EnySpree wrote:

playa2 wrote:Why must we be subjected to taking on someone else's aging star, why can't we grow our own ?

Was 2010 ever about building through the draft? Knicks are trying to get in the playoffs next year...no time for waiting for rookies to blossom

I don't understand the "aging star" referrence. The dude is 28. That is old?

I think MDA will do the same thing to Parker on what he did with Nash. Nash was viewed as old and lost a step in Dallas.

Curry for Parker? Sign me up!!

Also, Parker has an expiring contract.

franco12 wrote:

martin wrote:

playa2 wrote:Why must we be subjected to taking on someone else's aging star, why can't we grow our own ?

Knicks have been pretty good about focusing on Gallo, Chandler, no?

Martin, you serious?

That's a bit like saying an Ax Murder isn't that evil because, well, he doesn't kill everyone.

I am kinda hoping we miss out this year - partly because I'll be ok with missing out which I think might happen, and would be horrible.

But also because I am hoping it might wake this franchise up to rebuilding the right way.

The knicks have done a horrible job of developing talent through the draft. The jury is still out on Gallo, but we may get lucky.

And since Chandler is probably being included with Curry for Parker, you can take him out of your rebuttal.

I am not talking about the crap Isiah years you may be referring to (in reference to developing rookies), but so far Walsh's message since Day 1 has been about Gallo and Chandler in terms of rookies; hasn't changed either. And since Chandler is still on on the team, you refute of my rebuttal is crap.

martin wrote:

franco12 wrote:

martin wrote:

playa2 wrote:Why must we be subjected to taking on someone else's aging star, why can't we grow our own ?

Knicks have been pretty good about focusing on Gallo, Chandler, no?

Martin, you serious?

That's a bit like saying an Ax Murder isn't that evil because, well, he doesn't kill everyone.

I am kinda hoping we miss out this year - partly because I'll be ok with missing out which I think might happen, and would be horrible.

But also because I am hoping it might wake this franchise up to rebuilding the right way.

The knicks have done a horrible job of developing talent through the draft. The jury is still out on Gallo, but we may get lucky.

And since Chandler is probably being included with Curry for Parker, you can take him out of your rebuttal.

I am not talking about the crap Isiah years you may be referring to (in reference to developing rookies), but so far Walsh's message since Day 1 has been about Gallo and Chandler in terms of rookies; hasn't changed either. And since Chandler is still on on the team, you refute of my rebuttal is crap.

But your talking about 2 players.

Why did Walsh & Co trade Hill and a pair of future draft picks?

This desire for an insta-fix & impatience with developing talent - this has been going on a long time. Despite what Walsh may have said, I think the facts speak otherwise.

franco12 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

franco12 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:i have a feeling we'll end up with Parker or Arenas this summer.

Why not both! With all the cap room we have, we can just take Arenas off their hands and not send matching numbers back!

brilliant! i feel better our summer already.

Don't know if this means we can still bring back McGrady or not, but a line up of

Parker
Arenas
McGrady
Chandler
Gallo

just makes my heart sing

talk about exaggerating to make a point.

franco12 wrote:

martin wrote:

franco12 wrote:

martin wrote:

playa2 wrote:Why must we be subjected to taking on someone else's aging star, why can't we grow our own ?

Knicks have been pretty good about focusing on Gallo, Chandler, no?

Martin, you serious?

That's a bit like saying an Ax Murder isn't that evil because, well, he doesn't kill everyone.

I am kinda hoping we miss out this year - partly because I'll be ok with missing out which I think might happen, and would be horrible.

But also because I am hoping it might wake this franchise up to rebuilding the right way.

The knicks have done a horrible job of developing talent through the draft. The jury is still out on Gallo, but we may get lucky.

And since Chandler is probably being included with Curry for Parker, you can take him out of your rebuttal.

I am not talking about the crap Isiah years you may be referring to (in reference to developing rookies), but so far Walsh's message since Day 1 has been about Gallo and Chandler in terms of rookies; hasn't changed either. And since Chandler is still on on the team, you refute of my rebuttal is crap.

But your talking about 2 players.

Why did Walsh & Co trade Hill and a pair of future draft picks?

