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

Offseason aquisition possibilities - Category:No nonsense vet leadership
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 2 of 2 ‹ Previous 1  2 
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
franco12
Posts: 34069
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/19/2004
Member: #599
USA
3/19/2009  12:34 PM
Posted by martin:
Posted by SupremeCommander:
Posted by MS:

How are we rebuilding.

We ****ed up the draft yet again and passed on All-Stars and took a kid that may never be right again at 20 years old. His career is in trouble. Lopez is an All-Star in 2 years and the 2nd best center in the conference for the next 10 seasons.

We haven't made the playoffs for 7 years and we have chandler, lee, and nate as a core. That's disgraceful.

We add Larry Hughes for what reason to help us win three more games and knock us out of getting a pg we really want.

Accepting rebuilding is fine, but if there is a plan? Walsh could have easily moved Zach for a second round selection before the season and used the pick on Deandre Jordan and worked with him as a project. Not to mention we wouldn't have killed two roster spot

He had four very good players that went after gallo that could have been real foundations for the future. Stupidity just keeps winning out here.

+1

This isn't a rebuild. This is a countdown til 2010, when the Knicks sign all available mercenaries, which will likely be second or third tier players.

And, this strategy used to be employed by the NY Rangers... From after the 97 playoffs til after the strike, the Rangers chased players with money and what they got were players with no heart and didn't make the playoffs during that span, and for part of that time the old ass Glen Sather was the GM (still is, and many think the game has passed him by. The only reason the Rangers made the playoffs is because Jagr got dumped a la Steve Francis but reinvigorated his career annd the Rangers got lucky with a draft pick that turned out to be a franchise goaltender, even though the team had spent a first rounder on a different goaltener).

I'd say the rosy SupremeCommander left the building as the realist SupremeCommander returned thinking, "you are what you are." What the Knicks are is a youthful group of rentals, not a future.

[Edited by - supremecommander on 03-19-2009 11:12 AM]

why is MS's post +1 and why would you consider the Knicks NOT rebuilding.

- Hire the best coach you can. CHECK
- Settle an a philosophy and try to get players that match that style. CHECK.
- Try to do everything to change the culture. CHECK (Balkman, Marbury gone).
- get rid of long term contract and/or players that don't fit said philosophy. CHECK CHECK CHECK (Crawford, Zbo, James).
- play young guys lots of minutes and see what you got. CHECK.

Am I missing something or was Donnie supposed to turn 4 years of Isiah suck in 1 season?

The biggest argument against the notion that we are rebuilding is I think when we traded Crawford for Harrington, we weren't making that move as much for the future as it was to be better today.

I am sure- and I have no way to know- that Walsh could have traded Crawford for filler & a future first rounder. But he chose not to, instead opting for someone that made us better now, but kept open salary in 2010.

Rebuilding would be stocking assets- Harrington isn't an asset- he's a rental until renounced in 2010. And we're screwed if we have to resign him in 2010 because we have no better options!
AUTOADVERT
martin
Posts: 79878
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
3/19/2009  12:38 PM
Posted by franco12:


The biggest argument against the notion that we are rebuilding is I think when we traded Crawford for Harrington, we weren't making that move as much for the future as it was to be better today.

I am sure- and I have no way to know- that Walsh could have traded Crawford for filler & a future first rounder. But he chose not to, instead opting for someone that made us better now, but kept open salary in 2010.

Rebuilding would be stocking assets- Harrington isn't an asset- he's a rental until renounced in 2010. And we're screwed if we have to resign him in 2010 because we have no better options!

Huh? A BIG part of the rebuilding package that Donnie has explicitly talked about is cap flexibility, which is exactly why Zbo and Crawford were traded.

And Crawford ain't getting you a first round. No and's, if's or but's. NO WAY.

Tyson Chandler can barely get you expiring deals.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
3/19/2009  1:50 PM
Frankly Eric Gordon is a better player and guard that defends, attacks and shoots the ball well and is a two guard. We don't have a two guard obviously that's why we traded for hughes. I don't care if you have Crawford/Nate. They moved crawford and nate/gordon is what our coach like uptempo players that can shoot and attack. That's a fail? Please

Lopez: 23pts 8ass 5rbs 3blks on our vaunted up tempo attack? The guy can shoot from the outside, pass and protect the rim. How is that a fail? Can we explain where the kid is limited at 20 years old???? You can't . Fail on your response.

He made a nice hire at the coach we all like it, but again giving someone the most money isn't brain surgery. Trading someone for nothing and then signing Roberson doesn't take skill. Gallo is a great shooter but slow footed and can't defend.

