# Things are looking up



## Fordy74 (May 22, 2002)

http://www.nypost.com/sports/knicks/16890.htm


HINGS ARE REALLY LOOKING UP

By MARC BERMAN
PHOTO STEPH LADDER:
Stephon Marbury shoots over the Wizards' Brendan Haywood for two of his 24 points during the Knicks' 99-86 victory in Washington yesterday. Associated Press
Email Archives
Print Reprint
March 8, 2004 -- WASHINGTON - The Knicks are rolling again. The awkward adjustment is ancient history. The new guys, Nazr Mohammed and Tim Thomas, are fitting in now and the formerly rehabbing Allan Houston has his mojo back.

Marbury was brilliant, Houston vintage and Mohammed an inside scoring force in the second half of their 99-86 romp over the Wizards in yesterday's MCI Center matinee.

Even rookie Michael Sweetney, playing on his former home turf, supplied much-needed grit. The former Georgetown star pulled down a career-high 10 rebounds - seven offensive - in logging a career-high 23 minutes.

In winning their third straight game following a six-game slide, the Knicks no longer feel threatened by the bunched-up teams behind them. The Knicks are in sixth, and though only 11/2 games separates sixth and 10th place, Marbury talked about a top-4 finish.

"We're getting back into our groove but we haven't turned the corner yet," said Marbury, who recorded 24 points, 13 assists and five steals in his third straight superlative outing. "We want to try to get home-court advantage. We're no longer thinking about just making the playoffs. Our mindset has to be, not if we make the playoffs, but where we want to be in the playoffs."

Homecourt in the first round is a reach, as the Knicks (29-35) trail No. 4 Milwaukee by five games and No. 5 New Orleans by 41/2. But ensuring sixth would avoid a first-round matchup vs. the Nets or Pacers. "We're definitely coming closer and understanding each other's games and what each other likes to do," said Mohammed, who scored 15 points and grabbed seven rebounds.

Marbury got the ball to a hot Houston in the first half, then did it all. Marbury lit up the nation's capital during a game-clinching 12-0 run late in the third quarter.

In his fourth game back from a nearly five-week absence, Houston scored his post-rehab-high 23 points, 17 in the first half, making 9 of 18 shots. He looked more confident, getting true lift on his jumper.

"I've now got my legs under me," Houston said. "The way I felt, you don't realize what you were missing. Even the last two, three games, you think you're OK but you're really not there yet. When you feel comfortable enough to mix it up, put the ball on the floor, come off screens, you have a good base under you."

"Allan's getting his rhythm back," Lenny Wilkens said. "We talked about it would take three, four games."

In perhaps the game's biggest play, Marbury slapped the ball from Gilbert Arenas (28 points) as he drove into the lane. Marbury flew coast to coast for a layup and foul with 2.5 seconds left in the third. Though he missed the free throw, the Knicks were up 75-62 entering the fourth, and Washington's spirit was broken.

During the losing streak, Wilkens acknowledged the Knicks were "taking a step back" to take steps forward. It's happening now.

"I'm pretty happy the way we're playing," Wilkens said. "I see the growth."

Knicks 99 Wizards 86


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I love it when a plan comes together.

- Hannible (from the A-team)


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

The Knicks beat 3 crap teams in a row, and suddenly "everything is coming together." Call me when they beat three .500 teams in a row. Something they'll have to do in a playoff round.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

*Blatant negativy*



> The Knicks beat 3 crap teams in a row, and suddenly "everything is coming together." Call me when they beat three .500 teams in a row. Something they'll have to do in a playoff round.


Does this nannering neighbob of negativity really belong in a Knick forum????

Is it possible for anyone to post without his spewing?????

Its getting a little old


----------



## Tapseer (Jun 13, 2002)

:laugh: LOL I have been hanging on the sidelines the last couple of weeks, just checking what people got to say. I really didn't want to jump in the back and forth stuff. Hey ya'll, Rashidis' a Knick fan, he just sees the glass as being completely empty, as opposed to half full. We all need a little pessimism to keep us grounded as fans, and you have to admit Rashidi keeps us on our toes with his infinite stat reporting (regardless of whether their true or made up). This whole KVH vs. TT thing, I want to chime in on this. When our jumpshots were falling prior to this trade, our team looked fantastic, a real force to contend with. But when our shots weren't falling (i.e. those horrible Houston losses) we were horrible. I think IT saw what I saw. We were a perimeter team too dependent on the J. If they weren't falling, there was no help for us. The last 2 Knick losses before the All Star break, I thought someone changed the rim size at the Garden on the Knicks. Now you have a team with a little more balance. I'm not ready to make any proclamations yet, but now with Houston getting his legs under him, you kind of get to see the vision IT had for the team. I was one of the people who hated to see Van Horn go. I liked the Nazr Mohammed part of the trade, but not the TT for KVH. We just have to give it time and see what happens. One last point. We're a sub .500 team. If we have 3 consecutive wins against other sub .500 teams...they matter. It's called beating the teams you have to beat. You get a few of these to build team camariede, chemistry, then you go take on the big dogs. You don't start from the mountain top, you start from the valley and work your way up.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

Actually I agree with alot of what he says. The fact that it isn't always flattering to the Knicks doesn't make it so. His arguments about why certain % should not be compared without qualifiers are very valid. And it is true that they have not beaten anyone of quality in this last small streak..yet. Any real fan will sometimes have to take off the blue and orange tinted shades and see things for what they are.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

alfa,rashidi make ALOT of great points..but he also posts some very innacurate numbers which i am sure he is fully aware of..but i am done with that..its up to him ti persist or change....

