Were 5-10 since the trade and there seems to be a feel good about the team, why im not realy sure( other then cap space).
Zach is playing these days like he's the one playing for a new contract. Im starting to think we should have dump very one else and kept him. He maybe a little defensively challange, but he rebounds and scores with the very best of them and Im not sure how people think he's over paid.

I think they pulled the trigger to quick on that trade and probably should have waited until the trade dead line or better yet the end of the season. The way we were geling and playing Im sure we would have had tons of options, with at least 8 players stock rocketing.

I agree. I thought we got crap for what was given up. Wasn't a fan of either Randolph or Crawford, but thought they both had value. Turns out Harrington was better than I thought and Randolph was given up for the pu-pu platter. Then, I didn't like the moves, but the average negative effect of both trades is greater than I assumed. This team stinks.

However, I don't think people shouldn't be optimistic. The team's production relative to the opponent's is C. R. A. P. But there is something to be said for how the Knicks get their production. They play hard, some even play with enthusiasm. I think the hope is attached to the effort people see now, combined with a potential future star.

[Edited by - supremecommander on 12-20-2008 3:08 PM]

Posted by BRIGGS:

If you are going to remove your 20-10 low post player 10 games into the season--then go all the way with it--this is what I hate most--when a plan is half arsed. Now we sit in position where we will lose more players and were trying desperately to win 30 games--who cares--either accept full rebuilding tank and collect promising young SALARY restricted players and picks --either you try hard at winning or try hard at losing--if you are in the middle in the NBA--worst position to be. Change of culture--great except only 1-2 players will be here when it counts.

[Edited by - BRIGGS on 12-20-2008 3:12 PM]

What marquee UFA is going to sign with a team that seems happy with playing like garbage?

"Hey LeBron"

"Hey Supreme Commander, whats up"

"You want to resign in Cleveland and cement your hometown legacy, sign with Detroit who will get you some competitive teammates, or sign in New York where no one has any idea what they're doing?"

Posted by Silverfuel:

We were barely a .500 team with Zach. Whats the point of being .500? We are not fooling anyone. Everyone knows the real season starts in 2010.

D'Antoni said some nice things about how the team is doing these days. He mentioned how Lee and Nate are getting better and I think in large part that is due to Zach being gone. With Lee clearly. I think Zach was not moving the ball as well as he could. I think having Zach gone gives more shots to Lee, Chandler and Nate, so it's sort of like faster development for them. Anyway, in the long haul running up and down the court, Zach was not best for this system. I don't think his body would have kept up with it.
We can use that cap space from him in 2010 to hopefully get a replacement who also plays D.

If you are happy with being around .500 and having the last week of the season determine if you make the playoffs or not, and the results of that being either a first round exit or a low first round pick, then sure you will miss Zach and Craw.

But if you wanna start it all over, like we are, with a chance of building a contender soon, then you should love our status so far.

You have to be patient, though. People criticizing management for not finishing a plan that doesn't have to be finished in a year and a half, its pretty shortsighted. So is wanting Zach back. Don't you see that our potential with him would've been that, the Clippers? They are going nowhere and so were we with those players.

Its a transition period. Many of the players you see now wont be here for long. We have many tradeable assets and those most difficult to trade have been already moved or are on their way (Curry, come back soon so we can send you away).

Patience. Rome wasn't built in a day. Neither will the Knicks.

Posted by CrushAlot:

I think the Knicks were really counting on Mobley to be playing. He was a good defensive player, got alot of steals, and would have done well in D'Antoni's system. I do think it is right to question any plan that involves trading away a guy who gets 20 and 10 every night in hopes that you can sign someone in two years.

I think so too. Mobley's condition put a wrench in the immediate plans. I am still happy with the trades that went down. We just need another move to make us more competetive for the next 2 years. Hopefully, Gallo will be able to play soon so our core can grow together.

Since the plan is 2010 there is no way I tender a contract to Lee and Nate. Its a mediocre team with them and its going to be mediocre with them. Only thing they will do is basically stop the Knicks from getting top notch free agents. Trade them now its the best for the organizations future. Get back players on rookie contracts that will go beyond 2010 and draft picks if possible for them. Harrington needs to go because he is hindering Chandlers growth the man is jacking up shots at an incredible rate. Lucky for the Knicks he expires in 2010. But his value is up and trading him might be a very souond move especially for rookie contracts and draft picks. Some contending team can use Harrington and will look at him seriously.

Zach is better then lee in the prospective that he's going to always be a better offensively. My point is we were not going to be a .500 team with zach probably a 48 win team, and we shouldn't have done at the same time. You could tell from the fact that Mobly isn't here that the knicks didn't do there homework, and has made the steph thing even worse. Guys are getting injured and there still seems like theres no rush in to fill the roster spot, or resolve the steph issue.

Why don't they rush to get these things accomplish, so we can be a litle more competitive, and stop getting excited about moral wins, and players getting better individually in tight loses.

Posted by knicks1248:

Were 5-10 since the trade and there seems to be a feel good about the team, why im not realy sure( other then cap space).
Zach is playing these days like he's the one playing for a new contract. Im starting to think we should have dump very one else and kept him. He maybe a little defensively challange, but he rebounds and scores with the very best of them and Im not sure how people think he's over paid.

I think they pulled the trigger to quick on that trade and probably should have waited until the trade dead line or better yet the end of the season. The way we were geling and playing Im sure we would have had tons of options, with at least 8 players stock rocketing.

Yep, Ive been saying that over and over until I was blue in the face. No one around here will listen to reason dude. So now I just keep quiet and wait until all the championship plans fall apart and we become perennial playoff losers.

Soon you too will be blue in the face after you see that not many will follow your logic. Just trust me on this one.

Posted by jaydh:

I can't believe their are people on here yearning for the days of Zach and Crawful. Truly amazing.

[Edited by - jaydh on 12-20-2008 7:56 PM]

And say we could've been a 48 win team with them. With the same group that got 23 last season. And they still can't see the whole picture that its not about being around .500 and getting swept in the playoffs again with those heavy contracts that get you nowhere. Its about rebuilding to have a chance at a real contender.

Its like if the Blazers fans wanted back the Zach Randolph days. No patience, even with a situation you have no control of.

Zdump was a salary dump.

Move forward.