holfresh wrote:PS..I may question the fandom of those who joined the forum around feb of 2012 but that's it..

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:And to get back in topic..At the start of the year..JKidd got credit for the ball movement and was supposedly the reason the Knicks were winning..Felton got hurt and was out close to a month ..Prigs and Kidd had ample opportunity to take the reins and show us how to run a team..They didn't ..The Knicks played .500 ball..It's wasn't until Felton came back and got healthy that the team started playing better again..Now they are trying to credit Prigs with the late season good play..Come on..Prigs wasn't averaging 15 mins a game..

Kidd's biggest strength IMO early in the season was his 3pt shooting and D, he had very little if any mobility. He was playing SG when Felton was a the point and doing well, to make matters worse Kidd was getting more minutes than he should have.

The difference with Prigs IMO was that he was doing a better job of finding Melo among others. In the Boston series Felton was often getting double teamed as soon as he crossed halfcourt, sometimes even before that. They didn't guard prigs as closely at PG because they knew he wouldn't take it to the rim. When Felton was moved back to the 2 during the series it allowed him to work off the ball and he was able to penetrate and get to the rim and the foul line.

I'm not suggesting that prigs should be the starter for the entire season, he won't last and I want a PG who can get to the rim. I would like to see Felton challenged for the starting job by another PG out there, and if he wins fine, but I'd like to see if we can do better.

I see your point but my argument is since Felton played well at the 2 and gave teams problems with his ability to penetrate, score and dish ..How does Prigs get the credit for that..Why doesn't Felton get credit for his own play..It almost seems as a slight to him..The guy excelled when he moved off the ball and exploited defenses, so the credit goes to Prigs..I specifically remembered Doc saying Felton is killing us..

I rate Prigs higher as a distributor because when he's on the floor that's all he's looking to do, sometimes to a fault. Doesn't mean that Felton should only pass at PG. As I said earlier, there was a stretch where the ball movement wasn't where it was earlier in the season and a pass first PG was what we needed. We also needed better play at the 2 and Felton gave us that.

I don't believe it was just Prigs starting but a combination of Prigs and Felton moving to the 2. Prigs was setting Felton up as well so he should get some credit for that.

I'm not saying Felton is a lousy PG, but Prigs has more experience and I believe a better feel for where some players like to get the ball. When it comes to Tyson I think Felton is better at getting him scoring opportunities but Prigs is better with Melo and since Melo is our heavy hitter, more emphasis was placed on getting him the ball.

1- that can first defend his position
2- good penetration with solid creating/facilitating skills
3- hit a wide open 3point shot

Udrih
Will Bynum
Aaron Brooks

a combination of 2 of the above is much better than Prig's at his deal, all of which are realistic PG's that we can use the split the mini MLE on for LESS YEAR's

RonRon wrote:We need a PG

1- that can first defend his position
2- good penetration with solid creating/facilitating skills
3- hit a wide open 3point shot

Udrih
Will Bynum
Aaron Brooks

a combination of 2 of the above is much better than Prig's at his deal, all of which are realistic PG's that we can use the split the mini MLE on for LESS YEAR's

Um...Prigs is good for #'s 2 & 3. He's obviously a facilitator and he can hit a wide open 2 and 3. The problem is that he passes on a ton of wide open shots. I just don't understand why everyone is going nuts over the length of the contract. Many went nuts over Kidds deal and it's now gone. The same can happen with Prigs.

CashMoney wrote:

RonRon wrote:We need a PG

1- that can first defend his position
2- good penetration with solid creating/facilitating skills
3- hit a wide open 3point shot

Udrih
Will Bynum
Aaron Brooks

a combination of 2 of the above is much better than Prig's at his deal, all of which are realistic PG's that we can use the split the mini MLE on for LESS YEAR's

Um...Prigs is good for #'s 2 & 3. He's obviously a facilitator and he can hit a wide open 2 and 3. The problem is that he passes on a ton of wide open shots. I just don't understand why everyone is going nuts over the length of the contract. Many went nuts over Kidds deal and it's now gone. The same can happen with Prigs.

because it simply was not money well spent

For Kidd's money, we could have got Bayless, Delfino, or Matt Barnes
For Pablo we could have had many other players that actually have value
We were built to compete now with the moves we made prior and both Kidd and Pablo are flawed/over valued for their "experience/leadership" like Novak's was

RonRon wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

RonRon wrote:We need a PG

1- that can first defend his position
2- good penetration with solid creating/facilitating skills
3- hit a wide open 3point shot

Udrih
Will Bynum
Aaron Brooks

a combination of 2 of the above is much better than Prig's at his deal, all of which are realistic PG's that we can use the split the mini MLE on for LESS YEAR's

