# My views of the knicks as of now.



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Basically to me the knicks have talent but a bad mix and the coaching job is so bad it makes one think he is tanking sometimes...add to that the catastophies of the early season(marbury kin dying , zach's grandmother dying ,marbury throwing hissy fits on planes and a rough early schedule ) the season seemed doomed early especially with Zach and eddy being seemingly ill fits for each other.


I see this .

The defense more or less has ben just as bad this year as last year usually young players get better defensively, and for the most part that improvement hasn't come at all. Collins & balkman were expected to have bigger impacts and have faltered .

on offense marbury is gone, Qrich cant hit a shot to save his life, and curry has been terrible, although he has been better since zach has been out with injury.

chemistry couldn't be worse , its really a bunch of guy who seem to genuinely like each other , but have very few skills that compliment each other,mostly because the units used are bad fits, and the offensive schemes are run poorly, way too often the ball is swung outside to guys who cant shoot, the defense lets them have it wide open knowing they will rarely hit them.

a guy like lee who is an ok perimeter shooter should take the shot if only because after he its one or 2 it can allow him to drive past defenders who have to respect his shot ...while guys like jeffries ,malik rose or balkman wont get that respect because their scouts tell them if they hit it its luck, they should never even be out there , they should be cutting to the basket or hitting the offensive boards, setting screens getting other people decent shots , instead of taking bad ones, teams like the jazz , you never see milsap or jarron collins forced to take outside shots they have no business taking but it happens to the knicks all the time.

as for the players individually .

crawford has been doing well, but he is not a #1 option, he's really a 3rd option maybe even a #2 or top guy off the bench but certainly not a guy the offense to rise and fall with.

Zach's played decent but this team exposes his flaws , he isn't a defender , he isn't athletic , he needs a big mobile defender next to him who doesn't need touches, also when he feels he isn't getting the ball enough he gets selfish , a more strong armed coach would serve him well , he has basically had player friendly guys coaching him and he's gotten away with his only sometimes team oriented play when he has focused on team friendly play he can be awesome because he has alot of skills. 

Nate has been good , he too is basically a sparkplug type player , his improvement as a point guard has been fun to watch.

Curry has been bad , he cant get enough touches and when he doesn't he gets nervous and rushes his shots , but without Zach in there he looks better , and he unlike zach is a genuine guy who just by his presense makes his teammates better by virtue of all the attention he gets downlow...he needs to be benched , have his role changed to strictly a finisher or have the team structure its offense back to featuring him , which would be my decision.

Q. Richardson has been poor offensively as bad as any player in the whole league, he tries hard but he is playing hurt he hasn't help as much as every1 would like, and he is miscast he isn't a starter , at the 3 he is more of a backup 2 at this point.

Marbury is at this point and ending deal over the summer, 20 mil off the books can garner alot of probably a star player and a bad contract to give a team a new start in a year.

David lee is a good player an excellent rebounder and he is now opening up his game , taking his perimeter shot and using it to drive to the hoop when the opportunity presents itself ...needs to be a more powerful presence under the hoop , lay some hard fouls on people ...be a power forward, he still looks like he has the potential to do so unlike eddy and zach.

balkman has been mediocre , i thought he could grow into more this season but he hasn't as of yet , he has so many different abilities and even at times lockdown defense , but something is off with him this season , he gets into foul trouble too much in his limited minutes , he looks out of sync too often out there but he is a keeper until proven otherwise.

Wilson chandler is also a keeper , a young but emerging 2 way player who can shoot defend block shots as much as i like the idea of artest if Thomas said he was content to leave the 3 spot to balkman and chandler next season and live with the results i would be happy with that because they both just need court time to improve.

Randolph morris , to me he can play and should be given every chance to compete for the backup center spot , possibly starter if curry keep slumping.

Collin , its been a lost season for him , he needs to play or be traded its obvious he has been soundly beaten out by robinson for minutes and has lost the confidence he had at the end of last season, but he has a good game he could be just as good a compliment for crawford , even better because he can hide crawford's often lax defense and can run an offense just as well albiet less dynamically.

malik rose is just good guy who is a bad nba player with 8 mil. left on his deal after this season, he should fetch a good player this summer , or at the trade deadline next feb.

fred jones is an ok player plays hard , a perfect backup , and can play the pg in a pinch it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if he was brought back.

jared jeffries is overpriced but a good guy to have around...on a team that scores enough to hide his pretty poor shooting.

jerome james is a waste of a roster spot, his only redeeming quality is that he blocks shots and fouls hard....but he is either hurt or out of shape.

as a team they have no identity , a power team with no one who throws their weight around on defense , with a center who gets timid at times when he isn't forcefed the ball.

thomas as a coach is bad, on the pacers he was decent he even did ok last season he was able to motivate a team despite X& O deficiencies but this season he is bad, just bad the talent is there for a good coach to meld , but you just cant throw the ball out and expect them to play well. in truth some parts have to be moved. Thomas biggest mistake is that he thought he could make other grown men tougher just because he was their coach and that was as wrong as can be. people can only change so much from what they are.

the eddy and zach combo doesn't work, zach needs to go , he is the only one playing well enough to get something of value ...besides zach doesn't makes his teamates better eddy even with all his faults does. i would put some some defenders and tough guys on the court for him to make up for what he doesn't bring.something along the lines of zach,malik either balkman or randolph morris and nate for brad miller , kenny thomas SAR and shelden williams or another young guy like garcia or udrih would work out ...but really any deal that brings smarts, toughness and rebounding to the team overall to surround crawford and curry works....artest is nice but the deal can be extended to include him he he strongarms the kings into thinking he'll tale the MLE to be a knick as he has stated previously ..in which case it will probably be marbury who goes instead

outside of that a dynamic draft pick(o.j. mayo) who may have a brandon roy impact in a couple of years ...the talent level is there it just needs to be adjusted to have players that compliment each other....thats thomas' job or whomever's over the summer.


