# How would you fix the Knicks?



## NOBLE

The team seems to be going nowhere despite some of it's solid talent, so what are the necessary steps you would take to turn around this once proud franchise?


----------



## Krstic All-Star

Get rid of Dolan and Isiah, hire Herb Williams as coach, and make a few trades.


----------



## Kunlun

Keep it the way it is, *BUT* with a few changes that can be made to make this season unforgettable and truly special...

Trade David Lee to get Steve Francis back.

Trade Renaldo Balkman and whatever picks you can for Ricky Davis.

More run ins between Isiah Thomas and Stephon Marbury.

Players refusing to practice.

Major brawl with another team that brings the Knicks together.

Major locker room brawl to tear the Knicks apart.

Isiah Thomas suits up for a game. First player coach in decades.

This combined with the continuation of Isiah's so far superb work will make this season the best yet in the Isiah Thomas era. Don't let us down Knicks, we are staying tuned.


----------



## Samael

Honestly, I would concede the frontcourt just leave it as it is. It's one of the major problems obviously, both Zach and Eddy can't defend, both are useless help defenders, the twin tower experiment might be working on offense but it has failed miserably on defense.

What I would do instead is cover up the defensive liabilities of the frontcourt by bloistering the backcourt because it's not really helping when th backcourt guys get beat all the time, then all that's left to cover is Zach and Eddy that just won't work at all.

I would rather have lock down defenders on the backcourt than what the Knicks have at the moment. 

I'd take a Pietrus/Bell type player over Jamal Crawford.
I'd take a pass first PG with decent defense like Bibby/Miller
Make a move for Artest.

With a tougher defensive backcourt it may just be enough to cover the defensive stupidity of the froncourt.
then hire a defensive minded coach like Carlisle then let most of the scoring come from the frontcourt.


----------



## R-Star

I'd make a real, real big bomb. Get all the players and coaches in MSG for practice and............boom.


Clean slate.


----------



## nbanoitall

solid talent and yet the team isn't going anywhere. duh. Once the Houston and Spre duo came to and end the clock was ticking for knicks management to figure out it was time to break the team down and rebuild. tick tick tick... its almost 2008. Seriously it should have started a couple a years ago at least. There is no saving this team. There is no magic trade or coach that can fix this team. Keep your youth dump everyone else. try and get picks other youth and save money by bringing back shorter and expiring contracts. have herb finish out the year.


----------



## DWADE4

Ok lets be realistic and keep the sarcasams away for a little bit. First and foremost get a TRUE pointguard, Nate is a good back-up but need a true floor general who thinks pass first shoot second. Trade Zach while his value is high for a threat down-low who can rebound and play interior defense while giving you points in the paint. Someone like Drew Gooden, Pau Gasol, Kenyon Martin, someone who plays close to those. 

Trade Q along with some other bench player not named David Lee and Nate for a SF like Ricky Davis. Now i'm not the GM for this team so obviously i didnt take my time to think of real trade scenarios but gave a little input of what the knicks have to do to get outta this slump. Trade away the roster basically not named Eddy Curry, Jamal Crawford, David Lee, Nate Robinson, and Balkman. 

Knicks trade Jared Jefferies, Malik Rose, Q.Richardson, 2008 1st round draft pick, 2010 1st rounder, and 2009 2nd rounder to Sac.Town for Shareef Abdur Rahim, Ron Artest, Kenny Thomas. 

Then you trade Zach, Fred Jones, Wilson Chandler, and Mardy Collins and a draft choice to Memphis for Pau Gasol and Damon Stoudamire. 

Now you have a team of - 

PG - Damon Stoudamire | Nate Robinson
SG - Jamal Crawford | Maurice Evans
SF - Ron Artest | Shareef Abdur Rahim | 
PF - Pau Gasol | Kenny Thomas |
C - Eddy Curry | David Lee | Randolph Morris 

Then trade of 2 of the remaining key bench players like Renaldo Balkman for Maurice Evans. Final step buy-out Stephon. And their a whole new knicks team which is not in a mess.


----------



## thatsnotgross

As a knick fan, I am in tears. Its been years since we got a decent team out there. The two coaches I want is already taken, Stan Van Gundy and Rick Adelman. The GM I want would probably be one of the old guys, West, Colangelo or Walsh. The problem with Walsh is that I'm afraid he will keep Isiah.

My goal during the Isiah fiasco was to get under the cap by the time Lebron's FA. New York is still an attractive place for a megastar the problem is, we keep overspending on mediocre, overhyped players.

I would trade Eddy Curry, Crawford, Qrich, Jared Jeffries, Marbury, Zbo, for shorter contracts. Tough thing to do but I would try. Each trade I would give them 3 million dollars to boot.

I would also buy any late first rounders for 2-3m dollars. Hi, Phoenix Suns.

I would buy any 2nd rounder that I think a player has a potential to be a great role player or hide some Euro talent in Europe. (Scola, Arenas, Boozer, Ginobili, Gibson).

If I don't have any room on my roster, I'll draft a European player in the first round and stash them in Europe. It would be stupid for us to force anything. Guys like Sergio Rodriguez comes to mind.

My first round pick for this year would be either Derrick Rose, Michael Beasley, Kevin Love or anyone that has great potential WITH A BRAIN. No OJ mayo, I dont' want any of that crap streetballas in MSG. This isn't the damn west 4th street playground. 

Yes, give me Tyler Hansborough heart and work ethic in the late first round. Give me guys that will work hard in the late first round then a project. 

I would go and try to sign Pietrus, Calderon, Ryan Gomes... all of these players are restricted FAs though. 

I would start to cut ties with long term contracts. I'll let Marbury play out his miserable career and let him walk. As well as any other players that is close to being a FA. 

My goal is to make this team athletic (yeah like Isiah wanted it) but with brains. I want this team to play hard with huge amount of work ethic. Knick fans CAN SUPPORT LOSERS that plays hard and give it all 110%. They will root for a rebuilding project as long as the kids are like David Lee and Balkman. Not Marbury, Curry and Crawford.


----------



## seifer0406

You trade everyone on the roster with the goal of shredding salary. That means trading talent for trash. Fire everyone in the front office, lose another 2-3 seasons and try to build with draft picks. Just look at what Portland did with their team.


----------



## USSKittyHawk

Kunlun said:


> Keep it the way it is, *BUT* with a few changes that can be made to make this season unforgettable and truly special...
> 
> Trade David Lee to get Steve Francis back.
> 
> Trade Renaldo Balkman and whatever picks you can for Ricky Davis.
> 
> More run ins between Isiah Thomas and Stephon Marbury.
> 
> Players refusing to practice.
> 
> Major brawl with another team that brings the Knicks together.
> 
> Major locker room brawl to tear the Knicks apart.
> 
> Isiah Thomas suits up for a game. First player coach in decades.
> 
> This combined with the continuation of Isiah's so far superb work will make this season the best yet in the Isiah Thomas era. Don't let us down Knicks, we are staying tuned.


If you can't have a real discussion don't bother to contribute to the thread. Leave the sarcasm at the door, because it's getting old.


----------



## Kunlun

USSKittyHawk said:


> If you can't have a real discussion don't bother to contribute to the thread. Leave the sarcasm at the door, because it's getting old.


NBA is here for entertainment. I'm being entertained.


----------



## Cager

This is how I would fix the Knicks

Number one is to hire an experienced, successful GM. Then you make it clear that the reshaping of the Knicks will take multiple years and the GM will have 100% ownership backing during the process. Next is to determine the core group of players to build around and, besides David Lee there aren't any for sure keepers. The Knick fans demand players who give 100% effort on both ends of the court and all aspects of the game. That means it is time to end the relationships with Crawford, Curry and Marbury. Fortunately there are probably a number of teams that would be interested in Curry and perhaps even Crawford. I wouldn't give them away but they don't seem to be capable of performing consistently at a high level on both ends of the court and are simply not winning NBA players. I think the new coach needs to set the parameters around which the team will practice and play , probably like Larry Brown did, and be 100% supported by the GM. If there are players who don't like that then get them off the team. Hopefully it won't take as long to turn around as some franchises took ( Chicago, LA Clipps ) or are taking ( Atlanta, Portland)


----------



## Showtime87

R-Star said:


> I'd make a real, real big bomb. Get all the players and coaches in MSG for practice and............boom.
> 
> 
> Clean slate.


LMAO....I was thinking the same thing. Just give Zach Randolph and David Lee a heads-up beforehand, then bombs away! Seriously though, the Knicks are one huge dysfunctional mess and I don't think there's any easy fix here. The most obvious place to start is with the owner and the coach/GM. Dolan doesn't have a clue and Isiah has truly lost his mind. After that, trade or release everyone on the roster with the exception of Randolph and Lee and start all over again. This franchise has rotted from the inside, and until changes are made with the ownership and management, things are just going to get worse.


----------



## VeN

R-Star said:


> I'd make a real, real big bomb. Get all the players and coaches in MSG for practice and............boom.
> 
> 
> Clean slate.



rofl


----------



## E.H. Munro

I'd probably take Kitty to a game when she's in a really bad mood, and then turn her loose on the team with a machete after they lose. :bsmile:


----------



## urwhatueati8god

1st

Randolph to the Lakers for Sasha Vujacic, Kwame Brown, and a first

2nd

Curry and Crawford to the Wizards for Antawn Jamison and whatever else they can get out of it.

3rd

Richardson, James, Jeffries, the Lakers first, and a second for Snow, Marshall, and Damon Jones


----------



## HB

^How do any of those trades benefit the team?


