Posted by fishmike:

Posted by BRIGGS:

i wouldnt evaluate marbury at the olympics because this type of game is not suited for his style of play. here is an explanation PGs like Mike Bibbiy and John Stockton are fluid team players. They are in constant motion[by the way thats why i like rip for the olympics his style of play is made for it] marbury and iversen pound the ball into the ground to much because they have been the center pieces of their respective nBA teams. Stockton and Bibby -while being highly talented are mere pieces that fit into solid team play. You see glimpses of Marbury with team play--the best example is Phoenix and SA playoffs-- but for the most part--even dating back to GT--Marbury is THE GUY. Its hard to get two guys like iversen and marbury on a team and expect cohesion.

I still believe that if the USA team changes course and focuses on POWER--using the 4 bigs amare boozer emeka and duncan in two set rotations i.e 2 of the 4 are ALWAYS on the court--use a BIG 2G and sit either marbury or iversen and substitute Marion for Jefferson


any way you look at it, we WILL not have a great outside shooting team. The way we win actually is how the Knicks won in the 90s power it inside EVERY time in the halfcourt and aggresively defend+rebound. We can run opportunistically, but we also ned to run to get back on the D first and foremost.

I agree with this... I still think this USA team can win on defense and physical play. We need to be more patient on D. These international teams use the whole 30 secs. It doesnt help that everyone has been ice cold. We have seen Marbury, Iverson, Marion, Wade get hot with the shooting. Now would be a good time. I suprised we havent seen more motion and backdoor plays that take advantage of our athleticism.

Some would call me a homer but I'm putting a little faith in Larry B and this US squad to straighten their stuff out before its too late.

Posted by fishmike:



Some would call me a homer

Fishmike is quite the poet.

Posted by Solace:

Isles, that's fair. I suppose I see some of where you're coming from with your playoff views. I honestly just don't feel he had enough to work with for four games to be a fair judge, in this case. As for the Arroyo comment, I didn't realize that it was tounge in cheek.

As for the 'infinite funds' concept, I guess it depends on how you view it. Bonn had mentioned, numerous times, that in the next two seasons we'll have $60 million in ending contracts. In theory, we could drop slightly under the cap in two years, if we stopped adding pieces, so the financial situation isn't hopeless. However, does it really matter? I do believe we have nearly unlimited funds for a few reasons. One, I keep hearing people tell me that the luxury tax might not be triggered for the next few years. We were spending $120-$140 MM every year with the luxury tax invoked. Without it, we can afford to have a $100 MM payroll or more. Second, it all depends on getting fair value. I don't think any player that Isiah has personally signed has gotten a ridiculous deal. Crawford did ask for 7 years, $70 MM, but only got 7 years, $56 MM. Kurt got a fair extension. The rest has been moving around bad deals, and trying to add pieces that help.

I honestly don't think our odds would be that good by rebuilding and going through free agency. Here's why: Usually teams with minimal payroll have very poor records, so top line free agents don't want to sign there. So that Tim Duncan, Yao Ming, etc... free agent that we all desire, likely would stay with their current contending team, rather than leaving into an unknown rebuilding project. The best we could reasonably expect to do with a poor team into free agency is a guy like Steve Nash. Did you want Nash for $65 MM over 5 years with a $15 MM option for a sixth? I sure as hell didn't. Phoenix overpaid, because that was the only way they could get him. Utah overpaid for Okur & Boozer, because that was the only way free agents would sign there. See the dilemma? You need a winning team to attract free agents, winning teams usually cost money, but if you're spending money, the cap doesn't let you sign free agents? The only exception is Denver, who got good real quick, while still under the cap. That's the rare case, and would've been a big risk trying to hope for that. So, then you're hoping for that superstar draft pick, which is a huge crapshoot.

Anyway, at this point, I'm off the rebuilding kick. Sure, somewhere a year ago, I still feel my rebuilding team of Lampe, Sweetney, Vujanic, F. Williams, some more good picks, to go with a vet core of Van Horn, Dice/Kurt, Deke and Allan Houston, and then a few free agents once we got under the cap, to see how competitive we'd be in 2007, and possibly even make the playoffs once or twice before that. Isiah didn't share that vision and went a different path. At this point, it's done, and Isiah isn't going to stop in the middle and say, 'rebuilding would be better'. So, at this point, you have to keep looking ahead with the current mindset. That's what our GM is doing, and we are getting more athletic, younger and, arguably, considerably more talented. So, let's see what happens. If we win the championship in three years, great, but guess what? We're three years away from finding out, so let's just have some patience.

[Edited by - Solace on 08/18/2004 13:07:01]

Everyone here seems to be of the mind that we arne't going to be a contender for 3 more years at least so what would have been the harm in that?