----------



## aboveallodds24 (Sep 22, 2003)

Very nice post. Its good to see you have a little bit of positive outlook when it comes to the situation that is Knick basketball... a view from the outside would be spend the next 2 or 3 years rebuilding and clear some cap space. you can still be competitive rebuilding since your in the east. but i'd say try and get some Good people. a good model to use would be the same thing that Portland has used


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

*Great Post*

Curry weight and talent does not bother me, what does bother me is how the Knicks Head coach and coaching staff are using Eddy Curry talents and Zach Randolph talents. 

After watching the Knicks 4th quarters of the Piston, Cavs, and Hornets game my conclusion of this Knick team Losses has little to do with the Players. Each Loss had Head Coach Isiah Thomas 95% decision-making written all over it. 

What is bothering me the most is that the Knicks could use the remainder of this season to cultivate a meshing chemistry of players for next season (Young Players). 

How on earth does Curry grab just 4 rebounds going up against the likes of Theo Ratliff, Antonio McDyess, Jason Maxiell and Amir Johnson in the post. 
Ratliff and Johnson are rail thin. The former is ancient and coming off injuries and the latter is young and raw. McDyess and Maxiell are both of PF size. 
Yeah Curry scored 23 points. We know he can score. But 4 rebounds 0 blocks. It's hard not to focus on such a limited defensive production.

*The above is a Great Point,* something we been aware of during Larry Brown tour with the Knicks. This is why this Knick Team could use a Head Coach with 2nd half and 4th Quarter Strategy down the stretch of the remaining regular season games. 
All of Curry weaknesses on court is the area where Randolph Morris strive in at best this is not something NEW this was seen in the Knicks Summer League Team with Randolph Morris performance. 
Lately we been watching a well performance with Randolph Morris in the 4th qtr., the Knicks Head Coach and coaching staff had all season long to mesh "Curry & Morris" skillz together to form a tower downlow. That would've or could've been one of the Knicks decent Frontcourt tandems. Especially if used mainly in the 4th qtr. where a strategy of using 6.9 David Lee at the SF position, Morris at the PF position, and Curry at the center position. 
That frontcourt lineup in the last 6 minutes of the 4th quarter would have WON the Knicks last 4 games. 
Imagine a Frontcourt lineup of C-Morris, PF-Zach, SF-Lee, SG-Chandler, PG-Nate..... Image it first...


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

aboveallodds24 said:


> Very nice post. Its good to see you have a little bit of positive outlook when it comes to the situation that is Knick basketball... a view from the outside would be spend the next 2 or 3 years rebuilding and clear some cap space. you can still be competitive rebuilding since your in the east. but i'd say try and get some Good people. a good model to use would be the same thing that Portland has used


I believe an even better model to use would be the Celtics model who were in a very similar situation to us talent-wise and financially. Alot of people tend to criticize the decisions Isiah has made so far as team president but he has done things that Scott Layden could not do, acquire assets. I think that now that we have those assets, we should look to parlay them into players whose game fit what we hope to do in the future. We make a couple hits talent wise in some of these trades but better talent does not always equate to more wins. I think if Isiah starts focusing on getting these kinds of players, we'd be in a great situation in the next couple years especially with that lottery pick we're expecting this year.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I believe an even better model to use would be the Celtics model who were in a very similar situation to us talent-wise and financially. Alot of people tend to criticize the decisions Isiah has made so far as team president but he has done things that Scott Layden could not do, acquire assets. I think that now that we have those assets, we should look to parlay them into players whose game fit what we hope to do in the future. We make a couple hits talent wise in some of these trades but better talent does not always equate to more wins. I think if Isiah starts focusing on getting these kinds of players, we'd be in a great situation in the next couple years especially with that lottery pick we're expecting this year.


i agree with that to some point , no GM is going to give you something for nothing , the only real way to get talent from other GM's is to give them either talent or money...

the celtics model, to me was luck no one can convince me that was ainge's plan but paul pierce forced his hand with his demands for more vet talent or he wanted out , and because ainge had basically given his young players PT by virtue of not giving rivers any vets he could have played in front of them they were viable trading assets....Garnett didn't even want to go until they had aquired allen...

to me zeke is doing the opposite , he is playing his vets in the hope of trading them for better fitting veteran talent , if anything he has for the most part gone out of his way not to play young guys to keep their value low(r. morris, d.lee, balkman) because he has no real desire to deal them ....morris in particular because he is due for a new deal this summer as he is a FA and that cash will probably be used to try and lure artest before anything can be done for morris whom i think can play.

i really do think the knicks talent level is substantial and that another lottery pick can only help, they are primed for a quick turnaround if things fall into place for them.,


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> Basically to me the knicks have talent but a bad mix and the coaching job is so bad it makes one think he is tanking sometimes...add to that the catastophies of the early season(marbury kin dying , zach's grandmother dying ,marbury throwing hissy fits on planes and a rough early schedule ) the season seemed doomed early especially with Zach and eddy being seemingly ill fits for each other.
> 
> 
> I see this .
> ...


I agree for the most part, but Collins is a goat and it really looks like he's a lost pick. As for Fred Jones, he's not nearly productive enough to warrant keeping. He's mediocre at best. Richardson is quickly looking like the worst contract that the Knicks have. He's been one of the worst threes in the league and is getting paid way too much money to do it. Eddy Curry has the worst plus minus in the league of anybody who's played over 50% of his team's total minutes. He's bad.


----------



## OWLtrageous (Mar 7, 2007)

urwhatueati8god said:


> I agree for the most part, but Collins is a goat and it really looks like he's a lost pick.