As for tapseers points thay are very very good......

I am very much a bottom line guy in business and sports...I panned layden because he had 2 years of high payroll and no success.....I pan glenn sather due to that as well....

I will not deny that we have a LOSING record since the TT Naz/KVH Doleac trade...To me that is the bottom line..I wont blame it on TT or Naz,but i would have a tough time defending it..And yes i could bring up Marburys poor play....But i am a numbers guy and make my living doing it.....

I really liked Van Horn...alot...But it is clear to see Isiahs logic in this trade....We needed more athleticism,a slasher and some offensive production from the post....The guys have played well,especially Naz...9 games is simply not enough time to jump to any conclusions......

layden got a 2 year pass on his performance..i would think isiah deserves at least that,considering the team has gone from a .400 team to above .500 since the marbury trade and that is with constant lineup changes...


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> layden got a 2 year pass on his performance..i would think isiah deserves at least that,considering the team has gone from a .400 team to above .500 since the marbury trade and that is with constant lineup changes...


Layden "failed" because his steal (McDyess) got hurt. A healthy McDyess is pretty much the best big man in the east, on par with Jermaine O'Neal and Kenyon Martin.

And if it took 2 years to give Layden a grade on his performance, then perhaps we should do the same and wait 2 years before giving Isiah flying colors? See who gets taken with those picks the Knicks gave up, see what happens with the injury prone Penny and Nazr, see what happens with Lampe and Vujanic, see if Marbury breaks down like Iverson, see if the Knicks get swept out of the playoffs, see how badly Isiah overpays Kurt, see how many championships he brings.

There are lots of things that are far from set in stone when it comes to Isiah. So let's refrain from giving him such a large pat on the back, espeically since his "track record" coming in was a lot worse than Layden's.


----------



## the Trent Tuckers (Feb 15, 2004)

i agree with 'shidi, its great that the knicks are winning now, but its just annoying that they seem to have difficulty doing it against good teams. On the other hand the team has never been "complete" against good teams. H2O didnt play for 5 weeks, Kurt got ejected and suspended for 2 big games. We make a big trade going into a rough stretch. So lets see what happens next. I hope that we have everything together now, but I think next season will be the real barometer. 
I hope that they go to Milwaukee and smack the Bucks around.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Excuses, excuses. Layden didn't do well because McDyess got hurt. Newflash, injuries happen and he had nothing left when they did happen. Glad Layden is gone as he didn't do anything worthwhile. 

I said when he signed Mutombo that it was a stupid decision. Anyone who saw the Nets last year knew the guy was finished as a basketball player.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Hong Kong,I agree with you ...There is a reason a team would eat mutombos salary...But in laydens defense it was a relatively cheap bet and he is not a bad backup for 15 minutes..ON the other hand,I think The dyss trade was a TERRIBLE gamble compounded wit some terrible signings...But you know what???You are right...excuses,excuses..managemnet will listen for only so long and then its a bottom line business..Bottom line ,Layden failed....


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Rashidi,i agree..i would never give isiah flying colors at this point...i think hes 15 and 14,give or take a little....

but it is an improvement,thats undeniable,but at what cost which is impossible to tell as of today

where you and i disagree is i feel Layden made a very risky trade signing Dyss and in essence risked his career....His knee problems were well advertised and that was the risk of the deal...IT has made a different bet,trading away youth and a potential lottery pick...

time will tell,but in the meantime,it would apperar that the ship has at least stabalised


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

This year is a success to me, because I saw no way the Knicks making the playoffs this season before the year season began.

Now they have a shot to get into a first round 4-5 match-up because the Bucks and Hornets are fading. I will take it. Make no mistake about it, the Knicks (if Houston is healthy) can beat Indiana, New Jersey and Detroit. The Knicks have the best backcourt in the East and that is going to help them. All we need to do is neutralize the Big Men in the East, not stop them, because no one is going to stop Marbury and Houston. I would love to see the Nets because Kidd can't guard Point Guards anymore, so Kittles would have to get eaten up by Marbury. 

I don't know why people can't just sit back and enjoy the ride.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Newflash, injuries happen and he had nothing left when they did happen.


So I suppose that Grant Hill's injuries are John Gabriel's fault?

The Knicks also traded an injury prone player for McDyess, so it's not like they had any less than they did before.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Hong Kong,once again I COMPLETELY agree with you....We were a .375 ball club that now may make the 6th spot and could very well beat any team in the EAST...Plus with marbury and some occasional nastiness from TT this team is fun to watch..And i was at the game when TT dunked in Dalemberts face and the garden ERUPTED..the energy is definetly back .....

My biggest problem with this board and the members is you have a handful who will not clearly state what they consider a success or failure for the Knicks..So no matter what happens,they can always play monday morning quarterback.....

i am with you...if you told me the knicks would make the playoffs this year after laydens start,i would have thought you were nuts....

As long as the Knicks make the playoffs,I consider it a success.i do think the east isup for grabs...I am really enjoying the new NY Knicks..I cant tell you how much i hated watching the Chaney knicks squad,win lose or draw


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> 
> So I suppose that Grant Hill's injuries are John Gabriel's fault?
> ...


