Mastodon
@Brooklyn Nets

Is Mikal as a primary building block a marketing strategy or sound basketball decision?



Read an interesting thought today in an [interview of Lucas Kaplan by Ock Sportello](https://www.neverhungover.club/p/you-cant-stay-here-the-never-hungover) (check it out, definitely worth the read, and I usually hate blogs):

“… it feels like Mikal Bridges is a sort of poster child for the type of early-Brooklyn-years feel-good marketing energy. Mikal seems to be a magnetic personality, he’s great with press and fans, he’s reliable on and off the court, and he appears to be a genuinely good guy. That being said, do you think the team is talking itself into Bridges as this franchise savior a bit too prematurely just because he maps onto their possibly delusional vision of who they are as a franchise? We just saw the Celtics ruthlessly trade their mascot and object of an astonishing amount of fan projection, and they’ll probably be better off for it.”

Mikael most likely isn’t a first option, acquiring a first option as the last piece is incredibly unlikely and not wanting the Rockets to have our picks pay of is an obvious sunken cost fallacy.

So one has to wonder if the only reason the nets are staying put is so ownership can put a competent product on the floor and sell tickets, even if it isn’t in the teams best interest in the long term.

(I guess this all assumes the blazers wouldn’t have traded Scoot for a chance to have a real run with Dame)

by Howa_Boutno

10 Comments

  1. zestysnacks

    I think they are trying to straddle competitive and rebuild, and mikal is the guy for it. Gonna be a weird couple of years I think

  2. BKtoDuval

    Paywall, so I read half of it. But I usually appreciate Kaplan’s work.

    What’s the best marketing tool? Success. I don’t think they’re holding onto him for any other reason than belief in him. Scoot would sell more tickets anyway, especially if he’s the stud they expect him to be. Also I’m not even sure that was a real offer since that makes no sense for Portland to make that deal.

    No, I don’t think he’s the first option on a good team. But I do think he’s a culture setter, especially for a team that desperately needed a culture reboot. As we’ve already seen, stars respect him and want to play with him. So that could make him valuable too.

  3. addictivesign

    We’ll find out during the season. Was last year after the trade line a preview of what Mikal is gonna be able to do consistently with a higher usage rate? Or was he on a heater for a couple of months?

    It would be rare to go from a third/fourth option like he was in Phoenix to be a number one option.

    If we have a mediocre season and we get a godfather offer for Mikal we have to consider it. Most trade requests involving Bridges will be denied but the one that sets us on a younger timeline need to be examined.

    Personally I think we keep him unless the talent we get in return is just too good to give up. We don’t really need a load more picks.

  4. Subredditcensorship

    Look if scoot was really on the table then we’re one of the worst front offices in the league. Like idiots.

    But I don’t think it really was tbh, so marks and everyone just acted like milal wasn’t for sale.

    Mikal is a great piece to have if we can go star hunting in 2024-2025. Cheap deal for 3 more years and awesome complementary player Next to any true star. Also can help us prevent fully bottoming our

  5. just_so_irrelevant

    Both. We already know how marketable Mikal is. In terms of basketball though, he has already made a massive and unexpected leap in performance with the Nets despite the mess that was this season post-deadline. Who’s to say what his ceiling if he keeps working on this new offensive game and has a more balanced roster around him. People are way too quick to write him off as “never able to be more than a 3rd option” imo.

  6. mercfan3

    Mikal is fun and young and everything you would want if you were a marketer.

    You don’t have to be the best player on the team in order to be the most popular, or fan favorite.

    If fans have players they love, and it’s a young team that makes strides in the playoffs – that’s exciting for a base too. And a way to not lose ticket sales..

  7. mateodrw

    I think they are using Bridges’ personality and momentum to recover from the talent purge and the obvious decrement in tickets sales that this is producing while buying time to diagram some kind of “vision” to where this franchise is going in the future.

    There is reasons to be excited about Mikal, but is better to feel cautiously optimistic due to this league being imprevisible. There is only a 25 game sample of him performing at an All Star level and not even his teammates were expecting this kind of leap from his part.

  8. acmilan12345

    I don’t think the FO sees Bridges as a savior for the team.

    I think they see him as exactly the type of player they want to build around. As the article says, he’s a great guy and a great culture setter (which is a big contrast from the last group of stars lol).

    I’m really happy that we’re making Mikal so important, because he’s going to be the model Nets player going forward.

  9. TYPICAL_T0M

    A building block doesn’t have to be a 1st option or even a 2nd option on a championship team. I think for that reason people get confused by the term. He’s certainly a smart choice to build around. Entering his prime, great attitude, wants to lead, PLAYS EVERY GAME, etc.

  10. blackmetronome

    Building around Mikal is utter fucking nonsense. He’s not some superstar and fans here have deluded themselves into thinking he’s Kawhi 2.0.

    We need a superstar PG and another all star level player imo to go with Mikal and what we have already

Write A Comment