He made some trades, he brought in some players, he got us a new coach... overall, has he done a good job?

Good: Upgraded the point immensely & shored up the swingman depth by acquiring Marbury & Penny.

Dumped Eisley's contract.

Fired Chaney.

Dumped 'Spoon--- but did we really need Moochie for so many years?

Acquired a potential double-double PF/C of the future in Mohammed. Brought in Mark Aguirre to help out Sweetney (he could've helped out Lampe too)

TBD: Hired Lenny Wilkens, over a number of other names

Bad:
Took away FW's future on the Knicks by blocking his position w/ an established highly paid star. Marbury mega-contract makes him absolutely above the law; regardless of how badly he plays, he'll still get the big minutes.

Traded away a whole lot of POTENTIAL. We've lost 2 first rounders (1 potential lottery pick) and a 2nd rounder, as well as rights to the high upside Vujanic & 7ft shooter Lampe. Would we have been better off in retrospect just buying out Eisley to guarantee 20mpg+ with Vujanic?

Traded away KVH/Doleac when the going was good, disrupting chemistry and taking away the Knicks only player (other than Marbury) who demanded a double-team. Also took away 2 of the better shooting big men in the league.

Effectively downgraded our starting SF position by replacing our #2/3 scorer KVH with a player unaccustomed to that role in TT

Added a whole lot of contract weight to team, making the load of team salary among the highest in the history of the NBA. Made the salary cap situation worse than he arrived with.

Did too much trading, disrupting team chemistry again and again and again...

-------

In retrospect... would we have been a better off if IT just:
1) bought out Ward & 'Spoon
2) signed Mercer / DerMarr Johnson / Glover
3) fired Chaney, replaced him with... anyone?! :)

and an optional #4:

4) Used the McDyess as a chip to acquire Rasheed Wallace instead of Marbury

Im cuttin the knicks & IT some slack simply because i know it aint this year.. The way you gotta look at it is simply will the team be better down the road and you gotta look past the past. IT brong in hope towards the team and nobody knows what moves he can make as maybe even moving TT or NM anythings possible with IT. Just know that IT doesnt want to fail but it does hurt watching the knicks even though its not about this year lose and lose.. The knicks are a team that needs pieces and i dont doubt IT will try to get them.

Well... we don't know what his goal is down the road, but how much slack do you give a GM or coach?

One might argue that Thomas has used up virtually all of his tradable assets and what you see on the floor is what you might get for the next few years, save perhaps some free agent additions.

The question is--- what kind of upside do the Knicks have? Which players on the Knicks can make marked improvements?

Williams and Sweetney clearly have upside--- with more minutes and some polish, both look like they have the talent to be *at least* borderline starters in the NBA.

DerMarr Johnson has looked lost his whole NBA career (even pre-injury in Atlanta)--- he can't seem to produce within the team concept. Give him some garbage time and he might light it up. The athleticism is there... but as they say in the matrix, the body cannot live without the mind.

While I think Tim Thomas has upside, at age 27 it remains to be seen whether he can be a legit #2 or #3 scoring threat in the NBA... and whether he's worthy of commanding a double-team.

If you extrapolate Mohammed's numbers over starter minutes, you'll probably see something like Jamal Magloire: 12ppg/9+rpg. Maybe he'll learn a post move along the way. Still, he's not the most heady "basketball IQ" guy out there.

As far as anyone else under age 30, a PG probably shouldn't average too much more than 20ppg, so Marbury's about right with his career numbers of 20-8.

It's strange thinking about this, but there's no young help coming from the draft over the next 2 years...

There is an old axiom in sports: You're never as good as you look when you're winning, or as bad as you look when you're losing.

The current losing streak is not just about trading KVH, who is an inconsistent shooter, and is defensively challenged.

Things will turn around soon.

Posted by Rich:

There is an old axiom in sports: You're never as good as you look when you're winning, or as bad as you look when you're losing.

The current losing streak is not just about trading KVH, who is an inconsistent shooter, and is defensively challenged.

Things will turn around soon.

You wouldn't have never used that "axiom" with Layden and Chaney lol

Isiah is doing his think,keep it up.He help the Knicks become younger,taller and a good supporting group for the future and present.this change was needed for a couple of years back so right now im happy about the out come and its only going to get better.

I think Isiah has done a very good job given the task he was given to do. I don't agree with this quick fix at any cost and prefer rebuilding, but this is the direction they are going in, and I'll hang with it, as I have for years and years.

It seemed Laydog was not given the purse to spend as has Isiah. I find the 180 the team has done in its direction very interesting.

I think the playoffs are a must for team to fulfil its buisness plan.