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.

Yes, you seem to be having a hard time understanding, so allow me to help you. I am going to put it in plain english and add tables and charts and do everything I can to make this as clear as possible. If you are smart you will actually think and look at the long term (yes even if its 5 years) instead of looking forward to just 2010.

Below I have posted the past championship teams along with the mvp down to the year 2000.

Championship Team MVP
Los Angeles Lakers --Kobe Bryant
Boston Celtics --Paul Pierce
San Antonio Spurs --Tony Parker
Miami Heat --Dwyane Wade
San Antonio Spurs --Tim Duncan
Detroit Pistons --Chauncey Billups
San Antonio Spurs --Tim Duncan
Los Angeles Lakers --Shaquille O'Neal
Los Angeles Lakers --Shaquille O'Neal
Los Angeles Lakers --Shaquille O'Neal

I would have gone on past that but I believe this is more than enough to prove my point. Do you see a pattern here GKF? Notice that every team below started by building with the draft and then added a superstar after they had their drafted star? Ok now lets stop, phew I know that is alot for you to take in. You should stop here and take a breath. When you believe your starting to understand then continue reading.

The only exception noted below is the Detroit Pistons and that only is because they were able to collect players who were extremely talented and did not demand that much money. I guarantee you 9 times out of 10 that wont happen. As a matter of fact if you look at the long list of nba champions in this era you will be hard pressed to find another team like that. Even then, the Pistons only won one championship. When you are ready then continue to read... but only when your ready!

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. The overpriced signing will keep us bobbing on water with all the other teams instead of surpassing them. Dude every other team is playing the free agency also. All we really will be doing is remaining on par with most of the other teams out there, thus resulting in us becoming perennial playoff losers, yea, just like the pacers. I sense you are starting to become confused again, dont worry I wont have you read much more.

Moving Zach and Crawford had to only be about getting picks not clearing cap space. We should only worry about clearing space when we have that drafted player and we are ready, we are not ready yet. So now instead of playing bad players and putting ourselves in a good position to draft a really good player we are going to get non-championship level talent in the free agency go to the playoffs and lose year in year out.

Instead of building a dynasty to win championships over a period of 5 years we are going to be playoff losers in 2 years. Good plan, right GKF.

Please note: I believe this belongs in a thread of its own so most likely I will probably paste it elsewhere.

Posted by crzymdups:

Posted by djsunyc:

billups #3 pick overall
sheed #4 pick overall
rip #8 pick overall
larry brown = hof coach

bargnani #1 pick overall
bosh #4 pick overall
hedo #16 pick overall
jay triano = future hof coach

i guess some teams just know how to build.

Posted by crzymdups:

Posted by djsunyc:

billups #3 pick overall
sheed #4 pick overall
rip #8 pick overall
larry brown = hof coach

bargnani #1 pick overall
bosh #4 pick overall
hedo #16 pick overall
jay triano = future hof coach

i guess some teams just know how to build.

Posted by subzero0:

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.

We should be trying to either 1) get a pick in 2010 via trade

Isn't there a year before the next draft? Long time to make a trade. Why get upset now? We were active this year in the draft, no reason to think these guys don't see value in the draft. Can they get the right deal done? That remains to be seen, but I think they are right there with you on the importance of acquiring a 2010 pick.

wait until the following years to get a good position in the draft.

Your logic is flawed here. From the accounts I've heard, other than Jason Kidd we've been discussing 1 year deals for vets, so why would that affect our 2011 pick?

I understand why they target vets that have been on winning teams before. Our young guys need to see guys with good habits eventually, or else they will never develop. This is why we have interviewed so many people. Just because we interview does not mean we are hot for them and want them on the team. That's media nonsense that we seem to get sucked into. I think we are interviewing guys that have been in winning situations and seeing if they have the ability to be leaders here. If not, we seem to be moving on.

Posted by GKFv2:

Posted by subzero0:

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.

Yes, you seem to be having a hard time understanding, so allow me to help you. I am going to put it in plain english and add tables and charts and do everything I can to make this as clear as possible. If you are smart you will actually think and look at the long term (yes even if its 5 years) instead of looking forward to just 2010.

