Bonn1997 wrote:

misterearl wrote:Just Win Baby

fishmike wrote:big pressure for the KNicks... anything less than conf finals is a total failure. At least with Lin here you can play the backcourt of the future card w/ Lin and Shump at 22-23 years old. 4 of our 5 big aquisitions are over 35. This is a win now team. Lets see them win now.

fish.mike - you cannot play the Lin/ Shump card because Shump could be out the entire season.

All things considered Glen Grunwald knows what he is doing. Calmer heads than ours have already decided THIS roster is the best roster to challenge Miami. It is about talent and ego. The over-35 acquisitions you speak of are all reserves. Pine Brothers of the highest available quality. Cool.

If I am in the mindset of any Knicks player, especially one who has been around the block, this episode could be taken very personally. The competitive fire in my heart says, "damm some Linsanity, let's go win some freakin' games as Knicks!"

Our likely starting back-court of Felton and JR is one of the weakest in the league.

How about our back court of Bibby and Fields in the playoffs?

Bonn1997 wrote:

misterearl wrote:Just Win Baby

fishmike wrote:big pressure for the KNicks... anything less than conf finals is a total failure. At least with Lin here you can play the backcourt of the future card w/ Lin and Shump at 22-23 years old. 4 of our 5 big aquisitions are over 35. This is a win now team. Lets see them win now.

fish.mike - you cannot play the Lin/ Shump card because Shump could be out the entire season.

All things considered Glen Grunwald knows what he is doing. Calmer heads than ours have already decided THIS roster is the best roster to challenge Miami. It is about talent and ego. The over-35 acquisitions you speak of are all reserves. Pine Brothers of the highest available quality. Cool.

If I am in the mindset of any Knicks player, especially one who has been around the block, this episode could be taken very personally. The competitive fire in my heart says, "damm some Linsanity, let's go win some freakin' games as Knicks!"

Our likely starting back-court of Felton and JR is one of the weakest in the league.

are you saying felton who avg 18/9 for us, is a below avg pg..

when lin avg 5/2 for houston and got cut, would you then say we pick up a well below avg pg..

so felton is a below avg pg because he suck in portland and was very good in ny, but lin is good player because what he did in ny not what he did in GS and Houston prior...sounds very contradictive

blkexec wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

misterearl wrote:Just Win Baby

fishmike wrote:big pressure for the KNicks... anything less than conf finals is a total failure. At least with Lin here you can play the backcourt of the future card w/ Lin and Shump at 22-23 years old. 4 of our 5 big aquisitions are over 35. This is a win now team. Lets see them win now.

fish.mike - you cannot play the Lin/ Shump card because Shump could be out the entire season.

All things considered Glen Grunwald knows what he is doing. Calmer heads than ours have already decided THIS roster is the best roster to challenge Miami. It is about talent and ego. The over-35 acquisitions you speak of are all reserves. Pine Brothers of the highest available quality. Cool.

If I am in the mindset of any Knicks player, especially one who has been around the block, this episode could be taken very personally. The competitive fire in my heart says, "damm some Linsanity, let's go win some freakin' games as Knicks!"

Our likely starting back-court of Felton and JR is one of the weakest in the league.

Well, put in Shump over JR, and it looks like we have the strongest back court to me. A nice blend of offense and more importantly....defensive pressure, and the ability to defend both guard positions. Something Lin could not do.

+1

We haven't had 2 way players in awhile in the backcourt.

As good as they were on offense, Lin and Landry couldn't stop a nosebleed.

earthmansurfer wrote:martin and crushalot - I've loved reading Hahn, one of my favorite writers to follow and still will be.

That said, Alan Hahn works for MSG. There is a strong conflict of interest here. Does anyone expect him to write anything bad about his employer and keep his job? Wasn't he just saying that we should at least sign Lin and use him as an asset at the very least? I don't see that in this article.

Here is a snippet regarding this double talk: http://www.msg.com/blogs/alan-hahn/the-knicks-fix--decision-on-lin-sparks-heated-debate.html

During our broadcast here of the Knicks' Summer League game against the Suns on Sunday, Walt Frazier and I both agreed that the team should match the contract. "Worry about later, later," Frazier said, with the idea that if Lin proves to not be the value you hoped before Year 3, he can be traded as an expiring contract for one or two players. In fact, if the Knicks match, they can trade Lin after Jan. 15 with his consent, which means before this year's deadline, he could be moved. They can even ship him to the Rockets -- so Houston can enjoy that balloon in Year 3 -- next summer.

The idea is, just as an asset alone, Lin is too valuable to let walk without any compensation. In the NBA, if you don't match an offer sheet for a restricted free agent, you do not receive any compensatory draft picks as in other sports. You just lose the player. Even if Lin isn't part of the plan going forward, especially with Raymond Felton back to run the point (more on this later), Lin should be retained just so the franchise can get some type of return.

