# Isiah Thomas Runs His Franchise Like a Kid on a Videogame



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Seriously this many trades is unheard of. i like his aggressive strategy. It is like how kids play videogames and make the team how they want it. I think Isiah knows what it takes to win a championship NOW. He already brought in a superstar, and has nice depth on the team.


----------



## Charlie Brown (Oct 22, 2002)

Except for the fact that the NBA isn't a vid game and there is no reset button.

The Knicks are not serious contenders right now for the EC, let alone the NBA, and have limited draft picks and cap room in the future.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Doesn't every fan wish their GM was like this?

This just makes me more frustrated. Thomas has taken a team with no hope and no future, and given it hope. Sure he mortgaged the future. But they could be in the Finals THIS year.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

NYC = more money to spend than probably any other franchise.

Also, there is no such thing as rebuilding in NYC.


----------



## Charlie Brown (Oct 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RebelSun</b>!
> NYC = more money to spend than probably any other franchise.


Which helps if they are going to over the cap by resigning their own stars, but that really isn't the case with the Knicks. Their ability to spend money is neuatralized by the cap.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Seriously the Knicks are serious contenders for the East. They can take on any Easter conference team. Heck Marbury could tear up Parker in the Finals if that is the matchup. They got depth good shooters, and a leader.


----------



## nikebasketball (Jan 28, 2004)

> Also, there is no such thing as rebuilding in NYC.


*
Exactly, NY fans expect them to be in the playoffs every season and to have a good shot of at least winning the East.

NY fans are very demanding of their team.

I'm sure the heat will be turned up on the Knicks if and when the Nets are relocated to Brooklyn.
*


----------



## Charlie Brown (Oct 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> This just makes me more frustrated. Thomas has taken a team with no hope and no future, and given it hope. Sure he mortgaged the future. But they could be in the Finals THIS year.


I agree that the Knicks are improved over the team that they started the season with, but I would not give them a serious shot at the Finals. They are not a strong defensive team and have no legitimate post player, both of which will be important come playoff time.

Basically Thomas has mortaged the future to make a bad team an averge team. I don't know if that is something I would be happy with.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

I'm not so sure he's mortgaged the team's future. The pick he gave up is now looking unlikely to be very impactful, assuming they rise in the standings.

If Vuljanic or Lampje becomes a superstar, then, sure, he gambled and lost. Outside of that, he's made fairly canny moves, in my opinion. And I'm no big Isaiah Thomas fan.

They have what any team needs to be a title contender, and the hardest piece to get, a true superstar, in Stephon Marbury.

In offseason 2007, if Thomas doesn't add longer contracts, the Knicks will have major cap flexibility. Marbury is only 26...he'll be 29 then. Hardly in decline. He should still have three or four more *great* years at least.

If Thomas can use New York's great drawing power to add more talent from the free agent market, and drafts well in 2005, 2006 and 2007...New York could be championship-caliber.

Here's the point: This was what you could also have said *before* his deals, except they would have had the unproven Vuljanic and Lampje and wouldn't have had Starbury. So, he really hasn't mortgaged anything.

The big problem New York had with saying, "Wait three seasons and then you'll see," was that they were afraid to fade into irrelevance during that time. With Stephon Marbury, and interesting but not-far-reaching trades happening, Thomas is keeping the Knicks interesting while they wait for that flexibility.

Of course, that's just my interpretation of Thomas' efforts...maybe he's not thinking like that all.


----------



## tpb2 (Oct 23, 2003)

As soon as that trade happened, I was thinking the EXACT same thing.


----------



## Ron Mexico (Feb 14, 2004)

and NBA gms are starting to run franchises as if their listening to sports talk radio every week a coach is fired


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

With the highest payroll in the league locked up in overpaid vets, New York HAD no future to mortage. If you are going to be in cap hell, you might as well be a good team too.

At the start of the season New York had absolutely no future, now Isiah comes and they are a major team in the eastern conference, I like his 'nothing to lose' attitude.

