# Who stays-who goes?



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

Kiyaman got me thinking when he asked who would be next years starters. 

Marbury and JC in the backcourt. Collins first off the bench.

A healthy Qrich at the 3. Balkman plenty of time.

Lee at the 4

Curry at center. New guy the backup.

The development of the young guys has led me to think maybe Garnett could push us to contender status within 2 years. If he could be attained without losing Lee, Collins, and Balkman. I'd do it. Might have to acquire some draft picks to sweeten the pot. Could Frye, Nate, and 3 first rounders do it? I'm thinking along the lines of the Suns' picks. Depending on fillers, it could be a very good team.

Curry, Garnett, Qrich, JC, and Marbury

Lee, Collins, Balkman and who ever


----------



## Cager (Jun 13, 2002)

Keep Curry and Lee. Everyone else should be used to trade for some players who know how to play winning basketball. The Knicks don't need the flashy, sometimes brillamnty players that has helped us continue to lose games. Nobody on the team can be considered a winner. They have all played too many seasons as losers.


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

3 first round picks?....wow...some people never learn


once again we should mortgage our future for an aging veteran past his prime. These are the same quick fixes management has been trying to do for years and look where it has gotten us.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

ChosenFEW said:


> 3 first round picks?....wow...some people never learn
> 
> 
> once again we should mortgage our future for an aging veteran past his prime. These are the same quick fixes management has been trying to do for years and look where it has gotten us.


I definitely co-sign with this post. Let's stop trying to go for veterans with so much mileage it will make a 64 Chevy blush. It's time to rebuild, and we should have done so during Ewing's last year with the Knicks.


----------



## shakespeare (Nov 2, 2006)

At this point, I am for whatever it takes to make the team a perennial contender. So I cannot really say who stays, or who goes because if a good deal came along, I think IT should bite.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*As I said....*

in my post. I expect that Garnett would make us contenders for the next 4-5 years. You got a better plan? I'd love to hear it. Plus Chosen, I said we would ACQUIRE picks to use, not our own future picks. Twinkie has suggested numerous times about the possibility. of securing late first rounders from the Suns. Since we would retain Lee, Collins, and Balkman, along with Curry, I fail to see how it is mortgaging the future. Please explain rather than just criticize.


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

francis - 20 mill
marb- 20 mill
garnett - 20mill

x2 for being over the cap = 120 million only on 3 players.... unless the timberwolves take back 1 or a few of our large contracts which isn't going to happen.


Come on now, let's get back to reality.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Chosen.....*

Perhaps you are unaware that 60 mil comes off the books this summer with an additional 40 mil expiring in 09.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

*Re: Chosen.....*



alphaorange said:


> Perhaps you are unaware that 60 mil comes off the books this summer with an additional 40 mil expiring in 09.


And the Knicks will still have the highest payroll in the league by default.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*So who cares?*

If you put out a contender, nobody will be complaining about the payroll, including Dolan, so what's your point? You don't get points for being under the cap and sucking.


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

The players that should be got rid of are Nate Robnson,Channing Frye,Steve Francis and Jared Jeffries

Jeffries is the worst high profile(ish) player to ever don a knicks uniform and should be given away for ANYTHING

Francis is so selfish it defies belief,he and steph detest each other and it will never work out,if crawford is the choice at SG then francis must leave.


To the guy who said Garnett is past his prime then my reply is .... go watch baseball because your obviously not watching the nba....garnett is the best player at his position and a top 2 in the whole nba along with kobe

There is zero chance of getting Garnett without giving up David Lee/others so that idea should be scratched,although myself personally i would give up Lee is a heartbeat because he will never have the offensive prowess that garnett offers,however i dont believe the knicks will take that chance so its a moot point.