Below I have posted the past championship teams along with the mvp down to the year 2000.

Championship Team MVP
Los Angeles Lakers --Kobe Bryant
Boston Celtics --Paul Pierce
San Antonio Spurs --Tony Parker
Miami Heat --Dwyane Wade
San Antonio Spurs --Tim Duncan
Detroit Pistons --Chauncey Billups
San Antonio Spurs --Tim Duncan
Los Angeles Lakers --Shaquille O'Neal
Los Angeles Lakers --Shaquille O'Neal
Los Angeles Lakers --Shaquille O'Neal

I would have gone on past that but I believe this is more than enough to prove my point. Do you see a pattern here GKF? Notice that every team below started by building with the draft and then added a superstar after they had their drafted star? Ok now lets stop, phew I know that is alot for you to take in. You should stop here and take a breath. When you believe your starting to understand then continue reading.

The only exception noted below is the Detroit Pistons and that only is because they were able to collect players who were extremely talented and did not demand that much money. I guarantee you 9 times out of 10 that wont happen. As a matter of fact if you look at the long list of nba champions in this era you will be hard pressed to find another team like that. Even then, the Pistons only won one championship. When you are ready then continue to read... but only when your ready!

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. The overpriced signing will keep us bobbing on water with all the other teams instead of surpassing them. Dude every other team is playing the free agency also. All we really will be doing is remaining on par with most of the other teams out there, thus resulting in us becoming perennial playoff losers, yea, just like the pacers. I sense you are starting to become confused again, dont worry I wont have you read much more.

Moving Zach and Crawford had to only be about getting picks not clearing cap space. We should only worry about clearing space when we have that drafted player and we are ready, we are not ready yet. So now instead of playing bad players and putting ourselves in a good position to draft a really good player we are going to get non-championship level talent in the free agency go to the playoffs and lose year in year out.

Instead of building a dynasty to win championships over a period of 5 years we are going to be playoff losers in 2 years. Good plan, right GKF.

Please note: I believe this belongs in a thread of its own so most likely I will probably paste it elsewhere.

I read that JohnWallace made a note of Chauncey Billups and Shaquille O'Neal being obtained as free agents as evidence that my premise is false. Even though the number of championship teams that I have used have MVP's that were drafted is greater than the number of championship teams that that have MVP's which were Chauncey and Shaq I will respond to this.

I have already explained my thoughts on the Pistons, so I will not go over that. When it comes to Shaquille O'Neal and the Lakers winning in 2000, 2001, and 2002, they had Kobe Bryant who was, if not the best, then the second best player on the team. And oh yea, he was drafted. Any questions JohnWallace44?

Look here genius, I made a long drawn out post and you responded with the same regurgitated crap. What future did we mortgage? Zach Randolph? You are living in a fantasy world but I'm not surprised since you endorsed Isiah's moves to begin with. How in God's name are we going to acquire picks for these players when they aren't worthy of picks? Does the fact they have been traded for even worse junk after we traded them not tell you anything about their value?

I like how you can predict what will happen in the future. You've already turned on the water works because you are Nostradamus and know exactly what will happen. Yes, we will be "playoff losers" in 2 years because we have not followed your amazing "lose for a minimum 5 years and hope to draft a superstar plan (never mind we fall behind 1 year without a 2010 pick but yet you say we can 'get' one as if it's that easy)". With your plan we will be in the championship. I also remember when you said we'd be a playoff team with the addition of Zach Randolph. How did that work out?

I like how you also insult the Pacers success by calling them "playoff losers". You might as well insult the Knicks history throughout the 90's as well since we did the same thing. Our fans are proud of our 90's Knicks and I don't hear anyone calling them "playoff losers" like a sore-assed person. Making the playoffs in 13 of 17 seasons as a GM and reaching the Finals during that time is a damn good resume. Damn good. Trying to pretend that means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things is a joke. You're better off discussing how good Randolph would make us then trying to downplay Donnie and the Pacers' history.

