1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

2001-2003 Nets - How good?

Discussion in 'NBA Dish' started by JW86, Sep 19, 2019.

  1. dharocks

    dharocks Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    9,032
    Likes Received:
    1,969
    Those teams were actually borderline-dominant defensively. Kidd was one of the greatest team defenders ever in his prime.

    Tough to watch in the half court.
     
  2. Jontro

    Jontro Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    Messages:
    34,300
    Likes Received:
    22,004
    didn't kidd have super duper star teen sensation richard jefferson? he was like iguadala level superstar iirc back then
     
  3. Zboy

    Zboy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    27,234
    Likes Received:
    21,955
    Of course Kidd carried those teams. But that doesnt take away anything from how bad those teams were.

    Kidd was the only redeeming quality of those Nets teams. And he got the best out of that sorry ass squad. They just played defense and played hard and thats about it. That was their only redeeming quality lol. But when it came to offense, the players were average at best. Their most productive player on offense, Kidd, couldn't even shoot from outside.

    Kidd was one of my favorite players even before he entered NBA. I used to watch him play in California. He was a gamer. Great competitor. But even then, it was hard for me to watch those Nets team play. I used to watch them because of Jason Kidd. There was no other reason to watch that team play, unless you were a sorry ass Nets fan.

    Also, unfortunately for Kidd he didnt develop a good reliable outside shot until later stages of his career when he was on the Mavs. But all wasnt lost. His outside shooting, floor leadership, and his defense were some of the biggest reasons Mavs won the championship.

    If Kidd had an outside shot from early on in his career, he would have been deadly.

    But anyways...those Nets sucked.
     
    #23 Zboy, Sep 22, 2019
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2019
  4. yoeddy

    yoeddy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,832
    Likes Received:
    499
    Strong defensively, deadly in transition with guys who could run (Kittles, Jefferson, Martin). Agree that they were not a great half-court team, but excellent ball movement leading to back-door baskets and a high rate of assists for the team overall.
     
  5. Reeko

    Reeko Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    45,462
    Likes Received:
    127,163
    those Kings teams had a ton of offensive talent, the Nets sucked offensively

    the Kings could actually compete with the Lakers and were capable of beating them if healthy and the games weren’t rigged...the Nets had absolutely zero shot

    the Nets are a 1st round or 2nd round exit at best in the West, but because the East was so trash, they were a finals team
     
  6. sealclubber1016

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    18,999
    Likes Received:
    27,530
    Those Kings teams would have cruised to 3 straight finals if they were in the east. The Mavs and Spurs likely would have as well.

    If I remember correctly, the Rockets went undefeated against the central division (back when there were only 4 divisions) in 01...and missed the playoffs in the west.
     
  7. yoeddy

    yoeddy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,832
    Likes Received:
    499
    The Nets weren't the Kings or Mavs offensively back then, but they did rank in the top half of the league in points/game...very much the result of strong defense and a great transition game. Regarding competing with the Lakers in 2002, I agree that the Lakers were the better team, but the Nets were more constrained by their idiotic head coach, Byron Scott, who pretty much mailed it in for the Finals because he was still in love with the Lakers' organization and was resigned to losing. In the 2003 Finals, they did take 2 games from the Spurs...at that point, players knew Scott had no plan so they relied on themselves and Eddie Jordan (asst coach) to figure out how to battle.

    Regardless, those Nets team played excellent team basketball...beautiful to watch even if you weren't a fan.
     