----------



## Showtime87

urwhatueati8god said:


> 1st
> 
> Randolph to the Lakers for Sasha Vujacic, Kwame Brown, and a first


I'll take that deal. :clap2:


----------



## urwhatueati8god

HB said:


> ^How do any of those trades benefit the team?


Knicks total salary at the end of 2009 when Marbury's contract runs up = $10,685,515


----------



## knickstorm

i'd rather focus on world peace as it is a more realistic and attainable goal


----------



## dropkickmeltinjohns

Trades:

Q rich for Ruben Patterson
R Balkman + M Rose and J Jeffries for R Artest and SAR
David Lee and more salary for Antoine Walker.

Zach (near untradable), he is a big man who can move. Who better to have him with Toine. 
Marbury is untradable (in a good way)
You add a volume shooter and a player who can put up 20/10 when he weighs 230 in Antoine Walker. Huge asset in the playoffs too.
Ruben Patterson, more defense and Patterson put his rape days behind him.
Ron Artest, well you know what you get. A well rounded fun guy for the locker room.
SAR, with constant training and one on ones, he can at least put up 6ppg off the bench with 5rpg.

I feel that with the right coach and that coach is Isiah, all of these guys can have nice chemistry and they are all character guys when you dig deep and try to see whats truly in their souls. 
TO write Marbury off as a cancer is dead wrong. The right coach just needs to get through to him and if its not Isiah, its zen master who once played in NY. This type of team I mentioned here is the one NY should build for. A team full of vets, they can win now with a team like this.


----------



## USSKittyHawk

knickstorm said:


> i'd rather focus on world peace as it is a more realistic and attainable goal


Pretty much....


----------



## da1nonly

Package Marbury and stuff for Artest. Sac would want marbury if they trade Bibby. 

send Jeffries overseas.

Thats all


----------



## Kiyaman

*NO TRADE will help this Knick-Team right now!* 

This Knick-Team needs a SYSTEM to play to vs certain NBA strong offensive teams (Spurs Halfcourt Offense, Suns fastbreaking offense, Celtics peremeter offense), and NBA strong defensive teams (Rockets Bigman Zone, Mavs clutter in the paint, Pistons relentless one on one help defenders). 

Once this Knick-Team build a System to play to (A Role Playbook) with consistent lineups it will be able to see the WEAKLINKS in certain Knick players that does not fit well and could be traded before the trading deadline. 
Having different types of Talent on your roster is great, but the important thing is how do you use this talent to benefit the team. 

This Knick Team does not Play Talented players it plays high money contract players inwhich an idiot gave this player a high money contract. Example: Kenyon Martin deserved every penny on his new contract from the New Jersey Nets. The Denver Nuggets G.M. Kiki Vandeweigh should have learned from himself when he was a Star Player for Denver Nuggets he played as a STAR Player with his Nuggets Teammates, but for every other team he played for he was a complete BUM. Kenyon Martin was an Outstanding Star player with his teammates on the Nets. The Denver Nuggets does not have a quarterback PG any where as good as Jason Kidd or a fastbreaking scoring & defender like Kerry Kittles at SG, or an overall complete player like Richard Jefferson at SF, where Kenyon Martin leadership at PF on both ends of the court could take advantage of oposition teams with Team-Scoring and Team-defense. Denver is an individual team performance that cant get past the first round of the playoffs. 
*Which the Knicks are the same way (Individual Talent) and cant get to the playoffs...*


----------



## loganporter

NOBLE said:


> The team seems to be going nowhere despite some of it's solid talent, so what are the necessary steps you would take to turn around this once proud franchise?


don't pay them any mind, that'll set them straight.


----------



## knickstorm

da1nonly said:


> Package Marbury and stuff for Artest. Sac would want marbury if they trade Bibby.
> 
> send Jeffries overseas.
> 
> Thats all


Artest?!?! havent we seen these poor character guys are no goood to teams?


----------



## Tragedy

Get a new owner. Firesale this season if possible for young chemistry guys, keep Lee, Balkman at the very least. Don't give up any picks, and just hope you land Derrick Rose or Michael Beasley


----------



## Kiyaman

No one or two new players are going to come into the Knick Franchise and change anything. They will look for an old H.S. or College injury to not suit-up and play with this UNORGANIZED TEAM and Knick Franchise. 

Untill this Knick Team is under controll, and the Head Coach is doing the right thing to make each player come to each game & Practice with a WINNING attitude with his teammates to go all out as if this is the last game they will ever play. No Player in the league could step into this Knick situation and make things better for the Knick-Fans. 

The First Knick 11 Games has showed that the Knicks is the WORST TEAM in the NBA this season and its previous seasons...


----------



## truth

urwhatueati8god said:


> 1st
> 
> Randolph to the Lakers for Sasha Vujacic, Kwame Brown, and a first
> 
> 2nd
> 
> Curry and Crawford to the Wizards for Antawn Jamison and whatever else they can get out of it.
> 
> 3rd
> 
> Richardson, James, Jeffries, the Lakers first, and a second for Snow, Marshall, and Damon Jones


I like your first proposal as it is REALISTIC,and would do anything to get Zack off the team.Hes very talented,but the wrong player to play alongside Curry.In the perfect world,I would rather move Zack to the Bulls for Ty Thomas,and shortly have a front line of Curry,Ty Thomas and Wilson Chandler.If you are going to ride Curry,you need complimentary pieces to make up for his deficiencies...

I would then move Marbury at all costs.The guy is a loser,always has been and always will.He divides teams instad of bringing them together,and is pure cancer....As far as I am concerned you can have Marburys 20/8 and Zacks 23/10....

I dont think JC is tradeable,so you either give him a very short leash at the 1,or you use him off the bench...For now,I guess Nate starts...


----------



## Mateo

Realize that David Lee is your best player, so you have to get rid of either Curry or Randolph. I'd keep Randolph because at least he rebounds. Basically they have to clean up the team's biggest problems: too many players who only do 1 thing well (mostly scoring).


----------



## urwhatueati8god

truth said:


> I like your first proposal as it is REALISTIC,and would do anything to get Zack off the team.Hes very talented,but the wrong player to play alongside Curry.In the perfect world,I would rather move Zack to the Bulls for Ty Thomas,and shortly have a front line of Curry,Ty Thomas and Wilson Chandler.If you are going to ride Curry,you need complimentary pieces to make up for his deficiencies...
> 
> I would then move Marbury at all costs.The guy is a loser,always has been and always will.He divides teams instad of bringing them together,and is pure cancer....As far as I am concerned you can have Marburys 20/8 and Zacks 23/10....
> 
> I dont think JC is tradeable,so you either give him a very short leash at the 1,or you use him off the bench...For now,I guess Nate starts...


I think the best the Knicks would be able to do would be to move Crawford and Curry for Jamison. I doubt that they could do anything better than that, but if they could get any type of picks out of the deal than that would be awesome. I think all the trades are obtainable, but it's hard to tell. As for Marbury, he's rotten meat. Nobody would acquire him unless you paid them way too much money in the first place.


----------



## Da Grinch

the knicks main issue has been the same for about 4 years .

they lack a force on their team that gives them the intensity they need to be truly successful.

they have talent , actually alot of it , they have scoring, rebounding size and even some defensive players , but those guys cant score .

i think ultimately a deal for artest really might be the kick in the pants the team needs , he is unstable, but he always plays hard , and he makes others play hard around him.

the knicks need smarter harder play.

here is what i would do 

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/featur...ms=18~18~18~18~18~18~1~23~23~23~1~1&te=&cash=

in the end the knicks lineup would look like this 

eddy , brad miller jerome james
zach, sheldon williams malik rose , abdur-rahim
artest balkman chandler,
qrich sstoudamire 
crawford claxton collins 

brad miller and sheldon williams are very good high post players both are known for their smart play and very good midrange jumpshots , miller especially is an extremely skilled passer , while williams is good defender and rebounder .

stoudamire is a zone buster , while claxton is a true point guard 

abdur rahim is basically cap filler , the kings dont really have any use for him right now and he's eating up their cap , if Thomas can get any use for him all the better .

its bad to see Lee go but you got to give to get in this world...the knics are al little light on true 2's but they have plenty of guys who can slide over in collins crawford artest and even balkman has slided over before to decent results.


----------



## alphaorange

*Any team with Randolph and Curry*

is doomed. Neither can or will pass....especially Randolph. Neither plays defense....especially Randolph. Both have too many turnovers. Curry doesn't board. And those are you mainstays? They have one rebounder in their starting line up. Crawford is no point guard. When he plays the one, his scoring suffers big time. Qrich may be finished as a front line player. Sorry but that team wins nothing, plus we had a zone buster for next to nothing and cut him. Lee is actually one of the best players we have as far as being complete and full effort guy and you trade him.....

We had a start last year but IT screwed it up by bring Zach here. He is as bad as all the Blazer fans said he would be.


