eViL wrote:[newscaster]oohah and earl having an old fool battle for the ages. film at eleven.[/newscaster]

on one side, you got earl spinnin everyone into mass confusion. on the other side, you got oohah fantasizing about his make-believe rolls royce ridin king of the hood days. folks, this is gonna be a tough one to call.

all this in a thread titled, "BRIGGS" with the topics varying from Douglas, to Blair, to the etymology of the word "dime" as in assists, to wingspan, to rolls royces, to callin' hotties on pay phones at night across the street from the park, this thread has got it all.

misterearl wrote:rvwink - positively brilliant and well done.

Toney and Harry carried Jonesboro High School through the state of Georgia on their backs. At each and every game their parents watched and cheered. The same for college. You've heard of tennis parents? The Douglas' were two sport parents who were the foundation for their development, and made EVERY game, home and away. They went through several cars due to the heavy mileage. They are middle class, deeply committed and passionate about excellence in the exact manner Richard Williams raised Venus and Serena.

People who focus on athletic ability are missing the entire point of what makes Toney special. The intangibles of fatherhood and family are impossible to measure. Shooting percentages are irrelevant if you don't have the courage to take the shot when it matters most.

"Rumble young man rumble."

I live about 8 miles from jonesboro HS. I used to hear about the douglas boys all the time.... they were tough, competitive kids... I am not suprised both of them are having sucessful pro careers....

BRIGGS wrote:

rvwink wrote:"Atleast Douglas fits in my memory banks as a guy who resembles Knicks of the 90's--you know the type that won games."

My original infatuation of Douglas related to his admirable character, work ethic and self confidence which fits with what you said above. When I originally suggested that Toney Douglas had outstanding potential because of the kind of person he was, you initially suggested someone else who you thought the Knicks should have taken instead of Douglas. You were very confident you were correct. Second, you disregarded Douglas' consistent record of being the "go to" scoring guy on his college team that carried his team into the NCAA tournament. Instead you actually insisted that Douglas must be a flawed scorer because he missed so many shots in Summer League. That was mistake number 2 imo.

The fun for both of us is predicting who will be good, before it happens on the court. So I don't give you any credit for finally recognizing that Douglas was an outstanding late first round pick. Its too late to take credit for figuring that out imo. I am surprised I haven't once seen you refer to a guy's intangibles in making your assessment. You seem to focus primarily on a player's athletic potential. Did I get that wrong? Because my mind played such a valuable role in enhancing my own athletic results, I am attracted to athletes with character and confidence.

I'm sorry I didn't have privy to the fact that the Knicks had a second choice in the first round until a few hours before they drafted. But I would have taken Dejuan Blair all day every day at 29 from what was left. And at the end of the day--he is no slouch--he's good/great pick there--and I will be proven right. On a bad team like the Knicks Dejuan Blair would have a MUCH higher impact than Douglas and would had more value to W-L.

I don't know if I agree with what you're sayin' here, and you know I love Blair. I was talking him up more than anyone before the draft and got laughed at on occasion, even by you Briggs, where I remember you telling me to "go back to the drawing board" and that "we don't need a 6'6" PF right now." You've obviously had a huge change of heart on the kid somewhere along the way and hey that's fine. He is damn a good player.

I agree, I kinda thought they should've taken Blair at 29 myself, even after the Hill pick at 8, and said so at the time. After we found out we purchased the additional pick and he was still on the board, I thought it was a no-brainer even if it would've been a little overkill. That was more kneejeck reaction than anything because I love Blair and wasn't familar with TD. Having said that - two things: (1) I don't think Blair is a more skilled player or has more upside than Jordan Hill. I don't know what to tell ya, that's how I feel and I followed them both very closely last year where I think I've got a pretty good pulse on these two and what they can do. (2) What makes you think Blair would've gotten time on this team under Mike D. when he's not giving it to Hill right now? As good as Blair is you can't tell me he's more skilled than Hill. No way. They knew they'd be up against the possibility of losing Lee and they made it a point to bring in Hill for a look. Why didn't they bring in Blair for a workout as well? I think they read the situation properly and took the right PF at 8. They obviously wanted Evans or Curry but when they weren't there they went with a possible David Lee replacement and a damn good player in his own right. MDA, whether you agree with it or not and I'm on the record as saying I DO NOT, wants to go with a frontcourt right now of Lee and Danilo followed by Harrington and Jeffries. Hill can't crack that frontcourt rotation right now but Blair could've and we'd be winning games?? And Blair would've been playing ahead of Hill even if we had taken both at 8 & 29 respectively?? I don't see it. My feeling is Blair would've been outside the circle of trust as well with this friggin' D'Antoni.

JohnWallace44 wrote:Some of you are just not reading what the anti-Douglas (even though we're not really anti) folks are posting.

Nice player, but miscast.

