# Sadly , there has been little real improvement thus far over past regimes.



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

http://www.probasketballnews.com/story/?storyid=309



> The New York Knicks started off the Mike D'Antoni era with a 6-3 record, though that mark may have been deceptively good considering that four of the wins came at the expense of Charlotte, Washington, Memphis and Oklahoma City. Since that time, the Knicks have gone just 22-38, including their current four game losing streak "highlighted" by back-to-back home blowout defeats at the hands of New Jersey (115-89) and Sacramento (121-94), a team that had lost 28 straight games this season versus Eastern Conference opponents. To paraphrase an oft quoted (but possibly apocryphal) declaration by tennis pro Vitas Gerulaitis, "The Eastern Conference cannot beat the Kings 29 times in a row!"
> 
> The way that the Knicks bolted out of the gate and the high-scoring, fast-paced style that D'Antoni uses created a lingering buzz suggesting that D'Antoni has transformed the Knicks from their losing ways under previous coach Isiah Thomas -- but is that perception really accurate?
> 
> Al Harrington, Nate Robinson, David Lee and Chris Duhon are each posting single-season career high scoring averages but all of those points have not been converted into extra wins; D'Antoni has turned the Knicks into a more exciting team to watch with his seven seconds or less offensive philosophy but the reality is that in terms of the bottom line -- wins and losses -- the Knicks are not much better than they were when Isiah Thomas ran the show; Thomas had a .402 winning percentage in his first season on New York's bench, virtually identical to the .406 winning percentage that D'Antoni has posted so far in his first season in New York.


the duo of walsh and d'antoni are really banking on summer 2010 to save them, i dont see a superstar wanting to come to ny to play on a less competitive team for less money, the knicks need to play better for their dreams of grandeur to come true.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Da Grinch said:


> http://www.probasketballnews.com/story/?storyid=309
> 
> 
> 
> the duo of walsh and d'antoni are really banking on summer 2010 to save them, i dont see a superstar wanting to come to ny to play on a less competitive team for less money, the knicks need to play better for their dreams of grandeur to come true.


I think brighter times are ahead in spite of everything that has transpired. We made two awful trades earlier in the season that certainly didn't make us a better team. Fortunately, Walsh rebounded a bit and added two starting caliber players to our lineup that fit this system. We should be alright next year with an opportunity of having a full training camp to get everyone acclimated, a healthy Danilo back (hopefully), hopefully a proper back-up for Duhon to moderate his minutes and a draft pick in tow. When healthy, I certainly believe that we are capable of upsetting a team in the playoffs.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

P.S., I'm still not a fan of cutting payroll in hopes of signing a free agent in 2010. I think that it might be downright stupid when half the league is involved in a fire-sale because of their economic situations. Flexibility doesn't hurt anyone but I sure do hope that it is not at the sacrifice of anymore talent. Go after Monta, Hinrich and Deng....


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Good article and it's the truth, you are ultimately judge by your record and the media outlets and some fans are doing just that. New regime, but same results. I also agree about the 2010 plan which I didn't get too hype about in the very beginning. It may not pan out the way the media and some fans thought when we finally were able to free up cap space for the first time in years. I just don't see a guy like Wade (who already said he wasn’t thinking NY), and Lebron the two major players in this plan coming here. 

The rest of the free agents, aren't even close to the caliber of those two. If they sign Nash, they are getting an aging PG with a lot of mileage and an inadequate defender. Why get hype over that? Walsh may work his magic through trades, but what kind of player should we get? A player who has never won anything or got out of the first round in his NBA career? Thanks but no thanks, can I get some players who understand what it takes and have experience winning and getting in the playoffs and advancing? Walsh please refrain from trying to trade or sign losers, we need players who have experience winning, not losing and stuck in the first round. We need to change the losing mentality and the culture that’s losing is acceptable in the Knicks organization first and foremost.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

in the end you have to decide whats more important .

the knicks claim winning is the most important thing...they should be buyers and not sellers at this time and be selective and get quality 2way players who fit their system...and turn this thing around...not join a pipedream with 15 other teams.


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

funny thing is even if we are just plain horrible next season because we are waiting for the 2010 free agents we wont have a draft pick.


I think we owe the utah jazz a draft pick and it's unprotected come 2010.

we have to win and we have to do it soon. If utah lands a good prospect with our pick it'll be like adding salt to a wound


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*They probably won't lure LJ or Wade*

The others I don't really want. Nevertheless, being way under the cap is a good thing. It will open up the possibilities of trading for a very good player or players; especially with these times. I think they may end up trying to get a guy like 'melo. I am a big fan of Danilo and with him, Chandler, and a guy to be added by FA or trade (more likely), there is a very good core. IMO, this draft is absolutely key. I think they must get a quality starter from it. Depending on who declares, there should be good players available. I've been following Rubio for a couple of years and he would be my dream pick. If he comes out, the Knicks should do anything short of trading Danilo and maybe Chandler to get him. If there are picks to be bought, this year would be the year to buy them.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: They probably won't lure LJ or Wade*



alphaorange said:


