Posted by bitty41:

Posted by martin:

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by McK1:

Steph has come to camp out of shape the last 3 years. This year was a different story.

And IMHO the culture change theorem is a bunch of horse ish.

With Steph out the picture what has really changed:

mental toughness: FAIL

ability to make smart plays and execute when the game gets tight: FAIL

defense: FAIL

overall coachability of the team: well according to MDA, only 1 of the 30 losses is on him; so once again FAIL

Nates a chucker. Steph before whatever events led up to him ultimately getting a 3 tatted on his head had a killer midrange game scoring wise. He just sucked at being a creative playmaker.

This comment is gold! The apparent "change of culture" is just more of the same.

why is it more of the same?

Do the Knicks still have one of the worst records in the East? Yes

Are they still absymal defensively? Yes

Are they younger? No

Have they attained any draft picks? No

Are we still the laughing stock of the NBA with our scandals? Yup

Every year the Knicks do the same thing do so so in the beginning then they start looking like they can win a few more games, then the losing streak begins to set in, then injuries start happening, and the finale always consists of a lousy record with no playoff appearances let alone playoff wins.

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by BlueSeats:

The culture that needed to change was one of selfishness, petty agendas, entitlement and a certain cult of personality. Nobody said dumping our most talented players in order to bring in better leadership down the road would lead to immediate improvements in every facet of the sport. But offers a chance to do so in time.

People just have wholly unrealistic expectations, or some ill-defined bitterness, as if we lost something special.

If guys like Zach and Steph were really all that some think they are we mightn't have been such a laughing stock to begin with.

Is this a professional basketball organization or a high school cheerleading team? The reality is that success in this league in all professional leagues is measured by win/losses to argue that it is anything different is absurd.

I'm not arguing that Zach or Steph is something special but as it stands right now the Knicks are in the same place they were last season at the bottom of the Eastern Conference so just wake me up when that "culture" changes.

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by martin:

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by McK1:

Steph has come to camp out of shape the last 3 years. This year was a different story.

And IMHO the culture change theorem is a bunch of horse ish.

With Steph out the picture what has really changed:

mental toughness: FAIL

ability to make smart plays and execute when the game gets tight: FAIL

defense: FAIL

overall coachability of the team: well according to MDA, only 1 of the 30 losses is on him; so once again FAIL

Nates a chucker. Steph before whatever events led up to him ultimately getting a 3 tatted on his head had a killer midrange game scoring wise. He just sucked at being a creative playmaker.

This comment is gold! The apparent "change of culture" is just more of the same.

why is it more of the same?

Do the Knicks still have one of the worst records in the East? Yes

Are they still absymal defensively? Yes

Are they younger? No

Have they attained any draft picks? No

Are we still the laughing stock of the NBA with our scandals? Yup

Every year the Knicks do the same thing do so so in the beginning then they start looking like they can win a few more games, then the losing streak begins to set in, then injuries start happening, and the finale always consists of a lousy record with no playoff appearances let alone playoff wins.

you forgot one:

do they have cap flexibility in 2010 now to make deals or FA signings with? Yes

Posted by BlueSeats:

its really amazing. without eddy, marbury, zach, and crawford we have a better record than last year, and people say on the one hand we gave up too much talent, and on the other there's been no improvement to the culture. well if the talent went down what went up?

the chemistry is better, the payroll is better and the record is better, but somehow it was wrong, all wrong.

[Edited by - blueseats on 02-13-2009 3:46 PM]

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by BlueSeats:

its really amazing. without eddy, marbury, zach, and crawford we have a better record than last year, and people say on the one hand we gave up too much talent, and on the other there's been no improvement to the culture. well if the talent went down what went up?

the chemistry is better, the payroll is better and the record is better, but somehow it was wrong, all wrong.

[Edited by - blueseats on 02-13-2009 3:46 PM]

Last time I checked Marbury and Curry are still Knicks and still polluting the papers with their off court drama. So on that front Walsh has mostly failed.

I have no idea what the Knick's record was on Feb 13, 2008 but I can tell you that right now we are still one of the worst teams in the Conference at the 11th spot and outside of Washington all the teams below us could easily end up with a better record.

The "culture" we are talking about is losing. I don't care what kind of knuckleheads wear Knick uniforms as long as they are winning on the court.

Forget it bitty, If a) you think rebuilding is designed for immediate results and b) don't accept that being on pace for 10 more wins this season over last is immediate results its beyond me to explain it.

