# Keith Van Horn shoots like crap AGAIN.



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

Van Horn was 5-14 from the field in his latest game. Fortunately, the Bucks were only playing Atlanta, so they managed to get the win. Looks like his FG% really IS trailing off. I hope this doesn't happen to Tim Thomas.

Hey, Atlanta, aren't they the guys who KVH broke out against? Remember how we said it was "because of Frank Williams?" Well, looks like we were right. Keith royally sucked this time without the greatness of Frank. The Bucks are using the "Eisleyish" Damon Jones until the "Frankish" TJ Ford comes back, this is probably why he is sucking.

I am so glad we traded this guy for a SF than can dunk and shoot threes .003 (over his career) much better, and a C that can defend all-stars like Mark Blount, Chris "210 lbs" Bosh, and Samuel Dalembert.

Oh yeah, VH was only something like 13-14 on FTs. And he threw in 11 rebounds (at SF) and 4 pathetic steals.

If you're wondering, Tim Thomas' career high in FTs made is 12, his career high in attempts is 14, and his career high in steals is 4. And the 11 rebounds? TT has accomplished that a whopping 3 times this season! We got ourselves a marlin here kids!


----------



## NYKBaller (Oct 29, 2003)

Keep on saying stupid ****...


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

I think he is just saying how it was a bad trade and even though KVH might not have a good shooting night, he brings other facets of his game to the court. Which is true.

-Petey


----------



## Starbury03 (Aug 12, 2003)

Dont diss Jones he has been playing very good for the Bucks like the one game where he had 16 ast and no turnovers.


----------



## walkon4 (Mar 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> Van Horn was 5-14 from the field in his latest game. Fortunately, the Bucks were only playing Atlanta, so they managed to get the win. Looks like his FG% really IS trailing off. I hope this doesn't happen to Tim Thomas.
> 
> Hey, Atlanta, aren't they the guys who KVH broke out against? Remember how we said it was "because of Frank Williams?" Well, looks like we were right. Keith royally sucked this time without the greatness of Frank. The Bucks are using the "Eisleyish" Damon Jones until the "Frankish" TJ Ford comes back, this is probably why he is sucking.
> ...


[strike]your a fool.[/strike]

The reason why the Knicks havent been winning genious, is because Van Horn is missing. If you noticed, teams they beat up on earlier in the year(like my celtics) are now beating the Knicks and playing better ball.

The Truth hurts sometimes, and I am sorry to announce to you that Keith Van Horn is a better player than Tim Thomas. Keep thinking that Van horn isnt playing well this year when they go farther than the Knicks in the playoffs.
I don't want to see that, but maybe that will prove to you that the trade Isiah made was a complete joke.


----------



## H2O (Jul 10, 2002)

*Re: Re: Keith Van Horn shoots like crap AGAIN.*



> Originally posted by <b>TheTruth34</b>!
> 
> 
> [strike]your a fool.[/strike]
> ...


Perhaps you missed the dripping, baiting style irony present in pretty much all of that guys posts.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Do yourself a favor "The Truth" as I have learned.....Dont respond to that particular poster...The board will be a much better place...

:


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

yeah cause keith won us all our games. the first two of our 5 game losing streak were with keith. i blame stephon. It seems that if he shoots well we win, and if he doesnt, theres a good chance were screwed. Also, lenny wilkens playbook is shorter than a hallmark card


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

Correct. In wins, Marbury shoots 50%. In losses, he shoots below 40%.

That's why having a viable 2nd option is so crucial. If you can stop Stephon, you stop the Knicks. But that's why we got Tim Thomas! He can dunk... and stuff.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> I am so glad we traded this guy for a SF than can dunk and shoot threes .003 (over his career) much better, and a C that can defend all-stars like Mark Blount, Chris "210 lbs" Bosh, and Samuel Dalembert.


Welp, I'm back from vacation a little more tanned, but I see lettle else has changed around here.

Can anyone with a better memory than me recall some multi-player trades where the team that gave up the best single player in the deal still came out ahead? For instance, should Cleveland fans really cry every night Ricky Davis has a better game than Jeff McInnis?

This was a multi-player trade and needs to be evaluated as such. The Knicks had good stretches and bad with VH/MD, and they seem capable of the same with TT/Nazr. If it turns out to ba a leteral trade, as many of us suspecvted from the get-go, is that so hard to take?

I think that all this trade has done is changed the team stylistically form a perimiter only team to a better balanced team that is, at the moment, lacking consitent perimeter shooting. It is a backcourt driven team, stylistically more in the mould of Isiah's championship Pistons (style only, not talent). We see that this team only produces when Marbury and Houston do, much as it was with Isiah, Dumars and V. Johnson.

Now I don't expect this team to win a championship, so don't take me out of context. There is not a single position on this club that is as good as those Pistons were, but we've seen that a team in this mould (stylistcally) is capable of winning. At least it has a chance. But what perimiter-only teams have ever won *anything*? I can't recall a single team that was built like the Knicks that began this season ever even being a playoff contender.

And while I'm here, since it's always the same person who hates losing VH also hated picking up Marbury, let's look at what we gave up to get Marbury. Seems what people lament in losing is Vujanic, Lampe, and two first rounders. Well besides the issue that I don't think Vujanic would have played here at all (and was a bad draft choice for that reason), he's ANOTHER perimeter guy. As is Lampe! When is enough perimeter enough?!?!? 

And notice that we did not trade all the youth. The guys who were retained (Williams and Sweetney) just happen to be the guys who are producing in this league, and have a penetration or inside component to their game.

Could we use another god shooter now? Yes, it's presently a hole, but much less a hole than the inside game that began this season and last.

And yes we gave up two first rounders, but one is protected for most of this decade. The other will be a mid-rounder. It's not that much. And to offset this years mid-teen pick we signed Dermarr, a #6 pick. 

And funny the complaint is from the Layden supporter who likes to insinuate that Layden was building a youth movement through the draft. First off, if you like his picks keep in mind that most of the keepers were compensation prizes for FAILURE and thus landing in the LOTTERY. 

Second, he gave up a #1 for the washed up veteran Mark Jackson! and #1 and #2 for Othella!! Oh, and a #1 for an injured Luc Longley!!!

Rashidi, you're so high on Dalembert (I like him too), does it bother you that the #1 we gave up for Longley (18th pick) could have nabbed him, or Jason Collins, Zack Randolph, Tinsley, Parker, or Arenas? The pick we traded for Jackson could have netted us Karreem Rush, Q. Woods, Tayshaun Prince, or Carlos Boozer. 

Youth thru draft my arse. Perimeter thru failure more like it.

At least be happy that from our picks we finally got a young all-star caliber PG -- instead the scrubs Layden squandered our youth/potential on.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Oak,welcome back...I think you will find you are one of the few posters left who will be devoting much energy with certain posters....

If you like the theatere of the bizzare,take a look at the thread,"enough is enough"....


