blkexec wrote:If you can get Bargs at a low price....then its a good asset to have for a draft trade or bench player. The problem is they havrnt decided if they want him yet. He hasnt played in the triangle system long enough for Phil to evaluate. I think they made a few mistakes with the assets they just gave away before with nothing in return. So looks like a learning lesson to use Bargs to their advantage like they did with Pablo.

Plus with so many holes to fill...they cant afford to just cut a player whos capable of putting up 20 plus in their system. Since its so hard to find quality players that understand the triangle....Barbs is increaing his value right now...might as well get the most value for your asset. Its a dangerous game Phil is playing but hes a risk taker. I think we can still lose while Bargs continues to play well....But dont sleep on shev....hes part of this winning streak.

Yes, the Knicks have a stellar history of signing players nobody else wants just in case they need to make a trade.

Splat wrote:

blkexec wrote:If you can get Bargs at a low price....then its a good asset to have for a draft trade or bench player. The problem is they havrnt decided if they want him yet. He hasnt played in the triangle system long enough for Phil to evaluate. I think they made a few mistakes with the assets they just gave away before with nothing in return. So looks like a learning lesson to use Bargs to their advantage like they did with Pablo.

Plus with so many holes to fill...they cant afford to just cut a player whos capable of putting up 20 plus in their system. Since its so hard to find quality players that understand the triangle....Barbs is increaing his value right now...might as well get the most value for your asset. Its a dangerous game Phil is playing but hes a risk taker. I think we can still lose while Bargs continues to play well....But dont sleep on shev....hes part of this winning streak.

Yes, the Knicks have a stellar history of signing players nobody else wants just in case they need to make a trade.

Yes, that is true about knicks history.....Not sure what that has to do with Phils history as a GM for the knicks. But if you want to put the knicks mis management history all on Phil, thats your provocative. I try not to dwell too much in the past, since this is a new GM and a new approach by Dolan to give Phil some room to manage. We just started Phils era (not even a full year), so I can't judge him yet. And it wouldn't be fair to criticize him on every wrong move he makes, thats what rookies do. Thats not Phils issue, thats Dolan's problem for hiring a rookie to run his team. Phil (like Fisher) are going through growing pains. And what Phil does with Bargs has nothing to do with other Knick GM's.....who mis-managed their assets. But anybody that takes on a new job, with no prior experience, will fall on their face every now and then. Don't analyze the fall....analyze how they get up. How Fisher is still even kill, eventhough the knicks look worst than the Kentucky team. How Phils early moves back fired on him shouldn't be surprising. But how Phils been taking ownership for his falls, and how he got anything for Pablo, who clearly wasn't part of the teams future is amazing. I think Phil will get better, and he's actually showing that now. Fisher will get better, and he's showing that as well.

Regardless of Bargs history, his value is much higher than Pablo, and his value is increasing each game. Thats what you want. You want your assets to increase in value. The more valuable assets you have, the more trades and roster moves you can make. The draft is only 1 rookie. Free agents is the major key for us getting back to a respectable team. Bargs is part of that free agent pool. If he's the best option for the money, I have no problem with him coming back. If there are better players, at a cheaper rate, then you go after that guy.....Phil is a lot of things, but he's not an idiot. If it's simple to us, then he's already dwelled on that. Just keep in mind, you can't hit the start button, and just drop and add players like PS3.....

blkexec wrote:

Splat wrote:

blkexec wrote:If you can get Bargs at a low price....then its a good asset to have for a draft trade or bench player. The problem is they havrnt decided if they want him yet. He hasnt played in the triangle system long enough for Phil to evaluate. I think they made a few mistakes with the assets they just gave away before with nothing in return. So looks like a learning lesson to use Bargs to their advantage like they did with Pablo.

Plus with so many holes to fill...they cant afford to just cut a player whos capable of putting up 20 plus in their system. Since its so hard to find quality players that understand the triangle....Barbs is increaing his value right now...might as well get the most value for your asset. Its a dangerous game Phil is playing but hes a risk taker. I think we can still lose while Bargs continues to play well....But dont sleep on shev....hes part of this winning streak.

