[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Islesfan, Fish....for the last time....Brown Wanted Francis & Rose
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 5 of 6 « First‹ Previous 3  4  5  6 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
fishmike
Posts: 53902
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
6/16/2006  7:17 AM
Posted by crzymdups:
Posted by fishmike:

how do you explain only missing the playoffs 6 times in 23 years of coaching prior to the Knicks? Its hard I know. KNock him and his ways all you want. Like I have said 1000 times, everyone knew LB's quirks before he got here. Everyone knew he bugged his GMs every week for players and everyone knew in 23 years of coaching in the NBA he had 3 losing seasons.

I dont think Zeke need LB to pull the trigger on Steve Francis. He's exactly the kind of guy Isiah's traded for since he got here.

how do you explain LB being fired everywhere he's been? he leaves a lot and always goes to a new team, it isn't like he's made the playoffs with the same group a bunch of times in a row. even his last year in Indiana his boys tuned him out and they missed the playoffs. same in Philly. they tuned him out in Detroit, there were just as many stories about players hating him as loving him there and they won it all together.

david stern refused to acknowledge his existence in athens because Brown did the same roster crap (aka complaining about guys he asked to be on the team - yeah, his supporters tried to claim he didn't sign off on the team then, too.). Stern's response - you have Duncan, Iverson, Odom, Wade, Lebron, Amare, Melo, Steph, Boozer, Jefferson, Marion and more, please shut the hell up and do your job, Larry. Of course, Larry couldn't do his job then just like he didn't do it in New York, he became obsessed with what he didn't have and it took a fantastic game from GASP! that cancer Stephon Marbury for USA to even get a medal under the greatest basketball coach of all time.


he's a prickly guy. he knows basketball, I've never said he didn't (though he doesn't seem to want to acknowledge the new rules), but he isn't right for every situation. and before you say it, yes, I've already said that hiring him is Isiah's fault. though, Larry, with his heart of gold and brain of steel didn't seem to have any problem taking the money.
Every coach is fired.. thats part of the business, but for all Brown's rep as a nomad he's had pretty long stays at his jobs. 5-6 years w/ Phili and Indy are good runs and those were all good playoff teams. The stuff he pulled w/ Detroit was slimey and classless but he did win a title there, and again... that crap is part of the business. Riley did the same stuff to us, JVG quit on a bad team so not to tarnesh his coaching resume, all these guys pull this crap.

Read blueseats post, it says an awful lot. We know Brown is a complainer to begin with, but if he's hired and told the GM will build a roster of guys he wants to coach who's fault is it?

The whole thing is ironic if your Isiah. The guy who's driving you crazy is Brown, the only guy that can bail you out is Brown.

"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
AUTOADVERT
joec32033
Posts: 30631
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
6/16/2006  7:33 AM
Posted by nixluva:

IF Isiah really wanted Jalen he could've gotten him at any time. He may have had some interest, but I think most of those rumors were floated by Toronto, who really wanted to rid themselves of Jalen. Do you really think isiah couldn't have found a way to get Jalen, who Toronto couldn't WAIT to get off their team?

This whole thing is really about Larry Brown, TOTALLY destroying the season and acting like an ASS. He KNEW this year was about developing the youth and even the older players knew this. AD was shocked that LB wanted him to start. Malik hadn't been a starter in years, not even in San Antonio. Neither was MO. None of these vets DESEVERED to start. None of them factor into the teams longterm plans. SO WHY would LB waste valuable PT on these guys. No matter what moves IT made the handling of the team from day to day is ALL ON LARRY. How the team comes to play each night. if he can't motivate them, which he's horrible at doing, then he blames it on having so many young guys. WEll it was those very young players who gutted it out and got the team back into games, only to have LB send in the lame vets to lose the game. I'm SICK of Larry. He knows he could've done a better job, but he didn't do a good job on purpose. There's no way to escape that conclusion when you look at all the strange things he did this year.

Obviously not, if I remember the major hold up was that in order to take Jalen from Toronto, Zeke wanted them to throw in a first round pick. Think about it...How long did it take for the team to trade Vince? It doesn't just happen over night. Now obviously, Zeke couldn't come out and say "I'm trying to get Jalen from Toronto" because that violates the tampering section of the CBA.