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Starbury03</b>!
> Dont diss Jones he has been playing very good for the Bucks like the one game where he had 16 ast and no turnovers.



He has been an excellent point guard. WTF happened to kareem of coffee and his new scouting job. 

Or mr I am such a great scout scott layden. 


Anyway I'm tired of the Knicks losing. TT's stats are starting to remind of Ricky D's


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

KnicksBiggestFan....

You have alot of very revved up statements,which you are certainly entitled to



> Anyway I'm tired of the Knicks losing. TT's stats are starting to remind of Ricky D's


Are you blaming TT's play for the Knicks losing???I am not pleased with the Knicks losing either,but I wouldnt just place the blame on TT stats,unless I had something to back it up with....

I am not sure where you are going with this,and you of all people have the capacity to produce some insightful stats,if you cared to.

Take a good look at TT's stats..They are not bad at all,especially for a small foward...Do you realise he is shooting well over 50% from the floor???His stats are very close to KVH,and in fact if he shot as much as KVH he would be scoring more....His rebound numbers are less,but so are his turnovers...Are you just trying to get under peoples skin????

Nothing good is going to come of your comments....The very thing happened last week,when YOU bashed TT and said if he had Kobes brain..You are full aware of what happened next as another poster said some very "unusual" things after I questioned your statement.

You have made your point loud and clear..You dont like TT stats..Now present some numberes which would support your case.Personally,I dont think your argument is that strong..I am not sure,but I think marburys production may have tailed off,and he is the key to this team


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Oak,welcome back...I think you will find you are one of the few posters left who will be devoting much energy with certain posters....
> 
> If you like the theatere of the bizzare,take a look at the thread,"enough is enough"....


If enough is enough, then why do you still bother responding to me, hypocrite? Perhaps if you didn't let everything I say bother that tiny little head of yours, things wouldn't turn bizarre in the first place. You claim that I am oversensitive, and then you cry when the subject of rape comes up. How the topic of rape ended up in a topic about Maciej Lampe, you tell me.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

isiah traded away our future? So did layden. the knicks have to win now, not later. Layden knew this, as does Isiah. Theres a reason Layden traded Nene to get McDyess, and that was to win NOW. He could care less about our future. Now that hes gone all of a sudden he cares?


----------



## Perennial All Star (Aug 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> 
> If enough is enough, then why do you still bother responding to me, hypocrite? Perhaps if you didn't let everything I say bother that tiny little head of yours, things wouldn't turn bizarre in the first place. You claim that I am oversensitive, and then you cry when the subject of rape comes up. How the topic of rape ended up in a topic about Maciej Lampe, you tell me.


Ehh when did anyone ver mention you are oversensitive? And how did the topic of Maciej Lampe get started? Oh thats right you started it being the Suns fan that you are. Tell you what hypocrite, if your gonna sit here and praise other teams and bash with every post then what kind of fan are you? You admitted you are a Suns fan so why don't you go to their board and discuss Lampe, Eisley and McDyess all you want. And you can go the Bucks board too and talk about KVH 24/7. Go. Nobodies stopping you. Unless you get some sexual pleasure from making sarcastic posts and trashing the Knicks....


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

Oak,, I have a couple things (again) to say. First, Vujanic is of course a perimter guy..most guards are. He is also great in the open court(or so I hear). Second, Lampe is not just a perimeter player. Yes, he can shoot very well from outside but it was his low post game that had the Knicks thinking of him as a pivot. They liked his versatility. I am not condemning the trade but just want to see things called out correctly. And for Truth(good to see you), I still disagree with your comparisons via stats. I think TT and VH may be shooting similiar % but TT has been crap when it counts....hell, he was even benched in favor of Anderson, which is not a good sign. Even you must agree with that. VH has been better when the game is on the line, stats notwithstanding. We just have to agree to disagree, I guess. I hope TT works out...I really do. I just don't feel like the club improved with the move and it pisses me off because it sure looked like we were going places before it...and that is why I ***** and moan. Oh yeah...One last thing. Being a Knick fan doesn't mean you have to agree with everything they do or can't follow another team. I also admire what the Suns are doing..also the Nuggets(I'm a big 'Melo fan). I do bleed Blue and Orange, though.


----------



## Perennial All Star (Aug 13, 2003)

> Being a Knick fan doesn't mean you have to agree with everything they do or can't follow another team. I also admire what the Suns are doing..also the Nuggets(I'm a big 'Melo fan). I do bleed Blue and Orange, though.


Right and being a Knicks fan doesn't also mean you can bash the team in every single post, win or lose. What does that really prove? Absolutely nothing. Other than your not a loyal fan.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Alfa,see what happens here is you have some posters who are exceedingly sarcastic,negative,angry and just like to critisice..look at the title of this post....I am neither a KVH or TT fan...But,I dont let my emotions completely rulr my objectivity...TT has not been playing that badly.In fact I am presently suprised...I knew very little of his game pre trade...But with all the bashing,I looked at his stats and found many posts to be innacurate...

Do you know how many 4th quarters KVH did not play???TT was getting burned by Pierce and Wilkens made the adjustment...I am not happy that the knicks have goone 3 and 7 since the trade..But as an objective fan,the team really lives with Stephon..His play has been way more erratic lately and that is the main problem...At least thats the way i see it....

And tell me this..We are in a NY KNICK forum..KVH Plays for the Bucks....Why is there a post "KVH shoots like crap again"????

Shouldnt that be in the Bucks forum....Same thing with Lampe,unless scoring 8 points in garbage time is earth shattering news


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> You admitted you are a Suns fan so why don't you go to their board and discuss Lampe, Eisley and McDyess all you want. And you can go the Bucks board too and talk about KVH 24/7.


that would seem like the normal thing to do


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>alphadog</b>!
> Oak,, I have a couple things (again) to say. First, Vujanic is of course a perimter guy..most guards are.


That's hooey. Most PGs worth a dang can penetrate and dish. he was drafted for and touted to be our starting PG. He was touted to be one of the top 3 or 4 PGs in Europe. Now that he's shown even there he's not that great a PG we're told he'd make a great SG. Maybe, maybe he can shoot threes like nobody's business. Whoopie. So can Vashon Lenard, Steve Kerr, and Trent Tucker. You want them over Marbury?

But that's still not even my point about him. I have two, really. 1) Enough with the perimeter shooters. Layden had a fetish for them. If he had the same penchant for inside muscle I'm convinced he'd have mustered a lot better than Spoon and Othella. To his credit he tried to get some respect with Dyess, but in the end, having given up two good big men, he gave up more than he got. 2) Just keep in mid we never had Vujanic. We traded his rights. He's been nothing but what they call in the tech trade, vaporware: A product that is announced in the press but never brought to market.




> Second, Lampe is not just a perimeter player. Yes, he can shoot very well from outside but it was his low post game that had the Knicks thinking of him as a pivot. They liked his versatility. I am not condemning the trade but just want to see things called out correctly.