Yes, the Knicks have a stellar history of signing players nobody else wants just in case they need to make a trade.

Yes, that is true about knicks history.....Not sure what that has to do with Phils history as a GM for the knicks. But if you want to put the knicks mis management history all on Phil, thats your provocative. I try not to dwell too much in the past, since this is a new GM and a new approach by Dolan to give Phil some room to manage. We just started Phils era (not even a full year), so I can't judge him yet. And it wouldn't be fair to criticize him on every wrong move he makes, thats what rookies do. Thats not Phils issue, thats Dolan's problem for hiring a rookie to run his team. Phil (like Fisher) are going through growing pains. And what Phil does with Bargs has nothing to do with other Knick GM's.....who mis-managed their assets. But anybody that takes on a new job, with no prior experience, will fall on their face every now and then. Don't analyze the fall....analyze how they get up. How Fisher is still even kill, eventhough the knicks look worst than the Kentucky team. How Phils early moves back fired on him shouldn't be surprising. But how Phils been taking ownership for his falls, and how he got anything for Pablo, who clearly wasn't part of the teams future is amazing. I think Phil will get better, and he's actually showing that now. Fisher will get better, and he's showing that as well.

Regardless of Bargs history, his value is much higher than Pablo, and his value is increasing each game. Thats what you want. You want your assets to increase in value. The more valuable assets you have, the more trades and roster moves you can make. The draft is only 1 rookie. Free agents is the major key for us getting back to a respectable team. Bargs is part of that free agent pool. If he's the best option for the money, I have no problem with him coming back. If there are better players, at a cheaper rate, then you go after that guy.....Phil is a lot of things, but he's not an idiot. If it's simple to us, then he's already dwelled on that. Just keep in mind, you can't hit the start button, and just drop and add players like PS3.....

Well, thanks for your viewpoint. I don't agree.

You say Bargs asset value is growing each game. How can you make such an assertion other than to say he will be an asset (of whatever value) only if he is signed to a new contract. As of now, his asset value is zero since he was untradeable and the deadline has passed and he is an expiring.

That is not an argument supporting anything other than a fait accompli, i.e. if he is signed he is on the books and it implies nothing more.

Whether he is worth signing is another matter and you didn't make any kind of case for that. If his value is much higher than Pablo, then the market disagrees with you because there was a bid and offer made and accepted. No such deal transpired for Bargs.

As for Phil, I bolded the same piece as fishy did to highlight the consistent disparity in thinking between those who make basic predictive analysis and those who pretend the past did not exist. Logic is built on pre-existing facts, i.e. the past, otherwise there would be no basis for deduction.

In Bargs case, his past shows he is a bad player overall and whatever you think from a few games does not outweigh the past at all. Saying his value is rising is in your mind at this time, but unless there is a market for his services then this assertion will remain a fiction you believe in, not something supported by reality.

And this is why so many who fume about "negativity" get lost in hating haterz. They hate the dwelling on the past and pretend that optimistic projections not borne out by precedent is moral higher ground. No, the path to success is built on reason, not wishful thinking. Management remains suspect by their conduct based on past and current actions. Saying Phil and the organization will execute at a higher level is wishful thinking not borne out by the facts thus far.

Phil has a past already. He has a year to judge. Anyone who says you cannot draw any conclusions from his tenure thus far just isn't ready to pass judgment themselves, but again it has nothing to do with reality. You can give Phil his annual review now and he gets an F. Whether he'll be an A student next year remains to be seen, but when betting on the future success of students putting your money on the F student to outperform the A students (other GMs) is fundamentally without logic. I cannot take seriously people who say the past has no bearing on future outcomes. Not attacking you, but it really trivializes rational thought and is just la la land in here for some.

Mike is a fool. His response is the usual foaming at the mouth trash. I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt either way and I can do that peacefully. Mike can go back into his cave. I can skip his next 20 posts again without fear of missing anything.

