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

what constitutes a winning season?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 2 of 2 ‹ Previous 1  2 
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
11/1/2007  12:28 PM
now i didn't do so well on my SAT verbal section but let's see if this analogy works:

blueseats is to the current knicks management as rembee is to the the current posters on ultimate knicks.

you see, you guys are much more alike than you know...
AUTOADVERT
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
11/1/2007  12:28 PM
Posted by Bippity10:

It is accepted amongst many that if it wasn't for the injuries we would have won 38-41 games and possibly made the playoffs. So shouldn't we use that as a baseline for improvement?

who cares about insignificant words like "improvement" & "progress"... it's all about "transition" & "patience".
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
islesfan
Posts: 9999
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 7/19/2004
Member: #712
11/1/2007  12:34 PM
Larry Brown was supposed to, at a minimum, contend for a playoff spot with a .500 record. That was with 3 rookies, Starbury, an out of shape Curry, a bunch of deadweight and not a single defensive minded player.

2 years later Isiah has a supposedly in shape Curry, Marbury who supposedly gets it, Zach "I don't think anyone else went 23-10 last year" Randolph, Lee and Nate having 2 years under their belts, defensive minded players (like Jared "the Glue" Jeffries, Balkman, Collins and the irreplaceable Fred Jones, who all came here after Isiah proclaimed that LB had enough defensive players to win) and all that deadweight bought out.

That should be far superior to what LB had to work with and he was expected to win, funny but Isiah didn't mention that in his spin session about taking 9-10 years.

Considering all that, I'd put a successful season at 46 wins and the second rd of the playoffs. I think that's incredibly fair since LB was supposed to win at least 41 games with what he had. 2 years later, and with all of those supposed upgrades, Isiah should be able to do a little better.
If it didn’t work in Phoenix with Nash and Stoutamire... it’s just not a winning formula. It’s an entertaining formula, but not a winning one. - Derek Harper talking about D'Antoni's System
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
11/1/2007  12:36 PM
Posted by islesfan:

Larry Brown was supposed to, at a minimum, contend for a playoff spot with a .500 record. That was with 3 rookies, Starbury, an out of shape Curry, a bunch of deadweight and not a single defensive minded player.

2 years later Isiah has a supposedly in shape Curry, Marbury who supposedly gets it, Zach "I don't think anyone else went 23-10 last year" Randolph, Lee and Nate having 2 years under their belts, defensive minded players (like Jared "the Glue" Jeffries, Balkman, Collins and the irreplaceable Fred Jones, who all came here after Isiah proclaimed that LB had enough defensive players to win) and all that deadweight bought out.

That should be far superior to what LB had to work with and he was expected to win, funny but Isiah didn't mention that in his spin session about taking 9-10 years.

Considering all that, I'd put a successful season at 46 wins and the second rd of the playoffs. I think that's incredibly fair since LB was supposed to win at least 41 games with what he had. 2 years later, and with all of those supposed upgrades, Isiah should be able to do a little better.

Amen. It's amazing how standards changed once Isiah was placed in charge of everything.
I just hope that people will like me
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
11/1/2007  12:41 PM
i think the more appropriate question would be what are the minimum goals the team can achieve to consitute, at the very least, a satisfying season.

i thought lb's 23 win season was a GOOD THING b/c change was imminent (which i felt necessary)...but i felt management made the wrong choices. then many last year were satsified with 33 wins saying it was an improvement and the team was heading in the right direction.
islesfan
Posts: 9999
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 7/19/2004
Member: #712
11/1/2007  12:41 PM
Posted by Bippity10:

It is accepted amongst many that if it wasn't for the injuries we would have won 38-41 games and possibly made the playoffs. So shouldn't we use that as a baseline for improvement?

Good point. We keep hearing how, if not for injuries, they would have won around 41 games and made the playoffs. So why wouldn't they be better this year with Zach and another year of being together?

But no, those same people still want to set the lowest possible acceptable expectation, in order to claim success if they should reach it. To be honest, I'm amazed some Lovers aren't still using 23 wins as a basis for comparison.
If it didn’t work in Phoenix with Nash and Stoutamire... it’s just not a winning formula. It’s an entertaining formula, but not a winning one. - Derek Harper talking about D'Antoni's System
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
11/1/2007  12:42 PM
Posted by islesfan:

Larry Brown was supposed to, at a minimum, contend for a playoff spot with a .500 record. That was with 3 rookies, Starbury, an out of shape Curry, a bunch of deadweight and not a single defensive minded player.

2 years later Isiah has a supposedly in shape Curry, Marbury who supposedly gets it, Zach "I don't think anyone else went 23-10 last year" Randolph, Lee and Nate having 2 years under their belts, defensive minded players (like Jared "the Glue" Jeffries, Balkman, Collins and the irreplaceable Fred Jones, who all came here after Isiah proclaimed that LB had enough defensive players to win) and all that deadweight bought out.

That should be far superior to what LB had to work with and he was expected to win, funny but Isiah didn't mention that in his spin session about taking 9-10 years.

Considering all that, I'd put a successful season at 46 wins and the second rd of the playoffs. I think that's incredibly fair since LB was supposed to win at least 41 games with what he had. 2 years later, and with all of those supposed upgrades, Isiah should be able to do a little better.

that's about as fair an assessment as you're ever going to get on the topic... good post.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
TrueBlue
Posts: 29144
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 9/20/2006
Member: #1172
11/1/2007  12:46 PM
Posted by islesfan:

Larry Brown was supposed to, at a minimum, contend for a playoff spot with a .500 record. That was with 3 rookies, Starbury, an out of shape Curry, a bunch of deadweight and not a single defensive minded player.