Everyone acted like an ass on this team last year.....You're absolutely right none of the vets deserved to start, not one. And not one rookie earned a starting spot with consistent play and defense. Which leads to the root of the whole no rotations thing Larry did. How can you have a rotation when every player is being outplayed by his backup?

Why did Larry waste his time playing them? Because the plan was to rebuild while not losing. Isiah said this many times. Remember the "trying to fix the landing gear while the plain is still flying" Zeke used-I do I had it as my sig for a while. I am not saying Larry has no fault in it (If I was him I would have told Isiah not to get Jalen if I wasn't gonna use him)-but I do have to say, even though Larry has had players traded before and sometimes sours on the players he gets back after a while, I don't think he has EVER traded for a player and soured so much on him that he benched him and never played him. But supposedly he did that not once, but twice in two consecutive transactions-only allowing the guys ultra-minimal time since the minute they got here.

About him motivating, someone here posted a great comparison...I forgot who it was so whoever it was take credit....basic premise is-When a parent can't control his kid at age 6, you blame the parent because the kid don't know any better....if a guy starts acting up at 30, it's about time he took responsibility for his actions...no more blaming mommy and daddy.
~You can't run from who you are.~
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
6/16/2006  7:51 AM
Wow. Let me see if I get this straight. The argument is that it's Larry's fault we have Francis and Rose. WTH...??? If Larry has so much power that he made the decision without Isiah and Dolan, then can we please annoint him his proper titles of GM and Owner? Sheesh. Yes, the guy has input. The organization screwed up on this one, but Larry does not have the final decision.

Others are complaining that our kids didn't get enough minutes. I think the top minutes played having Marbury, Crawford, Frye, Curry and Nate was a pretty good indication. Who did we want getting the minutes? Butler? Udoka? Curry, Marbury and Crawford don't deserve among the top 5 on the team in minutes? Let's get real. There's a such thing as not handing minutes over. I'm sorry, but none of our kids played well enough to earn 40 minutes. Overall, Larry did a decent job. Most good coaches might've given each kid an extra minute or two per game, maximum. Anyway, can we really get so far down as to criticizing minutes on a 23 win team? This team was gutless and has a long way to go.
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
6/16/2006  8:07 AM
No one's saying it's Larry's fault we have them. We're just discussing whether he supported and was involved in the decision.
joec32033
Posts: 30631
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
6/16/2006  8:26 AM
Posted by Bonn1997:

No one's saying it's Larry's fault we have them. We're just discussing whether he supported and was involved in the decision.

That's the tone at least I am getting. There is no prior evidence on Francis other than he is the type of player Zeke keeps acquiring and not the type of player Brown usually wants-Not saying he didn't want him now, but just that to me it is highly unlikely. When it comes to Rose there is too much evidence that Isiah wanted Rose prior to Brown, to say Brown was the one who wanted Rose and is the reason we got him.
~You can't run from who you are.~
buddapaw
Posts: 23199
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 2/22/2006
Member: #1101
6/16/2006  10:03 AM
Posted by joec32033:
Posted by nixluva:

IF Isiah really wanted Jalen he could've gotten him at any time. He may have had some interest, but I think most of those rumors were floated by Toronto, who really wanted to rid themselves of Jalen. Do you really think isiah couldn't have found a way to get Jalen, who Toronto couldn't WAIT to get off their team?

This whole thing is really about Larry Brown, TOTALLY destroying the season and acting like an ASS. He KNEW this year was about developing the youth and even the older players knew this. AD was shocked that LB wanted him to start. Malik hadn't been a starter in years, not even in San Antonio. Neither was MO. None of these vets DESEVERED to start. None of them factor into the teams longterm plans. SO WHY would LB waste valuable PT on these guys. No matter what moves IT made the handling of the team from day to day is ALL ON LARRY. How the team comes to play each night. if he can't motivate them, which he's horrible at doing, then he blames it on having so many young guys. WEll it was those very young players who gutted it out and got the team back into games, only to have LB send in the lame vets to lose the game. I'm SICK of Larry. He knows he could've done a better job, but he didn't do a good job on purpose. There's no way to escape that conclusion when you look at all the strange things he did this year.

Obviously not, if I remember the major hold up was that in order to take Jalen from Toronto, Zeke wanted them to throw in a first round pick. Think about it...How long did it take for the team to trade Vince? It doesn't just happen over night. Now obviously, Zeke couldn't come out and say "I'm trying to get Jalen from Toronto" because that violates the tampering section of the CBA.

