BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Starpuch

trading young players and lottery picks for player

examples Eddy Curry Cramelo Mcdyess Marbury

signing a free agent who is a star? No starpuch

So it's impossible for an FA signing to be a starphuck?

Nope. Who wouldn't want IT on this team anyway for nothing but cash?

Would you say the same for Amare?

What's impressed you so much in his 3 games back anyway? The 44% shooting? The 6+ turnovers per 36 min?

Let me see--arent you the same guy who said a ten game sample is not much? How about the 29 points and 6 assits + the ECF he did last year? Do you even know who I Thomas is? Because that is a silly statement?

Hes not going to avg the same on Clev that he did on Boston--what we are looking for is health--we know the guy can play.

Nalod wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Starpuch

trading young players and lottery picks for player

examples Eddy Curry Cramelo Mcdyess Marbury

signing a free agent who is a star? No starpuch

So it's impossible for an FA signing to be a starphuck?

Nope. Who wouldn't want IT on this team anyway for nothing but cash?

Would you say the same for Amare?

What's impressed you so much in his 3 games back anyway? The 44% shooting? The 6+ turnovers per 36 min?

Let me see--arent you the same guy who said a ten game sample is not much? How about the 29 points and 6 assits + the ECF he did last year? Do you even know who I Thomas is? Because that is a silly statement?

Hes not going to avg the same on Clev that he did on Boston--what we are looking for is health--we know the guy can play.

Do you even know who I Thomas is? Do you even know who I Thomas is? Do you even know who I Thomas is? Do you even know who I Thomas is?

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Nalod wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Starpuch

trading young players and lottery picks for player

examples Eddy Curry Cramelo Mcdyess Marbury

signing a free agent who is a star? No starpuch

So it's impossible for an FA signing to be a starphuck?

Nope. Who wouldn't want IT on this team anyway for nothing but cash?

Would you say the same for Amare?

What's impressed you so much in his 3 games back anyway? The 44% shooting? The 6+ turnovers per 36 min?

Let me see--arent you the same guy who said a ten game sample is not much? How about the 29 points and 6 assits + the ECF he did last year? Do you even know who I Thomas is? Because that is a silly statement?

Hes not going to avg the same on Clev that he did on Boston--what we are looking for is health--we know the guy can play.

Do you even know who I Thomas is? Do you even know who I Thomas is? Do you even know who I Thomas is? Do you even know who I Thomas is?

LOL. We've had enough Isiah Thomases!

It's funny reading posts thT criticize others who want to improve but have no tangible plan themselves. If he's healthy it would be an incredible unique possibility

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Nalod wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Starpuch

trading young players and lottery picks for player

examples Eddy Curry Cramelo Mcdyess Marbury

signing a free agent who is a star? No starpuch

So it's impossible for an FA signing to be a starphuck?

Nope. Who wouldn't want IT on this team anyway for nothing but cash?

Would you say the same for Amare?

What's impressed you so much in his 3 games back anyway? The 44% shooting? The 6+ turnovers per 36 min?

Let me see--arent you the same guy who said a ten game sample is not much? How about the 29 points and 6 assits + the ECF he did last year? Do you even know who I Thomas is? Because that is a silly statement?

Hes not going to avg the same on Clev that he did on Boston--what we are looking for is health--we know the guy can play.

Do you even know who I Thomas is? Do you even know who I Thomas is? Do you even know who I Thomas is? Do you even know who I Thomas is?

LOL. We've had enough Isiah Thomases!

It's funny reading posts thT criticize others who want to improve but have no tangible plan themselves. If he's healthy it would be an incredible unique possibility

Right.
Being unimpressed with 3 games from Isaiah Thomas = Having no rebuilding plan

Who lead the nba in 4 th quarter scoring last year?
Who were the two teams in the ECf finals last year?
Who had the most wins in the east last year? And who was their best player?

