Posted by TMS:

how about ALL the players i listed are better than Jerome James...if you don't have a response or defense, don't waste my time & ask me the question to begin with...you're telling me Donyell Marshall, Eddie Griffin or Zeljko Rebraca wouldn't have been better fits for the Knicks than Jerome James at 5 years & $30 million?

as for your snit, how about you gimme some pointers on the finer art of picking up women, Bonn?



[Edited by - TMS on 08-26-2005 9:11 PM]

Griffin is a forward, rebraca is a forward and a very average one at that, and marshall is forward, a jump shooting forward, we don't need anymore forwards, unless any of them can grow a few inches and play center, then JJ was the better buy for the knicks... The KNicks....

well, oohah, last i checked players weren't lining up to sign in NY. so partly, why would gerald wallace sign here to in all likelihood back up TT and Q? i'm talking realistically. a starting caliber player won't want to sign here, especially not for what we can pay them, and if they're resticted, no way they end up here at all.

Hmmm.

also, there are issues of chemistry. gerald wallace would give us a fourth player who thinks they could start at the SF or SG (2 starting spots for craw, Q, TT, gerald, not even counting houston, or ariza).

Last I looked, the Knicks had no chemistry to speak of, so I am not going to worry about ruining what we don't have(Yet). Isiah shot our chemistry to hell with the Van Horn trade, that was the last time I remember then Knicks having a dynamic offensive game, and now we have Timmy. There, a spot for GW!: Timmy's. I don't see how replacing TT with ANYONE doesn't make chemistry better.

someone will be unhappy. it's inevitable, say what you will about earning the spot.

I don't give a damn about anyone who got beat out being unhappy. I care about W's.

we're also stocked at PF.

GW is a small forward.

bringing in another starting caliber player would only add to the chemistry issues we have, when we have a team that could compete with the talent it has on paper.

That is where we disagree. This team might be better than last year's (MIGHT!!!), especially if they have no injury problems. We are fighting for the 7-8 seed at best as configured. I don't see adding a player like Wallace as an instant chemistry problem either. Maybe he will be exactly the opposite. Why not?

we need to get players with specific skill sets (in jerome james' case, being tall ) that fit in, not just the flashiest or most prominent FAs out there.

I agree. GW is big and as athletic as they come. He is young, he is cheap, he as incredible potential still. I see that as addressing our needs.

incidentally, a S&T would solve some of these concerns.

Trade who for what? Are we still talking about Wallace?

failing that, though, i would rather concentrate on getting the best out of what we have rather than throwing in another complicating factor.

The way I see it, we still suck, especially our front line. Maybe GW can help. I don't see that as a complicating factor.

so to sum up, gerald wallace probably doesn't want to sign here. and if he did, we would have a pretty nasty glut and would be better served in terms of chemistry without sacrificing future production to take a flier on a less established player but one with potential to do what gerald does (i.e. be fast and jump high) down the road

I'd sum it up as "Masterplan Don't Want Gerald Wallace" . I understand that you may not think he is a good fit, or he might stunt Ariza's growth (That is my only worry.). I just don't see his being good enough to play as a problem, I don't think we can ruin chemistry that is not yet created, and I don't see how taking a young player like GW sacrifices anyone's future. Adding that he doesn't want to play here makes me think you just don't want him because that is pure speculation.

Who is the less established player you think might fit in be? Do you have a candidate? James Jones? I am glad we did not get him, enough with the raw 6'8" 3 point snipers!

and, if you really wanted an unambiguous answer, then yes, sometimes it is better to sign a less accomplished player. it's done all the time. issues of cost, chemistry, fit, potential, so on.

If the Knicks were any good I think any of those points might be valid, but our front line is all bench players and rookies, so I think fit is not determined yet. Money might be the issue (Can we afford GW?). GW's potential is huge so I count that as a plus. The Knick's chemistry is non-existent so I don't see that as a problem.

Good teams sometimes plass up players who are better than those on their team. Bad teams usually try to get better period.

oohah

Posted by TMS:

how about you gimme some pointers on the finer art of picking up women, Bonn?



[Edited by - TMS on 08-26-2005 9:11 PM]

Here's a horny robot that's dying to meet you; she may look like a robot, but she has human-like breasts, as you can see!



[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 08-27-2005 08:22 AM]

Posted by Nalod:



I don't about that design. If you can't tit Phuch a robot, what good are they?

Here's one just for you Nalod :

so you do think we can get gerald wallace for the LLE without charlotte matching?

I don't really know. It is interesting that they haven't offered GW anything yet. Either way, I don't see that as a reason not to pursue him, unless you know of someone we should be pursuing that we would miss out on. Do you?

yes. that's why the main point of my post was about the swing position. jsut a side note in case any other players names got thrown around. you clearly read my post, i know what position he plays.

I didn't question whether you knew what position GW plays, I just wondered why you wrote: "we're also stocked at PF." when he is not a PF. I don't see the relevance.

it's jsut an option. if we get rid of some of the glut as we pcik up a dude like wallace it solves some of the problems i was worried about. but adding another player who will demand/deserve minutes on top of what we have already have will be a handicap. could be wallace, could be anyone else of his level, as in a guy who could start for the average team.

Sign and Trade? I am all for it, especially if we lose TT in the process. GW is my TT killer! I still disagree with your entire premise that it would be a 'handicap' to add a player of GW's caliber and that it would be better to sign a lesser player.

so we had no chemistry last year, so let's keep doing what we did and add pieces that pinch everyone's PT?