We shall see what he becomes. Perhaps his youth is a benefit in that regard. Most Europeans arrive as finess players. The Knicks were supposedly developing him as a center but Isiah did not believe his training as such was on track. Not that I'd bet on the veracity of Isiah's words, but from what little I've seen from Lampe I have no cause to disagree But he is young enough that anything can happen.

Those guys just seem to grow up idolizing guys like Kukoc (the European Michael Jordan, if I remember correctly), not Karl Malone. Who'd you rather have?

Not that I have anything against the best of the Europeans or great finess players. They add a wonderful flavor to a good club. But I do think in this league you need them sparingly. Dallas, for instance, is overloaded, and needs some good ol' American muscle.

As for your position on the trade... I like it. You were leary and now you are cautiously optimistic. Tht's more than fair. Nobody has to like the trade, and I certainly don't assert Marbury is this clubs savior. I'm simply doing battle with the notion that Isiah was reckless with our youth. He spent some for a very high caliber starter (easily top 5, maybe top 2 at his position) but perhaps less than Layden spent for his overpaid and underproductive bench.

Do I wish we still had Lampe, the rights to Vaporware, an unprotected and a protected #1? Sure. But would I trade Marbury to Phoenix to get them back? Hell no!


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Oak,well said...And it is not like we dont have any youth....Marbury is only 27.TT is 27.Thats pretty young....Ill give layden credit for drafting Sweets and Isiah the foresight to keep him,though i think it was at Acguires urging....And who knows how good Demarr Johnson,24, may turn out..He was the 6th pick in the draft as a soph if i am not mistaken....Is Lampe any more talented than him???Time will tell.....

We have gotten much much younger this year...The only downside to the phoenix trade is not making the playoffs..Then we gave up a lottery pick...

Vujanic???We had his rights and NEVER got the opportunity to exercise them..No great loss....

I really dont understand all this commotion that we gave up all of our youth..The only youth we actually had that we gave up was Lampe and MAYBE a high or low lottery pick...Guess what,Marbury is worth it....


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> That's hooey. Most PGs worth a dang can penetrate and dish. he was drafted for and touted to be our starting PG. He was touted to be one of the top 3 or 4 PGs in Europe. Now that he's shown even there he's not that great a PG we're told he'd make a great SG. Maybe, maybe he can shoot threes like nobody's business. Whoopie. So can Vashon Lenard, Steve Kerr, and Trent Tucker. You want them over Marbury?


Huh? Horrible comparison. *Vujanic IS a penetrator.* That's why I compared him to Jamal Crawford, not Voshon Lenard.



> The only youth we actually had that we gave up was Lampe and MAYBE a high or low lottery pick...Guess what,Marbury is worth it....


Fast forward 3 years, will he be worth it then? Is he even worth it now? The Knicks have the highest payroll in league history, and their a 7th seed. The Knicks weren't exactly that far out of the playoffs before the Marbury trade. They were 9th or 10th before the trade. Marbury is worth 3 ranks in the standings? This is the future you want?

The Knicks have one chance of winning a championship in the Marbury era.

Kobe has to leave the Lakers as a free agent or go to jail. Payton has to opt out of his contract. Malone will retire at some point. That scenario pretty much leaves the Lakers no chioce but to trade Shaq and rebuild. And the only player with a worse contract than Allan Houston is Shaq. So maybe the Knicks will be able to trade Houston, Penny, a bunch of draft picks, and another player for Shaq. That's the only scenario I can actually see the Knicks winning a championship with Marbury. Assuming Shaq actually plays enough games during the regular season to get the Knicks to the playoffs.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Rashidi,this is one instance where i will take a bleaker view than you..I dont see ANY chance of the Knicks winning anytime soon...But I do think we are far better off than we were pre Marbury....I honestly dont see what we gave up...I admit,Lampe could be a player..You have far more patience than i,when it comes to Vujanic than I do...

Lets say we Kept the team as is.....Ward,Eisly,Dyss Lampe????What hind of draft pick would we have gotten??Would Vujanic have come over??Is he any good??

Thats doesnt thrill me either...And I have to tell you,I dreaded watching the Knicks the last 2 years and judging by last years attendence I wasnt alone...At least now,its exciting and we get to watch a great point guard...And i do think we could contend in the east next year,depending on the development of Sweetney and Naz....You know I blasted Sweets body but he has dropped 17 pounds and is an animal...


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> Fast forward 3 years, will he be worth it then? Is he even worth it now? The Knicks have the highest payroll in league history, and their a 7th seed. The Knicks weren't exactly that far out of the playoffs before the Marbury trade. They were 9th or 10th before the trade. Marbury is worth 3 ranks in the standings? This is the future you want?


I object to the insinuation in this and other posts that Layden had some sort of championship bound rebuild plan in place that Isiah rudely interrupted. You are so inconsitent. You shuffle your argument any which way just to support Layden and detract from Thomas. 

You say the Knicks should rebuild, yet pre-Isaih, when others suggested a real rebuild, you suggested that would be impossible in NY. Now you say that's what Layden was doing. Was he, in spite of him trading so many drafts for bench players? 

You suggest the Marbury deal has us mired in mediocrity for a decade with a huge payroll. If you you hadn't noticed, Layden had us mired in sub-mediocrity with a huge payroll.

And when Marbury and the Knicks were playing superbly you even suggested Layden was about to make the Marbury trade. Which is it, he was, or it was a bad trade that he'd never do?

Why don't you make things easy for a person like myself and pretend Dolan had no change of heart with Layden. Show us what steps you saw the mastermind Layden taking this year and next that would have brought us that illustrious championship you think we were so close to obtaining. I'd love to see what he had in store, and you seem to fancy that you are privvy to knowlege of his inner mind. I say that because what the rest of us saw was a bumbler who only told us "we like our team, we like our chances" or "Wait until McDyess gets back." Well we saw what happened when McDyess got back, a nice losing streak, an inflamed knee, and you proclaiming the Camby/Nene trade a success! 

So what were the future tricks he had up his sleve to keep the course and deliver the title he was so close to delivering? Keep player's age and contracts in mind. Then we can take it from there.

While you work on that let me revisit some of the highlights of Layden's tenure.

We saw Layden take a winning franchise fresh from the finals and turn them into lottery losers. We saw him sign a 30 year old Houston to a 7 year 100M+ contract. We saw him trade Chris Child's expiring contract and a first round draft picks for 45 year old Mark Jackson. We saw him trade a #1 and 2 pick for Othella (he traded Knicks pick D.Harvey for Strickland & then traded Strickland and another draft first rd pick for Harrington). We saw him trade Bogues & Rice for Eisley's contract and gave Anderson a 7yr deal while Rice's contract was ending in 04. We saw contracts of retiring players like Longley and LJ not come off the books because Layden filed the papers too late with the league office. And in the year of expiring contracts we saw him waive Travis Knight, even with his expiring contract!

