EwingsGlass wrote:

misterearl wrote:Theme Music: We're A Winner - Curtis Mayfield

EwingsGlass - your interpretation is narrow, defensive and negative. Allow me to make it more plain for you. If you don't remember the 1963 Knicks, you have no context for how the 1969 Knicks were assembled, or how long it took a legendary executive, Eddie Donovan.

I am defensive. I suggest my view is the optimist's view, though, MisterEarl. Without relying on a non-sequitur quote or pop culture reference --meaning, using your own words, what would you suggest "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" means in the context of a Knicks re-build? Make sure we do not Starphuch ourselves? Agreed.

That said, people are swinging at Nix for being excited for the opportunity to build a team this year...better yet, a franchise. What I see is a poster that is excited by both advanced metrics and salary cap considerations. This is the kind of fan I want to chat with.

Your response is "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Thanks for the neoclassical philosophy lesson. I'll remember not to re-sign Stephon Marbury.

So, no. I do not remember the 1963 Knicks. Or the 1969 Knicks. I would suggest that the change in the Collective Bargaining Agreement and the creation of the NBPA has changed the way teams are built since 1963. 1963 still had the territorial rule for instance (thank you for Bill Bradley). That said, a 5th draft pick and a forced trade from a lesser team seems somewhat familiar to me. Today, a combination of free agency and drafting well are necessary.

With the rookie scale contract limiting teams to 4 unrestricted years with their draft picks, the timeline to develop young players has changed. You basically need to have your franchise built within 4 years of drafting your franchise player so that when you cap out on the young star (limiting your free agent flexibility), you have your supporting cast in place. Even then, your team is subject to the collusive actions of players on teams like the Celtics and Heat where multiple superstars eschew the economic modeling to chase rings together.

You have to do more than remember the past. You have to predict the future in this league. I am not sure I need context for the 1969 Knicks so much as an understanding of how to beat teams like the Warriors, Cavs etc..

well.....at the end of the first contract the player is an RFA; all the team has to do is match. What's more, given that the max such a player can make is 25% under the cap, three or even four max players could fit on the roster without crossing the luxury tax line. The key is to keep the costs of the other players down, which is what the Knicks are learning to do.

misterearl wrote:Analytics R Us

Are there any available metrics (from the last two decades) on the average number of seasons required for an NBA franchise to make the leap from worst to Conference Finals?

See you keep thinking this has to have a historically similar result this off season and there is actually a good chance that this team does better than average in terms of improvement this summer. A normal or average year to year improvement may not apply to the Knicks next season. If things go well the Knicks could be much better next year and not just marginally better. That's what Phil and his staff are hoping for.

misterearl wrote:Analytics R Us

Are there any available metrics (from the last two decades) on the average number of seasons required for an NBA franchise to make the leap from worst to Conference Finals?

I know when I looked into it a while ago the average worst team in the league was .350 the following season. We do have cap space but it's a long process.

nixluva wrote:

misterearl wrote:Analytics R Us

Are there any available metrics (from the last two decades) on the average number of seasons required for an NBA franchise to make the leap from worst to Conference Finals?

Why would this even be a valuable statistic? We aren't expecting this to be an average off season. Unless you think every off season that the "average" team has a top 5 pick and $30 mil in cap space. This of course isn't the case, so for the Knicks there's a chance they can make a larger than typical increase in wins next season.

See you keep thinking this has to have a historically similar result this off season and there is actually a good chance that this team does better than average in terms of improvement this summer. A normal or average year to year improvement may not apply to the Knicks next season. If things go well the Knicks could be much better next year and not just marginally better. That's what Phil and his staff are hoping for.

I've lost track of what the argument is. AnswerMan, are you arguing that because most teams don't go from worst to first in a single offseason even if they have cap space and a top draft pick, that guys like Nix and me should not be excited about the opportunity to rebuild the roster and turn the franchise around this offseason?

Or that it is inevitable that a team that hasn't had a ring in 42 or so years will screw it up again?

dk7th wrote:

nixluva wrote:

misterearl wrote:Analytics R Us

Are there any available metrics (from the last two decades) on the average number of seasons required for an NBA franchise to make the leap from worst to Conference Finals?

Why would this even be a valuable statistic? We aren't expecting this to be an average off season. Unless you think every off season that the "average" team has a top 5 pick and $30 mil in cap space. This of course isn't the case, so for the Knicks there's a chance they can make a larger than typical increase in wins next season.

See you keep thinking this has to have a historically similar result this off season and there is actually a good chance that this team does better than average in terms of improvement this summer. A normal or average year to year improvement may not apply to the Knicks next season. If things go well the Knicks could be much better next year and not just marginally better. That's what Phil and his staff are hoping for.

where is the leadership going to come from this off-season? which free agents? which draft picks? this team will continue to underachieve unless and until we acquire leadership over and above talent. fishflop thinks that with the adequate amount of talent acquired all of a sudden leadership will emerge like magic, or according to some empirical evidence only he is privy to.

what do you think of this assertion of his?

nyk4ever wrote:

dk7th wrote:

nixluva wrote:

misterearl wrote:Analytics R Us

Are there any available metrics (from the last two decades) on the average number of seasons required for an NBA franchise to make the leap from worst to Conference Finals?

