I want this 40 year drought to end. I want one year in which the New York Knickerbockers are the champions of basketball.

The bare bone of expectation for me is that they make the playoffs and get to the semi-finals. To continue that upward trajectory.

This team is in win-now mode as currently constructed. Because for some reason, the Knicks signed FIVE aging veterans in the off-season, the youngest being the 35-year-old Prigioni. The core is not old but bench players in key positions are. If the Knicks had Faried off the bench, it wouldn't matter that Camby has played 14 games this year. But the Knicks are so desperately in need of size and rebounding down low that it does.

If the Knicks can pick up Evans/Blatche type of guys in the off-season --(seriously, there has got to be some kid in college, Europe, or the D-League who can board and play D!)--and shed some age on the bench, the window opens further.

My other concerns are Tyson's minutes and how much he'll have left in the tank for the postseason, and Amare's health in general and how much I should invest in someone that may break down before/during the postseason.

I have plenty of concerns as to how the Knicks actually PLAY the game - poor PnR D (any guard who can dribble the ball in the NBA seems to play All-World vs the Knicks), poor offensive execution, ISO-heavy O, lack of rebounding. The farther they get from November ball, the more that feels like aberration and the current style of play feels like the 'real Knicks'.

But, then, even during this 'bad stretch', they managed to once again beat the team with the best record in the NBA, proving that their win in SA was no fluke.

It would almost be easier if they weren't capable of excellent play. Then I could just say they aren't good enough and accept their limitations as a team. But, they are. They were. So all I can do is hope they re-invest in a defensive-oriented/ball movement philosophy. SOON.

If the season were to end today it'll be...

1.) Miami.
2.) New York.
3.) Chicago.
4.) Brooklyn.
5.) Indy.
6.) Atlanta.
7.) Milwaukee.
8.) Boston.

First Round:
Miami vs. Boston = Miami.
New York vs. Milwaukee = New York.
Chicago vs. Atlanta = Chicago.
Brooklyn vs. Indy = Indy (Nets flop against winning teams).

Second Round:
Miami vs. Indy.
New York vs. Chicago.

This is why it's a must that we take the 1st seed (instead of the two). The difference of opponent come the 2nd round is always unreal when comparing 1st seeds and 2nd seed opponent(s). I believe we can take Chicago come postseason play despite the lack of regular season success, even with Rose, but I'd much rather face a Brooklyn/Indy/Atlanta type of opponent during the 2nd round while Miami fights against the likes of (chances are) Chicago.

As of right now I consider us an Eastern Conference Finals team. I feel we're one of the top teams of the East who'll finish with the two seeds right up there with Miami. I think we'll get through the first two rounds but if we head into the postseason as the #1 seed? I'll really start to dream big.