 9-4
3rd 1st 3 Det 8-2
3rd last 3 Det 7-6 (Nets down 76-62)
4th 1st 3 Det 5-4
4th last 3 Det 10-8

Not only did the Nets barely win 2 of these mini-periods (by a combined 5 points), look at the end of the second-beginning of the third. A total point swing of 11 points. A conversion of a 6 point lead into a 5 point deficit.

Lawrence, if the ends and beginnings of quarters are so important, WHY DON'T YOU DO SOMETHING TO HELP YOUR TEAM DURING THIS TIME????

Game 27 - A Complete Game, with Character, no less

2007-12-22T22:05:00.000-08:00

Golden State comes in, not having beaten the Nets in the Meadowlands since 1997. However, after an abysmal (and Steven Jackson-less) 0-6 start, they've won 15 of their last 20 and are 8-6 on the road. They like to run and are averaging 109 pts per game. Have the Nets even come close to that this season?

Time was when coming to NJ meant a track meet. JKidd likes to run, and so did Kittles, KMart and RJ back in the glory days... Now the radio announcers talk about the Nets having to keep up with the Warriors.

A surprisingly good start while I fiddle in unexpected cop caused traffic. My son and I walk into the arena and the Nets have a 24-14 lead with a minute or so to play. Pretty soon it's 24-17 and I meantion to my son, oh boy, here we go, another weak finish to a quarter. Instead the Nets nail a 3 and have a 10 point lead after one. At home, no less.

And they keep it up, playing good D. They shooting pct is a Net-like 40% but so is the Warriors'. And with a little more than one minute to go, they're up by a gaudy 14.

But, as I say, there is a little over a minute left. And by halftime the lead has been halved as well, Nets up 52-45. I want to know why Lawrence Frank had not figured out that the needs to coach the ends of periods differently...

All during halftime I fretting. GS gets the ball. Score. Nets give it up. GS scores. 11:14 to go in the 3rd and it's a 3 point game.

Sure enough, that's exactly how the 2nd half started. And more. Pretty soon it's a one point game. This is starting to look like all the other bad home losses.

But the Nets show character and close out the 3rd up 8. Can they hold an 8 point lead?

No. With 3 and change minutes to play the Warriors bury a three and lead a point, 93-92.

Then 95-92 and GS has the ball! Oh no, not another pathetic example of the famous Coach Frank burning up your time outs once the game is out of reach - for the other team.

But then something really strange happens - the Nets show character! They score the final 8 points of the game, play great defense, and pull out the win in regulation!

This is finally a quality win at home over a quality team. A complete game, end to end, with the exception of the end of the 2nd quarter.

Two in a row:
- an overtime road win
- a solid home win over a quality team

Can we get 3 (vs Detroit)?

Game 26 - A win is a win...

2007-12-22T21:58:00.000-08:00

Let's give 'em a few points:
- It was a road victory.
- They pulled it out in OT on the road.
- Boone may be the real thing (except for the foul line)
- It's a W.

Hooray!

Now let's settle down...

Miami has the worst record in the East, 2nd worst in the NBA.
They just lost Mourning, probably for the year, if not the career (aw what a shame...)

Even still, it took OT.

But a win is a win.

Now, can they win 2 in a row? Especially with #2 being at home?

I doubt it...

Game 25 - They did it! (No, not win...)

2007-12-18T19:13:00.000-08:00

Well it took 25 games, but I don't look forward to watching them. I am sick and tired of watching this much talent underperform game after game after game after game after game after game...

Know when this game was lost? At 0.01 of the 1st period. For the third game in a row, and perhaps the 6th time this season, the Nets allow a buzzer beater 3. Sacramento 28-25.

Game over.

4 minutes to go in the 4th. 85 all. Sac takes a three. Good! And he's fouled! Four point play! 89-85. A four point difference they could never close.

Oh sure, they had chance after chance after chance after chance after chance:

JKidd launches a 3pt brick. (12 on shot clock)
Nets get stop.
VC bricks (18 on the shot clock)
Loose ball foul on Sacramento.
RJ bricks a 3 (6 on shot clock)
Nets get stop.
Lost ball turnover on RJ.
Salmons drives and gets a dunk.

Nets down 6, 91-85. 1:30 burned off the clock.

Number of drives to the basket by the Nets during that run - 0.
Number of drives to the basket by Sacramento during that run - 1.

Net result - +2 for Sacramento.

Nets outshoot their opponent for the 4th game in a row, this time shooting over 50+. 50-45.
Nets outrebound their opponent 45-31.

And lose.

The Nets are officially the worst team in the NBA at guarding the 3.

Lawrence Frank has the temerity to say during the postgame: We need to find a way to put together a complete game.

Um, isn't that your job, Larry?

This team is in a deep, deep funk, lacking confidence, lacking identity. For the 4th year in a row in the Lawrence Frank era. Give him a mulligan for Year 1, when Kidd was out. How can a team with 3 veteran stars come out year after year after year, seaching for an identity?

They have an identity - they are gross underachievers. They are a team without passion.

They are a bad team very poorly coached.

I am sick of watching them.

Game 24 - Cirque du No Way

2007-12-17T10:31:00.000-08:00

Another circus at the Garden...

Okay, let's reset the scene:

- The Nets just had a big team effort (10 players with non-trivial minutes) over the team that eliminated them last year, sporting one of the budding superstars of the game, who took them to the NBA finals last year.
- The Nets had their big victory in NJ, just 10 miles away from where they were to play tonite. Like a home game.
- The Knicks had just been embarrassed in Chicago, and faced a 2 hour plane ride after humiliation.
- Curry had just been held scoreless.
- The Knicks had beaten the Kidd-less Nets earlier in the month in the infamous "Migraine Game" and the Nets were looking for retribution.
- Marbury was not going to play.
- The Nets have dominated the Knicks at the Garden in the Kidd Era, and dominate the series something like 28-4 at both locations.

Final score: 94-86.

Knicks.

When I was in grammar school - GRAMMAR SCHOOL - I was a 60% foul shooter. We played some parochial schools, and those kids shot 90% - with regularity.

The Nets shot 43% from the line. An NBA team. 43%!

You never EVER see a HS team shoot 43%. Never EVER see a college team hit 43%. In the 60s, 70s and 80s foul shots were nearly automatic. Teams shot 85% for the year at the line.

43%...

Of course, they only took 16 foul shots for the game, so even if they shot 80% (as well they should!) it would have only been 6 points.

And why only 16 foul shots? (The Knicks took 36, some 20 more.)

The Nets outshot the Knicks, by pct (46-42) and number (80-76). The Knicks outscored the Nets 24-7 from the line.

Why?

Because the Knicks went to the basket. The Nets played yet another disinterested game, with both hands tied by themselves behind their back.

The Nets strength is when VC and RJ drive the basket. Both are 80% foul shooters, so even when they don't score they go to the line and usually convert. Yet how many times have we seen the Nets just sit back and take jumpers with 15 seconds left on the shot clock?

The Knicks are a bad team - badly conceived, badly coached. They were easily beatable. They have not shown the ability to stop the drive, to stop teams in the paint.

Had the Nets driven the lane, as their two stars are famed for doing, the Nets win. Even at 43.8% foul shooting, if the Nets get as many foul shot attempts as the Knicks, it's a tie game. If they shoot a respectable 75% they win in a walk.