We did that last year? If you are talking about Mo Taylor and Rose, I didn't like picking up those guys either, but I think it actually is coming out fine for us with Nate Robinson and Lee. As for pinching PT, Rose and Taylor recorded a bunch of DNP's. Furthermore, I don't care. I say let them compete. You're acting as if we are disturbing some kind of great squad.

no, IMO the solution is to be much more careful about who we invest in, make sure they have a role before we make promises. if you think a newly signed player will be happy fighting tooth and nail for PT and possibly warming the bench, i don't know what to tell you.

I don't know where you are going with thie "promises" bit. Like I said, I am not greatly concerned about their happiness with PT. Anyway, we have to use the money. You can't save it up from year to year. I don't see a better candidate than Wallace out there right now.

i also don't think we suck. maybe that's a difference of opinion, but i think we're at a point where we need to focus on chemistry, not accumulating mismatched players. we have talent at every position, nate marbs craw Q ariza TT sweets rose frye, not overwhelming but enough to compete. yu can disagree, but the difference between 7-8 seed and higher is not gerald wallace, it's chemistry and coaching.

Our backourt is definitely better than last year. Our front court might be worse. Please tell me what is so great, or even good, about our front court. It will all be talk about 'potential' what we hope they will do. The most accomplished players in our front court right now are Malik rose and Mo Taylor.

I didn't say Wallace will get us higher than the 7-8. I said that is the best the team we have now can do. More likely, I see us in the same type of lottery position all over again. I think Wallace can help us solidify a hold on the number 8 seed. Maybe.

hold the phone. craw, TT, Q bench players and rookies? that's wallace's competition, not lee, frye, rose. or don't you know GW's not a PF

Now you are just twisting words. I said "our front line is all bench players and rookies". Which is true. Only TT plays in the front court. JC and Wallace would not be splitting time in any way. Please don't give me the old "Q can play small forward" bit, he is a shooting guard, no matter where he plays.

And yes, Q and TT are career bench players and JC has come off the bench PLENTY in his career. For the most part all of these guys have only started on teams that blow.

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/tim_thomas/?nav=page Tim Thomas only got to start for Milwaukee when they disembowled the team, and he stunk so bad that they palmed him off on us. Do you know how that worked out? Is TT a starting quality player on a decent team to you?

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/quentin_richardson/ Q has started about 50% of his career games. Half his games started were last season.

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/jamal_crawford/?nav=page 50% off the bench.

look at minnesota dude. unhappy players=ineffective players. locker room sulking can really sabotage a team.

Sabatoge what? What kind of comparison is that? Minnesota had a very good team the year before last! We sucked last year, what is there to sabatoge? Please give me an example of what this happy Knicks team has done. I find it strange that you are trying to guage potential happiness of players against adding talent.

are you speculating that he wants to play here with TT and Q? how do you know he's remotely interested?

I have no idea what he wants to do. All speculation of where GW wants to play was introduced by you. I have not spoken about it.

you can't dismiss as speculation me saying i don't think he wants that kind of competition for a starting spot. i have not seen a single article hinting at any interest either way him and us. i think what i said makes sense. anything that makes any other position any less speculative?

Any other position on where GW WANTS to play is just as speculative as yours. Me, I don't usually specualate on where guys want to play, and I haven't on this thread. I could care less what an article says unless it has a direct quote saying "I do/don't want to play in XXXX". Even then, I would prefer to see it myself.

i don't particularly want him.

I can tell!

i don't know his game well, but as i understand it the same critiques dog him as his early days in sacramento. athletic, good defender, no J. i'd just as soon give minutes earmarked for him to ariza.

That I can understand.

would GW be the end of the world? no way, and if we got him i'd root for him. but we only have five players on the floor for 48 minutes a game. we don't need a bench 13 men deep.

So let's put out the best 5 we can.

let's get what we can out of what we have.

We know what the front court is already: mediocre. I hope someone breaks out into a star in the FC this year, but I am not counting on it.

if we do bring in more players, they should hit their peak once we clear out the trash like TT, mo, penny. anything sooner jsut adds to the train wreck. have you ever seen a train wreck? me neither, but i hear they're pretty ugly.

You've never seen a train wreck? Where were you last year? This year we just put new paint on the same train.

we had no chemistry last season, but what you're saying is, instead of working on it, forget about that problem and focus on adding more talent.

First twisting words, now inferring ridiculous conclusions to reinforce your point? I think we should develop chemistry with the best talent possible. They are not mutually exclusive as you seem to believe.

and, wallace is more talent at a position where we have players equally athletic and more skilled than him.

Wallace=best athlete on an athletic Knick's team. Now who is it that is more skilled than he and even approaches his athletic ability that he will be competing with?

IMO you have it backwards. we're already a more talented team than you give them credit for, and definitely a more talented team than last year. but unless you want us to underperform again, chemistry and not more players is the key.

we did not underperform by much last year, I hate to tell you. Performance notwithstanding, all you have to do is compare us to the rest of the conference to see we have the short end of the talent stick in the front court and we could easily end up out of the playoffs with our short, unathletic, and in many cases, underacheiving, front court. But if you think this front line is worthy of going to war with for a whole season, I guess that is your opinion. It is not even about GW persay, but about adding better players to the Knick's front court.

oohah

I found a lovely robot for you and that's the thanks I get?

Posted by TMS:

i told you, don't waste my time if you don't have a response worth reading...truth is, you know just as well as i do that the Knicks overpaid by ALOT to get Jerome James...is it really that difficult to admit that someone other than yourself might have been right about something all along?

Isn't the robot cute?