Find a way to agitate yourselves and work into a frenzy to hate on phil more.

Chandler wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:Gotta love this BS.
As if the Knicks weren't in talks with Minnesota?????
They had interest in making the deal. Lets now pretend as if Phil and the Knicks refused to take Rubio.
It didn't happen. There was strong interest from the Knicks. Trades are not easy to make.

But one thing about Rubio. He would have been great for 2 years, but longterm I wish we will able to get a PG that can shoot from outside as well. As good a passer as Rubio is, a great team needs a better primary creator than Rubio. You look at Minnesota, they don't even make the playoffs despite having better younger talent than us, and a better coach.

Plus, lets look at this another way. So many of us wanted to tank (not me, but I've come to embrace it now). The Knicks get Rubio over Rose, and then win a few more games now, maybe say finish with 35 wins instead of 30. That's a difference in drafting 6th or 11th.

We're in a good spot in the draft, and we're in a good spot because we're not committed to Rose beyond this season, or Melo beyond 2018. We have all the opportunities in the world to rebuild a team with KP/Willy as the two starting building blocks.

I generally agree w ur posts. But this isn't BS

Crzy is a great poster albeit one immensely frustrated w Phil and not without reason

Fwiw I'm still in Phil bandwagon and think he approached this situation the right way

IMO if anyone knew Rubio could consistently play the way he has been lately (a) we would have traded and (b) more tellingly minnny would not have traded him

I'm happy for Rubio at this point. But he's been in the league for a while now and underwhelmed and despite steals I don't consider him a good defender.

I don't like Rubio as the primary star point only because he can't shoot and I don't think it works in today's NBA. Just like with Rose, you get one thing (In Rubio's case passing in Rose's case driving/scoring) but you miss the other important part. We need to get a PG that can shoot, drive, and dish. Not just 1/3. Even 2/3 is meh. Strive for a PG that can do all 3 skills. I'd aim for a player like Goran Dragic, and think Goran has much more winning skills than Rubio. I like Rubio, but I feel people are too easily impressed by his passing skills.

We should be looking at younger players with the skill of Dragic instead of Rubio, IMO. It's why I'm intruigued by Monk. I don't know about his passing level, but he can shoot and drive. Is he a good enough passer to translate into a PG in the Tri? Has he shown an ability to find the open man on drives? I really don't know, but we need a guard that is our highest usage ballhandler who can shoot, drive and pass not just 1/3 or 1.5/3 like with Rose and Rubio. Ofcourse Rose vs Rubio, we are better off with Rubio. I just don't think we lost out on what is our biggest need, which is a PG that can do all three things - pass, shoot, drive.

Andrew wrote:First there were reports that the Knicks were trying to give Rose away for nothing. Was that true? Then they were asking for too much. Was that true?

Rubio is younger, cheaper, better defender, and overall is playing better than Rose this year (not just recently). Rose went AWOL, is not guaranteed to sign with Minn after this season and probably is going to want MAXish dollars from the team he does sign with....or at least 20M a year on a long term deal.

Knick fans were jumping for joy at a straight up swap (most at least).

Given all of that why do you think that it was a straight up swap. IMO Minn should have been asking for more (think draft pick) than just Rose in return for Rubio.

From what I've read, Minn fans are definitely not happy with Rubio's defense, and I think when I checked his player tracking data this year, it was not good. That said, he's still a much better PG than Rose.

nyknickzingis wrote:

Chandler wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:Gotta love this BS.
As if the Knicks weren't in talks with Minnesota?????
They had interest in making the deal. Lets now pretend as if Phil and the Knicks refused to take Rubio.
It didn't happen. There was strong interest from the Knicks. Trades are not easy to make.

But one thing about Rubio. He would have been great for 2 years, but longterm I wish we will able to get a PG that can shoot from outside as well. As good a passer as Rubio is, a great team needs a better primary creator than Rubio. You look at Minnesota, they don't even make the playoffs despite having better younger talent than us, and a better coach.

Plus, lets look at this another way. So many of us wanted to tank (not me, but I've come to embrace it now). The Knicks get Rubio over Rose, and then win a few more games now, maybe say finish with 35 wins instead of 30. That's a difference in drafting 6th or 11th.

We're in a good spot in the draft, and we're in a good spot because we're not committed to Rose beyond this season, or Melo beyond 2018. We have all the opportunities in the world to rebuild a team with KP/Willy as the two starting building blocks.

I generally agree w ur posts. But this isn't BS

Crzy is a great poster albeit one immensely frustrated w Phil and not without reason

Fwiw I'm still in Phil bandwagon and think he approached this situation the right way

IMO if anyone knew Rubio could consistently play the way he has been lately (a) we would have traded and (b) more tellingly minnny would not have traded him

I'm happy for Rubio at this point. But he's been in the league for a while now and underwhelmed and despite steals I don't consider him a good defender.

I promise you with the way this team has so many internationals, with Willy and Rubio being teammates for Spain, there is no way in hell that Phil is passing up trading for Rubio. Don't believe the BS in the media or the anti Phil agenda. The reason they had talks was because the Knicks were trying to trade Rose. It's not like Minnsota just woke up one day and siad "hey leys trade for Rose'. It was the Knicks who wanted that deal. The Wolves have done the same with Detroit. All season they've flirted with the idea to trade Rubio, only to back off last minute. They did the same with us. Trust me, if we could have gotten Rubio, Phil would have jumped it. Phil traded for Jose and Jose was a poor man's Rubio. Phil loves passing big guards like Rubio.

I don't like Rubio as the primary star point only because he can't shoot and I don't think it works in today's NBA. Just like with Rose, you get one thing (In Rubio's case passing in Rose's case driving/scoring) but you miss the other important part. We need to get a PG that can shoot, drive, and dish. Not just 1/3. Even 2/3 is meh. Strive for a PG that can do all 3 skills. I'd aim for a player like Goran Dragic, and think Goran has much more winning skills than Rubio. I like Rubio, but I feel people are too easily impressed by his passing skills.

