I guess you can lump me in with the optimists, but I have called Isiah out on several moves, but this isn't one of them. Never liked the Mo T trade from the jump. Getting rid of Mo means we wont be trading his expring contract for a multi year one which is good, no?

Can we agree on one thing. If there are some blind Isiah supporters here, there are definitely an equal amount of blind-Brown supporters.

[Edited by - bigbeast on 09-30-2006 11:42 AM]

Posted by joec32033:

The Knicks completed their buyout of Maurice Taylor. They will sign two big men to compete for the open roster spot: Wichita State center Paul Miller and Virginia power forward Elton Brown. Word is, Brown has given Eddy Curry all he could handle in scrimmages. Taylor was viewed as a potential cancer in the locker room, despite his immense trade value as an expiring contract

Well, now they are saying it IS a buyout, for one thing.


However it is the second bolded sentence that concerns me. Is this guy Elton Brown really that good, or can Eddy Curry really not handle an undrafted, unsigned FA?

Not talking to Joe here, just the topics presented.

Personally, I don't think it's a big deal one way or the other if Mo is on or off the team. I just find it funny if they waived him over negotiating a buyout. If they bought him out I have no trouble with it. We stiff have Jalen's gargantuan contract to trade, and I'm generally opposed to such trades anyway. Let's face it, we're not getting an ELton brand or jermaine O'Neal with an expiring, and I can do without the K-marts and Webbers of the league.

Someone noted isiah probably picked up Mo to replace KT. I think that's true. It's similar to his picking up TT to replace KVH. he goes for a more athletic but less established version and thinks he'll come out ahead, but it rarely works out. Unless you're getting someone 23 or younger, generally what you see is pretty much what you get. Isiah has to stop thinking he can give a man soul and heart.

As for the parts about Elton Brown, I've also wondered if that's one reason that Butler wasn't retained, because he made Curry and Snacks look bad. Not saying he has Curry's "all-star potential" but the man gave more than one has a right to expect from his stubby body and undersized contract, while from Eddy we get the reverse. I think Butler fairly reduced Eddy into a 24 mpg player, as I rarely preferred to see Eddy in for close games (few we had) or 4th quarters. It wasn't that Butler particularly excelled at anything so much as that he wasn't overwhelmingly deficient at anything, and he just seemed aware enough to facilitate a team game. Eddy's awareness is woeful and I don't know that we have anyone with court smarts to man the center position, other than perhaps Frye, though I don't consider that his natural position.

It's highly possible we needed to let Butler go so as to have our full MLE to sign Jeffires. I'm not familiar enough with Jeffries game to comment on the wisdom of that. I have a feeling he'll be a nice compliment to the team. However, given that we have scrappy guys like Lee and Balkman for the SF position (and Woods if we wanted him) might we not have been more balanced to have one guy at the center spot to do what Butler could do rather than to have three such guys at SF?

I dont care about this move. We still have Malik

Posted by PresIke:

This sure was one strange move by the Knicks. So what if Mo wanted to get waived. That doesn't mean you accomodate the guy, when his contract has some value this year. I just don't get it.

I mean do we really need this guy Miller or Elton Brown? They aren't going to play and neither was Taylor, so what's the point? Save a few bucks on the buyout? But then if some amazing deal (not saying that's likely or anything, like for say a Garnett) comes up during the season we then loose an asset. Color me confused.

please can we not bring color into this.

confusion = orange + blue

Posted by PresIke:

I thought (well I hope) Marv was kidding around, as I was just using a figure of speech.

No, you're clearly racist against confused people. Even though confused people aren't a race, still... err... next time be sensitive to the confused orange + blue people.

[Edited by - Solace on 09-30-2006 5:12 PM]

Jerome James signing & Mo Taylor trade I didn't understand. Thomas wanted to improve the talent level as someone posted a few days ago. But we gave up 2 shorter contracts and a 2nd rd pick for him. I didn't understand why Isiah felt Taylor was worth that much. And Jerome James was just horrible.

I did't like the Mo Taylor trade. But some of you guys harped on it like it was the end of the world. Those who defended the move(which wasn't me) only defended the fact that though its a bad move. Its not as bad as some were making it out to be. And threw in some positives about it. I don't recall to many people if any were ever saying it was a good move. But they were stating it wasn't worthy of being harped on as much as it was.

Just like waiving him. Yes it proves that it was a bad move. But again the trade to begin with wasn't the end of the world. Moving him and opening up a roster spot for a need since he is a redundant offensive player. Who doesn't rebound or play defense in the frontcourt and will effect the mins of Frye & Lee makes it a smarter move then holding him hostage on the bench only to get nothing but a worse contract at the deadline. The Marbury & Curry trades as well as the Jerome James signing based on production of Ws for the amount we have given up are the moves that have hurt this team so far. If those moves were paying off then nobody would care about the Taylor trade.

Posted by Bippity10:

NewYork it's not the end of the world. Cutting Taylor is not the end of the world. Trading for him was not the end of the world. Neither was signing JJ. But when you get a string of these mistakes over and over again you have fans complaining because they can see they are mistakes. Fans are frustrated because until this offseason it's been mistake after mistake after mistake. And only now is the front office starting to listen. The fear that this will change is still out there though.

i agree... but like this move because it ends that string of mistakes. clarence weatherspoon signing was a mistake. trading him for moochie was OK at best. signing vin baker was a mistake. trading them two and a pick for mo was a mistake. trading mo for kmart would be a mistake.

yes, that opinion is totally based on my lack of faith in IT's judgment and restraint with expiring deals.

Posted by EnySpree:

Its dumb that isiah waived him. He should have just ignored him like penny.

So he's waived. That means its done. Move along. Why is it so important that to bad mouth isiah so hard everytime he does something. Its stupid now.

I hate layden and I might be tempted to eat his first born but even he didn't get torn into as bad as isiah has. Layden didn't make one good move. Every single move he made was idiotic and there was nothing good about him. Still he never got raped with the stuff you guys write about isiah.

Again I respected brown till he got here still I never ran him over with all this nonsense. My signature says how I feel about brown.

I tell you man you guys are killing me with all this bull****. Its disgusting. Talk basketball.

actually, its GOOD that Isiah waived him. Its good to waive a guy that you have no future plan for when there's better younger guys that should get his minutes. Its good to waive a one dimensional player who's a black hole when the ball hits his hands.

Whats BAD is trading for him and giving up a draft pick in the mean time. There were some interesting prospects still on the board. Guillerimo Diaz, Paul Milsap, all BS aside we could have gotten Balkman there, PJ Tucker...

Our GM is awful.. why should I (as a fan) expect anything different in the future than this type of garbage?