Rookie wrote:I thought winning would be more fun, I was wrong. This is the most boring season ever. I am the least engaged with this team that I have ever been. I guess I’m more used to the flawed teams that overachieved and were extremely likeable

This team is extremely flawed. But I totally agree.

ToddTT wrote:

Rookie wrote:I thought winning would be more fun, I was wrong. This is the most boring season ever. I am the least engaged with this team that I have ever been. I guess I’m more used to the flawed teams that overachieved and were extremely likeable

This team is extremely flawed. But I totally agree.

Donte and iHart provided some level of energy, mayhem and entertainment this group somehow lacks

Rookie wrote:I thought winning would be more fun, I was wrong. This is the most boring season ever. I am the least engaged with this team that I have ever been. I guess I’m more used to the flawed teams that overachieved and were extremely likeable

"I thought winning would be more fun"...........
What if they do win this thing?

Now we have a deeper team, starters playing less, few yoots doing nice things, a season that has not yet been defined by a single stretch. We started off great, had a mid season melt down and looks to me "do your ****ing job" was a turning point where a coach gave them rope to hang themsleves into a bad stretch. This was a veteran team that needed to get its **** together. Mikal said all good things and had a decent stretch with the win streak that followed, but not fully following thru.

I see KAT using his physical size more to his advantage than finesse the last few weeks. Better defense, rebounding, especially on the offensive side, and less whining.
Jalen is passing more.
The Demon is a pleasure to watch. His game is evolving before our eyes. That foot injury was perhaps more substantial than we gathered. Its fun to see him mow down defenders. He gets blocked at times, but he can deal with it.

Browns use of the bench allows players out of the doghouse. Clarkson a most recent example. Shamet defense keeps him on the floor when he goes cold. Thats been a bit more frequent of late.

MoSanity. Curoius why his minutes been reduced but thats likely because Josh is feeling better. Many were ready to write him off but when he is healthy he has been awesome. His shooting? If we can keep him fresh for the playoffs that might a huge factor. teams can't leave him alone as they did two weeks ago.
T
his team has flaws and perhaps we see that more than the positives. Shit teams are still NBA rosters and when professionals hit long range shots they can hang vs. superior teams. Thus far our record vs. .500 or better teams is .643. vs .622 last season (via Stat Muse) [url] https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask?q=knicks+vs+teams+over.500+2024-25/url] Should be interesting to see how the rest of the year goes.

A team that is doing better defensively and top 5 in both catagories is unlikable? Thats infortunate.
We need X-man to come in and knock out someones teeth or Oak to slap some one that owes him money on the court!

Seems fans like to label things. The Mikal trade is not won or lost based on his performance game to game while the picks have yet to produce anyone close to what he has done last season and this. Thats how you grade that trade.
Takes years actually. Meanwhile we got to conf finals last year. Does that happen without him? Maybe, maybe not.
What is lost is time value of such a trade. YOu trade future currancy for NOW. Tangable production immediately! Picks can't do that.What you lose the unknnown "Opportunity cost" of moving picks. In time team gains others by trading for picks.

Some picks might not yield a thing, and the team making the pick has its own metrics to why they took that player. Maybe knicks don't take that specific player? Also Mikal could actually effect where that pick lands. One hopes you make a trade it makes you better.

Without a pick it opens up other opportunties. you get a Mo Diawara and he might be better than a mid to low 1st. Mo got a chance perhaps becasue we did not have a 1st. Given roster spaces are not infinate you can't always take both and make assumptions. Way too many variables factor in to say after a bad game of MIkals and label "We lost that trade". If Mo pans out that matters.

Panos wrote:

Nalod wrote:I agree with this dude that only one "it" team exists and we in the parity of the second tier. Beens saying this all season. Makes me not right or wrong, just open minded a bit.

Seems fans like to label things. The Mikal trade is not won or lost based on his performance game to game while the picks have yet to produce anyone close to what he has done last season and this. Thats how you grade that trade.
Takes years actually. Meanwhile we got to conf finals last year. Does that happen without him? Maybe, maybe not.
What is lost is time value of such a trade. YOu trade future currancy for NOW. Tangable production immediately! Picks can't do that.What you lose the unknnown "Opportunity cost" of moving picks. In time team gains others by trading for picks.

Some picks might not yield a thing, and the team making the pick has its own metrics to why they took that player. Maybe knicks don't take that specific player? Also Mikal could actually effect where that pick lands. One hopes you make a trade it makes you better.

Without a pick it opens up other opportunties. you get a Mo Diawara and he might be better than a mid to low 1st. Mo got a chance perhaps becasue we did not have a 1st. Given roster spaces are not infinate you can't always take both and make assumptions. Way too many variables factor in to say after a bad game of MIkals and label "We lost that trade". If Mo pans out that matters.

Disagree. You don't need to see what the picks yielded to know that you could have used those assets to make different trades from the one we're discussing. The argument was that you could have gotten a better player for those picks or they could have potentially been used in, say, a Giannis type trade instead of blowing their load on Mikal.

#2, this is a sports fan site. You often try to find ways to stifle conversation by one of various means, usually with some holier-than-thou perspective. In this case, you don't like the argument, so you say, "you can't analyze this trade until you know what all the picks turned into TEN FUCKING YEARS from now", when no one is going to want to discuss that trade anymore, just as no one wants to talk about the Joakim Noah signing which happened exactly 10 years ago this year. We're here to discuss the team and hypotheticals and be arm-chair GMs. I get that you don't like that.

Fair points.

Panos wrote:Thanks for saying so, dear Nalod. Feeling gracious tonight?

Its quite liberateing actually.