No one wishes such a life hack existed more than the New York Knicks. Perhaps no team in professional sports has prematurely taken the chicken out of the oven more times than the one that calls MSG home. Whether it’s giving up on young players too soon (my heart will always weep for Danilo Gallinari’s New York career that never was), trading a pick for a vet on draft night (Nene for Antonio McDyess, anyone???) or everyone’s favorite “Knicks gonna Knick” folly of dealing away future draft assets (Gordon Hayward, LaMarcus Aldridge, Dario Saric, Jamal Murray, and a younger, useful Joakim Noah—all taken with Knicks’ traded picks—make for a pretty good starting five), rushing the process hasn’t worked out so well in the past. If the Knicks were on a date that ended up in bed, they’d be better off not asking “was it good for you?”

Had to highlight that part because the guys we missed out on because we traded the pick, well they still have not won rings, and most are no longer on the team that drafted them(most by choice) .

You could be patient and continue to develop and lose, but as we see every yr, the franchise or the player is going to want to move on. You want continuity, then win and get better every yr, that's how teams stay together, and ppl keep theeir jobs.

I don't think we would be going on our 4th coach in 5 yrs if we were winning, and the roster has been flipped 4 times and over a 100 players in the process.

knicks1248 wrote:https://theknickswall.com/jonathan-macri-for-the-new-york-knicks-patience-makes-perfect/

No one wishes such a life hack existed more than the New York Knicks. Perhaps no team in professional sports has prematurely taken the chicken out of the oven more times than the one that calls MSG home. Whether it’s giving up on young players too soon (my heart will always weep for Danilo Gallinari’s New York career that never was), trading a pick for a vet on draft night (Nene for Antonio McDyess, anyone???) or everyone’s favorite “Knicks gonna Knick” folly of dealing away future draft assets (Gordon Hayward, LaMarcus Aldridge, Dario Saric, Jamal Murray, and a younger, useful Joakim Noah—all taken with Knicks’ traded picks—make for a pretty good starting five), rushing the process hasn’t worked out so well in the past. If the Knicks were on a date that ended up in bed, they’d be better off not asking “was it good for you?”

Had to highlight that part because the guys we missed out on because we traded the pick, well they still have not won rings, and most are no longer on the team that drafted them(most by choice) .

You could be patient and continue to develop and lose, but as we see every yr, the franchise or the player is going to want to move on. You want continuity, then win and get better every yr, that's how teams stay together, and ppl keep theeir jobs.

I don't think we would be going on our 4th coach in 5 yrs if we were winning, and the roster has been flipped 4 times and over a 100 players in the process.

So all we have to do is employ more "winning"? Cant' trade the picks cuz that has not worked, and developing players is not effective because the players who we would have picked have not won rings either? Your standing by this position?

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:https://theknickswall.com/jonathan-macri-for-the-new-york-knicks-patience-makes-perfect/

No one wishes such a life hack existed more than the New York Knicks. Perhaps no team in professional sports has prematurely taken the chicken out of the oven more times than the one that calls MSG home. Whether it’s giving up on young players too soon (my heart will always weep for Danilo Gallinari’s New York career that never was), trading a pick for a vet on draft night (Nene for Antonio McDyess, anyone???) or everyone’s favorite “Knicks gonna Knick” folly of dealing away future draft assets (Gordon Hayward, LaMarcus Aldridge, Dario Saric, Jamal Murray, and a younger, useful Joakim Noah—all taken with Knicks’ traded picks—make for a pretty good starting five), rushing the process hasn’t worked out so well in the past. If the Knicks were on a date that ended up in bed, they’d be better off not asking “was it good for you?”

Had to highlight that part because the guys we missed out on because we traded the pick, well they still have not won rings, and most are no longer on the team that drafted them(most by choice) .

You could be patient and continue to develop and lose, but as we see every yr, the franchise or the player is going to want to move on. You want continuity, then win and get better every yr, that's how teams stay together, and ppl keep theeir jobs.

I don't think we would be going on our 4th coach in 5 yrs if we were winning, and the roster has been flipped 4 times and over a 100 players in the process.

So all we have to do is employ more "winning"? Cant' trade the picks cuz that has not worked, and developing players is not effective because the players who we would have picked have not won rings either? Your standing by this position?

You would be living on FANTASY ISLAND to think everyone you draft will work out just has planed.

11 head coaches 15 losing season do you see any continuity in that.

3 head coaches (riley, nelson, JVG) in 16 winning seasons.

What part don't you get

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:https://theknickswall.com/jonathan-macri-for-the-new-york-knicks-patience-makes-perfect/

No one wishes such a life hack existed more than the New York Knicks. Perhaps no team in professional sports has prematurely taken the chicken out of the oven more times than the one that calls MSG home. Whether it’s giving up on young players too soon (my heart will always weep for Danilo Gallinari’s New York career that never was), trading a pick for a vet on draft night (Nene for Antonio McDyess, anyone???) or everyone’s favorite “Knicks gonna Knick” folly of dealing away future draft assets (Gordon Hayward, LaMarcus Aldridge, Dario Saric, Jamal Murray, and a younger, useful Joakim Noah—all taken with Knicks’ traded picks—make for a pretty good starting five), rushing the process hasn’t worked out so well in the past. If the Knicks were on a date that ended up in bed, they’d be better off not asking “was it good for you?”

Had to highlight that part because the guys we missed out on because we traded the pick, well they still have not won rings, and most are no longer on the team that drafted them(most by choice) .

You could be patient and continue to develop and lose, but as we see every yr, the franchise or the player is going to want to move on. You want continuity, then win and get better every yr, that's how teams stay together, and ppl keep theeir jobs.

I don't think we would be going on our 4th coach in 5 yrs if we were winning, and the roster has been flipped 4 times and over a 100 players in the process.

So all we have to do is employ more "winning"? Cant' trade the picks cuz that has not worked, and developing players is not effective because the players who we would have picked have not won rings either? Your standing by this position?

You would be living on FANTASY ISLAND to think everyone you draft will work out just has planed.

11 head coaches 15 losing season do you see any continuity in that.

3 head coaches (riley, nelson, JVG) in 16 winning seasons.

What part don't you get

IM the guy that says over and over that drafts don’t work out. The odds are what they are.
But we have traded the picks, and that very fact is a part of why we have failed.
Neither of us are on fantasy island.

But I have no idea what your babbling about.

Knicks have been trying to win for their entire existence. Have failed miserably many times over trying to win. Knicks1248's answer to that is just gotta win to keep continuity.

I wonder why most teams don't decide just to start winning. Its so simple, Why didn't teams like the Knicks or even outside of the Knicks. Like the Nets or Suns or Lakers or Kings just decide to start winning this season. 3 of those teams don't even have their draft picks for this coming draft. Why didn't they just win?