Can't belive how some of you thought we gave up those picks to houston like JJ and Hill were anything but 12th men on a good team...No one was taking those 2 with out picks, just like denver isn't press to take any of our players now without picks

knickstorrents wrote:Well bottom line is Jordan Hill is probably not as good a player as we hoped (when we had him). And he's still not a good player now. It's a young season though.

You know, after the Landry Fields pick I really don't care where we pick. I wonder if Fields will end up being better than even the Utah pick from last year as well.

If we pick 25 and Houston picks 20th due to a swap, I don't think it will make a difference (again.)

TMS wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=301026013

Can't belive how some of you thought we gave up those picks to houston like JJ and Hill were anything but 12th men on a good team...No one was taking those 2 with out picks, just like denver isn't press to take any of our players now without picks

Jordan Hill's perceived value was higher at the time we made the trade... the Rockets' GM specifically asked for him to be included in the deal & Donnie was hedging on including him... let's not try & make this out to be like we had to include an extra 1st round pick to "convince" some other team to take him off our hands... that wasn't the case & you know it... but hey, anything to flash the i told you so card i guess if it makes you feel better knock yourself out.

All i'm saying is that those two were trash from the get, the only value Hill had was his postion in the draft. If you were Houstons GM you would have demanded a pick as well.

The rockets knew they had Yao coming back, wasn't planing on trading scola, and chase was showing strong signs early, they wanted hill cause he was young, and an 8th pick (maybe NY did there homework on hill).

MDA took on so much heat for not playing BAD rookies, yet inserted 2 of them in his starting line up this season, and no one is disagreeing with that move. Now that another coach has bench hill, it's because of depth.

We also have some now who want to hold on to AR like is the next KG or KD even though he's on the bubble to crak the rotation. Dude is now been label a project, in which GS was well aware. Take a look at a player like RONDO.

year 1... you show flashes...
year 2... you become consistant
year 3... should tell weather you have a true star/all star

knicks1248 wrote:

TMS wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=301026013

Can't belive how some of you thought we gave up those picks to houston like JJ and Hill were anything but 12th men on a good team...No one was taking those 2 with out picks, just like denver isn't press to take any of our players now without picks

Jordan Hill's perceived value was higher at the time we made the trade... the Rockets' GM specifically asked for him to be included in the deal & Donnie was hedging on including him... let's not try & make this out to be like we had to include an extra 1st round pick to "convince" some other team to take him off our hands... that wasn't the case & you know it... but hey, anything to flash the i told you so card i guess if it makes you feel better knock yourself out.

All i'm saying is that those two were trash from the get, the only value Hill had was his postion in the draft. If you were Houstons GM you would have demanded a pick as well.

The rockets knew they had Yao coming back, wasn't planing on trading scola, and chase was showing strong signs early, they wanted hill cause he was young, and an 8th pick (maybe NY did there homework on hill).

MDA took on so much heat for not playing BAD rookies, yet inserted 2 of them in his starting line up this season, and no one is disagreeing with that move. Now that another coach has bench hill, it's because of depth.

We also have some now who want to hold on to AR like is the next KG or KD even though he's on the bubble to crak the rotation. Dude is now been label a project, in which GS was well aware. Take a look at a player like RONDO.

year 1... you show flashes...
year 2... you become consistant
year 3... should tell weather you have a true star/all star

um, no... Hill was not percieved as "trash from the get" & no, Houston's GM did not "demand a pick as well" to take him off our hands like you're trying to imply... Hill was added as a piece to the trade because the Houston GM WANTED him to be a part of the deal... he was viewed as an ASSET in the trade, not as a detracting excess piece that they took off our hands out of the kindness of their hearts... again, if u like to play the I Told You So game then at least get the facts straight.

nixluva wrote:Man picks and prospects are not guarantees. People need to just get off of the this insistence that there's some guarantee that any pick will live up to his perceived potential or never exceed the predictions analysts place on them ie Landry Fields. Hill was picked for his talent, but once they had him they learned some things that alarmed them and decided he wasn't right for them. It's the same reason we didn't take Jennings. They thought they saw some things in his character that they didn't like. It turns out that he would've been the better risk, but you can't always know those things and hindsight is always 20/20.

All the time guys fail to live up to predictions or exceed them. This is why I was arguing that it was a good idea to trade those assets which are not sure things for the opportunity to sign players with a given track record. You KNOW what you're getting. Now we also took on some projects like AR & Timo, so we still managed to get the "high potential" prospects anyway. I think the right decisions were made and tho nothing is perfect it's worked out very well for this franchise to be heading in the right direction.

how do you know what you're getting when the only thing you're trading for is cap space? please explain that one... trading future assets for star PLAYERS is a no brainer... no one is contesting this... trading future assets for nothing but cap space to try & take a gamble on a star player signing here with no guarantees in place that he will was a stupid idea from the very beginning.