But you don't get fouled taking jumpers from 20 feet out. With 15 seconds left on the shot clock.

The more tired you are the less likely those shots are gonna drop. The Nets succeeded in doing the sole thing that a team playing back to back cannot do in order to win - settle for the jumper.

I said to the guy next to me at the Clippers game - This team is like Springsteen's song - Like a river that don't know where it's flowin', they took a wrong turn and they just kept goin'. That's what these games are like - the Nets are not an organized team, a concentrated force. They're like a river, overflowing its banks, directionless, flooding some areas but dissipating it strength and by the time it gets to the dam it does not have enough power to turn the rotors.

That Franks must go is getting to be conventional wisdom. That the owner doesn't care is becoming obvious. That the GM is on cruise... Well, I hope at least not him.

Or J Kidd. So far both Kidd and Thorn continue to give an all out performance.

The Nets are down 10-14. With a modicum of discipline, of coaching, of professionalism (I mean, 43%!), this team could be 10 games over 500 by Feb 1.

Right now, tho, there are no levees, and the river just keeps flowing, taking wrong turns. And we have no idea where they're goin'.

Game 23 - Cirque du Soleil

2007-12-17T10:20:00.000-08:00

That's where I was - at MSG of all places, watching Cirque du Soleil's "Wintuk", as a guest of my wife's company. I have been going to see CdS for nearly 20 years, having first seen them performing literally in a parking lot in San Francisco. They are fabulous, and you owe it to yourself to go see them, whether at MSG, Disney World or one of their 3 Vegas shows. Or anywhere!

So I wasn't at the Meadowlands. I would still choose CdS in general, but how I wish I had been there tonite! An entire game against a superstar player. A bad start out of the gate and another (!) buzzer three at the end of the half (what is that, now, 3 this year alone - forget about Milt Palacio (not that I'm bitter, of course...)). Yet they maintained their composure, captured the lead and maintained it despite a strong charge by Cleveland.

RJ apparently played great D on LeBron and the Nets shot 48% for the night. Boone and Sean have emerged as a tandem to be reckoned with (it's looking like Krstic is not gonna make a comeback this year).

There is hope...

They play the lowly, ugly, dysfunctional Knicks tomorrow night at (ironically) MSG. They got blown out by the Bulls tonite, with Curry being held scoreless. The Nets are on an upswing and the Knicks have to make a two hour flight in disgrace and get back on the court in less than 24 hours.

Could this be the beginning of the turnaround?

Game 22 - Will it ever end?

2007-12-11T21:09:00.000-08:00

Harold Geneen, wizard of ITT, said:

Performance is your reality.

Basically he was saying the numbers that indicate your performance is your reality.

So here are the numbers:

The Clippers had lost 8 out of 9 coming in, this the first game of a road trip, after a transcontinental flight.

The Nets shot 30% for the game until the last minute, when some uncontested layups brought it up to a lusty 32%.

The Nets shot 0-15 to open the 4th; 5-25 for the entire period (and again, I believe 3 of those were uncontested layups).

The Nets got 20 turnovers, but only 10 points from them.

To my count, the Nets missed more than 10 layups in the game.

Jason Kidd, once again, got a triple double.

Final score: Clippers 91 Nets 82.

Look at it on the bright side - they shot near 20% better on Sunday and lost by 15. Maybe they're better off shooting 30% than 50%...

Finally, on the post game, fans are starting to ask almost exclusively coaching questions. Capshaw and Carino did their best to hew to the party line, but even wrapping up they were openly discussing the poor coaching.

Even they mentioned that altho the Nets were 9-13, they had started last year 9-13 as well, were 7-14 the year before and 10-14 the year before that, and made the playoffs all 3 years. So "Frank has that history of getting his team into the playoffs". I mean, really guys...

But then even they had to question whether the team can keep going back to that mode year after year. They mentioned that for a team with Carter, Kidd and Jefferson to be struggling like this, to be down 10+ points every game at home certainly points the finger at the coach.

But Capshaw brought up the 2 year extension. It would be a lot of money to buy out Frank.

Especially when you have an owner who doesn't care. Stefanski leaves and he is not replaced. The coach is rewarded for barely getting an allstar team into the playoffs with a 2 year extension.

I despair that this is going to be the return to the crap that reigned in the Meadowlands for decades, a return to the 17 to 35 win seasons. Why wouldn't JKidd want out? Why would VC want to stay in?

This season is a mess. It's no fun going to the arena.

Will it ever end?

Post Game - Frank vacuity

2007-12-09T18:43:00.000-08:00

Frank's post game can be summarized as follows:
- "we" didn't commit to defense
- "we" were not the agressors on offense.

Whose offense are they running, brain boy? Bill Cartwright's? Brian Hill's?

Who's supposed to get the team to commit to anything? Jason Kidd? Rod Thorn?

The Net's offense is this - stand around the arc and take a jump shot. Period.

What in the world does this man bring to the team? Are they listening to him? Does he help them in the game by knowing when to throw cold water on runs? The OTHER TEAM'S RUNS? Can he call a play even if he does call time out?

Altho this is the first time I have been a season ticket holder, I have watched every game, basically, since 2002. I have never seen a team, not even the lowly Knicks, play the same game over and over and over again. This is because any coach worth 1/10th today's salaries could figure out This ain't working. Try something different.

Does Frank vary his substitution pattern? No.

Does he vary his timeout pattern? No.

Does he change his offense? No.

What is his value?

Game 21 - Franks Wash-out

2007-12-09T18:26:00.000-08:00

Only down by 4 in 1st altho had been down 10.

Up by 6 at half, altho Wash had last shot.

Up 59-50. Washington gets it to 59-55 and nets are in disarray. No timeout called. What is he waiting for????

Timeout only called when Nets get down a point, ie, a 10 pt turnaround.

Tied at 70, Nets out shooting 58%-42, but Wash has taken 10 more shots and 6 more freethrows, all of which they made.

Nets up 72-71 and Carter fouls shooter shooting a three. Stupid foul. All 3 drained, Wash up 2.

Last minute. So far Nets have been outscored 3-0 at the end of the quarter, due to foul. Bad shot, another foul. 4-0. 5-0. (Kidd's on the bench, btw) Airball 24 sec violation. Wash will get last shot again. Good. 7-0 run. Washington leads by 6.

Commentator: "Nets once again not being able to finish a quarter, which frustrates Lawrence Frank." HE'S THE FREAKING CAUSE!

Twelve point turn around, unassisted by Frank.

Nets let Wash score 36 points. And Nets are OUTSHOOTING them 57-43!

Open the 4th. Kidd still on bench... That's helpful, brain boy Frank!

Hey, LF called a timeout! Just after Wash went up by 8! Great Larry boy! Only ONE QUARTER AND 14 POINTS TOO LATE!

Mark Jackson: What are the Nets trying to accomplish on the offensive end?

Being outshot 54-30 in the 4th.

Here's how Lawrence Frank teams have fared up to December 9th:
2004 5-13 (Ok, Kidd out with injury for beginning of the season)
2005 9-9
2006 7-11
2007 9-12

No Gil Arenas. Lose by 15.

Washington started the season 0-5. They now have a better record than the Nets.