You can see the future again? Guaranteeing we wont be like the Pistons and sign anyone of note? LOL. You can take the crying game elsewhere because it's gotten tiring. Crying one year in advance is tiring because it's been going on for a while before that already. Paul Pierce is not a superstar. The addition of KG and Ray Allen made him a better player and elevated his game. The Celtics didn't get KG through free agency but it's all in the same. Pau Gasol got traded to LA for garbage. Cap space is more than just free agents. You can make trades and absorb contracts in trades. you have flexibility others will not have. You will be able to set your franchise up for the next decade with the moves you make with your cap space. It's something we haven't had in 14 YEARS. No wonder we're been LOSING FOR 10 OF THEM. Do you see a connection here? You can build through the draft after we fall flat on our face next in 2010. If we do, go ahead and build through the draft. Trying to somehow say we "mortgaged our future" to make a run at free agents by trading garbage from our team is a joke. The 2011 pick is there and others will expire at that point. We can follow your brilliant plan (aka post-Jordan era Bulls plan) once we see what happens in the summer of 2010. We aren't ruining anything. We aren't doing anything wrong. We aren't even gambling. What we had here was garbage. What we have now is garbage. What we could have next summer wont be. And if we don't get it, so be it. We'll still be better off then where we were last season and even now. If you can't understand that then go back to replaying highlights of Marbury, Zach, Crawford, Curry and the whole gang and relive the "classic" times because you will never be happy. Just stop crying one year in advance. That's all I ask.

Posted by subzero0:

Posted by GKFv2:

Posted by subzero0:

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.

Yes, you seem to be having a hard time understanding, so allow me to help you. I am going to put it in plain english and add tables and charts and do everything I can to make this as clear as possible. If you are smart you will actually think and look at the long term (yes even if its 5 years) instead of looking forward to just 2010.

Below I have posted the past championship teams along with the mvp down to the year 2000.

Championship Team MVP
Los Angeles Lakers --Kobe Bryant
Boston Celtics --Paul Pierce
San Antonio Spurs --Tony Parker
Miami Heat --Dwyane Wade
San Antonio Spurs --Tim Duncan
Detroit Pistons --Chauncey Billups
San Antonio Spurs --Tim Duncan
Los Angeles Lakers --Shaquille O'Neal
Los Angeles Lakers --Shaquille O'Neal
Los Angeles Lakers --Shaquille O'Neal

I would have gone on past that but I believe this is more than enough to prove my point. Do you see a pattern here GKF? Notice that every team below started by building with the draft and then added a superstar after they had their drafted star? Ok now lets stop, phew I know that is alot for you to take in. You should stop here and take a breath. When you believe your starting to understand then continue reading.

The only exception noted below is the Detroit Pistons and that only is because they were able to collect players who were extremely talented and did not demand that much money. I guarantee you 9 times out of 10 that wont happen. As a matter of fact if you look at the long list of nba champions in this era you will be hard pressed to find another team like that. Even then, the Pistons only won one championship. When you are ready then continue to read... but only when your ready!

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. The overpriced signing will keep us bobbing on water with all the other teams instead of surpassing them. Dude every other team is playing the free agency also. All we really will be doing is remaining on par with most of the other teams out there, thus resulting in us becoming perennial playoff losers, yea, just like the pacers. I sense you are starting to become confused again, dont worry I wont have you read much more.

Moving Zach and Crawford had to only be about getting picks not clearing cap space. We should only worry about clearing space when we have that drafted player and we are ready, we are not ready yet. So now instead of playing bad players and putting ourselves in a good position to draft a really good player we are going to get non-championship level talent in the free agency go to the playoffs and lose year in year out.

Instead of building a dynasty to win championships over a period of 5 years we are going to be playoff losers in 2 years. Good plan, right GKF.

Please note: I believe this belongs in a thread of its own so most likely I will probably paste it elsewhere.

I read that JohnWallace made a note of Chauncey Billups and Shaquille O'Neal being obtained as free agents as evidence that my premise is false. Even though the number of championship teams that I have used have MVP's that were drafted is greater than the number of championship teams that that have MVP's which were Chauncey and Shaq I will respond to this.