2 years later Isiah has a supposedly in shape Curry, Marbury who supposedly gets it, Zach "I don't think anyone else went 23-10 last year" Randolph, Lee and Nate having 2 years under their belts, defensive minded players (like Jared "the Glue" Jeffries, Balkman, Collins and the irreplaceable Fred Jones, who all came here after Isiah proclaimed that LB had enough defensive players to win) and all that deadweight bought out.

That should be far superior to what LB had to work with and he was expected to win, funny but Isiah didn't mention that in his spin session about taking 9-10 years.

Considering all that, I'd put a successful season at 46 wins and the second rd of the playoffs. I think that's incredibly fair since LB was supposed to win at least 41 games with what he had. 2 years later, and with all of those supposed upgrades, Isiah should be able to do a little better.


That's why I won't let Nix slide with his projections he's been stuck in the 43-46 range for at least 2yrs if not 3 now but the team has supposedly made all these upgrades. Why hasn't one Lover stepped up and said 50wins?
LMFAO @ the Bio [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephon_Marbury[/url]
TrueBlue
Posts: 29144
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 9/20/2006
Member: #1172
11/1/2007  12:51 PM
Posted by Bippity10:
Posted by islesfan:

Larry Brown was supposed to, at a minimum, contend for a playoff spot with a .500 record. That was with 3 rookies, Starbury, an out of shape Curry, a bunch of deadweight and not a single defensive minded player.

2 years later Isiah has a supposedly in shape Curry, Marbury who supposedly gets it, Zach "I don't think anyone else went 23-10 last year" Randolph, Lee and Nate having 2 years under their belts, defensive minded players (like Jared "the Glue" Jeffries, Balkman, Collins and the irreplaceable Fred Jones, who all came here after Isiah proclaimed that LB had enough defensive players to win) and all that deadweight bought out.

That should be far superior to what LB had to work with and he was expected to win, funny but Isiah didn't mention that in his spin session about taking 9-10 years.

Considering all that, I'd put a successful season at 46 wins and the second rd of the playoffs. I think that's incredibly fair since LB was supposed to win at least 41 games with what he had. 2 years later, and with all of those supposed upgrades, Isiah should be able to do a little better.

Amen. It's amazing how standards changed once Isiah was placed in charge of everything.


Which is why I get irritated we at the very least don't use the 33 win season from 3 seasons ago as a starting point. 3yrs removed from that season with all the roster overhaul improvements we should be far better than a 40win team.
LMFAO @ the Bio [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephon_Marbury[/url]
islesfan
Posts: 9999
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 7/19/2004
Member: #712
11/1/2007  1:17 PM
Posted by TMS:
Posted by islesfan:

Larry Brown was supposed to, at a minimum, contend for a playoff spot with a .500 record. That was with 3 rookies, Starbury, an out of shape Curry, a bunch of deadweight and not a single defensive minded player.

2 years later Isiah has a supposedly in shape Curry, Marbury who supposedly gets it, Zach "I don't think anyone else went 23-10 last year" Randolph, Lee and Nate having 2 years under their belts, defensive minded players (like Jared "the Glue" Jeffries, Balkman, Collins and the irreplaceable Fred Jones, who all came here after Isiah proclaimed that LB had enough defensive players to win) and all that deadweight bought out.

That should be far superior to what LB had to work with and he was expected to win, funny but Isiah didn't mention that in his spin session about taking 9-10 years.

Considering all that, I'd put a successful season at 46 wins and the second rd of the playoffs. I think that's incredibly fair since LB was supposed to win at least 41 games with what he had. 2 years later, and with all of those supposed upgrades, Isiah should be able to do a little better.

that's about as fair an assessment as you're ever going to get on the topic... good post.

I am nothing if not fair.
If it didn’t work in Phoenix with Nash and Stoutamire... it’s just not a winning formula. It’s an entertaining formula, but not a winning one. - Derek Harper talking about D'Antoni's System
RemBee76
Posts: 20755
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #89
USA
11/1/2007  2:00 PM
Wait, I thought Larry Brown was brought in to be a teacher for our young guys, so the wins didn't really matter? Remember, The Professor? At least, that is what I was hearing while we were losing under him. So now we were supposed to expect that we would contend for a championship?

Personally, I couldn't have cared less what our record was under LB if he did what he was brought in to do...establish a system and build a team. I happen to think that playing successfully one way, then switching strategy because of something your point guard said in the papers, is not a way to do that.

I also don't happen to think that playing successfully and then trading for a baggage laden player who is going to force you to switch your strategy is a way to do it either.

But I'm willing to wait to see what happens. If we do manage to build on that all too short period of positive play last season I don't care what the numbers are. If we do that but get 44 wins, not 46, or lose in the first round of the playoffs, or miss the playoffs because of debilitating injuries late? It would still be a positive season.

46 wins, why do I know for sure that if the team gets 48 Isles will still find something to shriek about?
Its like a groupie website, or bitter ex-wives club. -Sebstar
Page 2 of 2 ‹ Previous 1  2 
« Reply To Topic
what constitutes a winning season?
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