And guess what. Gabriel's job will soon be gone. It may not be his fault but what about signing Juwan Howard and Tyronn Lue and Shammond Williams and drafting Steven Hunter, Reece Gaines and Jerryl Sasser. 

He has done a horrible job.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!
> Hong Kong,once again I COMPLETELY agree with you....We were a .375 ball club that now may make the 6th spot and could very well beat any team in the EAST...Plus with marbury and some occasional nastiness from TT this team is fun to watch..And i was at the game when TT dunked in Dalemberts face and the garden ERUPTED..the energy is definetly back .....
> 
> My biggest problem with this board and the members is you have a handful who will not clearly state what they consider a success or failure for the Knicks..So no matter what happens,they can always play monday morning quarterback.....
> ...


I am more interested in next season's Knicks team, but I am enjoying the renaissance of the Knicks this year. I have no expectations for them, even if they were to miss the playoffs. I will just root and root for them to keep winning and if they don't that is okay, because I never anticipated a playoff season this year. If the Knicks win any playoff series then the season I have had is gravy. I have always said that the playoffs w/o the Garden is not the playoffs. It just isn't.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

This is a non stat issue so i will address this



> So I suppose that Grant Hill's injuries are John Gabriel's fault?


There is a HUGE difference between trading for a player who happens to incur an injury by chance as opposed to trading for a player who has a very very poor medical record the last 2 seasons..The odds are haeavily stacked against you in the latter....(Keep in mind,Camby was misdiagnosed as well)

As an example rashidi,Do you think Vin baker being an alcoholic is more likely to have "personal" issues than a player who is not an alcoholic????

Please be reasonable 

Rashidi,everyone must ultimately be held accountable for their actions....layden took a calculated gamble and unfortunately lost..


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

rashidi,if you dont mind me asking,what sort of work do you do????you need not respond

we have such different views,i m curious


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> And guess what. Gabriel's job will soon be gone. It may not be his fault but what about signing Juwan Howard and Tyronn Lue and Shammond Williams and drafting Steven Hunter, Reece Gaines and Jerryl Sasser.
> 
> He has done a horrible job.


That is correct. I completely hold Gabriel's drafts against him. That is why the Magic have not advanced since bringing in McGrady and Hill.

And that's also the difference between Layden and Gabriel. Layden brought in Frank Williams, Maciej Lampe, Mike Sweetney, and Milos Vujanic. He was able to rebuild a fading Utah team into a deep Finals team with late draft picks.



> to trading for a player who has a very very poor medical record the last 2 seasons..The


McDyess missed one season with Denver before the trade. Please keep a stable count. He was averaging 19 ppg in the preseason when he went down. Do you remember when he went down? McDyess didn't even know he was hurt! He was laughing as he went back to the lockerroom. He didn't even land on it badly. It's just one of those things that "happen". 

Kurt Thomas spent more time with a cast on his leg than he did playing early in his career. He played 74 games his rookie year, 18 games his 2nd year, and 5 games his 3rd year, before the Knicks signed him. Since then, he has pretty much played every game he hasn't been suspended for (blame that on Knick doctors too).

Isn't re-signing Kurt Thomas a calculated risk? His leg could go at any time too, and the likelyhood only increases with age. How about Mohammed? He has played 26, 28, 58, 82, and 35 games prior to this season. He's hardly a safe bet either. Right now they look good because they haven't gotten hurt as Knicks yet. McDyess looked good too before his injury, double double good, and certainly an improvement over the annually injured Camby. People tend to forget that Camby's injuries killed what little hope the Knicks even had at a playoff run the year before. He is the least durable of any player even mentioned in this discussion. He is the Allen Iverson of Centers, except AI had the guts to play through his injuries. I don't see his durability magically recieving a boost as he grows older.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

rashidi,i am really curious to know what you do for a living..your responces fascinates me and i honestly cant see your logic which is cool...

I work on wall street and run an equity derivatives desk..I am a total numbers guy and analyse risk all day and trade based off of various distributions and models that my quants develop....

The major difference in our philosophy is that i can not afford excuses..Nobody cares in my field...Its bottom line,and I am as good as my last trade..

I am guessing you are in a creative field as our brains function completely differently.....


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

Being an NBA GM is more about creativity than results. What result are you searching for? A great season, or a good season? I happen to think the Knicks would be closer to a great season by sucking through a depressing 3 years instead of winning mediocrely for 3 years. Don Nelson took the Knicks to a 49 win season and people hated him. The 4th seed isn't good enough. If you're not 1-3, you're good, not great. Good doesn't win anything, which puts Good in the same boat as Bad. Except Bad has a better chance of becoming great, especially in the way the CBA is structured nowadays.

Can someone tell me what the plan for the Knicks is now? What do the Knicks do to improve next season? Right now the plan seems to be "give this team a full season" but what are they doing now that we won't see next season? They can't beat the big guns, and they go .500 against the other medicore (or worse) teams of the league. How does this team improve to become "great"? The only hope is if the Knicks can sign a selfish and overrated player that despises the media well below market value for a team with less of a chance at winning than the one he's on now.