I have already explained my thoughts on the Pistons, so I will not go over that. When it comes to Shaquille O'Neal and the Lakers winning in 2000, 2001, and 2002, they had Kobe Bryant who was, if not the best, then the second best player on the team. And oh yea, he was drafted. Any questions JohnWallace44?

Look here genius, I made a long drawn out post and you responded with the same regurgitated crap. What future did we mortgage? Zach Randolph? You are living in a fantasy world but I'm not surprised since you endorsed Isiah's moves to begin with. How in God's name are we going to acquire picks for these players when they aren't worthy of picks? Does the fact they have been traded for even worse junk after we traded them not tell you anything about their value?

I like how you can predict what will happen in the future. You've already turned on the water works because you are Nostradamus and know exactly what will happen. Yes, we will be "playoff losers" in 2 years because we have not followed your amazing "lose for a minimum 5 years and hope to draft a superstar plan (never mind we fall behind 1 year without a 2010 pick but yet you say we can 'get' one as if it's that easy)". With your plan we will be in the championship. I also remember when you said we'd be a playoff team with the addition of Zach Randolph. How did that work out?

I like how you also insult the Pacers success by calling them "playoff losers". You might as well insult the Knicks history throughout the 90's as well since we did the same thing. Our fans are proud of our 90's Knicks and I don't hear anyone calling them "playoff losers" like a sore-assed person. Making the playoffs in 13 of 17 seasons as a GM and reaching the Finals during that time is a damn good resume. Damn good. Trying to pretend that means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things is a joke. You're better off discussing how good Randolph would make us then trying to downplay Donnie and the Pacers' history.

You can see the future again? Guaranteeing we wont be like the Pistons and sign anyone of note? LOL. You can take the crying game elsewhere because it's gotten tiring. Crying one year in advance is tiring because it's been going on for a while before that already. Paul Pierce is not a superstar. The addition of KG and Ray Allen made him a better player and elevated his game. The Celtics didn't get KG through free agency but it's all in the same. Pau Gasol got traded to LA for garbage. Cap space is more than just free agents. You can make trades and absorb contracts in trades. you have flexibility others will not have. You will be able to set your franchise up for the next decade with the moves you make with your cap space. It's something we haven't had in 14 YEARS. No wonder we're been LOSING FOR 10 OF THEM. Do you see a connection here? You can build through the draft after we fall flat on our face next in 2010. If we do, go ahead and build through the draft. Trying to somehow say we "mortgaged our future" to make a run at free agents by trading garbage from our team is a joke. The 2011 pick is there and others will expire at that point. We can follow your brilliant plan (aka post-Jordan era Bulls plan) once we see what happens in the summer of 2010. We aren't ruining anything. We aren't doing anything wrong. We aren't even gambling. What we had here was garbage. What we have now is garbage. What we could have next summer wont be. And if we don't get it, so be it. We'll still be better off then where we were last season and even now. If you can't understand that then go back to replaying highlights of Marbury, Zach, Crawford, Curry and the whole gang and relive the "classic" times because you will never be happy. Just stop crying one year in advance. That's all I ask.

I endorsed Isiah's moves?? I told people we were going to be playoff contenders with Zach Randolph?? So now your going to resort to lying again right GKF? I was protesting Isiah's moves because he wasnt targeting the draft, he was targeting signing players... sound familiar?

Secondly, yes the Pacers and the Knicks were playoff losers. I dont care how proud you are of losing but I cant stand it and I will make sure I call it out when I see it. I think most Knick fans are upset with losing, thats why you hear us boo, yes even in the 90's. After Ewing left we should have scrapped everything and tried to rebuild by getting a player to build around in the draft. Just about every championship winning team in our generation, with the exception of the one Detroit team in '04, has done that. Look it up. I already made this point. So instead of building our team the way just about every other championship team in our generation has done you want to do it the Detroit Pistons way right? DUDE THEY ONLY WON ONCE!

And then to make your point you say that KG and Allen joined Pierce. Yes they joined him after he was drafted by the Celtics. Then you say Pau was there to help Kobe. Yes Kobe was drafted by the Lakers. How can you still not see the pattern. I am truly amazed this is flying completely over your head... I warned you to stop reading when you try to think too much.

