Posted by JohnWallace44:

Nate is our most driven, most talented player ability wise, but that said, we shouldn't be leaning on him as much as we do.

Since Craw and Randolph got shipped out and Duhon has worn down the team has completely put given the keys to Nate. We don't play our normal offense when he's in there anymore.

We need to work on having both. We need Nate to be able to play within the offense again so that we get the benefit of having his spark off of the bench, and still get normal shots for Al and Gallo especially, and Lee and Hughes to a lesser extent.

Nate will be signed next year to be somebody's super sub and we are using him wrong if we lean on him more than that like we've been doing since the break.

Posted by Cosmic:

Just wondering if people are feeling a bit better about Gallo, Wilcox, and Hughes.

.


Hughes got his legs and is producing imagine if we had a 2-guard all season long? Things might be different.

Wilcox does good things out there I think he should have been playing more right from the beginning and to be honest he should probably be starting at Center it would strengthen our bench more if he did.

Gallo...some of us tried to tell the pessimists that he has some special skills and they were all on display last night. He does a number of things very well and has a chance to be a good player. Was this his breakout game? Maybe. Still no reason to throw him on the fire for 35 minutes a game especially given his back. You could see him wincing a bit in the second half at one point and when he came out for good you could tell he was stiff. Keep the minutes down and work on him over the summer.


==========
Nate and Jeffries.

Well, we all know Jeffries is trash and that Wilcox does all the "little things" a heck of a lot better than Mr. Intangibles Jeffries. What to do though? Definitely keep him on the bench but we can't shut him down altogether otherwise we can't trade him. This guy irritates me second only to Curry.

Nate: You know for all the excitement, energy, and scoring punch was it just me or did we play a very cool, calm, and collected game without his antics out there? Until the final few minutes where we lost our composure of course. It was JUST ONE GAME but is it a hint that we're better off without him? It's tough not to flip flop on this guy.

To close these random thoughts....if this type of play were to keep up...did we poop the bed not doing the Jeffries/Nate for Kenny Thomas' 2010 trade? I like Nate but I just don't know if it was the right thing to pull out of that proposed deal. Walsh can claim it never existed all he wants - the league granted the Kings and Knicks a trade deadline extension to see if we could work it out. Thoughts?

Posted by K22:


I really wouldn't want to be in Donnie Walsh's shoes this summer when he has to decide what to do with him (and David Lee).

Posted by K22:

Posted by tkf:

I always said, if you can limit nate and al's shots and minutes, you can probably get the best out of both guys.. It is when they are hot and getting extended minutes, that they take bad shots and don't pass the ball... we still only had 14 dimes last night as a team, I think, but the ball did move a lot more..

Personally I wouldn't have both of them on the floor together. Either one or the other. The ball movement just tends to be non-existant when both are out there.

Posted by Cosmic:

Personally I think Nate is traded either during the draft or over the summer. He will probably take Jeffries with him. At most he gets the QO and is then dealt as a throw in during the year in trade. I don't forsee Nate being retained.

Lee....I think we really intend to retain him right up until his agent demands an obscene contract and refuses to negotiate. I think Lee stays a Knick.

agreed.

Posted by crzymdups:

Posted by martin:

Posted by Cosmic:

Personally I think Nate is traded either during the draft or over the summer. He will probably take Jeffries with him. At most he gets the QO and is then dealt as a throw in during the year in trade. I don't forsee Nate being retained.

Lee....I think we really intend to retain him right up until his agent demands an obscene contract and refuses to negotiate. I think Lee stays a Knick.

agreed.

i agree, too, except if nate signs a QO he can't be traded.

Walsh had a chance to trade Nate with Jeffries at the deadline but chose not to. It could very well come back to bite him.

I'm all for losing Nate and retaining Lee with a reasonable contract that doesn't prevent them from signing a second max free agent in 2010 or 2011.

Posted by crzymdups:


i agree, too, except if nate signs a QO he can't be traded.