gunsnewing wrote:

skeng wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

tkf wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Blow

It

Up

I said do that during the offseason.. oh well..

If you want to blow it up i get it, i just want to ask a couple questions so i can understand the expectations. Are you ok being a bad team for an indefinite amount of time? At what point is losing no longer acceptable? After 5 years? 7 years? What happens if we become the Bobcats or Kings or Suns or Wizards or Pistons or Bucks etc instead of the Pacers or OKC Thunder and are a lottery team for 10+ years? At what point does rebuilding become more successful than the Melo Era? How do we ensure we become a perennial 54-win team or greater and get to the 2nd round or greater with so many rebuilding teams unsuccessful year after year of accomplishing that feat?

We build like we almost did when we had Gallo, ill wil and DLee. If we'd drafted a PG in that 2009 draft, we'd end up with either Jrue Holiday, Brandon Jennings or Ty Lawson. Or tried moving up that one spot for Steph Curry. You know, instead of staying put with Chris Duhon. MDA would probably have been here longer and we wouldn't have felt the need to throw money at STAT and MDA might have had the clout to deny that STAT signing.

It's not impossible at all.

^this

Exactly, you are taking about if we did this or that. If we drafted a PG and then made a different trade for Melo. The same example you just used can be applied to the team that includes Melo now, not just the one that we had before him. You are using hinesight to justify rebuilding. If that is the case we should have moved up one spot for Curry, not signed Amare, resigned Lee and traded Gallo, Chandler, and Moz for Melo. So then we are left with Melo, Curry, and Lee. See, hinesight works with Melo on the team too, and makes us look like a very good team.

Knixkik wrote:

tkf wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

tkf wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Blow

It

Up

I said do that during the offseason.. oh well..

If you want to blow it up i get it, i just want to ask a couple questions so i can understand the expectations. Are you ok being a bad team for an indefinite amount of time? At what point is losing no longer acceptable? After 5 years? 7 years? What happens if we become the Bobcats or Kings or Suns or Wizards or Pistons or Bucks etc instead of the Pacers or OKC Thunder and are a lottery team for 10+ years? At what point does rebuilding become more successful than the Melo Era? How do we ensure we become a perennial 54-win team or greater and get to the 2nd round or greater with so many rebuilding teams unsuccessful year after year of accomplishing that feat?

It is proven in the NBA.. don't have to be bad for long. just be patient. we could move carmelo, get a pick and a couple of useful players... play shumpert and THJ, increase their value... look to get under the cap and be smart... not sure why you guys think we would be bad for 7 years.. if we are going to be bad that long after we trade carmelo, we were going to be bad with him... we are not wining with carmelo.. why is that so hard to accept? you don't have to be bad for long..

So how do you account for the fact that there are far more teams that remain in the basement each year than ones that can successfully go from blowing it up to successful in a short period of time? How do you account for all of the teams i listed? Is it poor management? If that is the case, how does our management fair in the rebuilding process? You are right, you don't have to be bad for long, but you could also be bad for a very long time as well.

skeng wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

tkf wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Blow

It

Up

I said do that during the offseason.. oh well..

If you want to blow it up i get it, i just want to ask a couple questions so i can understand the expectations. Are you ok being a bad team for an indefinite amount of time? At what point is losing no longer acceptable? After 5 years? 7 years? What happens if we become the Bobcats or Kings or Suns or Wizards or Pistons or Bucks etc instead of the Pacers or OKC Thunder and are a lottery team for 10+ years? At what point does rebuilding become more successful than the Melo Era? How do we ensure we become a perennial 54-win team or greater and get to the 2nd round or greater with so many rebuilding teams unsuccessful year after year of accomplishing that feat?

We build like we almost did when we had Gallo, ill wil and DLee. If we'd drafted a PG in that 2009 draft, we'd end up with either Jrue Holiday, Brandon Jennings or Ty Lawson. Or tried moving up that one spot for Steph Curry. You know, instead of staying put with Chris Duhon. MDA would probably have been here longer and we wouldn't have felt the need to throw money at STAT and MDA might have had the clout to deny that STAT signing.

It's not impossible at all.

With all due respect, that squad sucked. They would essentially be the Milwaukee Bucks and capped out from having retained a group of above average, albeit not great, players.

Bonn1997 wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

tkf wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

tkf wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Blow

It

Up

I said do that during the offseason.. oh well..

If you want to blow it up i get it, i just want to ask a couple questions so i can understand the expectations. Are you ok being a bad team for an indefinite amount of time? At what point is losing no longer acceptable? After 5 years? 7 years? What happens if we become the Bobcats or Kings or Suns or Wizards or Pistons or Bucks etc instead of the Pacers or OKC Thunder and are a lottery team for 10+ years? At what point does rebuilding become more successful than the Melo Era? How do we ensure we become a perennial 54-win team or greater and get to the 2nd round or greater with so many rebuilding teams unsuccessful year after year of accomplishing that feat?