Everyone acted like an ass on this team last year.....You're absolutely right none of the vets deserved to start, not one. And not one rookie earned a starting spot with consistent play and defense. Which leads to the root of the whole no rotations thing Larry did. How can you have a rotation when every player is being outplayed by his backup?

Why did Larry waste his time playing them? Because the plan was to rebuild while not losing. Isiah said this many times. Remember the "trying to fix the landing gear while the plain is still flying" Zeke used-I do I had it as my sig for a while. I am not saying Larry has no fault in it (If I was him I would have told Isiah not to get Jalen if I wasn't gonna use him)-but I do have to say, even though Larry has had players traded before and sometimes sours on the players he gets back after a while, I don't think he has EVER traded for a player and soured so much on him that he benched him and never played him. But supposedly he did that not once, but twice in two consecutive transactions-only allowing the guys ultra-minimal time since the minute they got here.

About him motivating, someone here posted a great comparison...I forgot who it was so whoever it was take credit....basic premise is-When a parent can't control his kid at age 6, you blame the parent because the kid don't know any better....if a guy starts acting up at 30, it's about time he took responsibility for his actions...no more blaming mommy and daddy.

I think you are wrong there buddy, how many games have the rookie unit get us back into? The fact of the matter is this at the start of the game we have no offence to speak of from the following areas SG, SF, PF and barely at C. hence we were alway behind early. Let me clarify. SG Q, SF Matt Barnes, PF AD and Curry, yeah a lot of offence there. They add Frye to the game and immediately the offence would pick along with Nate and Crawford, later D. Lee would get involved with rebounds and some defence. Frye earned his starting spot by about the 15 game of the season, yes his defence was lacking but we had some offence from the PF shot. To say not one rookie earned a starting sopt is absolutely BOGUS.
"Low Percentage Shots r US, these are our Knicks" "NY KNICKS the cure for basketball fanatic"
joec32033
Posts: 30631
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
6/16/2006  10:11 AM
Posted by buddapaw:
Posted by joec32033:
Posted by nixluva:

IF Isiah really wanted Jalen he could've gotten him at any time. He may have had some interest, but I think most of those rumors were floated by Toronto, who really wanted to rid themselves of Jalen. Do you really think isiah couldn't have found a way to get Jalen, who Toronto couldn't WAIT to get off their team?

This whole thing is really about Larry Brown, TOTALLY destroying the season and acting like an ASS. He KNEW this year was about developing the youth and even the older players knew this. AD was shocked that LB wanted him to start. Malik hadn't been a starter in years, not even in San Antonio. Neither was MO. None of these vets DESEVERED to start. None of them factor into the teams longterm plans. SO WHY would LB waste valuable PT on these guys. No matter what moves IT made the handling of the team from day to day is ALL ON LARRY. How the team comes to play each night. if he can't motivate them, which he's horrible at doing, then he blames it on having so many young guys. WEll it was those very young players who gutted it out and got the team back into games, only to have LB send in the lame vets to lose the game. I'm SICK of Larry. He knows he could've done a better job, but he didn't do a good job on purpose. There's no way to escape that conclusion when you look at all the strange things he did this year.

Obviously not, if I remember the major hold up was that in order to take Jalen from Toronto, Zeke wanted them to throw in a first round pick. Think about it...How long did it take for the team to trade Vince? It doesn't just happen over night. Now obviously, Zeke couldn't come out and say "I'm trying to get Jalen from Toronto" because that violates the tampering section of the CBA.

Everyone acted like an ass on this team last year.....You're absolutely right none of the vets deserved to start, not one. And not one rookie earned a starting spot with consistent play and defense. Which leads to the root of the whole no rotations thing Larry did. How can you have a rotation when every player is being outplayed by his backup?

Why did Larry waste his time playing them? Because the plan was to rebuild while not losing. Isiah said this many times. Remember the "trying to fix the landing gear while the plain is still flying" Zeke used-I do I had it as my sig for a while. I am not saying Larry has no fault in it (If I was him I would have told Isiah not to get Jalen if I wasn't gonna use him)-but I do have to say, even though Larry has had players traded before and sometimes sours on the players he gets back after a while, I don't think he has EVER traded for a player and soured so much on him that he benched him and never played him. But supposedly he did that not once, but twice in two consecutive transactions-only allowing the guys ultra-minimal time since the minute they got here.