TMS wrote:

nixluva wrote:Man picks and prospects are not guarantees. People need to just get off of the this insistence that there's some guarantee that any pick will live up to his perceived potential or never exceed the predictions analysts place on them ie Landry Fields. Hill was picked for his talent, but once they had him they learned some things that alarmed them and decided he wasn't right for them. It's the same reason we didn't take Jennings. They thought they saw some things in his character that they didn't like. It turns out that he would've been the better risk, but you can't always know those things and hindsight is always 20/20.

All the time guys fail to live up to predictions or exceed them. This is why I was arguing that it was a good idea to trade those assets which are not sure things for the opportunity to sign players with a given track record. You KNOW what you're getting. Now we also took on some projects like AR & Timo, so we still managed to get the "high potential" prospects anyway. I think the right decisions were made and tho nothing is perfect it's worked out very well for this franchise to be heading in the right direction.

how do you know what you're getting when the only thing you're trading for is cap space? please explain that one... trading future assets for star PLAYERS is a no brainer... no one is contesting this... trading future assets for nothing but cap space to try & take a gamble on a star player signing here with no guarantees in place that he will was a stupid idea from the very beginning.

Except when you do actually score the big banana, cause that was exactly the strategy of Miami and they won big time. And it's similar to what the Lakers did to secure Shaq. It's a gamble that did not pay off for the Knicks.

Let's put it into terms that are perhaps more Alba-like. If a single Jessica Alba let everyone know she was gonna date one dude who came to this specific club on a specific night and ride him like a cowboy until the sun came up and all you had to do was pay the cover to the club, and you are 1 of 7 guys who gets invited (team with cap space), what's your limit on how much you would pay/gamble?

$10? $50? $100? $5000? Nothing at all cause there is no guarantee of getting laid?

It's an outlandish scenario no doubt, but I think Donnie truly believed that he HAD to have cap space to be in the game. IE, no cover charge, no play.

Generally this is not just a multiple choice question, cause there was the added knowledge that the Knicks needed to secure a PG and other parts AFTER signing at least 1 max dude. Even with Amare you still need a PG and C. So although Donnie prob paid decent money at a chance to get some Alba action and didn't get any play from her, he wasn't totally left blue balled. He had a plan to attach Jessica's other friend.

He is better than Hill and JJ combined.

TMS wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

TMS wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=301026013

Can't belive how some of you thought we gave up those picks to houston like JJ and Hill were anything but 12th men on a good team...No one was taking those 2 with out picks, just like denver isn't press to take any of our players now without picks

Jordan Hill's perceived value was higher at the time we made the trade... the Rockets' GM specifically asked for him to be included in the deal & Donnie was hedging on including him... let's not try & make this out to be like we had to include an extra 1st round pick to "convince" some other team to take him off our hands... that wasn't the case & you know it... but hey, anything to flash the i told you so card i guess if it makes you feel better knock yourself out.

All i'm saying is that those two were trash from the get, the only value Hill had was his postion in the draft. If you were Houstons GM you would have demanded a pick as well.

The rockets knew they had Yao coming back, wasn't planing on trading scola, and chase was showing strong signs early, they wanted hill cause he was young, and an 8th pick (maybe NY did there homework on hill).

MDA took on so much heat for not playing BAD rookies, yet inserted 2 of them in his starting line up this season, and no one is disagreeing with that move. Now that another coach has bench hill, it's because of depth.

We also have some now who want to hold on to AR like is the next KG or KD even though he's on the bubble to crak the rotation. Dude is now been label a project, in which GS was well aware. Take a look at a player like RONDO.

year 1... you show flashes...
year 2... you become consistant
year 3... should tell weather you have a true star/all star

um, no... Hill was not percieved as "trash from the get" & no, Houston's GM did not "demand a pick as well" to take him off our hands like you're trying to imply... Hill was added as a piece to the trade because the Houston GM WANTED him to be a part of the deal... he was viewed as an ASSET in the trade, not as a detracting excess piece that they took off our hands out of the kindness of their hearts... again, if u like to play the I Told You So game then at least get the facts straight.

Really...hill is a bigger project then AR, played like a rookie for the entire camp and SL.
Did you speak with anybody's agent to verify your facts, how do you know exactly what Houston wanted other then what was printed in the papaers.

Even if hill was used as a Asset (which sounds plausible) he'll collect more DNP CD then AR will fo sho...JJ is likely to be brought out if they can't finder a taker for his expiring contract.

Both were at the peak of there value when they were traded, hill wasn't getting more time and he wasn't getting any better in a hurry. I know you biggest concern was the pick, but that pick (in all likely hood) could have turned into another pine riding PROJECT.