It is proven in the NBA.. don't have to be bad for long. just be patient. we could move carmelo, get a pick and a couple of useful players... play shumpert and THJ, increase their value... look to get under the cap and be smart... not sure why you guys think we would be bad for 7 years.. if we are going to be bad that long after we trade carmelo, we were going to be bad with him... we are not wining with carmelo.. why is that so hard to accept? you don't have to be bad for long..

So how do you account for the fact that there are far more teams that remain in the basement each year than ones that can successfully go from blowing it up to successful in a short period of time? How do you account for all of the teams i listed? Is it poor management? If that is the case, how does our management fair in the rebuilding process? You are right, you don't have to be bad for long, but you could also be bad for a very long time as well.

bad like our last 13 years?

That's what I'm not getting. Since losing to the Pacers in the ECF back in 2000 we've been to the playoffs a total of 5 times and made it out of the 1st round once. And the compare those other teams listed over the same period. The Kings were perennial contenders in the early part of the decade and really should have won a championship if not for the worst refereed game in the history of professional sports. The Suns were perennial contenders as well with a 2X MVP and 3 trips to the WCF. The Pistons won a title and made it to at least the ECF 5 years in a row. Over the last 10+ years we've basically been on the same level as the Bucks and Bobcats with a few decent years, one good year, and a joke the entire rest of the time.

BigDaddyG wrote:You'd have to ride it out Briggs. We don't have a first rounder this year and we won't have cap space for another year. Why make a trade when it won't probably wouldn't make us better?

It's not about making us better now, it's about making us better in the long run.

Knixkik wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

skeng wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

tkf wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Blow

It

Up

I said do that during the offseason.. oh well..

If you want to blow it up i get it, i just want to ask a couple questions so i can understand the expectations. Are you ok being a bad team for an indefinite amount of time? At what point is losing no longer acceptable? After 5 years? 7 years? What happens if we become the Bobcats or Kings or Suns or Wizards or Pistons or Bucks etc instead of the Pacers or OKC Thunder and are a lottery team for 10+ years? At what point does rebuilding become more successful than the Melo Era? How do we ensure we become a perennial 54-win team or greater and get to the 2nd round or greater with so many rebuilding teams unsuccessful year after year of accomplishing that feat?

We build like we almost did when we had Gallo, ill wil and DLee. If we'd drafted a PG in that 2009 draft, we'd end up with either Jrue Holiday, Brandon Jennings or Ty Lawson. Or tried moving up that one spot for Steph Curry. You know, instead of staying put with Chris Duhon. MDA would probably have been here longer and we wouldn't have felt the need to throw money at STAT and MDA might have had the clout to deny that STAT signing.

It's not impossible at all.

With all due respect, that squad sucked. They would essentially be the Milwaukee Bucks and capped out from having retained a group of above average, albeit not great, players.

Yes, exactly right. It was a fun team with some guys we thought were up and coming. Looking back now, we never had a shot to be more than a 6-8 seed.

Even if those guys lived up to the hype (which there was no chance in hall of happening), Gallo, Wilson Chandler and David Lee have all missed sizable portions of the season over the past 3 years. It's hard to imagine them being the core of a winning team when they couldn't even play in many of the games.

Knixkik wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

skeng wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

tkf wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Blow

It

Up

I said do that during the offseason.. oh well..

If you want to blow it up i get it, i just want to ask a couple questions so i can understand the expectations. Are you ok being a bad team for an indefinite amount of time? At what point is losing no longer acceptable? After 5 years? 7 years? What happens if we become the Bobcats or Kings or Suns or Wizards or Pistons or Bucks etc instead of the Pacers or OKC Thunder and are a lottery team for 10+ years? At what point does rebuilding become more successful than the Melo Era? How do we ensure we become a perennial 54-win team or greater and get to the 2nd round or greater with so many rebuilding teams unsuccessful year after year of accomplishing that feat?

We build like we almost did when we had Gallo, ill wil and DLee. If we'd drafted a PG in that 2009 draft, we'd end up with either Jrue Holiday, Brandon Jennings or Ty Lawson. Or tried moving up that one spot for Steph Curry. You know, instead of staying put with Chris Duhon. MDA would probably have been here longer and we wouldn't have felt the need to throw money at STAT and MDA might have had the clout to deny that STAT signing.

It's not impossible at all.

^this

Exactly, you are taking about if we did this or that. If we drafted a PG and then made a different trade for Melo. The same example you just used can be applied to the team that includes Melo now, not just the one that we had before him. You are using hinesight to justify rebuilding. If that is the case we should have moved up one spot for Curry, not signed Amare, resigned Lee and traded Gallo, Chandler, and Moz for Melo. So then we are left with Melo, Curry, and Lee. See, hinesight works with Melo on the team too, and makes us look like a very good team.