Seriously, what is this plan to get higher than the 4th seed in the next 3 years? Play the season, hope that nobody on the Knicks gets injured, and hope that players on the Nets, Pistons, and Pacers simultaneously go down with injuries? And hope that they don't draft any studs?


----------



## Fordy74 (May 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> Being an NBA GM is more about creativity than results. What result are you searching for? A great season, or a good season? I happen to think the Knicks would be closer to a great season by sucking through a depressing 3 years instead of winning mediocrely for 3 years. Don Nelson took the Knicks to a 49 win season and people hated him. The 4th seed isn't good enough. If you're not 1-3, you're good, not great. Good doesn't win anything, which puts Good in the same boat as Bad. Except Bad has a better chance of becoming great, especially in the way the CBA is structured nowadays.
> 
> Can someone tell me what the plan for the Knicks is now? What do the Knicks do to improve next season? Right now the plan seems to be "give this team a full season" but what are they doing now that we won't see next season? They can't beat the big guns, and they go .500 against the other medicore (or worse) teams of the league. How does this team improve to become "great"? The only hope is if the Knicks can sign a selfish and overrated player that despises the media well below market value for a team with less of a chance at winning than the one he's on now.
> ...


Well for starters, we have Marbury who is one of the better and exciting players in the NBA. We now have a reason to watch the games and see MSG alive again. Thats not a bad start. Isiah is building the team around Marbury. At least we have somewhat of a direction now as oppossed to a few months ago.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

I agree with everything you just said. I was young like a lot of these guys here when the knicks won the 'ships. I am also an SU fan, a Giant fan, and a Yankee fan. Winning it all is what it is about...anything less is not acceptable. I applaud IT for his work ethic and his creativity...but....if these guys don't win it all(and that is what this is about, right?) what the hell is plan B? He has painted himself in the corner and I believe you are right about this team. It is simply not good enough as constructed to win a title. Compounding that fact is another fact.....the East is only going to get better. Right now it is as bad as it gets. If we were in the west, we'd be home at playoff time. For me, a few exciting plays and not much to hope for in the future is not good enough. I am one of the guys that wanted to clean house and free up cap space. I felt we had some young guys that had a real chance to grow into real players and with the lottery pick coming this year and some pocket money in a couple of more, NY could have been at the top of the heap (which is where we want to be, right?) There is nothing wrong with admiring what is going on in phoenix..they are doing a hell of a job and are going to be a force..no question.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I thought the Knicks should clean house at the beginning of the season as well, but in all honestly with Allen Houston having his current deal, there is no way the Knicks will ever be able to clean house until that deal and the Luc Longley and Larry Johnson deals are truly off the cap. 

The Knicks had no flexibility and the one good thing the Knicks have is that Tim Thomas, Mohammed, Hardaway, Anderson all come off the books about a year before Houston. When Houston signed that 100 million dollar deal, the Knicks were not going to have cap room till the deal was finished. 

Leave it to Dolan and Layden to outbid themselves in the services for Houston. It is reminiscient of Tom Hicks outbidding himself to pay for A-Rod. Too bad we are the Yankees of basketball, so we can't trade him. :dead: 

The Knicks have a chance to go to the Finals this year. The championship is never set in stone as anything could happen in the playoffs. The Lakers could easily have only one title as opposed to 3 and the injuries will also play a huge role in how this years playoffs shake out.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

uh what? Say we stayed with Layden, made no trades. Okay we suck this year, we win 33 games, get a lottery pick. were still the highest paid team in the league with a bad record. You cant make a young good team if your this far over the payroll. Our lottery picks would just walk when their contract expires. I dont have the patience to wait til 2008 to finally start rebuilding. Not an entire century of sucking...please!

now when marbury plays well, you conveniently say that Layden was behind the deal since it takes a while for trades to be made, but when all is not well, its Isiahs fault and he traded out future away. We had no future. now at least in 2008 we wont suck, and the payroll will be down anyway. So the same thing happens, just Isiah's way is more fun.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> there is no way the Knicks will ever be able to clean house until that deal and the Luc Longley and Larry Johnson deals are truly off the cap.


They already are off the cap. If they were still on the cap, we'd exceed 100 million in payroll.



> The Knicks have a chance to go to the Finals this year.


So do about 20 other teams in the league.


----------



## Perennial All Star (Aug 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> 
> They already are off the cap. If they were still on the cap, we'd exceed 100 million in payroll.
> ...


Actually 16 to be exact. And the rest have a chance at the lottery, which is where we would have been with Layden and stuck with the 9th pick an d the highest payroll and your boy Eisley.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

I never said stay with Layden...I didn't like the way he built this team. However, even with those guys coming off the books, we still gave up 2 first rounders....How many times has that bitten a team? I liked the potential of a 7' young guy with skills...of a Sweetney...of a Williams and maybe a Vujanic. Add a fairly young KVH and we had something. Another lottery pick should have yielded a solid player...That being siad, I DO like Marbury. Its just that I think Rash may be right. He may spend his best years without a good enough supporting cast (see Ewing).


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I have no doubt that Vujanic was not going to sign here because he knew if he underperformed that he would wilter under the media crush. There is a reason a lot of FA's don't consider NYC when free-agency comes up, because our media is the most scrutinizing in America. 

Webber said he wanted to play in NYC, he is a damn liar. He can barely take the media out in SacTown. How would he do here? The Knicks need a guy who isn't afraid of the big stage and the scrutiny and we have that guy in Marbury, simple as that. Now just enjoy the ride instead of complaining about a past you can't change. 