Even Anthony Randloph would have been a nice selection that brings rebounding, ball handling and shoot blocking.
martin
Posts: 79878
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
3/19/2009  2:22 PM
Posted by MS:

Frankly Eric Gordon is a better player and guard that defends, attacks and shoots the ball well and is a two guard. We don't have a two guard obviously that's why we traded for hughes. I don't care if you have Crawford/Nate. They moved crawford and nate/gordon is what our coach like uptempo players that can shoot and attack. That's a fail? Please

Lopez: 23pts 8ass 5rbs 3blks on our vaunted up tempo attack? The guy can shoot from the outside, pass and protect the rim. How is that a fail? Can we explain where the kid is limited at 20 years old???? You can't . Fail on your response.

He made a nice hire at the coach we all like it, but again giving someone the most money isn't brain surgery. Trading someone for nothing and then signing Roberson doesn't take skill. Gallo is a great shooter but slow footed and can't defend.

Even Anthony Randloph would have been a nice selection that brings rebounding, ball handling and shoot blocking.

Regarding Lopez, you don't bring in a philosophy and coach and then players that don't fit that style. It's why PHO was failing for most of the year and why they have switched back to playing more uptempo.

Hey, if you want to site one game where Lopez played against an undersized David Lee who is obviously hurt, by all means.

If you want to rail against picking Gallo because we already have Lee/Chandler, my argument has the same weight for not taking Eric Gordon.

Bring up something new.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
fishmike
Posts: 53902
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
3/19/2009  2:31 PM
Posted by martin:
Posted by MS:

Frankly Eric Gordon is a better player and guard that defends, attacks and shoots the ball well and is a two guard. We don't have a two guard obviously that's why we traded for hughes. I don't care if you have Crawford/Nate. They moved crawford and nate/gordon is what our coach like uptempo players that can shoot and attack. That's a fail? Please

Lopez: 23pts 8ass 5rbs 3blks on our vaunted up tempo attack? The guy can shoot from the outside, pass and protect the rim. How is that a fail? Can we explain where the kid is limited at 20 years old???? You can't . Fail on your response.

He made a nice hire at the coach we all like it, but again giving someone the most money isn't brain surgery. Trading someone for nothing and then signing Roberson doesn't take skill. Gallo is a great shooter but slow footed and can't defend.

Even Anthony Randloph would have been a nice selection that brings rebounding, ball handling and shoot blocking.

Regarding Lopez, you don't bring in a philosophy and coach and then players that don't fit that style. It's why PHO was failing for most of the year and why they have switched back to playing more uptempo.

Hey, if you want to site one game where Lopez played against an undersized David Lee who is obviously hurt, by all means.

If you want to rail against picking Gallo because we already have Lee/Chandler, my argument has the same weight for not taking Eric Gordon.

Bring up something new.
but think about how cute Gordon and Nate would look together in the backcourt.

"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
3/19/2009  2:59 PM
Your argument makes no ****ing sense. Crawford sucks and wasn't a future piece. Chandler/Lee by all accounts are part of the teams future foundation that is the point I am making here

Cleveland is playing with a West/Williams backcourt I don't see how a Robinson/Gordon backcourt is any different. Nate is your bench guy. We didn't have a pg/sg for the future.

Tyson Chandler
8.8pts 8.9rbs 1.3blks

Andrew Bynum
14pts 8.2rbs 1.9blks

Andrew Bogut
11.7pts 10.2rbs 1.0blks

Zydrunas
13.1pts 7.5rbs 1.2blks

Brook Lopez
12.9pts 7.9rbs 1.9blks

The kid is 20 years old and getting his feet wet. He has touch, good hands, can score, can defend. We get killed every night we don't have size and we don't have anyone that can protect the rim. We were getting rid of either zach or curry. To not draft a player that will be an all-star is stupid. Gallo's a good shooter and is very limited. Even if you put the kid at the 4 who is the 5.

Your questions, make no sense if you are saying we had two players at the guard position that may or may not be part of our future vs. Chandler and Lee
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
3/19/2009  3:10 PM
Posted by BRIGGS:

Isiah's method of swapping players and mashing them together and hoping it works is NOT REBUILDING that's just a disaster....

Isnt that what we have done this year?
[/quote]

Nope.

What we've done is swapped out Isiah's misfits with rental players who will also be hitting the road by the time we actually begin to build the new New York Knicks.

These guys were not brought in to win games today nor next year. They're rentals. They're finanical rentals.