This guy had no plan for the future, he just happen to be able to draft a few guys by landing in the lottery, and then he simply ran out of time to bury this club. If he were into getting under the cap he wouldn't have signed Houston long term, traded Spree for a longer VH contract, signed Spoon, or traded Rice for Eisley and Anderson. If he were into stockpiling youth he wouldn't have traded drafts for meaningless bench veterans.

Please respond, I really want to see how waiting for Anderson's, Eisley's, Houston's, Spoon's, etc, contracts to expire, and adding another foreign prospect center was gonna bring that title to NY.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Insightful post...Good luck in getting a meaningful responce.The only positive i can say about Layden is his drafting of Sweetney..He clearly saw something I didnt,and since Sweetney dropped 17 pounds he has been scary good......

My main issue with the posters you refer to is everything is NEGATIVE,be it the Knicks or references to players they have traded and 99% of it is completely subjective..Rarely will you get an objective responce that supports laydens case and more often than not some posters waver quite a bit on their arguements as you pointed out....

I will say this much....as an objective Knick fan,i am disgusted at their performance of late.In fact,since the KVH trade we have flat out stunk,but unlike others, I dont blame it on TT...Marbury has been very erratic,and its hurt us....

In my opinion,post Mcdyss there was no vision for where this team was going..Ward,Eisly,Spoon,Anderson,Harrington simply were not a very promising future..After watching the Knicks recently,i am not sure what the answer is.Believe it or not,I do think Vin Baker is going to help,and Sweetney has me very optimistic..Wilkens has got to find a way to exploit teams when they zone ot trap Marbury..Right now its killing us....

Oaks points are very valid...Constant bashing of the Knicks without any valid arguments to support the bashing is a waste of time...If you argument is the Knicks currently sukk,come up with some ideas we can debate.....Otherwise,whats the point????


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Of course I wont get a meaningful reply. Rashid will find some moot point to take issue with or make some smug coment about Penny Hardaway. But he consistently propogandizes to the minds of the youth here and I feel the need to counter balance.

Everyone is disgusted now, myself included. But I disagree tht it's all about this year. If we don't make the playoffs this year but win the east next year was it a loss? I thought the Marbury trade was worthwhile and I've mentally let this years pick go. Whatever Phoenix gets with it, god bless them. Enjoy. 

I liked the trade becase you need stars in this league to win and we had none. Houston and VH are nice players, but they had a very low ceiling. Bringing in a young star is worth a risk. Just as passing on the trade would have been a big risk. Either way this team was about to incur a risk. At least we finally got someone young and good. It's more of a sure thing than getting under the cap so you can hope to compete to get a good thing.

A lot of teams cleared cap room this year, but after Kobe, how many are better than Marbury?

You asked Rashidi what he does for work since you disagree so often. I know he does this much:

http://db.gamefaqs.com/console/ps2/file/espn_nba_basketball_rating.txt

He does an excellent job, and we always knew he was a number crunching stat man.

Ironically, you and I agree a lot, and it is I who am the creative type. I'm a photographer. I suck at numbers, but I work from the gut and use just enough "technique" to get the job done.

Here's how I look at the Marbury trade. Maybe with your calculus you can tell me which statistically wins.

I assume most people don't miss Dyess, Eisley and Ward, but they lament the loss of rights to Vapornic, Lampe, and 2 drafts. Marbury and Hardaway have been around for a while, so we can assign a certain value to them. I'll say Marbury is worth a $100 bill and Hardaway a $20. here's the deal: I'll give you two bills (marbury and Penny) worth $120 right now, or I'll give you four bills, who's value is unknown to both of us, that range in value from $1 to $100. Two of the bills (Lampe and this years draft (draft position unknown)) I'll give you now. One bill I'll give you only if my friend decides to come over (Vapornic) and one somewhere around 2009- 2010. If My friend come, and if you wait until 2010, you might end up with $400. Or you could end up with $4. Or if my friend never comes, and you don't like to wait until 2010 you might just get $2.

I go with the $120 now and get to work investing it. It may not make me the richest man in the world, but it's a good chunk to work with.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Well,you dont need me to tell you the outcome is based off probability of an event occuring and their expected payouts which equals expected return..And that is what we are really getting at..What is the expected return of the 4 player package that the knicks traded away.....

The difficult part of what you are trying to do is discount receiving a player 5 years in the future to bring it back to a "present" value..Its easy to do in finance by applying the appropriate discount factor,i.e. risk free rate,corporate yield etc...I am not sure how one values today, a supertar to be recieved 3 years from now.....Its an interesting topic...

If i am not mistaken,Boston waited a year for Larry Bird and SanAntonio waited 2-3 years for the Admiral....They obviously didnt discount the wait at all.....

The expected return for the 4 players has to avg 30 to be equal to the 120 vallue you attatched to marbury plus penny....
If the Knicks make the playoffs,I dont see that package adding up to that much

The one very true thing you said,is you need superstars to win it all,and preferably 2.....

off the top of my head the only teams to win an NBA title thee last 14 years are the lakers,Spurs,Rockets and Bulls......

Do these names ring a bell???

Shaq and Kobe
Tim Duncan and David Robinson
Hakeem 
Mj and scottie

Hakeem snuck in because Mj was out..Other than that,you need BIG man and a sidekick or a guy named Michael..The Knicks clearly had neither....Now they have marbury..Get the big man and the rest shall follow


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

I agree, the value of the package the Knicks delt is unnown right now. It could be good, but it could also be bad. As a said before, based on what the Knicks have done before in the draft, I would be more inclined to believe that the package would be worth less than Marbury plus Hardaway. At least we have a known quality to builld around instead of betting on an unknown variable. 

And Turth, I think Hakeem did have some support too. Clyde Drexler (sp?) was a great player during that time period, and Sir Charles was on the second Rockets team if i remember correctly. I might be wrong though, since I am getting this right off the top of my head.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> And Turth, I think Hakeem did have some support too. Clyde Drexler (sp?) was a great player during that time period, and Sir Charles was on the second Rockets team if i remember correctly. I might be wrong though, since I am getting this right off the top of my head.


Charles definetly never won a championship,thats for sure...I dont think Drexler was on the championshipp teams either...Definetly not when they beat the Knicks..that was cassel,kenny smith ,horry and thorpe...Not a great squad,but MJ wasnt around...

maybe drexler was on the other team,I think rashidi will know


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

He got his championship with the rockets.

http://www.clutchfans.net/teams.cfm?Season=1995


Smith, Clyde, Whorry, Hakeem, Thorpe, and Sam.


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

P.S.


Ewing was better than Hakeem.


----------



## Tapseer (Jun 13, 2002)

Rashidi, KVH 0-8 in the 2nd galf of the Knicks Bucks game. TT hitting clutch ft at the end of the game really must get your goat. I must admit you have tough skin, which is cool. You can take it and dish it. Got to respect that, but for one day your wonder boy didn't come thru, though he was hardly alone in this game.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Ewing was better than hakeem???

