Can anyone see a reason for Knicks fans to be optimistic about the forseeable future? Really, IÕm not trying to be glib; IÕd love to hear reasons to believe (not including the classic knee-jerk "because THEY ROOL, BABY, YEAH!!!"). ItÕs just that management seems to be stuck in this cycle of trying to rebuild while simultaneously putting on just enough of a show to placate the casual fan, keeping us somewhere between the lottery and the second round. This is not to say it isnt a good team; fans in places like Golden State, NJ, and soon, Memphis, will have little sympathy for us, and rightfully so. ItÕs just that thereÕs not much possibility of the Knicks getting out of the East at present, and absolutely no chance of them competing with LA in a seven-game series (I know, who does?). At the same time, this philosophy rules out drafting and developing young talent, the last significant example of which being Ewing. Granted, that involved some luck and/or shenanigans with the ping-pong balls, but still. The Knicks are stifling the natural ebb-and-flow of any given sports franchise: load up, develop, compete, and then go back to the beginning. The current free-agent climate makes it obvious that all the pre-Salary Cap rhetoric about dreaming of playing in ÔThe Mecca of BasketballÕ was just that; now that the playing field is somewhat level, big-name free agents seem to see NY as high-pressure, low-class (EwingÕs ugly departure didnÕt go unnoticed, IÕm sure), and, well, no Orlando. Soon weÕll be another Chicago, with players using us to scare their real first choice into ponying up. ItÕll work, too, because everyone knows by now that weÕre more than happy to lavish starting moneyÑplus luxury tax, mind youÑon players that may not even make the rotation, let alone be a back-up (Clarence Weatherspoon, IÕm looking at youÉ). There are no trade scenarios that amount to anything more than idle shuffling, at least not without another freakish Sprewell-for-Starks type situation falling into our laps. This is borne out by the humiliating man-handling weÕre enduring by Les AlexanderÑyou have to worry about the kind of precedent this sets at a time weÕre trying to unload our arthritic, mediocre-on-his-best-day, Jew-baiting PG. Anyway, IÕm rambling. I would honestly love to hear an argument for why we, as Knicks fans, might realistically expect to be in contention for a title anytime soon. Again, itÕs a good team on the right night, but as far as I can see, thatÕs the best we can hope for the next 4 or 5 years. By the way, this site has gone further than any other to fill the post-Sportstalk vacuumÑwhoever puts it together, nice job.

Posted by scylla:

Can anyone see a reason for Knicks fans to be optimistic about the forseeable future? Really, IÕm not trying to be glib; IÕd love to hear reasons to believe (not including the classic knee-jerk "because THEY ROOL, BABY, YEAH!!!"). ItÕs just that management seems to be stuck in this cycle of trying to rebuild while simultaneously putting on just enough of a show to placate the casual fan, keeping us somewhere between the lottery and the second round. This is not to say it isnt a good team; fans in places like Golden State, NJ, and soon, Memphis, will have little sympathy for us, and rightfully so. ItÕs just that thereÕs not much possibility of the Knicks getting out of the East at present, and absolutely no chance of them competing with LA in a seven-game series (I know, who does?). At the same time, this philosophy rules out drafting and developing young talent, the last significant example of which being Ewing. Granted, that involved some luck and/or shenanigans with the ping-pong balls, but still. The Knicks are stifling the natural ebb-and-flow of any given sports franchise: load up, develop, compete, and then go back to the beginning. The current free-agent climate makes it obvious that all the pre-Salary Cap rhetoric about dreaming of playing in ÔThe Mecca of BasketballÕ was just that; now that the playing field is somewhat level, big-name free agents seem to see NY as high-pressure, low-class (EwingÕs ugly departure didnÕt go unnoticed, IÕm sure), and, well, no Orlando. Soon weÕll be another Chicago, with players using us to scare their real first choice into ponying up. ItÕll work, too, because everyone knows by now that weÕre more than happy to lavish starting moneyÑplus luxury tax, mind youÑon players that may not even make the rotation, let alone be a back-up (Clarence Weatherspoon, IÕm looking at youÉ). There are no trade scenarios that amount to anything more than idle shuffling, at least not without another freakish Sprewell-for-Starks type situation falling into our laps. This is borne out by the humiliating man-handling weÕre enduring by Les AlexanderÑyou have to worry about the kind of precedent this sets at a time weÕre trying to unload our arthritic, mediocre-on-his-best-day, Jew-baiting PG. Anyway, IÕm rambling. I would honestly love to hear an argument for why we, as Knicks fans, might realistically expect to be in contention for a title anytime soon. Again, itÕs a good team on the right night, but as far as I can see, thatÕs the best we can hope for the next 4 or 5 years. By the way, this site has gone further than any other to fill the post-Sportstalk vacuumÑwhoever puts it together, nice job.

The force is strong with you, my son.

Of all the teams that follow your suggested model, which ones have realistic chance of competing with the Lakers in a 7 game series? The Knicks have done a good remaining consistently competitive for several years. The teams who have made it to the lottery and have decided to rebuild have not. Only San Antonio was able to pull of the Duncan miracle which netted them one title. Only one team can win a title each year. At least the Knicks are always in contention while other teams are always in the lottery.