Posted by tkf:

Posted by martin:

Posted by BRIGGS:

would i trade
mike Sweetney and Rudy gay for eddie curry? NO anyone else?
Mike Sweetney and Rajon Rondo for Eddie Curry?No anyone else?
Mike Sweetney and Lamarcus Aldridge for Eddie Curry NO
Mike Sweetney and Adam Morrison for Eddie Curry? No anyone else?


in fact i came up with several more names that I would NOT pair with Mike Sweetney AND give up my rights to the greg oden draft for Eddie Curry we give away 2nd round picks like the cherries on top we have 0 value for them--heck we paid how much to SA to get malik for pick 30+30? and we are likely to have what pick 33 this year--oh yeah thats in houston for mo taylor.
Let isiah Thomas come on this board and refute me. Im not an idiot, Id like to debate this with any so-called nBA professional, ESPECIALLY given NO NBA team wanted eddie in FA

which leads me to point 2 if any scker thinks that they [knick management] didnt think they were a sure-fire playoff team now, you are foolish. they dont have a 125 MILLIOn $ payroll because they are rebuilding---what business fundtion increases payroll at such huge rates to lose more money? NONE--in times of despair business CUT payroll---you see they didnt acquire Q-Rich for 40mm Jerome James for 30mm Mo taylor for 9mm per Malik rose for 6.6mm per in the last 6-7 months to ebuild--you dont rebuild with those types you are trying to win now. What has happened is utter failure--the players are ineffecient soft and dont mesh. if we were rebuilding no rookie would have a jacket on like david lee for multiple games to let 37 year old davis play--its a lie--but its a convenient lie we put pieces that dont fit together and its going to be hard to descramble them.

Isiah did a good job of drafting Trevor Ariza Channing Frye and David Lee. I like nate at 30 but not for a larry brown team.
the eddie curry trade could equla disaster so i give no grade but it has a high chance of big time back fire.

other than that isiah has clearly wasted 300+ mmillion dollars with Taylor marbury Craw Q-rich really every vet he acquired


like i said i think we are going in the right direction somewhat --i mean we have spent so much money we have had to get something for it, no? i mean we couldnt have 12 earl boykins for 300-400mm spent? but for the monetary advantage we have, they have[knicks management] should be rated as a d since isiah walked in.


they have to admit failue to themsleves first back up stop lying and try to JUSt get rid of some guys who just dont fit. Ill trad q -rich for a bag of peanuts--anyone buying?

I can shoot down your assumptions so fast and it will make your argument crumble in a second man.

You state that NO other team was interested in Curry. Bull crap. You have zero way of knowing this. ZERO. Maybe you are relying on Chad or whatever but there were other offers and inquires.

Let me put this to you clearly: The Knicks have a $125 million dollar payroll and they are also rebuilding. Deal with it. Just because you as a team are bleeding through the nose does not make it mutually exclusive for you to be rebuilding. What part of younger bodies do you not understand? Frye, Lee, Nate, Crawford, Jackie, Curry are all young. Your definition of rebuilding means collecting draft picks and starting from scratch and maybe signing a free agent. Guess what? In NY you cannot do this. Why? It’s financially unreasonable. Same for the Yankees. The Yankees as a baseball organization lost money because of payroll, but baby, they don’t count the revenue made by TV, corporate sponsors and other whatnot. Same with the Knicks, they have the highest per seat average and with the other streams, they cannot afford to be Atlanta or Toronto for years.

Now, how many more picks do you want on this team? You almost have too many young guys and the current ones need playing time. So why are you complaining about some more second round picks that they included in the Curry deal? Oh, and anyone with a right mind would also say that Jackie would be a middle first rounder this year. We do have SA 30th pick and also have Isiah. First you praise Isiah for being a talent guy and then you shoot down the notion of the 30th pick. Don’t both add up together to be OK. You and I both can rattle off a full list of potential candidates at the 30 range that are impact.

The Knicks were only in a position to increase payroll to increase talent OR they would have had to sit until Houston came off the books plus about 3-4 years it would take Bynum to grow up. That’s a total of 6-7 years of HUGE losses. That’s financial mismanagement of ungodly proportions BRIGGS. And that’s what you call irresponsible.