Get it? The guy can be a good player, and at the same time not really help us. He's got 2 assists in two games and is not initiating the offense. When we need a PG the most, we're turning to a rookie who is either reluctant or unable to play that position correctly per the offense.

I'm not insulting his family when I point out that he's got the same number of assists as Blair in his amazing two games.

Reality is that we're losing games... by a lot. If it were Crawford/Nate/Marbury scoring 20+ with one assist in a double digit loss, you'd be screaming that they were empty points. Correct or no?

Difference is that he's playing good defense, but we're going to find out soon if we can win with Douglas running the show. So far, no good.

When Nate gets back, I feel like they'll need to try them in the backcourt at the same time.

jw has he been playing point? he's been at the 2, with hughes or dudu at the 1.

they told him to play the 1 in sl and he registered 21 assists and 2 turnovers in his first 2 games with a crap squad.

u should stick to picking up long-armed chicks.

JohnWallace44 wrote:He's playing more than enough minutes at the point to do better than one assist. He plays some off guard. He has to because he's not ready to initiate the offense. Problem is, nobody else can do it either. That's why we have a problem.

If you want to tell me that this was the plan and Donnie went into the season with Duhon and only Duhon as a point guard, then I've got more issues with the old man.

Or... are you saying that Douglas is capable of playing point given his SL performance (I agree he did look more PG-ish then) and he's just deciding not to run it effectively now?

Whatever is going on, its not helping us win games. Someone between Nate/Duhon/Hughes/Douglas has got to be able to operate a pick and roll, and hit the open man when a help defender comes. That is not exactly mission impossible.

Does Douglas have a position? If you think size does not matter, then he's a great 2 guard. If you watch the championship contending teams in this league, then you might think otherwise. Until we can win with Douglas going 20 and 1, then I'm going to continue to believe that he's a bench guard masquerading as the #1 option for the Knicks.

just watch this squad and see what d'antoni sets him up with to run successful plays with this team - that's right, exactly nothing.

Marv wrote:
just watch this squad and see what d'antoni sets him up with to run successful plays with this team - that's right, exactly nothing.

Its not a complicated offense. If you want to say that it's everyone else's fault... Just like its the fault of the other players that Gallo's not hitting anymore right? D'Antoni's fault that Hill isn't getting off the bench too right?

Would... I don't know... Brandon Jennings have the same problems initiating offense? Seems to me in what I've watched that they're running a lot of the same sets.

You're going to say, not fair, Douglas is a 2Guard - So we drafted a 6'1" off guard?

Just gets better and better in Knicks-land. It's a never ending joke on some of the best fans in the world.

JohnWallace44 wrote:

Marv wrote:
just watch this squad and see what d'antoni sets him up with to run successful plays with this team - that's right, exactly nothing.

Its not a complicated offense. If you want to say that it's everyone else's fault... Just like its the fault of the other players that Gallo's not hitting anymore right? D'Antoni's fault that Hill isn't getting off the bench too right?

Would... I don't know... Brandon Jennings have the same problems initiating offense? Seems to me in what I've watched that they're running a lot of the same sets.

You're going to say, not fair, Douglas is a 2Guard - So we drafted a 6'1" off guard?

Just gets better and better in Knicks-land. It's a never ending joke on some of the best fans in the world.

yeah it's not a complicated offense - position 4 people around the 3-pt line, let them throw the ball around the horn and then have one of them brick it. fabulous.

douglas has been introducing some energy and intensity and willingness to go toward the rim into the mix. and he's been successful at it. now d'antoni has to actually insert some kind of a feasible offense featuring guys moving inside and flashing to receive passes. that's when you’ll see assists start to accumulate.

JohnWallace44 wrote:Kam, is that what guys like Briggs and I suggested? Two bigs? The suggestion is a completely different draft strategy... and maybe spending more time on scouting instead of blaming it on Jennings for not coming to EuroBasket even though he schooled Evans in our individual workout.

Blair was supposed to go mid first round.

I do wonder though who is in charge on the defensive end. This would be where TD would assert himself first.

Because they are not trying to maximize their short term play, the Knicks situation is radically different. To help in their pursuit of Lebron next summer, improvements to the Knicks current lineup through the draft were critical. Having already drafted Hill at 8, and needing a back up point guard, the back court was where they were going. Also because they were not playing with a cheap second round pick, taking a chance on someone that was injury prone made no sense at all. The Knicks paid $3 million for the pick, and Toney's 2 year deal cost them almost $2 million, the Knicks needed the highest possible chance for success that they could find for the $5 million they were investing in this player.

I simply don't understand what the people who think DeJuan Blair should have been the Knicks 29th pick were dreaming about. The Knicks simply couldn't afford the downside risk that goes with a player without ACLs. Then risk number two is expecting a player that stands 6'5" and can't jump to succeed primarily as a rebounder.