Have watched some Nets games, and I like Larkin...but he is not a difference maker, IMO.

Aldrich is no game changer, either, and Amundson, if in the groove he got into last year when he played so much, is a better player, at least for what we want that position to do. I was surprised when Aldrich got pushed around a couple of times last year...thought he was stronger, and I don't think his D, in general, was what I had been expecting it to be.

Shved might have been worth keeping. Good change of pace guy, who would have worked well coming off the bench. I don't know the truth about any kind of contract discussions he had with the Knicks, but I thought he played well for us last year.

No way we are 28-13 with these guys, though.

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:and did not have Admundson and Seraphin--wed be 28-13 right now.

I wonder when its opt out time if guys like Affalo D Will are gone the same way?

So is this trolling or do you really not understand NBA basketball to this degree?

I think I have it down a bit--Im trying

On the trolling or the understanding of NBA basketball?

jrodmc wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Last night against Cavs

players 8-9-10 for Spurs 6 points on 3-4 6 rebounds--spurs win by 4--the last two guys were both +5 by the way. You break down the NBA into micro analysis and you will find the bench players who produce are the difference between W+ls in close games.

Also if we are serious about going down the stretch and playoffs--we will address 2 spots either for future 2s or d league --or maybe a swap for oquinn etc.. we need a bench enhacement

So effectively you are taking one game with the Spurs bench and comparing that to Schveyd on the IR in some other country, Larkin the misfit toy, and Cole the project. Check.

Phil cleaned house of any old, bad smells and Cole got his money elsewhere, and has spent a large part of this season on the DNP list.

If Jarret Jack didn't go down, would you be even paying attention to Larkin and his +20 minutes and great +/- numbers the last few weeks?

yeah I don't quite understand the comparison. Spurs 6-7-8 guys are former all-star, former all-star, high level backup with 8 years experience (5 with team). When you have the luxury of mixing in 8-9-10 with those types of players and also starters (HOF, allstar, MVP, solid starter, allstar), you get the luxury of giving 9-10 5 minute runs that they can excel in. Knicks just don't have that luxury. Yet.

On another note: Guys 9-10 were given 5 minutes and 9 minutes. Sporadic by all means. KOQ, Seraphin and whomever else best be ready when their numbers are called, no excuses from bench players.

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Last night against Cavs

players 8-9-10 for Spurs 6 points on 3-4 6 rebounds--spurs win by 4--the last two guys were both +5 by the way. You break down the NBA into micro analysis and you will find the bench players who produce are the difference between W+ls in close games.

Lsst night, Memphis vs. Griz.

http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=400828476

Memphis played 10/last 3 bench guys = 2 pts and 2 rebounds.

Detroit played 10/last 3 bench guys - 13 points, 3 board.

Griz win by 2.

What did I do wrong?

Did I forget to carry a 1?

Also if we are serious about going down the stretch and playoffs--we will address 2 spots either for future 2s or d league --or maybe a swap for oquinn etc.. we need a bench enhacement

As to opposed to what?

Lopez/Afflalo/O'Quinn were a less than serious gesture?

The rub isn't addressing needs, it's addressing them well.

If it was just a matter of will and signing D-League players, there wouldn't be 13 teams looking up at the Knicks today. They'd just get serious and get better.

The GS Warriors essentially play 6 guards every game who have some kind of impact. We dont have that. If we added Schved and Larkin--we would. Grant and Galloway way way way too many blank games and were 19-20. If we had decent caliber players like that--the net win loss would be different by a margin. We lost in NJ because we had no quality to go to. We ve lost other games because we got blanked by our guards. I mean youve watched our games--look at the +- of our guards--not to good. Improve the guards and we are MUCH better. So those two back end guards to me make a material difference for this particular team.

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Last night against Cavs

players 8-9-10 for Spurs 6 points on 3-4 6 rebounds--spurs win by 4--the last two guys were both +5 by the way. You break down the NBA into micro analysis and you will find the bench players who produce are the difference between W+ls in close games.

Lsst night, Memphis vs. Griz.

http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=400828476

Memphis played 10/last 3 bench guys = 2 pts and 2 rebounds.

Detroit played 10/last 3 bench guys - 13 points, 3 board.

Griz win by 2.

What did I do wrong?

Did I forget to carry a 1?

Also if we are serious about going down the stretch and playoffs--we will address 2 spots either for future 2s or d league --or maybe a swap for oquinn etc.. we need a bench enhacement

As to opposed to what?

Lopez/Afflalo/O'Quinn were a less than serious gesture?

The rub isn't addressing needs, it's addressing them well.

If it was just a matter of will and signing D-League players, there wouldn't be 13 teams looking up at the Knicks today. They'd just get serious and get better.

The GS Warriors essentially play 6 guards every game who have some kind of impact. We dont have that. If we added Schved and Larkin--we would. Grant and Galloway way way way too many blank games and were 19-20. If we had decent caliber players like that--the net win loss would be different by a margin. We lost in NJ because we had no quality to go to. We ve lost other games because we got blanked by our guards. I mean youve watched our games--look at the +- of our guards--not to good. Improve the guards and we are MUCH better. So those two back end guards to me make a material difference for this particular team.