Not buying Mardy as a goat. He is stuck in a horrendous situation. He can't get minutes despite the fact that the Knicks are absolutely horrible. I don't understand why they picked up his contract for a third year yet they don't play him. It would've been better off for him to test free agency as he has acommodity that about 80% of the NBA doesn't have: he can play defense. Leave it to the Knicks to stick with a bunch of bums during a lost season instead of seeing what they can see with their young guys.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Da Grinch said:


> i agree with that to some point , no GM is going to give you something for nothing , the only real way to get talent from other GM's is to give them either talent or money...
> 
> the celtics model, to me was luck no one can convince me that was ainge's plan but paul pierce forced his hand with his demands for more vet talent or he wanted out , and because ainge had basically given his young players PT by virtue of not giving rivers any vets he could have played in front of them they were viable trading assets....Garnett didn't even want to go until they had aquired allen...
> 
> ...


I never said or implied that a GM would give you something for nothing. I feel that a majority of the players we have on the Knicks can be considered assets because of just how talented they are. Isiah made a point earlier in the season that he only feels that there is one player making alot of money and that player was Marbury; every other player was paid justly for what they could potentially contribute in a game. Like the Celtics, I feel the Knicks have enough assets to bring in the veteran leadership and play necessary for us to be a relevant NBA team. I do agree that Ainge's hand was forced by a malcontent franchise player but the end result is still the same as if it wasn't.

I also believe that you have a very interesting perspective that I agree with concerning how Isiah is utilizing his players. It drove me crazy how he refused to play some of our young players extended minutes but the rationale behind doing so is there. It would suck to see any of those guys bolt via free agency over the next couple years. I'm hoping Isiah or some other GM/coach (hopefully Walsh if it must be someone else) finds the right mix in time to avoid those guys from demanding a change of venue out of frustration.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I never said or implied that a GM would give you something for nothing. I feel that a majority of the players we have on the Knicks can be considered assets because of just how talented they are. Isiah made a point earlier in the season that he only feels that there is one player making alot of money and that player was Marbury; every other player was paid justly for what they could potentially contribute in a game. Like the Celtics, I feel the Knicks have enough assets to bring in the veteran leadership and play necessary for us to be a relevant NBA team. I do agree that Ainge's hand was forced by a malcontent franchise player but the end result is still the same as if it wasn't.
> 
> I also believe that you have a very interesting perspective that I agree with concerning how Isiah is utilizing his players. It drove me crazy how he refused to play some of our young players extended minutes but the rationale behind doing so is there. It would suck to see any of those guys bolt via free agency over the next couple years. I'm hoping Isiah or some other GM/coach (hopefully Walsh if it must be someone else) finds the right mix in time to avoid those guys from demanding a change of venue out of frustration.


i never said you implied that .

all i'm saying is that teams decide whose value they are going to keep high ...last year for instance it was painstakingly clear david lee was outplaying Frye , but he started over him and got nearly as many minutes ...thats no accident or coincidence in my opinion that he was traded soon therafter .


you have to remember the GM is also the head coach its not unheard of these agendas happening especially on teams that are at the moment going nowhere.

the celts made assets out of unproven talent , the knicks are basically doing the opposite they are playing their vets who have proven themselves and are basically just trying to show the league that they can still play, and are not really giving their young talent all that much playing time as most teams with the knicks record would do.

i think because they are going to deal some of them in the offseason , i thik the main ones that will go are Zach , marbury and malik rose , the last 2 have ending deals at around a combined 30 mil. next season.

as much as i like wilson chandler and balkman i think one of them has to go , most likely imo it will be chandler that goes , Thomas is seemingly going after Artest hard when the offseason comes and there is just no reason to have those 3 plus jeffries.

i also agree the knicks have enough to go after some real vet talent in the offseason and i think they will , i just think they will be sending off their veterans for the most part out instead of youth like the celts did , and that among other reasons is why the knicks fans have been scratching their heads wondering why certain vets have been playing so much and instead of other players.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Da Grinch said:


> i never said you implied that .
> 
> all i'm saying is that teams decide whose value they are going to keep high ...last year for instance it was painstakingly clear david lee was outplaying Frye , but he started over him and got nearly as many minutes ...thats no accident or coincidence in my opinion that he was traded soon therafter .
> 
> ...


My mistake then earlier. What you just said helped to clarify alot for me and is a different perspective that I have not seen yet but does sound pretty solid. The question is what kind of players we bring in. What would be some of the first things you look to do in terms of personnel or the kind of personnel you'd look to bring in.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

OWLtrageous said:


> Not buying Mardy as a goat. He is stuck in a horrendous situation. He can't get minutes despite the fact that the Knicks are absolutely horrible. I don't understand why they picked up his contract for a third year yet they don't play him. It would've been better off for him to test free agency as he has acommodity that about 80% of the NBA doesn't have: he can play defense. Leave it to the Knicks to stick with a bunch of bums during a lost season instead of seeing what they can see with their young guys.



I agree Mardy Collins is not a goat, their are too many teams in the league whom have players that can move without the ball and play great off the ball to give Mardy Collins an average of 7 assist a game. 
When you look at the Knick teammates that Mardy Collins get playingtime with you will notice the majority of them have to dribble the ball before they shoot, they dont play Team Defense, and they only move comming toward the ball rather than toward the hoop. 
So I feel for Mardy Collins and Nate Robinson. 

It looks to me that Head Coach Isiah Thomas is coaching his best for LOTTERY Ping-pong Balls in the last 25 games...


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Just watching other teams like New Orleans, Boston, and Portland redeem themselves, gives me hope we can do better next year. Wait....I'm just kidding.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Da Grinch said:


> i never said you implied that .
> 
> all i'm saying is that teams decide whose value they are going to keep high ...last year for instance it was painstakingly clear david lee was outplaying Frye , but he started over him and got nearly as many minutes ...thats no accident or coincidence in my opinion that he was traded soon therafter .
> 
> ...



Some might consider this to be a lateral move but what about trying to make a trade to the Bulls for Larry Hughes and Drew Gooden using Zach Randolph as bait? I've always felt that Gooden would be a solid compliment to Curry. I feel he can accomplish many of the objectives Isiah may have had in mind in the Randolph deal; a double headed low post monster but this time within more of a team concept and a little bit more defensive intensity. I think Hughes can still play at the high level of play he did with the Wizards and might actually help Marbury fit into our offensive attack a little bit better (if he's still around next year).