Nate "the jerk" Robinson is just not good enough and his attitude blows,he`s just a sideshow that distracts from the real business of winning a championship and should be dealt for future pick(s)


----------



## Wishbone (Jun 10, 2002)

now I'm no Knicks fan... but living in the area and having watched enough of the games this year... It's obvious that IT put together a very flawed roster. It wasn't so obvious at the beginning of the season, but it's clearly not going to work for the future.

who has to go?
Nate Robinson:
the guy's got Napoleon complex big time, and it's only hurting the team when he goes and 'thugs' it up, trying to prove himself out there. Sure he hits some big shots, but not enough to be a real offensive powerhouse. Simply put, he's not conducive to winning basketball
Quentin Richardson:
Wrong place at the wrong time. Q can be a productive player, but he's just not a fit for the system the Knicks are running. and since he's not really a hustle guy, doesn't play the defense, get the rebounds or make the plays to be useful, he's just not going to work on this team
Steve Francis:
Simply can't share the ball or the playing time with Marbury. again just the wrong fit.


Should go

Jerome James:
No explanation needed... the problem is how do you unload that contract?
Jared Jeffries:
Not so bad, but not living up to his contract either. Perhaps redundant with Balkman on the roster. could be unloaded as filler
Malik Rose:
Has had a few good games as of late, but he'll always be undersized, isn't getting any younger and is immentintly replaceable

Should stay

Eddy Curry:
Not convinced he's a franchise player, but Zeke gave up a lot to get him, so for the time being he stays
Marbury:
Actually started coming around to be the player he should be before he got hurt. If he can pick that up where he left off next here, he becomes a Must Stay player.
Balkman:
Proved the critics wrong to some extent. What can I say? He's a useful player to have, gets some of the dirty work done and doesn't run his mouth.
Channing Frye:
His game didn't show any improvement over last year... but he's still 6'11" and can contribute in three main aspects: scoring, rebounding, defense. May not ever be a star, but worth having around.
Mardy Collins:
Nice player. Plays within himself for the most part. Does what he needs to to contribute. Doesn't hurt the team with his play or with his mouth. Could be the ballhandler/play-maker the Knicks need on the second team.

Must Stay
Jamal Crawford:
This guy should be the leader of the team. Was on a tear before he got hurt, and really has the best offensive game of anyone on the roster.
David Lee:
Another leader. The guy hustles like you'd want everyone on your team to, and manages to be in the right spot more often then not. IT's true gem of a draft pick.


the rest of the roster is pretty much just filler anyway, so it just doesn't matter what happens with them


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

www.starbury.com said:


> To the guy who said Garnett is past his prime then my reply is .... go watch baseball because your obviously not watching the nba....garnett is the best player at his position and a top 2 in the whole nba along with kobe


did i say garnett was trash? NO....did i say garnett is done or useless? NO.....if you actually think garnetts best years are yet to come you are [in larry browns voice] "DELUSIONAL". garnetts best years have past. His peak was the 03-04 season and if you look at his stats they have steadily gone down...and will continue to. 

if you would take your Kevin Garnett panties out your *** maybe you could see that without throwing a hissy fit


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

every1 but francis cato frye and robinson stays


----------



## Truknicksfan (Mar 25, 2005)

> Quentin Richardson:
> Wrong place at the wrong time. Q can be a productive player, but he's just not a fit for the system the Knicks are running. and since he's not really a hustle guy, doesn't play the defense, get the rebounds or make the plays to be useful, he's just not going to work on this team


Actually hes a pretty good defender(one of best on team), he reounds very well and before he got hurt he had a time were he was really usefull to us.

But thats where we run into the problem, he may NEVER be healthy and may retire early because of his bad back.


----------



## Ruff Draft (Nov 21, 2004)

Truknicksfan is correct. Q fits your team the way you want, when he is healthy.


----------



## thatsnotgross (Dec 4, 2006)

Nate Robinson gotta go to And1 league so he can show ballaz and thugs his skills.

Marbury still has to go because this guy is not a winner and ppl you seriously gotta stop saying "he never had a good team". HELLO! he is in the Eastern Conference and he is supposedly leading this team IN THE ATLATNIC Division. Home to *possibly* 3 top 10 lottery teams (oh and we all know who has our pick).

Jamal Crawford has to go, I remember my other forums *****ing at me about how young he is and how he will learn. Its been how many years he has wore that Knick jersey and how many years he has been shooting up bricks. People criticize Jason Kidd for his horrid shooting yet no one really talks about Jamal Crawford and his bricks.

