[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Walsh's rating so far
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 7  1  2  3 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
Rookie
Posts: 27322
Alba Posts: 28
Joined: 10/15/2008
Member: #2274
12/3/2008  11:11 AM
Marbury - I'll give him an 'F' on this one as it should have been handled before the season started which would have opened up a roster spot for a young bench player, preferably a Guard

Roberson - I'll give him an 'F' on this one as this guy is not an NBA player and never will be. What a waste of a guaranteed contract and a desperately needed roster spot.

Gallinari - I'll give him an 'F' on this one as this is looking to be a bust. There were better players available, ones that would fit our needs now and for the future. What a waste of a first round draft pick. Seeing him sitting on the bench makes me sick. He should have been sent to the 'D' league to free a roster spot.

Balkman - I'll give him an 'D' for this one. As of today we have gotten absolutely nothing out of this trade. We sent him, and cash, to the Nuggets for two players that we cut. Hopefully we'll get something of value from the 2nd round draft pick in 2010 which is the only reason I'm not giving him an 'F' for this salary dump.

Crawford - I'll give him a 'B' for this trade. Harrington is my kind of player - he has range, he can create and he plays defense - and he helps our salary cap situation for the 2010 season. I would have given Walsh an for this move had he not done the Randolf/Collins deal on the same day. He also should have gotten at least a second round pick on this trade.

Randolf - I'll give a 'D' for this trade. While I'm glad we were able to move Randolf's contract, we could have gotten more for such a productive player than what we got. There was no reason to rush on this. Also, the timing was very bad and left us short of healthy bodies. A little patience and we could have gotten more than Tim Thomas in this deal. I would have walked on this one. Hopefully Mobley won't drop dead on the court and can become a productive addition. I still give him a 'D' on this as I would have waited for a better deal that would have included a draft pick since it doesn't look as if we are interested in any contract that extends pasts 2010.

Curry - I'll give a 'C' on this one. If anybody deserved harsh treatment, it was Curry. Hopefully Coach and GM are on the same page on this one - PLAY HIM/TRADE HIM. If MDA doesn't give him minutes, I'll change this grade to an 'F' for another wasted trading chip for a GOOD player who fits this system.

James - I'll give a 'C' on this one. Hopefully this will be resolved this mont. If it drags on, I'll change this grade to an 'F'.

Lee - I would give him a 'C' on this one. He still is what he was last year. They probably could have given him a new contract which could help his trade value. As it stands, I'm not sure what his status on this team is. Is he part of the future or a trade chip to unload another player. Will he expire and move on or force us to give him more to keep him than we would have had to if we had resolved this in October. His inaction on this one might come back to bite him in the arse, in which case I'll change this grade to an 'F'.

Nate - I'll give this one an 'F' as we are short on guards and he should be kept. If we had re-signed him in Octoberwe could control the situation instead of having another team set his value.
AUTOADVERT
martin
Posts: 80009
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
12/3/2008  11:22 AM
^I give an 'F' on this post.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
12/3/2008  11:26 AM
what Martin said

Assigning arbitrary grades to Walsh's moves in early December of his first year is just plain tacky

two thumbs down
once a knick always a knick
JamaicanJetFan
Posts: 20617
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/27/2008
Member: #2297
USA
12/3/2008  11:27 AM
I, for one, have loved every move Walsh has made. He has gotten rid of HUGE salaries with Zach and Jamal. You can't blame Walsh for Gallo's back. Roberson was a flier...and without him...who was going to back up Duhon last night? PEJ? Ya, right.

I think the real stud so far has been MDA. His refusal to play Curry and Marbury is ballsy and awesome. He has turned Duhon into a legit PG. He is playing to Al and TT's strengths and he is turning a weak roster into a competitive team.

Although, wtf was with playing Malik last night?
Rookie
Posts: 27322
Alba Posts: 28
Joined: 10/15/2008
Member: #2274
12/3/2008  11:38 AM
Posted by martin:

^I give an 'F' on this post.