The deal as proposed would need a few more pieces to make it work financially. I think Larry Hughes, Drew Gooden and Chris Duhon for Zach Randolph, Mardy Collins and Fred Jones (sign and trade) would be able to work. Randolph gives them a full-time low post option, something Gooden can't handle and many have recognized. Randolph does have issues defensively but the Bulls are a strong enough defensive team to mask it and would have their shooters benefit greatly from the spacing he provides on the floor. The Bulls tough love culture might be exactly what Zach needs to properly play his game. Fred Jones would be a solid backup and Collins would be the big guard they have seemed to value so much with such a small back-court.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Some might consider this to be a lateral move but what about trying to make a trade to the Bulls for Larry Hughes and Drew Gooden using Zach Randolph as bait? I've always felt that Gooden would be a solid compliment to Curry. I feel he can accomplish many of the objectives Isiah may have had in mind in the Randolph deal; a double headed low post monster but this time within more of a team concept and a little bit more defensive intensity. I think Hughes can still play at the high level of play he did with the Wizards and might actually help Marbury fit into our offensive attack a little bit better (if he's still around next year).
> 
> The deal as proposed would need a few more pieces to make it work financially. I think Larry Hughes, Drew Gooden and Chris Duhon for Zach Randolph, Mardy Collins and Fred Jones (sign and trade) would be able to work. Randolph gives them a full-time low post option, something Gooden can't handle and many have recognized. Randolph does have issues defensively but the Bulls are a strong enough defensive team to mask it and would have their shooters benefit greatly from the spacing he provides on the floor. The Bulls tough love culture might be exactly what Zach needs to properly play his game. Fred Jones would be a solid backup and Collins would be the big guard they have seemed to value so much with such a small back-court.


Another potentially solid move would be Stephon Marbury and a 2nd round pick for Mike Miller, Brian Cardinal and Kyle Lowry. Marbury would be an expiring contract this next year, so I figure a Memphis team that was looking to ditch bad contracts would be very interested in this deal. Cardinal's contract would be regretable but could be a serviceable player for us. He is a model professional whose hard work might rub off well on some of the younger players. As for Miller, his game is exactly what we need next to Eddy Curry.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> My mistake then earlier. What you just said helped to clarify alot for me and is a different perspective that I have not seen yet but does sound pretty solid. The question is what kind of players we bring in. What would be some of the first things you look to do in terms of personnel or the kind of personnel you'd look to bring in.


simply put guys who have games who fit in around the stars of the team ...most role players are not all that good , but they the best ones accept their roles and use their skills in the team concept as best they can ...

i'd settle around june's draft pick(which should be top 5) eddy and jamal as the focal players on the team , all the top guys in the draft that the knicks should be interested in can fit around them somewhat easily , (beasly mayo and rose)

as for the role players , i'd go for versatile players who hustle, rebound and play defense .

the keepers (david lee , mardy collins and the team should go after artest and choose between chandler and balkman as his backup...if they dont get artest they should keep both of them)

outside of that group every1 is extremely tradeable to me.

in the paint i would go after enforcer/rebounder/leader types who can hit an outside jumpshot at least passably guys like kenyon martin , jermaine oneal, shelden williams, okafor,'sheed wallace , u.haslem, joe smith , kurt thomas , pj brown.

guys playing as role players on teams like the spurs (horry , omberto) arent any better but they do what they are supposed to do to make their stars more impactful...the knicks need more guys who are willing to do that ...and that guy(s) should be better than malik rose.

on the perimeter , basically i would want guys who play defense can handle the ball a bit and can shoot/score...i like the idea of a crawford/larry hughes backcourt, or even guys like marquis daniels obviously a guy like artest, marko jaric, sasha vuljanic,pietrus.

guys who are very attainable and in the right setting can be very useful.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Da Grinch said:


> simply put guys who have games who fit in around the stars of the team ...most role players are not all that good , but they the best ones accept their roles and use their skills in the team concept as best they can ...
> 
> i'd settle around june's draft pick(which should be top 5) eddy and jamal as the focal players on the team , all the top guys in the draft that the knicks should be interested in can fit around them somewhat easily , (beasly mayo and rose)
> 
> ...


I like your idea alot. 

Do you believe that Drew Gooden could be that enforcer and rebounder type you mentioned earlier? He's not very gritty but I feel he's a solid rebounder, a good defender when he puts his mind too it and an excellent high post scorer (an excellent compliment to Curry). Gooden even blocks a shot on occassion which for us would be an upgrade. 

As far as Crawford's backcourt mate, do you feel that Mike Miller fits? I really like his game and become a big fan of bringing him in here after finding out he is available. He's not a good defender but adequate at the very least (which is an upgrade slightly for us). At this point, I feel he'd be a much better option than Marko Jaric, Sasha Vujajic and Pietrus.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I like your idea alot.
> 
> Do you believe that Drew Gooden could be that enforcer and rebounder type you mentioned earlier? He's not very gritty but I feel he's a solid rebounder, a good defender when he puts his mind too it and an excellent high post scorer (an excellent compliment to Curry). Gooden even blocks a shot on occassion which for us would be an upgrade.
> 
> As far as Crawford's backcourt mate, do you feel that Mike Miller fits? I really like his game and become a big fan of bringing him in here after finding out he is available. He's not a good defender but adequate at the very least (which is an upgrade slightly for us). At this point, I feel he'd be a much better option than Marko Jaric, Sasha Vujajic and Pietrus.