Sorry to undermine your life's work here.... (but the mouth is foaming quite a bit today)

nixluva wrote:The problem with judging Bargs on the past is that it tells you nothing about what he will do in this system and in this role. He never played in this system but what Phil and his staff did note is that his skills would indicate a strong likelihood of success in this system. Why? Because he's a big that has good overall skills and can score from pretty much anywhere on the floor. He's particularly strong in the midrange area of the floor which is the bulk of where his touches would come in this system. He's one of the best PnP bigs in the league over his career and so here on this team in this system he'd get more of those PnP looks that he excels at.

Judging Phil based only on the past few months is problematic as well. Phil has been using logical thinking in the kind of players he's been bringing in. Phil gave his initial plan a couple of months and then moved on to a rebuild minus most of the players he was left with from the previous regime, that didn't want to buy in or didn't fit. In the process he did bring in youth and picks. You can't give him an F for the entire year since the new plan is not about W/L's but setting a new course which he's been doing. It's all too easy to look at this short stint with Phil and only see the negatives and predict the future will be bad based on that information, but I think that approach is shortsighted and lacks any nuance. You miss a lot of important things when you take such a rigid view on things.

Look Nix, I'm just going to affirm your right to believe what you want from now on without attacking you for it. I haven't missed anything. I just don't sweep inconvenient truths under the rug. Yes, the past is not necessarily prologue, but it most certainly is relevant.

Saying you can't assess Bargs simply because he has not played in the triangle before is what you believe, but it has nothing to do with extrapolation from facts. You're extrapolating merely your desired outcome.

Saying he will be a smart player who regularly defends well and who stays healthy and who is consistent because of the triangle is like saying my broke neighbor will become a self-made billionaire when he is presented with the right money making system. Bargs doesn't become outstanding all of a sudden because poor little him was misunderstood and poorly utilized his whole career and now Magic Phil has the special sauce that will fix him. You engage mostly in wishful thinking and this is a prime example of it.

Bargs is a damn loser and he lacks any intestinal fortitude. For his mindset alone, you should want him as far away from this team as possible.

And Phil is your favorite pet. I get it. I can give him an F. Waddya gonna do boudit?

Yes Phil has logic. His own logic. So far, no good. But it will likely be better next year. For that, you can thank the abyss. It is hard not to be better than this. A minor bounce into mediocrity will prove little, only that the worst has past, not that excellence is guaranteed.

I will grant that this triangular fixation of his could produce some entertaining ball down the road if they really do populate this wreck with thinking players who work their butts off. But if it results in Phil excluding optimal talent and backfires by signing smarter, but truly untalented players to fit his agenda, then he will be on the razor's edge.

Phil is pretty clueless though about asset management. He is really poor at flipping players for other assets. He gets a big fat F. Stop kidding yourself that he has not failed at this.

He may have gotten some bench players. Cool. But he epically fukked up with the Melo signing. BIG FAT F. Dude, he has fallen on his face. You want to tell me when you're going to grade him? in 2032?

fishmike wrote:

nixluva wrote:The problem with judging Bargs on the past is that it tells you nothing about what he will do in this system and in this role. He never played in this system but what Phil and his staff did note is that his skills would indicate a strong likelihood of success in this system. Why? Because he's a big that has good overall skills and can score from pretty much anywhere on the floor. He's particularly strong in the midrange area of the floor which is the bulk of where his touches would come in this system. He's one of the best PnP bigs in the league over his career and so here on this team in this system he'd get more of those PnP looks that he excels at.

Judging Phil based only on the past few months is problematic as well. Phil has been using logical thinking in the kind of players he's been bringing in. Phil gave his initial plan a couple of months and then moved on to a rebuild minus most of the players he was left with from the previous regime, that didn't want to buy in or didn't fit. In the process he did bring in youth and picks. You can't give him an F for the entire year since the new plan is not about W/L's but setting a new course which he's been doing. It's all too easy to look at this short stint with Phil and only see the negatives and predict the future will be bad based on that information, but I think that approach is shortsighted and lacks any nuance. You miss a lot of important things when you take such a rigid view on things.

I think he meant judging Phil on his past. See? He's got a year as a GM under his belt. More than enough info for Spat to... well whatever it is Splat does to judge Phil a future failure as well. Notice Splat waited for the deadline to pass before deciding he *didnt* have better things to do after all and is back to trolling us with his look how smart I am posts indicating every fan on this board lives under the umbrella of faulty logic.