From the article:

This was what Lin wanted, otherwise, why would he and his representation go back to the Rockets to renegotiate a deal that was already completed just to intensify the severity of a match by the Knicks?

Hahn has no proof here. It is his opinion. It favors MSG's viewpoint.
*****

Lin wasted no time putting out the word that he wanted to stay with the Knicks. He told SI.com, "Honestly, I preferred New York. But my main goal in free agency was to go to a team that had plans for me and wanted me."

Again, this is his opinion. Ditto with favoring MSG.

The article continues, mostly in the same way (and then concludes with non Lin things). Not saying he is wrong regarding Lin, but it sure suddenly looks like everything is on Lin and MSG is no longer mentioned. He mixes in truths like "Felton, too, has his work cut out for him as he focuses on bouncing back from a poor season in Portland while others focus on if he can be an upgrade over Lin. ..." I understand logic and deception better than most people, as I was trained in it (not that that makes me understand it better but it helps). When you start to piece things together you don't draw conclusions, you just let the piece present itself and speak for itself. This recent "piece" supports MSG.

Martin - I always read content, but that is not the whole picture. You got to look at the messenger. And I do see the truth in the false when it's there, I'm not closed off because of Hahn's connections to MSG. But right now, it is my opinion that he is on damage control.

crushalot - It's not that he wrote anything false, it's all subjective and going in one direction. Quite different than the days leading up to the decision.

Does anyone really think that Hahn would have a job for long if he was critical of MSG? The record of MSG and Dolan speaks otherwise. They are a publicly traded company, there can be no freedom in that - it is rather a control mechanism of sorts, where money and control are the bottom line. Business as usual.

EMS

your post makes no sense to me. Where is the double talk you speak of? The first and second bold parts say the same thing: Alan thought MSG should match.... which goes against what MSG did.

And then you follow up with:

earthmansurfer wrote:

Lin wasted no time putting out the word that he wanted to stay with the Knicks. He told SI.com, "Honestly, I preferred New York. But my main goal in free agency was to go to a team that had plans for me and wanted me."

Again, this is his opinion. Ditto with favoring MSG.

There is no opinion here from Hahn, that's just a quote from Lin saying exactly what Hahn said he did, no opinion.

earthmansurfer wrote:Martin - Hahns other piece says MSG should match AND should not let an asset walk - this is before the decision. Then after the decision he is picking Lin apart, all subjectively, no facts. That stands out, he makes no mention of that in the recent piece. Double talk - stating what MSG should do, then when they don't do it, he is now attacking Lin. Hey, why not finish what you started Hahn?

The second quote is Hahn using emotionally swaying words like "wasted no time" and "putting out the word" - come on. Give me facts, don't weigh them down with subjectivity. He is just supporting MSG, writing like that. Write neutral, don't sway the reader. He did that when he wanted MSG to match. He didn't say "MSG would be stupid" or the like. He kept it neutral. Anyone could easily have taken what Lin said in a positive light, or perhaps just a business light - saying the write things.

And then continues a few lines later with "There's more, but you get the point." No Hahn, that is your point, your perspective. Maybe we don't "get" your point. Building your story with emotionally swaying words does not make it true. But it does tend to pull a reader in emotionally. Emotion is not concerned with truth, it's concerned with being correct - most of the time.

And a few more lines later "So despite the fact -- and this is fact -- that Jeremy had less interest in returning to New York than he did in returning to Houston..." Again, same thing - there is no fact here. Lin said he wanted to return to the Knicks, but Hahn takes that and other quotes and presents his side as fact. Don't give me less than circumstantial evidence as fact, when circumstantial evidence alone isn't enough on it's own to accuse.

And this one is a beauty, right after bringing up the asset comment - "That would, I guess, be considered a spiteful move." What? Now it's a spiteful move? Really? But your other article said we should do that? Note the strong language "spiteful". We wouldn't want MSG to be spiteful. He is a crafty writer.

I've noticed when people have an agenda they leave things out, they steer us in a certain direction and present their perspective (which is believable) but it is just that - their perspective and it is supported with more of their perspective. It doesn't bring all things into account, only things that support their perspective. And if those things are just statements they can use emotionally swaying words to get us "to see" what they see. But it is all perspective.

I don't buy the article.

IMHO you are reading too much into the article and I am still confused about supposed double talk etc.

I go to the link and the date there is 19 July article... today. In the article Hahn talks about not letting the asset walk and discussing with Clyde on Sunday about not letting Lin go.... so why are you talking about him not mentioning this in the recent piece: IT'S IN THE RECENT PIECE, just like you quoted. Hahn, both before and after the decision, said that Lin should have been matched.

Also, this is a blog article, not some fact finding mission of written word. If you want to take the "wasted no time" line as a dig on Lin feel free, but it's also what he did and/or the timeline as to when he said it.