Nalod wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:Absolutely so far so good. My fear -- as the youth movement struggles pressure on the FO from our ADHD fan base and phony media gasbags causes them to change course and max a Jimmy Butler or an injured/over 30 star. Or trade young assets/#1 picks. Please no.

Losing will no doubt put pressure on the faithful but I doubt FO caves.
This is a new era. To link it to the past failure is irrelevant to the future. Only quick fixes that fail is our only obstacle.
With each losing season comes a fresh prospect via the draft. But it also comes with expectations and another timeline.
Coincidentally the acquisition of blue chip talent increases statistical probability of future success.
The short sighted fans have no bearing until viewership and ticket sales drop.
Until Briggs is made President and KNicks1248 made GM i'll sleep good enough with this FO for a few years.

I am willing to believe.... :)

nykshaknbake wrote:

Chandler wrote:My fingers and toes are crossed but personally I'll reserve judgment for now. My concern is implicit in this "rebuild" is that there is a certain amount of hubris and not much evidence of success. At a minimum, we're led to believe that several teams had no idea how to develop a player (who they would have every incentive to develop) but we will, e.g.:

Denver (mudiay)
Charlotte, Portland, Chicago (Vonleh)
Orlando (Hezonja)

As I said I'll hope for the best.

Having said that, it seems there is more success by finding diamonds in rough (or at least non-lottery picks) and developing them into a specific role, then rehabbing lottery busts. Our own experience with Rose, D.Williams, and Beasley is even guys who were at the top of the draft who never translated that promise to NBA success never rehabbed with us or with other teams. I actually struggle to think of a single lottery pick who underwhelmed but then thrived because of a change of scenery

Sorry to be the party pooper

You can't really put Rose in that category...when he was healthy he was the MVP and led the Bulls deep in the playoffs. Beasley had a nice season with us. No you cant expect lottery busts to be all stars, but it's possible to get them to be solid contributors. All 3 you mentioned we have were very low cost/free.

by the time we got Rose he was a has been. I'll admit I was excited about the prospect.

My point is the evidence suggests these guys can't make it. They didn't make it for a lack of opportunity, support, and probably not lack of effort. But they didn't make it but we seem to feel we have the magic

Evidence suggests we're wrong, and we might have better luck finding a diamond in the rough and developing them. Pat Riley did it when here (Mason, Starks etc) and in Miami. GS (Dray). I don't know if Jerry West found Dray but pretty sure he was on to Marc Gasol. Pop (Danny Green and tons of others). None of the great teams are taking 1st ground busts and rehabilitating them into what they promised to be on draft night but failed to deliver when the season started.

I will now shut up and go back to finger crossing

BigRedDog wrote:

Chandler wrote:My fingers and toes are crossed but personally I'll reserve judgment for now. My concern is implicit in this "rebuild" is that there is a certain amount of hubris and not much evidence of success. At a minimum, we're led to believe that several teams had no idea how to develop a player (who they would have every incentive to develop) but we will, e.g.:

Denver (mudiay)
Charlotte, Portland, Chicago (Vonleh)
Orlando (Hezonja)

As I said I'll hope for the best.

Having said that, it seems there is more success by finding diamonds in rough (or at least non-lottery picks) and developing them into a specific role, then rehabbing lottery busts. Our own experience with Rose, D.Williams, and Beasley is even guys who were at the top of the draft who never translated that promise to NBA success never rehabbed with us or with other teams. I actually struggle to think of a single lottery pick who underwhelmed but then thrived because of a change of scenery

Sorry to be the party pooper

Chauncey Billips for one. Sorry to be the party pooper pooper

Good point, but for every Chauncey I can probably name 10 to the contrary without trying too hard

GustavBahler wrote:

Chandler wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:

Chandler wrote:My fingers and toes are crossed but personally I'll reserve judgment for now. My concern is implicit in this "rebuild" is that there is a certain amount of hubris and not much evidence of success. At a minimum, we're led to believe that several teams had no idea how to develop a player (who they would have every incentive to develop) but we will, e.g.:

Denver (mudiay)
Charlotte, Portland, Chicago (Vonleh)
Orlando (Hezonja)

As I said I'll hope for the best.

Having said that, it seems there is more success by finding diamonds in rough (or at least non-lottery picks) and developing them into a specific role, then rehabbing lottery busts. Our own experience with Rose, D.Williams, and Beasley is even guys who were at the top of the draft who never translated that promise to NBA success never rehabbed with us or with other teams. I actually struggle to think of a single lottery pick who underwhelmed but then thrived because of a change of scenery

Sorry to be the party pooper

Chauncey Billips for one. Sorry to be the party pooper pooper

Good point, but for every Chauncey I can probably name 10 to the contrary without trying too hard

I would add Doug Christie. Enough evidence out there to say there are exceptions to the rule. Fizdale is a big believer in his ability to develop players. Looking forward to seeing if he can deliver.

Also, Kurt Thomas, Marcus Camby and Tyson Chandler. There many ways to accrue talent. Just got to keep an openmind to what's available.