About him motivating, someone here posted a great comparison...I forgot who it was so whoever it was take credit....basic premise is-When a parent can't control his kid at age 6, you blame the parent because the kid don't know any better....if a guy starts acting up at 30, it's about time he took responsibility for his actions...no more blaming mommy and daddy.

I think you are wrong there buddy, how many games have the rookie unit get us back into? The fact of the matter is this at the start of the game we have no offence to speak of from the following areas SG, SF, PF and barely at C. hence we were alway behind early. Let me clarify. SG Q, SF Matt Barnes, PF AD and Curry, yeah a lot of offence there. They add Frye to the game and immediately the offence would pick along with Nate and Crawford, later D. Lee would get involved with rebounds and some defence. Frye earned his starting spot by about the 15 game of the season, yes his defence was lacking but we had some offence from the PF shot. To say not one rookie earned a starting sopt is absolutely BOGUS.

Bro, Frye was inconsistent, wasn't a great defender, and seemed to lose some stamina at the end of the year, before he got hurt. Lee actually was the rookie that made the best case to start, IMO, because he made things happen whenever he was on the court. Lee also had some pretty big holes in his game-he wasn't a great team defender-which we need with Marbury and whoever started at 2 guard. Nate is a 5-9 PG who would have had to move to 2 guard to get time (which he had to do and a 5-9 2 guard with a defensive sieve in Steph next to him is not a great combo. Plus Nate needed to learn some maturity and how to play the point. Keep in mind you can't look back to what the rookies developed into at the end of the season and apply it to the middle of the season. It took all season for the rookies to get to where they are. During the season not one rookie point blank earned a starting spot.

Also we got offense from the center spot in the begining of games....the knock on Curry was that he always got all his points early and faded. Barnes was one very early in the season, he doesn't qualify as anything-I stated in another thread we have no SG and no SF to speak of-Q is a pure swing player and Q@ is not a starting quality SF yet-When you talk abou having Marbury and Curry on the floor and pulling Q for a rotating SG with Craw and Nate (there is offense there, bro).

[Edited by - joec32033 on 06-16-2006 10:17 AM]
~You can't run from who you are.~
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
6/16/2006  10:21 AM
There were 8 rookies that averaged more than 24 minutes a game.
I just hope that people will like me
buddapaw
Posts: 23199
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 2/22/2006
Member: #1101
6/16/2006  11:04 AM
Posted by joec32033:
Posted by buddapaw:
Posted by joec32033:
Posted by nixluva:

IF Isiah really wanted Jalen he could've gotten him at any time. He may have had some interest, but I think most of those rumors were floated by Toronto, who really wanted to rid themselves of Jalen. Do you really think isiah couldn't have found a way to get Jalen, who Toronto couldn't WAIT to get off their team?

This whole thing is really about Larry Brown, TOTALLY destroying the season and acting like an ASS. He KNEW this year was about developing the youth and even the older players knew this. AD was shocked that LB wanted him to start. Malik hadn't been a starter in years, not even in San Antonio. Neither was MO. None of these vets DESEVERED to start. None of them factor into the teams longterm plans. SO WHY would LB waste valuable PT on these guys. No matter what moves IT made the handling of the team from day to day is ALL ON LARRY. How the team comes to play each night. if he can't motivate them, which he's horrible at doing, then he blames it on having so many young guys. WEll it was those very young players who gutted it out and got the team back into games, only to have LB send in the lame vets to lose the game. I'm SICK of Larry. He knows he could've done a better job, but he didn't do a good job on purpose. There's no way to escape that conclusion when you look at all the strange things he did this year.

Obviously not, if I remember the major hold up was that in order to take Jalen from Toronto, Zeke wanted them to throw in a first round pick. Think about it...How long did it take for the team to trade Vince? It doesn't just happen over night. Now obviously, Zeke couldn't come out and say "I'm trying to get Jalen from Toronto" because that violates the tampering section of the CBA.

Everyone acted like an ass on this team last year.....You're absolutely right none of the vets deserved to start, not one. And not one rookie earned a starting spot with consistent play and defense. Which leads to the root of the whole no rotations thing Larry did. How can you have a rotation when every player is being outplayed by his backup?