Exhibit A - The Jason Kidd trade is paying major dividends for the Nets. This is a great example of how to handle a situation where your star guard becomes a sideshow distraction. They also turned their 2008 draft picks they recieved in this deal into gold. They became stronger through good management. Can you compare Thorn to Walsh?
JamaicanJetFan
Posts: 20617
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/27/2008
Member: #2297
USA
12/3/2008  11:39 AM
Um...did Thorn have to cleanup Isiah's GIGANTIC mess?

Answer is no.
martin
Posts: 80009
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
12/3/2008  11:45 AM
Posted by Rookie:
Posted by martin:

^I give an 'F' on this post.

Exhibit A - The Jason Kidd trade is paying major dividends for the Nets. This is a great example of how to handle a situation where your star guard becomes a sideshow distraction. They also turned their 2008 draft picks they recieved in this deal into gold. They became stronger through good management. Can you compare Thorn to Walsh?

Did you just compare Marbury to Kidd? Walsh is supposed to trade f'ing Marbury? The dude that didn't play last year cause of ankle problems? That took a flight home after being demoted? That publically fought with every Knicks coach he has had? For real?
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
12/3/2008  11:48 AM
With his thought process, I predict he'll stay a rookie for quite a while longer.
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/3/2008  11:49 AM
Walsh tried finding takers but no one wants to trade for Marbury and few teams will offer him more than 1 million dollars. He's seen as a locker-room cancer around the league.
lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/3/2008  11:52 AM
I agree though, that Roberson looks completely overmatched. He cannot penetrate at all. When he runs the point its basically him handing the ball off to someone else at the top of the key and then him going to the three pt line waiting for a pass to come back to him so he can launch his three. I know he was signed as a three pt specialist but the only threes he makes are the onese where we're down a ton with a minute to go and no chance of coming back (ie no pressure) and after missing his first 3 three-pt attempts when we really needed the bucket.

Basically, take me and put me on the floor instead of Roberson and i'll give you the same production. I'll hit the backboard on my first few shots when the game is on the line and maybe when we're safely out of it i'll finally swish a bucket or two. But probably not because i would try to do somehting other than shoot the ball every time it comes to me in the halfcourt set. Roberson is a sideshow novelty that hasn't panned out.

[Edited by - kam77 on 12-03-2008 11:53 AM]
lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
12/3/2008  11:52 AM
De-activate his account please.

Comparing one of the 10 best point guards of all time, an all nba performer and someone that took the team to the playoffs every year with the team as well as two NBA finals to a pg with one of the worst winning %'s in the league, a history of failure, destroying teams and clashing with every coach including his supposed mentor is a perfect example of why Walsh deserves an F.

How about Duhon: A. Fourth in the league in assists for 5 million
rmears718
Posts: 20029
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/13/2006
Member: #1140
12/3/2008  11:53 AM
A fat "F"...Reason: The Draft; Height & Brooke Lopez!!!
Rookie
Posts: 27322
Alba Posts: 28
Joined: 10/15/2008
Member: #2274
12/3/2008  11:55 AM
Posted by martin:
Posted by Rookie:
Posted by martin:

^I give an 'F' on this post.

Exhibit A - The Jason Kidd trade is paying major dividends for the Nets. This is a great example of how to handle a situation where your star guard becomes a sideshow distraction. They also turned their 2008 draft picks they recieved in this deal into gold. They became stronger through good management. Can you compare Thorn to Walsh?

Did you just compare Marbury to Kidd? Walsh is supposed to trade f'ing Marbury? The dude that didn't play last year cause of ankle problems? That took a flight home after being demoted? That publically fought with every Knicks coach he has had? For real?

if he is un-tradable and he isn't going to play, then why is he still on the team? Is he an asset or a detriment to the team? it's as simple as that. Making things overly complicated and sticking to proceedure hasn't exactly yielded any benefit now has it. It's a contrast in styles. There are people who are always ahead of the curve (proactive) like Thorn was and has been. If you are happy with the way things are going, then great. Maybe you can explain to me why you are happy with the way things are going.
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/3/2008  11:55 AM
Rmears, Those reason(s) are all the same.

