Pages: 1
IslesFan
Major Leagues


Reged: 02/11/03
Posts: 2848
ESPN.com Jetting through the NBA playoffs by BIll Simmons
#636030 - 04/23/04 11:35 PM Edit Reply Quote



ESPN.com Jetting through the NBA playoffs by Bill Simmons

"... let's discuss the Knicks.


They had Manhattan buzzing as recently as two months ago. That's the way it works in New York. They make the classic panic trade for Marbury, look good for a week in January and naturally everyone starts thinking about the Lakers in June.


You can guess where I stand. Right after Isiah Thomas was hired last December, I predicted in The Magazine that he would run the team into the ground. This franchise was already headed nowhere -- no cap space, no All-Stars, little hope. It was a situation thatcried for patience. Whomever took over for the Artist Formerly Known As Scott Layden needed to blow everything up, create cap room and start over. In other words, the Danny Ainge Approach -- clean house, make some panic trades, ignore the cap -- couldn't possibly work here.


The Jerry West Approach seemed like a much better plan. Take your time. Stockpile assets. Only deal from strength. Think four years instead of four months. And most importantly, don't panic.


Isiah? He panicked.


Unable to wait even three weeks after moving into his new office, Isiah pulled a Jim Fassel and pushed his chips to the middle of the table, dealing his few tradeable assets (two coveted Europeans, two first-rounders and cash) for Marbury and Penny Hardaway -- two more ghastly contracts -- in the process, blowing his long-term cap flexibility to smithereens and insuring that the 2006 Knicks would look exactly like the 2004 Knicks.


Seduced by Steph's pedigree and anxious for a change -- any change -- New York fans embraced the trade. It was like the current Bachelor becoming enamored with Trish, the trashy, conniving, homewrecking model who looks stunning in a ****tail dress. You can have a million warning signs, you can even have a friend planted in the house telling you this girl is sleaze ... and you still can't help picking her for the Final Six. Just to see what happens.


And yes, there's something about Marbury's game. He always makes you feel like his team has a puncher's chance, that he can catch fire at any moment, maybe even take over an entire game, win a series by himself, carry you a couple of rounds. Even though it hasn't happened yet. And may never will. But that potential gets people talking about the team. Gets the arena buzzing before games. Gets people calling into the Fan. Gets those blue No. 3 "MARBURY" jerseys moving out of the Pro Shop like hotcakes.


With all this commotion, it was easy to forget that, if this was a Texas Hold 'Em Tournament, Isiah had just gone "all-in" after two hands. Knicks fans happily chugged the Kool-Aid, conveniently ignoring the fact that their GM just mortgaged the next 3-4 years for someone who ...


A. Hadn't won a single playoff series.
B. Was playing for his fourth team in eight years.
C. Monopolizes the ball.
D. Didn't get along in New Jersey with one of the best players on the Knicks (Keith Van Horn), which meant there needed to be a second trade.
E. Only played unselfishly last season (when he was gunning for a contract extension).
F. Ditched a once-in-a-lifetime situation in Minnesota with KG.


Seems like a pretty big gamble just to sell some tickets and make the back page of the Post, right?


Again, New Yorkers didn't care. Back in January, I remember discussing the deal with my Knicks fan friends, spelling out exactly what had happened, then listening to them respond with the same thing: I don't care, I'm just happy they're interesting again. It was like watching a buddy who hadn't gotten lucky for a few months suddenly fall in love with a stripper.


They felt differerently after Isiah hired Lenny Wilkens -- apparently Red Holzman was the second choice -- then gave Van Horn away for Thomas and Mohammed, a classic "I'll give you a quarter for two dimes" trade. This had evolved into a soft, rudderless team built around a shoot-first point guard, flanked by mediocre defenders and guys who couldn't rebound or contend shots. I'm not even sure they run any plays. When Lenny holds up one finger, I think he's signalling that he needs to pee.

Anyway, the inevitable losing streak followed, along with the questions about Isiah and Marbury, as well as the birth of a new face: The Isiah Thomas "If I Look Angry Enough When I'm Watching This Blowout Loss, Maybe People Will Forget That I Brought Most Of These Guys In" Face. Well, you did.


Hey, we know about Isiah, who burned bridges in Detroit and Toronto, bankrupted the CBA and failed miserably with a talented Indiana team. Pretty cut and dry. But what about Marbury? How do you explain last year's remarkable season in Phoenix, when he reached his ceiling as a player and seemed poised to finish his career with the Suns? How could someone fall from "Franchise Player" to "Trading Block" in less than seven months? Could he ever regain the magic?


That's why, with the obvious exception of KG, Marbury was the most interesting player in Round One. Nobody knew what to expect. As Pierce and the C's proved last spring, the right player and the right crowd can be a pretty dangerous combination in Round One. You never know.


What do you suppose Phoenix thinks of the Kidd-for-Marbury trade now?
Alas, the Nets looked better than ever. And the Knicks looked downright dreadful. Especially Marbury. He spent the first half of Game 2 launching jumpers, rarely driving to the basket or getting his teammates involved. In the second half, with the game slipping away, he started penetrating and setting up Kurt Thomas and Shandon Anderson -- yikes -- who predictably couldn't hit anything. When he tried to take over the game again, it was too late. It was a kooky performance, one of those games that reminded people why he's been traded multiple times. Even the TNT announcers were calling him out.