Move forwards and not backwards.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Actually 16 to be exact. And the rest have a chance at the lottery, which is where we would have been with Layden and stuck with the 9th pick an d the highest payroll and your boy Eisley.


16? The playoffs are not set in stone, to be exact. There are like 6 east teams fighting for the last 3 spots, and probably 2 teams fighting for the 8th spot in the west.

The Knicks for instance, could still find themselves in the lottery, just by going on a 4 game losing streak.


----------



## The OUTLAW (Jun 13, 2002)

Watch out behind you. With the win tonight (their 8th in the last 10 games) have pulled within 1 game of the Knicks. I think you guys picked the right time to turn it back on.

Oops, actually we are tied with you but you have one game on us in the loss column.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> That is correct. I completely hold Gabriel's drafts against him. That is why the Magic have not advanced since bringing in McGrady and Hill.
> 
> ...


First I would like to say that I certainly think that there is a difference between signing Grant Hill and McDyess. Before he came to Orlando, Grant Hill didn't have any serious injuries that made ppl wary of him. In fact, everyone wanted to get Hill, he was the prize of free agency. Orlando was suppose to be contending for #1 in the East with McGrady and Hill. However, Hill was unfortunately injuried. No one ever saw that happening. It was just one of those unlucky injuries that end a players career. 

McDyess, however, is a different case. Everyone knew of his injury ridden past. Many teams didn't want him even after the Nuggets made himavailable. It was a medical red falg for him. The Knicks took the risk that McDyess would be fully recovered from the injury and traded for him. However, they knew of his past and that there would be a decent chance that 1) McDyess wasn't fully recovered and 2) McDyess would get injured again. McDyess proved he could still play, but he was injuried again. It is a fact that when you injury yourself and heal, it is a lot easier for you to injury yourself again, especially the same place. I know this from personal experience. You can't compare Hill's injury and McDyess' because Layden knew that McDyess had a chance of being injuried again, while Gabriel had no idea Hill would be injuried so badly. 

I was wondering, Rashidi, you stated that Layden brought in Frank Williams, Maciej Lampe, Mike Sweetney, and Milos Vujanic to rebuild the Knicks, correct? Layden was going to rebuild the Knicks with his late draft picks. However, what is the differance with Layden's picks and Gabriel's picks? Gabriel was going to rebuild the Magic with his picks too. What makes Williams, Sweetney, Lampe and Vujanic better than Steven Hunter, Reece Gaines and Jerryl Sasser? What is the differance? I know you can say that Lampe and co have more "potential," but until each player actually produces, I wouldn't compare the players yet. Many players with potential have fizzeled (anyone want to o**** how many top ten picks havn't panned out?). None of the players above, with the exception of Frank Williams, have really done anything for their team. And this isn't an arguement between "now" and the "future." Gaines has more potential to be a better PG than Williams, for example. And btw I'm not saying Gabriel is a good GM either, he has done a pretty crappy job in Orlando, I'm just saying that you can't praise Layden for his drafts and criticize Gabriel for his when none of the players have really performed well in the NBA yet. 

To be fair, I was one of those fans who wanted to blow up the Knicks and rebuild. However, since the Marbury traded basically said no to that plan, I decided I was going to look on the bright side and support my team. If we didn't trade away our future, there was a chance that Lampe, Vujanic, and co would have developed into NBA starters. However, I don't think it would be a wise idea to totally rely on young, unproven players for your future like the Bulls. Yes there will be Van Horn, but do you want Van Horn to be your franchise player? I think we can agree that Van Horn's stats are a result of him not being the #1 option and that he wouldn't do too well as a #1. The Bulls had Jalen Rose, but it didn't do them any good. It would be foolish to hope that all of your prospects pan out and have your whole team's future on those few prospects. Lampe may be good, but it's gonna take some time, like that Nugget's guy who was #5 overall (Sitka?) Both Vujanic and Lampe and the two first rounders coud turn into something, but I wouldn't place my future on them and turn out to be like the Bulls. I believe that the Knicks can surround Marbury with enough talent to at least make it to the NBA championships. Marbury/Houston/TT/KT/Nazr with Mutumbo, Penny, Anderson, DeMarr, Frank Williams etc could make it out of the East. And to be honest, were the Knicks ever going to get a center to match up with the big men in the west? Lampe, no way, too skinny. If he puts on weight he will probably lose some of his quickness and SF skills IMO. With the two first round picks? For this years' draft we would probably have around the 7-9 pick, too low for Okafor (sp) and Paval and there aren't that many quality big men in the draft. In the future drafts, too hard to say. 

It is very true that we could have had a few great players from Lampe, Vujanic, and the 2 firsts. However, that would be a high risk, high reward strategy. there is also a big chance that we would get burned and be crappy for many more years. I don't want the Knicks to be like that. With Marbury, we may have traded away some of our "potential" but we gained a lot more stability. At least we know which way we should go with the team now, instead of staying crappy for a few years and praying that our prospects and draft picks would pan out. Looking at the past success of our drafts, it would be hard to believe that our future ones could be much better.