Jared Jeffries, this is why Wizards didn't match and this is why we were the only team to give him a midlevel exception with years to go with it. His stat line ususally shows... 4pts 3rebs and a bunch of hustle plays. I didn't know hustle players garner that much of a salary.

Jerome James someone show him the Cheesecake factory and let him live there please.

Quinten Richardson must go as well. How many times has he played more than 70+ games. This guy is as fragile as Camby. People used to ***** about Camby, its time to hand Qrich and his retarded head knocks after a three to go. We all say he is talented but before you are talented you need to get onto the floor first. 

Steve Francis... no need to explain. Someone give him the Damon Stoudamire award. Great with his first team and then suddenly almost nonexistent

Eddy Curry, every board that I have been to has said he is getting better. In what, please? You mean he is scoring better. HELLO knicks fan, since when did we EVER knock on his post scoring ever? Anyone?! The anti EC coalition wants to let some of the EC lovers in here that we love his scoring but its his half ***, or half hearted ways during a rebound, man defense, careless turnovers, help defense, poor passing, lack of effort on defense that really bothers us. All he Eeddy Curry will ever be known is a semi glorify scorer who will never see 22+ points per game. NOTHING ELSE. Yes he is our franchise player that plays one way ball. I like that

David Lee, Frye, Balkman and collins (by default) are the only ones I would keep. 

But I think I have learned a life lesson this basketball year. As long as you can "improve" in the eyes of a ******* owner that looks like a low budget porn star (bill Simmons words) and shows no results in a weak conference and atrocious division. You will get a fat contract. Let me call up Goldman Sachs (unfortunately they aren't idiots).


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

ChosenFEW said:


> did i say garnett was trash? NO....did i say garnett is done or useless? NO.....if you actually think garnetts best years are yet to come you are [in larry browns voice] "DELUSIONAL". garnetts best years have past. His peak was the 03-04 season and if you look at his stats they have steadily gone down...and will continue to.
> 
> if you would take your Kevin Garnett panties out your *** maybe you could see that without throwing a hissy fit


points and rebounding are up on last years totals and still way above his 12 year career average 

4th highest points per game average in 12 seasons 
4th highest rebounding per game average in 12 seasons 

hardly dimishing rapidly as you claim 

if 22.4 points 12.8 rebounds and 4.1 assists is diminishing then he can diminish on the knicks with my blessing

take the **** out your eyes and do some research


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

<table class="playerStatTable careerAvg" border="1" bordercolor="#cccccc" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td class="yr">02-03</td> <td class="tm">MIN</td> <td>82</td> <td>82</td> <td>40.5</td> <td>.502</td> <td>.282</td> <td>.751</td> <td>3.0</td> <td>10.5</td> <td>13.4</td> <td>6.0</td> <td>1.4</td> <td>1.6</td> <td>2.79</td> <td>2.40</td> <td>23.0</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td class="yr">*03-04*</td> <td class="tm">*MIN*</td> <td>*82*</td> <td>*82*</td> <td>*39.4*</td> <td>*.499*</td> <td>*.256*</td> <td>*.791*</td> <td>*3.0*</td> <td>*10.9*</td> <td>*13.9*</td> <td>*5.0*</td> <td>*1.5*</td> <td>*2.2*</td> <td>*2.59*</td> <td>*2.50*</td> <td>*24.2*</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="yr">04-05</td> <td class="tm">MIN</td> <td>82</td> <td>82</td> <td>38.1</td> <td>.502</td> <td>.240</td> <td>.811</td> <td>3.0</td> <td>10.5</td> <td>13.5</td> <td>5.7</td> <td>1.5</td> <td>1.4</td> <td>2.71</td> <td>2.50</td> <td>22.2</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td class="yr">05-06</td> <td class="tm">MIN</td> <td>76</td> <td>76</td> <td>38.9</td> <td>.526</td> <td>.267</td> <td>.810</td> <td>2.8</td> <td>9.9</td> <td>12.7</td> <td>4.1</td> <td>1.4</td> <td>1.4</td> <td>2.37</td> <td>2.70</td> <td>21.8</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="yr">06-07</td> <td class="tm">MIN</td> <td>76</td> <td>76</td> <td>39.4</td> <td>.476</td> <td>.214</td> <td>.835</td> <td>2.4</td> <td>10.4</td> <td>12.8</td> <td>4.1</td> <td>1.2</td> <td>1.7</td> <td>2.70</td> <td>2.40</td> <td>22.4</td></tr></tbody></table>
of course they're up this year. It's a one man show up there

he IS past his prime which is the truth regardless whatever man-crush feelings you may have for KG.