> The others I don't really want. Nevertheless, being way under the cap is a good thing. It will open up the possibilities of trading for a very good player or players; especially with these times. I think they may end up trying to get a guy like 'melo. I am a big fan of Danilo and with him, Chandler, and a guy to be added by FA or trade (more likely), there is a very good core. IMO, this draft is absolutely key. I think they must get a quality starter from it. Depending on who declares, there should be good players available. I've been following Rubio for a couple of years and he would be my dream pick. If he comes out, the Knicks should do anything short of trading Danilo and maybe Chandler to get him. If there are picks to be bought, this year would be the year to buy them.


i dont think any1 is saying being under the cap is a bad thing, flexibility in a good thing...but...if in pursuit of this you deal away 5-6 players to get a player who is only marginally better than what you had , or in some cases not better than what you had.

case in point chicago a few years back , which dealt donyell marshall, jalen rose , jerome williams, jamal crawford , tyson chandler and eddy curry and let trenton hassell go at least in part to have at the free agent market of 2006 , to get ...ben wallace...

if you get a shaq like the lakers did in 1996, in the free agent market , its worth it because you can build a championship team around him rather easily...chris bosh on the other hand, carmello, or an injury plagued t-mac?

teams aren't good because of cap space , they are good because they outplay the other teams a majority of the time...the easiest way to accomplish this is by having better players and there is no set way to accomplish this, even though people say there is , if there were than every team would be doing the same thing every year.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*I don't see the comparison to the Bulls*

I don't think anyone we got rid of was someone that was going to be a part of the "new" Knicks. The only trade that didn't net us cap space ended up being a neutral trade. We are rebuilding whether we call it that or not. I think Chandler can be a solid #3 guy, maybe even a #2. I think Gallo (if healthy, and I think he will be) is a #2 or maybe a #1 in a few years. There are just things that I see when I watch him beyond scoring. My wish list is for a good starting center and/or a starting PG. Although we may not end up with one of the top 3 guys in the league, I believe we can compete by having a go-to guy and a well rounded, intelligent team. I like Aldrich if he comes out....and of course Rubio is my pipe dream.

I think the cap space is going to help us one way or the other.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: I don't see the comparison to the Bulls*



alphaorange said:


> I don't think anyone we got rid of was someone that was going to be a part of the "new" Knicks. The only trade that didn't net us cap space ended up being a neutral trade. We are rebuilding whether we call it that or not. I think Chandler can be a solid #3 guy, maybe even a #2. I think Gallo (if healthy, and I think he will be) is a #2 or maybe a #1 in a few years. There are just things that I see when I watch him beyond scoring. My wish list is for a good starting center and/or a starting PG. Although we may not end up with one of the top 3 guys in the league, I believe we can compete by having a go-to guy and a well rounded, intelligent team. I like Aldrich if he comes out....and of course Rubio is my pipe dream.
> 
> I think the cap space is going to help us one way or the other.


That cap space may come in particularly handy in 2012 if the guy we're gunning for is Chris Paul. I don't see him sticking with the Hornets if their looking to clear cap space and rebuild. Hopefully they suck around that time and hopefully we have a lot of money available. I still believe the best way to look to acquire him would be via trade and we would obviously need assets for that. That is why I wouldn't mind looking into trading for a place holder like Monta Ellis because those are the sort of guys that could net you a superstar should they become available. *I think Chris Paul and Carmelo Anthony are legitimate possibilities for our team if their teams start to falter in the near future.*


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> http://www.probasketballnews.com/story/?storyid=309
> 
> 
> 
> the duo of walsh and d'antoni are really banking on summer 2010 to save them, i dont see a superstar wanting to come to ny to play on a less competitive team for less money, the knicks need to play better for their dreams of grandeur to come true.


Yea, it ain't gonna happen the way things are going now.

The best we can do is a disgruntled star who REALLY wants to leave. Like Chris Bosh, or Amare possibly, or a good player on the tail end of their prime for too much money.

We'd be better off trading our assets for draft pics, and young guys who can play but just need an opportunity. The only guy I'd want to keep is Nate Robinson, personally. Lee has the best trade value, and everyone else I'm ho-hum about.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

*Sadly , there has been little real improvement thus far over past regimes.* 

Our new regime decision-making and future-plans after one year on the job has sent this Knick team back to the 1978-79 season where we received the 3rd pick in the draft. 
Our new regime throwed a little over $50M bucks out of the window in just one season without using one dollar of it to help the Knicks organization. 

In the 2009 offseason this new regime will have to pull-off several "Miracles" (not one) before training camp start if they dont want the Knicks to become the 3rd worst team in the 2009-10 season.
Which happens to be the season the Knicks will have to give their first round pick to Utah. 

Salary Cap flexiblity in 2010 will be great for teams like the Miami Heat whom Super-Star player could be resigned after they sign one of the 2010 star FA to go alongside of each first round pick player on their roster they drafted in the last four years. 
Resigning J.O'Neal to a one year contract this summer after a decent Miami Postseason.....should explain best what cap flexability is good for.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

*I hope everyone understand that lowering our Salary Cap and not having a Super-Star and a average Star on our roster when lowering our salary cap does not give us "Cap Flexibility" it makes us an expansion team.* 

*Here is what "Cap-Flexibility" means*

*Orlando Magic *had Howard, Turk, and Nelson when they lowered their cap. 
*Phoenix Suns *had Marian, Amare, and Joe Johnson when they lowered their cap. 
*Boston Celtics *had Super-Star Paul Pierce and a long roster of upcomming young star players with rookie contracts to be flexible in the trading market to get a veteran Super-Star and Star player. Which we may see alot of teams get succesful doing in the 2010 offseason (sign and trade) or 2009 trading deadline. 