Why did Larry waste his time playing them? Because the plan was to rebuild while not losing. Isiah said this many times. Remember the "trying to fix the landing gear while the plain is still flying" Zeke used-I do I had it as my sig for a while. I am not saying Larry has no fault in it (If I was him I would have told Isiah not to get Jalen if I wasn't gonna use him)-but I do have to say, even though Larry has had players traded before and sometimes sours on the players he gets back after a while, I don't think he has EVER traded for a player and soured so much on him that he benched him and never played him. But supposedly he did that not once, but twice in two consecutive transactions-only allowing the guys ultra-minimal time since the minute they got here.

About him motivating, someone here posted a great comparison...I forgot who it was so whoever it was take credit....basic premise is-When a parent can't control his kid at age 6, you blame the parent because the kid don't know any better....if a guy starts acting up at 30, it's about time he took responsibility for his actions...no more blaming mommy and daddy.

I think you are wrong there buddy, how many games have the rookie unit get us back into? The fact of the matter is this at the start of the game we have no offence to speak of from the following areas SG, SF, PF and barely at C. hence we were alway behind early. Let me clarify. SG Q, SF Matt Barnes, PF AD and Curry, yeah a lot of offence there. They add Frye to the game and immediately the offence would pick along with Nate and Crawford, later D. Lee would get involved with rebounds and some defence. Frye earned his starting spot by about the 15 game of the season, yes his defence was lacking but we had some offence from the PF shot. To say not one rookie earned a starting sopt is absolutely BOGUS.

Bro, Frye was inconsistent, wasn't a great defender, and seemed to lose some stamina at the end of the year, before he got hurt. Lee actually was the rookie that made the best case to start, IMO, because he made things happen whenever he was on the court. Lee also had some pretty big holes in his game-he wasn't a great team defender-which we need with Marbury and whoever started at 2 guard. Nate is a 5-9 PG who would have had to move to 2 guard to get time (which he had to do and a 5-9 2 guard with a defensive sieve in Steph next to him is not a great combo. Plus Nate needed to learn some maturity and how to play the point. Keep in mind you can't look back to what the rookies developed into at the end of the season and apply it to the middle of the season. It took all season for the rookies to get to where they are. During the season not one rookie point blank earned a starting spot.

Also we got offense from the center spot in the begining of games....the knock on Curry was that he always got all his points early and faded. Barnes was one very early in the season, he doesn't qualify as anything-I stated in another thread we have no SG and no SF to speak of-Q is a pure swing player and Q@ is not a starting quality SF yet-When you talk abou having Marbury and Curry on the floor and pulling Q for a rotating SG with Craw and Nate (there is offense there, bro).

[Edited by - joec32033 on 06-16-2006 10:17 AM]

Frye's decline in production can be attributed to Larry's substition patterns, he would be playing well for a while then all of a sudden he would be relegated to the bench. The same can be said about the rest of the team. The six game winning streak in which D.Lee started is another instance of where a rookie earned his starting spot and then after playing well be relegated to the bench. This my friend happened all to often.
"Low Percentage Shots r US, these are our Knicks" "NY KNICKS the cure for basketball fanatic"
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
6/16/2006  11:22 AM
Why do you think LB would take Frye out of the game? Senility?
I just hope that people will like me
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
6/16/2006  11:32 AM
I'm still amazed by how people are not holding the players on this team accountable for this season. This team is built around a bunch of misfits and castoffs from other teams but somehow they are getting a pass for this year and its immediately blamed on the coach. Rookies like Channing Frye, Nate and Lee all got the proper amount of playing time last year, look up the stats on minutes per game for rookies, all 3 Knicks rookies were pretty high up on that list.
Channing Frye - 24.9 mpg
Nate Robinson - 21.4 mpg
David Lee - 16.9 mpg

Having rookies play this many minutes is unheard of and a tribute to just how badly the vets on this team played. Rookies should not be earning more minutes then you when you have the "all-stars" the Knicks have.