There is not a single positive to be taken from tonite's game.

Clearly, it is Frank. He must go.

But the owner doesn't give a Ratner's ass. Get my project thru. And Rod Thorn looks like a guy ready to jump ship. Stefanski was allowed to leave. JKidd gets a migraine and people automatically think he's mutinying.

Lawrence Frank is an infected boil on this team. His infection is festering in this team. They look shell shocked, out of answers.

Frank has coached one of the best teams in the east to mediocrity for 5 seasons now. He is single handedly killing them. They have no hope while he rules the bench.

Because he has no clue. None. Whatsoever.

Game 20 - Didn't need to go

2007-12-07T20:49:00.000-08:00

End of 1st qtr - down by 10
End of half - down by 15

Sound familiar? It's so repetitive I didn't even need to go tonite. I could have written this post and stayed home.

Is Lawrence Frank the only one who is not getting it?

The Nets are 4-8 at home. It's Dec 7 (a day that will live in infamy).

In 2001-2002, the Nets lost 8 games at home the ENTIRE SEASON.

Last 8 home games: 1-7 and the 1 was an overtime win over hapless Philadelphia.

Through it all, Frank maintains his mechanical substitution patterns...

No wonder Kidd had a migraine the other night. I'm getting one myself!

Here are the halftime scores for those 7 losses:

12/7 Houston 48-33 (and a 3 at the buzzer was disallowed)
12/5 Knicks 51-42
11/27 Memphis 58-45
11/17 Miami 45-35
11/16 Orlando 45-32
11/12 Hornets 49-37
11/10 Celtics 59-52 (only single digit deficit at the half of the run)

And here's the kicker: The game they WON, at halftime:

12/1 Phila 51-35

And just before that loss run, here's the halftime score of the game they won:
11/8 Wash 41-36

That is, the Nets have not had the lead at home at the half since NOVEMBER 6, over a month ago. And only twice were they within 10, and only won one of them.

Here's the first quarter scores of that run:

12/7 Houston 28-18
12/5 Knicks 26-18
12/1 Phila 28-19
11/27 Memphis 28-25
11/17 NETS 23-18 (lost anyway)
11/16 Orlando 25-10
11/12 Hornets 26-21
11/10 NETS 27-26 (against the Celts and they lost anyway)
11/8 Wash 27-15

Even the two games they actually won during this "run" ("this is the NBA and teams are gonna make runs..." - Lawrence Frank. Okay, so how come it's never the NETS??) they had to dig out of major holes, as early as the first quarter.

Night after night after night the Nets are coming out flat. What should that tell you, Frank?

CALL TIMEOUT IN THE FIRST QUARTER AND GET THEIR FREAKING ATTENTION.

Game 19 - Migraine, no gain

2007-12-05T19:09:00.000-08:00

The Knicks win their first road game of the season.

Ok, JKidd sits with a migraine. But the Knicks had neither Marbury nor Curry.

Knicks win the first qtr by 8. Win the game by 7.

Last 3 mins of 2nd qtr: Knicks 11-4. 7 point difference. Number look familiar?

Timeouts by Nets during that period? ONE! With 2 seconds left, and the damage already done.

9-10. Mediocrity.

And their coach can't help them.

I can't imagine this is a stable situation. Something is gonna happen....

GV

Game 18 - Predictable blowout, predictably done

2007-12-05T18:27:00.000-08:00

LeBron can't play. Cleveland lacks other talent. Ragtag Nets, even on the road. Win.

And finally win by 10+. And finally win by 20+. On the road.

IN a couple of weeks they play Cleveland at home, I would imagine with LeBron. Then we'll see...

Even so, Cleveland was 9-9, another mediocre team...

Tomorrow they play the awful Knicks at home. Can they get a home winning streak going?

We'll see....

Off day - Embracing mediocrity

2007-12-05T17:59:00.000-08:00

Against teams .500 and over: 1-7
Against teams less than .500: 7-2

This is the classic definition of mediocre - a .500 team that can beat sub-.500 teams and can't beat those over it.

How can a team with so much talent be so mediocre?

Most of the time there is a complex of reasons, but in this case the data is so stark it's amazing to me that no one else is concentrating on it: Lawrence Frank cannot in-game coach.

The Nets are one of the few teams in the NBA yet to have won by 10 or more points. (The Knicks, Seattle and Minnesota are the others. Combined they have barely more wins than the Nets.) They have lost 6 by 10 or more, 5 by 20 or more.

During the Lawrence Frank era, as they say, the Nets are 166-138, a difference of +28. But 14 of them were the initial streak, so it's really +14. Over 5 seasons.

Bruce Ratner is not going to make a coaching change. What will happen?

JKidd wants to stay. VC is staying. RJ is the focal point now of the O.

The cases are:
- Frank suddenly and unaccountably "gets it"
- The Nets remain mired in mediocrity.

A shame, really. A decent coach would easily get 50 wins out of this talent. Might not get out of the 2nd round, but then again, the 2nd round might be a lot easier with 50 wins...

I wonder if Brian Hill would do better...

We'll never know.

It's time, for my own sanity, to mourn 2002, 2003, 2004 and embrace mediocrity, sadly...

Game 17 - Predictable blowout, predictably done

2007-12-05T17:49:00.000-08:00

Here's some stats that will tell you everything you need to know:

Last 1:50 of 1st qtr: Detroit 5-0
Last 1:13 of 2nd qtr: Detroit 7-0
Last 2:00 of 3rd qtr: Detroit 7-0

Cumulative: Detroit 19-0
Final margin of loss: 23

Nets time outs during those periods above: 0

Say what you will - If your coach is not willing to help you out, at best you'll be mediocre.

At best.

Game 16 - Groundhog Morning

2007-12-02T11:53:00.000-08:00

Ok, we all know the script:
- Fast start, no defense
- JKidd MUST come out with 2 mins to play in the first qtr.
- Nets down 9 after 1
- JKidd sits out the first half of the 2nd
- Nets down 10 when he gets back in
- Stupid foul at the end of the half
- Nets down 16 at the half

Shooting pct at half: Phi 59 NJ 37
Rebounds at half: Phi 28 NJ 12

How many times are we gonna see this stuff this year?

Then:
-Nets have furious 3rd qtr and trail at the end by 1
- Nets dawdle in the middle of the 4th and trail by 5
- Nets come back and have a 2 pt lead, and the ball, with 43 secs left.

Now, might this not be a good place to call timeout, set up a play, go back up by 4 with, say, 25 secs left?

Of course not, and Philly scores on foul shots. THEN the Nets call timeout (one play too late, a Lawrence Frank trademark), set up a play, and VC misses the shot.

OK, overtime.

15 seconds left, Nets up by 5. Remember that.

Philly has TWO POINTS in OT up to this point. But they launch a 3. Twish. Two point game.

Phila fouls right away, RJ cans one of two. Three point Net lead, 8 seconds to play.

Nets foul right away, in the back court, which ensures that no matter what happens, the Nets will be up by at least 1.

Ok, stop right there. Go back.

Remember previously, Nets up 5, 15 seconds to play. WOULDN'T HAVE MADE SENSE TO FOUL AT THAT POINT??? The Nets obviously had that in mind, since they used that strategy the rest of the game. But wouldn't it have been better to make it a 5-3 or 5-4 game than a 3-2 or 3-1 game?