*The list of potential free agents in 2010 is deep and spectacular. There are superstars:* 

Lebron James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh, Tracy McGrady and Dirk Nowitzki. *There are perennial All-Stars:* 
Joe Johnson, Amare Stoudemire, Carlos Boozer, Michael Redd, Ray Allen, Josh Howard, Manu Ginóbili, Jermaine O'Neal and Steve Nash. And there are high-level role players: Luis Scola, Tyson Chandler, Stephen Jackson, Mehmet Okur, Hedo Turkoglu, Mike Miller, Udonis Haslem and Marcus Camby.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: I don't see the comparison to the Bulls*



alphaorange said:


> I don't think anyone we got rid of was someone that was going to be a part of the "new" Knicks. The only trade that didn't net us cap space ended up being a neutral trade. We are rebuilding whether we call it that or not. I think Chandler can be a solid #3 guy, maybe even a #2. I think Gallo (if healthy, and I think he will be) is a #2 or maybe a #1 in a few years. There are just things that I see when I watch him beyond scoring. My wish list is for a good starting center and/or a starting PG. Although we may not end up with one of the top 3 guys in the league, I believe we can compete by having a go-to guy and a well rounded, intelligent team. I like Aldrich if he comes out....and of course Rubio is my pipe dream.
> 
> I think the cap space is going to help us one way or the other.


my point is what the team traded away for cap space was better than what the team got with the cap space.

supposedly there is no real plan in place which is the worst secret ever because every1 knows this is for lebron, who may win a title this season, while the knicks look on pace to lose 50 games...the cavs can pay him more because of how the CBA is set up, so it amounts to him wanting to leave his posible championship team , and definitely a contender to come to a lottery team....for less money, and the more endorsement stuff is lunacy , James does not have a problem getting endorsements , Nike wants a winner in cleveland a helleva alot more than loser in new york.

and no one has a solid reason other than big city narcism which isn't a good reason btw considering hometowns win these bidding wars far more often .

if this was a good plan i'd say so , trust me i have no problem with the knicks getting lebron , or even wade , but its a pipedream...and a bad one at that.

plenty of teams have cap space but take a quick look at who's winning and you'll find mostly its the capped out teams ...

the division leaders 
celtics, cleveland,orlando,denver,lakers and the spurs.

who is getting to the promise land with cap space?

celtics sucked for a while and hoarded draft picks and got 2 stars with them to add with a former draftee in paul pierce.

cleveland drafted James , to go with another another draftee in Illgaustas, they traded for mo williams , and when they had cap space they used it on larry hughes who didn't help them at all.

orlando drafted Howard , drafted nelson used the MLE on hedo, and used their cap space when they grossly overbidded on rashard lewis , a nice player but probably the 3rd or 4th best player they have, not exactly the difference maker howard is.

in the west the nuggets traded for billups, drafted melo, and nene , traded for jr smith , when it had cap space , it used it on k-mart ...whom i doubt is more than an MLE player.

the lakers drafted via draft day trade kobe, drafted bynum, farmar, and luke walton, and traded for gasol , odom ,vujacic and ariza...the last time the team had cap space they signed shaq, who left the 60 win magic for the 53 win lakers , back in 1996

the spurs drafted duncan parker and manu, every1 else was a low level free agent or the got them by trading for them...i cant even tell you the last time the had significant cap space....its probably been at least 20 years pre-david robinson.

and aside from all being division leaders, another thing these 6 teams have in common is that all 6 of these teams are *at least *10 million dollars over the salary cap.

cap space is a story teams tell to allow them to stockpile talent through the draft, while also stockpiling money since rooks get paid a relatively small amount, it almost never comes true , and is just a way to buy time.

good teams dont need cap space, they have good players.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Sure all great teams are capped out....*

You can't get really good players and not be. The Celtics are the only team that has really been able to trade for great players. The rest of the contending teams pretty much built around there draft picks. Of course we are trying for James....who wouldn't be? We sacrificed nothing to get cap space ad financial flexibility. I'm sure there is a very general plan "B" because the situation is far too fluid to have a specific plan in place. Walsh is no idiot. If melo and management fight, he will be traded and it would be for another superstar. There will be others as well, not to mention the possibility of using some of this flexibility to trade up in the draft or sign other FAs that are for sure better than we had. Its a good thing. There was no way we were wining with the guys we had....NO WAY. If we end up with Joe Johnson and McGee (just speculating possibles), we'd be way farther ahead than we were. I'm just saying. Having flexibility without having to sacrifice good players to get it is a no brainer. I suspect plan "B" will be in effect......


