Improved shooting
more depth at PF
A Center to back up Mitch
Improved PG's
Better defenders
Better passing
A star

We took RJ Barrett who was clearly the best player available and he turned out great compared to expectations despite the many reservations people had(especially me, I wanted Culver but thank god i'm not running things).

Given how far behind in development we were it was always unlikely we'd get the biggest FA's. We wen't from having no NBA caliber PF's to having 3, one coming off a career season, one who was a respected two way vet for many good teams, and one wildcard which to many was fine.

We brought in 3 two way players that would improve our shooting(Morris and Wayne Bullock)

We got a very serviceable PG

So what gives?

You could make the argument that maybe we bring in a center instead of one of the PF's we brought in, and I'd agree given how raw Mitch was. But who were the feasible the alternatives? Dedmon? Valenciunas? Zubac? WCS? Dwight Howard?

You could make the argument that Payton wasn't enough, but if not him then who? Cory Joseph(who sucks right now)? a rapidly declining George Hill? Or make riskier allocations and spend over the top to lure Rubio or Rozier?

You could say that maybe we don't sign Ellington and trust Dotson and Trier to fight it out..but would we be better?

I knew coming in that the way we built this roster wasn't great but given the alternatives I'm not sure we would have been that much better. We got better passers, defenders, shooters, and more depth at the 4. We still lacked PG play, an outright go to player, and a reliable center but all things can be handled under a good coaching scheme. I'm not saying fire Fizdale yet but this idea that they are throwing him under the bus is overblown.

TPercy wrote:Lets also be clear: The front office clearly had the right mindset in FA in looking for vets who could improve the roster and help groom the young ones on short term deals. They could have done a slightly better job in terms of who they signed but going forward we are still on the right track.

Both your most previous posts are fair and accurate.

I agree. The FO did ok given the assets in play.

BigDaddyG wrote:Saw this on Reddit.

I didn't know if I wanted to laugh or cry.

Clearly, Van Gundy has been reading my post

BigDaddyG wrote:

Uptown wrote:I'm watching the Rockets and Clippers game and Van Gundy chimed in on the Fizdale situation. "Fiz is an outstanding basketball coach. We need to be patient. We put together a new basketball team, injury and absence at the point guard position, we have a young rookie at the starting 2, we have multiple forwards that are trying to play the same spot, we gotta calm down and let it play out some. We always say we are in it together and we gotta be patient, but then at the first sing of adversity, teams start to break a part. Stay the course and let that man coach his team."

Clearly, Van Gundy has been reading my post

When is the last time you heard a coach crap on another coach who is on the verge of being fired? And don't mention Rex Ryan.

Van Gundys comments on Fiz were unsolicited. In other words, he ain't have to say anything at all. Heres a question for you, what lies were told in the above mentioned quote from Van Gundy?

You need mature and/or self-motivated players to respond well in that type of coach-player dynamic. I think that's why Morris, RJ, Taj and Payton seem ready to play most nights, whereas many of the younger guys (fighting for minutes with similar ability players) like Knox, Randle, and Portis don't seem to have that inner fire and consistency. So don't think it's all the players or the coach - but given this roster which reeks of younger and less disciplined style players - think they would do better with a touger/hard-nosed kind of coach.

Chandler wrote:The guy who quit on the Knicks is lecturing us to be patient?

Why are people still bitter about that? Do people have to stay working for the Knicks forever? Are they not allowed to stop?