It amazes me! He obviously gets the strategy, but even still doesn't implement it in time. One play too late.

The killer is, Philadelphia had a chance to WIN. That's right, only 2 seconds left but if you don't believe it can happen I have two words for you: Milt Palacio.

Air ball. Nets win.

A lot of people are getting on the Nets fans, but I have to say, they were cheering at the end and jubilant when they won.

But to be honest, it felt like a loss...

Off daze - Musings...

2007-11-29T15:50:00.000-08:00

After Tuesdays stinker, the Nets don't play until Saturday. Today (Thursday) would normally be a game day. Instead, we have 4 days till the next game.

So I'm sittin' here thinking...

Suppose the Nets got rid of Frank. Who would they get?

Or more aptly, are the Nets just the modern NBA (Nothing But Ability), filled with talent only players who have no fear and take no motivation from their coaches?

There was a time, not too long ago (or maybe it was - 20+ years....) when there were fixer coaches, coaches who could turn teams around. Bill Fitch comes to mind right away. He took the newborn Cavs to the playoffs multiple years, turned the Celts around from an abysmal run to the Championship in 2 years (okay, he had talent), turned Houston into a perennial playoff team from a bad set of seasons, even got the Clippers in. Most remarkable, he took an awful Nets team and got it into the playoffs in 3 years. If you needed a turnaround, he was the guy to call.

There were solid coaches, like Bill Sharman and Alex Hannum, innovators like Jack Ramsay and Hannum, old reliables like Red Holtzman, legends like Red Auerbach. All these guys had one thing in common: They could lead men.

Who are their equivalents now? Larry Brown was kinda like Fitch. The Van Gundys are solid (tho neither has won anything yet), there are legends, like Riley and Jackson.

But can they lead men?

I'm not blaming them. A decade ago Phil could definitely lead men. Then again, his assistant was #23. Riley had the ears of Showtime, but Showtime had ears to go with their obvious talent. The Pistons rallied around Brown, and they didn't have the earthshattering talent of the Celtics, Lakers, 76ers of the 80s. Was that him? Given that Saunders got them nearly as far and the Knicks were just as abysmal the year after, it's not so clear.

I admire Eddie Jordan, whose offense was part of the reason the Nets zoomed in the early 00s. I saw his Wizards play a couple of weeks ago. Was his team listening to him? Didn't look like it...

Maybe the question should be, could ANYONE lead these men?

Maybe what I don't see, what I can't see, is that Lawrence Frank is an excellent leader for today's kind of player - a guy with phenomenal athletic talent and absolutely no mind for the game. Maybe he can get more thru to the young players, so full of themselves and their Sportscenter moves and their bling and newfound millions, than the old style coaches, the my way/highway guys. Maybe he's gotta "just let them play" because there is no other alternative.

I suspect that LF is more in tune with today's reality than most. I suspect because he is always talking "left brain" - basketball, basketball, basketball, and no personality stuff - the players don't mind him and don't mind him managing the game. Maybe he's so inoffensive and "professional" in the locker room that the players, particularly Kidd, Jefferson, VC, are more likely to blame their bipolar play on themselves, and not on poor in-game management.

Maybe that's why, year after year, the Nets get off to a poor or at least mediocre start, then put on these phenomenal end of season surges, when the light bulb goes off and they realize they actually have to play seriously to make the playoffs.

Maybe that's why, year after year, the team is still "trying to find an identity" deep into January.

If that's the case, then that's the case. The new NBA.

If so, though, then it becomes much more incumbent upon the coach to manage the game properly, to grab those close wins by knowing how to cool off a run, call a timeout, draw up a play. Maybe if a coach can steal a few in the beginning of the season a team will gain some confidence and decide that their identity is as a winning team....

Byron Scott was a great competitor, a fierce competitor, when he played. He took the Nets to the finals twice. Actually, he didn't - Jason Kidd did. Jason Kidd was a leader of men who convinced his teammates, rookies and downtrodden veterans like Van Horn and Kittles, that the losing was over and that they could win. Rod Thorn put together a group of rookies who were wide eyed open to play and listen, and a similarly positive minded set of back ups. Fast Eddie brought the back door Princeton offense, and the chemistry between Kidd and Kenyon was obvious.

The Nets won 52 games that year, and should have won about 60 the next, given the talent and experience they had. They also had a great amount of success with San Antonio, and when that became the Finals matchup, it all looked good...

But the Nets only won 49 games that year. And despite cruising to the Finals vs a very weak Eastern Conference, Buddy Byron blew the finals all by himself, failing to play Mutombo consistently, making formulaic substitutions that threw water on their own runs, while failing to call timeouts that would have thrown water on the oppositions'.

Game 6 was the capper. He sat Mutombo too much, sat Kerry Kittles to start the 4th when KK was totally enfuego and the Nets had a 9 pt lead, and, due to those blunders, as San Antonio went on a 19-2 run in San Antonio, failed to call a timeout to stop it.

Had he played Mutombo in Game 1 the Nets might have come home up 2-0 and might have won it in NJ. Had he left Kittles in to start the fourth quarter of Game 6 the Nets might have at least forced a Game 7. Had he called a timeout when it was only an 8-0 run...

Clearly, Kidd was displeased and midway thru the next season Byron was gone, then Nets at .500, way below talent. Frank comes in, the Nets roll off 14 straight and even then only get 47 wins, and bow out in the Eastern Semis, despite being up vs Detroit 3-2 and going home. Kidd could barely walk... So we chalk that one up to bad luck.

Since then, tho, broken record. Bad starts, furious finishes, talent wins out in the first round, talent not enough in the second.

In my informed opinion, Jason Kidd is the best all around player in the league, and his triple doubles prove it. He is the most intelligent and aware player in the league, by far. He did what I have seen no other player or coach ever do - turn a perennially moribund franchise, not just team but entire FRANCHISE, around, into a perennial playoff team.

But in an all-talent league, intelligent all around play is not enough. JKidd is not a scoring machine, not a gun, not a shooter. He can coach on the floor and is essentially obliged to, but he can't make every shot, and is not the guy you want to have the ball in his hands with the clock running down and you need a 3.

They thought they got that with Carter, but he plays, well, bipolarly. They want to have it in RJ, but aside from injury he is not quite money.

Washington has Arenas, Miami Wade, Cleveland LeBron, LA Kobe, San Antonio Duncan, Detroit Hamilton. These guys WANT the ball for the last shot and have the TALENT to deliver. The Nets don't have that guy.

What they need is something to compensate. Something like great in-game strategic and tactical coaching.

I wonder - can anyone get this message to Lawrence Frank? Does he even see this?

Despite the "Big Three" and an improved supporting cast, the difference maker for this team has to be the coach. The difference maker has to be Frank.

Will he step up? Can he step up?

Right now, he shows no sign of it...

Game 15 - I've passed this way before...

2007-11-27T21:49:00.000-08:00

I honestly was optimistic going to the arena tonite, and it wasn't just because I had been given upgraded seats. After a 3-1 roadtrip and a clutch win over the Lakers, I thought, geez, maybe they've turned the corner...