once again your delusional


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Chosen...you are wrong*

It is exactly because he is the show that his numbers are slightly less. Who else do you need to guard? He is in his prime now, not past it. My worry is that he will start to diminish soon, however, the guy is very lean...never had an injury...and may play til he's forty at an effective level. Remember, he's no banger. He needs a fresh start and I'd love it to be in NY. I think trading for one older guy that can make us a contender is a very good thing. How else are we going to get there? What is your plan. Right now, we simply do not have enough talent to get to contender. You think this years pick holds the key? The FAs we can't afford? What other stars have we got ANY shot of trading for? If you think we are just too young, you must also be one of the people that think Curry will lead us.......

THATSNOTGROSS.. you are far too harsh and just plain wrong on some accounts. Marbury was great this year...maybe his best ever. Curry would be a wonderful 2nd option with powerful mates bookending him up front. Qrich played very well when healthy. Lets see if the surgery helped that. JC would be great in a more limited role and Nate, while immature is very talented. I'm not opposed to including him in a trade but itt wouldn't break my heart if he stayed and had a chance to grow up and learn the meaning of defense.


----------



## thatsnotgross (Dec 4, 2006)

*Re: Chosen...you are wrong*



alphaorange said:


> THATSNOTGROSS.. you are far too harsh and just plain wrong on some accounts. Marbury was great this year...maybe his best ever. Curry would be a wonderful 2nd option with powerful mates bookending him up front. Qrich played very well when healthy. Lets see if the surgery helped that. JC would be great in a more limited role and Nate, while immature is very talented. I'm not opposed to including him in a trade but itt wouldn't break my heart if he stayed and had a chance to grow up and learn the meaning of defense.


Think about this for a second... You said Marbury play this year might be his best ever and Curry played his BEST EVER. They are both supposedly our franchise players yet how many games they won in the Eastern Conference and Atlantic Division?

Everything you have said is WHAT I SAID but you're giving all of them the brush under the rug because of excuses. How many more years do you need to give JC and NRob to grow up? 

In your eyes everyone is "GREAT" when there is no obstacle courses around them. Thats like hitting the lottery. Every team faces their bumps and bruises during the year. 

You say that JC would be "GREAT" during his limited role. Again, he makes 9 million dollars a year which no team came even close to giving him that money makes him a very viable part of this so called quick fix.

Nate Robinson is in his 2nd year and soon to be third year. He is talented but the man doesn't play with a playbook. He crapped about Larry Brown, one might figure he would listen to IT more jsut like the rest of this team did. He didn't. He rarely follows the offense and is a disturbance to the flow of the Knicks game. 

With Qrich, you said it! He is talented ONLY when healthy. My point is, he is as fragile as Camby. He has never been healthy all but 2 or 3 seasons in his career.

4 players that are talented yet they don't have the capacity to be a franchise player, floor leader or even be the general on the court (Marbury, Crawford, Curry and Nate Robinson).

You say this is Curry best season but it only garner us to place in the top 10 AGAIN. 

These guys are paid one of the highest salaries for their level of play is just unbelievable.

You are going around and saying this team is talented yet they can't put together a cohesion to get the most important stat of all. A win. I don't care how talented you are, you need to have some sort of IQ and actually be able to play.

I don't think any Knicks fan is going to sit on their couch another season and wait again for this team to actually have some sort of cohesiveness. How many years has the core been together yet they couldn't find a groove.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*You took liberties.......*

with what I posted. I never said Curry was a franchise player. In fact, I called him a second option. If you read my other posts, you will see that I am a big critic of Curry. I also never said Marbury was a franchise player, only that he had perhaps his best year. I think they are two big cogs in need of a prime time player. I siad JC is a role player and you are right, he makes a bit too much for what he does(7mil, not 9). Nate is indeed very immature but he is also very young and inexperienced. Francis, I don't want and never did. Same with Jeffries. Qrich was a very fine player when he wasn't hampered by his back. I am anxious to see if the surgery will set him free. Also, as I posted earlier, the knicks lose 60 million off the cap this summer, and 40 more next year. I think it is possible to field a team of Marbury and Collins....Lee, Garnett, and Curry, with Balkman, Qrich,and whoever is left to complete the team. That is a damn good team for mthe next 5 years.