[Edited by - kam77 on 12-03-2008 11:55 AM]
lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
12/3/2008  11:56 AM
Posted by MS:

De-activate his account please.

Hahaha. Best line of the day.
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
Rookie
Posts: 27322
Alba Posts: 28
Joined: 10/15/2008
Member: #2274
12/3/2008  12:08 PM
Ok Ok. you guys are right. The Marbury saga needs to drag on. Gallinari was the best player available in the draft. Roberson was the best available guard available this summer. We were lucky to trade Randolf for Thomas and a player with a heart condition. Lee and Nate shouldn't have recieved new contracts in October because it's better to have to pay them more after they become free agents. Balkman wasn't worth anything more than a future 2nd round pick...
martin
Posts: 80009
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
12/3/2008  12:09 PM
Posted by Rookie:
Posted by martin:
Posted by Rookie:
Posted by martin:

^I give an 'F' on this post.

Exhibit A - The Jason Kidd trade is paying major dividends for the Nets. This is a great example of how to handle a situation where your star guard becomes a sideshow distraction. They also turned their 2008 draft picks they recieved in this deal into gold. They became stronger through good management. Can you compare Thorn to Walsh?

Did you just compare Marbury to Kidd? Walsh is supposed to trade f'ing Marbury? The dude that didn't play last year cause of ankle problems? That took a flight home after being demoted? That publically fought with every Knicks coach he has had? For real?

if he is un-tradable and he isn't going to play, then why is he still on the team? Is he an asset or a detriment to the team? it's as simple as that. Making things overly complicated and sticking to proceedure hasn't exactly yielded any benefit now has it. It's a contrast in styles. There are people who are always ahead of the curve (proactive) like Thorn was and has been. If you are happy with the way things are going, then great. Maybe you can explain to me why you are happy with the way things are going.

I'll add more later cause I gotta split.

Let me start with a question: With the roster he inherited, what MORE could you do? We have a plan in place and got rid of 2 players who definitely could NOT be a part of a championship winning - or on the track for that - considering their production types. We are now in line 2 sign a top line free agent in 2 years. Shelving Marbury, Big Game and Curry and brining in MDA has almost gotten us to .500 and the culture has shifted. We compete every game even when we have 7 healthy bodies and our 7th guy is a YMCA scrub. We got a really good PG for $6M and only for 2 years.

Has he handled the Marbury situation to perfection? No. Has it really been detrimental to the team? We are nearly .500 and none of the playing guys are complaining.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
12/3/2008  12:17 PM
Posted by martin:
Posted by Rookie:
Posted by martin:
Posted by Rookie:
Posted by martin:

^I give an 'F' on this post.

Exhibit A - The Jason Kidd trade is paying major dividends for the Nets. This is a great example of how to handle a situation where your star guard becomes a sideshow distraction. They also turned their 2008 draft picks they recieved in this deal into gold. They became stronger through good management. Can you compare Thorn to Walsh?

Did you just compare Marbury to Kidd? Walsh is supposed to trade f'ing Marbury? The dude that didn't play last year cause of ankle problems? That took a flight home after being demoted? That publically fought with every Knicks coach he has had? For real?

if he is un-tradable and he isn't going to play, then why is he still on the team? Is he an asset or a detriment to the team? it's as simple as that. Making things overly complicated and sticking to proceedure hasn't exactly yielded any benefit now has it. It's a contrast in styles. There are people who are always ahead of the curve (proactive) like Thorn was and has been. If you are happy with the way things are going, then great. Maybe you can explain to me why you are happy with the way things are going.

I'll add more later cause I gotta split.

