more surprising turnaround? 01-02 nets or 07-08 hornets?

by **j.23** on Sat Apr 12, 2008 7:57 am

the 01-02 new jersey nets came back from an abysmal 26-56 season in 00-01 to a 52-30 record the year after. not to mention, they made it to the nba finals as well.

in regards to the hornets, they were 39-43 last year and are sitting 55 wins as we speak. i don't know how the playoffs will play out, but judging from what has transpired this season, who do you think has had the more impressive and surprising turnaround?

.. which leads to my second question.

if chris paul does not win MVP this year, who do you think got the crappier end of the stick? jason kidd in 01-02 when he should've won it, or paul this year?

by **Lamrock** on Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:24 am

The Hornets are more surprising. Sure, they would have made the playoffs last year if they stayed healthy, but nobody expected them tops in what may be the toughest Western Conference ever. The Nets on the other hand, set away a team cancer for the best Point Guard in the league. Doubling the win total and going to the finals was surprising, but Hornets surprised me more.

Also, I'm sure you were get debated on Kidd being the 2002 MVP, but I would say he got the worse end. Paul is going up against Kobe and Lebron in a tight race.

by **benji** on Sat Apr 12, 2008 9:17 am

Jason Kidd should not have won the 2002 MVP, and it's good he didn't, Nash has already made enough of a mockery of the award.

Neither turnaround should have been surprising. Health + better players + improvement from youngins will do that to a team. Not "making teammates better" or silly memes like that.

Let us compare who was playing...
2006-07 Hornets playing times:

Code: Select all: Mason 65% Chandler 63% Paul 59% Butler 56% West 48% Pargo 43% D. Brown 42% B. Jackson 33% M. Jackson 26% Johnson 18% Armstrong 16% Simmons 13% Stojakovic 11% Bass 4% Vinicius 3%

2007-08 Hornets playing times:

Code: Select all: Paul 76% West 72% Chandler 70% Stojakovic 68% Peterson 45% Pargo 38% Jackson 24% Butler 23% Armstrong 18% Bowen 17% Ely 16% Wright 16% Wells 10% James 4% Vinicius 2%

I don't think I need to mention that Peterson and Stojakovic are better than Butler and Mason, who were both killing the Hornets last season. A healthy Paul and West is too obvious.

2001-02 Nets:

Code: Select all: Marbury 65% Williams 59% Martin 58% Harris 52% Newman 52% Van Horn 44% Jackson 42% Eschmeyer 34% Douglas 28% K. Gill 23% Overton 8% Stepania 7% Samake 6% Strickland 5% McIlvaine 5% Ollie 4% E. Gill 4% Feick 4% Thomas 1%

2002-03 Nets:

Code: Select all: Kidd 77% Kittles 66% Martin 63% Van Horn 62% Jefferson 48% Harris 39% Williams 39% MacCulloch 38% Collins 35% Johnson 9% Scalabrine 7% Dial 6% Armstrong 5% Marshall 3% Goodrich 1% Slater 0%

You see the same exact thing in the "shocking" Suns turnaround. They got healthy, stopped playing crappy players, and added some nice new ones.

The Kidd for Marbury trade improved the Nets defense at the cost of their offense. There's no reason to not believe the Nets wouldn't have made a jump even keeping Marbury with the health and delicious additions. They were a borderline .500 team two years earlier and didn't have talent like Martin, Jefferson and MacCulloch. Nor defenders like Collins and Kidd.

by **GoHornets** on Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:17 am

I wouldn't say that the hornets' turnaround is surprising, of course I didn't expect they to win the conference, but I did expect they to finish between the top four teams. I mean, New Orleans had excelent players but they get injured, still they were able to battle for west's last seed. So, with healthy players you would expect to qualify for the playoffs.

Besides of the West thing, I cant understand the Magloire - Mason trade. (N)

by **Matthew** on Sat Apr 12, 2008 6:18 pm

GoHornets wrote:I wouldn't say that the hornets' turnaround is surprising, of course I didn't expect they to win the conference, but I did expect they to finish between the top four teams. I mean, New Orleans had excelent players but they get injured, still they were able to battle for west's last seed. So, with healthy players you would expect to qualify for the playoffs.

Besides of the West thing, I cant understand the Magloire - Mason trade.

If only the hornets never traded Kobe for Vlade :crazy:

And I think the Hornets turnaround has been more impressive. The east was at its worst that season and the Nets got alot of easy wins. The Hornets on the other hand have been in conference of brilliance that I havent seen before and yet they are (for now) still on top of it. But I would not be surprised if Denver takes them out in the first round.

by **GoHornets** on Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:05 am

Kobe only wanted to play for L.A, he wasnt going to play for Charlotte, so it was a good trade.

by **Oskar** on Sun Apr 13, 2008 2:07 am

I think the Boston Celtics turnaround is even more surprising.

by **j.23** on Sun Apr 13, 2008 2:13 am

did you expect them to remain the same or slip even more with the addition of garnett and allen?

by **GoHornets** on Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:49 am

Boston's turnaround is NOT surprising. They only had Pierce. Next season they have Pierce, Allen and Garnett. If you're surpirse to find them with the best record in the league with such good players, you don't know nothing about NBA.

by **Oskar** on Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:24 am

Oh, my bad, I got it wrong. Well, they're record is a turnaround, but well.. If you guess so.

And also, telling that I don't know( you wanted to add ) nothing about NBA, is totally wrong.

They didn't have good record last year, but they do have excellent record this year, so, they have a nice turnaround, but they have a big turnaround in their roster too.
Also, please don't tell that I don't know nothing about NBA, tell me what you know about me ?

by **benji** on Sun Apr 13, 2008 6:35 am

GoHornets wrote:If you're surpirse to find them with the best record in the league with such good players, you don't nothing about NBA.

There was no reason to think the Celtics would have the best record and best defense in the league by a mile. We knew KG would play well, and that Pierce would bounce back after a down season. What we didn't know was that Rondo and Perkins would go from useless on the offensive end to above average. Their improvements are logical, but could not be foreseen.

Nor did we know that Leon Powe would step into KG's spot when he was gone and play even better than he had last season. Feel free to include Glen Davis playing so well, and Doc Rivers getting over his crush on Brian Scalabrine.

We knew they would be a good team, and one at the, if not the, top of the Eastern Conference, but only fanbois thought they'd win 66-67 games. And even they didn't project that it would be defensive dominance and the youngins that would put them there. With the non "big-three" guys playing like they did last year, this team would've been the 50-55 caliber win team most people projected, possibly 55-60 wins only because they play in the Wasteland.

more surprising turnaround? 01-02 nets or 07-08 hornets?

more surprising turnaround? 01-02 nets or 07-08 hornets?

Who is online