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

ChosenFEW said:


> <table class="playerStatTable careerAvg" border="1" bordercolor="#cccccc" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td class="yr">02-03</td> <td class="tm">MIN</td> <td>82</td> <td>82</td> <td>40.5</td> <td>.502</td> <td>.282</td> <td>.751</td> <td>3.0</td> <td>10.5</td> <td>13.4</td> <td>6.0</td> <td>1.4</td> <td>1.6</td> <td>2.79</td> <td>2.40</td> <td>23.0</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td class="yr">*03-04*</td> <td class="tm">*MIN*</td> <td>*82*</td> <td>*82*</td> <td>*39.4*</td> <td>*.499*</td> <td>*.256*</td> <td>*.791*</td> <td>*3.0*</td> <td>*10.9*</td> <td>*13.9*</td> <td>*5.0*</td> <td>*1.5*</td> <td>*2.2*</td> <td>*2.59*</td> <td>*2.50*</td> <td>*24.2*</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="yr">04-05</td> <td class="tm">MIN</td> <td>82</td> <td>82</td> <td>38.1</td> <td>.502</td> <td>.240</td> <td>.811</td> <td>3.0</td> <td>10.5</td> <td>13.5</td> <td>5.7</td> <td>1.5</td> <td>1.4</td> <td>2.71</td> <td>2.50</td> <td>22.2</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"> <td class="yr">05-06</td> <td class="tm">MIN</td> <td>76</td> <td>76</td> <td>38.9</td> <td>.526</td> <td>.267</td> <td>.810</td> <td>2.8</td> <td>9.9</td> <td>12.7</td> <td>4.1</td> <td>1.4</td> <td>1.4</td> <td>2.37</td> <td>2.70</td> <td>21.8</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="yr">06-07</td> <td class="tm">MIN</td> <td>76</td> <td>76</td> <td>39.4</td> <td>.476</td> <td>.214</td> <td>.835</td> <td>2.4</td> <td>10.4</td> <td>12.8</td> <td>4.1</td> <td>1.2</td> <td>1.7</td> <td>2.70</td> <td>2.40</td> <td>22.4</td></tr></tbody></table>
> of course they're up this year. It's a one man show up there
> 
> he IS past his prime which is the truth regardless whatever man-crush feelings you may have for KG.
> ...


Your original post was incorrect and my reply proved so,all you have manged to prove is that garnett did`nt have his best ever season of 12

all the pathetic innuendo about mancrushes just makes u look even more foolish 

grow up sonny


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

Could Marty Collins run a decent backcourt motion with Marbury and Crawford calling all the shots next season? NO! 

Will 65% of all the offensive-plays be given to none-passing Curry? Probably. 

Will the Knicks have allot of different Players next season? YES! 

*Starting PF-David Lee alongside of SF-Balkman and Combo-Guard Mardy Collins has become Knick-Fans Future BIG-3-Players.* 
*The question now is will the Knicks Head Coach play these 3-Players (on court) together next season? * *I doubt it.*

The Knicks Head Coach did a POOR Job this season by not playing Lee, Frye, and Nate (on court together), inwhich the 3-players had some great moments of chemistry together the previous season. Breaking these 3-Rookie-players up from playing together (this season) stagnated their creative performance on attacking their oponents on offense/defense together. Giving these 3-young players no-reason to practice together to form a better bond on and off the court. 

*1) Was the Knicks 3-First Round Rookies Familiar with each other talents after their Rookie season? YES! 
2) Did the Knicks 3-First Round Rookies Practice and Play together throughout the offseason? YES! 

3) Do you think the Knicks 3-First Round Rookies in the offseason created some new plays to use on the court together for their second season in the NBA? YES!* they had to because all 3 stayed close together throughout the Offseason from the Knicks Summer League Games to where Lee & Balkman took over when Frye got reinjured and Nate & Collins tandem had to help out more in the defensive rebounding department. 

