Posted by ARES:

if emeka okafor comes out i take him at 9, i see him as a poor man kmart. we will finally get a front court guy that can jump. and with the second pick get troy bell or hatten if they fall that far. both of them are better than Williams.

Posted by martin:

Posted by HARDCOREKNICKSFAN:

Count on Scott LayDown to blow these picks like he did last year, and the year before that...

Tell you what, instead of making blaket statements, how about backing up your words with what you would have done with the picks. Most GMs thought the trade for Dice was a good one. What would you have done with the 25th and second rounder?

Posted by ARES:

if emeka okafor comes out i take him at 9, i see him as a poor man kmart. we will finally get a front court guy that can jump. and with the second pick get troy bell or hatten if they fall that far. both of them are better than Williams.

Posted by spencerdoobie:

Posted by tkf:

I tell you what I would have done, I would not have done the trade at all, I liked , Amare, Wilcox and nene, and still would have been happy with either one. But If the trade was done and all I had was the 25 pick I would have looked big, since we had 2 PG's making a mint already. I would have looked at Boozer or Gadzuric actually In all honesty I wanted Gadzuric, but I would not have to make that decision because I would not have traded the pick!

HA HA HA, oh man this is way to funny.......how does it go? LMFAO?

the king of retrospect strikes again! OF COURSE you like amare now, after he has won ROY and looks like a sure fire future all star, but trying to play like you would have drafted him at 7 last year? wow, thats funny business "dukes"! you can look all over the place, ask any GM any scout, any "expert", NOBODY would have taken Amare lst year at 7, most thought he was going a little to high at 9 (now read this part slowly so you don't get confused) obviously in RETROSPECT it wasn't to high at all, looking back after his monster rookie year he should have either gone first or second, but AT THE TIME nobody thought he would be as good as he has turned out to be.....it is so easy to criticise the deal now after dyess went down, but AT THE TIME it was a damn good trade and it still may work out, there is no way to judge it at this point without seeing dyess on the floor.......that was a good deal at the time and it is just plain bad luck that dyess went down again, especially on such a fluke play........

you would be a perfect GM if they invented time machines! HA HA, you liked Amare, that's good stuuf. thanks for the laugh bro........

[Edited by - spencerdoobie on 05/24/2003 00:58:07]

Posted by prodson:

Posted by spencerdoobie:



the king of retrospect strikes again! OF COURSE you like amare now, after he has won ROY and looks like a sure fire future all star, but trying to play like you would have drafted him at 7 last year? wow, thats funny business "dukes"! you can look all over the place, ask any GM any scout, any "expert", NOBODY would have taken Amare lst year at 7, most thought he was going a little to high at 9 (now read this part slowly so you don't get confused) obviously in RETROSPECT it wasn't to high at all, looking back after his monster rookie year he should have either gone first or second, but AT THE TIME nobody thought he would be as good as he has turned out to be.....

spencerdoobie i hate to burst your juicy bubble... but tkf said ...he would take wilcox or stoudemire with the knicks pick last year. furthermore, not everybody was swinging from mcdyess nuts last year when the trade went down.

it wasn't so much the trade but the direction...

hey prod I ignore this clown, I won't respond to his post, he has no clue dukes... I can go to real GM where I personally said I would take amare, and if we didn't watch pheonix who drafts athletes like that take him and we will regret it. i can pull the thread with the dates!!! As you said it is the direction. Just like trading Ewing, we didn't have to trade him!!! we could have let him walk, instead leayden's direction led us into the abyss!!

Posted by martin:

Found this in one of the articles from Bergen. Past #9's:

1994: Eric Montross
1995: Ed O'Bannon
1996: Samaki Walker
1997: Tracy McGrady
1998: Dirk Nowitzki
1999: Shawn Marion
2000: Joel Przybilla
2002: Amare Stoudemire

There are no in between picks there. This tells us we're either going to land a future superstar or a dud.

Posted by tkf:

Posted by prodson:

Posted by spencerdoobie:



the king of retrospect strikes again! OF COURSE you like amare now, after he has won ROY and looks like a sure fire future all star, but trying to play like you would have drafted him at 7 last year? wow, thats funny business "dukes"! you can look all over the place, ask any GM any scout, any "expert", NOBODY would have taken Amare lst year at 7, most thought he was going a little to high at 9 (now read this part slowly so you don't get confused) obviously in RETROSPECT it wasn't to high at all, looking back after his monster rookie year he should have either gone first or second, but AT THE TIME nobody thought he would be as good as he has turned out to be.....

spencerdoobie i hate to burst your juicy bubble... but tkf said ...he would take wilcox or stoudemire with the knicks pick last year. furthermore, not everybody was swinging from mcdyess nuts last year when the trade went down.

it wasn't so much the trade but the direction...

hey prod I ignore this clown, I won't respond to his post, he has no clue dukes... I can go to real GM where I personally said I would take amare, and if we didn't watch pheonix who drafts athletes like that take him and we will regret it. i can pull the thread with the dates!!! As you said it is the direction. Just like trading Ewing, we didn't have to trade him!!! we could have let him walk, instead leayden's direction led us into the abyss!!

TKF''s brand new web site........."real GM with a time machine"!


"dukes"