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Sure all great teams are capped out....*



alphaorange said:


> You can't get really good players and not be. The Celtics are the only team that has really been able to trade for great players. The rest of the contending teams pretty much built around there draft picks. Of course we are trying for James....who wouldn't be? We sacrificed nothing to get cap space ad financial flexibility. I'm sure there is a very general plan "B" because the situation is far too fluid to have a specific plan in place. Walsh is no idiot. If melo and management fight, he will be traded and it would be for another superstar. There will be others as well, not to mention the possibility of using some of this flexibility to trade up in the draft or sign other FAs that are for sure better than we had. Its a good thing. There was no way we were wining with the guys we had....NO WAY. If we end up with Joe Johnson and McGee (just speculating possibles), we'd be way farther ahead than we were. I'm just saying. Having flexibility without having to sacrifice good players to get it is a no brainer. I suspect plan "B" will be in effect......


i think the knicks sacrificed a great deal for this plan.

the team started out 6-5 before the trade 23-42 afterwards

for starters a serious playoff chase, this season, which would have benefitted all the young players , nate , lee, chandler, galinari, they all would have benefitted from an atmosphere where the games count for more.

also as the team is more successful the team's assets are more valuable, meaning in all probability could have gotten more trade for craw and zach if they chose to do it later.

duhon's season went in the toilet after being burnt out due to lack of depth,

next year is basically sacrificed already , no MLE deal because any1 worth his salt can get a multiyear deal...the knicks aren't giving a multi year deal next summer...and there is no 1st rounder next season.

and for what ?

flexibility to do 1 , maybe 2 moves, usually its 1 though, it is not a plan that has a high history of success and thats just a fact.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Agree to disagree..*

There never has been a model for what the Knicks are trying to do. So, to say it hasn't been successful is invalid. These are the facts: NY has a great coach and management that is very well respected with a good track record. They have some talented young pieces and should add at least one more this year. They have enough flexibilty to acquire at least one max player and possibly 2. At the least one max and a high 2nd tier player. It is NY....media center of the free world. No team has ever had this much working for them. I'm not sure about getting it done in '10 but I am confident if they don't, they will by '11.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

To say that nobody has tried to do what the Knicks are doing is only partially accurate. Nobody has tried to do what the Knicks are trying to do in such a short period of time. The Knicks are rebuilding whether anybody wants to word it that way or not. To say that the team was better off before the trades of Zach Randolph and Jamal Crawford is the equivalent of saying that the Clippers are better than the Kings. Yes, the Clippers are statistically better than the Kings. They also have albatross contracts on mostly overpaid schmucks that keep them from acquiring any players that would get them to the next level and they lose their first round pick next year to boot.

Rebuilding is going to be hard as hell for this team. They had the highest payroll in the league and nothing to show for it. If the team had made the playoffs, they would have been done in the first round regardless. The team had no potential. Crawford has been blacklisted from the Warriors and the two general managers who trusted Randolph and Crawford with their respective franchises are likely to be fired in the off-season. How anybody was supposed to be tricked into thinking they had any value whatsoever is beyond any and all logic. They are both overpaid players who shouldn't be anything better than a fourth option on a good team.

Should the 2010 plan fail, it will merely take longer to rebuilt than originally thought. The Knicks will just need to go out and acquire more picks with whatever talent they have and it should hopefully lead to prosperity. Being smart with the picks would certainly help to. The Knicks already have the likes of Wilson Chandler who is a good fourth option or mediocre third option and Danilo Gallinari who is a good third option or mediocre second option. Obtaining any one of the top three free agents in the 2010 class would go a great way and obtaining another member would solidify team as a powerhouse in the eastern conference. If they are unable to do so, 2010 won't bode well for them and they should be able to make up for it with a quality draft pick.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Reread my post*

No team has EVER had money for 2 max players. No major market team has EVER tried this with this much cap space. And no team with a stable, highly qualified coaching staff in place with a high functioning management with ownership that is willing to spend whatever it takes has EVER tried this. So to have all of these in the same scenario is absolutely unheard of. If you disagree, please show me where I am wrong. My guess is that we will end up with at least two allstars that are not on the team already. There is simply no way to know what we will look like. For example, if we end up with Bosh, he will either have to play center (in which case Lee will be gone), or PF(which means Gallo will be a SF and Chandler will likely be gone).

If we were to trade and get 'melo, DG moves to PF and Chandler goes again. Bosh is very much a possibility. 'Melo's situation is also fluid and he is free in '11. In the next couple of years there will be a cyclone of activity and NY will be in an unprecedented position to be in the middle of it.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Agree to disagree..*



alphaorange said:


> There never has been a model for what the Knicks are trying to do. So, to say it hasn't been successful is invalid. These are the facts: NY has a great coach and management that is very well respected with a good track record. They have some talented young pieces and should add at least one more this year. They have enough flexibilty to acquire at least one max player and possibly 2. At the least one max and a high 2nd tier player. It is NY....media center of the free world. No team has ever had this much working for them. I'm not sure about getting it done in '10 but I am confident if they don't, they will by '11.


actually you are wrong , the heat have no salary obligations outside of wade (who has a player option)past summer of 2010. the only player they are likely to have picked up is mike beasely, if by some miracle they lose wade , they will have max space for 2 guys .

plenty of other teams have room enoungh for 1 max guy and are a move or 2 away from having room for 2 just like the knicks, like the nets , okc,cleve. chicago, det., memp.,minny, portland, and spurs.

its been done before , and its being done right now.

the knicks have 18.16 mil not counting the team options of gallo and chandler and the extentions of lee and robinson in which they will likely sign at least ...curry they may get rid of if he gets healthy , a team may take a flyer on him...but who will take jeffries...and why?

most of the teams i have named previously have just as much young talent as the knicks if not more, the knicks aren't special come summer of 2010, walsh has had virtually no sucess as a hunter of big time free agents in his long career, thats just not how he has done business in indy. 

the ny media center thing is a myth , how many endorsements did pat ewing senior have ?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Reread my post*



alphaorange said:


> No team has EVER had money for 2 max players. No major market team has EVER tried this with this much cap space. And no team with a stable, highly qualified coaching staff in place with a high functioning management with ownership that is willing to spend whatever it takes has EVER tried this. So to have all of these in the same scenario is absolutely unheard of. If you disagree, please show me where I am wrong. My guess is that we will end up with at least two allstars that are not on the team already. There is simply no way to know what we will look like. For example, if we end up with Bosh, he will either have to play center (in which case Lee will be gone), or PF(which means Gallo will be a SF and Chandler will likely be gone).
> 
> If we were to trade and get 'melo, DG moves to PF and Chandler goes again. Bosh is very much a possibility. 'Melo's situation is also fluid and he is free in '11. In the next couple of years there will be a cyclone of activity and NY will be in an unprecedented position to be in the middle of it.


the magic signed t-mac and grant hill , in 2000, both max deals...its been attempted before...in orlando in 2000, was the only time it succeeded.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

I agree completely, though I don't know if everyone considers Knicks management competent being that they are owned by the Dolans. They are a black cloud over the team for sure regardless of how well Donnie Walsh performs as a general manager, which in my opinion has deserved him at least a B-. I was referring more so to the fact that rebuilding has been tried before, and they are using youth rather than trying to retool which is how it should have been done in the first place. The team didn't do that under the Isiah Thomas regime which is what's going to make it so hard this time around Most teams take at least three to seven years to rebuild while the Knicks are trying to do it in two.

Carmelo Anthony is nothing but over-inflated stats He has never ranked as a top twenty player in P.E.R, he’s never ranked as a top twenty player in win shares. He isn’t even one of the top twenty active players in career P.E.R. He is Stephon Marbury repeated. He isn't good enough to lead a team to a championship and he never will be. He finally has a team that is doing well this season because he has Chauncey Billups on his team and the likes of Nene, J.R. Smith, Chris Andersen, and even Renaldo Balkman are playing insanely well. When Anthony was out for six games, the Nuggets won five of them.

Let’s not forget that Stephon Marbury came in as one of the only players along with Oscar Robinson to average 20 points and eight assists a game. He was dynamic. That turned out to be one of the most abysmal moves the Knicks will ever make. He came in with a 19.3 P.E.R. which is only 4/10 of a point off of Anthony. Acquiring Anthony would be the same exact type of move and would mark a death sentence to the Knicks rebuilding plans because he in and of himself will never lead a team to an N.B.A. championship. If the Knicks plan on getting Anthony, they had better be damn sure they're getting Dwyane Wade or LeBron James, because even if Anthony was coupled with Chris Bosh, it still wouldn't be enough.

On a side note, Nate Robinson has a better P.E.R. than Anthony does this season. Not saying Robinson is better, but that should in part prove how overrated Anthony is as a player.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

*Re: Reread my post*



alphaorange said:


> No team has EVER had money for 2 max players. No major market team has EVER tried this with this much cap space. And no team with a stable, highly qualified coaching staff in place with a high functioning management with ownership that is willing to spend whatever it takes has EVER tried this. So to have all of these in the same scenario is absolutely unheard of. If you disagree, please show me where I am wrong. My guess is that we will end up with at least two allstars that are not on the team already. There is simply no way to know what we will look like. For example, if we end up with Bosh, he will either have to play center (in which case Lee will be gone), or PF(which means Gallo will be a SF and Chandler will likely be gone).
> 
> If we were to trade and get 'melo, DG moves to PF and Chandler goes again. Bosh is very much a possibility. 'Melo's situation is also fluid and he is free in '11. In the next couple of years there will be a cyclone of activity and NY will be in an unprecedented position to be in the middle of it.



Did u forget about coach Doc Rivers and his coaching-staff on the Orlando Magic when they signed two MAX-contracts of Grant Hill and T-Mac in the offseason...


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

The number one team right now that looks to have the best *"Cap Flexibility"* in 2010 FA offseason is the San Antonio Spurs whom only big contracts will be Tim Duncan & Parker. Their plan seems to be signing a star FA inwhich the team is in need of....before resigning Ginobli and their other FA players on the team. 

*My guess is....*

Duncan, Ginobli, and Parker will be in the 2010-11 FINALS.....this season and next season FINALS belong to Kobe, Lebron, and D.Wade, out of the 3 Super-Stars they have these two seasons to get their Championship Ring before the Spurs take back their Crown in the 2010-11 season.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*My point has been proven*

It was tried once before regarding cap space. It was successful (proving that it can be done). The Magic didn't have the staff, the willing ownership, the management, or location (media-wise). They got players, true. But not the ilk of Wade, Lebron, etc. McGrady was not a star at that time, and Hill was coming off serious injuries. Not the same class of players. 

