Posted by nixluva:

Posted by djsunyc:

ok, let's take winning titles out of the equation.

how about just winning and advancing in playoffs? we didn't win a title with ewing's teams but that's all we can ask for as a fan base, right? just to win and advance and hope to get lucky.

so isiah's taking risks...the question is why? why is EVERY acquisition a risk? why not a combination of risks and some solid non-risks? he's like the preston wilson of nba gm's - sexy player, bats .240, will get you 25-30 homers b/c he swings for the fences every at bat, but strikeouts 200 times a year. ultimately, he doesn't help your team win and ends up being a journeyman.

the best player isiah acquired was marbury. the most non-risk acquistion of the bunch (although he too had alot of questions around him). every player since then have been MAJOR risks. anybody can appreciate the gunslinging style but it just leaves knicks fans scratching their head asking "why hasn't it worked yet?"

Isiah takes a chance on some guys because they have the kind of upside and talent that can make for a big jump in wins. So far that hasn't happened but you have to realize that he's NEVER held this group out as finished product. From the time we draft Frye, Lee and Nate, this team has been a new project, but too many of us want to forget that and treat this team like one of Laydens win now teams. IT'S NOT!

This is more of a semi rebuild and as such things can be shaky before they get settled and the team wins more regularly. Last year was a good example of that. The team had a rough start then it settled squarely into a .500 level, win one, lose one team. Now he's made the team better yet again and the team will have a 2nd year with the same base group and coach. Progress has to be allowed to develop. You guys seem to want it to be immediate as if this is an old vet team that has no developing players and their all settled and know what to do.

It's also an exaggeration to say that all he seems to add are high risk problem child type players. This team is actually FULL of nice guys that haven't been in trouble with the law. We also drafted some very stable players like Lee and Frye and even Balkman and Collins. Jared is a low risk guy. You knew you weren't getting a guy that had super high production. You just hoped to get a team player that defended and moved the ball. Q is a very solid team leader type of player as is Malik. Guys haven't come here and acted out either.

Posted by djsunyc:

Posted by nixluva:

Posted by djsunyc:

ok, let's take winning titles out of the equation.

how about just winning and advancing in playoffs? we didn't win a title with ewing's teams but that's all we can ask for as a fan base, right? just to win and advance and hope to get lucky.

so isiah's taking risks...the question is why? why is EVERY acquisition a risk? why not a combination of risks and some solid non-risks? he's like the preston wilson of nba gm's - sexy player, bats .240, will get you 25-30 homers b/c he swings for the fences every at bat, but strikeouts 200 times a year. ultimately, he doesn't help your team win and ends up being a journeyman.

the best player isiah acquired was marbury. the most non-risk acquistion of the bunch (although he too had alot of questions around him). every player since then have been MAJOR risks. anybody can appreciate the gunslinging style but it just leaves knicks fans scratching their head asking "why hasn't it worked yet?"

Isiah takes a chance on some guys because they have the kind of upside and talent that can make for a big jump in wins. So far that hasn't happened but you have to realize that he's NEVER held this group out as finished product. From the time we draft Frye, Lee and Nate, this team has been a new project, but too many of us want to forget that and treat this team like one of Laydens win now teams. IT'S NOT!

This is more of a semi rebuild and as such things can be shaky before they get settled and the team wins more regularly. Last year was a good example of that. The team had a rough start then it settled squarely into a .500 level, win one, lose one team. Now he's made the team better yet again and the team will have a 2nd year with the same base group and coach. Progress has to be allowed to develop. You guys seem to want it to be immediate as if this is an old vet team that has no developing players and their all settled and know what to do.

