Posted by djsunyc:

Posted by Killa4luv:

Posted by djsunyc:

pass on zach. pass on amare. if amare is available, then something is up.

we've been taking nothing but risks. time to scrap all of that nonsense and build it from the ground up.

again, frye or zach? regardless of what the package is for zach, make a choice b/c that's what it will come down to.

Zach is much better than Frye offensively, and Frye may never be as good as Zach. The package matters to me, but I would pick Zach over him, any other argument, imo, is based on an emotional attachment to a player's potential; and again, I freaking LOVE Frye. But Zach is like 2 years older at 24 and has a full NBA season under his belt after surgery, and an elite offensive reportoire, in the paint, on the elbow, top of the key, hes an all around PF. I'd do it.

does being a lockerroom problem figure into the equation at all?

Yes it does, but no much. He's young hes gotta max contract and he's on a team that sucks. A team where he is asked to be the leader. That is a mistake, imo. But according to published reports, we have the best coach in basketball, shouldn't he be able to get the most out of this guy? Isn't this what he makes 10 mil per for?

well, nate can't. i'm sure you'd rather have him here than lb, no?

dude, at some point, you say "thanks, but no thanks" to guys like this. max contract, causes problems in the lockerroom REGARDLESS of who the coach is, and isn't helping the team win. (mo cheeks and nate haven't been able to change him...but i guess since they don't make $10 mil a year, they shouldn't be able to).

just b/c a guy isn't a good leader doesn't mean he shouldn't be a good soldier.

so you're a supporter of steph. you like mo. you don't mind bringing in zach. you're isiah's lovechild.

[Edited by - djsunyc on 05-08-2006 3:20 PM]

Posted by djsunyc:

well, nate can't. i'm sure you'd rather have him here than lb, no?

dude, at some point, you say "thanks, but no thanks" to guys like this. max contract, causes problems in the lockerroom REGARDLESS of who the coach is, and isn't helping the team win. (mo cheeks and nate haven't been able to change him...but i guess since they don't make $10 mil a year, they shouldn't be able to).

Not because they don't make 10 mil per, but because they arent the best coach in basketball. Isn't this what you would think the best coach in the game should be able to accomplish? Shouldn't he be able to work with a 20 and 10 big man who is one of the best in the league?

Again getting Zach would depend on several things, the deal, and the direction the team was going in, but my point is I am not unilaterally opposed to having him on the team. There are scenarios where I think it would make alot of sense actually. With his youth and talent it doesn't make sense to me to just not entertain any offers for him.

As opposed to guys like K-Mart, Cyber Twon, etc. There are no scenarios where I want them on our team, EVER! I wouldn't care if they got bought out and resigned for the vets minimum, I do not want to see those guys on my team.

just b/c a guy isn't a good leader doesn't mean he shouldn't be a good soldier.

so you're a supporter of steph. you like mo. you don't mind bringing in zach. you're isiah's lovechild.

I agree with the first part.

You like Craw and LB. Mo is a decent player, who I think will go to another team and be used properly and flourish in his role as a reserve ala Dice. Thats my honest assessment of him. You are caught in a love triangle with Craw and LB. Stuck in the middle, pun intended.

Posted by djsunyc:

btw, according to 82games.com (tom's loving me right now)

PER 48 mins:

randolph at PF is averaging 11.0 rebs
randolph at C is averaging 12.3 rebs

frye at PF is averaging 11.0 rebs
frye at C is averaging 11.5 rebs

an in terms of rebound player rating, randolph is 25.5 and frye is 25.4

so, outside of frye getting less minutes b/c it's his rookie season, he's just an effective a rebounder per 48 mins.

he's doing this while carrying he scoring load.

Frye doesn't expend nearly as much energy on the court.different ballgame if Frye was to become option 1 instead of an accessory piece scoring off Steph's penetration.

true we won't know till he is option 1, but comparing their rebounding per 48 and rebounding rate to make a point about what Frye is capable of when the 2 players serve two totally different functions on their team is the same slanted view

[Edited by - McK1 on 05-08-2006 7:25 PM]

The word defense is an obsession. So one defensive minded player is gonna make a differnce? Who is this player?

Ratliff has never been healthy his whole career! K-mart is damaged goods and fits the same argument DJ has. Dalembert is not gonna be traded to ny, who else? That rookie from Africa?

Don't think just because you can say defense that everyone else that is not saying it doesn't want defensive players! That is just about the most annoying thing that I see posted on here.

So if the knicks get hassell the knicks will turn to a contender? Wtf?

All the 48 mins per stats still do not say Larry is gonna finally start frye.

I'm very confused with the last few comments. No one here loves Nate and marbs or whoever that much. So don't throw that nonsense back at me or other posters.

Defense? Duh! Team defense! The coach has to get guys thinking and playing to their strengths on both ends. The team should not have to think. And there is no person in this league that will come in and all of a sudden make the knicks the ****ing pistons!

Yeah the knicks have to continue to make moves. Even if you win the championship you have to make changes!

Who should the knicks bring in? I love frye too but brown didn't play him even though he was kicking ass!

Ben Wallace is getting old and showing it. Besides he isn't coming to ny for obvious reasons.

Joel pryzbilla? Gadzuric? That retard from canada who is not as good as gadzuric?

Wtf?

Please add Reggie Evans to the list. I don't care how many boards you get and how well you play defense. I don't want to spend the next 5 years defending how grabbing a hand full of nuts is a good defensive play. It would be like telling someone that they should keep watching the Crying Game over and over because it is a great movie.

[Edited by - Pharzeone on 05-09-2006 08:21 AM]