We should be looking at younger players with the skill of Dragic instead of Rubio, IMO. It's why I'm intruigued by Monk. I don't know about his passing level, but he can shoot and drive. Is he a good enough passer to translate into a PG in the Tri? Has he shown an ability to find the open man on drives? I really don't know, but we need a guard that is our highest usage ballhandler who can shoot, drive and pass not just 1/3 or 1.5/3 like with Rose and Rubio. Ofcourse Rose vs Rubio, we are better off with Rubio. I just don't think we lost out on what is our biggest need, which is a PG that can do all three things - pass, shoot, drive.

I'm not sure it was that clear. Rubio still has 2 years of a deal. There's a draft w lots of pgs. And a FA class with lots of pgs. And keep in mind that even if we didn't draft a pg teams that do may be forced to release or trade some of their existing pgs (e.g. Think about celts if they draft a pg)

Point being, it wasn't such a no brainer to trade for Rubio at the time given some of the alternatives above.

My only criticism of crzy post is it employs hindsight. Rubio wasn't playing that way at the time or for the previous 7 years. To look at a recent hot streak and say we should have expected that seems suspect

Personally while I don't hate Rubio I have concerns w his outside shooting and most of his defense

meloshouldgo wrote:Revisionist history based on speculation rather than facts. One thing you can be sure of though, if we had made the trade Malik Monk would have been a pipe dream. We would be picking around 15th. Or he would have had a few rough games at first and people would be crucifying Phil for getting a PG that can't shoot. When the intent is to knitpick no matter what it doesn't matter what you do.

I agree, he would have messed with the tank. I'd rather have one of the studs in this draft, and add Rubio later on (or someone else). Impatience has never lead the Knicks to the promised land, and that won't change no matter who is the GM.

Steady ahead.

Sorry, wasn't looking for a 7th or 8th seed playoff push only to get swept by Boston or Cleveland.

Keep losing.

Keep drafting well.

nyk4ever wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:Good no trade result.

Sorry, wasn't looking for a 7th or 8th seed playoff push only to get swept by Boston or Cleveland.

Keep losing.

Keep drafting well.

exactly. we want a higher pick, not a lower one. that's hard for some people to understand though.

not for nothing either, rose is averaging 19ppg on 50% shooting since the all-star break, but his numbers aren't posted because it doesn't fit the agenda.

More than happy to add Rubio if we ALREADY had KP and Josh Jackson/Tatum/Isaac/Monk or even any of the PGs from this draft. Then perhaps we could have something special here. But no, we're not there yet. We're still building internally through the draft.

I'm simply not giving up or risking the chance to draft another potential franchise changing piece for Rubio. No way in hell.

He's just not that good.

crzymdups wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/espnsteinline/status/847681668466917377

Instead of hating on Phil we should commend Phil. Rubio's superior play has put the Wolves ahead of the Knicks in the lottery aspect. Should I say the Knicks ahead of the Wolves.

crzymdups wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:Revisionist history based on speculation rather than facts. One thing you can be sure of though, if we had made the trade Malik Monk would have been a pipe dream. We would be picking around 15th. Or he would have had a few rough games at first and people would be crucifying Phil for getting a PG that can't shoot. When the intent is to knitpick no matter what it doesn't matter what you do.

BS - this team is a mess, they would've won maybe 2 or 3 more games max. They could still tank, this would be a trade for the future.

If it's speculation why is Stein mentioning it? Of the ESPN guys, he almost never trolls the Knicks. He knew it was a real deal on the table.

Anyone who didn't dance a jig if they traded Rose for Rubio doesn't know much about basketball.

Rubio
Monk / CLee
Melo / Lance
KP
Willy

That's the bones of a good team. Maybe you move Melo for Austin Rivers and have a good young guard corps for the first time in like 25 years

As usual, Shouldgo missed the point. Trading an expiring contract for a 2 year bargain is a no brainer. Think either Phil's ego got in the way or his gift for dealing with people screwed things up. Probably ended talks with "Do you know who I am?"

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

nyk4ever wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:Good no trade result.

Sorry, wasn't looking for a 7th or 8th seed playoff push only to get swept by Boston or Cleveland.

Keep losing.

Keep drafting well.

exactly. we want a higher pick, not a lower one. that's hard for some people to understand though.

not for nothing either, rose is averaging 19ppg on 50% shooting since the all-star break, but his numbers aren't posted because it doesn't fit the agenda.

More than happy to add Rubio if we ALREADY had KP and Josh Jackson/Tatum/Isaac/Monk or even any of the PGs from this draft. Then perhaps we could have something special here. But no, we're not there yet. We're still building internally through the draft.

I'm simply not giving up or risking the chance to draft another potential franchise changing piece for Rubio. No way in hell.

He's just not that good.

agreed. i love rubio, i wanted us to draft him however many years ago that was now. if we had a core in place that was missing an orchestrator, like him, i would have definitely wanted to pull the trigger. but as of right now, i think the capspace and the higher draft pick are more important. as vmart also said.. keeping rubio, who has played well, has led to the wolves winning more games, which gives us more ping-pong balls. win-win.

fishmike wrote:I would have been pumped for Rubio. I think he would be a good fit. Its just not fair to assume a deal was on the table and the Knicks phucked it up, and then kill the Knicks for phucking it up.

I dont think anyone has been impressed with the deal's Phil has made so Im not sure it was as simple as what was proposed. IF it was obviously another bad miss by Phil.

oh stop fish, you know you're just a "phil-apologist" and trying to "spread your pro-phil agenda"