It's to-to BAD that the Knicks Head Coach did not want to show the Knick-Fans what great chemistry his assistant coach Mark Aquire discovered throughout the Summer Offseason in practicing hard with the 5-Players of: 
C-Frye (6.11)
PF-Lee (6.9)
SF-Balkman (6.7)
SG-Collins (6.6)
PG-Nate (5.9) 
They did not have much of an offense, but their defensive setups was devastating to watch with a defensive hustle that switch better defenders on Knicks offensive oponents (in the Summer League Games). 
*It would've been nice to see this group of 5-Young Players on the court together at least once in the 2006-7 regular season games, but we did'nt. *


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

www.starbury.com said:


> Your original post was incorrect and my reply proved so,all you have manged to prove is that garnett did`nt have his best ever season of 12
> 
> all the pathetic innuendo about mancrushes just makes u look even more foolish
> 
> grow up sonny


you proved so by telling me to go watch baseball LOL....sure buddy


Im better off talking to the wall. At least it doesnt have the option of replying with complete utter BS


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

*Re: You took liberties.......*



alphaorange said:


> with what I posted. I never said Curry was a franchise player. In fact, I called him a second option. If you read my other posts, you will see that I am a big critic of Curry. I also never said Marbury was a franchise player, only that he had perhaps his best year. I think they are two big cogs in need of a prime time player. I siad JC is a role player and you are right, he makes a bit too much for what he does(7mil, not 9). Nate is indeed very immature but he is also very young and inexperienced. Francis, I don't want and never did. Same with Jeffries. Qrich was a very fine player when he wasn't hampered by his back. I am anxious to see if the surgery will set him free. Also, as I posted earlier, the knicks lose 60 million off the cap this summer, and 40 more next year. I think it is possible to field a team of Marbury and Collins....Lee, Garnett, and Curry, with Balkman, Qrich,and whoever is left to complete the team. That is a damn good team for mthe next 5 years.


The Knicks lose 63 million off of the cap this off season, but they only lose 810,000 the next season.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Correct.....*

Francis and Marbury come off the following year. Rose will prolly opt out. Is that this year or next?


----------



## Gotham2krazy (Nov 22, 2005)

*Re: Correct.....*

Players that need to go? Stephon Marbury, Steve Francis, Jared Jeffries, Jerome James, and Nate Robinson. Five players won't be too hard to get rid of, well maybe four. I've yet to see what Jeffries is really good for, the guy can come off the bench for me for all I care as a defensive specialist. But no way will I let Jeffries even remotely come close to a ball unless if it's defensively.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

*Re: Correct.....*



alphaorange said:


> Francis and Marbury come off the following year. Rose will probably opt out. Is that this year or next?


Francis and Marbury don't come off the books until the year after next. There is no option on Malik Rose's deal. He expires at the same time as Marbury and Francis.

http://hoopshype.com/salaries/new_york.htm


----------



## undefined_playa (Oct 23, 2005)

*baiting*


----------



## thatsnotgross (Dec 4, 2006)

*Re: You took liberties.......*



alphaorange said:


> with what I posted. I never said Curry was a franchise player. In fact, I called him a second option. If you read my other posts, you will see that I am a big critic of Curry. I also never said Marbury was a franchise player, only that he had perhaps his best year. I think they are two big cogs in need of a prime time player. I siad JC is a role player and you are right, he makes a bit too much for what he does(7mil, not 9). Nate is indeed very immature but he is also very young and inexperienced. Francis, I don't want and never did. Same with Jeffries. Qrich was a very fine player when he wasn't hampered by his back. I am anxious to see if the surgery will set him free. Also, as I posted earlier, the knicks lose 60 million off the cap this summer, and 40 more next year. I think it is possible to field a team of Marbury and Collins....Lee, Garnett, and Curry, with Balkman, Qrich,and whoever is left to complete the team. That is a damn good team for mthe next 5 years.


Alphaorange, just to clarify. When I say, Curry and Marbury are the franchise. It wasn't you or I that decided that fate, it was the man who is running the show down the drain. Unless you think IT brought them in here to be 2nd options then all i can say is, IT is even a bigger idiot than I thought.