Back at MSG for Game 3, Marbury pulled the same schizo routine, displaying little of the toughness he showed in that Spurs series last spring. And yet the Knicks kept hanging around; you could sense the fans clamoring for Marbury to take over the game. Never happened. He missed two threes in the final minutes that would have brought the house down. And that was that. On Sunday, the Nets arrive at MSG with brooms.


Here's the kicker: Thanks to Isiah, this same Knicks team will return intact next season. And the year after that. They don't have any choice. Everyone makes big money. The only tradeable commodity on the team is Marbury, heading into his ninth year, and he isn't going anywhere. So Knick fans will spend two more seasons being tantalized by a potential superstar, someone who should be one of the better players in the league, but he isn't, and there really isn't a definable reason why.


Did Isiah screw the Knicks for the foreseeable future? I think so. It's a not-quite-a-playoff-team led by a not-quite-a-superstar, with no real way of turning things around in the next three years, and the wrong guy calling the shots to boot. Not exactly a recipe for success. Then again, you could say the same thing about the Celtics

Question:

Where would this article be if the Knicks were up 3-0 in this series? Or down 2-1? Or up 2-1? Thats how fickle the media is. Lose a couple games, get down in a series and you are a career failure. Nobody is happy about the way things have gone against the Nets.

This is not a good team, nobody is claiming it is - so why be so hard on Marbury? He had a much better supporting cast on the Suns. Wait and see...it was going to take at least 4 years anyway to rebuild the team so who says it wont take that long to build around Marbury?

RELAX. (sorry for the caps Martin but I think that is something the critics need to hear)

After the fact, all the critical acclaim is oh so agreeable, fact is there was probably more points of view on the KVH/TT trade. Anything to point the finger in lieu of defeat is the expected.

Look hear, Dolan wanted to make playoffs and we did. Next year's goals may be spelled out a little more.........chill

Posted by Bobby:

After the fact, all the critical acclaim is oh so agreeable, fact is there was probably more points of view on the KVH/TT trade. Anything to point the finger in lieu of defeat is the expected.

Look hear, Dolan wanted to make playoffs and we did. Next year's goals may be spelled out a little more.........chill

Word.

Crap article. I don't know where to begin.

i honestly believe we are in good shape as a team.

we dont need a starting or back up pg.
we dont need a starting 2 guard, i think penny can handle the back up 2.
the 3..........i'm not sure of, i think TT is a quality starter, dermarr needs more minutes to prove he can back the 3.
pf.....kind of a concern, kurt is way to up and down, sweets will be the man soon. i like sweets starting and nazr as back up.
my main concern is a "low post scorer, shot blocker, rebounder, monster in the paint".

i think this team (if we could get a quality centre) has ALOT of depth, and some promising rooks.

look at the options we have

pg-marbury, williams
sg-houston, penny
sf-thomas, dermarr
pf-sweetney, nazr
c-??????,?????????

i dont think we need baker, harrington, mutombo, anderson, noris or kurt thomas.

we need some C's bad...........any ideas?

I hope we sign Rodney White even if he stinks all year... then at least your focus will change.

I just read this article - and I will preface my statements by saying that I like Bill Simmons as a writer, funny dude really - but the whole thing sounds about as misinformed as any other article I have read that tries to discuss the problems of the Knicks.

1) With or without the trade the Knicks were/are anchored with Houston's contract and Anderson's contract. You cannot get under the cap until after Houston is off the Knicks. Period, end of story. So the Knicks were in the same position until then.
2) FWill, Sweets, DerMarr.
3) I can't believe there is even discussion about the Nazr-TT/KHV trade as a bad one.
4) $9M comes off the cap after next year, $34M comes off the cap the following year. BOTH ARE HUGE TRADABLE ASSETS. Let me repeat that again. All of the money that expires in the next 2 years is tradable. If the expiring contract of Dice (with zero expectation of him returning to team) and some second round picks along with a first can be traded for a high level all-star, it can be done again.

More than any time period over the past 5 years Isiah has put the Knicks in a position where they can get better. Through trades, through coaching, through whatever.

Crazy really. You would think that Bill would be happy that Boston is putting the beat down on the Yanks.

Point per point, that's a a good answer.

Kidd was a wife beater, a brick shooter and had never won anything before coming in NJ.

Now he's kind of semi god though, heck, he still ahsn't won anything.

does it say anything that marbury's teams career win totals are far below .500? he hasnt exactly played with the worst talent--to me it shows that he is a clear tier below NBA superstars and realistically on the level of great player--below the *franchise player* tier. I dont think anyone suggests that Marbury isnt a great player because he is--i would suggest that we mightve done better going in different directions looking for multiple assets. Lets say we took the trade for Rahim and Ratliff which did not consist of any draft pick. We couldve traded Rahim seperately or kept him couldve traded Ratliff seperately or traded him and still kept the rights to vujonic had our first round pick, lampe and a future 1. Rahim with us wouldve continued to put up 20-10+ we wouldve had Ratliff--it was the better move for us because we couldve broken those assets down further.

Hence thats why you can understand -shoving the chips into the middle of the table" instead of acquiring mulpile draft picks/young players for Rahim and Ratliff[and or keeping one of them] and having many more avenues to travel. IF Marbury was a last piece thast one thing--but really he's not.

Posted by BRIGGS:

then you must acknowledge that the nets dont have alonzo mourning and that we were down + 20 to the nets with TT on the floor in game 1.

to suggest that the loss of alonzo mourning for the Nets is somehow equivalent to the loss of Houston for the Knicks is ridiculous. One is a 20 minute a game role player and the other is the leading scored for the other team.