Chris Copeland had been grinding it out overseas for 3x as long as Beverly was. of course, the Knicks failed to do this with Cope, and we lost him to Indy because of our lack of foresight. (the debate over whether we should've kept him or not, see other threads)

here's a rule of thumb - if you're going to offer a guy who has been playing overseas and desperately wants to be in the NBA, how about you get a team option or 2 so that if the guy CAN actually play in the NBA, the team is rewarded for their foresight and keen eye for talent.

Grunwald has shown a nice eye for talent - Lin, Novak, Copeland, Prigioni were all guys anyone could have had but we scooped up. but Grunwald, Allan Houston, and whoever else is "negotiating" these deals routinely fail to exercise any foresight and get a year or two that is favorable to the team. think about how different things would be if the Knicks did what Houston GM morey did with Beverely on ANY of those players - the knicks could still have Lin, Novak, Cope, AND Prig if we had gotten 2-3 years of team options on the cheap.

if we sign this Bobby Brown guy and we fail to get a team option for year 2, it will be classic #sameoldknicks moment.

did Dolan impose a team rule on management that we negotiate against ourselves? that we refuse to assert leverage when we have it? that we always let the other side get the benefit of the bargain?

it would be nice if, for once, we could be like "wow the Knicks front office made a savvy move, now we have a player on the cheap locked up who can actually play." who knows, maybe this Brown guy is the next Grunwald diamond in the rough?

arkrud wrote:The Knicks problem is constant luck of flexibility.
And this comes from the owner not from GM.
In Dolans empire GMs and coaches are just a puppets for beating and scapegoats to take responsibly for organizational failures when they inevitably getting fired.

HOW can that be the case when Dolan typically give his GM's total autonomy. Except for the Carmelo trade, I can't remember EVER hearing about Dolan interfering with one of his GM's. The problem was the GM's he hired and the moves THEY made which eliminated any and all flexibility. Checketts did it, Layden did it, Isiah did it, and now our current GM is doing it.

Jmpasq wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

arkrud wrote:The Knicks problem is constant luck of flexibility.
And this comes from the owner not from GM.
In Dolans empire GMs and coaches are just a puppets for beating and scapegoats to take responsibly for organizational failures when they inevitably getting fired.

HOW can that be the case when Dolan typically give his GM's total autonomy. Except for the Carmelo trade, I can't remember EVER hearing about Dolan interfering with one of his GM's. The problem was the GM's he hired and the moves THEY made which eliminated any and all flexibility. Checketts did it, Layden did it, Isiah did it, and now our current GM is doing it.

I think he is constantly putting pressure on them to acquire names and players with better numbers then talent.

The only thing that stays the same is Dolan. He and his focus on profits and entertainment not on bbal as a game and not on winning makes Knicks what they are.
High cost profitable product which has little to do with competitive pro sports.
Lakers managed to get best of both worlds, Dolan succeed only is business part.
But at least it is some success.

CrushAlot wrote:I believe last year the Knicks had the fourth highest payroll in the nba. The man is willing to pay the money and stays out of most things basketball related. He has a horrible media policy and if reports are accurate sometimes manages from a place of emotion. That being said the Knicks troubles were caused by the guys he put in charge to bring a winner to NY. Layden and Isiah were really bad gms. Walsh's run in NY and the whole 2010 plan was bad. In Walsh's defense it was bad for a lot of teams but the Knicks franchise was weakened for the long term by his moves.