But in this case, he stated that he wanted to build around Marbury when he first came here. Then the Curry trade happened and he wanted to build around him. After Frye showed a promising couple of months, he wanted to build around both Frye and Curry. So it wasn't you that already made that nice little judgement. It was already made.

IT legacy will be tied to Marbury's and Curry's career as the Knicks GM. 

Now, you're saying that these guys are at BEST 2nd options and so on. Then you go off on landing or praying or whatever you do to get Garnett? 

Small problem, how are you going to get Garnett? Through trades? If you're thinking about lowballing for Garnett forget about it. I've heard so many damn imaginary and crappy ideas on how to get Garnett its not even worth mentioning it here anymore. Are you going to add what most posters will add NateRob, Frye and a bunch of players that will match Garnett salary? Because I've heard it all and its laughable and just ridiculous for anyone to read at times.

Or you're hoping to get Garnett when he gets into his free agent year which is either 1 or 2 years from now depending if he wants to pick up the option? BTW, before you even think about Garnett, you will have to extend Lee's contract which he should be aiming for what Qrich is getting. Or perhaps extending Frye if he rebounds the next season? Yeah, I can see how this will work. You're thinking about 2009 cap space? The knicks will probably blow a couple of MLE mistakes or get a even larger contract to just trade Francis.

Everything is just a dream right now and people are just saying "WHAT IF we can get this <insert superstar here>" when our cap is going down.

Also let me repeat this... you mention that Marbury and Curry had their BEST season to date. Yet we only won 33 games. Think about this for a moment please. The knicks do not have flexibility in their salary cap, the Knicks will have to swap and get that Chicago pick and I do believe we do not have a damn 2nd round pick. The only thing they have for this coming offseason is...

a.) a low first rounder AGAIN (yes knicks fans, just because BAlkman did well doesn't mean he wasn't a freaking reach.)

b.) a MLE contract (History says IT will blow it again, Vin Baker, Jerome James, Jared Jeffries)

c.) and our usual trading chips (Frye and Nate Robinson)

So you tell me, with what we have, what makes you think we will garner 9 extra wins with the three I mention above? Even if we get 9 damn wins to just creep ourselves into the playoffs. Do you realize that next season we still will have the highest payroll with 38-42 wins in the Eastern Conference and Atlantic Division. 

If you're one of those optimistic, happy happy go lucky, "you can do it guys", "we have 8th place trophies" type of guy. then you will call it a success.

Unless you're the pessimistic or I shall say in this situation a realist, then we're a mediocre team that thinks we have 2 franchise players but in reality they are crap.

Yeah I love our situation these days. Mediocre and missing out on probably one of the deepest drafts in a long time.


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

*Re: Chosen...you are wrong*



alphaorange said:


> It is exactly because he is the show that his numbers are slightly less. Who else do you need to guard? He is in his prime now, not past it. *My worry is that he will start to diminish soon*, however, the guy is very lean...*never had an injury*...and may play til he's forty at an effective level. Remember, he's no banger. He needs a fresh start and I'd love it to be in NY. I think trading for one older guy that can make us a contender is a very good thing. How else are we going to get there? What is your plan. Right now, we simply do not have enough talent to get to contender. You think this years pick holds the key? The FAs we can't afford? What other stars have we got ANY shot of trading for? If you think we are just too young, you must also be one of the people that think Curry will lead us.......


he already is....slowly but surely.

Im sure he has had plenty of injuries. He just plays through them and doesn't whine like others.

_“He's a soldier,” Davis said. “If he's hurt, you would never know it unless something was broke or something. I just hope he's all right.”_
_ "Garnett might not play again in their final four games of this season, according to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. Garnett missed the 105-88 loss to Dallas at Target Center because of pain in his right quadriceps and will be out indefinitely"_

he hasn't even finished the whole season these last 2 years. from 1999-2005 KG missed ONLY 3 GAMES

from 2005-2007 Garnett has missed 12 games. Obviously all the signs are there only a blind man couldn't see it

he could have all the talent in the world but nobody can win a fight against 'father time'


----------