I don’t know where you came up with the $300million dollar number. Look man, AD and Penny come off the books this year, Houston and Mo T next and JYD after that. And soon you loose your financial argument angle.

Curry is a risk, but that’s the position the Knicks were in. The guy is 23 and has really not been coached well. Isiah has surrounded him with the best teaching coach out there. Any reasonable person would say that Curry/Frye is a great freaking front line to build around. Maybe you would stake your team around Sweets and Gay. That’s nice.

You keep saying that what has happened is utter failure, but it’s only failure because it is not what you would have done. Here is a benchmark: What would have done in the 2 years since Isiah has taken over? Tell us your moves.

Great post martin I agree 100% but most of all I love this point..

Look man, AD and Penny come off the books this year, Houston and Mo T next and JYD after that. And soon you loose your financial argument angle.

and once that happens, they will then complain that our uniform colors are too orange and that kills the inner competitive spirt of the team, so until we change uniforms, we are doomed. In other words I can't wait for them not to have that argument, but they will scratch for something else..

It is also funny how we just swap picks with the bulls in 2007, but Briggs and other list that as a asset for the bulls as if the bulls can't be a lottery team in 2007, I mean that possibility still exists, and if that happens will the swapping of picks really mean anything?

My feeling is this, if we had 3 picks next year and drafted gay, morrison and aldridge, and had to trade 3 future picks to get those 3 guys briggs and others would complain that we gave our future away for 3 guys who might not be stars, It never ends. It seems as if Briggs wants top 3 picks for the next 20 years so he can always say, we have a future, or we can draft this star or that star, regardless of what happens on the court.

look at the Clipper from 200-2001 Olowakandi, Miles, Maggette, Odom, Richardson, Dooling..

Even the Clips from 01-02 Olowakandi, Brand, Maggette, Miles, Odom, Q, Dooling, Boykins....

Alot of young talent, not enough time to develop any of it because they spread themselves too thin by having too much...

As far as the cap number and rebuilding, I think what happened was as the knicks of the 90's (with Ewing, Oakley, et al) started to break down, management (dolan) tried to cobble it together because they felt they were one piece away- and that worked for a while, but rather than getting over the hump, they just dug themselves a deeper hole.

So, for Martin et al, I disagree that MSG wouldn't rebuild by tearing it down- they've done that with the rangers finally- its just they felt that there one piece away for too long. I think they are in a full rebuild mode right now.

And for Briggs et al, gosh- Curry is still only 23. Big mean peak late. And when Bynum is still a bench warmer at 23, you've officially notified that you can't say he's still young yet and hasn't developed, and you'll have to dismiss him as a 'he's been in the league 4 years and down nothing'.

Wait, didn't curry put up better numbers his first year as a pro than Bynum?

ALL sports are a cyclical business. This business model is poor awful and has basically failed. The NY Knicks will BLEED money this year, no doubt about it. I bet there is a huge shift into mandating payroll to be severely cut. You see bad signs when the NY Knicks are cutting ticket prices by 30-50% 20 games into the sesaon and it will get worse and worse and worse. By doing a traditional rebuild, they would NOT have HALF this payroll and would be half way done with it. Fans would have hope and like Chicago, fans paid to see that hope. They WILL NOT pay to see 90% of this roster with guys who seem disinterested, guys with towels over their heads, guys who are fat and injury prone etc... and the reward the Knick fans get at the end of this bad season--the Chicago Bull will be making a top 5 selection with our draft pick and the fANS KNOW that it could happen again next year. The NY Knicks, slothed in payroll disaster have very little chance to improve the team right now, so they have to somehow pull it together from within. the Ny knicks CANNOt fire Larry brown, to bring the subject up is absurd--he just signed a 5 yr 50$ deal and I dont blame Larry brown--its NOT his fault that the vets are inconsistent, that we dont have a PG, SF etc... he didnt do that.

Posted by fishmike:

Briggs, its easy to look at a plan thats failing and detail why its failing and why an alternative would have been better. Your assuming people will come out to watch rookies "play hard" en route 25 win season. Its an assumption. The Garden was DEAD before the Knicks won the Ewing draft. Your just posturing. I bet if you go the route of a dump, tank and draft rebuild your looking at an empty building. There is also no guarantee you actually get franchise talent. The Bulls are a good example. It took them 6 years into it to break .500 ball. 6 years.