drew is a good rebounder and decent scorer he can score inside and out and he is talented but he isn't much of a leader or enforcer he would be much better for the knicks than lets say zach , even though zach is a better player , but i have doubts he would fit better next to curry than lets say david lee , which means he could come off the bench , i dont think he would tolerate that too well...its a situation where gooden does some things better than lee and lee does some things better than gooden(rebound, play with energy) to make up for curry's flaws ,its the sort of thing where it could mess up the team more because neither player is really bringing anything the other cant/wont and neither is much better than the other overall....also the guys i listed have a history of defending their teammates against rough play , something neither zach eddy drew or david lee have a history of doing , the only guy on the knicks roster who is known for this is jerome james , but he cant get court time.

a guy like mike miller would surely help out more but he would cost more to aquire , if the grizzlies were having a fire a sale i would definitely be on line with this , but it appears unlikely , they should have their pick of suitors come offseason...but he can handle , shoot and score , he is a smart player who fits his game around others , he is perfect....outside of his defense which you already mentioned.

the reason i named the players i did , in addition to their skillset , is that they are for the most part easily aquired, the knicks may have to take a bad contract or something else undesirable , but their teams aren't really attached to keeping them if a deal comes along.


----------



## Zuca (Dec 4, 2003)

Without adding one or two draft picks you can't get Mike Miller. Grizzlies just declined a Mike Miller + Brian Cardinal trade for Jason Williams and Ricky Davis (expiring contracts).

As for the others, I believe that your team need some changes and I'll give some ideas here.

Zach Randolph may be talented but his trade value is low actually. His contract is long and although Chicago can use a player like him, I actually don't think that they're willing to involve Gooden in a trade for him (I was suggesting a Randolph + Q Rich trade for Gooden and Hughes since the season started). Indiana, on the other side, is a team where he can fit well. O'Brien is a coach who would love to have Randolph and his low post scoring skills (when he was in Philadelphia, they traded for Webber looking for low post scoring, although they didn't clicked well), so there is my idea (that also involves Portland):

NY trade Randolph and QRich to Indiana; trade Marbury and Malik Rose to Portland;

Indiana trade Jermaine O'Neal, Troy Murphy and Marquis Daniels to Knicks;

Portland trade Raef Lafrentz and a resigned Von Wafer (to fit salaries) to Indiana; trade Darius Miles and the Knicks 2nd round pick they've acquired in their Randolph trade to Knicks;

Why?

Honestly, as much this team deserves this, I can't believe that Isiah will be fired. At best, he would stay as the coach. Jermaine O'Neal love Isiah as a coach and as a person, and Isiah love O'Neal also. JO would embrace this team even in this actual situation, and he can be a good frontcourt mate for Curry.
Murphy would replace some of the Randolph post scoring and is a nice option coming of the bench, backing up both PF and C positions.
Marquis Daniels is a slasher, not a bad defender and can be used sometimes even at the PG spot.
Miles is a player that Isiah also like, an athletic SF who can play some defense (when healthy) and getting him is the price of getting rid of Marbury and getting your 2nd rounder back. Not to mention that although Knicks would be adding some salary, they would be saving some luxury tax, replacing Marbury bigger (although expiring) contract with Miles lesser contract, which expires after the 09-10 season, along with O'Neal and Marquis contracts.

As for Indiana, they save some salary and get Randolph (who may be a good fit in O'Brien system as it was explained) while getting rid of Marquis (who had some troubles this season), JO (who need a scenario change) and Murphy big contract. Lafrentz is an expiring contract and can also fit well with his good scoring in the perimeter. I also believe that QRich can play well with O'Brien.

Portland would increase their cap size in the next season, but both Marbury and Rose contracts are expiring. They would likely buyout Marbury contract and save more money. Malik would be a good locker room presence and can teach some good things with his experience to their kids.


I'll share more ideas later...


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*nope*

This team is going to be rebuilt, and IT is not going to be part of it. Not as a coach...not as an executive. He has been very bad at both. There will be no acquisition of Miles...or Jermaine...or Hughes. They will unload Marbury by trade or buyout. Curry will be shopped but will probably end up here. Zach has to go, and will. Those two cannot exist together. It was a bad idea from the start. Just a bad trade. JC is NOT a pg and the team will try to do whatever they can to secure Rose if he comes out. Think Chris Paul type potential. If they miss on Rose and manage to be able to get Beasley, then the front line is set. Beasley, along with Lee, make up for Curry's lack of board work, and his perimeter game opens up the spaces for Curry to post and Lee to cut. They will still need a PG, and it will have to be a decent one (Arroyo?). If Beasley comes, Balkman or Chandler will have to go. If Rose is drafted, some of our guards will go. Collins might be the first, but surely Marbury is done here. We'll still need scoring, rebounding SF to match with Lee and Curry, or the front court will have to be changed up. There is enough cash and talent to get us the 2 picks we need. In a perfect world, we'd get the first pick, try to get Seattle's first pick by way of either JC and or Nate plus a future 1st pick (they could use a guy like JC since they have no real SG, I know Durant plays there but he fits better as a 3). If they could pry that pick from the sonics, it could end up as the #2 or top 5, at least. They could try to move up using that as bait and adding players. A long convoluted way of saying I'd kill to have Rose and Beasly. BTW, add Patrick Ewing Jr.....he has exactly what we need. He could replace either Chandler or Balkman or both if we got Beasley. I think he's a 2nd rounder.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: nope*



alphaorange said:


> This team is going to be rebuilt, and IT is not going to be part of it. Not as a coach...not as an executive. He has been very bad at both. There will be no acquisition of Miles...or Jermaine...or Hughes. They will unload Marbury by trade or buyout. Curry will be shopped but will probably end up here. Zach has to go, and will. Those two cannot exist together. It was a bad idea from the start. Just a bad trade. JC is NOT a pg and the team will try to do whatever they can to secure Rose if he comes out. Think Chris Paul type potential. If they miss on Rose and manage to be able to get Beasley, then the front line is set. Beasley, along with Lee, make up for Curry's lack of board work, and his perimeter game opens up the spaces for Curry to post and Lee to cut. They will still need a PG, and it will have to be a decent one (Arroyo?). If Beasley comes, Balkman or Chandler will have to go. If Rose is drafted, some of our guards will go. Collins might be the first, but surely Marbury is done here. We'll still need scoring, rebounding SF to match with Lee and Curry, or the front court will have to be changed up. There is enough cash and talent to get us the 2 picks we need. In a perfect world, we'd get the first pick, try to get Seattle's first pick by way of either JC and or Nate plus a future 1st pick (they could use a guy like JC since they have no real SG, I know Durant plays there but he fits better as a 3). If they could pry that pick from the sonics, it could end up as the #2 or top 5, at least. They could try to move up using that as bait and adding players. A long convoluted way of saying I'd kill to have Rose and Beasly. BTW, add Patrick Ewing Jr.....he has exactly what we need. He could replace either Chandler or Balkman or both if we got Beasley. I think he's a 2nd rounder.