Surely you jest


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

*For once rashidi is RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

Hey rashidi,i had no idea you could tell the future...How did you know KVH would have a donut in the second half and get TOASTED bt TT.......

Thats the first reall accurate post ever by you..Thanks for the great post

Man that KVH hides in crunchtime!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

*Re: For once rashidi is RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



> Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!
> Hey rashidi,i had no idea you could tell the future...How did you know KVH would have a donut in the second half and get TOASTED bt TT.......
> 
> Thats the first reall accurate post ever by you..Thanks for the great post
> ...


No I don't jest.

And where were you when KVH saved us a few times at the buzzer? Still dancing on spree's nuts?


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> Still dancing on spree's nuts?




LOL...i am not sure if you are saying I like Spree or bashed him....

But you sure do like talking and thinking about guys jumping on one anothers nuts..Something you want to come out with and say???Its cool man,whatever floats your boat....

BTW,if you think Ewing was better than Hakeem,you have totally lost it..care to present your case????

Lets go big boy


----------



## Tapseer (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Re: For once rashidi is RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



> Originally posted by <b>Knicksbiggestfan</b>!
> 
> 
> No I don't jest.
> ...


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> Wow man, that is kind of harsh, just for a difference of opinion


welcome to the world of KnicksBiggestFan..say anything contrary to what he thinks and watch him erupt.....

I think the" i dont jest part" was in reference to the Ewing vs Hakeem comparison...He blurted out that ewing was better than Hakeem and i replied surely you jest..He gets extra aggressive when he makes those type of statements and you call him on it and he knows the numbers dont back him up....

Seriously KBF have you looked at the Ewing (hands of stone) vs The Dream comparitive stats??......take a good look at the playoff numbers and take a peak at rebounds,bloxk shots and assists as well


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: For once rashidi is RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



> SF - Tim Thomas
> C - Nazr Mohammed
> PF - Vin Baker
> SG - Allan Houston
> ...


I wouldn't be so quick to cut KT out of the line-up. Since the trade dealine he's played lousy, but before that, like in that stretch where he made like 28 consecutiver jumpers with a broken finger on his hooting hand, he was instrumental to our earlier success. He was our most reliable mid-range shooter.

And in yesterdays game, KT's technical was the turning point. He got umped and everyone turned it up. The turnaround was sparked by I think two consecutive blocks, plus a layup and an assist, and then some.

I like what some of the other guys bring to the table but I wouldn't count ol' crazy eyes out just yet.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Man he does have some wide open crazy eyes........

Oak,this this sweetney has enormous talent and upside.......
Not only does he get after the ball,but he is REALLY athletic...He had a spin move in the 4th quarter where he penetrated from inside the key and spun and missed a layup....You can tell from that one move,he has what it takes...Its up to him,how good he wants to be....


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

I know, I'm on sweet's wagon too. And I'm one of the few that still likes Mutombo. If nothing else, we get to sit Othella. 

But I'm not willing to base my team around Baker. I'd prefer to stay with the development of sweets and naz and add baker as needed. i know how good he looked yesterday, and i know how high (pun) is his upside. but his downside is equally low. I don't want our team addicted (pun) to him only to suffer withdrawls in the post season. Sure, give him 15-25 mpg, but don't start him and don't sell the farm for him.


----------



## Tapseer (Jun 13, 2002)

I'm saying that if Vin Baker continues to play like he did against the Bucks, you are going to have to start him. He will turn out to be your best front court player barring relapse. Kurt came off the bench before, he'll be all right. I just like the idea of Baker being a PF rather than C. I think that type of line up makes us more potent on offense.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> I just like the idea of Baker being a PF rather than C


OOOOOHHHHH,i dont like that.......I dont mind baker splitting time wit Naz,but I dont want Baker taking one second of Sweetneys time at PF....

I am telling you,this kid is going to be a monster.....That spin move yesterday is all i needed to see...Hes has some serious athletic skills,tremendous instincts and a BIG #$%$ body.....

Oak,I agree ...Deke should be getting time ahead of harrington..Thats just not right...

regarding baker,the big risk is he initially plays well,we become somewhat dependent on him and he hits the bottle again...


----------



## SavSicc (Feb 26, 2004)

I hope Vin Baker Get the starting Center job. Cause that guy can't play a Knick of defense HAHAHA *****azz Knicks


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

His D actually isnt that bad and who is there to worry about in the east at the center slot,other tha jermaine oneal and Z??


----------



## Tapseer (Jun 13, 2002)

Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!


OOOOOHHHHH,i dont like that.......I dont mind baker splitting time wit Naz,but I dont want Baker taking one second of Sweetneys time at PF....

I wouldn't want Baker to swallow Sweetney's minutes either. Sweetney has been playing outstanding, but allowing that, if Baker brings game like he has been, you have to put him out there too. I was definitely against signing the alcoholic, but he look like he has copme ready to play. He grabbed a rebound, dribbled up the courtdrove from the left side of the floor and drew a foul. He just walked in off the street Friday! The man has skills. LW even said he might start him tomorrow. I say let LW work it out between Kurt and Nazr. When Mutombo gets healthy again, LW will have a nice problem trying to work him in also. I rather have this problem than not having any bodies at all. I mean if you look at all these interchangeable players on the frontline and looking at our team as a whole, it's a shame these guys didn't have a training camp and season together. We're deep and talented.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

I am VERY suprised how good Vin looks..I am not sure if I would start him only because that second unit of Penny and Anderson can really stink it up on offense....can you imagine our offense with Mookie,Penny,Shandon and Naz or Deke???The only good news is sweetney would pull down 20 offensive rebounds in 20 minutes with that squad shooting


----------



## Tapseer (Jun 13, 2002)

It would be a good defensive unit, and don't forget about Kurt. I'm not saying that is what we should do, just wishful thinking. Vin could come off the bench but with him starting. you're just opening things up more for Marbury, TT and H20. A real low post player defenses would have to double. It's still early talking about Vin right now, but his play during the first half against the Bucks, his overall game was exciting. Taking nothing away from Nazr or Kurt, Vin did his thing. Frontcourt depth is excellent now, with a lot of variety in people's game. We can hacka a whoever, we still have another big guy off the bench to play. All this team is lacking is time. For players to get to know one another, for cohesion, to get this mix all on the same page. My #1 question is who is the guy on the team who puts foot to when the team plays lackadaisical like they did in the first half? Who is the guy on the team with the whip?


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: For once rashidi is RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*



> Originally posted by <b>Tapseer</b>!
> 
> 
> > Originally posted by <b>Knicksbiggestfan</b>!
> ...


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

I actually think that aside from perhaps a two year period where Hakeem peaked, won the MVP and those chamionships, he and Ewing were quite even. Lot's of their offensive moves were the same. Hakeem was more mobile defensively though. But they were not night and day different.

Van Gundy made a good point about their matchup in the finals. The Rockets doubled Ewing routinely while Hakeem was played straight up exclusively (remeber Riley's mano a mano thing) often by Mason. The odds were in favor of Hakeem mounting better stats. And if the dream were so superior defensively, why was HE the one getting the help?


