Posted by Bippity10:

Even with Marbs improving we don't really have a guy that everyone can look to as an example of how to play. Marbs is learning and guys follow his lead, but it's tough to be a great leader when you are learning these simple things yourself.

I feel the exact same way. Marbury, for all his talent and good play, is not the best person to be leader on this team. We need another star player (or close to that) who works hard, has some more experience, plays D, and is a vocal leader.

Which is another reason why I am oppossed to that trade proposal involving Frye. Frye has many of the tools, high intelligence, charisma, and displays of leadership to be that kind of player. His D is not good, and he needs to work on other parts of his game as well, but this guy is no dummy either, and has shown us to be a hard worker. The problem is it might take a few years for him to completely develop, and we don't really have many others like that, making it's hard to be patient.

I also like Lee's confidence and hard work, and Nate has some hope too because of his big heart. He needs more self-discipline, but I don't think he's as arrogant enough to not work on that. He listens to Brown and is young and hyper so it's understandable that he makes mistakes. Everyone talks about his b-ball IQ, but John Starks was not considered THE brightest player on the Knicks making some dumb plays at times, but made up for it with heart and hustle when we were winning. I see a lot of the same heart and hustle out there in Nate, which is why I'm not a big anti-Nate person either.

The reason they are getting flack is because they are being forced to play major minutes and we see their weaknesses affect us in the W & L columns. Good teams don't depend on rookies to win games, which is evidence to suggest we are NOW, sort-of, rebuilding (not what we were led to believe earlier in the year, though). I think to rail on Nate & Frye is a bit harsh being that they are rookies. In 3 years if they look the same then I'd feel more comfortable with nasty criticism, but now they are learning.

However, we also have gaping holes at key positions, a PG/leader who is is learning himself, too much dreck, and inconsistent, overpaid or over-the-hill veterans like Mo, Malik, Davis, Q1, Penny, James, and even Curry & Crawford and two other other young unproven players like Woods & Butler. That's a tough roster to win with on a consistent basis, or change easily no question.

We are definitely in a heck of a bind.

[Edited by - PresIke on 02-02-2006 3:53 PM]

[Edited by - PresIke on 02-02-2006 3:53 PM]

Posted by fishmike:

Crawford and Frye for Ike Diogu, Pietrus and Derrick Fisher
Antonio Davis and QRich for Theo Ratliff and Rueben Patterson
Mo T, Nate, Ariza and the Spurs pick for Maggette and Rebraca

Marbury/Fisher
Pietrus/Patterson
Maggette/Woods/Rose
Ike/Lee/Butler
Curry/Ratliff/Rebraca

Much tougher team. Maggette I'm looking to get at a discount because of the injury. I see that as the one big risk. As for the rest I'm putting blue collar tougher guys around Marbury/Curry's scoring. Fisher/Patterson/Pietrus/Ratliff gives me a unit of guys that can play defense. Since we have no shot at a high pick in the next 2 years there's no reason to lose for the sake of losing. Change the make up into guys that play a certain way.

Marbury isnt Iverson but he's a 20/8 player with a good FG% and takes care of the ball. Curry's got his holes but he scores at 54% and gets to the line. Stick 2-3 other guys out there happy to play hard D and rebound and this team gets better fast.

Do we win 50 games and go the ECFs? God no, but this doesnt stop us from looking to use Garden $$$ to pick up prospects/picks and continue to build a pipeline.

No way I would do this if we had our picks. This is damage control but there is still an upside to that squad

I'm not saying all those deals would fly either, the point is the direct I would push the team in.

I agree with your philosophy of getting rugged players in here. I think it's particularly needed on the wings. I don't think these trades are realistic, but guys like Pietrus and Maggette would be huge upgrades.

I still say Frye is better than Diogu. He plays with a toughness/edge to his game. He's looked bad on D because he hasn't gotten consistent minutes and because our guards are letting guys into the paint at will.

Doesn't it suck that we could have drafted Pietrus instead of Sweetcakes?

edit: I do think the Q and AD for Theo and Patterson trade is realistic, and I would strongly consider it. I hate paying Theo for three more years though. I agree they should try to make some changes to win now. There's no point in tanking until Marbury's contract is over. Don't take anything longer than Marbury's contract back. Moving Marbury would kill any interest in this team, and I highly doubt the Garden would present a team without a face. Even the Rangers who dumped a lot of salary kept Jagr around.

[Edited by - crzymdups on 02-02-2006 5:13 PM]