sidsanders wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:If curry drop dead of a heart condition, then I can blame thomas, but everything Curry has done since he got here has been self inflicted. No one can say curry did not have the potential to be a star in this league when thomas aquired him. He may have given him a few extra $ but you can say that about more then half the league. I can't see how anyone could have predicted such a flop.

the fact that the bulls gave up on him and he had been under-achieving in chitown isnt enough? his coach thinking he didnt work hard enough in chitown? the warning signs were there

The trade was largely celebrated around here. Nobody really sweated the draft picks because we all pretty much assumed that Curry would have us in the playoffs.

It was a relatively risky trade, but that pretty much centered on Curry's heart condition as Knicks1248 alluded to. Curry was viewed as a young, budding center on the rise and in a big man depleted east would pretty much run the Garden if he could stay on the court.

Didnt turn out that way, and the trade is one of the worst in sports history, but there was logic behind it.

Paxon also offered 400k a year for 50 years if Curry go away and no play. Hi hi??

Cosmic wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:You're not right in saying that Paxon didn't want to give up on Eddy. Wishing and hoping Eddy turns it around is different from not wanting to give up. If he didn't want to give up, he wouldn't have traded him.

Paxon also offered 400k a year for 50 years if Curry go away and no play. Hi hi??

I recall Paxson being very animated and very upset the day of the trade.

He did the trade because Eddy forced his hand with the QO situation. Eddy was ready to take the QO, sit out the season, and walk for nothing. That forced Paxson's hand as a GM.

"I would never have put Eddy on the basketball floor, it's as simple as that, if he didn't take the test," Paxson said. "People can criticize me for that, and I really don't care."

He talk about the genetic test or whatever they wanted him to take to prove that he won't keel over and die.

How about this though-- both Paxon and Isiah were fools for wanting to have anything to do with a 7'0" 300 pound Shaqesque figure that couldn't grab more than 6 boards a game. That's a warning sign.

Cosmic wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:I see...you're saying he didn't want to give up on what he could have become, which means that he was valuable at the time, which means that Isiah was justified in trading for him at the time.

How about this though-- both Paxon and Isiah were fools for wanting to have anything to do with a 7'0" 300 pound Shaqesque figure that couldn't grab more than 6 boards a game. That's a warning sign.

Agreed.

Looking back on my own thoughts I remember when Curry was a Bull and marveled at how he could put up 18 points on 9 dunks in the first half of games (he actually did that to us once) but then he had NOTHING in the 2nd half. All he did was gasp for air every 2nd half. I recall fans way back when wanting to trade for him and I recall saying no way...dude can't play but one half..and has zero defense.

Then we traded for him and for whatever reason I was excited. Made excuses for him, etc. But it didn't take long (fall 2006) before I turned on the fat piece of trash.

Fools gold. That's what Isiah was. Fools gold.

The man had an eye for college talent. No doubt. Problem was he used that same perception on NBA veterans he traded for. Didn't work for them. Ever. Every veteran he traded for he saw them as a kid he could mold. Never happened.

And, again, Isiah's BIGGEST mistakes were the length of contracts he gave players he liked. There was no need for it. Here was a man taking a RISK on any given player - and giving into their demands for a full length contract. That was the problem. Here you are taking a RISK on a player - giving him a big pay day - and you don't make the final year a TEAM option? Afterall, it's ME taking a risk on YOU...and I give YOU all the leverage in a contract?

Who the hell works like that? Oh..Isiah did. Oops.

That's a great summary and evaluation of Isiah's time here. Right on the ball.

Where I do agree with Isiah is his idea that he could mold these veterans. I firmly believe that, while more challenging, you can mold a veteran to your liking assuming he is sufficiently stable in mind and in environment. He just wasn't the guy for the job. And it's really not a challenge that you
take on with multiple players in a very short period of time. I guess you could say that his direction was sound in some ways but his approach was kind of like the opposite of the way things should be done.