HofstraBBall wrote:Really like what Perry has brought to the organization. And the direction we are heading. For the first time in many years it is easy for a fan to see and understand what the FO is focused on. Perry has a clear objective. To Develop Young Talent. He is signing low cost young players, who were highly rated at some point, and will invest the time, money and personnel needed to properly develop them. Big difference from what Dolan has done in years prior. We went from Phil's indecisive rebuilds signing players like Noah, Rose and other old rejects. With a egocentric philosophy placing more importance on personal beliefs rather than long term development and goals. To Perry who has a clear vison to truly rebuild with young talent and long term sights. Think we are in great shape, specially if we get a healthy KP and find a way out of contracts like Noah, Timmy and Lee. Which are moves that I don't feel Perry is a fan of. Was impressed with young signings this summer and, although not the pick I wanted, love Knox. Good job by Perry and his staff in rating this kid higher than some of the other predictable picks. First time in many years I I am excited to renew my annual ticket package.

I like Perry a lot I just don't trust his boss Mr. Mills or the dream crushing owner Mr. Dolan. I could see Tweedledee and Tweedledumb forcing the franchise into Kemba Walker and Jimmy Butler at the cost of 60 million and our top 5 2019 draft pick.

TripleThreat wrote:

Chandler wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:

Chandler wrote:My fingers and toes are crossed but personally I'll reserve judgment for now. My concern is implicit in this "rebuild" is that there is a certain amount of hubris and not much evidence of success. At a minimum, we're led to believe that several teams had no idea how to develop a player (who they would have every incentive to develop) but we will, e.g.:

Denver (mudiay)
Charlotte, Portland, Chicago (Vonleh)
Orlando (Hezonja)

As I said I'll hope for the best.

Having said that, it seems there is more success by finding diamonds in rough (or at least non-lottery picks) and developing them into a specific role, then rehabbing lottery busts. Our own experience with Rose, D.Williams, and Beasley is even guys who were at the top of the draft who never translated that promise to NBA success never rehabbed with us or with other teams. I actually struggle to think of a single lottery pick who underwhelmed but then thrived because of a change of scenery

Sorry to be the party pooper

Chauncey Billips for one. Sorry to be the party pooper pooper

Good point, but for every Chauncey I can probably name 10 to the contrary without trying too hard

Bill Parcells introduced the long standing "JAG" concept to the general public in his post Giants years.

JAG = Just Another Guy

Is he a good player? A blue? ( Elite players are designated by the color blue on the roster/big board)

No, he's a JAG (Just Another Guy)

Sometimes you just need a warm body to eat up minutes. Noah is not going to last a full season physically, this isn't even factoring in his off the court issues. Zinger is injured and his projections don't mean squat. He might take much longer to heal and be game ready. Hernangomez was traded. KOQ left as a free agent. Kornet and Robinson are very raw. Kanter can't be expected to play in critical 4th quarter moments when you need a defensive stop.

Vonleh is a warm body. Maybe he could be more. Odds are against it. By soaking up some minutes, you find out. You also prevent Kornet and Robo from being run into the ground as young players.

There is real talent scarcity in the NBA. People always ask why teams didn't get any "real help" Given the cap space situation, and the losing and bad owner situation, and the narrow talent pool, there really isn't a lot of help out there.

Very few people period have NBA grade height and athleticism.

Guys like Fizdale talk about development because he does not have a choice. What else is he gonna say? These are just JAGs? Because they are just JAGs. But sometimes you need guys like that too. The more critical issue is they are JAGs on short contracts and easily disposable. This is where the Lance Thomas situation went bad, they paid a JAG the kind of money more suited to an 8th guy in your rotation. JAGs are not the problem, paying them and giving them contracts outside the bounds of what a JAG is worth is the problem.

Signing Vonleh's all day is NOT a problem. Giving Lance Thomas a 4 year deal is the real problem. Thomas' contract prevents the Knicks from using that money in a buyers market for free agents. You want better players you need cap flexibility to sign them. The Knicks don't have it. Why? Because of stupid contracts like the one they gave Lance Thomas.

Guys like Vonleh are really not the problem here.

The league really needs to be contradicted, there are to many teams for the talent base. Instead they will probably add 2 more further stretching the talent base.

Vmart wrote:If not for Phil this team would not have gotten the wheel turning. Now it’s up to Mills to complete the direction that Phil set the team on.

wargames wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Vmart wrote:If not for Phil this team would not have gotten the wheel turning. Now it’s up to Mills to complete the direction that Phil set the team on.

The firing of Grunwald and hiring of Mills after the MCkinsey study employed by MSG and affiliates was at the turning point.
Dolan instinctively starphuchs and the attraction to phil to hand the keys was a good idea, but it did not work. Mills is capable given his back ground.
Regardless of past regressions the team is now engaged in a proper rebuild. Does that mean we are on the upswing? Record wise that is not a given. We have accumulated some blue chip talent and very young ones at that.
Phil tried to build on top of a core of Melo, Rose and Noah. It was a decision that did not work.
Knicks stunning FO rebuild in 12 months!

Talking about the Mckinsey study, I would love to see the results. I remember when it was going down I thought it was pointless cause Basketball isn't a direct correlation to business. However, Dolan did take a major step back afterwards by first initially giving the keys to Phil and eventually Mills. So if that was the advice...... I am legit impressed.

Results Rangers are rebuilding as are the knicks. Gone is starphuching. Dolan got to see the light and stepped back. Im guessing this was not easy and he was seduced by Phil's potential. I think Cablevision and its vast size required he do it.
Mills, Fiz, and Perry don't have the gaudy cred that was always a stable in a starphuch hire.