Bargs sucks, we all hate that trade but blkexec said it simply and perfectly? How can you assess if the guy doesnt play? He saw Amare... pass. Now he's looking at Bargs. Depending on the price it might be a reasonable fit. You take a look. Thats what they are doing.

beside being a terrible basketball player who has been a disastrous let down, he may have quit on the team this season as phil was quite perplexed as to why he was still (claiming) injured.

If we are looking for culture change, seeing his face is just a reminder of a gross failure and loser mentality.

there is no way that this guy is here next year. why he is playing? very good question.

nixluva wrote:

Splat wrote:

nixluva wrote:The problem with judging Bargs on the past is that it tells you nothing about what he will do in this system and in this role. He never played in this system but what Phil and his staff did note is that his skills would indicate a strong likelihood of success in this system. Why? Because he's a big that has good overall skills and can score from pretty much anywhere on the floor. He's particularly strong in the midrange area of the floor which is the bulk of where his touches would come in this system. He's one of the best PnP bigs in the league over his career and so here on this team in this system he'd get more of those PnP looks that he excels at.

Judging Phil based only on the past few months is problematic as well. Phil has been using logical thinking in the kind of players he's been bringing in. Phil gave his initial plan a couple of months and then moved on to a rebuild minus most of the players he was left with from the previous regime, that didn't want to buy in or didn't fit. In the process he did bring in youth and picks. You can't give him an F for the entire year since the new plan is not about W/L's but setting a new course which he's been doing. It's all too easy to look at this short stint with Phil and only see the negatives and predict the future will be bad based on that information, but I think that approach is shortsighted and lacks any nuance. You miss a lot of important things when you take such a rigid view on things.

Look Nix, I'm just going to affirm your right to believe what you want from now on without attacking you for it. I haven't missed anything. I just don't sweep inconvenient truths under the rug. Yes, the past is not necessarily prologue, but it most certainly is relevant.

Saying you can't assess Bargs simply because he has not played in the triangle before is what you believe, but it has nothing to do with extrapolation from facts. You're extrapolating merely your desired outcome.

Saying he will be a smart player who regularly defends well and who stays healthy and who is consistent because of the triangle is like saying my broke neighbor will become a self-made billionaire when he is presented with the right money making system. Bargs doesn't become outstanding all of a sudden because poor little him was misunderstood and poorly utilized his whole career and now Magic Phil has the special sauce that will fix him. You engage mostly in wishful thinking and this is a prime example of it.

Bargs is a damn loser and he lacks any intestinal fortitude. For his mindset alone, you should want him as far away from this team as possible.

And Phil is your favorite pet. I get it. I can give him an F. Waddya gonna do boudit?

Yes Phil has logic. His own logic. So far, no good. But it will likely be better next year. For that, you can thank the abyss. It is hard not to be better than this. A minor bounce into mediocrity will prove little, only that the worst has past, not that excellence is guaranteed.

I will grant that this triangular fixation of his could produce some entertaining ball down the road if they really do populate this wreck with thinking players who work their butts off. But if it results in Phil excluding optimal talent and backfires by signing smarter, but truly untalented players to fit his agenda, then he will be on the razor's edge.

Phil is pretty clueless though about asset management. He is really poor at flipping players for other assets. He gets a big fat F. Stop kidding yourself that he has not failed at this.

He may have gotten some bench players. Cool. But he epically fukked up with the Melo signing. BIG FAT F. Dude, he has fallen on his face. You want to tell me when you're going to grade him? in 2032?

How is what Phil did with the team and Plan A, before the switch to plan B really relevant in determining if he'll be successful with Plan B? You do realize it's two completely different approaches? One has nothing to do with the other and thus the results of Plan A aren't predictive of what is going to happen with Plan B. Phil has sent away players and brought in different players who he thinks may fit better and bring a different energy. So far things have gotten better since making the change and working in new players.