----------



## Da Grinch

*Re: Any team with Randolph and Curry*



alphaorange said:


> is doomed. Neither can or will pass....especially Randolph. Neither plays defense....especially Randolph. Both have too many turnovers. Curry doesn't board. And those are you mainstays? They have one rebounder in their starting line up. Crawford is no point guard. When he plays the one, his scoring suffers big time. Qrich may be finished as a front line player. Sorry but that team wins nothing, plus we had a zone buster for next to nothing and cut him. Lee is actually one of the best players we have as far as being complete and full effort guy and you trade him.....
> 
> We had a start last year but IT screwed it up by bring Zach here. He is as bad as all the Blazer fans said he would be.


its funny , it really is how people live in such absolutes .

the knicks have only 1 rebounder in their starting lineup?( richardson grabbed 15 yesterday , 6.7 in 29 minutes agame at the 3 spot , in addition to randolph by my count)

curry cant board so the zach-eddy union cant work, yet the knicks rebound extremely well.

http://www.covers.com/pageLoader/pa...tistics/2007-2008/statistics_regular.html&t=0

they are 3rd in the league in rebounding margin....how much more improvement do you really need from curry when thats the case?

and its not like Lee is such a worldbeater these days that his impact is the only thing the knicks have as a hope not to be crummy , 

Zach has his flaws, but he he is still a much better player than lee, he is even rebounding better which is lee's main strength as a player.


Lee this season has been decent , but not the player he was last year and pretty much has shown why he isn't really a starter in this league yet.

in his 1st start he put up 14 and 14 and udonis not only did better with 16 and 16 but made key defensive and rebounding plays down the stretch that were missing from the knicks starting 4 that game .

in his 2nd start he was just bad going 2-10 from the field (coupled with the 6-15 effort in the heat game and you can see he just really seems to better off going up against reserves rather than starters) while the guy he was guarding went 9-14 for 23 points and 7 boards while he garnered 4 points and 5 boards.

the 3rd game he started he played very well, he got his #'s(24 and 16) against career reserve mikki moore who is avg. a mighty 5 points and 4 boards this season .

the most important stat is of course they were 0-3 in those games , so i'm having a hard time figuring why people have such a hard on for Lee starting when the games really prove he has no business starting, especially ahead of randolph .

in many ways he is a slightly bigger more physically talented haslem but haslem makes plays when his team needs them, he makes a defensive impact on games both on his man and in the team concept and he is a willing taker and maker of open mid-range J's , things Lee is still struggling with.

and actually historically Crawford scores very well at the 1 and more efficiently enjoying his height advantage to shoot over smaller players...all any1 has to do is check 82games.com or just look up his stats when he has started at pg , he is actually slightly better at pg.

has nichols played an nba minute yet?

he has busted no zones as of yet because the rest of his game doesn't get him on the court, just like it didn't in ny and he is a natural 3 when the knicks are extremely stocked at that position

you are for the most part spouting cliches' that are inaccurate.


----------



## alphaorange

*You're great at numbers*

But you are clueless as how to look inside of them. Randolph is a better scorer than Lee. True. He is a better rebounder? Don't think so. He's off to a good start on the boards but we'll see where he ends up. He's a walking turnover. No denying that. He's the worst black hole I've ever seen. His defense is atrocious. He shooting what 40%. Lee is AT LEAST his equal as a rebounder, a better defender, a better passer, a better FT shooter, and a huge advantage at FG%. I don't believe Lee is a star in any way. He IS however a much more valuable player to the TEAM concept. Zach may be a nice guy but his game puts far too much pressure on his teammates on defense and slows the offense to a crawl with his non-passing and turnovers. Twelve games plus pre-season is not a too small sample to draw conclusions. They are NOT the offensive juggernaut you predicted...in fact, only seven teams score less. Defensively they are worse. Only three teams shoot a lower % and only 6 teams give up a higher %. So it makes sense to you to put a guy that has few TOs, plays decent defense, gives you a double/double nearly every night with a few assists, a couple of steals, and shoots far better from the floor and the line on the bench while Zach starts? Sorry, even one guy like that hurts(Curry), two is death. Randolph is NO..NONE..NADA..of a defensive factor. Never was, never will be. That is a complete BS statement that can't be backed up in any way. JC is not a PG or he'd be playing it, don't you think. He's had chances. Dnic not playing on the Cavs has nothing to do with his playing here. He is not needed at Cleveland. Other more experienced guys are doing OK. Still on the team, though, isn't he? Even an idiot should realize there is a ton of politics involved. You trade for a big contract, he better play. Guaranteed contracts win out over non nearly every time. That team you just constructed will be horrible. There isn't a real star anywhere to be found. No playoffs for that one.


----------



## alphaorange

*And btw,*

we weren't comparing Lee to Haslem. Far as I could tell, it was Lee/Zach. And it was about who was better for the TEAM, not one on one scoring.


----------



## Mateo

*Re: You're great at numbers*

The problem is that the Knicks have too many one dimensional players. I've said it time and again, you can't simply acquire a guy who's good at scoring and a guy who's good at rebounding and a guy who's good at defending and stick them together and think you have all the pieces. Players have to play on both ends while they're in the game. That's why it's a big problem when you have specialists. That's what this team has too much of. Marbury is a ball-handling and scoring specialist. He stinks at everything else. Curry is a scoring specialist; he stinks at everything else. Jeffries is a defensive specialist; he stinks at everything else. Ditto to Balkman. Randolph and Lee at least have 2 things that they are pretty good at. No one else really does, though.


----------



## alphaorange

*Re: You're great at numbers*

Actually, Lee is a decent scorer down low. No Curry, but he does OK as a complimentary guy. His weakness is his jumper. If he had a good one, he'd be one of the best. I agree, with you, though. We need a team of basketball players. Not athletes that play ball...not streetballers....not boneheads. Think Phoenix...the Spurs...those type of teams.


----------



## Da Grinch

*Re: You're great at numbers*



alphaorange said:


> But you are clueless as how to look inside of them. Randolph is a better scorer than Lee. True. He is a better rebounder? Don't think so. He's off to a good start on the boards but we'll see where he ends up. He's a walking turnover. No denying that. He's the worst black hole I've ever seen. His defense is atrocious. He shooting what 40%. Lee is AT LEAST his equal as a rebounder, a better defender, a better passer, a better FT shooter, and a huge advantage at FG%. I don't believe Lee is a star in any way. He IS however a much more valuable player to the TEAM concept. Zach may be a nice guy but his game puts far too much pressure on his teammates on defense and slows the offense to a crawl with his non-passing and turnovers. Twelve games plus pre-season is not a too small sample to draw conclusions. They are NOT the offensive juggernaut you predicted...in fact, only seven teams score less. Defensively they are worse. Only three teams shoot a lower % and only 6 teams give up a higher %. So it makes sense to you to put a guy that has few TOs, plays decent defense, gives you a double/double nearly every night with a few assists, a couple of steals, and shoots far better from the floor and the line on the bench while Zach starts? Sorry, even one guy like that hurts(Curry), two is death. Randolph is NO..NONE..NADA..of a defensive factor. Never was, never will be. That is a complete BS statement that can't be backed up in any way. JC is not a PG or he'd be playing it, don't you think. He's had chances. Dnic not playing on the Cavs has nothing to do with his playing here. He is not needed at Cleveland. Other more experienced guys are doing OK. Still on the team, though, isn't he? Even an idiot should realize there is a ton of politics involved. You trade for a big contract, he better play. Guaranteed contracts win out over non nearly every time. That team you just constructed will be horrible. There isn't a real star anywhere to be found. No playoffs for that one.


as usual when responding to your posts , Reading is fundamental.

i didn't actaully say randolph is a better rebounder , I posted *he is rebounding better* (that means currently present tense being used and all), thats a fact ...unlike in portland zach has alot of help on the boards and on the offensive side of the ball, so his rebounding spike may not be an abberration or it just might be, time will tell...but he is boarding better than lee right now , to dispute it in any way makes you look stupid, like you cant do 2nd grade math, so i am just going to assume you misread my post yet again.

i know my posts seem to strike a cord with you , i assume because the truth hurts your fanboy feelings on lee and your other favorites..,like frye who is not exactly making a fool of thomas for trading him seeing as the blazers have a major hole in the post with zach gone and oden out for the year ....yet they only see fit to play him 19 minutes a game and he is avg. only 6 points .

maybe Zeke isn't at fault after all, he may still have a good future but the idea he should have played ahead of curry or instead of curry is looking more ridiculous by the day....since you want to pull up posting history .

and the knicks haven't been scoring well lately but they started out well, only faltering when they went out west and zach started missing games , he appears back in a groove now and lookie there a win as recently as yesterday.

see thats the difference between zach and lee , he has pretty %'s but when he is matched against starters he doesn't produce wins , he isn't really a factor because he isn't a starting caliber player , which is why the only game in which he really played well stats aside is the game he was matched up against another bench player masquerading as a starter in mikki moore, when he went up against haslem and marion he looked bad and was outplayed and haslem is no worldbeater but he looked like one in the 4th quarter of the knicks-heat game...but i wont dispute he can beat the snot out of their backups on the court.


if lee is such a better defender who does he stop or slow down ?

does he give good help on penetrators? ...no usually when he does come over all he does is put his hands straight up in the air and doesn't move them , any scorer worth his salt can easily shoot over them and does, when in fact lee does come which is really not all that often.

those are really the 2 main factors of power forward defense and he doesn't excel at either , at least zach can outproduce whomever he is matched up with no matter who that person is if he cant stop them or slow them down...and the knicks defense really hasn't been any worse or better than it was last year so its hard to see where your beating your chest over it has any merit.

heck he isn't even avg. more steals or assists than zach who made few very nice passes yesrerday, i dont believe for a second that zach cant pass , i believe he believes more in his shot than any1 else's unless he thinks he is passing for a layup or dunk, its just how most scorers are until they gain faith in their teammates making more difficult shots...and recently the knicks really haven't been making those shots so he hasn't been passing for them much , i would assume if he were to continue that way and it became a detriment to the team he would be benched ...it hasn't happened yet...nor is it likely as long as lee is playing the way he is.