----------



## knicksfan (Jan 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> Excuses, excuses. Layden didn't do well because McDyess got hurt. Newflash, injuries happen and he had nothing left when they did happen. Glad Layden is gone as he didn't do anything worthwhile.
> 
> I said when he signed Mutombo that it was a stupid decision. Anyone who saw the Nets last year knew the guy was finished as a basketball player.


isnt this the same dikembe mutumbo that had like 7 blocks against his former team, the nets this year. isnt this the same mutumbo who many thought was robbed of an allstar spot. isnt this the same mutumbo whos 7-2 and the best center the knicks have had since patrick ewing. if not then i appologize, but if so then that is one move i have to agree i liked from layden. i havent liked many of his moves, but this was a good one. TELL ME DIFFERENT!!!!!!


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> McDyess, however, is a different case. Everyone knew of his injury ridden past.


Huh? Injury ridden past?

96-96: 76 of 82 games
96-97: 74 of 82 games
97-98: 81 of 82 games
98-99: 50 of 50 games
00-01: 70 of 82 games
01-02: 10 of 82 games

What are you talking about? McDyess played over 90% of his games prior to the knee injury. He only missed one season, which does not compare to the 2 seasons that Kurt Thomas missed, nor does it compare to Marcus Camby's brutal injury history.



> Many teams didn't want him even after the Nuggets made himavailable.


Got any sources on that one?



> It was a medical red falg for him. The Knicks took the risk that McDyess would be fully recovered from the injury and traded for him.


They also traded little of value for him. Other than Nene, what else are the Knicks missing out on? They dumped Mark Jackson on the Nuggets (they waived him afterwards) and got two draft picks, who ended up being F-Will and Lampe. The Camby/McDyess swap was risk for risk. Camby spent most of last year injured too, and he had never ever played more than 63 games in his career (something McDyess did 4 times pre-injury).



> However, they knew of his past and that there would be a decent chance that 1) McDyess wasn't fully recovered and 2) McDyess would get injured again. McDyess proved he could still play, but he was injuried again.


But that's no different than the Marcus Camby situation.



> You can't compare Hill's injury and McDyess' because Layden knew that McDyess had a chance of being injuried again, while Gabriel had no idea Hill would be injuried so badly.


But Layden also knew Camby had a chance of being injured again.



> I was wondering, Rashidi, you stated that Layden brought in Frank Williams, Maciej Lampe, Mike Sweetney, and Milos Vujanic to rebuild the Knicks, correct? Layden was going to rebuild the Knicks with his late draft picks. However, what is the differance with Layden's picks and Gabriel's picks? Gabriel was going to rebuild the Magic with his picks too. What makes Williams, Sweetney, Lampe and Vujanic better than Steven Hunter, Reece Gaines and Jerryl Sasser? What is the differance?


Let's take a look at what Orlando has done in recent drafts.

2003
Reece Gaines 16th
Zaza Pachulia 42nd
Keith Bogans 43rd (acquired from Bucks for cash)

2002
Ryan Humphrey 19th (acquired from Jazz for 18th pick Curtis Borchardt)

2001
Steven Hunter 15th
Brendan Haywood 20th (acquired from Cavs for Michael Doleac, soon traded to Wizards for future considerations)
Jeryl Sasser 22nd
Omar Cook 32nd (traded to Nuggets for future 1st round pick)

2000
Mike Miller 5th (rookie of year in weak class)
Keyon Dooling 10th (traded with Corey Maggette to Clippers for future 1st round pick)
Courtney Alexander 13th (traded to Mavs for future 1st round pick and cash)

1999
Laron Profit 38th

1998
Micahel Doleac 12th
Keon Clark 13th (traded to Nuggets, not sure for what)
Matt Harpring 15th
Miles Simon 42nd

1997
Johnny Taylor 17th
Eric Washington 47th

John Gabriel has been GM of the Magic for 7 seasons. During that time he has had a whopping 12 first round picks, with 6 second round picks.

12 first round picks. Whenever he DID draft a good player, he traded them for crap.

Keith Bogans is the only good player he pulled from the 2nd round. What's sad is that since 1999, Bogans appears to be the best draftee of the Magic after Mike Miller. Of course, the Magic certainly lucked out on that one, as they thought so highly of him that they passed him up at 42.

Make sense of this trade. Corey Maggette AND 10th pick Keyon Dooling for a future first round pick. I don't know which is more pathetic - the fact that Orlando took Dooling 10th, or the fact that they traded Maggette (the best player the Magic have drafted in the last 10 years) WITH HIM for a future first pick.

Mike Miller was traded with Humphrey for Drew Gooden and Gordon Giricek. Most thought this was a good trade. But then they picked up Juwan Howard, who is similarly talented to Gooden and plays the same position.

Matt Harpring was dealt for established stiff Andrew DeClerq.

Lampe has more potential than anyone the Magic drafted.
If the Knicks cut Frank Williams, let's just say he won't have trouble finding another NBA job like Jeryl Sasser. Sasser was a terrible pick. A combo guard that couldn't shoot or pass. Not exactly a good combo. Mike Sweetney on the other hand, at #9 clearly has a lot more value than most other Orlando bigs, like Doleac at 12th, Hunter at 15th, and Humphrey at 19th.



> And to be honest, were the Knicks ever going to get a center to match up with the big men in the west?


I don't really see Nazr doing any better than KT. 



> For this years' draft we would probably have around the 7-9 pick, too low for Okafor (sp) and Paval and there aren't that many quality big men in the draft. In the future drafts, too hard to say.