You're holding Phil's feet to the fire over mistakes as if GM's don't make mistakes all the time. Phil gave the team a chance but once Phil realized it wasn't going to work he took decisive action. He waited only 37 games before flushing Plan A. He took the heat for it, but it's what he does going forward that is going to be most important. We have to wait to see what he actually does in the future. We have the outlines of what he's likely to do. IMO none of what happened in the 1st few months is proof he can't be successful or that his new Plan is going to be a failure.

The thing is that targeting Smart players who also have talent is an option too. Not just smart players who have no talent as you seem to be suggesting. As if Phil is some Moron who has never seen the best NBA talent before. GTFOH!!! This is why I can't take you and other naysayers seriously.

Lot's of people don't like Bargs so your trashing him doesn't bother me. The thing is that Phil has kept him around and if he did't want him here he wouldn't be here and playing right now. Your statements about Bargs have no bearing on whether or not he can be successful playing in this system. No different than the past had any real impact on Jason, Lou Amundson, Thomas or Galloway. You put someone in a different environment and you may get a different result.

Since you are clearly bereft of any ability to construct a logical argument and are driven solely by emotion, I'll say one thing about you. You are relentless in your affirmations. Regardless of how affiliated you are with the organization, you are surely their biggest pumper and Phil Jackson's #1 stroker.

You are like the Stuart Smalley of basketball fans promoting your franchise:

"We're good enough, We're smart enough, and doggone it, people like us."

I can't bear a grudge against the greatest Knicks homer of all time. You're just too foolish to take seriously. You yapping GTFOH!! and saying you can't take naysayers seriously is just the icing on the cake. You're a clown dude. I'll try to not respond anymore to spare you. You have every right to post whatever you want and I won't get in the way of that.

Splat wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Splat wrote:

nixluva wrote:The problem with judging Bargs on the past is that it tells you nothing about what he will do in this system and in this role. He never played in this system but what Phil and his staff did note is that his skills would indicate a strong likelihood of success in this system. Why? Because he's a big that has good overall skills and can score from pretty much anywhere on the floor. He's particularly strong in the midrange area of the floor which is the bulk of where his touches would come in this system. He's one of the best PnP bigs in the league over his career and so here on this team in this system he'd get more of those PnP looks that he excels at.

Judging Phil based only on the past few months is problematic as well. Phil has been using logical thinking in the kind of players he's been bringing in. Phil gave his initial plan a couple of months and then moved on to a rebuild minus most of the players he was left with from the previous regime, that didn't want to buy in or didn't fit. In the process he did bring in youth and picks. You can't give him an F for the entire year since the new plan is not about W/L's but setting a new course which he's been doing. It's all too easy to look at this short stint with Phil and only see the negatives and predict the future will be bad based on that information, but I think that approach is shortsighted and lacks any nuance. You miss a lot of important things when you take such a rigid view on things.

Look Nix, I'm just going to affirm your right to believe what you want from now on without attacking you for it. I haven't missed anything. I just don't sweep inconvenient truths under the rug. Yes, the past is not necessarily prologue, but it most certainly is relevant.

Saying you can't assess Bargs simply because he has not played in the triangle before is what you believe, but it has nothing to do with extrapolation from facts. You're extrapolating merely your desired outcome.

Saying he will be a smart player who regularly defends well and who stays healthy and who is consistent because of the triangle is like saying my broke neighbor will become a self-made billionaire when he is presented with the right money making system. Bargs doesn't become outstanding all of a sudden because poor little him was misunderstood and poorly utilized his whole career and now Magic Phil has the special sauce that will fix him. You engage mostly in wishful thinking and this is a prime example of it.

Bargs is a damn loser and he lacks any intestinal fortitude. For his mindset alone, you should want him as far away from this team as possible.

And Phil is your favorite pet. I get it. I can give him an F. Waddya gonna do boudit?

Yes Phil has logic. His own logic. So far, no good. But it will likely be better next year. For that, you can thank the abyss. It is hard not to be better than this. A minor bounce into mediocrity will prove little, only that the worst has past, not that excellence is guaranteed.

I will grant that this triangular fixation of his could produce some entertaining ball down the road if they really do populate this wreck with thinking players who work their butts off. But if it results in Phil excluding optimal talent and backfires by signing smarter, but truly untalented players to fit his agenda, then he will be on the razor's edge.