see the thing with lee is he got a few starts and he didn't make the impact that you and kiya posts that he always makes , the reason is of course because usually he is playing other backups and among backups Lee is a star, a 6th man of the year candidate any season he comes off the bench for the forseeable future , against starters he is mediocre at best....for instance in your post you mentioned "huge" edge lee has in fg%, it has mostly come against in his work as a backup , he shot .432 in those games he started not much better than Zach's .414, a number that would have been far lower if he didn't get to pad his stats against career journeyman mikki moore (he shot 32% against marion and haslem)

value to me is shown by helping your team and your ability to help in that end, Lee had 3 games and they didn't win any of them and in the heat game if any heat player cost the knicks the game it was haslem who was Lee's man so he really hasn't won any points with me in the he should be starting argument especially with his defense, yesterday the knicks beat the bulls and pretty much led the whole game, lee hardly even played, only 11 minutes , so his value to me isn't really all that high...but his trade value is pretty high, much more than his actual value. So to me he is perfect trade bait. the knicks can lose with out him , so the question is how does he help them win?

and this season he hasn't really done much to that end.

in fact in the knicks wins randolph has exceeded him both points and rebounds in all 3 games , curry has outscored him in all 3 outrebounded him in 2 and tied him with 7 in the t'wolves game, 

JC plays 2 guard because if wasn't it would be in fred jones' hands and thats not gonna work he is still 6'5 or 6'6 so he can play both spots at a starters level right now....mardy nate fred jones and marbury cant unless some improvements are made in parts of their games, and nate grows which appears unlikely.

he is avg. 4.8 assists a game good # of starting pg's(about 1/3 of the leagiue's starting pg's) in this league are currently averaging less..so his passing eye really shouldn't in question for any1 who knows the game...and i think its been pretty obvious he has been passing up shots he could have taken to play in the team concept for a few years now, not that you can see it.


----------



## Da Grinch

also the cavs aren't the world's deepest team, ira newble has played 123 minutes this season , i find it hard to believe they cant find 1 for nichols if he is the player you tout him to be.


----------



## E.H. Munro

Napalm might be a good start.


----------



## eddymac

The Knicks should have never did the deal for Marbury back in 04. They should have used the lottery to rebuild their team. Then let the contracts of Keith Van Horn, Charlie Ward, Mutombo, Howard Eisley, Shandon Anderson, Clarence Whetherspoon expire. All those contracts would have been expired in the summer of 04 through 06. 

Looking at their current roster they have some young players with promise. David Lee, Renaldo Balkman, Nate Robinson, Wilson Chandler, Mardy Collins, Jamal Crawford, Eddie Curry and Morris Randolph. The problem is that they dont have an identity. Are they a Suns type team or are they a half court type team. The defense is also a problem as good as Randolph and Curry are on offense they are just as bad defensively. In order to be a good team it starts on the defensive end. Offense is not the problem defense is the problem and thats something that needs to be addressed. 

If I were Isiah I would try and make a deal for Ron Artest. He would be an upgrade over Richardson. Artest could do a little of everything he can score and can defend the perimeter as well as the post. The Knicks dont have any shotblockers upfront. All the Knicks bigs Curry, Randolph, Lee, Rose, Morris aren't shotblockers. Thats a problem that isiah needs to address as well.


----------



## TwinkieFoot

This is pure speculation but what about this proposal?

*Hawks Trade:*
Josh Smith...F
Josh Childress..G/F
Speedy Claxton...PG
Lorenzon Weight...C

*Hawks Recieve:*
Daniel Gibson...PG
Brad Miller...C
Shareef Abdur-Rahim...PF
Jerome James...C
$3 million cash incentives

I recall there being recent discussion by Joe Johnson to Hawks management about the need for veteran role players. Some of these articles went as far to refer to him as being completely fed up and frustrated. Needless to say, it's in your best interest to satisfy your best player. This trade does that by adding capable veterans to our roster whose fairly weak at the 5 spot and inexerpeinced elsewhere in the front court. Brad Miller was an all-star both in the East and West and I do not believe he is far removed from that form. Shareef is still the scorer he once was but excellent for use as your 6th man off the bench. DANIEL "BOOBY" GIBSON, may very well be the answer to your void at the PG position so all in all, I believe this is an excellent trade. You lose alot of cap space but cap space was meant to be used on good players and that is what you get in addition to ditching Speedy Claxton's horrendous contract. You may even be able to pick back up Lorenzon Wright who would serve no real purpose to the Knicks other than financial flexibility.

*Knicks Trade:*
Stephon Marbury...PG
Jerome James...C
$3 million cash incentives

*Knicks Recieve:*
Larry Hughes...SG
Demetris Nichols...G/F
Lorenzon Wright...C (BOUGHT OUT)

Knicks make this trade to get a disgruntled player out of New York and strengthen our already weak backcourt defense. Larry is injuried and very injury prone but when healthy, he is a quasi all-star who can make his presence felt on this Knicks team. Demetris Nichols was a guy we were forced to cut during training cap because of roster space issues but would not be of concern now with Jerome James out of the way.

*Kings Trade:*
Mike Bibby...PG
Ron Artest...SF
Brad Miller...C
Shareef Abdur-Rahim...PF
Kenny Thomas...PF

*Kings Recieve:*
Josh Smith...PF
Anderson Varejao...F/C
Josh Childress...F
Donyell Marshall...PF
Stephon Marbury...PG

This may seem like the most ridiculous aspect of the trade but is not when you look deeper into it. The Kings currently are a team on the brink of rebuilding but are stuck with several large long term contracts. This trade alleviates them of the financial responsibility to all of those contracts and bring in some very talented young players with older veterans that provide greater financial flexibility. They may very well have their future front-court together with Varejao, Smith and Childress in addition to guys like Kevin Martin and John Salmons in the backcourt.

*Cavs Trade:*
Larry Hughes...SG
Donyell Marshall...PF
Daniel Gibson...PG
Anderson Varejao...F/C (sign-and-trade)
Demetris Nichols...G/F

*Cavs Recieve:*
Mike Bibby...PG
Ron Artest...SF
Speedy Claxton...PG
Kenny Thomas...PF

The Cavs make this trade because it nets them two all-star caliber players to put next to Lebron James for next to little. They have to assume the financial responsibility behind these players but would well be worth the investment considering they'd be legit title contenders.


----------



## TwinkieFoot

From there, I'd probably look to make a move for Gerald Wallace. Would be a tall order considering the Bobcats are winning but it may be possible that we make them an offer they can't refuse. They for some reason want more big men so we could start the package off with something that includes David Lee and Lorenzon Wright. Both guys offer solid play at the 4 and 5 spots and can even fill in as starters on occassion. I'd also look to include Jamal Crawford so they'd have a swingman to replace Wallace next to Richardson. I think this also opens up a little bit more time for Adam Morrison who was a no.2 pick a couple years ago. The trade gives them more of an offensive punch and gives the Knicks one of the best perimeter defenders in the league who could rebound, and block shots with the best of them.


----------



## TwinkieFoot

Would the Sixers look into giving up Andre Miller for draft picks? Would Mardy Collins or Nate Robinson, Randolph Morris and Malik Rose with a draft pick get them talking for Miller and Calvin Booth?


----------



## alphaorange

*Why do people keep wanting retreads*

like Andre Miller? There is a REASON they are available. We need to start getting guy we can build around. And I mean for real. We don't have ANYONE. I had hoped I was wrong about Curry and that you would be right but it just isn't to be. Zach is another guy that just has too many flaws. Marbury? I was right about him when they first got him. Cancer. JC? 6th man. Q? not any more. Lee? Starter with the right guys around him. 12-14/10-12 board guy. Balkman? Depends on the team around him. We don't need journeymen. We need a stud.


----------



## the_shamus

Let's do another Bulls/Knicks trade: Gordon and Wallace to NY for Randolph and Jones. You guys someone to defend and rebound next to Curry and your native son Gordon would be good paired with Crawford in the backcourt. There you go, both teams benifit and are more balanced.


----------



## Krstic All-Star

the_shamus said:


> Let's do another Bulls/Knicks trade: Gordon and Wallace to NY for Randolph and Jones. You guys someone to defend and rebound next to Curry and your native son Gordon would be good paired with Crawford in the backcourt. There you go, both teams benifit and are more balanced.


That'd be GREAT for the Knicks, but the Bulls would have to be insane to do it.


----------



## alphaorange

*Still need a PG..nm*

nm


----------



## TwinkieFoot

*Re: Why do people keep wanting retreads*



alphaorange said:


> like Andre Miller? There is a REASON they are available. We need to start getting guy we can build around. And I mean for real. We don't have ANYONE. I had hoped I was wrong about Curry and that you would be right but it just isn't to be. Zach is another guy that just has too many flaws. Marbury? I was right about him when they first got him. Cancer. JC? 6th man. Q? not any more. Lee? Starter with the right guys around him. 12-14/10-12 board guy. Balkman? Depends on the team around him. We don't need journeymen. We need a stud.


I don't think there is ever a discussion about the top 5 best PG's in the game without Andre Miller's name being mentioned. I believe that he is the ultimate proof that the number of times you move to different teams is reflective of how good a player you are rather than teams not wanting you; if you think about it, most NBA players spend an average of 5 seasons give or take in the league. He was first traded to the Clippers because he wanted out and was moved for one of the league's top young prospect in Darius Miles at the time. He signed with the Nuggets because the Clippers were to cheap to pay him and traded to the Sixers because there was no other way of landing a superstar like Allen Iverson without giving up talent in return.