Larkin is a decent caliber guard and Galloway isn't?

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Last night against Cavs

players 8-9-10 for Spurs 6 points on 3-4 6 rebounds--spurs win by 4--the last two guys were both +5 by the way. You break down the NBA into micro analysis and you will find the bench players who produce are the difference between W+ls in close games.

Lsst night, Memphis vs. Griz.

http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=400828476

Memphis played 10/last 3 bench guys = 2 pts and 2 rebounds.

Detroit played 10/last 3 bench guys - 13 points, 3 board.

Griz win by 2.

What did I do wrong?

Did I forget to carry a 1?

Also if we are serious about going down the stretch and playoffs--we will address 2 spots either for future 2s or d league --or maybe a swap for oquinn etc.. we need a bench enhacement

As to opposed to what?

Lopez/Afflalo/O'Quinn were a less than serious gesture?

The rub isn't addressing needs, it's addressing them well.

If it was just a matter of will and signing D-League players, there wouldn't be 13 teams looking up at the Knicks today. They'd just get serious and get better.

The GS Warriors essentially play 6 guards every game who have some kind of impact. We dont have that. If we added Schved and Larkin--we would. Grant and Galloway way way way too many blank games and were 19-20. If we had decent caliber players like that--the net win loss would be different by a margin. We lost in NJ because we had no quality to go to. We ve lost other games because we got blanked by our guards. I mean youve watched our games--look at the +- of our guards--not to good. Improve the guards and we are MUCH better. So those two back end guards to me make a material difference for this particular team.

Briggs, you ignored my contextual reply to you and you undermine your point by comparing the Knicks unfavorably to the Warriors and Spurs.

The appropriate response here is "duh".

Knicks were Sixer/Wolves/Laker level this year, and guess what, this year those teams still are.

Knicks have gone to .500 level, how about we rightfully expect them to hang around there for part of a season before we measure them against GS and SA?

Direct question - is that an unreasonable expectation, yes or no?

Knick are GOING to lose games this year because they aren't as deep or talented as other teams. Sometimes they'd gonna have a bad night and lose to teams who aren't as deep or talented as they are.

You aren't going to fix the latter now matter how hard you try.

Specifically, I don't know what Larkin did last year to make retaining him the non-brainer you're making it out to be. Were you a vocal advocate of retaining him then, or are you harping on it in hindsight.

Your posts make it seem like you think there are fans here who don't want the KNicks to have better players and be deeper.

The equation is how to do that.

Shane Larkin plays for another team.

If you have a trade proposal, by all means post it.

How about Lance Thomas and C Early to Charlotte for Jeremy Lamb and Kyle Oquinn to Milwaukee for Jarryd Bayless and Chris Copeland--or if for nothing else see if we can trade Larkin for Early and a 2nd rounder.

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Last night against Cavs

players 8-9-10 for Spurs 6 points on 3-4 6 rebounds--spurs win by 4--the last two guys were both +5 by the way. You break down the NBA into micro analysis and you will find the bench players who produce are the difference between W+ls in close games.

Lsst night, Memphis vs. Griz.

http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=400828476

Memphis played 10/last 3 bench guys = 2 pts and 2 rebounds.

Detroit played 10/last 3 bench guys - 13 points, 3 board.

Griz win by 2.

What did I do wrong?

Did I forget to carry a 1?

Also if we are serious about going down the stretch and playoffs--we will address 2 spots either for future 2s or d league --or maybe a swap for oquinn etc.. we need a bench enhacement

As to opposed to what?

Lopez/Afflalo/O'Quinn were a less than serious gesture?

The rub isn't addressing needs, it's addressing them well.

If it was just a matter of will and signing D-League players, there wouldn't be 13 teams looking up at the Knicks today. They'd just get serious and get better.

The GS Warriors essentially play 6 guards every game who have some kind of impact. We dont have that. If we added Schved and Larkin--we would. Grant and Galloway way way way too many blank games and were 19-20. If we had decent caliber players like that--the net win loss would be different by a margin. We lost in NJ because we had no quality to go to. We ve lost other games because we got blanked by our guards. I mean youve watched our games--look at the +- of our guards--not to good. Improve the guards and we are MUCH better. So those two back end guards to me make a material difference for this particular team.

Briggs, you ignored my contextual reply to you and you undermine your point by comparing the Knicks unfavorably to the Warriors and Spurs.

The appropriate response here is "duh".

Knicks were Sixer/Wolves/Laker level this year, and guess what, this year those teams still are.

Knicks have gone to .500 level, how about we rightfully expect them to hang around there for part of a season before we measure them against GS and SA?

Direct question - is that an unreasonable expectation, yes or no?

Knick are GOING to lose games this year because they aren't as deep or talented as other teams. Sometimes they'd gonna have a bad night and lose to teams who aren't as deep or talented as they are.