I think "rebuilding" all depends on who is brought in and part of me still really thinks that Dolan won't bring in someone willing to necessarily do that. There hasn't been any indication of this from Dolan's past hirings or anything recently. 

I almost want to keep Isiah around until after the draft simply because I think there is no way that he could botch our pick. I feel confident that Derrick Rose would be a Knick with Isiah in charge. Rose is exactly the kind of player we need and definitely would be pursued by Isiah who loves Chicago players.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Zuca said:


> Without adding one or two draft picks you can't get Mike Miller. Grizzlies just declined a Mike Miller + Brian Cardinal trade for Jason Williams and Ricky Davis (expiring contracts).
> 
> As for the others, I believe that your team need some changes and I'll give some ideas here.
> 
> ...


I look forward to hearing some of those ideas.

As far as Isiah goes, the last thing that I would want him to remain as with this team is the coach. He's not nearly the X's and O's guy I thought him to be. I think that he needs to be an assistant coach for a few seasons before he's able to really manage the responsibilities of being a head coach. Evaluating talent is truly his calling and should be his job with this team. He has shown time and time again in the draft that he has a keen eye selecting solid players and making trades (aside from the financial aspect of it).

About Mike Miller, I thought the proposed trade between the Grizzlies and Heat involved only ONE expiring contract for Mike. I also thought that Pat Riley was the one who balked at the trade and not the Grizzlies organization , valuing the financial flexibility and prospects of fixing their mess with it more. If this is the case, I think the Knicks definately would be in the discussion especially given the likelihood we'd take a contract like Cardinal's. As far as a draft pick goes, the Knicks could send a couple 2nd round picks and cash incentives along with Marbury to get the deal to work. It should be one of the best deals on the table.

Cardinal's contract would be where it stops, however, with taking bad contracts from other teams. If we get too out of hand with those sorts of trades, we'd end up in the same situation we were in during the Scott Layden era; a bunch of serviceable players that are vastly overpaid, for far too long a time. I say lay off the kind of trades you mentioned unless we're completely fleecing these teams talent wise.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Da Grinch said:


> drew is a good rebounder and decent scorer he can score inside and out and he is talented but he isn't much of a leader or enforcer he would be much better for the knicks than lets say zach , even though zach is a better player , but i have doubts he would fit better next to curry than lets say david lee , which means he could come off the bench , i dont think he would tolerate that too well...its a situation where gooden does some things better than lee and lee does some things better than gooden(rebound, play with energy) to make up for curry's flaws ,its the sort of thing where it could mess up the team more because neither player is really bringing anything the other cant/wont and neither is much better than the other overall....also the guys i listed have a history of defending their teammates against rough play , something neither zach eddy drew or david lee have a history of doing , the only guy on the knicks roster who is known for this is jerome james , but he cant get court time.
> 
> a guy like mike miller would surely help out more but he would cost more to aquire , if the grizzlies were having a fire a sale i would definitely be on line with this , but it appears unlikely , they should have their pick of suitors come offseason...but he can handle , shoot and score , he is a smart player who fits his game around others , he is perfect....outside of his defense which you already mentioned.
> 
> the reason i named the players i did , in addition to their skillset , is that they are for the most part easily aquired, the knicks may have to take a bad contract or something else undesirable , but their teams aren't really attached to keeping them if a deal comes along.


Personally, like what you mentioned earlier, I do not believe that we have primadonnas on the bench. A guy like David Lee would be and should be fine continuing to come off the bench. David Lee was clearly the better player between both he and Channing Frye and did not voice any sort of displeasure playing behind him. Frye may have been his friend but I doubt that that that sort of demand would effect their relationship. I know every situation is different but Jamal Crawford played behind Stephon Marbury for 2 seasons despite both being good friends and he voiced his displeasure without it necessarily affecting that relationship. So basically, I wouldn't mind having another version of David Lee given how high a level he plays and how well he meshes with Curry. The leadership and enforcer type could be found at another position or even off the bench. You did mention bringing in an Artest like player.

It definately would be nice to get the Florida connection going between both Miller and Lee. I think the possibility of a reunion could be a reality considering for what little they were about to take in return for him. If I recall correctly the Grizzlies had a deal with the Heat for an expiring contract before Miami backed out of the deal. The Knicks definately could do the same and offer up a young guy like Wilson Chandler who might not be a player the Grizzlies would use but could be put an asset for another deal.

P.S., I haven't really taken a good look at Mikael Pietrus. All I've really noticed is that he has an ability to hit a jumper consistently and is extremely athletic and utilizes it well enough on the defensive end. Is there anything more beyond this?


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I believe an even better model to use would be the Celtics model who were in a very similar situation to us talent-wise and financially. Alot of people tend to criticize the decisions Isiah has made so far as team president but he has done things that Scott Layden could not do, acquire assets. I think that now that we have those assets, we should look to parlay them into players whose game fit what we hope to do in the future. We make a couple hits talent wise in some of these trades but better talent does not always equate to more wins. I think if Isiah starts focusing on getting these kinds of players, we'd be in a great situation in the next couple years especially with that lottery pick we're expecting this year.



