If there was any lingering doubt as to which side has the upper hand in the local basketball war, it was removed Tuesday night. The Knicks waltzed into the Meadowlands and demoralized the few remaining Nets fans by strolling to an 87-79 win. Adding insult to injury, the Knicks won in spite of themselves; they took bad shots, made 22 turnovers, blew defensive assignments, and seemingly fouled Eric Williams at every opportunity.

For the Nets, the game highlighted a recurring theme: terrible offense. This team couldn’t score at a Hilton sisters slumber party. Despite Jason Kidd’s best performance since returning from injury – 15 points in 21 minutes – the Nets mustered just 79 points against a bad defensive squad.

It’s not well known, but the Nets have been a poor offensive team throughout the Kidd era. As much as everyone talks about Kidd’s passing, New Jersey won two Eastern Conference championships largely because of defense. Last season, the Nets ranked 25th out of 29 NBA teams in Offensive Efficiency – my measure of how many points a team scores per 100 possessions – and still won the Atlantic Division.

This year, they’ve sunk to new depths. The Nets are the single worst offensive team in basketball, worse even than the 1-19 Hornets, who have all their players injured, and a Hawks team that gave up on the season before it even started. The Nets produce just 93 points per 100 possessions, a whopping eight points below the league average. This makes it virtually impossible for the Nets to win unless the defense plays out of its mind.

How did the offense get so awful? First, the Nets are a very poor shooting team, making just 41.7% of their shots from the field. That’s the third worst number in the league, although not nearly as miserable as the Hornets. It’s not necessarily outside shooting that’s befuddling the Nets – their 35% mark on 3-pointers is above the league average – as much as it is that so many of their 2-point attempts are coming from bricklayers like Jason Collins and Brian Scalabrine.

The other culprit has been turnovers, where the Nets dominate the league, turning the ball over on a mind-blowing 18.2% of their possessions. Check out the chart on turnovers, and then sit down while you digest this thought: The difference between the Nets and the next worst team, Atlanta, is nearly as big as the difference between Atlanta and the league average. It’s as though the Nets are playing a different game than everyone else, one in which the ball is infinitely harder to dribble and pass.

As for why the Nets are making so many turnovers, the mystery begins and ends with Richard Jefferson. He’s making nearly five miscues a game, primarily because he’s been forced to play out of position at shooting guard (not to mention being the de facto point guard during much of the time that Kidd’s been out). Obviously, having to initiate the offense is stretching the high-flying forward’s abilities, and one hopes that Kidd’s return to full-time duty will see Jefferson back on the receiving end of the All-Star point guard’s deliveries.

The Nets’ poor shooting and the huge turnover total point out one other giant weakness: shooting guard. The disastrous decision to exile Kerry Kittles and cut Lucious Harris has been compounded by the Nets’ inability to find competent replacements. Suffice it to say that nobody expects to see “Netography: Rodney Buford” in the YES Network program listings 20 years from now.

Buford’s inability to play the position has indirectly caused Jefferson’s spiraling turnover total. If Buford could get the job done, Jefferson could play small forward. And if RJ didn’t have to handle the ball all game against guys like Jamal Crawford and Larry Hughes, he wouldn’t get the ball picked so much.

As to why Buford has failed, there’s a stat out there just for him. It’s something I call the “Brick Index.” Basically, it measures the players whose shooting is doing the most damage to their teams. I take the difference between a player’s points per shot attempt (for the mathematicians in the audience, I define shot attempts as field goals + [free throws x 0.44]) and the league average, then multiply by his shot attempts per 40 minutes and adjust for his team’s pace.

The resulting Brick Index gives us how many additional missed shots a player adds to his team’s total if he plays 40 minutes a night. It’s more indicative of a player’s contributions than field-goal percentage because it takes into account his 3-pointers and trips to the foul line. Buford has shot a pitiful 31.5% on the season, almost never gets to the line (just 12 tries all year), and has made only 9 3-pointers.

This hasn’t dampened his enthusiasm, however, as he averages nearly a field-goal attempt every two minutes. As a result, Buford’s shooting has single-handedly been killing the Nets’ field-goal percentage. As the chart shows, Buford is the Michael Jordan of masonry. He can get a house built in half the time of nearly any other player in the league.

This brings up the question of why Lawrence Frank continues to play him. We all understand that Little Larry hasn’t been given much to work with here, but it’s reaching the point of defying common sense to keep sending Buford back on the court. The Nets would be better off giving his minutes to Kaniel Dickens – he can’t possibly be worse.

Replacing Buford won’t be a panacea, especially when the Nets have so many other glaring weaknesses. But with Kidd getting back into shape, Travis Best providing surprising zip, and Zoran Planinic due back shortly, the Nets’ backcourt soon could be in good enough shape to improve the offense markedly. Maybe that would only up their output from “pathetic” to “bad,” but “bad” was good enough to win the division a year ago. In an awful Atlantic Division, it may be good enough again.