As for the most recent deal, Van Horn has been putting up good numbers so far this year, but he's always been a good regular season player. The guy has an 18 ppg career average in the regular season, and a 12 ppg career average in the playoffs. The guy flat out dissapears. I'm not sure about Tim Thomas, but Keith Van Horn isn't a winner and I can't blame Zeke for dealing him.


----------



## Charlie Brown (Oct 22, 2002)

I'm not disagreeing that Thomas has improved the Knicks since taking over. They are definitely an improved team. 

But I do question where it has gotten them. I do not see them as anything more than a botton tier EC playoff team, which in respect to the entire NBA makes them about a middle of the pack team.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

In a time where trading has become so difficult most fans would like their GMs to be a bit like Isiah has shown.


----------



## ill subliminal (Apr 3, 2003)

I think he's running it with the (correct) mindset that Layden was the worst GM of all time. Therefore, all moves that are the opposite of Layden are good deals.

I don't know the numbers for the latest trade, and I know Thomas' contract ain't so good, but being the 3rd or 4th option on the Knicks is a pretty ideal situation for him. I think this will end up as a good deal for NY.


----------



## Primetime23 (Feb 3, 2004)

This team already had major cap problems before Isiah got there, Scott Layden may have been the worse GM in the history of sports

With the exception of Mcdtyess coming off the books this summer, Isiah has added good players by getting rid of bad contracts. Taking Penny's huge salary on to get a building block like Marbury was worth it because of his potential to turn this team around.

Good trade for the Knicks


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PSUmtj112</b>!
> 
> But I do question where it has gotten them. I do not see them as anything more than a botton tier EC playoff team, which in respect to the entire NBA makes them about a middle of the pack team.


But what has it really cost them? Before, as now, they had at least three seasons to go before they could really gain flexibility. That hasn't been sacrificed.

The only difference is now they'll be a playoff team while they wait instead of a non-playoff team (but not *so* bad as to get an impact--top three--pick).


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ill subliminal</b>!
> 
> I don't know the numbers for the latest trade, and I know Thomas' contract ain't so good, but being the 3rd or 4th option on the Knicks is a pretty ideal situation for him. I think this will end up as a good deal for NY.


Apparently Thomas' deal expires at the same time as Van Horn's (2006, though Van Horn has a player option for '05...think he'll opt out of his huge deal, though?), but Thomas is paid slightly less per year. About $10 million per year on his deal while Van Horn's was closer to $12 million per year.


----------



## 1 Penny (Jul 11, 2003)

C: Mohammed
PF: K.Thomas
SF: T.Thomas
SG: Allan Houston
PG: Stephon Marbury


Looks good. Isiah Thomas is going all out, they definitely pick up an atheletic forward out of Tim. The future? Isiah doesn care right now, he just wants to improve for the next 2-3 seasons. 

By the time these players are declining, Isiah would probably be out of NY anyways. He is running this org for the moment, the future is now attitude.


----------



## NYKBaller (Oct 29, 2003)

Forgetting that if the young players the Knicks have develop. I.E. Demarr Johnson, Mike Sweetney, and Frank Williams.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

I like all of these moves so far. The Marbury deal was a no-brainer in my opinion. He got a franchise PG in Marbury for very little in terms of proven NBA talent. McDyess was a FA after this season and barely played this year. Ward is nothing more than a role player. Lampe is young and seems to have a high skill level but he's far from a sure thing. Big guys who live on the perimeter scare me. Vujanic has yet to come to the United States and showed no interest in coming over in the near future. What were the Knicks supposed to do? No one even knows how his game will translate to the NBA. The first round pick means nothing. The Knicks are probably going to the playoffs anyways. Honestly, once you get out of the top 5 I don't think there's a big difference between the #6 pick and the #20 pick in terms of talent. Besides, even if they managed to get a top 5 pick there is no Lebron, Carmelo, or Duncan coming out. The one thing that has been proven time and time again in the NBA is that you can find quality talent throughout the draft. The second round has produced quite a bit of talent over the years. The Knicks still have that pick if I'm not mistaken. Basically, it was Vujanic and Lampe (i.e. unproven talent) for a 26 year old player who happens to be one of the 15 best players in the game. I can't fault Thomas for that move. I like this deal as well. As well as Van Horn has been playing, he was a square peg in a round hole at SF. Houston is enough of a liability as it is at SG. You could build a freeway between those two guys if they were on the court at the same time. In adding Thomas he improved his team's youth, athleticism, and defense. They aren't going to win the East but they are a hell of alot closer than they were 2 months ago. If they can add Rasheed over the Summer I think they have a chance to be as good as anyone in the East.