Here's Coach Franks record up to Dec 1:

2004 3-11 (albeit no Jason Kidd)
2005 7-8
2006 6-9
2007 7-7

I wouldn't call his talent laden teams "fast starters"...

Without exaggeration, probably 50 games in the Frank era have followed this script:

1st qtr - close, JKidd on the bench at the 3 min mark
2nd qtr - Nets fall behind double digits as Kidd watches from the bench; by the time he comes in the damage has been done.
Half - Nets down around 10.
3rd qtr - Nets close the gap.
4th qtre - Nets get oh so close but lose.

Tonite was one of those 50.

The Nets were down only 1 at the 1:24 mark when Kidd, predictably, is benched. When he returns to the game, at 8:27 of the third, they're already down 10.

Number of timeouts called by Frank during that time - 0

At the 5:00 mark, Memphis is up 18, 51-33.

Number of timeouts called by Frank during that time - 0

By the end of the half, the Nets are down 13. If they expect to win, it will take a gargantuan effort.

FFWD to 2:05 left in the game. RJ's foul shots have just made it 99-98 Memphis.

Bad call (refs say Nets knocked ball out of Lowry's hands, when in fact he had lost control)
Bad defense (easy layup by Lowry)
Bad foul (luckily tho Lowry misses)
Bad shot
Bad foul
Bad shot
Bad foul

By then it's 1:15 left and the Nets are down 5.

But Lawrence Frank has wisely hoarded his precious time outs so he can use them when the game is out of reach.

The Nets are 3-6 at home, the second worst home record in the East. Only Miami, Seattle and Minnesota have worse home records in the entire NBA.

The Nets shot 45%, outrebounded Memphis, Kidd had another triple double, and had only one more turnover.

A coach has many functions. But one of them is in-game strategy and tactics. Frank does not know how to manage a run by the opposing team. At one point the Nets closed to 12, 51-39, closing the gap from 51-33. Memphis immediately called timeout. A minute later the Grizzlies were back up by 15. The half ended with them up by 13. The timeout worked - it short circuited NJ's run.

Had it been Frank, no timeout would have been called until the lead was down to 5 or 3. I know: I've yelled from my seat at the arena or in my living room for him to call the timeout earlier, throw some cold water on a run. No dice.

A fan at the postgame show on the radio brought up that Frank is the problem, not the players, or chemistry or "finding themselves" (I hate that last phrase - if you don't know what kind of team you are after playing together for 2 1/2 years, you will never, never, ever know...). His substitutions are odd (anyone remember Nenad Krstic? How about the much ballyhooed Magloire? Neither has played at all, not one second, in the last 3 games. How about Malik Allen who put in 18 productive minutes and 8 points in the win against the Lakers? How was he rewarded? Did not play...)

Carino and Capshaw hemmed and hawed, making one excuse after another, until finally Carino brought up the truth - they just signed Frank to a two year extension beyond this one. He's not going anywhere.

So thus we are condemned.

A coach with a feel for the in game game would have this team at 10-5 or even 11-4.

The Nets, for the 4th consecutive year under Lawrence Frank, a team laden with talent, limps into December with a losing record. And an embarrassing record at home.

All because their coach does not know when to call a time out.

Rod - aren't you paying attention?

Frank - when are you going to decide that YOUR STYLE IS NOT WORKING.

It sure would be nice if Bruce Ratner actually cared....

Road Trip Postmortem - WRONG WRONG WRONG

2007-11-25T22:01:00.000-08:00

I was about as wrong as I could be about this road trip. An ugly loss and three ugly wins, not a negative sweep. 7-7 coming home, not 4-10. A remarkable come back win, huge turnaround performance in the last game.

Give credit where credit is due.

The other teams stink.

But 3-1 is 3-1, and 7-7 is not 4-10, 5-11 or 6-8, either.

I had no or little faith in this team when they left. Even on this road trip, they won 3 games by a total of 12 points - 4 points per game. That's how fragile the victory margin was.

Will Frank or any other Net learn anything from this?

Whether they do or not, they deserve credit. 3-1 is 3-1 and 7-7 is definitely not 4-10.

Game 14 - Even Steven

2007-11-25T21:33:00.000-08:00

A win is a win.

The Nets had a 12 point lead with 4 minutes to go. They had battled back from a 12 point deficit at the half, a half when they shot their typical 37% and had typically finished the quarter poorly.

But their third quarter effort was really superlative. By its end the game was tied at 72.

The fourth quarter saw the effort continue. And so with 4 minutes to go there they were, with a 12 point lead.

With a little more than a minute left they were down by 2. Just like that.

Timeouts called by Coach Frank in that period: 0. Typical.

During this period the Nets missed 5 of 6 free throws at one point. Typical.

And the game came down to another potential Milt Palacio opportunity - to lose.

And two strange calls - an offensive goaltending call on VC, a three point shooting foul on JKidd, you could see it falling apart.

Nonetheless, there was defense in the end, despite the score. They did come back from 12 down.

They showed great character to do so. I give them credit.

VC made several key shots down the stretch. I give him credit.

Kidd, as always, RJ with his fearlessness, Boki on both sides of the court, Wright with good D on an indifferent Kobe. All deserve credit.

3-1 on the West Coast swing. First time they have won the Thanksgiving road trip since 1997. Three wins in a row, so a streak is on going home against nother troubled team. Back to .500.

All deserves recognition, credit.

But they were still in position to lose on the final shot. They did not have destiny in their own hands. All the things that have dogged them in the Frank era dogged them tonight.

As I said, I will say this many times this year - a win is a win.

I just wish I felt like somebody was learning something.

Game 13 - 3.5 Quarters Domination; .5 Abomination

2007-11-24T03:06:00.000-08:00

A win is a win, but...

You've got a 2-10 team, a young team, a coach trying to break back in, a team swamped by relocation rumors, a crowd chanting Save our Sonics! A team that has not yet won at home...

Just out of curiousity, with the Nets now an almost respectable 6-7, lets look at the margins of victory/loss...

Avg Margin of Victory: 5
Avg Margin of Loss: 18

Number of times Nets have won by more than 10: 0 By 20: 0
Number of times Nets have lost by more than 10: 5 By 20: 4

Hold your breath wins: 6
Hold your breath losses: 2

I bring this up because even by shooting 56% the other night and 49% last night, the games were uncomfortably close. Even with RJ averaging around 30 a night, the games were uncomfortably close.

The hallmark of the Frank era has been skin of the teeth wins, blowout losses.

I went to bed last night in the beginning of the 2nd. Nets up by 6, shooting 62.7%. Over 60% and a mere 6 point lead. I said to myself, this does not bode well, shooting so high a pct and a single digit lead.

The offense looks like it's clicking, like it did in the 4-1 start. The team is better offensively with RJ in the spotlight and VC playing a supporting role. Part of this, I think, is because when Frank abandoned the full team offense of the Kmart, Kittles, Kidd, Keith years that was so successful for the Klear Out for Vince idea the Nets immediately became mediocre. VC would score 40, rest of the team would watch from the 3 point line.

With RJ, JKidd can revert to alley oops and backdoors much better, even when RJ is not the recipient.

So why is the margin of victory so small?