You have no plan-- you just spit back stats. Do u even watch basketball?

franco12 wrote:But, Briggs, you are wrong. This group is the group that becomes a winning franchise, and we don't need no starphuchs!

I'm going to do something I rarely do.

I'm going to change my mind and look at a personnel move that is actually, in form, a poor market based decision and consider the Knicks should do it anyway.

Thomas at 3/60, with the third year as a team option. Salary structure so that the 2nd year, the maximum of 15 percent that can allotted towards not likely to be earned incentives that don't actually work against the cap. ( In short, if Thomas gets hurt most of the season, enough to not accrue service time for a full NBA season, the Knicks would pay 17 million and then not pick up his third year team option)

Briggs should acknowledge that others here are right, signing Thomas is a bad market based decision. If the Knicks signed Thomas a 100 times, 80 times it would blow up in their faces. Even at most optimum, you'd be looking at a treadmill team that would , at best, be fun to watch, but would get blown of the first round of the playoffs.

It would be a functional 2/40 deal, but the phantom 3/60 would work to appease IT2's ego.

I've watch some more game film of IT2 recently, and he's a tough little bastard.

BUT, and it's a HUGE but here. It would all be predicated on trading THJr without taking in long term salary back, getting some non guaranteed contracts that can be waived and realizing this would be a team that would get torched night after night on defense.

If IT2 would take that deal, then I say sign him. I change my mind.

Jmpasq wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

franco12 wrote:But, Briggs, you are wrong. This group is the group that becomes a winning franchise, and we don't need no starphuchs!

I'm going to do something I rarely do.

I'm going to change my mind and look at a personnel move that is actually, in form, a poor market based decision and consider the Knicks should do it anyway.

Thomas at 3/60, with the third year as a team option. Salary structure so that the 2nd year, the maximum of 15 percent that can allotted towards not likely to be earned incentives that don't actually work against the cap. ( In short, if Thomas gets hurt most of the season, enough to not accrue service time for a full NBA season, the Knicks would pay 17 million and then not pick up his third year team option)

Briggs should acknowledge that others here are right, signing Thomas is a bad market based decision. If the Knicks signed Thomas a 100 times, 80 times it would blow up in their faces. Even at most optimum, you'd be looking at a treadmill team that would , at best, be fun to watch, but would get blown of the first round of the playoffs.

It would be a functional 2/40 deal, but the phantom 3/60 would work to appease IT2's ego.

I've watch some more game film of IT2 recently, and he's a tough little bastard.

BUT, and it's a HUGE but here. It would all be predicated on trading THJr without taking in long term salary back, getting some non guaranteed contracts that can be waived and realizing this would be a team that would get torched night after night on defense.

If IT2 would take that deal, then I say sign him. I change my mind.

Your deal is palatable but someone will pay more

I hate the draft this year after 9. If the Nets are willing to take Noah or Lee/Thomas for the 13th pick and Dinwiddie---deal. Dinwiddie is better than anyone at 13 anyway. That gives me the cap room to sign IT. Adding IT and Dinwidde would be huge. Use the 2nrd rounders to grab a PGs like Brunson or Holiday and maybe Colson with the other.

Lets say for example
IT
Dinwddie
J Brunson
B Colson.

NYKBocker wrote:

franco12 wrote:Stop with the Isiiah Thomas threads!!!

I've seen this team play out like this, and my hunch is next year and the future is bright. I can't remember where I saw a young team lose a lot of close games, and the next year they start to win those. Maybe it was early Ewing.

This isn't blind fanacticism like nixluva. This is a legit belief that next year, we start to win these games.

I am confident in our FO. Confident that these players- this core group we can debate- will continue to grow, and next year, we start to see them win these close games.

We've seen flashes. We need more depth, more discipline, yes, more talent.

But, Briggs, you are wrong. This group is the group that becomes a winning franchise, and we don't need no starphuchs!

I agree but what is wrong with the nixluva approach?