Not sure why you make that comparison otherwise? Is it because Walsh gave us the ole' lip service of remaining competitive while rebuilding?

Isiah promised us a RING with the trash he threw together year after year. Walsh is promising us a bright FUTURE team but suggested that in the mean time he wasn't just going to completely dump the roster and win 5 games a year.

There's a difference a very big difference.

Those of you that STILL seem stuck in the Isiah era of "Just one more player and we're going to be good!" just can't understand that Walsh actually has a plan - so when he trades for Harrington and then Hughes you guys say to yourselves "He did this to upgrade the roster and win more games." when reality IS "he did this to ensure the plan that has Isiah's mess torn down by July 2010 yet in the meantime made sure we could actually field a team."

Again, there's a very big difference here.
http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
JohnWallace44
Posts: 25119
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/14/2005
Member: #910
USA
3/19/2009  4:47 PM
Cosmic,
this thread is about adding one vet to a mix of developing players in order to teach them a thing or two about how to win.

Its not about adding players with the thought that it will make us a top 4 team in the East.

Alan Hahn: Nate Robinson has been on a ridonkulous scoring tear lately (remember when he couldn't hit Jerome James with a Big Mac in early January?)
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
3/19/2009  4:52 PM
JohnWallace - what you said.

What would you consider as the primary criteria for a No Nonsense Veteran Leader?
once a knick always a knick
JohnWallace44
Posts: 25119
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/14/2005
Member: #910
USA
3/19/2009  6:36 PM
Posted by misterearl:

JohnWallace - what you said.

What would you consider as the primary criteria for a No Nonsense Veteran Leader?

Tough to say. You would have hoped that Duhon would do the trick. Q tries. Camby would be ideal if we could trade for one.

Just talking about pure UFA's, then it depends on who we have here. If we keep some vets I'd get Artest.

If we go all youth, then I'd try to bring in Marion for a year. If he's going to get nothing in free agency as expected, then see if he'll come in for a year and pump up his value again.
Alan Hahn: Nate Robinson has been on a ridonkulous scoring tear lately (remember when he couldn't hit Jerome James with a Big Mac in early January?)
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
3/19/2009  7:44 PM
JohnWallace - Duhon hasn't led since Duke and even then he was painting by the numbers Coach K laid on the floor. He could grow into a leadership role but first he might need to make the adjustment to an 82 game NBA schedule as a starter, just to understand what is required.

I don't think veteran leadership is so simple as identifying talented guys. Ron Artest has the ability to lead ON te court but his track record of unpredictable behavior will NEVER convince a group of impressionable players to follow his example. You gotta be able to convey a point of view verbally, as well as by example. Artest is nowhere NEAR the guy who I want setting the tone for an entire franchise. Supporting cast member? Perhaps.

Marcus Camby would be a perfect fit at center. Period. Leader? I'm not so certain. Will he call a team mate at 3AM to talk about a blown defensive switch and show up for training camp in game condition?

If I could create a template for a leader fro former Knicks it would include the steady hand and playoff-tested temperment of Maurice Cheeks

Veteran leadership only talks to the media when he wants to. The "don't ask me no stupid questions" no-nonsense approach to the media, and colleagues, of Charles Oakley. I had the opportunity to be introduced to Oak and one could tell there was a distance you simply did not approach past. I dug that about him.

Veteran leadership wants to take charge in the fourth quarter by doing whatever it takes to win. The poster child? Bernard King. Sure, men like Bernard are rare, but in college you can separate the boys from the men. Here is where the crapshoot that is the NBA draft comes into play. You can decide to go for talent, or you can do the homework and look at how a player relates to his family, peers or even life-changing setbacks. The person who did the homework on Dwayne Wade KNEW that he handled his business on and OFF the court at Marquette.

My kingdom for another "heart and soul" guy in the tradition of DeBusschere, Guerin, Reed, Lonnie Shelton, or even Kurt Thomas (without the domestic issues of course)

Preferably one who can play.

[Edited by - misterearl on 03-19-2009 7:45 PM]
once a knick always a knick
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
3/19/2009  8:21 PM
"It's so easy for us to get distracted by a bad call or someone forcing a shot up or not rotating and helping out," he said. "We get distracted. It lingers about three or four plays. A hardened veteran team does not succumb to those type of mistakes."

- Mike D'Antoni
once a knick always a knick
Page 2 of 2 ‹ Previous 1  2 
« Reply To Topic
Offseason aquisition possibilities - Category:No nonsense vet leadership
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