As I say, I did not stay up for the game. I did expect a loss, and when I woke up I procrastinated - didn't look up the score right away. I was mildly surprised to see they won, expecting their shooting to decline into the 40s (it did) and expecting a 3rd Qtr collapse (they didn't). Then I read the recap - a 13 point lead had declined to a 1 point lead. And when it did, there was less than a minute to play - anyone's game.

With all the talent the Nets have, I have to pin the blame on the coach (big surprise!).

1. He cannot manage the end of a quarter, much less the end of the game.

2. He has no idea - NO IDEA - what to do with timeouts, as his predecessor, Lord Byron, did not.

3. His loyalty to Jason Collins (a fellow Stanford alum) is not only misplaced, it's a complete headscratcher at this point.

4. His substitutions are formulaic.

I looked at the play by play on NBA.com. As always, his instincts as to when to call timeout, particularly (but not exclusively) on the road, are piss poor. He will not, STUBBORNLY WILL NOT, call a timeout until the crisis is present. Oddly, two tv timeouts forced him to talk to his team at places where he should have called a timeout but did not. Did he set up a play?

Don't know. I was asleep at the time...

I have said this before in this blog - doing the same thing time after time and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. Given that he has coached like this for the last 3 seasons, I suspect I will continue to say it a lot...

And I suspect I will say this as well:

A win is a win, but...

Game 12 - When you least expect it...

2007-11-21T22:36:00.000-08:00

...they play with passion. And accuracy. The Nets shoot 54%. Imagine. Of course, Portland shot 56%. But a win is a win, I guess...

They jump out to a 15-8 lead. I'm in the car. By the time I get home Portland has gone on an 18-4 run and are down 26-19 after 1. Frank calls a timeout (the only one of the half...) when it's tied, but didn't he get the idea before then? Oh well, at least he didn't wait for them to be down 10...

Normally, this is the end of the Nets. They won't come back, and at one point in the 3rd they're down by 1o. 3 mins to go in the 3rd. But they do pull thru and finish down 5 after 3.

And then, lo and behold, they close the gap early on in the 4th. They had to have shot 60% in the fourth, which doesn't hurt, but the key play of the game came with the Nets up 3 and 7 seconds to go. Boki tries a 3 (why in the world are they trying a 3?????) and who gets the rebound? Jason Kidd. Gets fouled. Sinks both (altho the first one was an adventure). Game over.

Are the Nets coming together? Was it because Carter is back?

Or is this just the laws of probability exerting themselves?

The Nets are a 40% shooting team. They shot 54% tonite. Was that it?

Why, after all this time of the "Big Three" being together, do we not have any confidence that we know who this team is?

A win is a win. They should beat 2-10 Seattle. There would be your 2 wins on the road. They could play the 7-4 Lakers with house money.

We'll see....

GV

Game 11 - Told ya

2007-11-21T22:28:00.000-08:00

I watched about 3 minutes of the end of the first half. Nets had a chance to close to 5, but instead, a typical end of quarter collapse, the hallmark of the Lawrence Frank era, put them down 10 at the half. I went to bed expecting defeat.

Maybe they might find some character and make close, I thought.

Nope. 102-75. Not competitive. Not caring.

Kidd rips the team afterwards. Now the rumors are he wants out.

The surprise of this season is that the Nets are in the middle of the pack (21st out of 30) in attendance.

Imagine if Kidd leaves....

Honestly, JKidd is my favorite player in the NBA, and not just because he's a Net. He single handledly turned a moribund franchise into a playoff franchise and a contender for 3 years. It's flat out remarkable what he's done. He is by far the most intelligent player in the NBA, Steve Nash included. He deserves to play on a contending team, a team with some visibility. A team with a future.

GV

Prediction for the West Coast Roadtrip!

2007-11-17T19:21:00.000-08:00

Question - When was the last time the Nets won two games on a West Coast roadtrip?

The Nets squandered, FLAT OUT SQUANDERED, their opening homestand, going 3-5 at home. They are 4-6. This after starting the year 4-1.

Four game West Coast road trip coming up.

Prediction: They will lose all 4. They will return with a 4-10 record.

This is the third autumn the Great Lawrence Frank has coached the team. Let's look at their record after 14 games each year:

2005 7-7 (2 wins on a 5 game West Coast swing, by the way)
2006 5-9 (after an 0-4 West Coast swing)
2007 ????

Look, Bruce Ratner used the Nets to get his project done. He does not care one whit about the team. And he will NOT stand for getting a new coach and be on the hook for Frank, whom the Nets unaccountably resigned.

The Nets are condemned to this sub-mediocrity with a superior talent laden squad.

I need to come to peace with this. I am a season ticket holder...

Game 10 - 11 good minutes...

2007-11-17T17:43:00.000-08:00

The Nets hit their first 7 shots. Miami is in disarray. Sean Williams is looking like the real deal. With 30 seconds left in the quarter, they are up 23-15, an 8 point lead.

The Nets cannot close out a quarter, half or game. Have you noticed? Cannot do it.

By the time the first quarter ends, the Nets are up, but only by 5. The Nets have dominated; the Heat are in disarray. But the Nets are only up 5.

Halftime - Heat 45, Nets 35. The Nets have turned it over 20 times already.

Wait - it gets better! With 1:40 to go in the half the Nets were only down 39-35. They were outscored 6-0 during that time, including a layup, a LAYUP by Wade with less than a second to go. During that 1:40 the Nets shoot 0-1 on FOUR POSSESSIONS - that's right, one shot in FOUR POSSESSIONS.

How many time outs did Mr. Frank call during that time? 0

How many time outs did Coach Frank call during the 2nd qtr, when his team was in disarray? 0

How many time outs did The Great Lawrence call in the half? 0

The phrase "settle your team down" is absent from Frank's vocabulary, from his consciousness.

And thus it is absent from his team's performance.

End of the third - 63-61 Miami.

The Nets are shooting 52%! Unfortunately, they have 19 fewer shots than Miami...

They pulled to 60-59 with a minute left. It looked like another classic Nets poor finish, as the Heat went up 63-59. But Nachbar drains a shot as the clock expires.

But the Nets miss their first 4 shots and go back down by 8. Lawrence Frank "lets them play"...

It's the same old story, every game. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. Nets don't score until the 9:25 mark, while Miami has scored 6, then when Kidd drains a 3, so does Miami, right back.

When will it dawn on this boy wonder to start Kidd in the 4th and to CALL A TIME OUT TO KEEP THE GAME WITHIN REACH? Especially when your team is not scoring. And the clock is ticking...

And here's what happens - exactly how The Great Lawrence Frank set it up:

The Nets are down 4 with a minute to go, but they have two time outs! Isn't that great?

By two miracles, Dwayne Wade misses BOTH foul shots AND altho the Nets barely get the rebound and are tied up immediately, Joey Crawford gives them the time out, their last one.

The Magnificent Coach gets to call a play!

Inbound pass perfect. RJ's position - perfect. Puts up the layup, right under the basket...

Doesn't use the backboard.

Nets lose.

Hey, brain boy - tell me something: Would it be better to have stopped the "runs" that Miami had and go into the final minute up 10, or to be down 4 with two timeouts?

HOW COME HE DOESN'T GET IT??

Frank - your strategy NEVER WORKS!

TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Game 9 - Shoulda stayed in traffic

2007-11-17T17:29:00.000-08:00

Because of traffic, a late running appointment, and more traffic, by the time we got to our seats it was 29-14 Orlando. The Nets were shooting 20% at the time. They rallied to shoot 29% for the game...

There was one sequence in the first half where the Nets missed 4 consecutive layups - on one possession.

At one point the Nets had rallied to 56-49, made a stop and had the ball. J Kidd found Sean Williams all alone, driving to the basket, uncontested. A layup brings them to 5, on a night when Orlando was struggling (41% for the night, but 38% after 3). But no - time for the highlight reel - DOH! The "slam" bounds away, Orlando scores, pulls away again.

Even still, as miserably as they played and shot, the Nets find themselves down only 69-61 at the end of 3. Fourth quarter opens and they get a steal and foul shots. One of two, 69-62.

That would be the last point they scored until 5:45 left in the game...

This was a sorry effort by a sorry team with a sorry attitude.

And their sorry coach can't get them out of it.

Game 8 - On the road...

2007-11-14T17:45:00.001-08:00

Did you know... Jack Kerouac came from the Boston area?

Devils/Rangers is on, so I'm only peeking on Slingbox...

In general, the Nets seem to be playing well. But the last 2 minutes were horrible. Turnover after turnover, and the Celtics take the lead into the locker room at the half...

I'm sorry, the Celts are just not that good, not to me. Maybe in this day and age, but in absolute terms, they're just okay. Thus the sorry state of the NBA.

The 3rd Qtr has been the abyss for the Nets. If they can continue to exert their will over a listless Celtic squad, they could pull off a big victory and give them some momentum, especially with the undefeated-on-the-road (there's Kerouac again!) Magic and the newly revived Heat (since Wade is back).

But honestly - the last time I can remember the Nets playing that consistently well they had Kenyon Martin on the team...

We'll see....

Ok, the Nets come out looking just as sloppy as the end of the first half. They get down 8 and at least Frank wants to call a time out - but J Kidd won't signal it and drives to the basket and scores.

The Nets are shooting 6-15 from the line. RJ misses only his third foul shot of the season.

Unfortunately, the Celts go up 9 before Frank calls timeout. If the past is any indication of the future, it's game over.

We'll see...

Poor finish to the third.

Poor start to the fourth.

No help, no clue from Frank.

Since the end of the first, the Nets have scored 37 points.

Game over.

Game 7 - The definition of insanity...

2007-11-12T22:19:00.000-08:00

...is when you do the same thing as you have done over and over and yet this time expect a different result.

4-2.

When the Nets were 4-1, I dared to dream. Take the Celts and you're 5-1, then knock off the Hornets and you're 6-1, and you play Orlando and Miami at home, with a game (probably a loss) in Boston in between New Orleans and Orlando, and you could be 8-2 after 10, about to go on the first road trip of the year. Even 7-3 would be very respectable, even with 2 early season losses to your division foe, the Celtics.

I was in fact dreaming. As long as Lawrence Frank is coach, the Nets will never approach 50 wins, will never make it out of the first round, will be lucky to break even at 41-41.

Tonite's game is the primary piece of evidence for this hopelessness.

Despite being up 12 at the half, and shooting in the 50s, the Hornets play abysmally in the 3rd and finish it down 2. The Nets have come all the way back and seem to have momentum on their side.

Nonetheless, the Nets, despite scoring 30 in the quarter, don't look really good doing it, and let opportunity after opportunity to take a 10+ point lead slip away.

Still, the Nets find themselves with under 5 minutes to play, one full and two 20 second timeouts in their possession and up 11 points. New Orleans has continued to play sloppily and the Nets continue to miss opportunity after opportunity, with the Hornets now shooting under 40%.

With 4:28 to go, Peja drains a 3, as is his wont. Then Malik Allen commits a stupid foul away from the ball, turning it into a 4 point play.

Nets 79, NO 71. 7 point lead, and a 4 point play just happened. You've got 3 timeouts left. Settle your team down. Set up a play and get it back up to 9. Throw water on the nascent rally.

No chance.

Offensive foul. Missed slam dunk.

When the dust clears, the Nets lead is 3. And there is still 3 minutes to go.

Missed layup. Missed foul shots. Missed opportunities.

So here we are, 42 seconds left, Nenad Krstic on the line shooting two. You know, the Croatian with the sweet shot. 50% from the floor.

He misses the first shot.

He misses the second shot.

BUT WAIT - who comes out of nowhere to get the rebound but Jason Kidd. The Nets get a reprieve and a new 24 second clock with 42 to go in the game, with 2 timeouts left. Call time! Set up a play!

No chance...

With only 15 seconds drained off the shot clock, Krstic throws up a brick. Even the brain dead announcers had just said, time to set up Richard Jefferson to be the hero. 9 seconds left on the shot clock and the ball is nowhere near RJ.

Clang.

Of course, Lawrence Frank comes by his ignorance of how to manage the end of the game from good ol' Byron, so surprisingly, NO does not call timeout to set up a play either!

Nonetheless, there are 27 seconds left on the clock. If the Hornets score at the end of 24 there will only be 3 seconds left. Maybe if Frank had called timeout when Jason got the rebound he could have made everybody aware that they could foul with 10 seconds left, put somebody on the line to make them earn it, then call timeout again to set up another play. Maybe the Nets would not have had to foul because the set play they should have called during the timeout they should have called would have them up 2.

Well, of course, Chris Paul drains the clock down, and drives the lane for an easy bank shot. 2.6 seconds left. Nets call time.

Now, my theory is, Scott and Frank jealously hold onto their timeouts in case they need them for just this kind of situation (altho Scott just bypassed his opportunity). Of course, if you manage them in that way, you are almost assuring that you will need to use them at the end, because you will be giving the other team every opportunity to go on one of those runs that every team (except, somehow, the Nets) seem to make.

Looking back at the last few seasons, the Nets nowadays rarely win by more than 10, much less 20. Many of their wins are nail biters, which I presume emboldens Frank in his hold-onto-the-timeouts fetish. What he doesn't seem to get, which other NBA coaches do seem to get, is that a well placed timeout much earlier in the game can usually mean you coast in the 4th qtr. Will he ever learn this lesson?

Nets set up the inbound pass. I say to my wife, I bet the house that Antoine Wright shoots the shot. Not Krstic, who, aside from just bricking, has the most accurate shot on the team. Not RJ, who has carried the team scoring more than 25 almost every game (and having 32 at this point), to say nothing of shooting something like 62 of 64 from the charity stripe, so if he drives the basket and gets the foul is likely to drain them both. No.

The one who will get the ball will be the irratic and inexperienced Antoine Wright. And he will miss.

New Orleans doesn't like what it sees, and calls time out.

What is Lawrence Frank telling his team? Is he saying, Get Jefferson free and have him take the shot? Is he saying, deke with RJ and get the ball to Nenad?

Nets line up again. Don't like what they see. They call time out.

(What a privilege it is to see these two great basketball minds at work! It's a good thing they didn't squander their time outs doing things like stopping the other teams momentum...)

Again, I wonder what L Frank is telling his guys... Make sure Antoine gets it so he can throw up a wild shot, off balance...

Nets line up. Mercifully, both teams are out of timeouts. (If not, I'm sure they would continue to call them until they were all expired. That's what you've got 'em for!) Nets get the ball in bounds. To... Antoine Wright. He's off balance. He throws up a wild shot.