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>son of oakley</b>!
> I actually think that aside from perhaps a two year period where Hakeem peaked, won the MVP and those chamionships, he and Ewing were quite even. Lot's of their offensive moves were the same. Hakeem was more mobile defensively though. But they were not night and day different.
> 
> Van Gundy made a good point about their matchup in the finals. The Rockets doubled Ewing routinely while Hakeem was played straight up exclusively (remeber Riley's mano a mano thing) often by Mason. The odds were in favor of Hakeem mounting better stats. And if the dream were so superior defensively, why was HE the one getting the help?


A true Knick fan. I tend to argue that Ewing was a better defender, and that Hakeem was a better post player, I forgot to mention on the Quadruple doubles ewing put up. Well I shouldn't say all. But how many other people do that in post season competition?


I forgot all about that Van Gundy comment. Now that I think about it though we did Play Hakeem man up, and Ewing was doubled by Hakeem and Cheap shot rob? Right?


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> I actually think that aside from perhaps a two year period where Hakeem peaked, won the MVP and those chamionships, he and Ewing were quite even. Lot's of their offensive moves were the same. Hakeem was more mobile defensively though. But they were not night and day different.


Hakeem's hands were VASTLY better than Ewings. Hakeem blow by other centers, could actually make a pass (much less catch one), and was a better defensive player. Hakeem wasn't defensive player of the year for his 4 blocks a game. He was defensive player of the year for his 2 steals per game, easily tops among centers. It is conceded by most that Hakeem ranks in the top 5 centers of all-time (depending on your opinion of Shaq), while Ewing is somewhere around 8-10, behind Shaq, Moses Malone, and David Robinson.



> Van Gundy made a good point about their matchup in the finals. The Rockets doubled Ewing routinely while Hakeem was played straight up exclusively (remeber Riley's mano a mano thing) often by Mason. The odds were in favor of Hakeem mounting better stats. And if the dream were so superior defensively, why was HE the one getting the help?


Because Tomjanovich wasn't an idiot. Who else did the Knicks have besides Ewing? Those Knicks remind me of the 02-03 Spurs. Nothing without Duncan. The strategy certainly panned out since Starks went 2-18 in the final game. The Knicks could get away with man to man because every player on the court was a strong defensive player. Kenny Smith and Vernon Maxwell were not strong defensive players.

http://hoopsanalyst.com/ewingfaq.htm


----------



## Tapseer (Jun 13, 2002)

Yeah, it might be asking alot for us to put so much faith and hope onto Vin Baker, but he is on our team now. Vin can have a relapse, fall off the wagon and go down the drain, but in the meantime I'm going with what we have. I hated to give up Lampe, Vujanic and the draft picks. Prior to IT getting here, that's all we had to look forward to. As a matter of fact, prior to IT, I thought the Knicks were winning TOO MUCH, blowing our chances at getting a good pick in the lottery (ala last year). With IT making the trade, and the other moves he made, he bought excitement back to an otherwise meaningless season. Yeah, once in a while I think about what might have been if we kept our picks and draft choices, but we'll never know what will be until it happens. We can harp on it then. I feel that this team as constituted now is very strong, and won't be knocked out in the first rd. And EVEN if we did, this team will only be that much stronger after having a full traing camp together next year. Even better than if we kept our pick, vujanic and Lampe. Who knows what may happen this summer with sign and trades, veteran signings. Maybe IT finds a way to recoup that first rd pick. We don't know what's going to happen this summer. We can be sure IT will keep it hot though!


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> Hakeem's hands were VASTLY better than Ewings. Hakeem blow by other centers, could actually make a pass (much less catch one), and was a better defensive player. Hakeem wasn't defensive player of the year for his 4 blocks a game. He was defensive player of the year for his 2 steals per game, easily tops among centers. It is conceded by most that Hakeem ranks in the top 5 centers of all-time (depending on your opinion of Shaq), while Ewing is somewhere around 8-10, behind Shaq, Moses Malone, and David Robinson.


Thank you Mr Rashidi....I think hakeem is vastly better than Ewing..Ewings hands were terrible.The only part of his game that was better than hakeems was his Jumper..Other than that,its all Hakeem


----------



## Tapseer (Jun 13, 2002)

I really don't like when people pick on Ewing's limitations. When He was coming ou tof Georgrtown, he was the HOYA DESTROYA. He was a defensive player, unlike Hakeem who attended Houston and was a member of PHI SLAMMA JAMMA. Ewing worked very hard on his offensive game in the pros. I would take Ewing over any former Knick, over Shaq, Duncan or anybody else. He bought a lot to NY, and a lot of people never appreciated what he bought to the table EVERY night. Not complaining about a thing, and taking care of business. Sore knees and all.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Hakeem did have better hands, was a better passer and played marginally better D mostly due to quicker foot speed. But Ewings bad hands really didn't show up until his latter years. I think Dream just peaked a little higher and lasted a hair longer.

But boith teams were carried by their man in the middle and at that time the power was in the east. Ewing had the higher hurdles to jump, and with less helping hands. In '94 the diffrence maker in the finals was none other than the punk rookie, Cassel. He came from nowhere sticking daggars in our heart. And still and all, homecourt and an off night by Starks was all that stood between the Knicks and glory. And as noted, in '95 Hakeem had smooth Drex, with his hollywood looks and game, while Patrick was a finger roll away from taking the east with ragtag lunchpail group from the CBA.

What really took it out of Patrick was the broken wrist and the lockout season. Patrick was the wrong guy to be in that position with the players union. It occupied his time, he's always been bad with the media, he put on weight, it was all downhill from there. Still he came up big in that crucial game against Miami, and whenever asked to.

In the end I do give Hakeem the edge but not by all that much. Early in their careers I thought Patrick was the better of the two. Hakeem just aged well. So too with Mr Robinson. Clearly he had the physique of a god, but he was plagued with criticism for being dispassionate about the game -- too many interests: the navy, the piano, etc, -- something Patrick's worst critics could never accuse him of. Yes, Robinson was better defensively and posted equal offensive numbers, but the Knicks were always a force to be rekoned with under Ewing's tutelage, with minimal supporting cast, while the Spurs were bums until Duncan came along. Patricks passion for the game, his competitive spirit, was much fiercer than Robinson, and with that he willed his team further.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

I agree that the Dream was a better player in his later years, but from what I have heard before Ewing and the Dream were pretty closely matched during their primes. And the West may be the best conference in the NBA now, but in the 1990's, at least the mid 1990's, the EAST was the dominate conference, if only because of one player, Jordan. The Dream didn't have to go through a great Bulls team in the West, but Ewing did. I think it is a bit harsh to say that Ewing was playing in the easier conference.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> while Patrick was a finger roll away from taking the east with ragtag lunchpail group from the CBA.