I doubt any of these guys sign long term with the spurs. Duncan IS the Spurs and he is getting near the end as a dominant player. I am also well aware there are other teams with space, but none with enough space to attract (2) players. The Cavs can add one to give them 2, and the heat has the same situation. As I said, I don't think Wade or Lebron are coming. I AM in favor of the cap space. This team had NO FUTURE with the players on the roster. The players had to be changed and I simply see no other way than the way they are doing it. Would they make the playoffs with the old players? Maybe, but who cares. They would have been cannon fodder for the other teams in the playoffs. Same as always, too good to get good picks, too bad to advance, and over the cap. No future. I have no idea what the team will be like in '10, but it will be much different. I am OK with that.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: My point has been proven*



alphaorange said:


> It was tried once before regarding cap space. It was successful (proving that it can be done). The Magic didn't have the staff, the willing ownership, the management, or location (media-wise). They got players, true. But not the ilk of Wade, Lebron, etc. McGrady was not a star at that time, and Hill was coming off serious injuries. Not the same class of players.
> 
> I doubt any of these guys sign long term with the spurs. Duncan IS the Spurs and he is getting near the end as a dominant player. I am also well aware there are other teams with space, but none with enough space to attract (2) players. The Cavs can add one to give them 2, and the heat has the same situation. As I said, I don't think Wade or Lebron are coming. I AM in favor of the cap space. This team had NO FUTURE with the players on the roster. The players had to be changed and I simply see no other way than the way they are doing it. Would they make the playoffs with the old players? Maybe, but who cares. They would have been cannon fodder for the other teams in the playoffs. Same as always, too good to get good picks, too bad to advance, and over the cap. No future. I have no idea what the team will be like in '10, but it will be much different. I am OK with that.


um, no the bulls tried it that offseason too, they just failed, they missed out on grant hill, tim duncan , tim thomas, eddie jones, austin chroshere, t-mac and wound up with brad miller and ron mercer, 

the magic's targets that off-season were tim duncan and grant hill, 2 all nba players...i think they were certainly in the same category as the guys in summer 2010, Tim Duncan is probably the best power forward in the history of the game, when Wade and James can claim the same at their respective positions without getting laughed at you let me know.

and grant hill's injury at the time wasn't considered nearly as serious as it turned out to be..

you think NY has everything compared that matters to free agents , it seems highly unlikely considering New york has one of the highest state tax rate i believe and states like texas and florida have no state tax at all. and with no winning tradition during this century why would a guy like James leave his title contending team for a bad team for less money, wade has already won a title in miami and he has a chance for a really good run , he has mike beasley, plus they can add a max player in 2010...at this point ny cant match that ,

in reality only 5 (6 if you want to count T-mac) in their prime star free agents have switched teams in the last 13 years(mcdyess, brand, nash, hill,baron davis )

and add that to the one team that actually suceeded orlando was never more than 1st round fodder themselves so its not at all the cure all you are making it out to be.

the soundest way is to make a winner is to either aquire as many good players as you can through trade and draft well...free agency really hasn't been nearly as impactful as those 2 ways,


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Times change*

We'll have to wait and see. Hill was no way considered the level of wade, lebron, or Amare. Duncan, yes. Hill, not as much, since he was coming off an ankle injury that had not fully healed.

BTW, both players were actually part of a sign and trade. McGrady was far from a star at the time. It was his first season with the magic that he actually blossomed.

URWHATUEAT....If you can't admit that Anthony is a top ten player, you are beyond help. You use PER to support one side of your argument and against another. Which is it? Carmelo Anthony was the reason SU won the title in '03. Carmelo Anthony as a rookie helped the Nuggets completely turn around from one of the worst records to the playoffs, something that LeBron failed to come close to doing. You need to watch some ball with someone that could teach you what you are watching. He wasn't selected to the Olympic team because he was over rated. In fact, he was considered the 2nd best player on the team. You simply cannot put up the kind of all around numbers he does and not be great. Or maybe you know someone who has? Just read about him on Wlikipedia and you may get a clue.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Times change*



alphaorange said:


> We'll have to wait and see. Hill was no way considered the level of wade, lebron, or Amare. Duncan, yes. Hill, not as much, since he was coming off an ankle injury that had not fully healed.
> 
> BTW, both players were actually part of a sign and trade. McGrady was far from a star at the time. It was his first season with the magic that he actually blossomed.
> 
> URWHATUEAT....If you can't admit that Anthony is a top ten player, you are beyond help. You use PER to support one side of your argument and against another. Which is it? Carmelo Anthony was the reason SU won the title in '03. Carmelo Anthony as a rookie helped the Nuggets completely turn around from one of the worst records to the playoffs, something that LeBron failed to come close to doing. You need to watch some ball with someone that could teach you what you are watching. He wasn't selected to the Olympic team because he was over rated. In fact, he was considered the 2nd best player on the team. You simply cannot put up the kind of all around numbers he does and not be great. Or maybe you know someone who has? Just read about him on Wlikipedia and you may get a clue.


grant hill was pretty much the nba's best small forward for the last 4 years he was a piston , and MVP candidate .

carmelo is no grant hill....and neither is wade since he has never made an all-nba team .

and none of them are duncan who has a legit claim of being the best ever at his position something that puts him in the company of MJ magic bird wilt russell, roberson, malone and jabbar....james is great , but he aint there at least not yet.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Yes, Grant was very good.*

All NBA one time. That means top 5. 2nd team a few times. That means top 10. Not a GM in the league would take Duncan over LeBron. Wade is not in that class, either. Let's face it, LJ is the star of this class. Everyone else is 2a or 2b.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Yes, Grant was very good.*



alphaorange said:


> All NBA one time. That means top 5. 2nd team a few times. That means top 10. Not a GM in the league would take Duncan over LeBron. Wade is not in that class, either. Let's face it, LJ is the star of this class. Everyone else is 2a or 2b.