This team is learning and growing. These are called growing pains. A little tweak here and there and we are going to be contenders for many years.

IMO my Preseason predictions get conflated with concepts for building this team. It’s not all the same. I’ve been supportive of this team’s current approach even with the recent losing record.

Now that this team has had a few drafts and more of a youth movement they should continue to try and stay with their 25 or younger approach.

Yes they have Vets playing a significant role this year but the long term is still more about the youth. Going All In on a 29 yr old for big money doesn’t make sense. Not with adding kids in the coming draft and a 19 and 22 yr old as part of your long term core.

BRIGGS wrote:

Jmpasq wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

franco12 wrote:But, Briggs, you are wrong. This group is the group that becomes a winning franchise, and we don't need no starphuchs!

I'm going to do something I rarely do.

I'm going to change my mind and look at a personnel move that is actually, in form, a poor market based decision and consider the Knicks should do it anyway.

Thomas at 3/60, with the third year as a team option. Salary structure so that the 2nd year, the maximum of 15 percent that can allotted towards not likely to be earned incentives that don't actually work against the cap. ( In short, if Thomas gets hurt most of the season, enough to not accrue service time for a full NBA season, the Knicks would pay 17 million and then not pick up his third year team option)

Briggs should acknowledge that others here are right, signing Thomas is a bad market based decision. If the Knicks signed Thomas a 100 times, 80 times it would blow up in their faces. Even at most optimum, you'd be looking at a treadmill team that would , at best, be fun to watch, but would get blown of the first round of the playoffs.

It would be a functional 2/40 deal, but the phantom 3/60 would work to appease IT2's ego.

I've watch some more game film of IT2 recently, and he's a tough little bastard.

BUT, and it's a HUGE but here. It would all be predicated on trading THJr without taking in long term salary back, getting some non guaranteed contracts that can be waived and realizing this would be a team that would get torched night after night on defense.

If IT2 would take that deal, then I say sign him. I change my mind.

Your deal is palatable but someone will pay more

I hate the draft this year after 9. If the Nets are willing to take Noah or Lee/Thomas for the 13th pick and Dinwiddie---deal. Dinwiddie is better than anyone at 13 anyway. That gives me the cap room to sign IT. Adding IT and Dinwidde would be huge. Use the 2nrd rounders to grab a PGs like Brunson or Holiday and maybe Colson with the other.

Lets say for example
IT
Dinwddie
J Brunson
B Colson.

Yeah we aren't going to lose enough games this year to get the SF we need. Even though I don't believe in Frank as a legitimate difference maker I can't get past giving a 5'8 PG 25 million a year

BigDaddyG wrote:Will that roster win enough games to justify signing IT.

My reasoning is likely to be dramatically different from Briggs. ( Using logic and all that...)

I see the next two years as burning time. Phil Jackson truly f**ked this team right at the end. Totally f**ked the next four years of this team in his last offseason. (Seriously, shut up Nix, no one wants to hear it from you right now)

I don't think Noah and Lance Thomas are movable. At all. That's two more years of just ugly contracts. I'm not quite sure Lee can be moved, not without taking in an equal salary of some kind for the same length. It stands to reason that Kanter will opt in. There are just too many bad contracts to progressively move forward. Worse, the more this team loses, the more it risks Zinger leaving the first chance he gets.

IT2 would be an open acknowledgement that the next two seasons are just burning time, but the team can at least be fun and entertaining while that time smokes off. He's a fun player to watch. Together with Zinger, they can probably get the 8th seed and form up some highlight reels. As long as they hold their draft picks, they can keep drafting guys and hoping they pan out.

With or without IT2, this is a team that won't be bad enough to get a high lottery pick.

If it's going to be a waste of two years because of the ugly contracts, then have it be two years where the team just has fun and makes it fun for the fans. Again, the SSOL Suns under Pringles and Nash was very much like this.

Briggs will likely think the Knicks can be a contender with IT2.

Yeah, no.