The Knicks players aside from the rookies and Q should be ashamed of themselves for the horrid performance they put on last year. Coaching only takes you so far and in the end its up to you to perform when your on the court. The players didn't hold up their end of the bargain and THAT should be the headline this offseason, not that we have throw away our Hall Of Fame coach.
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
Rich
Posts: 27410
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 12/30/2003
Member: #511
USA
6/16/2006  11:34 AM
If there was one player who was jerked around it was Lee. Players need to be able to understand their roles and count on a given number of minutes. None of the three draft picks could do that with Larry.
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
6/16/2006  11:35 AM
It's because the common wisdom is that when LB is gone we will be able to reach our true potential of a young up and coming team. Most people fee he is the only thing that is holding us back from our true destiny.

[Edited by - Bippity10 on 06-16-2006 11:35 AM]
I just hope that people will like me
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
6/16/2006  11:49 AM
Posted by Bippity10:

Why do you think LB would take Frye out of the game? Senility?

Senility my describe his behavior over the past year, but I don't know which particular substitution (or even which game) you're referring to in your question.
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
6/16/2006  11:50 AM
I didn't know either. I was just responding to an equally general post. So maybe you can bring one into the conversation.
I just hope that people will like me
joec32033
Posts: 30631
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
6/16/2006  11:55 AM
Posted by nyk4ever:

I'm still amazed by how people are not holding the players on this team accountable for this season. This team is built around a bunch of misfits and castoffs from other teams but somehow they are getting a pass for this year and its immediately blamed on the coach. Rookies like Channing Frye, Nate and Lee all got the proper amount of playing time last year, look up the stats on minutes per game for rookies, all 3 Knicks rookies were pretty high up on that list.
Channing Frye - 24.9 mpg
Nate Robinson - 21.4 mpg
David Lee - 16.9 mpg

Having rookies play this many minutes is unheard of and a tribute to just how badly the vets on this team played. Rookies should not be earning more minutes then you when you have the "all-stars" the Knicks have.

The Knicks players aside from the rookies and Q should be ashamed of themselves for the horrid performance they put on last year. Coaching only takes you so far and in the end its up to you to perform when your on the court. The players didn't hold up their end of the bargain and THAT should be the headline this offseason, not that we have throw away our Hall Of Fame coach.


Thank you...this team is on a s;ippery slope with youth as it is, and by that I mean we are getting ALOT of young players and trying to develop all of these guys and that just normally doesn't happen. And what's worse is that some of these players have a relatively low ceiling. I mean I look at it this way, and it is exactly what I was afraid of. We have a little more vet "leadership"(use that term loosely) but with Nate, Lee, Frye, Jackie, Q2, Craw, Q1 it reminds me of the clips of 6 years ago with Miles, Q, Maggette, Odom, Brand, Dooling,Jaric, Olowakandi.......alot of youth, but it is spread too thin. At least the Clips had alot of lotto picks that at the time had very high upside. We are loading up on late first round picks with decidedly less upside.
~You can't run from who you are.~
buddapaw
Posts: 23199
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 2/22/2006
Member: #1101
6/16/2006  12:03 PM
Where is the low ceiling on Nate, Lee and Frye? Just because someone is a high lotto pick doesn't guarentee stardom. Joe Smith, Sam Bowie and there are too many to mention.
"Low Percentage Shots r US, these are our Knicks" "NY KNICKS the cure for basketball fanatic"
buddapaw
Posts: 23199
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 2/22/2006
Member: #1101
6/16/2006  12:09 PM
The Knick rookies have shown a lot more effort and passion for the game than a few of the so-called vets on the team. They have been willing to learn. Lee is actually working on his jumpshot which he never had and has shown some improvement.
Noone really knew how good a shooter Frye was all he has to work on is his defence and get a little stronger.
Nate I don't know, what he lacks in size he makes up for in heart. He actually makes the game fun to watch when he is in because you don't know what he will do next, also a decent 3pt shooter and a pest on defence. That's pretty good upsides on my books.
"Low Percentage Shots r US, these are our Knicks" "NY KNICKS the cure for basketball fanatic"
joec32033
Posts: 30631
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
6/16/2006  12:26 PM
Posted by buddapaw:

Where is the low ceiling on Nate, Lee and Frye? Just because someone is a high lotto pick doesn't guarentee stardom. Joe Smith, Sam Bowie and there are too many to mention.