hill was all-nba 2nd team when the all nba 1st team had duncan and karl malone at forward,(or duncan and garnett.) 

he was the nba's best small forward in those years.

thats what I said , i never said top 5.

and at similar points in their careers its almost a certainty most GM's would take duncan before James , not now because duncan is signifcantly older...not because James is going to have a better career or is a better player.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

*Re: Times change*



alphaorange said:


> We'll have to wait and see. Hill was no way considered the level of wade, lebron, or Amare. Duncan, yes. Hill, not as much, since he was coming off an ankle injury that had not fully healed.
> 
> BTW, both players were actually part of a sign and trade. McGrady was far from a star at the time. It was his first season with the magic that he actually blossomed.
> 
> URWHATUEAT....If you can't admit that Anthony is a top ten player, you are beyond help. You use PER to support one side of your argument and against another. Which is it? Carmelo Anthony was the reason SU won the title in '03. Carmelo Anthony as a rookie helped the Nuggets completely turn around from one of the worst records to the playoffs, something that LeBron failed to come close to doing. You need to watch some ball with someone that could teach you what you are watching. He wasn't selected to the Olympic team because he was over rated. In fact, he was considered the 2nd best player on the team. You simply cannot put up the kind of all around numbers he does and not be great. Or maybe you know someone who has? Just read about him on Wlikipedia and you may get a clue.



*I believe at the time when Grant Hill was a FA....*he was considered the Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, and Jordan of the NBA the 2 previous seasons *(The league top Tripple-Double player). *
Grant Hill received the highest salary of all FA that offseason. 

*Kiki Vandeweigh fired coach Dantoni and drafted Carmelo Anthony....*to add Melo to the league best rebounding and shotblocking bigman rotation that season "Camby, Nene, and Chris Anderson"....plus Kiki added young FA PG-Andre Miller to challenge PG-Earl Boykins who will be the Starter or backup....and I believe SG-Voshon Lenard average 16 points during Carmelo rookie season. 
*Those 7 players in the rotation got Denver to the playoffs.*


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

urwhatueati8god said:


> To say that nobody has tried to do what the Knicks are doing is only partially accurate. Nobody has tried to do what the Knicks are trying to do in such a short period of time. The Knicks are rebuilding whether anybody wants to word it that way or not. To say that the team was better off before the trades of Zach Randolph and Jamal Crawford is the equivalent of saying that the Clippers are better than the Kings. Yes, the Clippers are statistically better than the Kings. They also have albatross contracts on mostly overpaid schmucks that keep them from acquiring any players that would get them to the next level and they lose their first round pick next year to boot.
> 
> Rebuilding is going to be hard as hell for this team. They had the highest payroll in the league and nothing to show for it. If the team had made the playoffs, they would have been done in the first round regardless. The team had no potential. Crawford has been blacklisted from the Warriors and the two general managers who trusted Randolph and Crawford with their respective franchises are likely to be fired in the off-season. How anybody was supposed to be tricked into thinking they had any value whatsoever is beyond any and all logic. They are both overpaid players who shouldn't be anything better than a fourth option on a good team.
> 
> Should the 2010 plan fail, it will merely take longer to rebuilt than originally thought. The Knicks will just need to go out and acquire more picks with whatever talent they have and it should hopefully lead to prosperity. Being smart with the picks would certainly help to. The Knicks already have the likes of Wilson Chandler who is a good fourth option or mediocre third option and Danilo Gallinari who is a good third option or mediocre second option. Obtaining any one of the top three free agents in the 2010 class would go a great way and obtaining another member would solidify team as a powerhouse in the eastern conference. If they are unable to do so, 2010 won't bode well for them and they should be able to make up for it with a quality draft pick.



Alot of your opinions gain points and alot of your opinions take away points. Crawful should've been traded in the offseason not during the season. With Zach Randolph lowering his trade-value with the offseason Bar-Brawl but comming to Training-Camp healthy buying into Dantoni's system with 18-14 stats that brings wins....u dont trade a player with that performance in the 11 game of the season u wait awhile (before deadline) to get a decent player in return (Brad Miller, Tyson Chandler, Mark Gasol, Boozer). 
Walsh trading Zach Randolph to help his friend (Dunleavy) keep his job as Clippers G.M. and Headcoach (2-12 start) did not appeal to Zbo b/c his perfomance did a flip to the performance he gave us last season....Zach DUI was the icing on the cake for Dunleavy job, FA Brand walking to Philly, Kaman & Camby complaining injury, Signing FA Baron Davis to a salary way above his performance, losing this year draft pick. Clippers Dunleavy is good as FIRED. 

Did the New Regime really enhance the Knicks future-goal with the transaction they made during this season? No! No! No! 
1) Mardy Collins and Renaldo Balkman were under cheap rookie contract that expires in 2010. 
2) Crawful, Zach, and Curry are scorers inwhich alot of teams whom dont have a chance of getting any of the 2010 FA will and would trade for these Knick scorers. 
3) Our goal should've been trying to trade for one of the elite 2010 FA in this 2009 offseason. 
4) we may lose to great energy players this offseason to FA which will come back to bite us (Lee & Nate).
5) What type of roster will we have next season? 

