Bonn that's pretty much what I have said. Give them minutes after they earn it. But sometimes you can't think like a fan. Our standards of earning are not the same as the coach. The coahc sets the standard. When the player meets that standard he plays them. The vets on our team are already lost so give them the time for now. When Channing and David are playing D(or whatever it is that the coach sets as the standard) the way they are asked by the coach(not by us) then you give them minutes. If you watch the history of basketball guys like Riley, LB, Parcells etc are all this way. Why? Why is it harder for talented young guys to get time with these coach's? Because this is how they think. The standard for starting is not Malik Rose or MoT. The standard is what the coach sets. As fans we don't know what this is. So we sit back and give the benefit of the doubt to guys that know 100000 times more than us. At least I do. I trust that no coach, regardless of what fans think they know, loses on purpose. His role is to develop the players. Whether that is on the court OR IN PRACTICE.

You may be right that Channing and Lee didn't play much (especially in the first half of the season) because they fell below Larry's set standards. But that just means he's setting insane standards for young players. I don't know about those other coaching examples you gave. I see them all playing young players way ahead of veterans even in some cases where the veterans are superior (which certainly isn't the case with the Knicks). (Haslem in yr 2 ahead of 'Zo and Walker; Josh Howard ahead of Stackhouse under the COY; Kwame at PF ahead of Devon George)

Posted by Bonn1997:

You may be right that Channing and Lee didn't play much (especially in the first half of the season) because they fell below Larry's set standards. But that just means he's setting insane standards for young players. I don't know about those other coaching examples you gave. I see them all playing young players way ahead of veterans even in some cases where the veterans are superior (which certainly isn't the case with the Knicks). (Haslem in yr 2 ahead of 'Zo and Walker; Josh Howard ahead of Stackhouse under the COY; Kwame at PF ahead of Devon George)

But Bonn that's a different situation then ours. We all need to stop comparing us to other teams. Haslem and Josh and Kwame are in situations in which they have clear leaders setting the standard for them. We have noone on the court setting the standard for them. So we can't have them developing habits on the court. We are a bad, bad team. Our situation is different. This nonsense about LB not playing young guys is such a misnomer. It's such an out and out scam created by the papers. Tayshaun Prince in his second year and third year under LB played over 30 minutes a game. My guess is that if he had not played defense the way he does he would not have gotten those minutes. I can also guarnatee(although a guess) that Frye would be getting those same 30 minutes a night next year no matter who was coach. Even if it was LB.

Take a step back and relax. The minutes will come for Frye. As a know nothing, no defense rookie last year he still averaged 24 minutes a game. Stop beleiving the hype. The minutes will come. And he will benefit from a year of seeing chaos and not once complaining about his minutes as much as the rest of us have. That's the attitude we need. He knows his time is coming, if we haven't.

[Edited by - bippity10 on 06-08-2006 7:02 PM]

Reggie Evans is a nice player who I'd love to have but BARELY worth the MLE, in my view, based on the market these days.

Of course, when it comes to the Knicks I guess it's assumed that they overpay for everyone.

This almost seems like the year where we should not be a player in the free-agent market.

Unless Caron Butler or Jefferies become viable targets (hahaa), we're spinning our wheels thinking anyone else is attainable or will have the type of impact we all would hope for. I'm still clinging to the the prayer that Isiah doesn't do anything rash, once the Al Harrington "sweepstakes" begin.

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by Bonn1997:

You may be right that Channing and Lee didn't play much (especially in the first half of the season) because they fell below Larry's set standards. But that just means he's setting insane standards for young players. I don't know about those other coaching examples you gave. I see them all playing young players way ahead of veterans even in some cases where the veterans are superior (which certainly isn't the case with the Knicks). (Haslem in yr 2 ahead of 'Zo and Walker; Josh Howard ahead of Stackhouse under the COY; Kwame at PF ahead of Devon George)

But Bonn that's a different situation then ours. We all need to stop comparing us to other teams. Haslem and Josh and Kwame are in situations in which they have clear leaders setting the standard for them. We have noone on the court setting the standard for them. So we can't have them developing habits on the court. We are a bad, bad team. Our situation is different. This nonsense about LB not playing young guys is such a misnomer. It's such an out and out scam created by the papers. Tayshaun Prince in his second year and third year under LB played over 30 minutes a game. My guess is that if he had not played defense the way he does he would not have gotten those minutes. I can also guarnatee(although a guess) that Frye would be getting those same 30 minutes a night next year no matter who was coach. Even if it was LB.

Take a step back and relax. The minutes will come for Frye. As a know nothing, no defense rookie last year he still averaged 24 minutes a game. Stop beleiving the hype. The minutes will come. And he will benefit from a year of seeing chaos and not once complaining about his minutes as much as the rest of us have. That's the attitude we need. He knows his time is coming, if we haven't.

[Edited by - bippity10 on 06-08-2006 7:02 PM]

Sounds more like an excuse. Why does none of this BS about earning minutes, developing good habbits, etc. not apply to 22 yr old Curry who plays every minute he can besides foul trouble? He, not Frye or Lee, is the youngster in the frontcourt whose "bad habits" and need to "earn" time should be most striking.
BTW, what's with the "have a beer and smile," "sit down and relax" stuff? Why assume someone's angry merely because they disagree with you?


[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 06-08-2006 9:15 PM]

Posted by Bippity10:

Bonn: Do you think that is perception or reality. Frye averaged 24 minutes. Curry averaged 26.

You just proved my point. If the two kids had to earn their min on a level playing field, Curry would have barely gotten off the bench. ("He's gotta play well, not just out play guys like Malik"--I hear that a lot, only it's in reference to Frye and by those who don't dislike Brown's coaching last year.) And Frye would have played much more than Curry. But that didn't happen. This so-called "earn your PT" strategy that Larry supposedly implemented didn't apply to Curry. Maybe Larry thought Eddy was cute and cut him some slack

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 06-08-2006 10:41 PM]

Posted by Bippity10:

This almost seems like the year where we should not be a player in the free-agent market.

I agree 100%...I've been saying this all off season...keep the team as it is, dump franchise and moT. They are only disgruntled players left.

I have to disagree somewhat that Lee didn't earn playing time over Malik.

Also, bringing in Reggie Evans torpedos JackieB who is quickly becoming a solid player.

I'm suprised you are looking to throw the MLE at a player in a contract year that is not a shot blocker or pure point.

Do your eyes just get warm and fuzzy at any MLE candidate? I'd rather resign reezy at the MLE.


[Edited by - rvhoss on 06-09-2006 10:07 AM]

Posted by fishmike:

Lee's a shrimp next to Evans. If you want to bulk up 15-20 pounds and use him as an uptempo 4-5 thats cool, but he may not be able to hold that weight, and he may not be an effective player at that weight either.

Posters said Lee is/can be as good a rebounder as Evans. Who said anything about body weight?

Posted by McK1:

why would Butler re-sign here?

there is interest in portland.