100% agree that some of Isiah's move have been bad and had ZERO logic. Dont get me started on Mo Taylor, JJ, Vin Baker, etc
But a Marbury/Curry team with the veterans and young guys we have on this roster SHOULD be better then 6-17. A LOT better. I dont know if the record is an aberration or if management grossly overestimated the talent on the roster. That will obviously play out over the next couple months.

It surely is after the fact, but it doesnt change reality. With the resources and attraction of MSG, they couldve done a traditional rebuild and made money doing it by keeping payroll down and when it was time--ramping up. We have Curry and Frye, so they will have to work that angle and its not a bad angle. Buyt for $$$ out, it should be a whole lot better AND its going to be a difficult course going forward. Now they need to execute every move they make successfully.

Posted by BRIGGS:

ALL sports are a cyclical business. This business model is poor awful and has basically failed. The NY Knicks will BLEED money this year, no doubt about it. I bet there is a huge shift into mandating payroll to be severely cut. You see bad signs when the NY Knicks are cutting ticket prices by 30-50% 20 games into the sesaon and it will get worse and worse and worse. By doing a traditional rebuild, they would NOT have HALF this payroll and would be half way done with it. Fans would have hope and like Chicago, fans paid to see that hope. They WILL NOT pay to see 90% of this roster with guys who seem disinterested, guys with towels over their heads, guys who are fat and injury prone etc... and the reward the Knick fans get at the end of this bad season--the Chicago Bull will be making a top 5 selection with our draft pick and the fANS KNOW that it could happen again next year. The NY Knicks, slothed in payroll disaster have very little chance to improve the team right now, so they have to somehow pull it together from within. the Ny knicks CANNOt fire Larry brown, to bring the subject up is absurd--he just signed a 5 yr 50$ deal and I dont blame Larry brown--its NOT his fault that the vets are inconsistent, that we dont have a PG, SF etc... he didnt do that.

I agree with this 100%.

Posted by martin:

they cannot afford to be Atlanta or Toronto for years

the knicks have been atlanta or toronto for years, record-wise. I cant beleive Im saying this but I have to agree with briggs on this one, if your gonna lose why not do so with cheap young promising talent? I dont think its fair for martin to assume that the fans would stop coming to the garden if they started rebuilding becuase I dont think the Win/Loss record would even be that much different.



[Edited by - slimpack on 12-19-2005 10:38 AM]

coveting Curry and being willing to give up the farm when he was just fat but super talented is not the same as going after him after he missed 20 games and the play-offs b/c plus part of the Bull's training camp due to a defined career/life threatening heart condition.

Posted by fishmike:

getting Curry is the first real risk that they took, and be honest with yourself. Think of some of the scenarios we have shot out there in the last couple years that involve getting bigtime talent up front. I mean a year ago people were willing to give up multiple #1's for a guy like Dalembert, Kwame, Chandler or Curry and you usually laughed it off like we had NONE, ZERO chance at getting a player like that. Instead we should target the Zaza's, Steven Hunter's and Joel Pzserbella(sp?)'s of the league.
Now we took a risk and a shot at getting a potential star frontcourt player and now laughing it off. You cant have it both ways. What the Knicks need to do is focus on Frye's defense and rebounding. Focus on getting Curry at 280 and NOT the 310+ that he's looks like now. Mark Aguire did solid work with Sweetney. If we can accomplish something similar w/ Curry and Frye we have our starting frontcourt for the next 10 years. Now if you dont believe in Curry and Frye's talent than this arguement is wasted. If you do then no matter what happens in the draft it was a worthwhile gamble.

excellent post fish, the key is you have to believe the knicks got what they wanted in curry, I am fine with it, pair curry with frye, two 22 year old kids and you can have a frontcourt that is good for years to come. The thing is now that we are playing bad, all of a sudden curry went to having potential in the eyes of some to no potential and having less value than guys who are not even domianting on the college level( like gay). and Rondo. I mean some people will just never be satisfied, to them moves only make sense if they work out in the short term, they don't want to even bother looking at the long term benefits, or possible beneifits, yet they look at undrafted players who never played a NBA game as a bigger plus.. go figure..