The Pistons were founded on a team of journeymen and they not only have won a championship in recent years but also been contenders for several. CHAUNCEY BILLUPS was very much a journyman throughout his NBA career and was actually the Finals MVP. Andre Miller at the very least has remained productive and an integral component of every team he has been with, something Billups can not say. Although the Knicks do not have the major building block, they have several high caliber players that if paired with the proper teammates can make alot of noise.


----------



## Tom

It will take a while...the Knicks need more Tradeable players...like David Lee. You get a few more of these guys you can package them with a weaker Marquee player and still get a star.


----------



## TwinkieFoot

the_shamus said:


> Let's do another Bulls/Knicks trade: Gordon and Wallace to NY for Randolph and Jones. You guys someone to defend and rebound next to Curry and your native son Gordon would be good paired with Crawford in the backcourt. There you go, both teams benifit and are more balanced.


I think that this is actually a trade that works more in favor of the Bulls. Ben Wallace's game is steadily declining and Gordon to me is the perfect example of an individual whose game benefits more from the system than the system from his game. He's a mediocre defender and possess' little known ability outside of scoring the ball very well from the perimeter. I'm not a fan and do not believe that hurting ourselves even worse financially and getting back less talent in the process is the way to go.


----------



## TwinkieFoot

Tom said:


> It will take a while...the Knicks need more Tradeable players...like David Lee. You get a few more of these guys you can package them with a weaker Marquee player and still get a star.


To be honest, I believe our team is filled with tradeable players but just ones who do not readily fit each other. People complain about these guys being winners but that is largely because most are too young to ever have been given the opportunity to win before they arrived with the Knicks who have been in upheaval for years. Some of them, such as Quentin Richardson have proven to be productive players within winning systems elsewhere in the league so I have no doubt that he can be moved for someone valuable down the road. I think right now, we have just how have to condense our roster and find more "glue guys" similar to what Colangelo did with the Raptors when he first arrived. We have the pieces, we just need to rearrange things around them to work (and it is very much possible).


----------



## alphaorange

*What you say is SOMETIMES true..*

However, Miller has been actively SHOPPED by every team he has played for, sans Cavs. Denver looked for a "buyer" after his first season there. The fact that the Sixers keep bringing his name up has more to do with sending him down the road than it does keeping him. They have no viable replacement. I can't recall any team asking about his availability the last 3 years. Thats because everyone knows he is available.


----------



## Kiyaman

Every response to this Post has some value-points however, this Post *"How would you fix the Knicks?"* would not exist if President/Head Coach Isiah Thomas, Herb Williams, Mark Aquire, and Hannerty, would have done their Jobs this offseason weeks before Training-Camp had open, by assembling the entire Roster for a couple of Pick-up games. 
*The WINNING Players were right there in the offseason aquisition of Zach, Jones, with Rookies Morris, Chandler, and D-Nichols.*

All this Knick-Team was lacking was/is a Basic-System to follow up on in Offense and Defense, which could have been established during the offseason so the players would know their ROLE on this team before Training-Camp opened. 

The Knicks drafted their Two Star offensive Players in the 2007 Draft in 6.8 Wilson Chandler and 6.8 Demetris Nichols whom only needed one personal training coach for these two outstanding Tandem players whom (co-exist with each other at 6.8) a chemistry could have been built at the SF/SG position (Future Knicks) which may not have been a "Jordan/Pippin", but the two had a co-existing future together as Rookies defending the passing lane while playing outstanding B-Ball with each other. 
The two players offense on the "Peremeter" together was devastating and the number one reason to keep both players on the roster to build just on that in the next two seasons (They seem to challenge each other in practice on hitting 3's which this Knick team is in a desperate need of with our Starting-5 always falling behind in points vs the next team.). 

If the Knicks were Coached right this 2007-8 season those two Rookies would've added a big-punch off the bench in each game they played in from the peremeter just averaging 10 to 12 minutes together in any game they played in (Like I said the two long bodies are outstanding defenders on the passing lane.). 

*Why Head Coach Isiah Thomas dont take advantage of the Knick-Players that co-exist together on the court, and keep giving them playingtime together is the main reason why I feel the Knicks have a 5-11 record and No Team Chemistry to build success with.*

The Knicks SF-Q.Richardson & SG-Crawford dont seem to be working together on offense or defense. The two Knick-Starters talents and Skillz keep falling back on a "One on One" system that does'nt add presure to any of the Knick oponents making the Knicks weak at both the SF and SG positions. This would've been the right reasons to replace them with the two rookies (SF-Chandler & SG-D.Nichols) in the last 3 to 4 minutes of the quarter every other game. To build on the Rookies and let the Knick-Fans voice the play of SF-Q.Richardson and SG-Crawford perfomance together at MSG. 

The Knicks dont have any ALL-STAR Players on their Roster however, the Knicks Head Coach rotation of Players this season says it does with a 5-11 record. 
*Is it the Knick Players or the President/Head Coach reason for a 5-11 record???*


----------



## loganporter

nothing short of a buy out by a foreign national would achieve a quick fix a la the rockets of houston. 

are we on the same page yet?


----------



## eddymac

After giving it long thought this is what I would do to rebuild the Knicks.
First of all I like Isiah Thomas but he put together the wrong mix of players. He knows talent he just doesn't know how to out it together, so my first move would be to bring in someone with a proven track record. For example Jerry West he is proven as an executive in the NBA. He and Isiah would work together. The next move would be to remove Isiah as the head coach and hire someone who will be in it for the longhaul. For example Rick Carlise etc. The next move is to establish some kind of order. This means players will be dealt with accordingly if they break the rules.

As for the players I have three catagories for the players on the current Knicks roster.

*Needs to leave *

Stephon Marbury
Zach Randoplh 
Jared Jefferies
Quinten Richardson
Fred Jones
Jerome James
Nate Robinson

*On the fence*

Eddy Curry
Jamal Crawford
Wilson Chandler
Mardy Collins
Randolph Morris

*Keepers*

David Lee
Renaldo Balkman
Malik Rose

Considering that Marbury's cantract expires in the summer of 09, you let it run its natural course and let it expire and he walks as a free agent. Same thing with Fred Jones. Richardson's contract expires in the summer of 2010 you let his contract off the cap. You can try and deal players like Nate Robinson whose contract expires in 2010, you can package him or you can let his contract expire. I would waive Jefferies and eat the rest of the salary. Same with Jerome James whose contract expires in 2010. I would try and deal Zach as well as Robinson to a team like Chicago because they need a frontcourt scorer plus he and Ben Wallace would compliment each other in the paint. In return you get expiring deals and draft picks. 

So that way you land someone like Derrick Rose who would run the team. You also use the other Bulls pick to get players that fill your need. 

Within 09 and 11 alot of these bad contracts would come off the books and you can begin to rebuild through the draft, and reserve enough cap space for a big free agent pickup.


----------



## Tragedy

Malik Rose is not a keeper.


----------



## Jamel Irief

Tragedy said:


> Get a new owner. Firesale this season if possible for young chemistry guys, keep Lee, Balkman at the very least. Don't give up any picks, and just hope you land Derrick Rose or Michael Beasley


Does this post mean you still refuse to call Isiah a bad GM?


----------



## Mr. Hobbes

Draft DeAndre Jordan. Trade Lee (only way they'll take Curry), Curry, Robinson, and Balkman for Artest, the injury prone SAR, and Brad Miller. Trade Crawford and Jones for Jaric, Walker, and Telfair.
Give Marbury the Eddie Robinson treatment.

Telfair/Jaric
Richardson?/Jeffries
Artest/Chandler
Randolph/Walker/SAR
Miller/Jordan

Maybe not. But I just thought it'd be nice to see Telfair (who doesn't suck anymore) and Artest in NY.


----------



## Da Grinch

i hate to say it but it may be time to pull the plug on zach randolph .

i would trade him for ben wallace and a draft pick...because wallace is aging somewhat quickly he should not be a straight up deal, but he provides what the team needs , a tough influence, a rebounder and a lane defender and most importantly a respected leader , this team just doesn't have one. ...while giving the bulls what they need a a rugged inside scorer who can hit the outside J.

as it is now Zach is not meshing and more importantly he appears to be rubbing his teammates the wrong way , so this problem may never go away, especially with this unit who get their teeth on defense from their offense ...for some reason they need to score to defend well...curry for all his faults gets his teammates easier shots due to the amount of effort the opposing team uses to stop him, often collapsing the team into the post to strip , block and bother him.

i would then trade marbury and probably randolph morris for larry hughes and eric snow .

i would then for better or worse live with eddy curry, jamal crawford balkman or chandler, lee , ben wallace as the core of the team .

if the kings will take a balkman/nate package with salary filler (like malik or jeffries) i say do it , if not i would wait and let rose's deal become an ending deal next season and then he has more value.

i would expand balkman's role if he's not traded , let him start bringing the ball up and give him more distribution responsibilities, give him more freedom to push the ball after rebounds and to let crawford and hughes be more attack oriented on offense.

i would also spotlight lee a little more when he has mismatches.

i would bench richardson because enough is enough , if he isn't going to hit from the outside he isn't a better starter than balkman...he is right now a backup 2 and little more.

the team will likely still be in the lottery and then they can draft a top notch 3 or a point guard of which there really will be a few in the draft .

if the team trades nate , they can use the MLE to sign boykins so nate is very expendable right now.


