CrushAlot wrote:

Cosmic wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Cosmic wrote:What's looking bad? A roster that is in the final stage of having been torn down? This is a surprise?

Come'on.

There's nothing to judge here. We're waiting to see what is built in 2010 and that's all.

To critique what you see going on today and blast Walsh or Mike over it... would be unwarranted.

They're in the final stage of tearing down the mess of a team Isiah left us.

They start to build a new team this summer. You judge them on the new team - not on how they coached the torn down mess.

Its funny, when the trades were made I said the excuse for D'Antoni for the rest of the season would be that he could not win after so much turnover in the roster. However, I am sure that the only guy traded at the deadline that Walsh had a goal of trading at the start of the season was Jeffries. Darko, and Nate were traded for not even equal value. They have expiring contracts so the only reason they were moved was because the coach was not comfortable communicating with them and having them around. The fact that Hill's value was so low because he wasn't coached and never had a chance to play is on D'Antoni also.

He couldn't win prior to the trades. WHO HAS WITH THIS ROSTER?

Come'on.

This and last year WERENT ABOUT WINNING DURING THESE YEARS. EVER. NEVER. They were about preparing the franchise to build a new team starting in 2010. Nothing more. Anyone expecting more either were blind to the plan or just didn't want to accept it.

Nate? Played like an autistic kid with tourettes. That wasn't a winner.
Hill? Hill sucks. Nothing to do with Mike.
Jeffries? Trash. If your team misses Jeffries it highlights just how terrible your team is and why you NEED to tear it down.

I thought the goal coming out of training camp was to get into the playoffs so LeBron would notice. I also thought the coach spent more than half the season saying that they were trying to get into the playoffs when he was playing the vets. No one else has had this roster. Gallo is a D'Antoni pick. Hill was endorsed by D'Antoni. Chandler,Curry and Lee are the only guys left from Isiah's tenure and I believe two of them are supposed to be part of the future.

I think you fell for LIP SERVICE. You don't really think the franchise could tell the fanbase, ticket buyers "Hey, we're ripping it down, we're going to suck." Do you?

Had to read between the lines, and, it was quite obvious the moment Walsh came here he looked over the situation, saw what got us in this mess, put an end to that, and sought to start from scratch. Since then it's been one long ride of tearing down the roster.

The whole "remain competitive" thing was PR at it's best. But, I will hand it to Walsh. He didn't trade everyone for pure trash. He took a look at decent players in return. Wilcox, Darko, Hughes, TMac, House, TT, Mobley, Walker, Harrington... He didn't just do a full salary dump then cut the players that came back. He did a good job here. Of course, when you trade trash, chances are you get trash back. But he didn't leave us high and dry or imbalanced as a roster. Until...the final deadline deals this go around. Yet being in the final home stretch of the tearing it down plan, that's fine now. Season was already over.

Hill...Well, Mike can't come out and say he didn't want the pick. That was a mystery pick. Walsh even said he thought the scouts screwed up on it. Saying if they thought Jennings was so good why didnt they tell him. Yet that is a mystery too as the Knicks tried out Jennings TWICE. No idea why they messed that up. Walsh went on to say that these arent his scouts, he wanted his scouts, but Dolan had eaten enough salary and didnt want to fire everyone, and that Walsh had to work with the remaining guys, and Walsh said he understood. Lot of weird stuff in that. Yes, absolutely.

Gallo? Absolutely nepotism. We know the connection. Mike played with his father. But even then Gallo has shown flashes of great skill. Will he put it together? I don't know. I'll give him until January of next year to be looking a whole lot better or I too will be on that "this kid stinks" wagon.

Should we have gone for Lopez/Jennings? I think any GM looking back on the Knicks would have. Do those two fit Mike's coaching? I don't know...and I think it's important for a GM to get his marquee coach "HIS PLAYERS".

A lot going on there.

Last bits to touch on...

LEE: Don't know about this guy. As lazy as it got tonight. As lazy as it gets on defense. So good on offense. I just don't know. Dude plays like a 14M player on one end and a 1M player on the other. Do you build a team around him? No.

Chandler: Had some nice stretches this year but also some crappy ones. Again, Inconsistent and not very bright. Nice 6th or 7th man for certain. Not a building block. Again, let's see how he works over the summer.

He too, come January, if he's showing the same... well, if we still don't have our star, then, adios Wilson.

JWill, Tinsley, AI - eh, those guys weren't getting us out of any rut, but, all the same his reasoning for not signing them was BS as he still played Duhon 48 minutes a game.

Bender.. LOL BENDER. Oh jeez why does this fool even play. I know he's a Walsh friend and all but enough is enough. Didn't the guy flat out FALL DOWN ALL BY HIMSELF IN THE OPEN COURT tonight with no one around him? He did, didn't he. I know I saw it. I laughed.