Phil is pretty clueless though about asset management. He is really poor at flipping players for other assets. He gets a big fat F. Stop kidding yourself that he has not failed at this.

He may have gotten some bench players. Cool. But he epically fukked up with the Melo signing. BIG FAT F. Dude, he has fallen on his face. You want to tell me when you're going to grade him? in 2032?

How is what Phil did with the team and Plan A, before the switch to plan B really relevant in determining if he'll be successful with Plan B? You do realize it's two completely different approaches? One has nothing to do with the other and thus the results of Plan A aren't predictive of what is going to happen with Plan B. Phil has sent away players and brought in different players who he thinks may fit better and bring a different energy. So far things have gotten better since making the change and working in new players.

You're holding Phil's feet to the fire over mistakes as if GM's don't make mistakes all the time. Phil gave the team a chance but once Phil realized it wasn't going to work he took decisive action. He waited only 37 games before flushing Plan A. He took the heat for it, but it's what he does going forward that is going to be most important. We have to wait to see what he actually does in the future. We have the outlines of what he's likely to do. IMO none of what happened in the 1st few months is proof he can't be successful or that his new Plan is going to be a failure.

The thing is that targeting Smart players who also have talent is an option too. Not just smart players who have no talent as you seem to be suggesting. As if Phil is some Moron who has never seen the best NBA talent before. GTFOH!!! This is why I can't take you and other naysayers seriously.

Lot's of people don't like Bargs so your trashing him doesn't bother me. The thing is that Phil has kept him around and if he did't want him here he wouldn't be here and playing right now. Your statements about Bargs have no bearing on whether or not he can be successful playing in this system. No different than the past had any real impact on Jason, Lou Amundson, Thomas or Galloway. You put someone in a different environment and you may get a different result.

Since you are clearly bereft of any ability to construct a logical argument and are driven solely by emotion, I'll say one thing about you. You are relentless in your affirmations. Regardless of how affiliated you are with the organization, you are surely their biggest pumper and Phil Jackson's #1 stroker.

You are like the Stuart Smalley of basketball fans promoting your franchise:

"We're good enough, We're smart enough, and doggone it, people like us."

I can't bear a grudge against the greatest Knicks homer of all time. You're just too foolish to take seriously. You yapping GTFOH!! and saying you can't take naysayers seriously is just the icing on the cake. You're a clown dude. I'll try to not respond anymore to spare you. You have every right to post whatever you want and I won't get in the way of that.

Splat wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Splat wrote:

nixluva wrote:The problem with judging Bargs on the past is that it tells you nothing about what he will do in this system and in this role. He never played in this system but what Phil and his staff did note is that his skills would indicate a strong likelihood of success in this system. Why? Because he's a big that has good overall skills and can score from pretty much anywhere on the floor. He's particularly strong in the midrange area of the floor which is the bulk of where his touches would come in this system. He's one of the best PnP bigs in the league over his career and so here on this team in this system he'd get more of those PnP looks that he excels at.

Judging Phil based only on the past few months is problematic as well. Phil has been using logical thinking in the kind of players he's been bringing in. Phil gave his initial plan a couple of months and then moved on to a rebuild minus most of the players he was left with from the previous regime, that didn't want to buy in or didn't fit. In the process he did bring in youth and picks. You can't give him an F for the entire year since the new plan is not about W/L's but setting a new course which he's been doing. It's all too easy to look at this short stint with Phil and only see the negatives and predict the future will be bad based on that information, but I think that approach is shortsighted and lacks any nuance. You miss a lot of important things when you take such a rigid view on things.

Look Nix, I'm just going to affirm your right to believe what you want from now on without attacking you for it. I haven't missed anything. I just don't sweep inconvenient truths under the rug. Yes, the past is not necessarily prologue, but it most certainly is relevant.

Saying you can't assess Bargs simply because he has not played in the triangle before is what you believe, but it has nothing to do with extrapolation from facts. You're extrapolating merely your desired outcome.

