Reading Comprehension 101

1 Of course Gallinari is not a "lock". There are no "locks" in the draft. Then again, Benoit Benjamin was pretty good.

2. holfresh - Do you see a spot reserved for Lee (other than sixth man) or Nate in the thread starter I referred you to? C'mon, please read more carefully dude.

3. Duhon in the future? Yes.

It's not about the team I envision. It is about taking a critical look at the incremental moves (not wet fantasies) that Walsh has available. Of course it could all change in one bold stroke, and I would be estatic.

Just Reality. And please keep the country's economic tailspin, that will affect pro sports in ways most have not considered, in the back of your mind.

I would entertain any reasonable alternative (please no "dreck for talent" deals, thank you) that you propose Donnie Walsh has at his disposal.

I don't mind getting to FA or having the ability to get to FA--it;s healthy and smart for a basketball team to have the ability to get a FA. To force the situation where you hamstring your team is a different ballgame. That is why I think we traded Zach too soon. If someone gave us two picks a young prospect and an ending contract--OK that is a rebuilding direction. Trading him for Tim Thomas and excepting another player at 9mma year for two years was a desperation scenario. If the trade market was that bad for Zach--why did we rush to trade him--we have TWO years until 2010--we were going good as a team. I'm not saying Zach Randolph is the end all. Im saying we didnt need to do that trade and that trade HURT this season for a package that was NOT good enough. What we did was over DO it for 2010. When you trade Zach for TT the team will not be as good. Zach was NOT playing anything like last year--he was really good and we were winning. That trade was not good enough to alter the team like that 11 games in.

Right now if we were not so radical in terms of 2010--we would have

Chris Duhon signed long term MLE or average 5.5 mm for 6 years
Nate probably 5 years 25mm
David Lee 6 years 45mm


Now it will be a question if we can retain ANY of them and that question should not be there.

Gee um, how many championships has Lebron won already?
I think since he's been in the league 5 teams have managed to win without him.

oh no! Lebron's not coming!!!

If only there were some other free agents in 2010 that we could sign using our cap space.

If only there weren't a rule stating we had to use all of our cap space in 2010 and not wait till, say, 2011.

If only we hadn't traded away our superstars Zach and Jamal, who were such a huge part of the success of recent years.

I guess we're screwed.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by BRIGGS:

I don't mind getting to FA or having the ability to get to FA--it;s healthy and smart for a basketball team to have the ability to get a FA. To force the situation where you hamstring your team is a different ballgame. That is why I think we traded Zach too soon. If someone gave us two picks a young prospect and an ending contract--OK that is a rebuilding direction. Trading him for Tim Thomas and excepting another player at 9mma year for two years was a desperation scenario. If the trade market was that bad for Zach--why did we rush to trade him--we have TWO years until 2010--we were going good as a team. I'm not saying Zach Randolph is the end all. Im saying we didnt need to do that trade and that trade HURT this season for a package that was NOT good enough. What we did was over DO it for 2010. When you trade Zach for TT the team will not be as good. Zach was NOT playing anything like last year--he was really good and we were winning. That trade was not good enough to alter the team like that 11 games in.

Right now if we were not so radical in terms of 2010--we would have

Chris Duhon signed long term MLE or average 5.5 mm for 6 years
Nate probably 5 years 25mm
David Lee 6 years 45mm


Now it will be a question if we can retain ANY of them and that question should not be there.

So the Blazers were not rebuilding intelligently when they got rid of Zach?

Different team different time different direction. So your key to rebuilding is trading Zach Randolph? We traded him into a thin market when we didnt have to. What was the rush--do we have Branden Roy OR anything like him on this team? No

Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by BRIGGS:

I don't mind getting to FA or having the ability to get to FA--it;s healthy and smart for a basketball team to have the ability to get a FA. To force the situation where you hamstring your team is a different ballgame. That is why I think we traded Zach too soon. If someone gave us two picks a young prospect and an ending contract--OK that is a rebuilding direction. Trading him for Tim Thomas and excepting another player at 9mma year for two years was a desperation scenario. If the trade market was that bad for Zach--why did we rush to trade him--we have TWO years until 2010--we were going good as a team. I'm not saying Zach Randolph is the end all. Im saying we didnt need to do that trade and that trade HURT this season for a package that was NOT good enough. What we did was over DO it for 2010. When you trade Zach for TT the team will not be as good. Zach was NOT playing anything like last year--he was really good and we were winning. That trade was not good enough to alter the team like that 11 games in.

Right now if we were not so radical in terms of 2010--we would have

Chris Duhon signed long term MLE or average 5.5 mm for 6 years
Nate probably 5 years 25mm
David Lee 6 years 45mm


Now it will be a question if we can retain ANY of them and that question should not be there.

So the Blazers were not rebuilding intelligently when they got rid of Zach?

Different team different time different direction. So your key to rebuilding is trading Zach Randolph? We traded him into a thin market when we didnt have to. What was the rush--do we have Branden Roy OR anything like him on this team? No

The only way you get guys like Roy is by sucking and having cap space. Trading Randolph and Crawford gave us both.

Exactly; that gives you a good chance at signing a guy like Roy as an FA or drafting him in the lottery. When you get rid of highly overpaid guys like Zach and Jamal and over-time replace them with reasonably paid guys, you're probably more likely to be able to trade for a guy like Roy too. So if you want a guy like Brandon Roy to be part of your rebuilding, I think the best way to get him is to do exactly what Walsh has started doing.

