I know we already signed Kirnett but I don't like him Plumlee played ok but he's easily replaceable and Nigel Hayes is A euro player

There were several bigs like wArney Auguste etc who actually played well on other teams thT we can give 2 nd looks to

The big club. If were not going to trade Carmelo I'd rather play to win this year
We have size depth 3 point shooting a guy who can still make big shots
But we sorely need a pro pg--if we can trade why don't we bring back the 6-5 euro pg we gave up on who was MVP of his league schved?

BRIGGS wrote:The positive I took out of SL is that we had 3 guards who shot the 3 ball well and played team ball
Dotson Randle and Artis. The only other guy I felt played well was Laberydie( for the first time in 3 years)
A couple of obvious points Randle did not show well for the Pg position. Beyond atrocious and numerous TOs he shot 33% from 2 point range which is just far below any reasonable standard. What he did do well is shoot 3s and for thT reason alone he should be pRt of the 17 man roster
Dotson played well enough to garner a chance to gain minutes at the back end of the roater11-13 .
Artis is a guy who played well enough to get a camp invite and see what he can do against better players. Same thing with Laberysie-- he played well enough to see if he can belong.

I know we already signed Kirnett but I don't like him Plumlee played ok but he's easily replaceable and Nigel Hayes is A euro player

There were several bigs like wArney Auguste etc who actually played well on other teams thT we can give 2 nd looks to

The big club. If were not going to trade Carmelo I'd rather play to win this year
We have size depth 3 point shooting a guy who can still make big shots
But we sorely need a pro pg--if we can trade why don't we bring back the 6-5 euro pg we gave up on who was MVP of his league schved?

You previously posted (yesterday) Knicks are a 25 win team without a vet PG. Shved does not take them from 25 to 41 wins.

Do you think he does or were you exaggerating about 25 wins without?

BRIGGS wrote:The positive I took out of SL is that we had 3 guards who shot the 3 ball well and played team ball
Dotson Randle and Artis. The only other guy I felt played well was Laberydie( for the first time in 3 years)
A couple of obvious points Randle did not show well for the Pg position. Beyond atrocious and numerous TOs he shot 33% from 2 point range which is just far below any reasonable standard. What he did do well is shoot 3s and for thT reason alone he should be pRt of the 17 man roster
Dotson played well enough to garner a chance to gain minutes at the back end of the roater11-13 .
Artis is a guy who played well enough to get a camp invite and see what he can do against better players. Same thing with Laberysie-- he played well enough to see if he can belong.

I know we already signed Kirnett but I don't like him Plumlee played ok but he's easily replaceable and Nigel Hayes is A euro player

There were several bigs like wArney Auguste etc who actually played well on other teams thT we can give 2 nd looks to

The big club. If were not going to trade Carmelo I'd rather play to win this year
We have size depth 3 point shooting a guy who can still make big shots
But we sorely need a pro pg--if we can trade why don't we bring back the 6-5 euro pg we gave up on who was MVP of his league schved?

You're clearly running out of topics for new threads if you're bringing up our 5 summer league games we played weeks after it's been over...lol. Artis isn't a guard either.

BRIGGS wrote:

RonRon wrote:Christian Wood

I am serious not mocking Briggs btw

Scveyd and Wood would be two cheap nice pick ups

Perhaps, but all they're doing is giving the Knicks less lottery balls.

Neither and/or both is transforming them from the 25 win team you analyzed to a playoff team.

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

RonRon wrote:Christian Wood

I am serious not mocking Briggs btw

Scveyd and Wood would be two cheap nice pick ups

Perhaps, but all they're doing is giving the Knicks less lottery balls.

Neither and/or both is transforming them from the 25 win team you analyzed to a playoff team.

I have zero interest at maximum lottery balls. If we are 20-40 then I would go all out. But why am I not trying to win? If it was me I would try to win-- I don't think losing has any benefit. If it's natural and aggressive then you let it go. But at day 1 you try your hardest pick ups like wood andA AS would help not hinder winning. Wood is 22 and AS 28

So you're saying you don't see any benefit to getting a top 3 pick as opposed to a 7-10 pick?

Are you arguing as presently constituted what you described as a 25 win team would make the postseason with Shved and Wood? Or are you saying you prefer a 30 win team to a 25 win team?

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

RonRon wrote:Christian Wood

I am serious not mocking Briggs btw

Scveyd and Wood would be two cheap nice pick ups

Perhaps, but all they're doing is giving the Knicks less lottery balls.

Neither and/or both is transforming them from the 25 win team you analyzed to a playoff team.

I have zero interest at maximum lottery balls. If we are 20-40 then I would go all out. But why am I not trying to win? If it was me I would try to win-- I don't think losing has any benefit. If it's natural and aggressive then you let it go. But at day 1 you try your hardest pick ups like wood andA AS would help not hinder winning. Wood is 22 and AS 28

So you're saying you don't see any benefit to getting a top 3 pick as opposed to a 7-10 pick?

Are you arguing as presently constituted what you described as a 25 win team would make the postseason with Shved and Wood? Or are you saying you prefer a 30 win team to a 25 win team?

It doesn't matter what someone prognosticates about w-l. Adding a couple of good young cheap players should always be a good avenue

I didn't prognosticate 25 wins, you did. Obviously you think it matters or you wouldn't have brought it up.

If you want to add a marginal PG that's fine. But don't make it like it's the difference between a disastrous season and a successful one.

It's the between 25 wins and maybe 28 wins and there is a legitimate argument to be made the Knicks long-term interests are best served by the 25 win season season.

Unless the 25 wins was just hyperbole for effect and you think the Knicks are closer to competing than you let on?

Is that it?