Why would this even be a valuable statistic? We aren't expecting this to be an average off season. Unless you think every off season that the "average" team has a top 5 pick and $30 mil in cap space. This of course isn't the case, so for the Knicks there's a chance they can make a larger than typical increase in wins next season.

See you keep thinking this has to have a historically similar result this off season and there is actually a good chance that this team does better than average in terms of improvement this summer. A normal or average year to year improvement may not apply to the Knicks next season. If things go well the Knicks could be much better next year and not just marginally better. That's what Phil and his staff are hoping for.

where is the leadership going to come from this off-season? which free agents? which draft picks? this team will continue to underachieve unless and until we acquire leadership over and above talent. fishflop thinks that with the adequate amount of talent acquired all of a sudden leadership will emerge like magic, or according to some empirical evidence only he is privy to.

what do you think of this assertion of his?

leadership just happens. maybe the leadership will come from the head coach,maybe a vet free-agent, maybe melo, or maybe a young guy will step and take the reins. i dont really care if melo is a leader or not, as long as he scores the ball and makes positive contributions out on the court. to sit here in april and ask where the leadership will come from, like there is an answer that people are going to pull out of their asses is stupid to me. these things take care of themselves, especially when teams start winning games.

gunsnewing wrote:Yea like when we acquired Kidd and he proved to be a Great leader. Worth his weight in Gold. On a cheap deal

I'm sure Phil willfind someone if he really tries and not give up this time after striking out.

You can thank Tyson for Kidd

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:Again, my point was that you can't predict how successful the Knicks will be next season by focusing on the past.

This is odd. Isnt the only reason you have faith in Phil is because of HIS PAST? Guess what? His past isnt going to influence the present.

nixluva wrote:Before this season started we all knew this summer was going to be very important to the teams future and not last summer when Phil didn't have the same options for upgrading the roster. This is why they called this season a transition year. Just doing a simple comparison of what Phil had as options last summer verses this summer, it's clear he has more to work with this summer and major upgrades are possible.

Firstly, this year was important, Phil miscalculated and has admitted such. it was not a trnasition year, he thought this was a playoff team. he truly felt just like you that a few upgrades and this team wasnt as bad as the 37 win team. Sorry, you both were wrong.

I agree Phil has more to work with, but he is a novice. Start him off with small chips and see what he does.....so far he has failed. we can all hope with a full deck of cards he'll be able to play his hand to a winner, but thats being blindly hopeful.

2. This past season won't help you determine how successful next year's team will be because we will have a different group of players starting next season. If it was the same group then this year could make it easier to predict what will happen, but it's not going to be the same group starting next year.

3. Yes this year was important, but it was still a transition year. Phil was looking to establish his imprint on the franchise and his new coaching staff. If everything went as planned they probably should've made the playoffs, but almost nothing went as planned in terms of health or players buying in, so he did the right thing in flushing that team.

4. Now we head into the off season with more assets for rebuilding the team. This summer has nothing in common with last season in terms of what Phil will be able to do. Phil has a very able staff which includes an Executive of the Year winner. They know what they're doing, despite how things transpired this season. You may not respect their abilities but they are not a bunch of young guys just trying to figure this out for the 1st time. You can get away with calling Phil a novice because of how this season went and that's fine but that doesn't make it true.

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Yea like when we acquired Kidd and he proved to be a Great leader. Worth his weight in Gold. On a cheap deal

Phil apparently wasn't capable of adding players like that in the past fourteen months though. It's not like it required major cap space to add Kidd.

This post is a case in point of how someone takes a myopic view of past events to further their agenda. The moves made during 2012 - 2013 including the signing of Kidd were what got the Knicks ultimately into deeper longer term trouble. But don't let that get in the way of your bash Phil agenda.......here's a look at all the Gem moves you wish Phil could have made......

Signed Jason Kidd to a 3 year 9 Million dollar contract - he played on year

Sign & Traded for Camby ($4 mil plus over 3 years) giving up 2 2nd round picks and players - he played in only a few games as a Knick - complete flop

Put an inept Chris Smith on the Roster to appease and resign JR - it did not work out with Chris, and JR was extremely effective for one year and then a distraction thereafter

Let Jeremy Lin go and instead traded a 2nd round pick and other players for Ray Felton - who was effective for 1 year then had domestic abuse and gun troubles and was inneffective thereafter..........and Kurt Thomas who only played one effective year for the Knicks after that

Exercised the option on Shumpert who remained injury plagued and ineffective as a Knick

Signed Rasheed Wallace who was effective as a Knick for approximately 1/4 of a season

Signed Ronnie Brewer who was generally ineffective as a Knick

Signed a really old Prigioni to a 3 year contract to basically be a 3rd sting PG

Signed Kenyon Martin - ineffective

Signed Jeremy Tyler - ineffective

Signed Beno Udrih - ineffective

Signed MWP - ineffective

Drafted THJ - uneven/spotty play - not sure about future with Knicks