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by BlueSeats:

its really amazing. without eddy, marbury, zach, and crawford we have a better record than last year, and people say on the one hand we gave up too much talent, and on the other there's been no improvement to the culture. well if the talent went down what went up?

the chemistry is better, the payroll is better and the record is better, but somehow it was wrong, all wrong.

[Edited by - blueseats on 02-13-2009 3:46 PM]

Last time I checked Marbury and Curry are still Knicks and still polluting the papers with their off court drama. So on that front Walsh has mostly failed.

I have no idea what the Knick's record was on Feb 13, 2008 but I can tell you that right now we are still one of the worst teams in the Conference at the 11th spot and outside of Washington all the teams below us could easily end up with a better record.

The "culture" we are talking about is losing. I don't care what kind of knuckleheads wear Knick uniforms as long as they are winning on the court.

Forget it bitty, If a) you think rebuilding is designed for immediate results and b) don't accept that being on pace for 10 more wins this season over last is immediate results its beyond me to explain it.

How can a team still be rebuilding after nearly 10 seasons of losing records with no playoff victories, 3 different General Managers, 5 coaches, with your team's average age being 27, and with only one draft pick in the next two summers? Not since 2001 have the Knicks won a playoff game and now we're rebuilding AGAIN.

Nice attempt at flipping the entire discussion because you started off on the premise that the "culture" has changed but when it was pointed out to you that the "culture of losing" has remained now it's become the old reliable "we're rebuilding". The two biggest problems with the Isiah Thomas era Eddy Curry and Stephon Marbury still remain with the organization so when the eradication of all the problem children going to happen with this so-called "change of culture"? At least Marbury will be done at the end of this season though I still think that situation was handle poorly and Curry I can't see any team in their right mind ever taking this guy on.

Just admit there has been no change of "culture". I'm willing to concede that Walsh is making an attempt to at least change it and he's also willing to acknowledges that it needs to be changed which is something his two predecessors never understood. So on that front he does have self-awareness and has changed one thing (which is future cap space). But the losing still continues, the off-court drama still continues, and the Knicks remain among the worst on the Conference.

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by BlueSeats:

its really amazing. without eddy, marbury, zach, and crawford we have a better record than last year, and people say on the one hand we gave up too much talent, and on the other there's been no improvement to the culture. well if the talent went down what went up?

the chemistry is better, the payroll is better and the record is better, but somehow it was wrong, all wrong.

[Edited by - blueseats on 02-13-2009 3:46 PM]

Last time I checked Marbury and Curry are still Knicks and still polluting the papers with their off court drama. So on that front Walsh has mostly failed.

I have no idea what the Knick's record was on Feb 13, 2008 but I can tell you that right now we are still one of the worst teams in the Conference at the 11th spot and outside of Washington all the teams below us could easily end up with a better record.

The "culture" we are talking about is losing. I don't care what kind of knuckleheads wear Knick uniforms as long as they are winning on the court.

Forget it bitty, If a) you think rebuilding is designed for immediate results and b) don't accept that being on pace for 10 more wins this season over last is immediate results its beyond me to explain it.

How can a team still be rebuilding after nearly 10 seasons of losing records with no playoff victories, 3 different General Managers, 5 coaches, with your team's average age being 27, and with only one draft pick in the next two summers? Not since 2001 have the Knicks won a playoff game and now we're rebuilding AGAIN.

Nice attempt at flipping the entire discussion because you started off on the premise that the "culture" has changed but when it was pointed out to you that the "culture of losing" has remained now it's become the old reliable "we're rebuilding". The two biggest problems with the Isiah Thomas era Eddy Curry and Stephon Marbury still remain with the organization so when the eradication of all the problem children going to happen with this so-called "change of culture"? At least Marbury will be done at the end of this season though I still think that situation was handle poorly and Curry I can't see any team in their right mind ever taking this guy on.

Just admit there has been no change of "culture". I'm willing to concede that Walsh is making an attempt to at least change it and he's also willing to acknowledges that it needs to be changed which is something his two predecessors never understood. So on that front he does have self-awareness and has changed one thing (which is future cap space). But the losing still continues, the off-court drama still continues, and the Knicks remain among the worst on the Conference.

There is no distinction between culture and the Knicks' record?

Is there losing when guys don't give effort and coach don't give a crap vs. losing while playing the right guys (ie not pushing minutes for those who don't deserve) and playing hard while getting incrementally better even if you are still losing?

I guess if you take the black and white view of culture meaning wins - and technically we are winning more than last year - then the discussion is moot.