----------



## Cager

Da Grinch said:


> i hate to say it but it may be time to pull the plug on zach randolph .
> 
> i would trade him for ben wallace and a draft pick...because wallace is aging somewhat quickly he should not be a straight up deal, but he provides what the team needs , a tough influence, a rebounder and a lane defender and most importantly a respected leader , this team just doesn't have one. ...while giving the bulls what they need a a rugged inside scorer who can hit the outside J.
> 
> I think that is a great idea. Curry can still be a force but he needs to play alone. Ben will be a major help on defense and rebounding. Both Ben and Zach have issues that a team must deal with but Eddy can give the Knicks enough low post scoring and Ben doesn't demand the ball so they should co-exist better than Zach and Eddy. The Bulls already have someone that can replace much of what Ben does in Noah and they may be desperate enough to take on a bad character guy.


----------



## alphaorange

*Show me...*

How the team you end up with contends for anything. The Bulls pick will be meaningless by seasons end, probably 16-21 range. Nobody there is going to do much to help this team. Even IT says there is only a couple of guys on this team that will be there when the team contends. BTW, Balkman was exposed as a ball handler earlier in the season. He's OK in the open court but a huge liability against pressure. This talk of him being a point forward by some folks is absolutely ridiculous. He is a role player off the bench, and a good one. It is time to admit that this team and the players IT chose as its nucleus is just not good. Nobody is winning anything building around Curry....or Zach.....or both. So where does that leave the team? Right back where we were a couple of years ago. There is NO WAY to trade and make this team a contender. Trade Curry and Zach for picks. Try to trade Marbury to a team looking for cap space next year for a bad contract and picks/or a young REAL talent. Jones goes...Nate comes off the bench....Lee starts..Balkman comes off the bench and plays 20+...Qrich goes....Rose goes(for his sake)...jeffries off the bench...JC starts (for now)....Shoot for Derrick Rose first, then Beasley/Greene if he is gone. Its only a start but it can't be done in a year.


----------



## Da Grinch

Cager said:


> Da Grinch said:
> 
> 
> 
> i hate to say it but it may be time to pull the plug on zach randolph .
> 
> i would trade him for ben wallace and a draft pick...because wallace is aging somewhat quickly he should not be a straight up deal, but he provides what the team needs , a tough influence, a rebounder and a lane defender and most importantly a respected leader , this team just doesn't have one. ...while giving the bulls what they need a a rugged inside scorer who can hit the outside J.
> 
> I think that is a great idea. Curry can still be a force but he needs to play alone. Ben will be a major help on defense and rebounding. Both Ben and Zach have issues that a team must deal with but Eddy can give the Knicks enough low post scoring and Ben doesn't demand the ball so they should co-exist better than Zach and Eddy. The Bulls already have someone that can replace much of what Ben does in Noah and they may be desperate enough to take on a bad character guy.
> 
> 
> 
> the bulls need to upgrade their talent level , the knicks need more than anything for their pieces to fit .
> 
> i like Noah , they need to just play him and live with the results until he can become consistently the player every1 envisions to be .
Click to expand...


----------



## Da Grinch

*Re: Show me...*



alphaorange said:


> How the team you end up with contends for anything. The Bulls pick will be meaningless by seasons end, probably 16-21 range. Nobody there is going to do much to help this team. Even IT says there is only a couple of guys on this team that will be there when the team contends. BTW, Balkman was exposed as a ball handler earlier in the season. He's OK in the open court but a huge liability against pressure. This talk of him being a point forward by some folks is absolutely ridiculous. He is a role player off the bench, and a good one. It is time to admit that this team and the players IT chose as its nucleus is just not good. Nobody is winning anything building around Curry....or Zach.....or both. So where does that leave the team? Right back where we were a couple of years ago. There is NO WAY to trade and make this team a contender. Trade Curry and Zach for picks. Try to trade Marbury to a team looking for cap space next year for a bad contract and picks/or a young REAL talent. Jones goes...Nate comes off the bench....Lee starts..Balkman comes off the bench and plays 20+...Qrich goes....Rose goes(for his sake)...jeffries off the bench...JC starts (for now)....Shoot for Derrick Rose first, then Beasley/Greene if he is gone. Its only a start but it can't be done in a year.


is there some magic portal available to show you, because we've gone through this on other subjects and you tend to become rather unreasonable and your behavoir often gets annoying.

but ok i'll give you the benefit of the doubt and explain.

none of Zeke's offenses require a true pg , so a grouping of hughes balkman and crawford(along with mardy, nate and snow) all taking turns at the point depending of how they are playing and matchups should work out fine all have various degrees of experience at playing the 1.

balkman's ballhandling responsibilities would be done at times when it helps the knicks , not just because i want to see him with the ball.

there is a world of difference between bringing the ball up on occasion and being a point forward i dont know who you are talking about with the point forward talk. I've seen tim Duncan bring the ball up , but I would call him a point center.

balkman bringing the ball upcourt against guards pressuring him can be a problem ...but there are few small forwards in the league that are any good at all at pressuring a dribble upcourt , its just not something they are trained to do....so at *small forward *balkman bringing the ball up shouldn't be a problem at all, and if a team wants to put a guard on balkman fine he doesn't have to bring the ball up, crawford and hughes would take most 3's in the league off the dribble easily and balkman can punish that guard on the offensive boards, like i said previously its not about making him the point guard its about using his skills to help from a team concept and to keep him involved on offense .

the bulls won 47 games a few years ago with every1 touting them to be the future of the east with curry as a centerpiece so i dont know if its wise to say any1 cant win with him, because its surely possible...most bulls fans realize that curry instead of the 2 lotto picks they got for him would make their future brighter.

if the season ended now the bulls would be picking 10th , nbadraft.com has oj mayo in that slot. i actually think they'll be closer to 16 when all is said and done but with 2 decent picks and Thomas' history as a drafter I'm not too concerned with who they can get especially since its jan. 6th right now and the draft is almost 6 months away , no sane person thinks its written in stone yet , as long as they get value for the their picks and they fit into the team or are traded for people who are, its good enough. 

you may like the idea of gutting a team for picks/cap space whatever , i dont , i think its a far bigger crapshoot especially if you dont get the 1st few picks in the draft , all the surefire star bigs are usually taken very early.

i cant remember the last time a team gave away a REAL young talent for cap space , thats usually why they wanted cap space in the 1st place , so they would be in position to aquire 1, generally the talent they do trade is 1 they have tired of having and want to start over with some1 else, so i dont know how viable your idea of trading marbury for that is, what teams did you have in mind alpha?

richardson is untradeable, his back is uninsured and his production is so far below his paycheck he is a knick until his contract is an ending deal...if even then because of his surgery risk, the only way to get rid of him is to cut him , and even so he'd still be on the cap until his deal expires.


----------



## alphaorange

*If you believe your moves do anything*

toward building a contender, you're a fool. Guess what? The season isn't ending today and the Bulls will not pick 10th. Who the hell said anything about other SFs bringing the ball up? I simply said Balkman's handle is much overrated. JC and Hughs leading the league in 3's is no formula for big success either. Neither is a consistent bomber. That means some great games...some average games...and a lot of duds. When the Bulls won 47, who was saying that Curry was the foundation, or even one of the top two hubs? I'm not suggesting we will reap any big rewards for trading our crap. Thats why I wrote picks/young talent...may have to settle for picks. 
Let me recap: Your idea wastes more years while we find out that team can't win more than 40-45 games and a 2nd round exit. This insures crappy picks, the possible loss of the only talent we have as they leave via FA, and facing rebuilding process 3 years removed from where it should be. I'll take being in Portlands position, or Seattles position any day. 

While you belittle my knowledge of the game, remember this: I said the team wouldn't win with Marbury, I said that Curry would not ever rebound or play defense, and that he would fade when needed most. I said that Nate was a bench player at best because of his 10 cent head.I said Zach was a negative move and that he and Curry would not exist in a positive way. I also said both would declining numbers. I also predicted this team would be brutal. I said that Frye was being misused and would be a productive player. I also said Lee had to play big minutes as he furnished things we desperately needed. You, on the other hand, predicted us to be an average defensive team and an offensive juggernaut. I don't really think you have been right on enough....if anything..to tell me I don't understand the game. You keep touting Thomas as this great judge of talent. You mean like Fred Jones at 14? His no-brainer pick of Camby? Stoudamire? Who else WAS there to pick? Frye over Bynum? Lee was a good pick..better than IT thought. Nate? bench player who was not the best player on the board and a non-need. Balkman? Collins? Passed on Williams, Gibson, Boone, Lowery, and Rondo. Let's not give him too much credit, shall we? He is generally good at borderline draft positions but has blown some big ones.