This desire for an insta-fix & impatience with developing talent - this has been going on a long time. Despite what Walsh may have said, I think the facts speak otherwise.

this is not even interesting.

Update from RealGM:
As the Knick front office monitors all of the latest chatter about LeBron James, the team is putting just as much emphasis on planning an alternative course of action in case James sign elsewhere or remains in Cleveland.

Several sources tell Alan Hahn of Newsday that the Spurs are "clearly ready to consider moves" for Tony Parker.

The Knicks would prefer to work a deal for Parker before July 1 in order to bolster their free-agent chances, but David Lee may need to be part of a sign-and-trade offer.

If Parker can be acquired but James still slips from their grasp, the Knicks would go after a free-agent big man -- Amar'e Stoudemire, Chris Bosh or Carlos Boozer -- and look to use their remaining cap room to sign Joe Johnson or Rudy Gay.

The team does not appear to have any intention of waiting another season to make dramatic improvements to the roster. With or without James on board, Donnie Walsh and his staff are preparing to enact an aggressive plan to build a contending roster this summer.

Read more: http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/67061/20100607/knicks_target_tony_parker_will_not_wait_till_2011/#ixzz0qBf2ZJ28

I guess this means Parker is a facet of Plan B?

Moonangie wrote:

Update from RealGM:
As the Knick front office monitors all of the latest chatter about LeBron James, the team is putting just as much emphasis on planning an alternative course of action in case James sign elsewhere or remains in Cleveland.

Several sources tell Alan Hahn of Newsday that the Spurs are "clearly ready to consider moves" for Tony Parker.

The Knicks would prefer to work a deal for Parker before July 1 in order to bolster their free-agent chances, but David Lee may need to be part of a sign-and-trade offer.

If Parker can be acquired but James still slips from their grasp, the Knicks would go after a free-agent big man -- Amar'e Stoudemire, Chris Bosh or Carlos Boozer -- and look to use their remaining cap room to sign Joe Johnson or Rudy Gay.

The team does not appear to have any intention of waiting another season to make dramatic improvements to the roster. With or without James on board, Donnie Walsh and his staff are preparing to enact an aggressive plan to build a contending roster this summer.

Read more: http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/67061/20100607/knicks_target_tony_parker_will_not_wait_till_2011/#ixzz0qBf2ZJ28

I guess this means Parker is a facet of Plan B?

Everything I have heard and read pretty much adds up to:
1) scour the draft for as many servicable skilled role players as possible
2) use Curry's contract to aquire a veteran player or player w/ a bad contract who fits and can contribute
3) sign FAs

not really rocket science. All depends on how it gets executed

martin wrote:

ItalianStallion wrote:Someone has to explain to me how Parker fits into our pick and roll offense. I realize he's a very good player, but he's more of a penetrator and we need someone than can also knock down the 3.

Spurs run a ton of pick and rolls.

I would have to watch enough Spurs games to comment, but one of the keys to D'Antoni's offense is the spread pick and roll. That requires the PG to be able to knock down 3s at a high enough rate to prevent the defense from cheating on him. You want to create a switch that puts the opposing guard on our C or allows the PG to have space to knock down 3s when they don't. But if the PG can't knock down 3s, no one has to switch. The defense can just allow the PG to throw up bricks (see Duhon). Parker is about 30% from beyond the arc. That's not only not good, it's POOR! I don't get this move at all.

martin wrote:

ItalianStallion wrote:

martin wrote:

ItalianStallion wrote:Someone has to explain to me how Parker fits into our pick and roll offense. I realize he's a very good player, but he's more of a penetrator and we need someone than can also knock down the 3.

Spurs run a ton of pick and rolls.

I would have to watch enough Spurs games to comment, but one of the keys to D'Antoni's offense is the spread pick and roll. That requires the PG to be able to knock down 3s at a high enough rate to prevent the defense from cheating on him. You want to create a switch that puts the opposing guard on our C or allows the PG to have space to knock down 3s when they don't. But if the PG can't knock down 3s, no one has to switch. The defense can just allow the PG to throw up bricks (see Duhon). Parker is about 30% from beyond the arc. That's not only not good, it's POOR! I don't get this move at all.

how many rings does Tony Parker have?

I am with Martin on this - I don't understand the hate for TP - the guy can ball, granted he has some mileage on him.