Unlikely. Shaq and the Magic stomped Ewing and the Knicks every time. The season series that year was 3-1.

And a ragtag lunchpail group? Mason and Starks had been in the league quite a while by then, with Starks coming off a 19 ppg season and Mason winning 6th man of the year in 95.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Not only did Shaq stomp Ewing,But the Dream made Shaq look foolish...I assume you guys watched the Dream play..he was a phenomenal athlete,incredible footwork and had some of the best post moves ever for a big man....Taking nothing away from Ewing,the Dream just had more tools and HANDS


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> And a ragtag lunchpail group? Mason and Starks had been in the league quite a while by then, with Starks coming off a 19 ppg season and Mason winning 6th man of the year in 95.


I don't know how you define lunchpail players. I consider them guys who come into the league unheralded, with little fanfare and possibly not the best skillset, but who scratch and claw to respectability.

Starks was bagging groceries at Safeway before the Knicks signed him. He was considered a defense-first player with streaky offense. Still, he left a game with a broken nose only to come back in the second half wearing a mask and hitting 5 threes. Mason I think was playing in Turkey. He had one of the strangest combination of skills you'd ever find in the league: an enforcer's body and mentality but with decent ball handlig skills, and a very limited linedrive shot. He was totally an "attitude" player. Charles Oakley, from the "illustrious" Virginia Tech, may have been the best Knick rebounder of all time... with a 2" vertical leap... and considered one of the best help defenders in the league. A decent 18 foot shot but no post moves. But he was Mr Intangiables, first to take a charge, dive on the ground or into the stands for loose balls, first to show up to practice. A no nonsense put-up or shut-up guy who finally kicked some sense into the punk head of Vince Carter (and is overbearing mother) to show up and play in the playoffs.

Those guys were all lunchpailers of limited pedigre and skills, who gutted out games with grit, commitment, passion, and a win-or-bust mentality.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Those guys were all lunchpailers of limited pedigre and skills, who gutted out games with grit, commitment, passion, and a win-or-bust mentality.


And what exactly is your point? Are you trying to say the Knicks overachieved? I don't get it.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> 
> And what exactly is your point? Are you trying to say the Knicks overachieved? I don't get it.


I think he is trying to say that the Dream had more talent surrounding him compared to Ewing, correct? Hakeem had an actual star in Drexler helping him while Ewing had to carry his team of overachievers on his back. Therefore, Ewing had a tougher path to the finals, correct?


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

am i mistaken,or did dream have drexler for only one of the championships...

i dont remeber drexler when the Rockets beat the knicks

wasnt it Cassel,Kenny Smith,horry Dream and otis thorpe???I cant remember....

Ewings biggest problem wasnt his teammates,it was the dam bulls...

Ewing had the talent to beat eveyone but the bulls..And dont forgwet,he got verrry unlucky twice..Once when he had to sit out for standing near midcourt for the Ward/PJ fight.....We lost that series after being up...


And worse was the team with LJ,Camby and co when he got hurt..I think we would have won it all if he was healthy


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Rashidi and Dracono3 are both right. My points are that the Knicks overachieved thhrough hustle and detrmination, and that Ewing was a large part of that. He had more of it than Robinson and went futher than him in their respective primes. 

And that Hakeem had that 2nd great star in Drexler for his 2nd championship in '95. And that in '94, in what may have been Hakkeem's best year, when Ewing and Dream went head to head with about equal supporting casts, the reason the Knicks came up short was not because Hakeem bettered Ewing, but because the Rockets supporting cast was more clutch. Cassel came from nowhere with daggars, Horry with big block in game 6, and starks no-show in game 7.

To those of you who think Hakeem was vastly beter than Ewing, he was not the difference maker in that series.


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

I'll get in on this after exams. Anyone who doesn't think John Starks was ragtag needs to watch the bag boy play. 


I love his fire, and his never quit attitude, but there is a huge reason he holds an NBA record for most 3 pointers ATTEMPTED during a playoff series.


Ewing did more, with less, in a more difficult conference.


And Shaq owning Ewing...... I'll get that one later.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

Olajuwon averaged 26.9 ppg and 9.1 rpg in the series against the Knicks. I don't have his assist averages, but it should be noted that his line in game 7 was...

25 points, 10 rebounds, 7 assists.

How many times did Ewing even have 7 assists in a game?

How do you think these guys like Sam Cassell came from "nowhere"? Maybe it's because somebody was giving them open looks?

If you put Olajuwon on the Knicks, and Ewing on the Rockets, Olajuwon's team still would have won.


----------



## Perennial All Star (Aug 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> Olajuwon averaged 26.9 ppg and 9.1 rpg in the series against the Knicks. I don't have his assist averages, but it should be noted that his line in game 7 was...
> 
> 25 points, 10 rebounds, 7 assists.
> ...


Are you seriously a Knick fan? You question the team and management and now you go after a legend like Patrick Ewing. And you still haven't responded about how great KVH played Sunday night in the 2nd half. Just leave you fool...


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Lets go RASHIDI...Its me and you together!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My man Oak has teamed up with KnicksBiggestFan,and your mortal enemy NYKfan123 is taking shots at us...

I know where KBF is going on the Ewing thing...Early on Ewing owned Shaq..But what he DOES not know,later on,Shaq schooled Pat so badly,that mase and Oak had to cover him.It was sad..And I am a huge Ewing fan,but Ewings game was pretty limited offesively....He really had no post game,and thats if he didnt fumble the ball..He was great,but Dream was greater

I got your back Rashidi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Are you seriously a Knick fan? You question the team and management and now you go after a legend like Patrick Ewing.


Legend yes. But you'd have to be an idiot to consider Ewing a top 5 all-time center.

How many times did he win MVP or Defensive Player of the year? How many times was he even on the All-NBA First Team?


----------



## Perennial All Star (Aug 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> 
> Legend yes. But you'd have to be an idiot to consider Ewing a top 5 all-time center.
> ...


He's top 7 or 8 but below 5, point is Olajuwon isn't better than him, even if he did win 2 titles.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

I love these guys that think all Knick fans have to be blind to anybody being a better player..coach..anything. The Dream was better than Ewing in every way. Probably not a GM in the NBA that wouldn't take him first ahead of Ewe. In that case,second ain't bad, though. And by the way, those Knick teams under Riley were just a bunch of muggers really, but that is the only way they could win and Riley knew it. He was aware that they couldn't possibly call all the fouls or the game wouldn't have enough guys to finish. They were short on perimeter players and athleticism. It was a credit to them that they found a way to win with what they had...which wasn't much, really. Patrick was a warrior.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

Breaking News.

Patrick Ewing > Shaquille O'Neal.

It must be true if Ewing is so clearly better than Olajuwon.

Hakeem Olajuwon
*6 time All-NBA First team (86-87, 87-88, 88-89, 92-93, 93-94, 96-97)*
3 time All-NBA Second team (85-86, 89-90, 95-96)
3 All-NBA Third team (90-91, 94-95, 98-99)

Patrick Ewing
*1 time All-NBA First team (89-90)*
6 time All-NBA Second Team (87-88, 88-89, 90-91, 91-92, 92-93, 96-97

Read it and weep.

