It’s easy to hate. In 2005, real estate developer Bruce Ratner announced plans to relocate the Nets to Brooklyn and an immediate backlash ensued. The fans in New Jersey were hurt, while Brooklynites needed some time to warm up to the idea of a basketball team making themselves at home in their backyard. Eventually, the metaphorical ball got rolling once Russian businessman Mikhail Prokhorov assumed the role of principal owner of the franchise on September 23, 2009.
Upon taking control of the Nets, Prokhorov promised that he would put a competitive squad out on the court. Is that a new philosophy? No. Every owner wants their team to win as soon as possible, but like many franchises, they go through their bumps along the way. In the last three seasons, the Nets have gone 58-172. Surely, the tide needed to turn at some point and what better time then their big move to the Big Apple?
With the Nets only a couple months away from their first game in the newly-created Barclays Center, expectations are high. But why is that? It’s simple: When it comes to competing in New York, the pressure to succeed is a lot greater. Just ask the New York Knicks. So, with money to spend and a fresh start in a new town, Brooklyn added a couple players and retained others. Yet a recent article posted on Grantland entitled “The Brooklyn Nets Brand” is referring to their moves as the most inorganic approach to assembling a team. Which, we figured the Heat or Tartabull-era Yankees had a copyright on, but hey. Well, let’s dissect what Grantland considers the three ways that the Nets have failed as an NBA rebuilding project and see who you agree with more.
Written by Jose Martinez (@ZayMarty)