----------



## Da Grinch

*Re: If you believe your moves do anything*



alphaorange said:


> toward building a contender, you're a fool. Guess what? The season isn't ending today and the Bulls will not pick 10th. Who the hell said anything about other SFs bringing the ball up? I simply said Balkman's handle is much overrated. JC and Hughs leading the league in 3's is no formula for big success either. Neither is a consistent bomber. That means some great games...some average games...and a lot of duds. When the Bulls won 47, who was saying that Curry was the foundation, or even one of the top two hubs? I'm not suggesting we will reap any big rewards for trading our crap. Thats why I wrote picks/young talent...may have to settle for picks.
> Let me recap: Your idea wastes more years while we find out that team can't win more than 40-45 games and a 2nd round exit. This insures crappy picks, the possible loss of the only talent we have as they leave via FA, and facing rebuilding process 3 years removed from where it should be. I'll take being in Portlands position, or Seattles position any day.
> 
> While you belittle my knowledge of the game, remember this: I said the team wouldn't win with Marbury, I said that Curry would not ever rebound or play defense, and that he would fade when needed most. I said that Nate was a bench player at best because of his 10 cent head.I said Zach was a negative move and that he and Curry would not exist in a positive way. I also said both would declining numbers. I also predicted this team would be brutal. I said that Frye was being misused and would be a productive player. I also said Lee had to play big minutes as he furnished things we desperately needed. You, on the other hand, predicted us to be an average defensive team and an offensive juggernaut. I don't really think you have been right on enough....if anything..to tell me I don't understand the game. You keep touting Thomas as this great judge of talent. You mean like Fred Jones at 14? His no-brainer pick of Camby? Stoudamire? Who else WAS there to pick? Frye over Bynum? Lee was a good pick..better than IT thought. Nate? bench player who was not the best player on the board and a non-need. Balkman? Collins? Passed on Williams, Gibson, Boone, Lowery, and Rondo. Let's not give him too much credit, shall we? He is generally good at borderline draft positions but has blown some big ones.


see this is what i'm talking about , I think you think this message board is some sort of back alley rumble spot for your basketball ramblings.

any core of decent players can be built up for title contention...if some1 around 2000-2002 said rip hamilton and billups would form the best backcourt in the league, champs and be perenial all stars by 2007 they would have been laughed at seeing how their careers were going at that point, billups a career vagabond and rip some1 his GM basically gave away because his contract demands (something in the 6 yrs 50 mil. range) were seen as ridiculous considering the kind of player he was thought to be...and at the time of the deal it wasn't seen as a bad one at all.

you think gibson is a better player than balkman or collins ?

thats your opinion but if he were on a regular team like the raptors or even the bobcats do you think he could run it?

not from what i've seen , he is basically a modern day john paxson , too small to play the 2, too unskilled to run pg in a fulltime fashion and needs a superstar and other ballhandlers to help him run a team...if not for pavlovic hughes and especially James he would be rotting on the bench or in the D-league trying to hone his skills.

he's a system player at this point and a darn good one all he's asked to do is bring the ball up, play some D and hit open shots anything else he does is gravy....some very mediocre players have been asked to do the same thing and have been well rewarded with professional success , nice contracts and many other nice things , but no one should confuse gibson with a good player at this , in time maybe, but all he is now is a role player who gets to start because he is hitting his shots while damon jones and eric snow aren't.

its also worth noting that you have failed to mention any team that would take marbury now for cap space after next season , who they would possibly send back or why they knicks would even want who'd they would send back?

its easy to attack others for their opinions but all i have ever seen from you are vague, regurgitated theorums and snide comments , lets hear your solutions *in full detail * for once.

there are 2 sides to the spectrum , i have alot of respect for many posters here because they put their thoughts out here for the world to see, any1 can say " they cant do it " when watching a losing team.

even though i rarely agree with kiyaman his thoughts are his own not something he is expousing from somewhere else and he is a solution minded person , a person who wants things to go in a positive direction .

there are also other posters of whom i have varying degrees of agreement on their plans but at least i know its their plans so i can respect that . 

i dont get that from you...so i want to see whats going on in that head of yours.

what makes you think gutting the team for picks will work any better for the knicks than the majority of the bottom 3rd of the league which is seemingly constantly gutting their teams searching for that right superstar to lead them who almost never comes to them?

if not the draft then what player will come to the knicks on a gutted team that is so good he can tun a frnachise around , but somehow will take less money to be a knick because his own team can give him more , or is basically been told by his team they dont want him at that price ?

i will respond to the rest of your post when you can start on this .


----------



## alphaorange

*I told you....*

What they should not do...even before they did it. Don't get Marbury (as far back as the old board), don't trade Frye (he has a real value, even as a back-up), Don't get Randolph...or Miles. Basically, we wouldn't be in this mess if I had been making the moves. So now you want to know how I would fix crap that an idiot created....OK.

Let Marbury expire or trade him for something that works for us or buy him out next year. Trade Zach for whatever you can get as long as a pick is included. Provided we get a top 5 this year, get Rose or Greene, and start Lee. I would try to accumulate a late first next year so we can try to trade our '09 first(probable lotto) to a lotto team's '08 pick....possible because there are more bigs available next years lottery. So I plan on filling two slots with young guys this year. Rose, Greene, Beasley, Gordon, Jordan etc. Everything hinges on getting that 2nd lotto pick. I'm sure they can do it IF they are committed to it. Its worth taking a bad contract back if it gets us that pick. Figure next years pick to be a high pick so the swap of picks is possible. Keeping Curry and redefining his role depends on how the picks end up. There are some attractive FAs that are either unrestricted or restricted that could be signed and traded. Smith, Frye, Childress, O'Bryant. We don't need a bunch just the right kind of guys to fill out the team with potential and effort guys. Might consider trying to get Nichols back as he had good chemistry with the young guys and would add a needed quality, since only Nate is shooting well from three....the rest of the team is a disaster. Doesn't make much sense to try to get more detailed since one decision is based on the ones preceding it and without knowing what can be actually done, details are just fantasy.

I think if you go back and check, you will find that Kiyaman and I have been nearly parallel in most of our views. Biggest difference is he thinks (or seems to) that the players can be shuffled on this team so that they function very well. I don't. We both think that chemistry and player usage is horrible, and that IT sucks as coach.

"any1 can say " they cant do it " when watching a losing team." Uh...I made my statements long before this team was the loser it is

"even though i rarely agree with kiyaman his thoughts are his own not something he is expousing from somewhere else and he is a solution minded person , a person who wants things to go in a positive direction .there are also other posters of whom i have varying degrees of agreement on their plans but at least i know its their plans so i can respect that ." Whose thoughts do you think I'm posting? All mine, right or wrong.

"what makes you think gutting the team for picks will work any better for the knicks than the majority of the bottom 3rd of the league which is seemingly constantly gutting their teams searching for that right superstar to lead them who almost never comes to them?" There are plenty of teams in the bottom third that I would trade the Knicks for...including last years big loser Portland. Gotta believe I'm not alone there.

"if not the draft then what player will come to the knicks on a gutted team that is so good he can tun a frnachise around , but somehow will take less money to be a knick because his own team can give him more , or is basically been told by his team they dont want him at that price ?" Where did I say we need a superstar? Especially via FA. I believe our best chance is in the draft.

"its also worth noting that you have failed to mention any team that would take marbury now for cap space after next season , who they would possibly send back or why they knicks would even want who'd they would send back?" I really don't know that there is one, just like you don't know if there isn't. I said I would explore that. Portland got rid of Zach, didn't they?

"you think gibson is a better player than balkman or collins ?" Funny how you talk about Gibson, who was merely one name on the list..in fact you spend a great deal on him...like that is the heart of my response. Is he better than Collins? Who knows? Maybe....he is younger (just 22), healthier, and shoots the ball much better. I hardly think you make the obvious point you seem to think you do.

"any core of decent players can be built up for title contention...if some1 around 2000-2002 said rip hamilton and billups would form the best backcourt in the league, champs and be perenial all stars by 2007 they would have been laughed at seeing how their careers were going at that point, billups a career vagabond and rip some1 his GM basically gave away because his contract demands (something in the 6 yrs 50 mil. range) were seen as ridiculous considering the kind of player he was thought to be...and at the time of the deal it wasn't seen as a bad one at all." Guess the GM was wrong, huh? Comparing what can happen to Hamilton and Billups is an exercise in fantasy. Besides Rip was very, very good. If you're suprised he turned out so good, it is very telling of you. He was a 20ppg guy and very young. You sound like the guy who was always saying how Curry was going to really expand his game.....The fact is that not many guys, in fact very few, ever get much better after several years in the league. So tell me, which players in your scenario do you think are going to really improve? And more to the point, since you have to KNOW the team you just constructed goes nowhere...ever....how is starting over any worse?

Did I miss any of your questions? BTW, its no rumble for me, Although I love to argue as much as the next guy, I prefer to have at it with serious, realistic opponents. So far, I haven't seen much here except pipe dreams, which, by the way, indicate the desperation the fans feel. Asking for finely detailed plan is an ignorant request since all that can done is speculation based on a general outline or concept. You ought to know that.


----------



## Gotham2krazy

Bring Back Gundy.
Demote Zeke to Head of Scouting.
Hire Kiki as GM.
Start a front court of either Lee and Curry or Zach and Morris. 
Give Nate more minutes.
Promote Mardy to starting point guard.
Trade Stephon for a bag of skittles.


----------



## alphaorange

*Nope*

Van Gundy's style is no longer effective. Up tempo offense is the word. Just playing defense is not enough anymore. I like Jeff but his style of play won't get it done anymore. Rather have Colangelo than Kiki. Curry and Zach are problems, not solutions to problems. Nate?....maybe. Collins may not be talented enough to be a starter. Marbury?..agree except get a pick, too.


----------



## jimmybean

Let Isaiah play PG!


----------



## nymoorestx

First you have to admit that this team is going to the lottery, and right now it's about damage control, so you retool the starting five:

Marbury - though I hate to admit it he is still the best player on the squad

Crawford - more productive as a starter

Chandler - see what the rookie has

Lee - need someone to offset Curry on the boards

Curry - don't give up on him yet.