Has MDA been able to get these guys to play better? For a while they did play harder on D, but as we know that didn't last. It's what happens with players that by default don't really want to defend. Lee, Al, Nate... Guys like them just haven't shown that they can commit to a defensive effort for 82 games. Don't think MDA hasn't been coaching D, cuz the team clearly had instructions that they seemed to follow for a short period. But in the end they fell back on their old ways. That's why we're looking to replace these guys.

In the end we signed on for 2 years of nothing for the chance to lure Lebron or some other FA's. Someone is gonna take our money. Even if it's not Lebron, it still was worth taking the chance. We'll be able to put a much better team on the court and hand pick guys that will play the game right and give us the balance we need.

Swishfm3 wrote:

Cosmic wrote:Well, I agree that Mike isn't a coach that wants to adjust. He wants guys who can run his system - and then he wants to tell them to run his system - and then he wants to see his system run. End of story.

Can you please explain what this system is?

MDA's system is as follows:

- catch ball, shoot ball
- play no defense

don't worry about the guy running down the lane that's about to get the easy layup... just worry about scoring on the other end... shotblocking & defense have no place in his system

nixluva wrote:If DW was really interested in winning this year he would've brought in a real PG and a real useful Center. Instead we went cheap and picked up Darko who really didn't fit nor ever looked interested in fitting. Sure if you left him out there long enough he'd get some stats, but in terms of being a guy that could help us win, I never saw that from him. I hoped, but he looked listless and disinterested. Hill was much more energetic, but even if he got major minutes, he wasn't ready to help us win. In the end this season and last season were sacrificed in order to clear cap space and completely change the roster if needed.

Has MDA been able to get these guys to play better? For a while they did play harder on D, but as we know that didn't last. It's what happens with players that by default don't really want to defend. Lee, Al, Nate... Guys like them just haven't shown that they can commit to a defensive effort for 82 games. Don't think MDA hasn't been coaching D, cuz the team clearly had instructions that they seemed to follow for a short period. But in the end they fell back on their old ways. That's why we're looking to replace these guys.

In the end we signed on for 2 years of nothing for the chance to lure Lebron or some other FA's. Someone is gonna take our money. Even if it's not Lebron, it still was worth taking the chance. We'll be able to put a much better team on the court and hand pick guys that will play the game right and give us the balance we need.

interesting... so the argument is that our GM had no interest in winning games this year... if that's the case why did the head coach he hired say he would play Satan this year if it would help him win games? are these 2 on completely different wavelengths here? if Donnie's plan was just to clear cap for 2010 & had no interest in winning games, while his head coach was playing veterans that he thought could help him win more games, isn't that a cause of some concern? you would hope that the GM & the head coach are on the same agenda, otherwise isn't this just another repeat of the Isiah/Brown fiasco where the GM was trying to win games while the coach had his own agenda of trying to clear the roster & bring in his type of players?

Cosmic wrote:

sebstar wrote:

Cosmic wrote:What's looking bad? A roster that is in the final stage of having been torn down? This is a surprise?

Come'on.

There's nothing to judge here. We're waiting to see what is built in 2010 and that's all.

To critique what you see going on today and blast Walsh or Mike over it... would be unwarranted.

They're in the final stage of tearing down the mess of a team Isiah left us.

They start to build a new team this summer. You judge them on the new team - not on how they coached the torn down mess.

We have no real draft picks for the next few years.

We dont have any emerging franchise talent on this squad.

Everything is dependent on Lebron coming here. How confident are you that is going to happen?

And if we go through all this bullshyt just to sign Boozer and Joe Johnson and win 44 game each year, how will you feel?

Bron? 25%. 70% he stays in CLE. 5% elsewhere.

Draft picks? Well, we have a 2011 draft pick. It wasn't an outright give up it was a swap. Houston isn't very good at all. We should do well this summer regardless of LeBron. This swap will be minimal or not at all.

2012? Yeah, not liking giving that up, but the 2010 and 2011 offseasons, we have a real good shot to build a winner. The 2012 pick should be inconsequential at that point.

Signing Boozer and Joe Johnson, winning 44 games, and being a top 5 EC team? I'd be quite a bit happier than watching Curry, Zach, Q, Craw, Marbury plug their way to 23 wins, I can tell you that! Who wouldn't be!?

We sign Joe Johnson and Boozer - We'll be lucky to win 44 games. I see that as a disaster, and we'll be stuck with those players.

Once we max those two out - what kind of talent is getting added to the rest of the roster?

And even if we add Lebron, how did our supporting cast look against Cleveland?

ActionJackson wrote:I swear you fickle UK "fans" are never friggin satisfied. Give the man a chance to work his system w/his kind of players!!! I'm so glad my personal hero Mark "Action" Jackson didnt get the job because coaching for you whiners & complainers is a real downer

I don't know if you are joking or not, but Mark Jackson is my favorite player ever. If he came to coach the Knicks (Big mistake), I would become like the rest of the nuthuggers on this board, and would blindly, vehemently, and nastily attack anyone who dares to disrespect him!

oohah