You aren't going to fix the latter now matter how hard you try.

Specifically, I don't know what Larkin did last year to make retaining him the non-brainer you're making it out to be. Were you a vocal advocate of retaining him then, or are you harping on it in hindsight.

Your posts make it seem like you think there are fans here who don't want the KNicks to have better players and be deeper.

The equation is how to do that.

Shane Larkin plays for another team.

If you have a trade proposal, by all means post it.

How about Lance Thomas and C Early to Charlotte for Jeremy Lamb and Kyle Oquinn to Milwaukee for Jarryd Bayless and Chris Copeland

It's usually customary in polite society to respond to a genuine question. but that said, where is the Shane Larkin proposal.

You said the Knicks would better with Shane Larkin, so why aren't you proposing a trade for him?

Gave to read the full reply==== How about Lance Thomas and C Early to Charlotte for Jeremy Lamb and Kyle Oquinn to Milwaukee for Jarryd Bayless and Chris Copeland--or if for nothing else see if we can trade Larkin for Early and a 2nd rounder.

If you want to see a good player the Knicks should get from St Josephs named Isiaih Miles for next year. Not on any draft radars--real good player with great size for the 2.

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Last night against Cavs

players 8-9-10 for Spurs 6 points on 3-4 6 rebounds--spurs win by 4--the last two guys were both +5 by the way. You break down the NBA into micro analysis and you will find the bench players who produce are the difference between W+ls in close games.

Lsst night, Memphis vs. Griz.

http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=400828476

Memphis played 10/last 3 bench guys = 2 pts and 2 rebounds.

Detroit played 10/last 3 bench guys - 13 points, 3 board.

Griz win by 2.

What did I do wrong?

Did I forget to carry a 1?

Also if we are serious about going down the stretch and playoffs--we will address 2 spots either for future 2s or d league --or maybe a swap for oquinn etc.. we need a bench enhacement

As to opposed to what?

Lopez/Afflalo/O'Quinn were a less than serious gesture?

The rub isn't addressing needs, it's addressing them well.

If it was just a matter of will and signing D-League players, there wouldn't be 13 teams looking up at the Knicks today. They'd just get serious and get better.

The GS Warriors essentially play 6 guards every game who have some kind of impact. We dont have that. If we added Schved and Larkin--we would. Grant and Galloway way way way too many blank games and were 19-20. If we had decent caliber players like that--the net win loss would be different by a margin. We lost in NJ because we had no quality to go to. We ve lost other games because we got blanked by our guards. I mean youve watched our games--look at the +- of our guards--not to good. Improve the guards and we are MUCH better. So those two back end guards to me make a material difference for this particular team.

Briggs, you ignored my contextual reply to you and you undermine your point by comparing the Knicks unfavorably to the Warriors and Spurs.

The appropriate response here is "duh".

Knicks were Sixer/Wolves/Laker level this year, and guess what, this year those teams still are.

Knicks have gone to .500 level, how about we rightfully expect them to hang around there for part of a season before we measure them against GS and SA?

Direct question - is that an unreasonable expectation, yes or no?

Knick are GOING to lose games this year because they aren't as deep or talented as other teams. Sometimes they'd gonna have a bad night and lose to teams who aren't as deep or talented as they are.

You aren't going to fix the latter now matter how hard you try.

Specifically, I don't know what Larkin did last year to make retaining him the non-brainer you're making it out to be. Were you a vocal advocate of retaining him then, or are you harping on it in hindsight.

Your posts make it seem like you think there are fans here who don't want the KNicks to have better players and be deeper.

The equation is how to do that.

Shane Larkin plays for another team.

If you have a trade proposal, by all means post it.

How about Lance Thomas and C Early to Charlotte for Jeremy Lamb and Kyle Oquinn to Milwaukee for Jarryd Bayless and Chris Copeland

It's usually customary in polite society to respond to a genuine question. but that said, where is the Shane Larkin proposal.

You said the Knicks would better with Shane Larkin, so why aren't you proposing a trade for him?

Gave to read the full reply==== How about Lance Thomas and C Early to Charlotte for Jeremy Lamb and Kyle Oquinn to Milwaukee for Jarryd Bayless and Chris Copeland--or if for nothing else see if we can trade Larkin for Early and a 2nd rounder.

If you want to see a good player the Knicks should get from St Josephs named Isiaih Miles for next year. Not on any draft radars--real good player with great size for the 2.

What I'd like to have is a conversation with you where we actually respond to one another's questions. Not sure why you're so resistant.

The context of the thread is this year, not next year, so college players are irrelevant.

If Larkin is clearly as good as you say, why are the Nets trading him for Early?

Their season is ruined they have no picks and he's on a one year contract?

Larkin vs Portland:

16 minutes...2 pts (1/6)...1 assist...3 turnovers...1 steal...2 blocks(!)...-17 +/-

We'd be 10 games under .500 if Phil had kept him.