Why do you take everything I am talking about and take it to an extreme? Ok, answer me this who has higher potential, Odom or Lee? Miles or Nate? I didn't say they had a low upside, I said they had a lower upside than the Clips players had. I am also not equating high picks to automatic high upside....never said that. Guys are picked #1 and #2 for a reason....hindsight aside, at the time of the picks they were better prospects than the guys available in the 2nd round or at the end of the first right? Your argument sighting hindsight examples would turn the whole idea of the draft on it's ear. You have to take examples in the time frame and with the knowledge that was available back then.
~You can't run from who you are.~
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
6/16/2006  3:45 PM
1) if we sat Marbury, Q, Crawford, Curry, etc, and won 23 games with the rookies people would be killing Larry for benching our "best" players.

2) isiah and dolan would be up in arms that Larry was wasting their 125M roster.

3) this NYC scrutiny and pressure is not good for rookies. It's simply not wise to make THEM try to carry us to the playoffs, which certainly was the directive.

4) creeps like Marbury, Francis and Mo were whining enough as it was; can you imagine if they were all benched for kids? talk about a mutiny!!!

5) two rookies ranked 4th and 5th in total minutes in a season without a draft pick. The were edged out only by Marbury, Crawford and Curry. The year prior, when draft positioning mattered and the coaches were dominated by Isiah, the top 5 were all veterans.

Just accept that this team was not constructed to feature rookies last year. It was constructed for guys like Marbury, crawford, Q, AD, M. Rose, and James to carry the team while the rookies learned the ropes and increased their role as the year wore on.

The problem was that the veterans came into camp out of shape and with their egos up their butts and they slacked themselves into deficits they couldn't pull themselves out of. The rookies got cast into situations they weren't prepared for, and shouldn't have been expected to shoulder. But the veterans provided zero positive leadership, and then had the gall to get b/tchy when their heads and hearts got called into question. They let themselves be shown up and embarrassed NBDL refuges, and rookies.

Everyone says Brown should have established roles. He did, the veterans were assigned to start and be the leaders.

THEY FAILED HIM.

Marbury, Q, AD, Curry.

Which of them best fulfilled their role?

Marbury, the guard brown gave more freedom to than any other but who could never quit get any system that didn't entail him freelancing to his heart's content?

Q, who entered the season with a bad back and ankle befor ehis brother was murdered?

AD, who got suspended just when we got cooking?

Curry, who's "condition" justified him being out of condition?

What about Jerome James, our other "starting" center? The guy who halfway thru the season he was still begging out after 5 minutes of play?

But if Brown actually gave up on those 125M veterans- who isiah, dolan and so many fans had invested so much hope and expectations in - where would that leave us? People say that Brown killed everyones trade value. Well what would having guys like Marbury and Curry playing BEHIND Nate and Butler do to their trade value?

4 potential lottery picks were given up for just those two, but they should play behind the 5'7 21st pick and a 6'8 undrafted NBDL center?

So what did Larry do? He kept the expectations on the veterans to show leadership and to bear the pressure of the season while still allowing the opportunity for the kids to grow. Nobody got a free ride and nobody got shut out. There was a leadership vacuum that anybody was allowed to fill.

Who did best fill the leadership vacuum? Probably Malik, QR, Crawford, and Frye. (You can add Nate for his work on the floor but off the floor leaves questions. And Lee is still an unknown but shows promise.)

Don't like 'em as leaders? Is that Brown's fault, or Isiah's?

Please don't expect a poor rookie to have to unseat the Grand Negative: Mr Starbury. Remember: "he's the second most important person in the organization after dolan. And he's not in play and he'll never be in play. We don't get down like that!!!"

But what if we get him and his ilk out of here and see what some positive people can do?

Some of you guys are so afraid of what Brown will do to the roster - like that he wants all aged veterans. Have you really convinced yourselves that he wants to trade Nate, Butler, Frye, Lee, Crawford, etc so he can add cripple braindeads to add to Marbury, Francis, Jalen, and Jerome?

Just get rid of the poisons and let the guys who can lead lead and have the others get out of the damn way. Our problem wasn't that brown didn't establish roles or that the kids didn't get enough time, it was that the veterans failed in their roles, and that put all of the coach, management and the rookies in extremely difficult and awkward positions.
Page 5 of 6 « First‹ Previous 3  4  5  6 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Islesfan, Fish....for the last time....Brown Wanted Francis & Rose
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy