Posted by BigC:

Posted by TMS:

bottomline is we need a franchise star to anchor the team if we ever wanna win a championship... whether we get one via trade, draft or free agency, we gotta explore every possible avenue we can to get it done, even possibly tanking a season away if you have to... u don't win championships in the NBA w/o a franchise stud... i can only think of the Pistons as a counter example to that & in their case they had as deep a pool of very good talent as i can remember on any team.

Agreed. Not only that, but if you want to win a title you have to have 3 star players. There are no teams winning anything with just one guy. If the Knicks are ever to win another title they have a lot of work to do. If you look at most teams that have won a title besides the Pistons they have drafted star players plus signed free agents or trades. We need 3 star players to reach that goal. Teams know that they have to be stacked to get anything done.

The Pistons had borderline annual all-stars at 1-5 and I always thought when they won Rasheed Wallace was one of the 10 best players in the league (but I know I'm in the minority)

Posted by SupremeCommander:

Posted by BigC:

Posted by TMS:

bottomline is we need a franchise star to anchor the team if we ever wanna win a championship... whether we get one via trade, draft or free agency, we gotta explore every possible avenue we can to get it done, even possibly tanking a season away if you have to... u don't win championships in the NBA w/o a franchise stud... i can only think of the Pistons as a counter example to that & in their case they had as deep a pool of very good talent as i can remember on any team.

Agreed. Not only that, but if you want to win a title you have to have 3 star players. There are no teams winning anything with just one guy. If the Knicks are ever to win another title they have a lot of work to do. If you look at most teams that have won a title besides the Pistons they have drafted star players plus signed free agents or trades. We need 3 star players to reach that goal. Teams know that they have to be stacked to get anything done.

The Pistons had borderline annual all-stars at 1-5 and I always thought when they won Rasheed Wallace was one of the 10 best players in the league (but I know I'm in the minority)

Sheed had the ability to be one of the ten best players in the league and he was ocassionally, but he was definitely not consistent.

Posted by crzymdups:

Posted by SupremeCommander:

Posted by BigC:

Posted by TMS:

bottomline is we need a franchise star to anchor the team if we ever wanna win a championship... whether we get one via trade, draft or free agency, we gotta explore every possible avenue we can to get it done, even possibly tanking a season away if you have to... u don't win championships in the NBA w/o a franchise stud... i can only think of the Pistons as a counter example to that & in their case they had as deep a pool of very good talent as i can remember on any team.

Agreed. Not only that, but if you want to win a title you have to have 3 star players. There are no teams winning anything with just one guy. If the Knicks are ever to win another title they have a lot of work to do. If you look at most teams that have won a title besides the Pistons they have drafted star players plus signed free agents or trades. We need 3 star players to reach that goal. Teams know that they have to be stacked to get anything done.

The Pistons had borderline annual all-stars at 1-5 and I always thought when they won Rasheed Wallace was one of the 10 best players in the league (but I know I'm in the minority)

Sheed had the ability to be one of the ten best players in the league and he was ocassionally, but he was definitely not consistent.

It's funny how guys like him and Artest have some of the best talent in the league, but both acted up in the same manner and got tons of T's, suspensions, whatever. Artest is following Sheeds pretty similarly, since he now signed with a top team and has a great shot to win a championship.

Posted by knicks1248:

If walsh can get us a high pick in 2k10 and at least one max player he would be consider the best pres this franchise has had since I can remeber..

For sure, but that's fan wishful thinking, at least the draft pick. I think if he comes out of 2010 with a real star, and all should point at Lebron, he will be remembered like that. At this point, I'd be extremely happy if we can get a pick out of Nate or Lee.

Posted by knicks1248:

If walsh can get us a high pick in 2k10 and at least one max player he would be consider the best pres this franchise has had since I can remeber..

I could be wrong, but as of right now I really don't trust Walsh's drafting ability.

Posted by knicks1248:

Posted by TheGame:

I think we all want walsh tomake good moves and to take his time. My only issue is that I have never seen it take this long to sign another teams FA. I mean you might negotiate for a few months with your own FA. But team usually make a decision on outside FAs in a matter of 7-10 days. It seems like we have been "talking" to sessions for a month and still have not made a formal offer. And now we are considering stackhouse and j-will. I mean WTF. walsh make a damn decision already.

According to most he has until 2k11

Posted by GodSaveTheKnicks:

Walsh is an idiot! What is he waiting for? Instead of looking for veterans who will take a 1 year contract and understand they are here for the short term and won't chafe at the youngsters getting their minutes Donnie should..

Ummm..

Donnie should...?

What?

Someone was whining about not getting Artest.

If the plan was to unload as many contracts as we could and try to be player in 2010 and beyond, what is the logic in signing someone to a long term deal?

With Sessions it might make sense because he's at least young and hasn't peaked.

To everyone whining about how we haven't made any moves this offseason, please lay out your brilliant plan that is SO much better than being patient and waiting for better FAs to pop up in 2010, 2011, etc.

We're waiting...

P.S subzero..We Have NO 1st Round Pick This Year. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada. None.

So your point about signing these medicore veterans making us just good enough to get a medicore draft pick this year is uninformed.

[Edited by - godsavetheknicks on 08-06-2009 11:42 AM]

Posted by TheGame:

Posted by BigC:

Posted by Moonangie:

Posted by BigC:

Posted by knicks1248:

If walsh can get us a high pick in 2k10 and at least one max player he would be consider the best pres this franchise has had since I can remeber..

I could be wrong, but as of right now I really don't trust Walsh's drafting ability.

Perhaps that will change after you see what Gallo can do this year. I think he's gonna be a star and I'm juiced to watch him play. Haven't said that about a Knick in a loooooonnnnngg time. Chandler shows serious promise as well.

So I think adding a LBJ would do wonders for us, regardless of other moves.

When Danilo first got drafted I bumped into someone that worked for the Knicks. He said that he Knicks believe that Danilo will be the next Dirk. This is even before Danilo played a summer league game. Right now Danilo's issue is his health.

If DG's back holds up, I think he can get to a poor man's Dirk level. His shot looked awesome. Even with the bad back, he was not a bad defensive player. And his skillset allows him to do so many things on the floor. If he starts this year (which may not be a good idea), it think he can easily average 15 pts, 7 rbs, and 3ast, which would be pretty good for essentially his rookie season.

You know this is Al Harrington, Chris Duhon, and Larry Hughes' contract year right? There might be a lot of chucking and ducking going around. Not to mention if we get back Lee, and Nate back everyone will be trying to get theirs because they all know they will not be back.

Posted by BigC:



You know this is Al Harrington, Chris Duhon, and Larry Hughes' contract year right? There might be a lot of chucking and ducking going around. Not to mention if we get back Lee, and Nate back everyone will be trying to get theirs because they all know they will not be back.

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by subzero0:

Posted by GKFv2:

Posted by subzero0:

Posted by GKFv2:

Posted by subzero0:

Posted by GKFv2:

Posted by subzero0:

Ahh so hopefully now everyone is starting to realize exactly what Walsh is doing to the Knicks. Is it starting to hit you guys yet? Still need more clues guys? We are being turned into perennial playoff losers... just like the Pacers.

That's right. We should have stuck to your brilliant plan of keeping Zach and Crawford and making a run to the Finals. What fools we are!

Where do you read that I wanted to keep Zach and Crawford?? Get your facts straight! I wanted Walsh to make smart moves with the players by demanding picks in any trades possible.

Next time you want to shoot of at the mouth you should go read up on my past posts dude.

[Edited by - subzero0 on 08-05-2009 4:58 PM]

Because those players were subsequently traded for picks, right? You know their value, right? You were very upset when Randolph was traded. You said he had way more value than what we got. Well I guess if you consider Quentin Richardson way more value then that's all fine and dandy. I guess Crawford netted more value than Al in Acie Law and Speedy Claxton.

So what?

If they're as bad as you believe than keep them and demand that any team that wants them has to include a pick. If there are no takers as you are ascertaining then fine, keep them on the team and watch the team sink. Then, because we hadn't moved any of our picks in the meanwhile, when we finally are bad enough we try to hit the jackpot in the lottery. That GKF is how you build a championship contender. Do you want to know how to build a year in year out loser? Make idiotic trades, sign guys that arent championship level players and watch every year as teams defeat you in the playoffs. Resting your hopes on trying to sign that big player is a stupid idea. Trying to land a big name in FA without a young drafted star doesnt work. It just doesnt work.


[Edited by - subzero0 on 08-05-2009 5:08 PM]

Wait, what? So basically you wanted to keep guys like Zach around for no apparent reason other than to lose and get a draft pick. How does that make more sense than trading him and his terrible contract for cap space? Build through the draft. That would be pretty hard considering we would take a major step back without a draft pick next year. So you'd be okay with losing for the next 5 years at the minimum in order to accumulate draft picks and hope you strike it rich with one of them and they become a star? How is that going to work? How is that a better plan than creating cap space by trading terrible players? And how exactly is "demanding" a draft pick for crap going to get you a draft pick? I'm really not following.

Make idiotic trades? We haven't made any.

Sign guys that aren't championship level players? That's great. Who exactly is signing here to win a title? I think they're looking elsewhere at the moment.

Defeats us in the playoffs? Well, that would be a step up from where we are now.

The bottom line is 2010 is one summer away and already I see negative nancy's crying about the plan sucking and doom and gloom. It is what it is. Why can you not wait to see what happens first before you blast everything? We tried the "cap space doesn't matter" stuff for 14 years. 1996 got us Allan Houston. I think that was a pretty good signing. 2010 can get us someone even better. You and I don't know what will happen. As for this "young star" to attract a FA, there may be one on the team but the bottom line is anyone is coming here because they want to play here and they want a chance to win. There is no difference between draft players and losing and hoping to sign someone and having a mix young players and veteran expiring deals and hoping to sign someone. It's the same exact thing. The team will still be a loser.

Teams that are not able to hit that star in the draft, scrap everything and go back to do it again until they get their player. Then they go out and sign a big name player to go along with the player that they drafted and then they are ready to try to win a championship. Do you have that down GKF? Maybe you should print this post out and keep it on you at all times. You can refer to it every now and then when you need help understanding how to build a championship team.

I have no problems with with moving Isiah. I have no problems with moving Zach and Crawford. But I do have a problem with the strategy behind it. Mortgaging our future on free agency is the wrong way to go.

I guess I don't understand the logic behind the bold. How are we mortgaging our future on free agency?

If we don't sign a free-agent in 2010 our roster will consist of
Gallo-6 pick
Hill-8 pick
Chandler-23 pick
Douglas-29 pick bought by the guy that is "mortgaging our future"

Possible other young players:
Lee-
Nate
Targeting Sessions(23 years old)

the rest of the players
Old guys with expiring contracts

How are we mortgaging our future. If we hadn't traded away our number one in 2010 we would be in position to get a star via free-agency or a high draft pick. Can't really blame Walsh for this lack of a pick.

I understand the frustration. I understand the impatience. But what did we expect???? Isn't what I described above exactly what most teams look like when they begin to tear it down?

Your thinking small Bip. Even if we dont have a pick in 2010 it doesnt matter. We should be trying to either 1) get a pick in 2010 via trade or 2) wait until the following years to get a good position in the draft.

By us continuing to acquire marginal players we will continue to be just that, marginal in the standings. That means we will continue to get horrible picks in the draft.

That is what I meant in my post.