Your bench:

Robinson - to spell Marbury, and a good scorer
Balkman - to spell Nichols or Lee
Rose - to spell Lee
Morris - to spell Curry

Trade:

Zach - maybe we can come up with a package to get Artest
James - may have to buy him out or ride him out on the bench
Q - I think he is shot. Trade him it you can, but not much value there.

Let Herb or Marc take over as coach for the rest of the season. Call it an audition if you'd like.


----------



## nymoorestx

Starting five the rest of the way:
Marbury, Crawford, Chandler, Lee, Curry

Rotation:
Robinson, Balkman, Rose, Morris and maybe Mardy

Trade:
Zach, Q and James (maybe you get get Artest)


----------



## alphaorange

*Honestly?*

I think the Knicks should play to lose at this point. Probably not a popular opinion but if they play close to .500 ball after the break, they'll still suck, probably still wont make the playoffs, and won't get a high lotto pick. 

That would be the worst thing that could happen.


----------



## nieman

To me, Eddy Curry is not great...he's not a keeper. He can score in the post, but thats it. He peaked 4 years ago...with his best season statistically coming last year. He's more of a team killer than anyone else mentioned.

Its already known that you need a rebounder next to him, or a shot blocking big, BUT that just realistically doesn't work. He can't step out and hit the 15'...hell or the 10', so he can't play the PF. If you acquire a shot blocker to go next to him and play the PF it still doesn't work. He still couldn't guard the opposing PF or C, and the big would just be a man on the floor on offense...playing 4 on 5. Remember in Chicago when they had him and Chandler, one couldn't score, one couldn't rebound. Statistically they did what they did, but Chicago was a much better team when Curry was paired with A. Davis, because he could hit the 15'....it will be same scenario with us if they keep him over Zach. Zach is the more complimentary offensive player, better arsenal, play low and high post, and will at least ATTEMPT defense. An active 7' fits with him better because there won't be 2 players clogging the paint with one being ineffective.

Here you go, here' a trade scenario that works for all parties between Milwaukee, Seattle & Knicks. I think this deal is perfect for everyone involved..some more (NYK, Seattle) than others (Milwaukee), but realistically it works.

Seattle would get Eddy Curry & Fred Jones from us, Michael Ruffin and Jake Voskuhl from Milwaukee. They get Curry and 3 expiring contracts.....Seattle needs a real C, low post scorer..not PFs roaming the floor...Kurt ("he ain't good for sh1t on the block"), Collison & Wilcox. Curry fills the void, and since they want to develop their young players, why wouldn't they take 3 expiring contracts with it? They would free up some space taking away Wally's minutes. None of those other players expire this season either.

Milwaukee gets Jamal Crawford from us, Wally Szczerbiak from Seattle. They get a huge contract off the books next year and another scorer.....Milwaukee loses some baby contracts, but I'm sure they would take Wally's 13mil off next season, than ride with Simmons & Gadzuric's 15mil for 3-4 more years. They barely playing now. Plus with Crawford and Wally with Redd and Yi, it sorts of takes them from directionless to a 3-pt/jump shooting team. And I've always said Crawford is best coming off the bench as a combo guard. It's not like he's gotten better as a player anyway.

We get Luke Ridnour & John Petro from Seattle and Dan Gadzuric & Bobby Simmons from Milwaukee. A backup PG and one that plays different from Stephon, some bigs to be active in contrast to Zach and Bobby Simmons... ...With us, Petro, Gadzuric, Morris can all compliment Zach's lack of shot blocking. Hell, thats 18 fouls and they are easily be interchangeable. There would be a problem when Lee came on the floor BUT that can be solved by turning into a running team. Bobby Simmons isn't great but he's serviceable, and would be better than Q, Jeffries...who can both be dumped if anyone would take them.and Balkman (even though Balkman's energy is great). And Ridnour is a pass first PG who can knock down the outside shot....more consistent than Crawford. It would be a contrasting style to Stephon's. Only problem is we become either a half-court team or running team, but no real outside shooters, but chemistry would be better and its not like there were consistent shooters before either.

C- Gadzuric/Petro/James/Morris
PF - Zach/Lee/Rose
SF - Simmons/Balkman/Chandler/Jeffries
SG - Q/Collins
PG - Stephon/Ridnour/Nate

Then do something with Jeffries & Q for a SG


----------



## NeoSamurai

I think whats important to do is clear up some roles on this team: too many scorers on the starting five, not enough youth being developed on a team that isnt going anywhere. 

In terms of how to go about trades, the problem is that all these players have atrocious contracts and making a move for equal talent is virtually impossible to do. But I believe by trading some of these players, you'll be better able to develop roles for this team. So, the first move I'd make is Curry for Damon Jones and Donyell Marshall. The Cavs do it because they get offensive help for LeBron for players that arent playing much on this team. By trading Curry, the Knicks clear up who their interior offensive option is (Zach) who is better on the line and can be allowed to do what he does best which is play offense. Plus, you acquire 2 players who will be kept on the bench and have expiring contracts that coincide with some other big contracts 2 years from now (Jerome James, Stephon, Malik Rose) which will amount in total to about 40 million off the books. 

Then I'd move Crawford for Brian Cardinal and Hakim Warrick, again for the purpose of removing some bulk from this team, infuse some of the younger guys into the starting lineup to develop, and for contract reasons. Cardinal and Q's contracts are removed the next year, freeing up 13 mil. Memphis does it to add another scorer to fit their up-tempo style for 2 players who arent doing much on their bench. 

So, in terms of a lineup, you'd be looking at:

PG: Stephon, Nate, Damon Jones
SG: Q, Collins
SF: Balkman, Jefferies, Warrick
PF: Lee, Marshall
C: Zach, James

The problem with this lineup is obviously interior defense, but I think with this team you can play an up-tempo offense with agile bigs in Lee, Balkman, Jeffries, and Warrick all being able to get up and down the court. Plus, you get rid of the bad contracts on the team all at the same time 2-3 years from now, allowing you to make a run for a big name FA to go along with some of the younger talents that you pick up since youre picking high in the draft.


----------



## Da Grinch

*As usual Alpha,*

you huff and puff and ultimately provide nada.

a big cop out actually

i ask for detail because without it you can post the drivel you just did, how do the knicks get another lotto pick , and a good one at that , the players you mentioned all figure to go in the top 7 or so picks...a good chance the 5 you named could actually be the top 5 picks.



your big plan is mostly hinged on 2 lotto picks ?

the knicks cant deal their 2009 pick period , their 2010 pick is going to utah its unprotected so it is going , unless of course the knicks decde to send them their pick in 2009 instead(which they can do) in either case its not going in any deal you mentioned....so its a no go there...the rule is you cant trade *your* pick 2 years in a row not any pick , so as long as the jazz deal is on the books the knicks cant trade their 2009 pick under any circumstances.

even if it were possible its still foolhearty , history has shown that.

this decade had had 8 drafts and there have been 8 instances in which a team has had 2 lottery picks in it (in fact the bulls alone have done this 4 times in 2000, 2001, 2003 and 2006), it usually doesn't work, in fact its most successful incarnation last years blazers was more to other GM's insanity than the blazer GM's intelligence.


the bulls who desperately need a post up presence trade the best post up guy in the draft for tyrus thomas 

and the t'wolves who almost as desperately needed a dynamic guard to go with Garnett traded the best one in the draft to the blazers for randy foye.

the blazers actually weren't in position to get either until some1 else let them have them in trade.

its interesting you term other plans as pipe dreams when your plan basically is the biggest i've seen in some time.


and before you go on patting yourself on the back too much for supposed right calls you have more than your share of miscues(D. nichols, david lee channing frye , tyson chandler to name a few) 



but like i said this is a pipe dream , if somehow the knicks could get the top 2 talents in the draft like portland did last year , i could see it bringing a quick turnaround , but it requires such an extreme amount of luck in both drafting position and other GM's incompetetnce, its just a foolish undertaking to believe your plan is realistic.

and to get the best rookies you almost always have to be drafting before where Roy was drafted last season ...counting him in the last 20 drafts the rookie of the year has been beyond the 5th pick 3 times , once being a Thomas pick of damon stoudamire in 1998 the others being Roy and amare stoudamire

and to get those picks for a GM whom you seem to have no real faith in his drafting abilities...so figure that.

outside of the ideas that are against nba rules , what you have been posting is far from original...like i've said its been done 8 times this deade alone.

you proved very well why detail is needed when you post.


----------



## alphaorange

*You're an idiot*

They can most certainly trade an'09 pick if they have 2 of them. Re-read. I won't even begin to correct you if you can't see the similarities in principle between what you asked of me and the type of crap you spew. Do me a favor...don't bother responding to my posts and I won't bother reading yours. Deal? Moron.


----------



## Da Grinch

*Re: You're an idiot*



alphaorange said:


> They can most certainly trade an'09 pick if they have 2 of them. Re-read. I won't even begin to correct you if you can't see the similarities in principle between what you asked of me and the type of crap you spew. Do me a favor...don't bother responding to my posts and I won't bother reading yours. Deal? Moron.



its funny ...you in your last post to me you made a bit of a stink about me only picking one part of something you posted and not the whole (boobie gibson )here was alot more to my post than that and i noticed you couldn't respond to any of it...most likely because facts are hard to argue.

a simple mind often resorts to insults when his/her logic fails them....and you resort to insults in your posts an awful lot .


----------



## compsciguy78

In 4 words...

Get rid of Marbury


----------