Wilson Chandler overall performance in his second season stands as a young up comming Star-Player. Gallinari will never be able to match close to Chandler performance.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Calling BS again*

Grant Hill was very good..great in fact, but you could get struck by lightning by saying was considered the level of Bird, Magic, or MJ. Those guys are probably the top 3 players of all time. A healthy Hill gets to be top 20-25. As usual, your post is full of hyperbole. The year he was a FA he had -0- triple doubles. The year before? He had one. The year before? He had four. He had 13 and 14 his second and 3rd year respectively and never came close to that again. 

I'm sorry but your premise that we had anyone on these past few teams that could have been packaged for one of these premier FAs is just plain dumb fantasy. We couldn't trade our entire team for Lebron..or Wade...or anyone else. Who do you suggest other teams might want? Lee? Lee and a first round pick will get you...uh...a better first round pick. Patently ridiculous statement. I can't tell you how many articles I have read where a GM is quoted as not being interested in ANY NY players other than maybe Lee or Nate to a much lesser degree. I'm also so regretful that we traded Zach before he had a chance to improve his value by getting a DUI. Boy, that was a dumb move by Walsh.

I've got news for you. Gallinari is already better than Chandler. Outside of athleticism, there is NOTHING that Wilson does better. You got eyes...use them. Its OK, though. Chandler will be better BECAUSE of Gallo next year.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

Grant Hill last 2 seasons with Detroit he averaged 25 points, 7 rebounds, and 6 assist per game. 

*Grant Hill second season in the NBA he played 80 games averaging 20 pts, 10 rbd, 7 ast, and 1 stl.* 
The NBA and its fans after Grant Hill second season stats thought a young "Oscar Roberson". 


Wilson Chandler second season performance in the NBA has become the Knicks Top Valuable Player on the team with his relentless overall skillz on both sides of the court. 
What I seen from Wilson Chandler rookie season to now I could actually say next season will be his Star season where his name will come up for the All-Star game. 

Alot of top teams in the NBA would eat Curry contract as long as Wilson Chandler is thrown in the trade. 
That can not be said about "Project" Gallo.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*I'll take that bet all day*

Chandler will not sniff all star consideration next year. Bank on it.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

*Re: I'll take that bet all day*



alphaorange said:


> Chandler will not sniff all star consideration next year. Bank on it.


:10:

He'll never be an all-star.


----------



## Truknicksfan (Mar 25, 2005)

Chandler could be brought up for all-star "consideration" in a few years, but if we need him to be more then a really good #3 option, we are most likely in bad shape lol. So maybe its better for us if we never need him to be an allstar lol.

But then again im a chandler homer so..............:wtf: do I know.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Hey, I like Chandler too*

But he will NEVER be a #1 option, and maybe only a borderline #2. He has a ton of physical ability but he just has so far to go to be an allstar. Gallo, on the other hand, has so many skills already and everyone who knows anything about ball can see them. Many less questions about Gallinari.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

If we're depending on Chandler and/or Gallo to be the cornerstones of this franchise, then we are in serious doo-doo. I still haven't seen much out of Chandler to convince me he'll be anything more than a strong defensive player and I'm too concerned with Gallo's back injuries to think he'll be fulfilling his potential. Under the current circumstances, I believe that both will be excellent role players but clearly are not going to be able to shoulder the load of a team together.

I think the heat is on Donnie Walsh this offseason to augment our team with the young players that will actually make the playoffs interesting in the future for we Knick fans. The draft generally offers an excellent opportunity to bring in those type of players. Although the draft this year is pegged to be one of the weaker drafts to date, it still offers some intriguing talents/prospects. I suggest looking to start investing in high seeded draft picks by using whatever assets we currently have available (expiring contracts, lower seeded draft picks and players). This is really the only way we're going to get better as a team because (insert 2010 superstar FA) will not walking through that door; if we're going to build this team, we're going to do it like all the other teams that choose to do so by shedding contracts.

P.S., what are people's opinions of Jordan Hill? He's looked pretty impressive to me and would not mind making a deal to move up in the draft to select both he and Ricky Rubio. Thoughts?


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*You're underrating Gallo*

This kid is going to be real good. He did things with a bad back that Chandler never did in his first year. His injury was apparently not serious. He had a nerve rubbing against bone. Fixed and he is walking already with no pain except at the entry site. Mark it down....he will be special.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: You're underrating Gallo*



alphaorange said:


> This kid is going to be real good. He did things with a bad back that Chandler never did in his first year. His injury was apparently not serious. He had a nerve rubbing against bone. Fixed and he is walking already with no pain except at the entry site. Mark it down....he will be special.



Back problems should never be underestimated. The kid is a solid player but that doesn't mean his back problems will allow him to demonstrate how good he really is. Quentin Richardson was something of a beast physically during his younger days before back injuries robbed him of his athleticism. McGrady was a beast as well and actually skilled enough to make turn those assets into one of the best products in the NBA before back injuries staggered his career. As much as doctors believe they may have found the cause of Gallo's pain, they thought they had the right remedy earlier in the season and that clearly wasn't the case. Even if those injuries were not relevant, it is very hard to see how Gallo could be an all-star given the limited amount of time he played and how limited his role was (did he do anything beyond shoot jump shots offensively and make the extra pass?).


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Apples and Oranges*

Pippen would be a better comparison. Also, Qrich was never what I would call a beast. In fact, he looks quicker now than he ever did and still has very good hops. He is also apparently pain free. Gallo didn't really have significant damage. The pain was the issue. Fixed.


----------