Actually the Knicks likely would have the 7th-8th pick or lower. There are only 6 teams in the league with sub .400 records. If they had not made the Marbury trade, then Houston's injury takes the Knicks out of the playoff race for good (it also means Houston would still probably be resting right now)

NBAdraft.net lists these centers in 1st round
Andre Bledrinis 6th
Pavel Podzolkine 8th
Martynas Andriuskevicius 11th
Ivan Chirieav 12th (7'1 SF)
Rafael Araujo 18th
Ha Seung Jin 25th

Pavel would likely be available to the Knicks come draft time. The Knicks would also need a PG without Marbury and I would GLADLY take Sebastian Telfair, who is currently projected as 13th (3rd among PGs). He'd certainly be available if Pavel was off the board.




> Looking at the past success of our drafts, it would be hard to believe that our future ones could be much better.


Past success of our drafts??? The Knicks trade away every draft pick they get, and they always had late first round picks. They weren't picking in the teens every year like Orlando was.


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

That is one long *** post.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> 
> Huh? Injury ridden past?
> ...


When I meant injury ridden past, I basically meant that McDyess was seroiusly injuried the year before. Taht was a pretty serious surgery he had to take, and people wondered if he was the same player. You want me to give you some sources now? It might be a bit hard, since that was 2 years ago, but I clearly remember ESPNs report on the trade. ESPN said that the Knicks took a big gamble because it was unclear McDyess would fully recover. It also said that the Knicks were like the only teaming willing to take to risk for McDyess. I don't have the link right now, dunno if i can find it, but go check out the ESPN report if you can find it. 

I know Camby was injuried often too, even more often then McDyess. However, Camby didn't have people seriously wondering if he would ever play the same again. Sure people wondered if he would ever be healthy, but not to the degree McDyess got when he was injuried. 

I think you also miss the point that the focal point of the trade was McDyess and Nene. The knicks took a gamble for McDyess, and the Nuggets wanted another lottery pick to build for their future. The Nuggets wanted Nene, not Camby. Camby and Jackson were through ins to balance McDyess' salary. Sure the Knicks didn't give up much in Camby and Jackson, but Nene is one good player now. His numbers aren't great right now, but he has as much or even more potential compared to Lampe and others. Nene is a young, athletic bigman with long and quick arms who could play center, not to mention that he is already producing at 19. It is true that the Knicks got Lampe and Williams back, but Williams' potential is no where near Nene's. And lets be honest, Layden got Lampe through dumb luck. No one would have thought Lampe would drop that far. Lampe was a player that the Knicks were seriously considering at #9, the Knicks were extremely lucky to land him at the begining of the second. Granted, it was still Layden's pick and he should be given credit to, but there is no way that Layden would have known in 2002 that the Nuggets second round pick in 2003 would br the first pick and that Lampe would fall that far. 

True that Lampe probably has more potential than the Magic's picks. However, if you noticed, I also said that I didn't think Gabriel did a good job. I was just stating that we should say Layden was stocking up on talent and Gabriel wasn't. Both were. 

I think a front court of Nazr and KT with Mutumbo as a backup will match up better against the West than Mutumbo and KT with Dolec backing up. 



> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> NBAdraft.net lists these centers in 1st round
> Andre Bledrinis 6th
> Pavel Podzolkine 8th
> ...



Come draft time, to be honest, I don't think that any of the centers mention will really do any good for the Knicks. This may seem bias, but it isn't meant to be. I don't think the European bigmen are going to match up well in the NBA. They will have their skills and couldbe good players, but I don't see them banging in the post against players like Shaq and Duncan yet. I will be happy to be proven wrong, but that will be after I see a european bigman playing physical ball against players like Shaq. Either way, those centers are all projects that will probably take 3 years to develope. How long must we wait for the Knicks to be even respectable? I'm also a bit wary about drafting developing bigmen. I look at the Bulls and I shudder. The same can be said for Telfair. I would love him as a Knick, but he does need to develope too. And if we didn't trade for Marbury and still drafted Telfair, we would REALLY have a crowded PG spot. Eisley, Ward, Williams, Vujanic, and Telfair? Telfair would obviously be the top choice, and you think Vujanic would play for the Knicks when he would know that he has no chance as starting PG? 



> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> Past success of our drafts??? The Knicks trade away every draft pick they get, and they always had late first round picks. They weren't picking in the teens every year like Orlando was.


That is pretty close to my point. We usually just trade away our picks for old guys. When we do pick, we ALWAYS get players who can't really play that well (Williams seems to be good but he has no chance to prove himself). Some players are decent, but none really stand out that much. We have some nice backups and a decent player, but we havn't produced a single player capable of leading a team in the past 10 years. Our past drafts:

2002 25 Frank Williams 
2000 22 Donnell Harvey 
1997 25 John Thomas 
1996 19 Walter McCarty 
1996 18 John Wallace 
1996 21 Dontae' Jones 
1994 26 Charlie Ward 
1994 24 Monty Williams 
1992 20 Hubert Davis 

Granted the picks aren't that high, but the Knicks should have gotten at least SOMETHING MORE from those picks. I thoguht it was a bit too hard for me to place the whole future of the Knicks on a few drafts in the future when the Knicks haven't done jack in the years before. The knicks have a pretty bad record for drafting young players.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Come draft time, to be honest, I don't think that any of the centers mention will really do any good for the Knicks. This may seem bias, but it isn't meant to be. I don't think the European bigmen are going to match up well in the NBA. They will have their skills and couldbe good players, but I don't see them banging in the post against players like Shaq and Duncan yet.


American centers don't exactly do a much better job at that.



> Either way, those centers are all projects that will probably take 3 years to develope.


Which would fit in with the rest of the team.



> How long must we wait for the Knicks to be even respectable?


How long mst we wait for the Knicks to be champions? The road may be ugly, but it's not like winning 55% of your games for a 3 year stretch is very productive either.. Those are teams that you want rebuilding because they've hit their peak. Like the Fratello Cavs, Lenny Wilkins Hawks, and the present day Hornets.



> I'm also a bit wary about drafting developing bigmen. I look at the Bulls and I shudder.


What exactly is wrong with Eddy Curry? If the Bulls didn't trade Brand, Artest, and Miller, they're a playoff team.



> The same can be said for Telfair. I would love him as a Knick, but he does need to develope too. And if we didn't trade for Marbury and still drafted Telfair, we would REALLY have a crowded PG spot. Eisley, Ward, Williams, Vujanic, and Telfair? Telfair would obviously be the top choice, and you think Vujanic would play for the Knicks when he would know that he has no chance as starting PG?


1. Ward is gone by then. We all knew he'd be gone by January due to his contract buyout.
2. Vujanic can play either guard spot.
3. I don't expect Telfair to start in his first year. He's the first ever PG to make the jump from HS. There are definitely some durability issues given his small frame, and he'd have to learn the playbooks.



> We have some nice backups and a decent player, but we havn't produced a single player capable of leading a team in the past 10 years. Our past drafts:





> I thoguht it was a bit too hard for me to place the whole future of the Knicks on a few drafts in the future when the Knicks haven't done jack in the years before. The knicks have a pretty bad record for drafting young players


But most of these were by Grunfeld, not Layden. Layden was in charge for 4 drafts. He made a good deal in 2000 by getting Strickland for Harvey. In 2001 he didn't have a first rounder, and he didn't miss anybody in the 2nd, the best player he missed was Earl Watson, who would have been hard pressed to succeed as a 4th string PG. In 2002 was the McDyess gamble, and 2003 was Sweetney/Lampe. Take away Lampe, and just Sweetney alone made the draft a good one. So Layden's draft night record isn't as checkered as Gabriel's. Gabriel made a bad move annually for 7 years. SEVEN YEARS. People talk about Layden like he was the death of the Knicks, and he was only around four years.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> What exactly is wrong with Eddy Curry?


He is out of shape,which leads to his inconsistency...It drives every coach he has nuts...He is a fraction of what he could be



> If the Bulls didn't trade Brand, Artest, and Miller, they're a playoff team.


If you make that claim,couldnt the same be said for the Knicks??How good would the Knicks be if Layden had not of made the Mcdyss trade and had one decent draft pick pre Sweetney??

The sad reality is,to win an NBA championship you need one of 2 things...A great big man or a guy named MJ....Look at the last 14 years and look at the teams that have won...

San Antonio Duncan
Lakers Shaq
Houston Hakeem
Chicago MJ and company

Thats does not bode well for us


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> American centers don't exactly do a much better job at that.


That is true, I believe I said that I didn't believe there were any good center prospects IMO besides Okafur. Americans don't do a much better job, but they do have a higher success rate right now. It can change, but it is true that American centers are more physical now. My point was that IMO Okafur is the only center that can really match up against the Western bigmen in the future, and we wouldn't have been high enough to draft him unless we won the lottery. 



> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> 1. Ward is gone by then. We all knew he'd be gone by January due to his contract buyout.
> 2. Vujanic can play either guard spot.
> 3. I don't expect Telfair to start in his first year. He's the first ever PG to make the jump from HS. There are definitely some durability issues given his small frame, and he'd have to learn the playbooks.


Even if Ward is gone, there is still a glut of guards on the team. If we drafted Telfair, he woudn't start his first season, but there is no doubt he is the PG of the future. Would Vujanic come over knowing that he was not going to be a starter? Doubtful IMO. Vujanic can play the 2, but Houston is there with his monster of a contract. Houston would be starting SG no doubt. Eisley or Williams would probably mentor Telfair for a few years, but with Telfair, Eisley, Williams, Houston, and Vujanic (if he even comes) fighting for guard minutes I don't think it would be good for any of the players.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

gabriel will have fallen on the same sword of layden,except layden took a CALULATED gamble and Gabriel just got unlucky....

The Mcdyss deal,and his knee was the final straw for layden...Had Dyss been healthy,this discusiion would not be occuring and Layden would be still GM..Dyss was that good...

On the other hand,if Grant Hill was healthy,Orlando would be mighty good......Tmac and a healthy Hill????

Gabriel got very unlucky as where layden should have known the risks..


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!
> gabriel will have fallen on the same sword of layden,except layden took a CALULATED gamble and Gabriel just got unlucky....
> 
> The Mcdyss deal,and his knee was the final straw for layden...Had Dyss been healthy,this discusiion would not be occuring and Layden would be still GM..Dyss was that good...
> ...


My point exactly, thank you Truth.


----------