It's also an exaggeration to say that all he seems to add are high risk problem child type players. This team is actually FULL of nice guys that haven't been in trouble with the law. We also drafted some very stable players like Lee and Frye and even Balkman and Collins. Jared is a low risk guy. You knew you weren't getting a guy that had super high production. You just hoped to get a team player that defended and moved the ball. Q is a very solid team leader type of player as is Malik. Guys haven't come here and acted out either.

progress needs to be developed, ok fine. but at some point, wins have to matter. so far they haven't. but one day, they will and we are at dolan's mercy when that day is.

let me put it to you this way - everybody is killing mchale of the job he's done in minny.

wins since 95/96: 26*, 40, 45, 25(strike), 50, 47, 50, 51, 58, 44*, 33*, 32*

he's missed the playoffs only 4 years, his first and the last 3. what happened during the last 3 years? the owner refused to pay cassell and spree (who walked away for nothing). they then shifted focus to rebuilding (not to mention the death of malik sealy a few years before that).

he's made the playoffs 8 years in a row. yes, they only advanced once, but he's made them 8 years in a row. he drafted kg late in the first round.

and he's looked at as one of the WORST gm's in the league. are we in for a similar type tenure? b/c right now, isiah's tenure been worse.

Posted by djsunyc:

progress needs to be developed, ok fine. but at some point, wins have to matter. so far they haven't. but one day, they will and we are at dolan's mercy when that day is.

let me put it to you this way - everybody is killing mchale of the job he's done in minny.

wins since 95/96: 26*, 40, 45, 25(strike), 50, 47, 50, 51, 58, 44*, 33*, 32*

he's missed the playoffs only 4 years, his first and the last 3. what happened during the last 3 years? the owner refused to pay cassell and spree (who walked away for nothing). they then shifted focus to rebuilding (not to mention the death of malik sealy a few years before that).

he's made the playoffs 8 years in a row. yes, they only advanced once, but he's made them 8 years in a row. he drafted kg late in the first round.

and he's looked at as one of the WORST gm's in the league. are we in for a similar type tenure? b/c right now, isiah's tenure been worse.

Posted by djsunyc:

but those bad contracts are on high RISK players. that's why the word used is "dumping" grounds.

Posted by Solace:

Posted by Silverfuel:

Other than Eddy the players weren't HIGH risk, they were risky trades like the one for Crawford. He wasn't supposed to be the savior, he was just a replacement for Houston. And I dunno man, risky trades still does not make us a dumping ground. Dumping a salary would be Shandon Anderson and Howard Eisley.

Hasn't almost every trade we made been getting a player that another team desperately wanted to dump, while Isiah and some fans feel we got a bargain? That's what a dumping ground is. From the perspective of other GMs: "We have an overpaid player that we need out today. Who will take him? Hmm... the Knicks?" We are certainly getting that rep. In every trade, we take on extra salary. The odd part is how we talk about how great it was to get rid of overpaid player xyz, when we just took back another (possibly more talented) player who has a longer deal and is paid even more.

Posted by Ira:

Posted by Andrew:

Posted by babyKnicks:

I'd like to see a post after a team wins that the knicks have traded with under isiah.

Nazr to San Antonio

They were so happy with Nazr that they dumped him a couple of years later. Detroit picked him up and he finished the season riding the bench. Meanwhile, that trade gave us David Lee and Mardy Collins. Wouldn't you do that deal over again?

That was the second best IT trade. I think this Randolph trade will be his best. Randolph for Frye and Francis. How can you not like that?

Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by Solace:

Posted by Silverfuel:

Other than Eddy the players weren't HIGH risk, they were risky trades like the one for Crawford. He wasn't supposed to be the savior, he was just a replacement for Houston. And I dunno man, risky trades still does not make us a dumping ground. Dumping a salary would be Shandon Anderson and Howard Eisley.

Hasn't almost every trade we made been getting a player that another team desperately wanted to dump, while Isiah and some fans feel we got a bargain? That's what a dumping ground is. From the perspective of other GMs: "We have an overpaid player that we need out today. Who will take him? Hmm... the Knicks?" We are certainly getting that rep. In every trade, we take on extra salary. The odd part is how we talk about how great it was to get rid of overpaid player xyz, when we just took back another (possibly more talented) player who has a longer deal and is paid even more.

Yeah and factor who else wanted Jamal when he was a free agent, what about Eddy, what about Jeffries, what about Jerome James, Steph and Penny were total salary dumps. Actually a player who we just got rid of was sought after in Francis by Denver, Cleveland, and Clippers.