Saying he will be a smart player who regularly defends well and who stays healthy and who is consistent because of the triangle is like saying my broke neighbor will become a self-made billionaire when he is presented with the right money making system. Bargs doesn't become outstanding all of a sudden because poor little him was misunderstood and poorly utilized his whole career and now Magic Phil has the special sauce that will fix him. You engage mostly in wishful thinking and this is a prime example of it.

Bargs is a damn loser and he lacks any intestinal fortitude. For his mindset alone, you should want him as far away from this team as possible.

And Phil is your favorite pet. I get it. I can give him an F. Waddya gonna do boudit?

Yes Phil has logic. His own logic. So far, no good. But it will likely be better next year. For that, you can thank the abyss. It is hard not to be better than this. A minor bounce into mediocrity will prove little, only that the worst has past, not that excellence is guaranteed.

I will grant that this triangular fixation of his could produce some entertaining ball down the road if they really do populate this wreck with thinking players who work their butts off. But if it results in Phil excluding optimal talent and backfires by signing smarter, but truly untalented players to fit his agenda, then he will be on the razor's edge.

Phil is pretty clueless though about asset management. He is really poor at flipping players for other assets. He gets a big fat F. Stop kidding yourself that he has not failed at this.

He may have gotten some bench players. Cool. But he epically fukked up with the Melo signing. BIG FAT F. Dude, he has fallen on his face. You want to tell me when you're going to grade him? in 2032?

How is what Phil did with the team and Plan A, before the switch to plan B really relevant in determining if he'll be successful with Plan B? You do realize it's two completely different approaches? One has nothing to do with the other and thus the results of Plan A aren't predictive of what is going to happen with Plan B. Phil has sent away players and brought in different players who he thinks may fit better and bring a different energy. So far things have gotten better since making the change and working in new players.

You're holding Phil's feet to the fire over mistakes as if GM's don't make mistakes all the time. Phil gave the team a chance but once Phil realized it wasn't going to work he took decisive action. He waited only 37 games before flushing Plan A. He took the heat for it, but it's what he does going forward that is going to be most important. We have to wait to see what he actually does in the future. We have the outlines of what he's likely to do. IMO none of what happened in the 1st few months is proof he can't be successful or that his new Plan is going to be a failure.

The thing is that targeting Smart players who also have talent is an option too. Not just smart players who have no talent as you seem to be suggesting. As if Phil is some Moron who has never seen the best NBA talent before. GTFOH!!! This is why I can't take you and other naysayers seriously.

Lot's of people don't like Bargs so your trashing him doesn't bother me. The thing is that Phil has kept him around and if he did't want him here he wouldn't be here and playing right now. Your statements about Bargs have no bearing on whether or not he can be successful playing in this system. No different than the past had any real impact on Jason, Lou Amundson, Thomas or Galloway. You put someone in a different environment and you may get a different result.

Since you are clearly bereft of any ability to construct a logical argument and are driven solely by emotion, I'll say one thing about you. You are relentless in your affirmations. Regardless of how affiliated you are with the organization, you are surely their biggest pumper and Phil Jackson's #1 stroker.

You are like the Stuart Smalley of basketball fans promoting your franchise:

"We're good enough, We're smart enough, and doggone it, people like us."

I can't bear a grudge against the greatest Knicks homer of all time. You're just too foolish to take seriously. You yapping GTFOH!! and saying you can't take naysayers seriously is just the icing on the cake. You're a clown dude. I'll try to not respond anymore to spare you. You have every right to post whatever you want and I won't get in the way of that.

Splat--- First of all the name. It reminds me of taking a dump. Your posts make me think of the emperor's new clothes. You walk around thinking you are hot sheet but in actuality everyone is just laughing at you.

Rookie wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:
Splat--- First of all the name. It reminds me of taking a dump. Your posts make me think of the emperor's new clothes. You walk around thinking you are hot sheet but in actuality everyone is just laughing at you.

Rookie why don't you keep out of my issues with other posters? Once a friggin rookie always a rookie.

BigRedDog wrote:

Rookie wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:
Splat--- First of all the name. It reminds me of taking a dump. Your posts make me think of the emperor's new clothes. You walk around thinking you are hot sheet but in actuality everyone is just laughing at you.

Rookie why don't you keep out of my issues with other posters? Once a friggin rookie always a rookie.