"But what makes this particular reconstruction unique is the way it was concocted: it contradicts the premise of building a future nucleus through the draft. The Celtics got older on purpose.
“People seem to think it’s easier to coach younger players than older players, but it’s really the opposite.” This is the Celtics’ coach, Doc Rivers, speaking. Last month, he coached in the N.B.A. All-Star Game; last year, his name was usually mentioned only in reference to the possibility of his termination. “Most veterans in our league have had their day and chased the idea of being a star, and now they’ve fallen back to whatever they really are. They know who they are. Young guys always want to prove they’re better than whatever role you give them. They won’t buy into the system. They always say that they will, but the minute they have the chance to score, they’ll try to prove that they can be a scorer.”"

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/sports/playmagazine/02play-klosterman.html?_r=1&ref=playmagazine&oref=slogin

Is our problem that our players are too young? This is what Doc Rivers theorizes...
If this is true then the draft will not solve this issue within the next several years.
Is there merit in the Celtics model for the Knicks in 2009... trading youth for veteran talent?

Posted by colorfl1:

"But what makes this particular reconstruction unique is the way it was concocted: it contradicts the premise of building a future nucleus through the draft. The Celtics got older on purpose.
“People seem to think it’s easier to coach younger players than older players, but it’s really the opposite.” This is the Celtics’ coach, Doc Rivers, speaking. Last month, he coached in the N.B.A. All-Star Game; last year, his name was usually mentioned only in reference to the possibility of his termination. “Most veterans in our league have had their day and chased the idea of being a star, and now they’ve fallen back to whatever they really are. They know who they are. Young guys always want to prove they’re better than whatever role you give them. They won’t buy into the system. They always say that they will, but the minute they have the chance to score, they’ll try to prove that they can be a scorer.”"

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/sports/playmagazine/02play-klosterman.html?_r=1&ref=playmagazine&oref=slogin

Is our problem that our players are too young? This is what Doc Rivers theorizes...
If this is true then the draft will not solve this issue within the next several years.
Is there merit in the Celtics model for the Knicks in 2009... trading youth for veteran talent?

No.

[Edited by - gkfv2 on 03-02-2008 8:52 PM]

This thread deals with a theoretical question....

The point that the article is trying to make is that the old formula of stocking up on youth for the purpose of grooming them for your future lineup may no longer be the end all to become a contender....
Doc Rivers is talking about the difficulties in getting a young team to embrace roles...
The article theorizes that the plan may be to stock up on youth to acquire savvy vets... not to stock up on youth for the sake of stocking up on youth.

----> Now the Knicks are one of the youngest teams in the NBA...
The theory is that it is possible in the year 2008 that the league has changed, and that the Knick's situation can be turned around dramatically by importing the appropriate Vets... instead of enduring 4 more years of rebuilding.

[Edited by - colorfl1 on 03-02-2008 9:41 PM]

league is watered down. very few real contenders. so if you see a chance to make a major move and try to get your team ahead, then you do it (if the owner is willing to spend).

took portland 5 straight trips to the lottery to build that team. many cities, especially the larger markets, can not take 5 years to build a team with "potential".

you try to win right away unless you are lucky in the draft.

which is why i advocate the knicks trading their pick and expirings if they don't get the #1 pick.

the knicks CAN turn around the team within 2 years to become a perennial playoff team (not title contenders) but playoff team.

use marbury's expiring wisely. use malik's expiring wisely. use the pick in a smart deal.

then use quentin's and jerome's expiring the year after.

you can put together a team like denver or the wizards (with arenas) where you win 45 or so games, make the playoffs, and get back to the "one player away" team. that's the BEST any knicks fan can hope for. if that doesn't make you happy, then find another team or stop watching basketball. unless you strike oil in the draft, then don't expect a 3/4/5 year plan from any gm.

btw, if the knicks chose to build via the draft, it will FAIL unless they get very lucky. only 2 potential lotto picks coming up. none in 2010. and then 2011...well that's 4 seasons away.

[Edited by - djsunyc on 03-02-2008 9:52 PM]

Posted by colorfl1:

Posted by djsunyc:

league is watered down. very few real contenders. so if you see a chance to make a major move and try to get your team ahead, then you do it (if the owner is willing to spend).

took portland 5 straight trips to the lottery to build that team. many cities, especially the larger markets, can not take 5 years to build a team with "potential".

you try to win right away unless you are lucky in the draft.

which is why i advocate the knicks trading their pick and expirings if they don't get the #1 pick.

the knicks CAN turn around the team within 2 years to become a perennial playoff team (not title contenders) but playoff team.

use marbury's expiring wisely. use malik's expiring wisely. use the pick in a smart deal.

then use quentin's and jerome's expiring the year after.

you can put together a team like denver or the wizards (with arenas) where you win 45 or so games, make the playoffs, and get back to the "one player away" team. that's the BEST any knicks fan can hope for. if that doesn't make you happy, then find another team or stop watching basketball. unless you strike oil in the draft, then don't expect a 3/4/5 year plan from any gm.

btw, if the knicks chose to build via the draft, it will FAIL unless they get very lucky. only 2 potential lotto picks coming up. none in 2010. and then 2011...well that's 4 seasons away.

[Edited by - djsunyc on 03-02-2008 9:52 PM]

I am not advocating trading any more 1st round picks... it seems to me that we have already traded our fair share... but I do agree with your line of thinking... we are in NYC, we cannot sustain 4 straight lottery seasons... no management that Dolan would hire would ever embrace that.

We will get a lottery pick this year... and get a chance to get lucky... maybe we will get lucky like the Heat did with Wade and be able to quickly assemble a run built on the talents of 2 players. and supporting staff...
I think that is all you can hope for in a city like NY.

Guess what.
We cannot afford it but we WILL be lottery team for next 4 years if Isiah Tomas will stay (very likely).
And by the way we already ARE a lottery team for 3 years.
The problem is not the wrong plan but rather absence of any plan except Zeke plans to keep Zeke and his minions paid as long as possible.
By the way this worked to perfection...