dk7th wrote:TripleThreat wrote:It's not "optimism" if it denies any type of "pragmatism"
what does this mean? other than agreeing with most of your points and observations, i wonder what you mean here?
what are your overall hopes and expectations for the team? i have no idea but have a range of 29 to 42 wins which is admittedly ridiculously large a range.
What I mean is this, let me give you an example.
Last offseason, if a Dallas fan said they have high hopes for a leap in improvement from Al Farouq Aminu and that they believe he could be a strong addition to the Mavericks rotation and provide length and defense and grit, there is actually some context and reason to believe it might be possible.
A) Rick Carlisle is an established coach with championship pedigree and has veteran experience across the league
B) The Mavericks are a stable organization with a team first "Alpha" franchise player willing to subvert his game for the best interests of the team
C) Aminu signed a short contract for the veteran's minimum, he was on the way to being out of the league because he could no longer ride on his old draft pedigree and his plus rebounding. He needed to change his game to stay in the league but there was the push of possibly running out of real NBA options and playing for a contract, two thing that have been shown to motivate players to make drastic changes to their game and approach to foster a team oriented approach.
D) Carlisle and the Mavericks had good luck and put in good solid work rehabiliting Vince Carter from the player he used to be when he was young to a helpful back of the rotation player playing to his limitations in his later career. Again, the issue of a player on the edge of the end of his career and the desire to fight for a new contract were in play.
E) Aminu was always a very rangy player who was willing to go out and bang and fight to clean the glass. No one was asking him to take a massive leap against what he already did do well.
F) With Shawn Marion gone, a path to minutes became available plus a need/role for Aminu emerged naturally.
If last offseason, if someone said, hey, I think Aminu can really help that Dallas team, there is actually CONTEXT, REASON, OPPORTUNITY and LOGIC behind that possible development. If Aminu went to a team that was unstable, had a lousy coach with a bad track record, if the team has no history of developing veteran players into more useful cogs into the greater machine, if he was stuck behind so many guys that he'd get no minutes, and someone said "Hey I think Aminu can be helpful" then that's not really optimism. It's just making **** up and following the "Because I said so" type logic.
When Nixluva applauds Phil Jackson signing Amundsom, Derrick Williams, O'Quinn, Lopez and drafting Zinger and then talks about how he can see Clem Early developing more this year, that's not optimism in my book because it denies "pragmatism" The Knicks don't have a great current history of developing their draft picks. There is no clear path to minutes to develop. Nothing in Early's showing so far makes it seem that he even understands the basic Triangle sets. Yet, if you question Nixluva on it, he'll call you a hater and say you have no idea of what you are talking about and why can't everyone just be "positive"
Another example is EnvySpree, who last preseason said he could see STAT starting, pushing over 30 minutes a game and pushing the entire season as a strong contributor, including some defense. In context, STAT has been injury prone in his Knicks career, when was the last time he played a full season. When was the last time he was seen as even competent on defense? What actual indicators in context lend to the idea that STAT could survive 30 minute a night without falling apart?
Everyone has a right to their own opinion. But my take, and it's not going to be popular for some to hear, is that it's easy to hide behind "optimism" when you don't understand how the league works. When you don't understand NBA draft history, how the marketplace operates, how teams trend towards certain players, why trades happen, and what are the basic team building methodologies out there.
Nixluva and many other cry out - Sign Greg Monroe, he'll be great and help the Knicks win. If you point out Monroe can't defend the rim and in order to get a rim protector, you'd pretty much cap out the Knicks, nixluva will say you don't know what you are talking about, that getting Monroe does not limit the Knicks free agency. ( In context, a starting NBA center through free agency is going to command 10-12 million a year, maybe more, signing Monroe and then signing another center to cover Monroe's inability to play pivot defense would have capped out the team. But Nixluva doesn't care and it doesn't matter to stop him from calling anyone else a hater because he doesn't actually understand what the market value of a free agent pivot rim protector is in the modern NBA marketplace. )
But many of these same guys will talk about Jerian Grant without consideration that rookies have an actual learning curve, that nearly all will not produce at a historic rate and many will hit a rookie wall or actually struggle in order to develop.
Then again, a lot of the guys here will have no idea why Aminu did turn his career around and, in context, how that will or will not apply to someone like Derrick Williams. Instead, you get threads saying Derrick Williams will be awesome! Why? BECAUSE THEY SAID SO. Not that there is any type of real context to how teams operate and players change and develop over time to give solid reasoning.
"You know if Person X stopped being an alcoholic and stopped drinking, they'd be a pretty good guy, a good dad and a good role model"
That is exactly what some guys here sound like. Like they are banking on a drunk stop being a drunk but without any real reason for the guy to stop drinking. Rehab? Near death experience? Born again religious? That would actual context, but why bother with that when you can just roll with "Because I said so"
Melo isn't fighting for a new contract. He's never had anything as a Knicks except being totally enabled. He's never shown any real consistency on defense. Yet you'll have guys say "Hey, Melo is going to step it up this year on defense" Under what actual practical context? What's more likely, a guy in his 13th season and after 30K minutes will continue to show the same Don't Try/So What defense he's always given? Or he will suddenly, without any kind of logical leverage or motivation, become an entirely different player? That's like asking a drunk to stop being an alcoholic when no other conditions around said person has actually changed to leverage them to stop drinking.
IMHO, folks who want to hide behind "optimism" without any real sense of pragmatism is just another gravy train ride to reaffirm that sometimes ignorance is bliss.