Also, the reason we havent been winning is not only because we didnt have the cap space its also because we didnt put good enough players around Ewing, and we didnt have a drafted superstar to build around after Ewing.

Im glad you like losing GKF because more likely than not, your going to be seeing a whole lot more of it.

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by subzero0:

Posted by GKFv2:

Posted by subzero0:

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.

Yes, you seem to be having a hard time understanding, so allow me to help you. I am going to put it in plain english and add tables and charts and do everything I can to make this as clear as possible. If you are smart you will actually think and look at the long term (yes even if its 5 years) instead of looking forward to just 2010.

Below I have posted the past championship teams along with the mvp down to the year 2000.

Championship Team MVP
Los Angeles Lakers --Kobe Bryant
Boston Celtics --Paul Pierce
San Antonio Spurs --Tony Parker
Miami Heat --Dwyane Wade
San Antonio Spurs --Tim Duncan
Detroit Pistons --Chauncey Billups
San Antonio Spurs --Tim Duncan
Los Angeles Lakers --Shaquille O'Neal
Los Angeles Lakers --Shaquille O'Neal
Los Angeles Lakers --Shaquille O'Neal

I would have gone on past that but I believe this is more than enough to prove my point. Do you see a pattern here GKF? Notice that every team below started by building with the draft and then added a superstar after they had their drafted star? Ok now lets stop, phew I know that is alot for you to take in. You should stop here and take a breath. When you believe your starting to understand then continue reading.

The only exception noted below is the Detroit Pistons and that only is because they were able to collect players who were extremely talented and did not demand that much money. I guarantee you 9 times out of 10 that wont happen. As a matter of fact if you look at the long list of nba champions in this era you will be hard pressed to find another team like that. Even then, the Pistons only won one championship. When you are ready then continue to read... but only when your ready!

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. The overpriced signing will keep us bobbing on water with all the other teams instead of surpassing them. Dude every other team is playing the free agency also. All we really will be doing is remaining on par with most of the other teams out there, thus resulting in us becoming perennial playoff losers, yea, just like the pacers. I sense you are starting to become confused again, dont worry I wont have you read much more.

Moving Zach and Crawford had to only be about getting picks not clearing cap space. We should only worry about clearing space when we have that drafted player and we are ready, we are not ready yet. So now instead of playing bad players and putting ourselves in a good position to draft a really good player we are going to get non-championship level talent in the free agency go to the playoffs and lose year in year out.

Instead of building a dynasty to win championships over a period of 5 years we are going to be playoff losers in 2 years. Good plan, right GKF.

Please note: I believe this belongs in a thread of its own so most likely I will probably paste it elsewhere.

I read that JohnWallace made a note of Chauncey Billups and Shaquille O'Neal being obtained as free agents as evidence that my premise is false. Even though the number of championship teams that I have used have MVP's that were drafted is greater than the number of championship teams that that have MVP's which were Chauncey and Shaq I will respond to this.

I have already explained my thoughts on the Pistons, so I will not go over that. When it comes to Shaquille O'Neal and the Lakers winning in 2000, 2001, and 2002, they had Kobe Bryant who was, if not the best, then the second best player on the team. And oh yea, he was drafted. Any questions JohnWallace44?

Look here genius, I made a long drawn out post and you responded with the same regurgitated crap. What future did we mortgage? Zach Randolph? You are living in a fantasy world but I'm not surprised since you endorsed Isiah's moves to begin with. How in God's name are we going to acquire picks for these players when they aren't worthy of picks? Does the fact they have been traded for even worse junk after we traded them not tell you anything about their value?

I like how you can predict what will happen in the future. You've already turned on the water works because you are Nostradamus and know exactly what will happen. Yes, we will be "playoff losers" in 2 years because we have not followed your amazing "lose for a minimum 5 years and hope to draft a superstar plan (never mind we fall behind 1 year without a 2010 pick but yet you say we can 'get' one as if it's that easy)". With your plan we will be in the championship. I also remember when you said we'd be a playoff team with the addition of Zach Randolph. How did that work out?