LMAO we are all just toys for LeBron and he is playing with us to perfection.

LeBron says 2010 will be big and everybody makes him a Knick. Suddenly he would consider re-signing with the Cavs in 2009 and everyone goes into frenzy. Who wins either way? LeBron

You all who claim to know the future should calm down and wait to see what happens in the future. Logic nor dreams nor omens will tell you what will the Knicks nor any other team do in the future. If logic always worked there wouldn't be many trades in the NBA and there will be many in the deadline that will leave you wondering what were the GMs thinking.

And for those who want to believe that no free agent will leave their teams, relax! Its still one and a half years before we get cap space. Anyone can test the free agency before returning to their teams. In one of those tests you could get one or two and build from there. Years 2011 and 2012 will be big in free agency too and even if it doesn't pan out, there are many ways to build a team.

I don't understand what satisfaction can a Knicks fan have in thinking that no free agent will go to NY, that we will not find a way to make good trades and that we wont be able to sign our free agents or get value out of them.

only way to get a player like roy, in all honesty, is by drafting one.

but i digress...

when it comes to players in the 2010 free agent class, there is ALOT of money available. many teams have cap room to give guys max deals. so a player knows the money will be there, then it comes down to other factors to make their decision.

1. do they like new york?
2. do they want to raise their family here?
3. do they want to be scrutinized by the press every day?
4. do they want to be scrutinized by the fans every day?
5. do they think they can win in ny?

unlike baseball, a team can't outbid another team in the nba. there are set max contracts. so those other factors come into play. some people may embrace the challenge, but most players won't. if you had the option of making the same money in a company where it's quiet and you're appreciated or a place where you're constantly scrutinized, which company would you choose?

that's why it's very tough to lure free agents to ny. now, if the team was constantly winning championships, it might be an attractive lure for *older* players that have already got their payday. but that's not even a certainty.

knicks are putting themselves in a position to see which players would say YES to all those questions above. which is good, but even then, after the player signs, he may change his mind after some time here. it's a crapshoot. it's a total shame that ewing was so underappreciated during his time here. knicks fans should be ashamed of themselves. but i digress.

so at this point, it's very difficult to see who's going to be a free agent and who's not and why once CAN question whether the knicks putting all their eggs in the 2010 basket is the best idea for the franchise moving forward or not.

Posted by djsunyc:

only way to get a player like roy, in all honesty, is by drafting one.

but i digress...

when it comes to players in the 2010 free agent class, there is ALOT of money available. many teams have cap room to give guys max deals. so a player knows the money will be there, then it comes down to other factors to make their decision.

1. do they like new york?
2. do they want to raise their family here?
3. do they want to be scrutinized by the press every day?
4. do they want to be scrutinized by the fans every day?
5. do they think they can win in ny?

unlike baseball, a team can't outbid another team in the nba. there are set max contracts. so those other factors come into play. some people may embrace the challenge, but most players won't. if you had the option of making the same money in a company where it's quiet and you're appreciated or a place where you're constantly scrutinized, which company would you choose?

that's why it's very tough to lure free agents to ny. now, if the team was constantly winning championships, it might be an attractive lure for *older* players that have already got their payday. but that's not even a certainty.

knicks are putting themselves in a position to see which players would say YES to all those questions above. which is good, but even then, after the player signs, he may change his mind after some time here. it's a crapshoot. it's a total shame that ewing was so underappreciated during his time here. knicks fans should be ashamed of themselves. but i digress.

so at this point, it's very difficult to see who's going to be a free agent and who's not and why once CAN question whether the knicks putting all their eggs in the 2010 basket is the best idea for the franchise moving forward or not.

You can get Branden Roy--when he is 33

We'll get a FA--but if it is not Lebron while their may be some great players out there everything/anything else will be second rate. I think we can get 1 FA and my bet is it will be Stoudemire. Not bad but he's also a risk and not the same guy before surgery.

Posted by Knicksfansince94:

Why am I stupid, because I'm not a bandwagon jumper like you, and I don't wash my hemp clothes in a stream? hippie.

So you think that its Lebron or nothing? Life ends if we don't get Lebron? He's a prima donna and his act is getting old. I really don't need to hear his name for the next two years. There are PLENTY of free agents available in 2010. The plan all along was Lebron OR other free agents. Get over yourself, hippie.

[Edited by - knicksfansince94 on 12-21-2008 06:27 AM]

When Bryant and KG careers are over 'WHO ELSE IS GOING TO RULE BASKETBALL'? LEBRON IS GOING TO RULE EVERYONE FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS!!! You don't know how to be excited about winning and having it all? That's nuts!

It's the 'top star stupid'! And why are you calling me hippie? With over 86 hundred hits, I'm hardly a bandwagon fan. There's really nothing to bandwagon for right now anyway.

[Edited by - 4949 on 12-21-2008 1:36 PM]

Posted by BRIGGS:

We'll get a FA--but if it is not Lebron while their may be some great players out there everything/anything else will be second rate. I think we can get 1 FA and my bet is it will be Stoudemire. Not bad but he's also a risk and not the same guy before surgery.

probably not amare b/c of prior beef with d'antoni.

i think if the knicks don't get lebron or wade, then the 2010 plan was unnecessary. they are the only two true franchise changing players available that summer. otherwise, the knicks could've put together a team like the clippers and would be perfectly fine in the eastern conference w/ d'antoni.