12 times Olajuwon was voted at least 3rd best center in the league. 6 of those times he was voted best center in the league. Ewing was voted the best all of one time.

David Robinson
*4 time All-NBA First Team (90-91, 94-95, 91-92, 95-96)*
2 time All-NBA Second Team (93-94, 97-98)
4 time All-NBA Third Team (89-80, 92-93, 99-00, 00-01)

Robinson was voted at least 3rd best 10 times, and the best 4 times. Ewing was voted the best all of one time.

Shaquille O'Neal
*5 time All-NBA First Team: (97-98, 99-00, 00-01, 01-02, 02-03)*
2 time All-NBA Second Team (94-95, 98-99)
3 time All-NBA Third Team (93-94, 95-96, 96-97)

10 times Shaq has been voted at least 3rd best center in the league, 5 of those times he was voted best center in the league. Ewing was voted the best all of one time.

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
*10 time All-NBA First Team (70-71, 71-72, 72-73, 73-74, 75-76, 76-77, 79-80, 80-81, 83-84, 85-86)*
5 time All-NBA Second Team (69-70, 77-78, 78-79, 82-83, 84-85)

15 times Kareem was voted at least 2nd best center in the league. He was voted the best 10 times. The 3rd team did not exist in the Kareem era, so you'll have to forgive him for missing out on those (then again, Ewing was never 3rd team either). Once again, Ewing was voted the best all of one time.

Of the 5 centers I just listed, guess which one has never been Most Valuable Player? And guess which one coincidently has no rings?

Don't worry, I expect you to ignore all the facts because Ewing was a Knick. That's all that matters in the eyes of a fanboy.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

And LMAO, you're such a tool. Ewing was HEAVILY criticized by *Knick fans* for a good portion of his career. Why do you think he demanded the trade? I am stating the obvious, that Ewing was not better than Olajuwon, and you're telling me I'm a horrible fan. Go talk to every other person who was a Knick fan 8 years ago.

I was one of the few who did not criticize Ewing, because I thought most of the hypocritical criticisms were unfounded. Fans wanted him to have a lesser role in the offense, and Ewing's shots went down every year, and they still *****ed about him taking too many shots. He went from 18 shots per game to 13 shots per game in only 3 years.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

another horrible game for tim, played terrible in OT and almost lost us the game. Man, Keith is in all of my nightmares, i wish we still had him.


----------



## Perennial All Star (Aug 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PennyHardaway</b>!
> another horrible game for tim, played terrible in OT and almost lost us the game. Man, Keith is in all of my nightmares, i wish we still had him.


Tell me about it. I mean the man flat out sucks in crunch time.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

NYKfan123,

The Dream was better than Ewing in almost every way,except his jumper from ouside of 18....The tjing that bugged me about Ewing was he never(rarely) went strong to the hoop..All his moves usually ended up with him fading away...

Dream was an incredible low post player


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!
> Lets go RASHIDI...Its me and you together!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> My man Oak has teamed up with KnicksBiggestFan,and your mortal enemy NYKfan123 is taking shots at us...
> ...


Early on Ewing owned Shaq, but was owned later on. That is true, but Ewing is also older than Shaq by quite a bit. When Shaq started owning Ewing, Ewing was getting old. He just wasn't that great a player anymore. I don't think you can really judge both players because of the big age difference. When Ewing was at his prime, Shaq just entered the league. When Shaq was at this prime, Ewing as getting really old. You look at Hakeem and Robinson later in their careers. The last few years they played, they were just role players, not superstars anymore. Shaq started dominating them too, but that doesn't mean they were really worse then Shaq (IMO). Of course Shaq dominates most people so thats probably not that good an example. My point is that superstar players, especially centers, turn into roleplayers when they get really old. We should just look at what happened in their later years and forget about the years before.

Granted, the Dream probably had better physical abilities and hands, but the thing I love about Ewing was his warrior mentality, and IMO that counts as a lot.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!
> am i mistaken,or did dream have drexler for only one of the championships...
> 
> i dont remeber drexler when the Rockets beat the knicks
> ...


Drexler was with the Rockets for the second championship season. And yes I agree that Ewings biggest problem was that he was in the Eastern Conference with the Bulls, whoalways found a way to frustrate us Knicks fans somehow. However, you have to admit that Ewing had a less than steller supporting class around him compared to most championship teams.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Ewing had a great cast the year camby was there with Spree,Houston and LJ...Unfortunetly he got hurt...Overall he had an average cast of teammates and Pat Riley who for some odd reason refused to let Renaldo Blackman play while Starks bricked iit


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Ewing had a great cast the year camby was there with Spree,Houston and LJ...Unfortunetly he got hurt...Overall he had an average cast of teammates and Pat Riley who for some odd reason refused to let Renaldo Blackman play while Starks bricked iit


Blackman was not even in the playoff rotation. Hubert Davis would have gotten the minutes.

As for 98-99, Ewing had a great cast that year because he wasn't the focal point of the offense for the first time ever. However, even if he were healthy, the Knicks still would have fallen hard to the Spurs. Ewing was not even better than an aging David Robinson at that point, much less Tim Duncan. Don't forget that Camby's emergence came to fruition because of Ewing's injury.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> Don't forget that Camby's emergence came to fruition because of Ewing's injury.


Thank you for bringing that up...Everyone raved about Van Gundy,yet you and I know that if Ewing didnt get hurt Camby would have NEVER gotten off that bench..Yet van Gundy gets all the credit for that move...

Dont agree with you on a healthy Ewing playing alongside Camby...That would have made a HUGE difference vs the admiral and Duncan..Of course we will never know

For whatever reasons,?(maybe injuries) Riles never gave Blackman a shot...I mean Hubert Davis????


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Ewing was well past his prime that season. He had the wrist injury and came into camp out of shape after the lockout fiasco, and his less than stellar handling of the media as player rep. I think that position took a lot out of him.

He was still good enough to play even ball with Alonzo Mourning, don't get me wrong, he could bring it hard when needed, but he was into second or even third-option mode by then.

But from what we saw of him in the Miami series that year it's clear he could have made an impact against the Spurs. Enough to defeat them I don't know, but an impact for sure.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>son of oakley</b>!
> Ewing was well past his prime that season. He had the wrist injury and came into camp out of shape after the lockout fiasco, and his less than stellar handling of the media as player rep. I think that position took a lot out of him.
> 
> He was still good enough to play even ball with Alonzo Mourning, don't get me wrong, he could bring it hard when needed, but he was into second or even third-option mode by then.
> ...


Agreed, Ewing would have made a difference for sure. The Knicks couldh ave pushed the series to 6 or 7 games, and would have had a chance to win it all. Sure the possibilities aren't that high, but they would have been there if Ewing played IMO.


----------