I like how you also insult the Pacers success by calling them "playoff losers". You might as well insult the Knicks history throughout the 90's as well since we did the same thing. Our fans are proud of our 90's Knicks and I don't hear anyone calling them "playoff losers" like a sore-assed person. Making the playoffs in 13 of 17 seasons as a GM and reaching the Finals during that time is a damn good resume. Damn good. Trying to pretend that means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things is a joke. You're better off discussing how good Randolph would make us then trying to downplay Donnie and the Pacers' history.

You can see the future again? Guaranteeing we wont be like the Pistons and sign anyone of note? LOL. You can take the crying game elsewhere because it's gotten tiring. Crying one year in advance is tiring because it's been going on for a while before that already. Paul Pierce is not a superstar. The addition of KG and Ray Allen made him a better player and elevated his game. The Celtics didn't get KG through free agency but it's all in the same. Pau Gasol got traded to LA for garbage. Cap space is more than just free agents. You can make trades and absorb contracts in trades. you have flexibility others will not have. You will be able to set your franchise up for the next decade with the moves you make with your cap space. It's something we haven't had in 14 YEARS. No wonder we're been LOSING FOR 10 OF THEM. Do you see a connection here? You can build through the draft after we fall flat on our face next in 2010. If we do, go ahead and build through the draft. Trying to somehow say we "mortgaged our future" to make a run at free agents by trading garbage from our team is a joke. The 2011 pick is there and others will expire at that point. We can follow your brilliant plan (aka post-Jordan era Bulls plan) once we see what happens in the summer of 2010. We aren't ruining anything. We aren't doing anything wrong. We aren't even gambling. What we had here was garbage. What we have now is garbage. What we could have next summer wont be. And if we don't get it, so be it. We'll still be better off then where we were last season and even now. If you can't understand that then go back to replaying highlights of Marbury, Zach, Crawford, Curry and the whole gang and relive the "classic" times because you will never be happy. Just stop crying one year in advance. That's all I ask.

I endorsed Isiah's moves?? I told people we were going to be playoff contenders with Zach Randolph?? So now your going to resort to lying again right GKF? I was protesting Isiah's moves because he wasnt targeting the draft, he was targeting signing players... sound familiar?

Secondly, yes the Pacers and the Knicks were playoff losers. I dont care how proud you are of losing but I cant stand it and I will make sure I call it out when I see it. I think most Knick fans are upset with losing, thats why you hear us boo, yes even in the 90's. After Ewing left we should have scrapped everything and tried to rebuild by getting a player to build around in the draft. Just about every championship winning team in our generation, with the exception of the one Detroit team in '04, has done that. Look it up. I already made this point. So instead of building our team the way just about every other championship team in our generation has done you want to do it the Detroit Pistons way right? DUDE THEY ONLY WON ONCE!

And then to make your point you say that KG and Allen joined Pierce. Yes they joined him after he was drafted by the Celtics. Then you say Pau was there to help Kobe. Yes Kobe was drafted by the Lakers. How can you still not see the pattern. I am truly amazed this is flying completely over your head... I warned you to stop reading when you try to think too much.

Also, the reason we havent been winning is not only because we didnt have the cap space its also because we didnt put good enough players around Ewing, and we didnt have a drafted superstar to build around after Ewing.

Im glad you like losing GKF because more likely than not, your going to be seeing a whole lot more of it.

Someone please explain this "we are not building through the draft" mentality. How has Donnie contributed to this? In his two seasons he has drafted at #6 and #8. Is the argument that he should have dumped everyone with talent on our roster so we can try to get the top pick? Let's play make believe. Let's pretend that Gallo turns into a superstud. And around him we have Hill, Douglas, Chandler and Lee. Technically wouldn't that mean we did build through the draft?

It seems like the argument is more about not liking the Gallo and Hill picks or being upset that we didn't jettison talent for a chance to draft in the top 3, then it is about us not "building through the draft". Donnie has not only used two lottery picks, he's traded for another first rounder. The fact that we don't have a 2010 pick is probably not somehting that Donnie and Mike are happy with