----------



## jokeaward (May 22, 2003)

It's the all-Thomas team. Tim, Isiah, Kurt.

Tim Thomas and Mohammed... meh, why not?


----------



## The Mad Viking (Jun 12, 2003)

Great thread title! 

Might be true, too.

But the trades have a rationale to them, and are, i think, defensible no matter how you look at them.

Might turn out to be bad, but cannot be reasonably attacked as non-sensical.

TT is better all-round than KVH. KVH can be completely shut down, and offense is pretty much all he provides. In a recent game against Toronto, he was shut down by Mo Peterson, of all people.

Nazr & KT should give the banging needed, and TT, Houston & Marbury the skills, athleticism & scoring.

Character and leadership are another matter. I'm not so sure, and it's been a blind spot for Isiaih throughout his GM career...


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ill subliminal</b>!
> I think he's running it with the (correct) mindset that Layden was the worst GM of all time. Therefore, all moves that are the opposite of Layden are good deals.


Layden was the one who prepared the Marbury trade. Don't give him such a raw deal, he was fired before he could complete it.

Thomas was also willing to throw in whatever the Suns wanted.


----------



## Jmonty580 (Jun 20, 2003)

The actual money amounts of contracts doesnt matter, what matters is the length of the contracts. If we add more money to the teams payroll and it puts us furthur over the cap, it really doesnt matter as long as the player's contract that we added doesnt go on for ever. So money really isnt the issue in NY, contarct length is what matters. IF things dont work out in two or three years we should be pretty free to change things around a bit. Our longest contracts are Marbury and Sweetney which really isnt a problem.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Jmonty580</b>!
> 
> So money really isnt the issue in NY, contarct length is what matters. IF things dont work out in two or three years we should be pretty free to change things around a bit. Our longest contracts are Marbury and Sweetney which really isnt a problem.


Yup. Off-season 2007 is probably what Thomas is targetting. That's when Houston's gigantic deal ends, Hardaway's deal will also have ended the year before, as will Tim Thomas'.

Marbury will still be only 29.

2007 could be a very good year for New York.


----------



## Charlie Brown (Oct 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> But what has it really cost them? Before, as now, they had at least three seasons to go before they could really gain flexibility. That hasn't been sacrificed.
> ...


I pretty much agree with everything you wrote here. 

The only real difference is I don't see being a bottom tier playoff team in the EC as THAT much of a jump from where they were. Improved? definitely. A contender? Not really.

I really like the Marbury trade. They brought in a superstar, who happens to be from the area. That was a no brainer. But outside of that, most of their moves really did not thrill me. 

All the excitment in New York regarding the Knicks will quickly go out the window if they lose quickly in the playoffs, which will leave them looking towards the 2007 offseason. Which is kind of where they were before.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> Yup. Off-season 2007 is probably what Thomas is targetting. That's when Houston's gigantic deal ends, Hardaway's deal will also have ended the year before, as will Tim Thomas'.
> ...


That's a huge assumption that after being so aggressive in NY in a few months that Isaih is going to sit back for the *next few years* and be conservative with his spending.

Penny is going to have a $15M contract that is expering before then. Houston a $20M contract. Thomas, too.

Isiah is sure to flip one of these guys in another deal for another big contract like Starbury.

Knicks will not be under the salary cap in our lifetime.