Let me start with a question: With the roster he inherited, what MORE could you do? We have a plan in place and got rid of 2 players who definitely could NOT be a part of a championship winning - or on the track for that - considering their production types. We are now in line 2 sign a top line free agent in 2 years. Shelving Marbury, Big Game and Curry and brining in MDA has almost gotten us to .500 and the culture has shifted. We compete every game even when we have 7 healthy bodies and our 7th guy is a YMCA scrub. We got a really good PG for $6M and only for 2 years.

Has he handled the Marbury situation to perfection? No. Has it really been detrimental to the team? We are nearly .500 and none of the playing guys are complaining.

What more could he have done? Done all the above and put a team on the floor that is 17-0
I just hope that people will like me
martin
Posts: 80009
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
12/3/2008  12:18 PM
Posted by Bippity10:
Posted by martin:
Posted by Rookie:
Posted by martin:
Posted by Rookie:
Posted by martin:

^I give an 'F' on this post.

Exhibit A - The Jason Kidd trade is paying major dividends for the Nets. This is a great example of how to handle a situation where your star guard becomes a sideshow distraction. They also turned their 2008 draft picks they recieved in this deal into gold. They became stronger through good management. Can you compare Thorn to Walsh?

Did you just compare Marbury to Kidd? Walsh is supposed to trade f'ing Marbury? The dude that didn't play last year cause of ankle problems? That took a flight home after being demoted? That publically fought with every Knicks coach he has had? For real?

if he is un-tradable and he isn't going to play, then why is he still on the team? Is he an asset or a detriment to the team? it's as simple as that. Making things overly complicated and sticking to proceedure hasn't exactly yielded any benefit now has it. It's a contrast in styles. There are people who are always ahead of the curve (proactive) like Thorn was and has been. If you are happy with the way things are going, then great. Maybe you can explain to me why you are happy with the way things are going.

I'll add more later cause I gotta split.

Let me start with a question: With the roster he inherited, what MORE could you do? We have a plan in place and got rid of 2 players who definitely could NOT be a part of a championship winning - or on the track for that - considering their production types. We are now in line 2 sign a top line free agent in 2 years. Shelving Marbury, Big Game and Curry and brining in MDA has almost gotten us to .500 and the culture has shifted. We compete every game even when we have 7 healthy bodies and our 7th guy is a YMCA scrub. We got a really good PG for $6M and only for 2 years.

Has he handled the Marbury situation to perfection? No. Has it really been detrimental to the team? We are nearly .500 and none of the playing guys are complaining.

What more could he have done? Done all the above and put a team on the floor that is 17-0

your inner BoBo is showing.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
NYKBocker
Posts: 38516
Alba Posts: 474
Joined: 1/14/2003
Member: #377
USA
12/3/2008  12:20 PM
Posted by Rookie:

Ok Ok. you guys are right. The Marbury saga needs to drag on. Gallinari was the best player available in the draft. Roberson was the best available guard available this summer. We were lucky to trade Randolf for Thomas and a player with a heart condition. Lee and Nate shouldn't have recieved new contracts in October because it's better to have to pay them more after they become free agents. Balkman wasn't worth anything more than a future 2nd round pick...

I have no problem with the Marbury situation. He is getting paid and him not playing is good for me. Do you think Duhon shows his stuff if Marbury was allowed to spew his venom on the team?

Does Gallo have a different measuring stick than every other draft pick this year? The kid is young. Pick #6 is one of those picks that you try to swing for the fences with a player that you view has great potential. With what we saw in that one game in SL, his skill set looked excellent and he looked like a player. I have no problem with this pick.

Roberson I agree but he was signed close to min so no problem here either.

Randolph was traded for expirings with players that can actually play in this system. The Mobley heart is an issue but noone is perfect.

DLee and Nate? What exactly does it buy you to sign them asap?

Balkman? I questioned this also but right now it is a non-issue because of the players we have who has a better skill set for this system.
Page 1 of 7  1  2  3 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
Walsh's rating so far
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy