# Isiah's First Offseason Press Conf.



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

> With *at least $46.6 million coming off the Knicks' books after the 2008-09 season - Stephon Marbury ($21.9 million), Steve Francis ($17.1 million) and Malik Rose ($7.6 million) - the Knicks may get under the salary cap for the first time to sign a free agent outright without needing a sign-and-trade. *
> "We're in a comfortable position in terms of our base and cap," Thomas said in his first public remarks since the regular season ended six weeks ago. "*The next two years our numbers really look good. You got players two years from now, the free-agency crop looks good, and we want to be in a position to play in that, and we are in one. We don't need to do anything to set ourselves back." *
> 
> But the Knicks believe they'll have more leverage with their top free-agent priority, Seattle's Rashard Lewis, in a sign-and-trade. Thomas said yesterday he couldn't talk about Lewis, an entering-his-prime stud, until July 1. *Lewis has said he'd be interested in the Knicks because of the big-market allure,* but the Sonics, who turned down Knicks overtures at last season's trade deadline, declared this week they will re-sign him.
> ...


http://www.nypost.com/seven/0531200...knicks_unlikely_knicks_marc_berman.htm?page=2

Like I've been saying all along boys and girls, get under the cap and show some financial responsibility to sign good free agents, not guys like Jeffries. Lastly, it appears to me that free agents in fact due want to come to NY, base on what boys and girls? What I've been saying all along.....*the big market allure.* Someone bump that thread on the *NYK and the state of the cap again*. LOL :biggrin:


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

Isiah Thomas would look like a fool if he made any kind of trade with the Seattle Sonics Lenny Wilkins this offseason being the Sonics have Super-Star SG-Ray Allen to go along with the Number One draft pick Oden. 
Lenny Wilkins wants Nate Robinson speed and outside shooting on his roster to clear more room for Ray Allen to do his thing. And a sign and trade for Rashard Lewis will give the Sonics depth in getting two players from the Knicks (Nate or Frye and ???) for just Rashard Lewis. 

*Isiah Thomas should be concentrating on bringing Ron Artest into the Knicks Lockerroom to break some more Computor Modem this offseason...*


----------



## EwingStarksOakley94 (May 13, 2003)

I know very little about Sean Williams, but if he's a problem child then WE DON'T NEED HIM. I just can't believe my ears when you hear about these guys that the rest of the league is afraid of and yet Thomas has them on the top of his wish list. *I thought we were supposed to be getting character guys!* All I hear is that this guy has off the court problems and zero work ethic. Oh yeah, sounds like exactly the type of player to help this team.


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

yea but when marbury's contract is up you think isiah isn't going to resign him?


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Not for 16+ million*

Marbury will be retained if he is healthy but his numbers will be much smaller.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

USSKittyHawk said:


> http://www.nypost.com/seven/0531200...knicks_unlikely_knicks_marc_berman.htm?page=2
> 
> Like I've been saying all along boys and girls, get under the cap and show some financial responsibility to sign good free agents, not guys like Jeffries. Lastly, it appears to me that free agents in fact due want to come to NY, base on what boys and girls? What I've been saying all along.....*the big market allure.* Someone bump that thread on the *NYK and the state of the cap again*. LOL :biggrin:


i still dont think you quite get it .

rashard will be the end of any cap management talk....if he is a knicks he will be signed to a long term deal avg. over 12 mil a year, so by the time marbs and francis comes off the books the team will still have Qrich , JC eddy and at least Lee or frye signed to a big $ deal .

how exactly will that team be under the cap?


fiscal resposnibility does not mean the same thing in NY as it does in lets say milwaukee....and the knicks will have more than big city allure if they can win....right now it basically has Zeke's charisma and Dolan's wallet and that is quite enough to be in the running for any1 , cap space or not.


Zeke is the most fiscally responsible Gm the knicks have had in over a dozen years and he has jerome james on the roster, that says all you need to hear about cap space.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Da Grinch said:


> i still dont think you quite get it .
> 
> rashard will be the end of any cap management talk....if he is a knicks he will be signed to a long term deal avg. over 12 mil a year, so by the time marbs and francis comes off the books the team will still have Qrich , JC eddy and at least Lee or frye signed to a big $ deal .
> 
> ...


Your entire post is full of holes. Read the article and get back to me because all your questions is basically answered by Isiah himself. He has finally come to realize that you can't keep adding to the cap with a bunch of *"bums"* and expect to go somewhere. Is he finally learning his lesson, and preparing to clean the cap so we can sign folks who are worth the money? Our roster is full of overpaid bums, and that is not being responsible with finances. LOL @ Isiah being fiscally responsible GM in over a dozen years.....you losing it Grinch.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

USSKittyHawk said:


> Your entire post is full of holes. Read the article and get back to me because all your questions is basically answered by Isiah himself. He has finally come to realize that you can't keep adding to the cap with a bunch of *"bums"* and expect to go somewhere. Is he finally learning his lesson, and preparing to clean the cap so we can sign folks who are worth the money? Our roster is full of overpaid bums, and that is not being responsible with finances. LOL @ Isiah being fiscally responsible GM in over a dozen years.....you losing it Grinch.


quick lesson 

the knicks salaries next year will be less than the team Zeke inherited .

I find it funny you think he can clean the cap of people you call "bums" so tell me who is going to take them?

and for what you do know salaries have to match... right?

and more importantly how is this team ever going to be below the cap when they are searching for max players with long term deals in garnett, j, oneal, rashard (not a max player yet but he will be after this summer) and Kobe.

what the knicks wont be doing is searching out mediocre guys with big deals like malik rose, shandon & eisley. they are past that.

i am not losing it , but whoever believes a team that hasn't been below the cap in over 15 years and has a management edict of "We dont lose players over money!" is going to have a team cap # at around 30-35 million in 2 years is just not paying attention .

c'mon now if the knicks were really trying to lose salary whay are they chasing players who will not only cost them the guy they are after but also bad contracts in addition to that player?

teams who are slashing salaries dont chase these guys , take a look around the league , the teams who are very cap friendly lose players who cost money , they dont chase them (like the bobcats with G.wallace) and the bobcat franchise does have max money to throw at some1 , how come they aren't major players in the VC sweepstakes?

because those types of teams dont sign guys unless they have to and hold up teams without cap space for picks to facilitate trades .

do you honestly think the lakers are going to say "Here take kobe and we want nothing more than a matching salary."

thats not being realistic , just about every big name who has been traded went to a team starting over and that team sans superstar got major cap help from the team they gave the superstar to.

V. carter , baron davis, shaq, iverson all of them were dealt in part for ending deals(along with picks , players etc.) which the knicks actually dont have BTW so something is going to have to be substituted to make a deal with them viable.

teams aren't just going to say give us malik rose and here's and ending deal for your trouble, what is far more likely to happen is thet Malik will eventually be an ending deal and he will be sent for some1 who makes the cap situation worse.

you are better than that Kitty. GM's are like politicians , you can listen to what they say but its always smarter to actually follow what they *do* and what likely for them to do in the future .


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Da Grinch said:


> quick lesson
> 
> the knicks salaries next year will be less than the team Zeke inherited .
> 
> ...


You keep on dreaming thinking we are going to be a respectabile organization again with type your logic. We are always going to be the bottom of the barrel if we can't get our hands on quality players. Isiah has made the cap worse since taking over for Layden, so stop insulting my intelligence. Isiah has made plenty of mistakes, that did not help the situation but helped out other teams get out of their financial holes. See Marbury, Francis....as examples. How do you expect to get a player that remotely resembles a superstar on this team? I rather see him dish out money to players who can *actually play the game* "the right way", than give it to guys like Jerome James and Jeffries who have been flat our brutal. 

Some of our players are bums in my eyes because they aren't worth the money that Dolan invested in, but don't act like a team won't take them off our hands, now you just being plain naive. You were the main one with the poms poms drawing up trade ideas to the Lakers to acquire Kobe.

How in the world can you used the Bobcats as an example when the owner Johnson is crying to the Stern begging for revenue sharing from big market teams claiming he needs it to sign big free agents and that he is losing money. He is just plain cheap, and it's his own damn fault that his organization hasn't gotten off to a good start. 

Lastly, once again I don't mind Isiah spending the money and forcing us over the cap, but he needs to give the money to the players who can actual play the game of basketball and can put the Knicks back on the map, he has failed to do that. It's quite embarassing to have the highest payroll in the league and absolutely nothing to show for it.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*I'm insulting your intelligence?*



USSKittyHawk said:


> You keep on dreaming thinking we are going to be a respectabile organization again with type your logic. We are always going to be the bottom of the barrel if we can't get our hands on quality players. Isiah has made the cap worse since taking over for Layden, so stop insulting my intelligence. Isiah has made plenty of mistakes, that did not help the situation but helped out other teams get out of their financial holes. See Marbury, Francis....as examples. How do you expect to get a player that remotely resembles a superstar on this team? I rather see him dish out money to players who can *actually play the game* "the right way", than give it to guys like Jerome James and Jeffries who have been flat our brutal.
> 
> Some of our players are bums in my eyes because they aren't worth the money that Dolan invested in, but don't act like a team won't take them off our hands, now you just being plain naive. You were the main one with the poms poms drawing up trade ideas to the Lakers to acquire Kobe.
> 
> ...


i didn't insult your intelligence the fact that you think that says your knowledge of the knicks financial situation isn't where i thought it was .

the day Zeke took over the knicks they were commitited for 89 million in players .

next season the knicks are at 87.7 mil. that is if the knicks dont use their MLE...which they claim not to want to do....and they already used their LLE on Morris.

that is simple math but if you dont believe you can look it up.

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

even with the #23 pick it wont equal what he inherited.



> Good luck. The Knicks' payroll is $89 million. They're committed to $69 million in contracts next year(about $23 million over the projected cap). In 2006-07, the Knicks will owe nearly $38 million to graybeards Eisley, Anderson and Allan Houston.


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/oconnor/2003-12-23-thomas_x.htm

i never said zeke was perfect especially with signing free agents so you are losing your mind or just straight up lying on that one.

teams have to have a reason to take a player off your hands for instance malik is a knick today because he came with 2 1st rounders, no one wants inferior players for more money .

my trade scenerio for Kobe make the lakers cap very friendly in 2009 by having francis marbury and odom come off the cap then ...then they will have all this wonderful cap space you talk about , the fact that you think so little of this concept shows your real feelings if the situation was reversed and the knicks were the one getting lesser players for cap space , the way you have been begging for cap space it would be logical to assume that was deal that was exceptional for the lakers , but I'm betting you think otherwise because in your heart you know you are a hypocrite on this one.

even today francis is better than penny and ariza , not 16 million dollars a year better, but better .

the knicks have had the highest payroll in the league before zeke and weren't winners then either they won an avg. of 33.5 games the 2 seasons before Zeke's arrival.

and were 10-18 the day that article from USAtoday was made , they were going in the wrong direction with the league's highest payroll...or is your intelligence telling you something different now too?

what say you on that or am I still insulting your inteligence?

and another thing , its not the player's fault he isn't worth some arbitrary number in your head , an agent negotiated it with a GM and an owner signed off on it. end of story , no player after a disappointing season is expected to give the money back just like Lebron or any player who is underpaid cant renegotiate just because they want to ...thats life, get used to it.

bob johnson is a billionaire is is doing fine but he is just trying to make more $ with his begging , charlotte is very capable of making $ it did for quite some while until the public turned against shinn for his actions.

your big thing is that Zeke is making things worst , well then prove it .

their record wasn't better before zeke(10-18) they were on pace for a 29 win season...they still had the league's highest payroll so tell me how he was worst than layden again?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

just for giggles y'all , remember this was the climate in june under Layden.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nbadraft/d03/story?id=1571542



> NEW YORK -- It's the most predictable moment we'll have Thursday night, this side of David Stern announcing that "with the first pick in the 2003 NBA draft, the Cleveland Cavaliers select LeBron James."
> 
> Sometime after James walks off the stage of the Theatre at Madison Square Garden to embark on a career in Cleveland, Knicks fans assembled in the crowd will take center stage and have their say.
> 
> ...


i'm betting the world in knickdom is a lil' cheerier than this now.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

*Re: I'm insulting your intelligence?*



Da Grinch said:


> i didn't insult your intelligence the fact that you think that says your knowledge of the knicks financial situation isn't where i thought it was .
> 
> the day Zeke took over the knicks they were commitited for 89 million in players .
> 
> ...


You're talking about the financial situation we are in now, I'm talking about when he initially took over the organization and that is where he made the cap worse. He is finally learning from I can tell from his past comments not to take on any more salary, and he demonstrated that this season. So what are you talking about? Answer this question, did he or did he not made the cap situation worse than Layden at some point during his tenure as the GM? You covering Isiah's *** like he is some God send is a damn joke, and the more you try to blanket his behind with your raving endorsement of him makes you look rather foolish.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Da Grinch said:


> just for giggles y'all , remember this was the climate in june under Layden.
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/nbadraft/d03/story?id=1571542
> 
> ...


Why you act like I'm a Layden fan? I can't stand his sorry *** either. We have not had a decent GM since Ernie left, so what's your point?


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

You go archiving and failed to address Isiah's tenure as well. So here is some history for you since you seem to have amnesia:




> But with Ewing in decline and in the last year of his contract in 2000, Knicks general manager Dave Checketts was faced with a choice – trade his aging All-Star for a package of other players, or let Ewing's contract run out and begin the process of clearing salary cap space and rebuilding. Checketts chose the former, trading Ewing for three players with large, long-term deals: Glen Rice, Luc Longley and Travis Knight.
> The theory in New York was – and still is – that you can't rebuild from scratch. With ticket prices higher than anywhere in the NBA, and an impatient New York audience demanding a winner, Knicks management has subscribed to the theory that you must reload, not rebuild. Thus the Ewing deal.
> 
> Unfortunately for the Knicks, the trade not only didn't pan out – Longley, Rice and Knight never made an impact in New York – but it led to a series of other trades that further hamstrung the Knicks' salary-cap flexibility.
> ...


http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=sk-knicks022805&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Once again boys and girls, if Isiah can show some financial responsibility we can get the players that will actually get us to another level, and back on the map. You know I love you like my Knicks Grinch, but you dead wrong on this one buddy.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: I'm insulting your intelligence?*



USSKittyHawk said:


> You're talking about the financial situation we are in now, I'm talking about when he initially took over the organization and that is where he made the cap worse. He is finally learning from I can tell from his past comments not to take on any more salary, and he demonstrated that this season. So what are you talking about? Answer this question, did he or did he not made the cap situation worse than Layden at some point during his tenure as the GM? You covering Isiah's *** like he is some God send is a damn joke, and the more you try to blanket his behind with your raving endorsement of him makes you look rather foolish.


he didn't learn a lesson , he did what he had to to get a decent talent level on the team .

he initially built the team around marbury and H20 , a team built on marbury's driving ability and kicking it out to houston kurt thomas and tim thomas and nazr converting on feeds down low.

it was basically putting a band aid on an aging team but it was a team that was an easy playoff team, they made the playoffs that year despite starting off 10-19 before Zeke could do anything to stem the losses.

but when your best player basically becomes worthless overnight , he was hamstrung for a replacement because the only other major talent was marbury whom he wanted as a building block.

allan got hurt , so it was time for a new plan

so he spent $ to get tradeable assets 

JC for cap space
david lee mardy and malik for nazr.
eddy curry and AD for sweetney TT and a pick with a swap
QRich and nate for kurt thomas 
balkman and jalen for AD
francis for penny and ariza

all those deals cost $ which is why the other teams chose to do them , no one is giving away players , he said about a month ago he is no longer in a need to make and take such risks...if he hadn't done those moves he's still have that need.

you are just misreading whats happened , 

and kitty cap situations are only bad when you are hamstrung by them , the knicks could always still make deals and that you fell for such rhetoric saddens me because it was true for Zeke just like it was true for Layden and every GM before him.

the knicks had like 60 million in absolutely unuseable players this season and only 10 mil. in free agent deals you need to mention how mad you are at JJ1 and JJ2 is just showing how little you actually know.

you are mad at a backup center and a backup forward for the team's limitations ...how much impact were they really going to have even if they lived up to expectations?

what is more impactful 2 backups for 10 mil. or your star player who makes 20 mil. out since seemingly forever and who's contract is still on the books?

yet you whine about the JJ's, and who signed them, how much sense does that really make?

like jerome in 7 minutes of fun was supposed to be the difference in making the knicks a 50 win team instead of a 49 loss one.

did Zeke's signings of those 2 players really hurt the knicks , if they had been 2 random minimum salaried players you think the knicks would have been so much better off ?

i doubt it.

i think you are a bean counter you are more worried about the cap number than is logical.

how are the knicks going to lower their cap # to the point they will have enough for a max deal, and who will this guy and when will this happen?

you never did explain how you would go about this and i have asked you several times , I am guessing its just because you know the truth and think better of proving me right.

or was your idea just to cut guys until there were no more players?

or maybe trade them for equally salaried pieces of dead wood with shorter length deals...who are these players?

and find me this "raving" endorsement ....I think its as invisable as your logic ...so i dont actually expect to see it.

its sad when we are wrong but cant admit it huh?

instead you are just lashing out , I mean really now all I said was this.


> Originally Posted by Da Grinch
> quick lesson
> 
> the knicks salaries next year will be less than the team Zeke inherited .



and you claimed I insulted your intelligence , how sad is that?

especially when it was true,


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

*Re: I'm insulting your intelligence?*



Da Grinch said:


> he didn't learn a lesson , he did what he had to to get a decent talent level on the team .
> 
> 
> you are just misreading whats happened ,
> ...


 
Sorry, but you still wrong, you only want to read what is convenient for you. I'll let you continue on giving your boy love like he actually did something good since he got here. 

I'm a leave it like this, Isiah is either being placed on a short leash with Dolan's money, or he is listening to the GM who used to run the Raptors, his name slips my mind, or lastly he is finally realizing that having some sort of financial responsibility will set you up to make some nice strategic moves to make this team better. Lastly, if he follows my blueprint on how to run this franchise properly, then we will be back to being the Mecca of NY.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

USSKittyHawk said:


> You go archiving and failed to address Isiah's tenure as well. So here is some history for you since you seem to have amnesia:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


your post was ...well I'm just going to address the bolded part since it seems to be the part you take so much pride in.

Zeke signed vin baker to a huge deal ?

when did 2 years 7 mil. become a huge deal?

quick question and since vin baker and moochie norris (the 2 guys traded for mo taylor) have combined for 561 minutes since their timeas knicks and neither were nba players last season and Mo taylor played 2,546 as a knick ...how was that a bad deal for Isiah again and the knicks?

thats funny .


crawford's been worth every penny and the deal for malik rose also netted the knicks mardy collins and david lee....for a guy Zeke said he was not going to resign (nazr)

the difference between my article and yours is that mine is still valid, time pretty much exposed yours pretty bad...and your columnist cant really think that was an even sided piece , even then it was a hatchet job ...its just the blade would be aimed at him now for being so wrong.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: I'm insulting your intelligence?*



USSKittyHawk said:


> Sorry, but you still wrong, you only want to read what is convenient for you. I'll let you continue on giving your boy love like he actually did something good since he got here.
> 
> I'm a leave it like this, Isiah is either being placed on a short leash with Dolan's money, or he is listening to the GM who used to run the Raptors, his name slips my mind, or lastly he is finally realizing that having some sort of financial responsibility will set you up to make some nice strategic moves to make this team better. Lastly, if he follows my blueprint on how to run this franchise properly, then we will be back to being the Mecca of NY.


what blue print? ...a blueprint has actual specific action you've given none, and that toronto GM , he's that guy who gave marbury that deal you hate so much right?

and he's also the guy who left the suns when the going got good, now steve kerr has to chop 8 mil. off the cap because the toronto GM actually spent too much for the suns owner's taste.

see i can spin a story too , except my spin is pure fact.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

*Re: I'm insulting your intelligence?*



Da Grinch said:


> what blue print? ...a blueprint has actual specific action you've given none, and that toronto GM , he's that guy who gave marbury that deal you hate so much right?
> 
> and he's also the guy who left the suns when the going got good, now steve kerr has to chop 8 mil. off the cap because the toronto GM actually spent too much for the suns owner's taste.
> 
> see i can spin a story too , except my spin is pure fact.


Are you slow? I'm not talking about Colenglo genius I'm talking about Babcock I believe that's how you spell his name. The guy who is assisting Isiah as we speak. I also gave my version on how things should be done, but once again, when it's convenient for you then you acknowledge parts of my post. I'm still waiting for you to answer my question to the fact that Isiah had the cap higher than when Layden was in charge during his tenure. Man this conversation is done, and to think I thought you were on your game.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> your post was ...well I'm just going to address the bolded part since it seems to be the part you take so much pride in.
> 
> Zeke signed vin baker to a huge deal ?
> 
> ...


How interesting. I had no idea the Knicks were as talented as the Rockets. Clearly you must acknowledge said statement to be true for your aforementioned argument to hold any ground?


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

*Re: I'm insulting your intelligence?*



Da Grinch said:


> i didn't insult your intelligence the fact that you think that says your knowledge of the knicks financial situation isn't where i thought it was .
> 
> the day Zeke took over the knicks they were commitited for 89 million in players .
> 
> ...


87.7 million is still more than any other team in the league is slated for next year.

Knicks 2002-2003 (Layden) 37-45
Knicks 2006-2007 (Thomas) 33-49

Also, let's take a look at the teams that were worse than the Knicks at that time:

Miami
Cleveland 
Toronto
Denver

All of those playoff teams this year. All of these teams managed to rebuild within the same time period. Care to explain that one?

Also, the following teams were all worse than the Knicks following their 7th seed entrance:

Phoenix
Chicago
Philadelphia
Orlando
Boston
Washington
Cleveland
Toronto
Atlanta
Golden State
Seattle
Los Angeles Clippers

Phoenix, Chicago, Philadelphia, Orlando, Washington, Cleveland, Toronto, Golden State, and the Clippers all finished with better records than the Knicks this year. That's 75% of all the teams. How is it that despite the fact that Isiah Thomas is a good general manager, these teams all managed to rebuild faster than the Knicks? It certainly isn't salary, because even with Layden's terrible contracts (here) the Knicks would be under the cap, yet somehow, someway, the Knicks have actually gotten worse while 75% of the teams behind them have gotten better than them with lower payroll. Hmm. How interesting.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

urwhatueati8god said:


> How interesting. I had no idea the Knicks were as talented as the Rockets. Clearly you must acknowledge said statement to be true for your aforementioned argument to hold any ground?


actually vin baker is a power forward and moochie is a pg 

2 positions the knicks hold clear edges at ...or do you believe its easier to get playing time from juwan howard and stromile swift than david lee and channing frye.


also these guys aren't even the nba right now because they aren't good not because of competetion from rocket 3rd stringers...which also incedently beat them out of jobs.


clearly that is true.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: I'm insulting your intelligence?*



urwhatueati8god said:


> 87.7 million is still more than any other team in the league is slated for next year.
> 
> Knicks 2002-2003 (Layden) 37-45
> Knicks 2006-2007 (Thomas) 33-49
> ...


the 1st 4 teams you picked(maimi , cleveland, toronto and denver drafted in the 2003 draft LBJ, Melo , Wade and bosh ) i think you have to go no further than that since the knicks left that draft thanks to layden with mike sweetney...I think Zeke could have done better if you were giving him all nba caliber players to work with...didn't you know all this already? 

also its a pretty good bet the mavs will use their MLE and resign jerry stackhouse putting them over 90 mil. next season...as it is now they are at 81 mil, resigning stack could put them over the knicks by itself since he made near 10 mil. last season.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: I'm insulting your intelligence?*



USSKittyHawk said:


> Are you slow? I'm not talking about Colenglo genius I'm talking about Babcock I believe that's how you spell his name. The guy who is assisting Isiah as we speak. I also gave my version on how things should be done, but once again, when it's convenient for you then you acknowledge parts of my post. I'm still waiting for you to answer my question to the fact that Isiah had the cap higher than when Layden was in charge during his tenure. Man this conversation is done, and to think I thought you were on your game.


no I'm not slow but you are building a pretty good case that you are though.

babcock does not work with the knick,s he is currently the t'wolves asst. GM , and he did alot of the moves that sliced their cap down, but you you reference that somehow because he works with Zeke now he somehow taught him about spending.

the only former raptor emplyee with the knicks management now is glen grunwald and he was last with the raps in 2004 he has had virtually nothing to do with the team's sucess today , the only player thats is still on the team from his days is chris bosh...GG actually spent quite abit of money in his tenure on players considered very overpaid(AD, JYD, alvin williams etc.) mostly because he thought his raptor team could compete for a title and he overspent to keep them together , and he was pretty wrong about that.

you have things very mixed up , maybe you should have some1 who knows something about the nba go over your posts before you submit them.

ok there einstein. 

FYI: sarcastic jokes about intelligence only work when you appear to know what you are talking about in your posts... you might want to brush up on that stuff a lil' in the future.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

*Re: I'm insulting your intelligence?*



Da Grinch said:


> the 1st 4 teams you picked(maimi , cleveland, toronto and denver drafted in the 2003 draft LBJ, Melo , Wade and bosh ) i think you have to go no further than that since the knicks left that draft thanks to layden with mike sweetney...I think Zeke could have done better if you were giving him all nba caliber players to work with...didn't you know all this already?
> 
> also its a pretty good bet the mavs will use their MLE and resign jerry stackhouse putting them over 90 mil. next season...as it is now they are at 81 mil, resigning stack could put them over the knicks by itself since he made near 10 mil. last season.


You've failed to address the later part of my post.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: I'm insulting your intelligence?*



urwhatueati8god said:


> You've failed to address the later part of my post.


i'll address it like this .

when zeke became GM the team was absolutely worthless despite what the record shows .

8 of the 15 players dont even play in the nba anymore.(slavko vranes, allan houston,keith van horn shandon anderson , charlie , ward , howard eisley , frank williams and clarence weatherspoon, cezary trybanski ) plus the 2 players he had the rights to, fred weis and milos vuljanic have not come over and are not coveted anymore because time has told on them.

of the 7 remaining none is even a starter in the nba or has even been one for most of the time since their time as knicks.

this is the motley crew of knicks players inherited players still in the nba

mike sweetney 
mcdyess
k. thomas
mike doleac
deke mutumbo
demarr johnson 
othella harrington

so please explain to me how do you rebuild a team from a bunch of guys with 2 or less years left in the league and this ?

there is no value there , how do you build a team that is already overpriced and the players even if they were reasonably priced would still have little to no value.

when you do that you'll see what I mean.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

Phoenix had the likes of Marbury, & Hardaway holding their cap back, Golden State hasn't been under the cap in eight years because of the likes of Adonal Foyle, Troy Murphy, and Mike Dunleavy junior, Atlanta has absolutely nobody from that lineup still on their team and of their current starting roster, in 2003-2004 they had a collective three years spent in the NBA, Chicago would have been over the cap until now but the Knicks bailed them out with the Jamal Crawford deal, and Toronto was in equal cap hell with Antonio Davis, Jerome Williams, and Alvin Williams, but they passed on most of their problems to the Bulls only for the Bulls to be bailed out once again by the Knicks.

It should also be noted that the two primary teams the Knicks traded with, the Suns and the Bulls, have had the most rebuilding success.

Unless for some reason it can be deemed justifiable to obtain such contracts for the likes of Jamal Crawford or Stephon Marbury, this is all on Isiah Thomas.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

*Re: I'm insulting your intelligence?*



Da Grinch said:


> no I'm not slow but you are building a pretty good case that you are though.
> 
> babcock does not work with the knick,s he is currently the t'wolves asst. GM , and he did alot of the moves that sliced their cap down, but you you reference that somehow because he works with Zeke now he somehow taught him about spending.
> 
> ...


Did he or did he not hire a former Toronto GM and in the previous post didn't I say I forgot his name? (Read the original post again). You assumed that I was talking about Colangelo, so you can support your BS point on the Stephon deal, but it made you look foolish. If you knew who I was talking about in the first place, you would have said Grunwald during your original rebuttal to me, but of course you had to look it up yourself. I was right, he did hire a former Toronto GM, but I couldn't remember his name so I took a guess and said Babcock. So don't try to resort to covering up your dumb points by saying I don't know what I'm talking about in the first place.

The more you post on this subject trying to justify that Isiah is a great gm, the more foolish you look. You either must be on his payroll, or have tendencies that I won't divulge in this thread. You lost a lot of credibility and I really can't take you seriously when we are discussing Isiah. Get off of Isiah's jock for once and stop praising him like he did something great with this organization, because I'm still waiting to get in the playoffs and get out the first round like everybody else. I know a lot of Knick fans, and they all agree that he is not a good GM when it comes to handling the *financial side of things*, you are just basically in the minority here. The fact remains the same, Isiah appears to finally get it *(his comments support that fact, see first post):biggrin: *, being financially responsible can get you ahead of the game.

Still waiting for you to answer the question::whistling: *Who made the cap higher during their tenure...Isiah or Layden?* You dance around that question all day long because you know the truth. Your posts are as comical as a stand up comedian, but they usually get cheers, you just get booed off the stage.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Thomas is a good evaluator of draftees.....*

particularly of hidden talent. He could have let the team go to seed (and should have) and used the high lotto picks that would have resulted to rebuild the nucleus of a contender. Look what he has done via draft in 2 years...and that is without picks he traded away. Truth of the matter is that he was not trying to rebuild but rather just retool the team he inherited. Only after that failed did he realize he must rebuild. There are plenty of quotes by him to support that.

If he only let contracts expire without making trades....and he only kept the players he drafted....where do you suppose we'd be today talent-wise and cap-wise? That is the real question. I think we would be far better off fiancially and certainly no worse off talent-wise. He screwed up.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

urwhatueati8god said:


> Phoenix had the likes of Marbury, & Hardaway holding their cap back, Golden State hasn't been under the cap in eight years because of the likes of Adonal Foyle, Troy Murphy, and Mike Dunleavy junior, Atlanta has absolutely nobody from that lineup still on their team and of their current starting roster, in 2003-2004 they had a collective three years spent in the NBA, Chicago would have been over the cap until now but the Knicks bailed them out with the Jamal Crawford deal, and Toronto was in equal cap hell with Antonio Davis, Jerome Williams, and Alvin Williams, but they passed on most of their problems to the Bulls only for the Bulls to be bailed out once again by the Knicks.
> 
> It should also be noted that the two primary teams the Knicks traded with, the Suns and the Bulls, have had the most rebuilding success.
> 
> Unless for some reason it can be deemed justifiable to obtain such contracts for the likes of Jamal Crawford or Stephon Marbury, this is all on Isiah Thomas.



thats really not an answer .

my point is the knicks really didn't have assets to make themselves better .

the teams you mentioned all did and in fact you started naming them...

the knicks at the time thomas inherited them had no players that could now be considered a starter caliber player....the 1st team you named (the suns) at the time had marbury , marion, joe johnson , barbosa and amare stoudimire all players of considerable talent...4 of those 5 are starters(some even can be considered stars) and the other a top 6th man

the bulls in 2003-04 had curry, chandler , crawford, and kirk hinrich...all starters in todays nba....and if i were to continue you would see that pretty much all bad teams except the knicks at that time had players worth aquiring because they were good , young or good and young ...the knicks at that time were old and overpaid and most were on their last legs in the nba , and the young talent Zeke inherited wasn't any good and every1 knew it.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: I'm insulting your intelligence?*



USSKittyHawk said:


> Did he or did he not hire a former Toronto GM and in the previous post didn't I say I forgot his name? (Read the original post again). You assumed that I was talking about Colangelo, so you can support your BS point on the Stephon deal, but it made you look foolish. If you knew who I was talking about in the first place, you would have said Grunwald during your original rebuttal to me, but of course you had to look it up yourself. I was right, he did hire a former Toronto GM, but I couldn't remember his name so I took a guess and said Babcock. So don't try to resort to covering up your dumb points by saying I don't know what I'm talking about in the first place.
> 
> The more you post on this subject trying to justify that Isiah is a great gm, the more foolish you look. You either must be on his payroll, or have tendencies that I won't divulge in this thread. You lost a lot of credibility and I really can't take you seriously when we are discussing Isiah. Get off of Isiah's jock for once and stop praising him like he did something great with this organization, because I'm still waiting to get in the playoffs and get out the first round like everybody else. I know a lot of Knick fans, and they all agree that he is not a good GM when it comes to handling the *financial side of things*, you are just basically in the minority here. The fact remains the same, Isiah appears to finally get it *(his comments support that fact, see first post):biggrin: *, being financially responsible can get you ahead of the game.
> 
> Still waiting for you to answer the question::whistling: *Who made the cap higher during their tenure...Isiah or Layden?* You dance around that question all day long because you know the truth. Your posts are as comical as a stand up comedian, but they usually get cheers, you just get booed off the stage.


actually these are your exact words



> I'm not talking about Colenglo genius I'm talking about Babcock I believe that's how you spell his name.


nothing in there about not knowing his name if you want to talk about your original post , then explain why you got so ornery when i put coangelo's name in there , apparently you must have known you didn't know what you were talking about so the animostity is very out of place .

only dumb people get mad about things they are ignorant on ...are you dumb?

actually i assumed you were talking about BC because you were giving credit for cap management , and seeing how both babcock and grunwuld were fired for percieved mishandling of it (of opposite sides of the spectrum , ol' brian C made the most sense since he has been applauded for his use of it with his FA findings last summer.

but hey you want to use guys that actually make your point less convincing and make you look silly in the process, I'm going to let you.

i didn't have to look up grunwald, i knew who he was , i remember when zeke hired him , it was only last year, its you who needs to look these things up and i suggest you do a bit more of it before you post such drivel.


also I see you are desperate because desperate people have to make up things and hope it flies under the radar , i never said Zeke was a great GM , feel free to do a search and look up any and all of my posts , you cant find what is not there...i have only said i think he is doing a good job based on the situation he was left in, maybe your memory is shot but i remember before he was hired and the Knicks GM job was universally considered the worst in sports with the huge cap problem , substandard talent , pressure to win and a spendhappy but nonbasketball man in dolan at the helm.

Zeke isn't going to keep his job on winning alone if you paid attention to the way Dolan does business you would know that as far as Dolan is concerned Zeke is doing great which is why he can get extentions while not going to the playoffs, but instead of "getting it" you lash out at the things you dont understand.

you are telling on yourself really all i do is point out your very obvious mistakes.

grasping at straws because you dont know the facts , you dont use any logic and you are just lashing out but no one is buying it .

let it go.

and I'll answer your questions when you answer mine ms. architect.

but you wont and every1 who is reading these posts know why.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

*More rambling......*



Da Grinch said:


> actually these are your exact words
> 
> 
> 
> ...


LOL @ grasping for straws, where all you doing is rambling because you won't admit you are just plain wrong, and I'm not lashing out I'm telling you like it is. It's not my fault that you just don't get it, and the other posters in this thread do. Seems like you in the minority on this one Einstein.

You still failed to address the question I asked you from the very beginning earlier on in this debate, *way before* you asked mine. You also know the answer, which is why you won't partake in it, because the answer will make you look foolish. Take the L on this thread because that's exactly what your post reminds me of...a *Loser.*


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: More rambling......*



USSKittyHawk said:


> LOL @ grasping for straws, where all you doing is rambling because you won't admit you are just plain wrong, and I'm not lashing out I'm telling you like it is. It's not my fault that you just don't get it, and the other posters in this thread do. Seems like you in the minority on this one Einstein.
> 
> You still failed to address the question I asked you from the very beginning earlier on in this debate, *way before* you asked mine. You also know the answer, which is why you won't partake in it, because the answer will make you look foolish. Take the L on this thread because that's exactly what your post reminds me of...a *Loser.*


you asked me way before what ?

these questions to you in post 8



> I find it funny you think he can clean the cap of people you call "bums" so tell me who is going to take them?
> 
> and for what you do know salaries have to match... right?





> c'mon now if the knicks were really trying to lose salary whay are they chasing players who will not only cost them the guy they are after but also bad contracts in addition to that player?



what did you ask me before these ?

lets have fun and play this game.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

*Re: More rambling......*



Da Grinch said:


> you asked me way before what ?
> 
> these questions to you in post 8
> 
> ...


This was my answer, about a million posts ago. 



USSKittyHawk said:


> *Some *of our players are bums in my eyes because they aren't worth the money that Dolan invested in, but *don't act like a team won't take them off our hands,* now you just being plain naive. You were the main one with the poms poms drawing up trade ideas to the Lakers to acquire Kobe.


Don't get it twisted, they can be moved, and Nate and company are already being talked about in the first place. What did I say about Isiah going over the cap? *You can go over the cap, just as long as you have guys who can actually play that can justify you making that financial move in the first place.* Once again you have amnesia, you only want to read certain posts when it's convenient for Grinch. Our guys we have now, aren't that good to be this well over the cap we don't have not one superstar and we can't even get in the playoffs, I've been preaching that since post #1. You're getting desperate by the minute here, and I'm getting a kick out of it. Now, once again....I'm going to repeat what I've been saying from the very beginning, Isiah is finally getting it, too bad you don't. Oh BTW, who made the cap worse Isiah or Layden?


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> thats really not an answer .
> 
> my point is the knicks really didn't have assets to make themselves better .
> 
> ...


That wasn't the question at hand at all. The questions are, "Which of these players will grow into franchise players and capable of being so over the long haul? If none of these, how can said franchise player be obtained?" To build for the future, one must look to the past. Tim Duncan has never been traded. Michael Jordan was never traded. Hakeem Olajuwon was traded but not until he was way past his prime and held very little value. Isiah Thomas was never traded. Larry Bird was never traded. Kobe Bryant was never traded. Magic Johnson was never traded. Throughout the past thirty years there has been two franchise players who weren't traded their draft days who truly went on to be a championship winning franchise caliber player; Shaquille O'neal and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Both of those players had been to championship games before even being acquired. During the course of the past thirty years, their has been zero franchise players who have gone on to win NBA championships with their new teams without at least being in the finals once before hand. Eddy Curry, Jamal Crawford, and Stephon Marbury had not so much as seen a conference final. Keep saying what you will about Thomas, but he tried a path that has never before lead to success and is simply continuing the trend.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: More rambling......*



USSKittyHawk said:


> This was my answer, about a million posts ago.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't get it twisted, they can be moved, and Nate and company are already being talked about in the first place. What did I say about Isiah going over the cap? *You can go over the cap, just as long as you have guys who can actually play that can justify you making that financial move in the first place.* Once again you have amnesia, you only want to read certain posts when it's convenient for Grinch. Our guys we have now, aren't that good to be this well over the cap we don't have not one superstar and we can't even get in the playoffs, I've been preaching that since post #1. You're getting desperate by the minute here, and I'm getting a kick out of it. Now, once again....I'm going to repeat what I've been saying from the very beginning, Isiah is finally getting it, too bad you don't. Oh BTW, who made the cap worse Isiah or Layden?



Kitty, DaGrinch is making perfect sense to me but I guess that doesn't matter since your going to go about your childish ways and not respond to my posts. He made the point earlier that Isiah had to take on salary in order to gain assets to put this team in a position to improve. You denied that earlier but apparently you have come to terms with that reasoning since you claim Isiah's players can be moved; and don't get it "twisted" because every player on this roster was acquired by Isiah. Isiah did make the cap worse than Layden but at the same time, Isiah has shown tangible results. We have a roster that is actually improving and will continue to do so in the future as they mature. Could we say that pre-Isiah?


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

urwhatueati8god said:


> That wasn't the question at hand at all. The questions are, "Which of these players will grow into franchise players and capable of being so over the long haul? If none of these, how can said franchise player be obtained?" To build for the future, one must look to the past. Tim Duncan has never been traded. Michael Jordan was never traded. Hakeem Olajuwon was traded but not until he was way past his prime and held very little value. Isiah Thomas was never traded. Larry Bird was never traded. Kobe Bryant was never traded. Magic Johnson was never traded. Throughout the past thirty years there has been two franchise players who weren't traded their draft days who truly went on to be a championship winning franchise caliber player; Shaquille O'neal and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Both of those players had been to championship games before even being acquired. During the course of the past thirty years, their has been zero franchise players who have gone on to win NBA championships with their new teams without at least being in the finals once before hand. Eddy Curry, Jamal Crawford, and Stephon Marbury had not so much as seen a conference final. Keep saying what you will about Thomas, but he tried a path that has never before lead to success and is simply continuing the trend.


Correction, Kobe Bryant was traded on draft day, Isiah was traded to the Knicks before he retired and Kobe Bryant was preparing to be traded this week. As for this talk about franchise players not being to the finals once in their career's prior to being traded not being capable of doing so with another team, is complete nonsense. What relevance does that have on anything? Every situation is different and deserves to be treated differently. Even your claim is incorrect because Rasheed Wallace was a franchise player of the Blazers and when he was traded to the Pistons, he not only made the Finals but was the key difference in the Pistons winning the title. Like I said however, your point is mute especially with Eddy Curry and Jamal Crawford in the discussion since both are younger than any of the aforementioned (aside from Magic) who have a title underneath their belt. Both Jamal and Eddy are still coming into their own so the jury is still out on the both of them although the future does look bright.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: Thomas is a good evaluator of draftees.....*



alphaorange said:


> particularly of hidden talent. He could have let the team go to seed (and should have) and used the high lotto picks that would have resulted to rebuild the nucleus of a contender. Look what he has done via draft in 2 years...and that is without picks he traded away. Truth of the matter is that he was not trying to rebuild but rather just retool the team he inherited. Only after that failed did he realize he must rebuild. There are plenty of quotes by him to support that.
> 
> If he only let contracts expire without making trades....and he only kept the players he drafted....where do you suppose we'd be today talent-wise and cap-wise? That is the real question. I think we would be far better off fiancially and certainly no worse off talent-wise. He screwed up.



The thing about your reasoning is that if Isiah decided to leave the team as is, we would have still been hindered by costly, overpaid veterans, and 3 lottery picks to show for it. Instead, Isiah built a solid team with young players he traded for in Quentin Richardson, Jamal Crawford, Eddy Curry and 6 first round picks in the past 3 years. What NBA team has managed to secure 6 first round picks in 3 years time? There are some teams that have not had that many picks in the span on a decade. Right now, this is the most ideal situation we could have been in and I feel DaGrinch accuaretly depicted that for all of you.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Correction, Kobe Bryant was traded on draft day, Isiah was traded to the Knicks before he retired and Kobe Bryant was preparing to be traded this week. As for this talk about franchise players not being to the finals once in their career's prior to being traded not being capable of doing so with another team, is complete nonsense. What relevance does that have on anything? Every situation is different and deserves to be treated differently. Even your claim is incorrect because Rasheed Wallace was a franchise player of the Blazers and when he was traded to the Pistons, he not only made the Finals but was the key difference in the Pistons winning the title. Like I said however, your point is mute especially with Eddy Curry and Jamal Crawford in the discussion since both are younger than any of the aforementioned (aside from Magic) who have a title underneath their belt. Both Jamal and Eddy are still coming into their own so the jury is still out on the both of them although the future does look bright.


Again, I said not traded on draft day. Learn to read, then you can post. Again, players that have been traded after their draft day have never gone on to be a franchise player of a championship team. They've all drafted and a very select few of them have been signed, NEVER traded. The Pistons are an anomaly in every aspect of the way created by great, great coaching, so if you count Rasheed Wallace, that makes one in total. One in the past fifty years. 2%. That leaves a very small chance for return on investment. What does Thomas being traded have to do with anything? He was traded after winning a championship so he wouldn't be included in my sample size regardless. Bryant has nothing to do with this as well, as he has won his championships. Never did I state that those players who have one championships will win one again, I simply stated that those that haven't and are traded have never been their with again the anomaly of Wallace, which creates a 2% yield.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

urwhatueati8god said:


> Again, I said not traded on draft day. Learn to read, then you can post. Again, players that have been traded after their draft day have never gone on to be a franchise player of a championship team. They've all drafted and a very select few of them have been signed, NEVER traded. The Pistons are an anomaly in every aspect of the way created by great, great coaching, so if you count Rasheed Wallace, that makes one in total. One in the past fifty years. 2%. That leaves a very small chance for return on investment. What does Thomas being traded have to do with anything? He was traded after winning a championship so he wouldn't be included in my sample size regardless. Bryant has nothing to do with this as well, as he has won his championships. Never did I state that those players who have one championships will win one again, I simply stated that those that haven't and are traded have never been their with again the anomaly of Wallace, which creates a 2% yield.


I don't know if your capable of comprehending this but your point is mute, and not to far from stupid. Teams are in the market to win, plain and simple. What sense would it make to trade away a player that can win you a title as a franchise player before he does so? That is why you do not see this happen often but at the same time, their are circumstances that occur that throws this into wack; nothing is absolute. I bet at no other point in the history of the NBA did a team end of trading away a 22 year old center with the potential of winning a title because of a heart condition. Without that "heart condition," there would be no way that Curry would be with us right now.

P.S., with Jermaine O'neal demanding a trade and KG not to far from doing so, expect for that little stat of yours to be even more irrelevant.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I don't know if your capable of comprehending this but your point is mute, and not to far from stupid. Teams are in the market to win, plain and simple. What sense would it make to trade away a player that can win you a title as a franchise player before he does so? That is why you do not see this happen often but at the same time, their are circumstances that occur that throws this into wack; nothing is absolute. I bet at no other point in the history of the NBA did a team end of trading away a 22 year old center with the potential of winning a title because of a heart condition. Without that "heart condition," there would be no way that Curry would be with us right now.
> 
> P.S., with Jermaine O'neal demanding a trade and KG not to far from doing so, expect for that little stat of yours to be even more irrelevant.


Players have been traded for a lot of different reasons from age to crankiness to health to height to intangibles to athleticism. To narrow anything down like that is sheer ignorance because just about anything could be brought down to one single circumstance. The same thing could have been said for DeJuan Wagner. I bet no team has ever given up on a 21 year old guard because of a colon condition. Hell, it's rumored that Scottie Pippen was traded for Olden Polynice in part because Seattle's owner didn't like the way he talked (A lot of things have been said about the way Pippen "talks").


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: More rambling......*



USSKittyHawk said:


> This was my answer, about a million posts ago.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't get it twisted, they can be moved, and Nate and company are already being talked about in the first place. What did I say about Isiah going over the cap? *You can go over the cap, just as long as you have guys who can actually play that can justify you making that financial move in the first place.* Once again you have amnesia, you only want to read certain posts when it's convenient for Grinch. Our guys we have now, aren't that good to be this well over the cap we don't have not one superstar and we can't even get in the playoffs, I've been preaching that since post #1. You're getting desperate by the minute here, and I'm getting a kick out of it. Now, once again....I'm going to repeat what I've been saying from the very beginning, Isiah is finally getting it, too bad you don't. Oh BTW, who made the cap worse Isiah or Layden?


reading is fundamental.

all i asked was *who* could you trade them for and what team wants them at the prices they make?

your post is not an answer telling me that some1 would take them is not an answer to who .

come on, you can do better than that.

since you swear you answered it remind me , who did you say?

and while you are at it tell me how does Zeke chase superstar players while wanting to cut down the cap when common sense says he's going to have to take on more salary to do it?

acting like you are answering but not actually giving an answer doesn't work on me.

I asked *who* in post 8 you still haven't given up any names.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

urwhatueati8god said:


> That wasn't the question at hand at all. The questions are, "Which of these players will grow into franchise players and capable of being so over the long haul? If none of these, how can said franchise player be obtained?" To build for the future, one must look to the past. Tim Duncan has never been traded. Michael Jordan was never traded. Hakeem Olajuwon was traded but not until he was way past his prime and held very little value. Isiah Thomas was never traded. Larry Bird was never traded. Kobe Bryant was never traded. Magic Johnson was never traded. Throughout the past thirty years there has been two franchise players who weren't traded their draft days who truly went on to be a championship winning franchise caliber player; Shaquille O'neal and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Both of those players had been to championship games before even being acquired. During the course of the past thirty years, their has been zero franchise players who have gone on to win NBA championships with their new teams without at least being in the finals once before hand. Eddy Curry, Jamal Crawford, and Stephon Marbury had not so much as seen a conference final. Keep saying what you will about Thomas, but he tried a path that has never before lead to success and is simply continuing the trend.


i'm talking simply of assets to make a team better , you may need that to be a franchise player I dont believe it so ...and even if it were so , Zeke didn't inherit any so by that logic he wasn't going to have any anyway.

baby steps, before you can even have a star player you got to at least have starter quality players and Thomas didn't even inherit any of those outside of the grossly overpaid and quickly injured H2O, ....so he paid for them , figuratively and litterally , he inherited a team that was paying over twice the salary cap in salaries, FA agency is not an option outside of the MLE and that really usually gets you only fringe starters or decent backups , sometimes you get a gem and sometimes you get a bust , its a crapshoot.

and there have been plenty of great players who have been traded even during their careers and even in their prime in the past 30 years, Moses malone dr.J, scottie pippen .

and just because a player has never been traded doesn't mean they were untradeable , MJ was almost traded in the late 80's(i beleive around the 88 draft) but the owner jerry reinsdorf wouldn't allow it.

and kobe was traded on draft day he was originally a hornet , he was traded for vlade divac.

4 of the pistons starters were traded before they won a title and had never seen a final before they were pistons (both wallaces hamilton and billups).

but none of that really matters , has any team been as capped out as the team Zeke inherited with such a derth of talent ?

i mean really can you think of 1 team in the nba from the start of the 2003-04 season that on their whole roster doesn't have 1 current starter...not star or superstar , but a starter?

and thats forgetting of course the cap situation which was clearly the worst ever but just from a talent and trade asset viewpoint?

is there 1 team from the start of that year without 1 current starter anywhere on its roster.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

*Re: More rambling......*



Da Grinch said:


> reading is fundamental.
> 
> all i asked was *who* could you trade them for and what team wants them at the prices they make?
> 
> ...


 
I think you should be addressing the reading is fundamental part in your own post, because it's obvious *you can't read.* What is the initial topic of this thread about genius? Why should I sit here and submit a trade proposal? I told you Nate in company, in other words the majority of the players on this team can be moved, what part of the post you don't understand? Why should I go and do trade proposals, you want to do that..then create a thread and have fun. You refuse to discuss how your "homeboy" killed the cap since taking over this job, compared to Layden, so why should I participate in your little game? 

Nice try in trying to defuse the attention away from the incompetent GM that runs the Knicks. I can tell it's a waste of time discussing this any further because no matter what, you will co-sign everything that idiot does in terms of signings and trades that had pushed us in cap hell, and stopped us from getting players that would have made an impact on this team.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: More rambling......*



USSKittyHawk said:


> I think you should be addressing the reading is fundamental part in your own post, because it's obvious *you can't read.* What is the initial topic of this thread about genius? Why should I sit here and submit a trade proposal? I told you Nate in company, in other words the majority of the players on this team can be moved, what part of the you can't understand? Why should I go and do trade proposals, you want to do that..then create a thread and have fun. You refuse to discuss how your "homeboy" killed the cap since taking over this job, compared to Layden, so why should I participate in your little game?
> 
> Nice try in trying to defuse the attention away from the incompetent GM that runs the Knicks. I can tell it's a waste of time discussing this any further because no matter what, you will co-sign everything that idiot does in terms of signings and trades that had pushed us in cap hell, and stopped us from getting players that would have made an impact on this team.


thank you for proving my point , you have nothing and you never did. just rambling with no accountability or reason which is what i actually wanted to accomplish by continually asking you who.

if that was you real response you could have put that on the 1st page of this thread , but the truth you ducked and dodged til you couldn't anymore and exposed yourself.

you cant answer because you never actually knew what you were talking about.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> i'm talking simply of assets to make a team better , you may need that to be a franchise player I dont believe it so ...and even if it were so , Zeke didn't inherit any so by that logic he wasn't going to have any anyway.
> 
> baby steps, before you can even have a star player you got to at least have starter quality players and Thomas didn't even inherit any of those outside of the grossly overpaid and quickly injured H2O, ....so he paid for them , figuratively and litterally , he inherited a team that was paying over twice the salary cap in salaries, FA agency is not an option outside of the MLE and that really usually gets you only fringe starters or decent backups , sometimes you get a gem and sometimes you get a bust , its a crapshoot.
> 
> ...


Again, turning over the roster has nothing to do with anything as the Knicks still will be tops in payroll and still have very little if any chance at obtaining a franchise player. The current roster is all but maxed out in terms of the potential that they can reach and regardless of who they package they aren't going to be able to obtain the guy who is going to push them over the top. Even if they find a guy in the later rounds, the best that they can hope for is a first round goodbye. Had Thomas not made any moves at all - had he just left everything alone - the Knicks would have had the first round pick last year which amounted to the second pick, and on top of that they would have had the first round pick this year, which would have amounted to more than just the ninth pick as Frye would have been the starting center. Combine Frye with let's just say Sweetney, Roy, Lee, Collins, Marbury, etc. and this team would have had a far greater chance of succeeding than they do with the current group of stars that all have at least six years experience between them all other than Lee. To top it all off, there are plenty of imbeciles on the board who think that Lee - who has shown the most potential out of all of the young players - should be traded for a so-called star in menial proposals involving players which wouldn't lead the Knicks to where they ought to be all while acquiring players in their late 20's early thirties with massively back-loaded contracts which will only repeat the process of cap hell when the next general manager comes to fruition.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

urwhatueati8god said:


> Again, turning over the roster has nothing to do with anything as the Knicks still will be tops in payroll and still have very little if any chance at obtaining a franchise player. The current roster is all but maxed out in terms of the potential that they can reach and regardless of who they package they aren't going to be able to obtain the guy who is going to push them over the top. Even if they find a guy in the later rounds, the best that they can hope for is a first round goodbye. Had Thomas not made any moves at all - had he just left everything alone - the Knicks would have had the first round pick last year which amounted to the second pick, and on top of that they would have had the first round pick this year, which would have amounted to more than just the ninth pick as Frye would have been the starting center. Combine Frye with let's just say Sweetney, Roy, Lee, Collins, Marbury, etc. and this team would have had a far greater chance of succeeding than they do with the current group of stars that all have at least six years experience between them all other than Lee. To top it all off, there are plenty of imbeciles on the board who think that Lee - who has shown the most potential out of all of the young players - should be traded for a so-called star in menial proposals involving players which wouldn't lead the Knicks to where they ought to be all while acquiring players in their late 20's early thirties with massively back-loaded contracts which will only repeat the process of cap hell when the next general manager comes to fruition.


I think your missing the point that DaGrinch accurately made. When Isiah inherited the Knicks, they did not have any assets. In this league, you need assets to improve. Waiting for all the contracts to expire, would not have done anything because we would not have seen any sort of cap space for years regardless and would not have had any serviceable players to play. The drafts over the past couple of years since Isiah has arrived, has not featured any real franchise changing talent from the top on down; Dwight Howard appears to be the best and the Magic still appear to be a one and done team. 

By the time we would have finally seen the cap space your referring to, which probably would have been last year, we would have had maybe 3 lottery picks and nothing more. The money would have had available to spend would have been meaningless because there have not been any franchise changing talent realistic available for us to sign. Essentially, what you'd be looking at would be those 3 lottery picks and a cast of CBA players. In place of that, you have an emerging franchise caliber center and 6 first round picks over the last 3 years. I don't believe you recognize just how good this young team can be. We are still missing another game changer next to Eddy down the road but we have a very solid supporting cast in place for when we manage to do so.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

Six first round picks mean absolutely nothing when you're talking about only one of them being in the top ten and none of them being in the top five. Eddy Curry is not a franchise player. List one franchise player who is as one dimensional as Curry? People have become over-infatuated with this guy simply because he is a low-post juggernaut, but low-post juggernaut and offensive juggernaut are two completely different things. He will never be an offensive juggernaut because his turnovers impede his offensive ability far too much. The average NBA center turned the ball over about 2.4 times per 48 minutes. Eddy Curry turned the ball over 4.9 times per 48 minutes. That's a differential of 2.5. Hypothetically, if instead of turning the ball over those 2.5 extra times, he shot and missed 2.5 extra times, he'd be shooting .480 which is mediocre by a center's standards. Because of his turnovers, he cannot be the primary scoring option; teams will simply double team him and he'll be rendered ineffective. Combine that with his terrible defense, terrible rebounding ability, and lackluster free-throw shooting and he isn't a franchise player at all.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

urwhatueati8god said:


> Again, turning over the roster has nothing to do with anything as the Knicks still will be tops in payroll and still have very little if any chance at obtaining a franchise player. The current roster is all but maxed out in terms of the potential that they can reach and regardless of who they package they aren't going to be able to obtain the guy who is going to push them over the top. Even if they find a guy in the later rounds, the best that they can hope for is a first round goodbye. Had Thomas not made any moves at all - had he just left everything alone - the Knicks would have had the first round pick last year which amounted to the second pick, and on top of that they would have had the first round pick this year, which would have amounted to more than just the ninth pick as Frye would have been the starting center. Combine Frye with let's just say Sweetney, Roy, Lee, Collins, Marbury, etc. and this team would have had a far greater chance of succeeding than they do with the current group of stars that all have at least six years experience between them all other than Lee. To top it all off, there are plenty of imbeciles on the board who think that Lee - who has shown the most potential out of all of the young players - should be traded for a so-called star in menial proposals involving players which wouldn't lead the Knicks to where they ought to be all while acquiring players in their late 20's early thirties with massively back-loaded contracts which will only repeat the process of cap hell when the next general manager comes to fruition.


there are no guarentees in life , the teams with the 1-2 worst records draft 4 and 5 in late june.

they would not be below the cap because over half of it up to now has been wrapped up in Shandon anderson and allan houston they combined for 29.22 mil. this season the nba cap for this year is at 53.15 million leaving the team less than 24 mil. to make a team , if you were trying to make a team that fits the cap even the lowest spending team (bobcats ) are at 41 mil.

i see cap management during the Zeke era as an impossibility for that reason alone because there was no getting rid of of those 2 deals , and if the owner doesn't care and lets you spend more , why shouldn't he?

you think the roster is maxed out , i disagree , I think Curry has alot of growth in him he is only 24 , frye and lee are also only 24 i think they have growth in their game as well, as does nate, mardy, and balkman none are over 23.

crawford's game is still improving 
marbury in many respects just had his best year...he could get better with Zeke's tuteledge.
Jared spent most of last year hurt and trying to get in the flow I think he'll be much better next year
whoever Zeke picks at 23 i am pretty sure will be better than cato , the roster spot he is replaceing 
randolph morris is sure to be better if only because he has a summer to learn the plays and get more acclimated to the nba game, no one has ever been thrown into the nba like him.

thats most of the roster , nothing is guarenteed so maybe out of the 11 spots on the roster only 4 show actual growth , maybe 10-11 possibly the others james qrich malik or francis simply play better than last year while not being their best ever .

to simply say this is the best they can do , i dont know if that is ever true of any team ...ever.

nobody is perfect.

and it never matters where you pick as long as the guys can play , there isn't a single guy in the 1st round of the 2001 draft that can be considered better than a 2nd rounder that year by the name Gilbert arenas , if the 2005 draft was done over i doubt david lee would still be 30 , if you can get the same talent as guys who are drafting in the lottery i dont see the problem.

and i dont think your team really has a higher ceiling than the current one with sweets and roy being the only different ones mentioned 

i think curry > roy and either balkman or nate are better than sweets, heck even R. morris might be better than him although its really too early to tell with him.

like i said before the cupboard was bare so Zeke bought his talent , the knicks are actually on the younger side of teams in the nba they ended their season with an avg. age of 25, there probably aren't 8 teams younger than the knicks right now....the number is probably lower than that.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> there are no guarentees in life , the teams with the 1-2 worst records draft 4 and 5 in late june.
> 
> they would not be below the cap because over half of it up to now has been wrapped up in Shandon anderson and allan houston they combined for 29.22 mil. this season the nba cap for this year is at 53.15 million leaving the team less than 24 mil. to make a team , if you were trying to make a team that fits the cap even the lowest spending team (bobcats ) are at 41 mil.
> 
> ...


You're assuming that growth is measured in terms of age rather than experience, but that simply isn't true even when high school players are included. The likes of Garnett, Bryant, Miles, McGrady, Rashard Lewis, and many others all had reached their max potential by their sixth year despite coming from high school. Yes their are always anomalies for everything, but like the old saying goes, "Hope for the best, plan for the worst." Anomalies are to be hoped for, not planned on. To make things even more interesting, there really hasn't been anybody at all who had improved as such out of high school. There have been a few who have done it, but the majority of them have been European players. As for the draft, their will always be anomalies there, too, but when it's broken down there will always be a better chance of getting a true star player at the top portion of the draft than at the bottom rounds. Drafting responsibly is just as important but when able to draft responsibly while holding quality positions in the draft, one will be able to help their team that much more.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

urwhatueati8god said:


> Six first round picks mean absolutely nothing when you're talking about only one of them being in the top ten and none of them being in the top five. Eddy Curry is not a franchise player. List one franchise player who is as one dimensional as Curry? People have become over-infatuated with this guy simply because he is a low-post juggernaut, but low-post juggernaut and offensive juggernaut are two completely different things. He will never be an offensive juggernaut because his turnovers impede his offensive ability far too much. The average NBA center turned the ball over about 2.4 times per 48 minutes. Eddy Curry turned the ball over 4.9 times per 48 minutes. That's a differential of 2.5. Hypothetically, if instead of turning the ball over those 2.5 extra times, he shot and missed 2.5 extra times, he'd be shooting .480 which is mediocre by a center's standards. Because of his turnovers, he cannot be the primary scoring option; teams will simply double team him and he'll be rendered ineffective. Combine that with his terrible defense, terrible rebounding ability, and lackluster free-throw shooting and he isn't a franchise player at all.


Six first round picks means absolutely SOMETHING when those picks are made by Isiah Thomas. Obviously you have not been paying attention to the draft because each of those picks could rival some of the earlier picks that came before them. In either case, it does not really matter where your selected because solid players have been found at all points in the draft. Carlos Boozer, Michael Redd, Josh Howard, Boris Diaw, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobli, etc. all have been late first round picks or mid second round picks that have managed to approach being an all-star.

As for Curry not being a franchise player, I believe your somewhat right. At 24 years old and not having refined certain skills, I do not believe he is a prototypical franchise player. I do however believe he has the potential to be the team's franchise player and do so very soon. As for one dimensional franchise players, the league is littered with them from MVP Dirk Nowitizki to Amare Stoudamire to Pau Gasol, etc. All those guys really do is score the ball really well. Aside from that, none can not really be depended on to help their team in any other real fashion since none are of all-star caliber in any other category. Their teams allow them however, to be themselves and play their games. Why would it be hard to imagine that we assemble a team around Curry who very well could do the same thing for him?

I agree with the whole low post juggernaut and offensive juggernaut thing. Right now, Curry has only proven to be capable of being an excellent scorer on his own without knowing how to maximize his ability as a scorer by involving his teammates. Still, I do not believe that he'll be like that forever. He did turn the ball over alot last year but at the same time, those numbers were overinflated after most of our backcourt players went down with injuries and took away our perimeter shooting that gave Curry some wiggle room and our ability to point the ball in his hands. Even if he did get the ball in the post and was doubled, we had no one really to capitalize on that so what good would passing the ball have done? 

I don't but the 48% shooting nonsense because your betting on him missing the shot and Curry has proven he does not do that often at all. He has proven somewhat susceptible to doubles not because he can't score on them but because he does not capitalize on them and give his teammates better looks by passing the ball;* that is something that can be fixed just as with Hakeem Olajuwon and most other young talented centers.* He's not a terrible defender because he's proven to be an adequate one on one defender. His one main issue is the fact that he is a step slow when it comes to rotations, which is necessary when you have a poor defensive team. That is also something that can be fixed with experience at reading these plays and better conditioning. He's not a terrible rebounder but just mediocre. With one of the best rebounding teams in the league (top 4 I believe). We don't need him to rebound, we just need him to box out which he appears to help do considering that the Knicks have one of the highest deficits of rebounds to opponent rebounds, in the league. His free throw shooting seems to be improving in my opinion looking at his form. He's shot with more range, more often this season which is a good indication that his free throw shooting percentage will go up. In either case, he gets fouled so often that by him just getting to the line, puts points on the board for us.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

urwhatueati8god said:


> You're assuming that growth is measured in terms of age rather than experience, but that simply isn't true even when high school players are included. The likes of Garnett, Bryant, Miles, McGrady, Rashard Lewis, and many others all had reached their max potential by their sixth year despite coming from high school. Yes their are always anomalies for everything, but like the old saying goes, "Hope for the best, plan for the worst." Anomalies are to be hoped for, not planned on. To make things even more interesting, there really hasn't been anybody at all who had improved as such out of high school. There have been a few who have done it, but the majority of them have been European players. As for the draft, their will always be anomalies there, too, but when it's broken down there will always be a better chance of getting a true star player at the top portion of the draft than at the bottom rounds. Drafting responsibly is just as important but when able to draft responsibly while holding quality positions in the draft, one will be able to help their team that much more.


It's funny that you believe these high school players reach their prime by the time their in their 6th seasons yet Kevin Garnett did not have his best statistical year until his 9th season with 24.2ppg, 13.9rpg, 5.0apg, 2.2bpg and 1.5spg. Kobe Bryant and Tracy McGrady have never been more relevant in the NBA and yet both are past their 10th seasons in the league; Rashard Lewis had his best statistical season last year. I think your "anomolies" are not very unsual as you make it appear and those are just from high school.

As for the drafting thing, teams like the Hawks have held "quality positions" in it for years and yet they are no closer to winning than we are. Teams like the Spurs who've had some of the worse drafting positions in the past because of their success have managed to add two all-stars (Tony Parker and Manu Ginobli) and a cast of other very serviceable players who have yet to show what they can completely do as are the Mavericks.


----------