I cant buy this Celtics thing because they had one Super-Star Player (Paul Pierce) on the team that let the organization "BIG-DUMMY Danny Ainge" know about each cancer player he added to the roster since Liquor Store Baker. 
I cant buy the Scott Layden issue either, Scott Layden left alot of decent asset players that was working with Coach Chaney, plus five ending contract players that season. 
It was Layden Players that took Isiah Thomas to his only Knick Postseason. 

If one hav'nt learned anything about Isiah Thomas as a player, coach, and Owner, and G.M. Performances, then the Anucha Trial should've showed everyone that Isiah have poor relations with Player, Personal, and Friends through the participation of Marbury performance this season.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

(maybe)This is too much to read but it gives a Knick-Fan the analysis of Zeke and the Knick Players. 

*The Knicks TRIO Lineup of "Nate, Balkman, and Lee" co-exist together outstandingly vs NBA oponents since early lastseason. Why have this Trio of players been seperated from playing together throughout this entire season?* 

Watching the Knicks 109-98 LOSS to the Hawks shows Isiah is not a NBA Coach to have for next season. Zeke shows no coaching strategy to build chemistry within these Knick players. He wants out and the players would like that too. 
*There was no reason at all in the Hawks game that Coach Isiah Starting-5 Players should've been "Nate, Crawford, Balkman, Lee, and Zach". *
If they would'nt have got it right in the first quarter I'm sure they would have in the third quarter vs the Hawks Roster. 

The playingtime given to the *"Tazman Balkman"* whom have the Raw talent of becomming a decent Point-Foward in the league is being showcase by Zeke for trading him on draft night or during the offseason (to go in a trade for Marbury ending season contract). 

The majority of decent NBA teams have and build their team around three or four co-existing players on the team so the rest of the players on the roster could follow insuit to the Plan & Strategy given to these three or four players co-existing style. However....
On this Knick Team if three or four players have great chemistry together and they are not apart of Isiah Thomas Pet Players they will not get playingtime together no matter how well they play together. 

The Knicks best four players that co-existed well on the court using a help-defense and help-offense through hustling effort were lastseason 2nd Unit of players "PG-Nate, SG-Crawford, SF-Balkman, PF-Lee,". 
The Knicks Coach and coaching-staff went and stripped the best co-existing four-man lineup up (Lastseason) to give all of Crawford & Lee playingtime to helping the Poor co-existing Performance of "Marbury, Jefferies, and Curry" Trio lineup that needed so much help in every area of Team-Offense and Team-Defense. 
And Knick-Fans wondered WHY Lee & Crawford accidently caught season injuries at the beginning of midseason last year. Let's just say they did not agree with the complete benching of Nate & Balkman before their injuries. 

What did Isiah Thomas do so that SG-Crawford & PF-Lee dont catch another so-call accident season injury in the 2007-8 season? which they probably got the idea from SF-Q.Richardson early season injury (when Zeke first added Jefferies into the rotation for 30 mpg).
Zeke drafted SF-Wilson Chandler, and traded for SG-Fred Jones & PF-Zach Randolph. Zeke actions in the 2007 offseason was not to build and Train the players he had from lastseason during the offseason at a gym, but to replace certain players at the SG, SF, and PF whom came down with season injuries but stated that they would be well if the Knicks made the playoffs. LOL! 
I guess Zeke had to prove to his "REBELLING" players that he was the BOSS by his offseason transactions of getting replacements. 
Recall Francis dissaperance for two months last season. 
the long losing-streak after Isiah was given an extension on his contract. Plus the comments that Jalen Rose and Mo Taylor made before the BUY-OUT to shut them up about the Knick Organization while under investigation for the FIRING of Coach Larry Brown without pay.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

I actually feel sorry for the Player that the Knicks draft in their early 2008 LOTTERY pick if Isiah and alot of his selfish players are here next season...


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Kiyaman said:


> I cant buy this Celtics thing because they had one Super-Star Player (Paul Pierce) on the team that let the organization "BIG-DUMMY Danny Ainge" know about each cancer player he added to the roster since Liquor Store Baker.
> I cant buy the Scott Layden issue either, Scott Layden left alot of decent asset players that was working with Coach Chaney, plus five ending contract players that season.
> It was Layden Players that took Isiah Thomas to his only Knick Postseason.
> 
> If one hav'nt learned anything about Isiah Thomas as a player, coach, and Owner, and G.M. Performances, then the Anucha Trial should've showed everyone that Isiah have poor relations with Player, Personal, and Friends through the participation of Marbury performance this season.


I personally can't buy Paul Pierce being a "superstar." When you look at players in the discussion of superstar, names like Kobe Bryant and LeBron James have to be included and I just do not see Pierce being in that sort of discussion. Both Kobe and LeBron (especially Kobe) have managed to win with just as much if not less talent than Pierce in recent years. I think that alone should suggest that Pierce is a hell of a player but not a superstar. This would suggest that the Celtics situation was not very much different, in this sense, than the Knicks. 

As for those "cancers" your referring to, the managed to land both Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett. They must have had some value behind them in order to be dealt for those names.

I'm definately not buying Scott Layden leaving alot of "assets" after his firing. Expiring contracts can't do very much of anything for you if all that's left behind are aging back-up caliber veterans with long term contracts. You could always let those contracts expire but that would have done little to nothing for a Knick team that would have still be left far above the cap and unable to make any major moves financially for a key player. I think your also off base concerning the Layden players comment and them helping Isiah make the playoffs his first year here. If you recall correctly, Stephon Marbury, Tim Thomas, Nazr Mohammad, Vin Baker Moochie Norris, Anfernee Hardaway, Bruno Sundov, Cezary Trybanski and DeMarr Johnson were on that team. That's a total of 8 players out of a roster of 15; 5 of those players represented our 8 man rotation during those playoffs. I think it is pretty apparent who was really responsible for us being in the playoffs that year.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Kiyaman said:


> (maybe)This is too much to read but it gives a Knick-Fan the analysis of Zeke and the Knick Players.
> 
> *The Knicks TRIO Lineup of "Nate, Balkman, and Lee" co-exist together outstandingly vs NBA oponents since early lastseason. Why have this Trio of players been seperated from playing together throughout this entire season?*
> 
> ...


Call me crazy but maybe the reason why Isiah brought in Fred Jones, Zach Randolph and Wilson Chandler was because of the fact that they were pretty damn good players and not over some "conspiracy." That's just what you do when your looking to build a better team, ESPECIALLY *when the previous team had proven to be injury prone*. The Randolph experiment has proven to be a failure but at the very least, Randolph could net you some financial flexibility and/or talent (via draft or trade). That still leaves us in a better situation than if we still had Channing Frye and Steve Francis.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Personally, like what you mentioned earlier, I do not believe that we have primadonnas on the bench. A guy like David Lee would be and should be fine continuing to come off the bench. David Lee was clearly the better player between both he and Channing Frye and did not voice any sort of displeasure playing behind him. Frye may have been his friend but I doubt that that that sort of demand would effect their relationship. I know every situation is different but Jamal Crawford played behind Stephon Marbury for 2 seasons despite both being good friends and he voiced his displeasure without it necessarily affecting that relationship. So basically, I wouldn't mind having another version of David Lee given how high a level he plays and how well he meshes with Curry. The leadership and enforcer type could be found at another position or even off the bench. You did mention bringing in an Artest like player.
> 
> It definately would be nice to get the Florida connection going between both Miller and Lee. I think the possibility of a reunion could be a reality considering for what little they were about to take in return for him. If I recall correctly the Grizzlies had a deal with the Heat for an expiring contract before Miami backed out of the deal. The Knicks definately could do the same and offer up a young guy like Wilson Chandler who might not be a player the Grizzlies would use but could be put an asset for another deal.
> 
> P.S., I haven't really taken a good look at Mikael Pietrus. All I've really noticed is that he has an ability to hit a jumper consistently and is extremely athletic and utilizes it well enough on the defensive end. Is there anything more beyond this?


i wasn't thinking lee would have the problem but he certainly could , he's getting close to extension time so he may want/need to start to get a good bargaining position...chances are he'll be overpaid anyway , being such a crowd favorite and all. i was thinking gooden might be benched for lee , if lee proves to fit in better and gooden might make trouble , its one thing to be benched in favor of a guy who is clearly better than you , its another to be benched in favor of a guy you dont think is as good as you and their games are close enough in quality that either one of them can think that of the other...and there is the thing that gooden has been a starter for a while now so he is a good risk to not take too kindly to a demotion.

as far as pietrus goes ,not really he is just an excelent defender who can get hot from the outside , but he doesn't quite fit nellie's sytem for one on one off the dribble play...basically a better athlete but a less dirty and less effective bruce bowen.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Da Grinch said:


> i wasn't thinking lee would have the problem but he certainly could , he's getting close to extension time so he may want/need to start to get a good bargaining position...chances are he'll be overpaid anyway , being such a crowd favorite and all. i was thinking gooden might be benched for lee , if lee proves to fit in better and gooden might make trouble , its one thing to be benched in favor of a guy who is clearly better than you , its another to be benched in favor of a guy you dont think is as good as you and their games are close enough in quality that either one of them can think that of the other...and there is the thing that gooden has been a starter for a while now so he is a good risk to not take too kindly to a demotion.
> 
> as far as pietrus goes ,not really he is just an excelent defender who can get hot from the outside , but he doesn't quite fit nellie's sytem for one on one off the dribble play...basically a better athlete but a less dirty and less effective bruce bowen.


The thing is though, I do not believe Isiah envisions David Lee being a starter and neither would I if we had a guy like Drew Gooden. As much as I do believe Zeke was attempting to run up Frye's value by starting and overplaying him, there was an instance where he was benched in favor of Jerome James. Isiah could have easily just played David Lee in his place and choose not to. That may have been a mistake but I'm not to sure that would be a problem necessarily with a guy like Gooden because of what he can bring to the starting unit as a whole. I think his versatility offensively is what makes him a solid fit for us and gives him a slight edge over David Lee whose energy/hustle is best utilized off the bench IMO.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Twinkie..*

I'm not sure I have faith in IT not botching the pick. Frye over Bynum? Att this point, Lee is the only clear cut winner that he has picked. Everything else is either neutral or negative. Plus, if he is picking, he is picking with his plan (if he has one) in mind. Does anyone really believe at this point, that he has good judgment?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> The thing is though, I do not believe Isiah envisions David Lee being a starter and neither would I if we had a guy like Drew Gooden. As much as I do believe Zeke was attempting to run up Frye's value by starting and overplaying him, there was an instance where he was benched in favor of Jerome James. Isiah could have easily just played David Lee in his place and choose not to. That may have been a mistake but I'm not to sure that would be a problem necessarily with a guy like Gooden because of what he can bring to the starting unit as a whole. I think his versatility offensively is what makes him a solid fit for us and gives him a slight edge over David Lee whose energy/hustle is best utilized off the bench IMO.


i dont think Thomas thinks Lee is a starter now either , but moreso for his lack of being what Thomas envisions for his 4 spot, even though people like to say otherwise he has pretty much let it be known he wants more rough and tough play out of his post players .

lee to me is a starter quality player , but doesn't do what is needed to start on the knicks and i generally dont endorse him starting for that reason , he is amonst the best bench players in the league to me simply because he is way more talented than just about all of them.

jerome james as i recall got the lump of his starts before the trade deadline , and failed miserably to improve his stock and the experiment was shelved, at its conclusion i think malik even got a start. Gooden may very well bring that and becomes a better fit than lee if aquired , i dont doubt that it can happen i just think its far from a definite , that he would even start over lee and if that happens i think he would be more trouble than he's worth , for that reason alone it may be worth starting him no matter what actually.


----------