  8. Reeko

    Reeko Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    45,462
    Likes Received:
    127,163
    talk to me about offensive efficiency, not ppg...they were 17th in 01-02, and 20th in 02-03...that’s garbage for a finals team

    all they had going for them was excellent defense, fastbreaks, and Kidd’s court vision...at the end of the day, they were the equivalent of a mid-seed WC team and would’ve been beaten in the 1st or 2nd round by any number of teams out West

    saying that the Lakers were the better team is putting it kindly...they were vastly superior...in an entirely different tier...same with the Kings

    they beat the Spurs by 2 points and by 1 point lol...that easily could’ve been another sweep

    the fact that they were able to make even just 1 finals is a testament to how embarrassing the EC was back then...it would be like if a team slightly better than the Pacers with a healthy Oladipo was the best team in the EC and making finals appearances
     
  9. jordnnnn

    jordnnnn Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Messages:
    10,869
    Likes Received:
    11,796
    But they played TEAM ball. That counts for like +10 efficiency
     
    yoeddy likes this.
  10. yoeddy

    yoeddy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,832
    Likes Received:
    499
    I didn't say anything that contradicts what you said. As I said before, Nets were on par with a 4-5 seed in the West, the Lakers were clearly the better team in the Finals, as were the Spurs. But that does not make the Nets "trash" as some suggest here.
     
  11. Zboy

    Zboy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    27,234
    Likes Received:
    21,955
    lol @ comparing those pathetic Nets team to the Kings team.

    That Kings offense was so fluid. They were a well oiled machine on offense and their defense was not bad either. Great team coached by Adelman.

    The only reason they didnt win a ring was because of Dick Bavetta.

    Had Kings made to the finals, they would have steam rolled a Nets team that couldn't put the ball in the ocean.

    As pretty much everyone has said here, and will say elsewhere, that team was in the Finals because of Jason Kidd and because they were in the East. Remove the first and they wouldnt even make the playoffs. Remove them from the East and they were 1st or second round fodder if they made the playoffs. Definitely not NBA Finals worthy.

    Its because of **** teams like the Nets and Sixers of Iverson that I sometimes wish the NBA Finals wasn't a East/West scenario. I would rather have the two best teams in the league in different brackets.
     
    #31 Zboy, Sep 22, 2019
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2019
    tinman likes this.
  12. yoeddy

    yoeddy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,832
    Likes Received:
    499
    The Nets were 1-3 against the Kings in those 2 seasons. While they got blown out in 1 of the games, two of the losses were very close (97-98 in 2001 and 102-109 in 2003), and the win was a 117-83 blowout. Kings were very much the better offensive team, but Nets were by far the better defensive team.
     
  13. Reeko

    Reeko Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    45,462
    Likes Received:
    127,163
    doesn’t matter...still getting swept with ease
     
    tinman likes this.
  14. tinman

    tinman Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 1999
    Messages:
    97,525
    Likes Received:
    40,152
    LOL the Leastern conference was so bad that the Nets made it

    They were in some of the least competitive NBA finals in the history of time
     
  15. yoeddy

    yoeddy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,832
    Likes Received:
    499
    There have been plenty of 0-4 and 2-4 Finals in the history of time...in fact it's only gone to Game 7 something like 10 times since 1970...
     
  16. tinman

    tinman Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 1999
    Messages:
    97,525
    Likes Received:
    40,152
    Those Nets teams were scrubs
    The spurs would have waxed them like 20 to zero if there were 20 game series
     
  17. Jugdish

    Jugdish Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    8,278
    Likes Received:
    8,137
    Keith Van Horn was so good he made the NBA Jam cover:

    [​IMG]

    ...complete with his name spelled out just to be safe.
     
    yoeddy likes this.
  18. yoeddy

    yoeddy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,832
    Likes Received:
    499
    Yet the Spurs won that series 4-2...
     
  19. JW86

    JW86 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    6,796
    Likes Received:
    8,929
    Thanks for the information, seems like it was pretty much the lack of competition in the East, but also underestimating Kidd as a leader.
     
  20. yoeddy

    yoeddy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,832
    Likes Received:
    499
    I think you also have to credit the coaching staff...asst. Eddie Jordan in particular...for implementing the modified Princeton offense that he learned under Pete Carrill with the Kings. The switch from Marbury to Kidd was also huge for team chemistry and buy-in...the other players had so much more appreciation for sharing the ball after playing with Marbury. And fwiw, I will NEVER credit Byron Scott for any of the success of those teams...he was a horrible head coach (one of the reasons Kidd wanted him fired even after going to 2 consecutive finals).
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now