Posted by RemBee76:

Blue, DJ and i have had this same conversation elsewhere.

I think because McDyess was one of the league’s "good" guys, people forgive the effort to bring him here, even if it was every bit of a misguided effort as the one that landed us Marbury.

Posted by RemBee76:

Actually, blue, just me being a stickler again, but when you erroneously called Dice's injury a "fluke injury to the opposite knee" I don't think I'm coming out of left field in saying that you are justifying Layden's trade while chalking up the fact that it didn't work to bad luck.

Nor do I think you can zero in on just DJ when no less than three other posters similarly defended the dice addition today in a way I have never seen the Marbury trade defended on this board. In fact, I think that is what Killa was getting at in his original post.

layden went after dice b/c the team was on the road to nowhere and he had to make a splash after 3 years on the job. he chose the wrong player to take his chance with. but i understood the trade - it was the wrong choice but i understood the trade b/c layden, at that point, was desperate and possibly under mandate from dolan/mills to make a big splash (much like how isiah may have been to make one when he got the job).

[Edited by - djsunyc on 10-19-2007 5:41 PM]

Layden's team would kick this team's azz?

Posted by BlueSeats:
You'll often hear people say Isiah is a far better GM than Layden and they understand his desire to pair Marbury with Houston -- or, if Houston were healthy we'd have had a far better result.

Posted by BlueSeats:
It's not saying that the Dyess deal made sense, it's saying that if Layden was the worst GM of all time, as is often stated, than how bad must Isiah be if Layden's justifications were the same as isiah's, or if Layden's team would kick this team's azz?

Posted by BlueSeats:
Man, only a horrible job by his successor could ever gain Layden a lenient remembrance, but here we are.

Posted by RemBee76:

Posted by BlueSeats:
You'll often hear people say Isiah is a far better GM than Layden and they understand his desire to pair Marbury with Houston -- or, if Houston were healthy we'd have had a far better result.

Talk about straw men...if you have often heard this it hasn't been here.

Posted by BlueSeats:
It's not saying that the Dyess deal made sense, it's saying that if Layden was the worst GM of all time, as is often stated, than how bad must Isiah be if Layden's justifications were the same as isiah's, or if Layden's team would kick this team's azz?

For starters, no, I don't agree with that assessment. I don't think this team (+ a healthy Houston) would lose to Layden's team (+ a healthy McDyess), and I think that Layden's 9-19 record with that team and the excellent play we saw with Marbury alongside Houston begins to justify that (yes, yes, hypothetical, dyess wasn't healthy, etc, lets not go over all that again). We'll agree to disagree on that.

But secondly, McDyess was the only player on your original list actually acquired by Layden. He inherited those players and sat idly by while they deteriorated. So if you are searching for an explanation of how Layden might still be considered an inferior GM with that team, that is one place you might start.

You might also look at the fact that Layden’s azz-kicking squad was built while giving almost no consideration whatsoever to the development of youth. To think that in those days fans were excited about Mike Sweetney, Milos Vujanic, Maciaj Lampe and Frank Williams. Don’t want to play a game of “where are they now” with that group. I think the confidence you have in Spectacles crew comes largely from the very fact that they were entirely made up of vets that had played together several seasons on an end run of a team that had an established and proven system.

The comparison, really, is only useful if it’s an examination of the forces that shaped their regimes, looking at how tough it is employ the full rebuild some clamor for with New York’s fans and MSG’s boss. Layden himself said “This team will never be under the cap.” Well, he got something right.

Don't change the rules. Frozen in time, remember? The average age of Layden's squad was 31 years old, or something ridiculous like that. His last season we were routinely run out off the court by younger quicker teams with more stamina. Not crazy to think our squad would do the same.

Layden had Kurt Thomas playing center for chrissakes!

Posted by RemBee76:

Posted by BlueSeats:
If you'd like we can put the hypothetical aside and open up a new discussion about who was the better GM between Layden and Isiah.

Not really, like I said thats tired out.

I got dragged into this when you changed the subject after being called out on your spinning McDyess' injury to make Layden look like a victim of "fluke" injury.

And yes, that does invalidate your hypothetical. You might as well have said "what would Layden's team look like with a healthy Elton Brand or Jermaine O'Neal or Alonso Mourning" because if Dice was still a healthy 20ppg, 12 reb, 2 blk guy we would have had about as much of a shot at acquiring him as those guys.

Man, if our team had Kobe Bryant we'd have kicked Layden's teams azz.

You're just being lame now. I'm only talking about Dyess being as healthy as he was in preseason for us, before he got inujured here.

I was right earlier on, you're tricky, but not clever.



[Edited by - blueseats on 10-19-2007 9:35 PM]