My point is I don't think we should/could starphuch our way to a championship roster. I just hate Melo alot these days, and I'm sure Steph Curry would be included with the rest of the farm instead of Felton in that deal. I'm not putting my hindsight money on Dolan in any scenario.

But at the end of the day it all comes back to Jimmy. So yeah.. Maybe we're all just great big fools.

NardDogNation wrote:

skeng wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

skeng wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

tkf wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Blow

It

Up

I said do that during the offseason.. oh well..

If you want to blow it up i get it, i just want to ask a couple questions so i can understand the expectations. Are you ok being a bad team for an indefinite amount of time? At what point is losing no longer acceptable? After 5 years? 7 years? What happens if we become the Bobcats or Kings or Suns or Wizards or Pistons or Bucks etc instead of the Pacers or OKC Thunder and are a lottery team for 10+ years? At what point does rebuilding become more successful than the Melo Era? How do we ensure we become a perennial 54-win team or greater and get to the 2nd round or greater with so many rebuilding teams unsuccessful year after year of accomplishing that feat?

We build like we almost did when we had Gallo, ill wil and DLee. If we'd drafted a PG in that 2009 draft, we'd end up with either Jrue Holiday, Brandon Jennings or Ty Lawson. Or tried moving up that one spot for Steph Curry. You know, instead of staying put with Chris Duhon. MDA would probably have been here longer and we wouldn't have felt the need to throw money at STAT and MDA might have had the clout to deny that STAT signing.

It's not impossible at all.

With all due respect, that squad sucked. They would essentially be the Milwaukee Bucks and capped out from having retained a group of above average, albeit not great, players.

Yes, exactly right. It was a fun team with some guys we thought were up and coming. Looking back now, we never had a shot to be more than a 6-8 seed.

Of course that squad sucked. We had ****in Chris Duhon starting. We couldn't improve our most important position from having Chris Duhon, Toney Douglas, Sergio Rodriguez etc.? The Knuggets did pretty well with a very similar squad last season. That old Knick squad sucked cuz there was no plan for anything after 2010, but to clear the deck for LeBron etc. And I know it's hindsight, but you guys are making it sound like it's impossible for us to build patiently. And I'm not sure how everyone felt about the Jordan Hill pick, but I would assume everyone was more or less against it, except our FO. Our PG spot was our most glaring weakness, yet we go with a raw Pf/C.

And when did we go all in on rebuilding? 08? That's only two years of sucking with yoots, rather than 7-8 years of sucking cuz of knuckleheads and primadonnas.

I have never been against building the roster in a more traditional manner. For the record, I was thoroughly against Walsh scrapping the team for cap since day 1 and I hated virtually every move he made from that point (and I think that hindsight justifies my outrage). The problem was that the few young players we did keep (which were holdovers from Thomas' days) were not THAT good and Walsh traded away our picks for the immediate future, which helped to severely handicap the team.

Building a more conventional team was not an option during the summer of 2010 and since Walsh had no Plan B, we were left with few options except a team of mismatched talents. For all the talk about the success of the KNuggets, most of the guys who were traded were subsequently traded again (Raymond Felton and Anthony Randolph), were perennially injuried (Gallo, Chandler) or have been largely irrelevant (Mozgov). The Knuggets success had much more to do with George Karl and the players the Nuggets already had (e.g. Ty Lawson and Nene) than anything we gave them (though those picks will be big).

In retrospect, we probably should've used all of our cap space to acquire contracts teams were trying to shed (Al Jefferson, Michael Beasley and Kirk Hinrich) with the draft picks that were available during the draft.

My comparison with the knuggets was mostly because of our tempo of play, the prospect of a yoothier Knicks and our opportunity to grab Lawson or similar talent... and it supported my view that we'd be better off with those guys than Melo.

But yeah, I'm not sure what we're actually discussing now or that we disagree.

My bottom line is just that I think it's about time we did some real rebuilding with a competent GM. But that seems like too much to ask for with this franchise, so I'm just negatively inclined most of the time when it comes to our Knick situation.

VCoug wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:You'd have to ride it out Briggs. We don't have a first rounder this year and we won't have cap space for another year. Why make a trade when it won't probably wouldn't make us better?

It's not about making us better now, it's about making us better in the long run.

Yeah, but still, what pieces could we flip that would make us better in the future? Deals with contenders for low first rounders? I'd rather stand pat than make lateral moves for the Al Harringtons of the world. Even if we traded Melo, and I'm not saying we should, how many interested parties are out there? What if Melo does the same thing to us that he did with Denver and forces is to trade with the Lakers? What young chips do the Lakers have to deal us? We trade Shump for another young, at best, we'll probably get another young piece. Ray, Udrih, Metta probably could bring us back something but not much. The Knicks would probably be better off waiting till the end of the season. It would be similar to the season we traded Charles Smith, where we were mediocre and made moves after the season.