----------



## Greg Ostertag! (May 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PSUmtj112</b>!
> All the excitment in New York regarding the Knicks will quickly go out the window if they lose quickly in the playoffs, which will leave them looking towards the 2007 offseason. Which is kind of where they were before.


Yes, I'm sure that if they have a quick exit in the play-offs this year we won't hear a peep out of them until 2k7


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> That's a huge assumption that after being so aggressive in NY in a few months that Isaih is going to sit back for the *next few years* and be conservative with his spending.


Well, he doesn't have to be conservative in his spending...as long as he takes salaries that end by 2007. He could take a three year, $45 million contract and not hurt the Knicks' future any. (Assuming, of course, the owners don't get annoyed at coming out of the pocket.)



> Penny is going to have a $15M contract that is expering before then. Houston a $20M contract. Thomas, too.
> 
> Isiah is sure to flip one of these guys in another deal for another big contract like Starbury.
> 
> Knicks will not be under the salary cap in our lifetime.


That's always possible. And if he can flip those big contracts into superstars like Marbury, that's just as good, or better, than hitting the free agent market. The point is to rebuild with superstars/stars. Whether you get those in trades or free agency, doesn't matter.

What I don't think Thomas will do, which would be a departure from previous administrations, is flip those big contracts for mediocre/bad players with equally big deals...like Larry Johnson/Travis Knight/Keith Van Horn-types.

Either Thomas will cash in expiring contracts for stars/superstars or he'll let those deals expire and shop the free agent market.

I assume.


----------



## NYKBaller (Oct 29, 2003)

And also through the draft...


----------



## andras (Mar 19, 2003)

Isiah's definitely pleasantly surprising me with his deals. He improved his team dramatically now IMO he didn't ruin the franchise' future. I'm not sure how good team this team's gonna be - and I'm actually not that in love with Marbury: he's not a championship calibre superstar IMO - but so far Isiah has been phenomenal as a gm


----------



## Jmonty580 (Jun 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PSUmtj112
> 
> </b>!
> 
> ...


Not really, you have to remember this team has been through an earthquake this season, and this team has absolutely no chemistry now that we have been torn apart agian. Not to mention that Allan Houston could still be out for another two weeks, and who says thomas is done dealing things could change so much more. Oh Yeah and this team still hasnt completely had a whole season under Wilkens so they have to learn his system as well. With all that on the Knicks plate I think its safe to assume that if this team has an early exit from the playoffs that they will be able to use all of those shake ups as reasons why they were not able to get over the hump, and I think they are valid reasons. 

This team started the season with Scott Layden in office, Don Chaney as head coach (and lots of other assistant coachs were also let go of), Charlie Ward, Howard Eisley, Clearance wheaherspoon, Maciej Lampe, Slavko Vranes, Micheal Doleac, Kieth Van Horn and now all of them are gone. I think its safe to say that this team might not even make the playoffs with all of the changes that have taken place espaically now that KVH is gone, and with Allan Houston being out until only god knows when. At the same time Houston could come back playing great, and Tim Thomas could mesh wit the team perfectly and we could a contender in the east. The verdict is still out on this team, and it could still be out when next season starts.


----------



## Priest (Jun 24, 2003)

The knicks could of had MJ in his prime and still couldn't win a championship...


----------



## DJRaz (Aug 20, 2003)

*agreed*

i agree with the thread title, but i say good for him. i havent met a franchise mode in a videogame i can't dominate. i must have much dynasty-building ability in the videogame world. i always wondered how a real GM would do in those simulations?

i know the nba is more complex than a videogame. but i also know that each gm has the full-time (and very well paid) job of constructing that franchise's personnel along with a full staff and a team of scouts. so why not play it like the world's best videogame? i know i would use the same principles that have success in smaller-scale simulations.


----------



## Snicka (Dec 29, 2003)

Who here can see Mt Mutumbo come out of the locker room, back from injury, gimping around the court, leading this team to glory ala Willis Reed. I can just hear it now, Mutumbo is coming back from the locker room, marvelous, what does the czar think?


----------