Um...Prigs is good for #'s 2 & 3. He's obviously a facilitator and he can hit a wide open 2 and 3. The problem is that he passes on a ton of wide open shots. I just don't understand why everyone is going nuts over the length of the contract. Many went nuts over Kidds deal and it's now gone. The same can happen with Prigs.

because it simply was not money well spent

For Kidd's money, we could have got Bayless, Delfino, or Matt Barnes
For Pablo we could have had many other players that actually have value
We were built to compete now with the moves we made prior and both Kidd and Pablo are flawed/over valued for their "experience/leadership" like Novak's was

Novak was valued for experience and leadership? Really? As I said when Prigs was signed, its a good move if we get another PG on the roster who can get to the rim. I don't want the Knicks to depend on him too much like we did with Kidd. Knicks still need to make more moves.

RonRon wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

RonRon wrote:We need a PG

1- that can first defend his position
2- good penetration with solid creating/facilitating skills
3- hit a wide open 3point shot

Udrih
Will Bynum
Aaron Brooks

a combination of 2 of the above is much better than Prig's at his deal, all of which are realistic PG's that we can use the split the mini MLE on for LESS YEAR's

Um...Prigs is good for #'s 2 & 3. He's obviously a facilitator and he can hit a wide open 2 and 3. The problem is that he passes on a ton of wide open shots. I just don't understand why everyone is going nuts over the length of the contract. Many went nuts over Kidds deal and it's now gone. The same can happen with Prigs.

because it simply was not money well spent

For Kidd's money, we could have got Bayless, Delfino, or Matt Barnes
For Pablo we could have had many other players that actually have value
We were built to compete now with the moves we made prior and both Kidd and Pablo are flawed/over valued for their "experience/leadership" like Novak's was

Pablo at $2 million a year isn't terrible.

CashMoney wrote:

RonRon wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

RonRon wrote:We need a PG

1- that can first defend his position
2- good penetration with solid creating/facilitating skills
3- hit a wide open 3point shot

Udrih
Will Bynum
Aaron Brooks

a combination of 2 of the above is much better than Prig's at his deal, all of which are realistic PG's that we can use the split the mini MLE on for LESS YEAR's

Um...Prigs is good for #'s 2 & 3. He's obviously a facilitator and he can hit a wide open 2 and 3. The problem is that he passes on a ton of wide open shots. I just don't understand why everyone is going nuts over the length of the contract. Many went nuts over Kidds deal and it's now gone. The same can happen with Prigs.

because it simply was not money well spent

For Kidd's money, we could have got Bayless, Delfino, or Matt Barnes
For Pablo we could have had many other players that actually have value
We were built to compete now with the moves we made prior and both Kidd and Pablo are flawed/over valued for their "experience/leadership" like Novak's was

Pablo at $2 million a year isn't terrible.

also, it is not even a guaranteed 2, that's incentive base I believe.

holfresh wrote:Grunwald continues his curious contract offerings..

He lacks a backbone. I like him but that is clearly his flaw. He is not good at doing business face to face. He better suited behind the scenes. Not every player needs to be rewarded with an extra yr. especially when there are no other suitors. Jr Kidd Novak Cambyses prigs. And we are going to let a good player like Copeland walk

RonRon wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

RonRon wrote:

CashMoney wrote:

RonRon wrote:We need a PG

1- that can first defend his position
2- good penetration with solid creating/facilitating skills
3- hit a wide open 3point shot

Udrih
Will Bynum
Aaron Brooks

a combination of 2 of the above is much better than Prig's at his deal, all of which are realistic PG's that we can use the split the mini MLE on for LESS YEAR's

Um...Prigs is good for #'s 2 & 3. He's obviously a facilitator and he can hit a wide open 2 and 3. The problem is that he passes on a ton of wide open shots. I just don't understand why everyone is going nuts over the length of the contract. Many went nuts over Kidds deal and it's now gone. The same can happen with Prigs.

because it simply was not money well spent

For Kidd's money, we could have got Bayless, Delfino, or Matt Barnes
For Pablo we could have had many other players that actually have value
We were built to compete now with the moves we made prior and both Kidd and Pablo are flawed/over valued for their "experience/leadership" like Novak's was

Pablo at $2 million a year isn't terrible.

also, it is not even a guaranteed 2, that's incentive base I believe.

it is, the 3rd year is partial guaranteed as a TEAM OPTION
He is a vet min/3rd string PG, he is NOT worth using part of the MLE on period, especially with all the holes we need to fill and that he has no value at his age like Kidd as a possible future asset

Prigs is solid player. Besides not many holes left.