Clang.

The Nets are now 4-3. Next up - Boston, in Boston. Then at home vs 5-2 Orlando (4-0 on the road).

What do I hear for 4-5 when they play over the hill Miami on Saturday?

Mark my words, after only game 7. Despite all the considerable talent on the Nets, with Frank as coach, the best we can hope for is a .500 team.

Game 6 - Big three test, big test three

2007-11-12T21:48:00.000-08:00

So, 4-1 Nets at home against America's new darlings, the trade and free agent concocted Boston Celtics, 4-0. If the Nets win they'll be a half game up on the Celtics. If they lose, down 2 in the loss column. More importantly, if they win, people will be saying, hey, don't forget the Nets! If they lose, well, nobody's gonna touch Boston in the Atlantic Division, especially not the Nets.

The Nets actually win the first quarter by 2, and with a minute to go in the half are down by only four. Boston coughs it up and the Nets have the ball with under a minute, down only 4.

Hey Lawrence, how about calling a time out and setting up a play...

VC misses a technical free throw, but the Nets still have the ball. RJ misses a layup, but the Nets get the rebound and still have the ball, with a full 24 on the clock.

Hey Lawrence, how about calling a time out and setting up a play...

With 41 seconds to go, VC launches a three, of course. Clang, of course.

Boston gets the ball and what do they do? They CALL TIMEOUT AND SET UP A PLAY. KG gets off a shot down low and the Celtics go up by 6 at the half.

Yet again, as they have during the entire Lawrence Frank tenure, the Nets allow the margin to widen in the last minute because their coach cannot manage the clock properly.

So, instead of a 2 or 4 point deficit, it's 6. Totally unnecessarily so.

Boston gets the ball to start the second half, and with 6 second gone by, Paul Pearce scores on a layup and now it's an 8 point game.

The teams go back and forth sloppily on the court, but a minute later Boston reaches the magical 10 point lead mark. Every coach in the NBA, especially after giving up a throwaway basket to end the half and looking very sloppy to begin this one, would call a timeout here. Not Lawrence Frank.

RJ misses a 3. Ray Allen sinks two free throws. 12 point deficit. Sloppy play on both sides, up and down the court, but at 7:54, despite several Boston turnovers, they score again to up their lead to 13. J Kidd launches a three, misses. Luckily Boston misses a lay up, and then miracle of miracles Frank calls a timeout.

Unfortunately, by then the Nets are not down 6 or 8 anymore, but 13.

The Nets don't score out of the timeout and 3 more minutes of sloppy play ensue, during which the Nets score 2 points, both on free throws. When the dust settles, Boston has scored 8 more, and the Nets are down 19 with 4 minutes left in the half.

The game is over. The Nets make a late "run" to shave the lead to 7 with 40 seconds left, but that's it.

How do these games get out of hand for the Nets so quickly?

It should be clear - any fair minded person would see that the Nets had a chance to go into the locker room at the half only down 2, but instead, due to bad clock management and poor instincts for the flow of the game, their coach allows them to go in down 6, totally unnecessarily.

And then, to start the half, in the face of abysmally sloppy play by his team, he allows the deficit to continue to deepen until it's 13.

Thirteen points down to a juggernaut who's feeling it and knows the Nets are probably the only threat to them taking the division in a cake walk. Thirteen points on the road. Here, Lawrence Frank effectively says, take it.

It was supposed to be the Nets' Big Three vs the Celtics Big Three. It was also the third big test of the year for the Nets (Chicago, Toronto, Boston).

Instead, VC goes down in the second half, out indefinitely, and the Celtics walk away with an easy victory, having been totally out coached.

4-2. Already two games down in the loss column.

All for lack of a well placed timeout...

Game 5 - Snatching victory from the jaws of victory.

2007-11-12T21:14:00.000-08:00

"That was a game we would have lost last year, " Lawrence Frank gushed after his team's 87-85 home victory over the listless, winless Washington Wizards....

Hey Lawrence - by all rights you shoulda lost it THIS year as well...

7:32 in the second quarter, at home, against the winless and clueless Wizards, and the Nets are already down 20. Frank calls the second timeout of the half at this point, no sooner, despite his team playing so carelessly that the crowd actually boos them going into the timeout. The first timeout occurred when the lovable Wizards jumped out to a 10-2 lead to start the game. Frank would finish the half still holding onto several timeouts as usual.

Nonetheless, the Nets rally and are only down 5 at the half.

By the end of the 3rd, they're down one. Anybody's game, and the Nets have home court, all their timeouts and momentum.

Where's J Kidd? Remember - the law says, Thou Shalt always start the 4th with your key player on the bench.

When Kidd does come in, his team having lost the momentum, the game is tied. So far, so good.

And with less than two minutes to go the Nets are up 6, 85-79.

RJ commits a good foul and Caron Butler drains them both. A minute 30 to go, Nets up four, two time outs available. Ok, let 'em play.

Then you get the tell tale signs of a team unraveling - RJ launches a 3 with 17 seconds left on the shot clock.

If Mr Lawrence Frank is so excellent a coach, why don't his players understand, game after game, that the thing to do with a 4 point lead, the ball, and a minute 30 to go is to milk the clock down and try to score an easy 2? Then you'd be up 6 with a minute to go. The other team has to get the ball down court, score and get the ball back after you've (hopefully) drained the clock down 24 again.

Instead his players regularly shoot unnecessary threes that they effectively NEVER make (haven't made one all season in this situation, and 4 of the 5 games have had this same situation) and leave double digits of seconds on the shot clock...

Wright fouls Arenas, of all people, who drains both shots. Nets up only 2, with 1:14 still on the clock.

Hey, Lawrence - how about we call time out and set up a play? No? Oh, sorry...

RJ takes a shot and misses, again leaving double digits on the shot clock.

Despite Antawn Jamison launching a 3 of his own (dude - you're only down 4 with time to get the ball back; why are you shooting threes??) the Nets, in typical end of game fashion, stand flat footed as Songalia gets the rebound. He misses the put back, but Washington gets the ball again, fouls Butler and Butler drains both foul shots. Tie game. 35 seconds left.

Perfect time to call timeout and set up a play, right? Are you kidding?

Nets come down the court and AGAIN with double digits on the shot clock RJ shoots. But Washington bails out the Nets with a foul. RJ bails out the Nets by sinking both free throws. (He's missed two all season so far, out of about 50 attempts.) Nets up 2, but there is 24 seconds left on the clock.

Wouldn't it make sense, especially since you're on the road and winless, to call timeout and set up a play, Washington?

It becomes obvious that Washington's plan is to have Arenas take the last shot. He dribbles in place for about 10 seconds. Then he tries to drive the lane, backs out, looks like he's gonna drive the right side of the lane, pulls out, and then, with the shot clock on 1, finds himself in the corner, well covered, throws up an airball, and that's it. (There were three tenths of a second left, a 24 second violation, but the Nets got it in and game over.)

Second game in this young season that the opposition in the Nets building had a chance to tie or win. Second game this young season the Nets dodge a bullet, at home, against a winless team.

"That was a game we would have lost last year, " Lawrence Frank said.

Let's see if the Nets luck keeps holding up.