# well...so ends the knicks season.



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

Swept by the New Jersey Homers...we played well enough without 2 of Knicks best players out. I wonder what IT has in store for this franchise over the summer. Just glad Sweetney and others got a taste of the playoffs, even if be sour.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

the only think good about the series is the last two games. our guys actually played with some heart. They screwed up alot, but they were playing with a unit that probably hasnt played more then 5 minutes together all year.

Without 2 of our top 3 scorers, we played pretty damn good against the defending eastern champions. Jason Kidd is really damn good by the way, if any of you still think Marbury is better you got to be crazy. His passing and leadership is second to none. 

Anybody see martins post game interview though.....LOL..................

"knowhatimsaynnnnnn*spazzes out* yeahhhhhhhhh ! we the nets son knowhatimsayin"

Lets make pretend Isiah does nothing in the offseason......if the guys are healthy i think were a STRONG team.....especially with the hornets moving west and the most likely crappy bobcats coming in.


----------



## DeezNets (Aug 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PennyHardaway</b>!
> 
> Anybody see martins post game interview though.....LOL..................
> 
> "knowhatimsaynnnnnn*spazzes out* yeahhhhhhhhh ! we the nets son knowhatimsayin"



:laugh: :laugh: Yeah that interview was funny. Oh BTW, he just dropped 36 on you guys. If making fun of his interview is your way of easing the pain, then go right ahead.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> the only think good about the series is the last two games. our guys actually played with some heart.


Thats all you can ask of them..Having H20 out killed us..and TT getting clobbered didnt help either...

I am glad we lost to the Nets cause it exposed all of our weaknesses...Very little athletisicm and terrible outside shooting...

All in all it was a good year..Sweets looks to be for real,and lets hope TT stays pissd off all summer and develops an attitude..

getting marcus Camby wouldnt hurt


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

The first two games sucked. Lenny still had us ill prepared and we were riding the lck of chemistry train that we've been on all season.

But in these last two games the team finally began to gel, even with our two key guys out. The defense really tightened up. F-Will and Sweetney showed they can keep their heads in the playoffs. Shandon will likey never start for us again. So there were some positives...

And I'd been hoping for the Marbury/Williams backcourt all season - Lenny finally pulled it out, and it works!

He ended the first half, or near the end, with a three guard alignment of Frank, Marbury, Penny, KT, and Baker. I'd like to see more of what that squad could do, I think it's probably our 5 highest bball IQ guys. Sweets is pretty wise too, he makes few mental blunders.

On Marbury. He's a star, not a superstar. He's a great penetrator, but I hate his three point approach - usually too early in the shot, and from way behind the arc. He can be too much of a momentum player (sometimes called streaky, sometimes called poor shot selection). He does have heart. I think his biggest problem here is the whole team lack of identitiy. Teams that aren't very good can sometimes be hard to characterize, and it's hard for players to know their roles because so many are asked to do too much. I really think Marbury was at a point in his career where he wanted to become more of a playmaker, and thn all his scorers fell off the team. Lenney's telling him to be more "selfish", while Clyde and the media are suggesting he needs to set up his team. He seemed to be trying different approaches by what quarter of the game it was, or by what the defense was allowing, rather than dictating his approach. It's one thing to let the game come to you, it's another to take over a game. His team isn't good enough to allow Marbury to let the game come to him, and his shooting isn't good enough for him to take over on his own. In sum, I hope he has some guys who can play next year as I'm really curious to see just where he is at in his leadership and floor stewardship. It was very inconsistent this year, but no wonder.

Sure I wished the Knicks could have pulled a couple of wins from a hat, but without Houston and TT did we have a right to expect? No. We just wanted them to play tough and show heart and I think they did that at MSG, and that should carry over to next season.


----------



## Perennial All Star (Aug 13, 2003)

Till next season....when I can finally look forward to Anderson off the roster one way or another and a couple of new talented players coming.


----------



## Max Payne (Mar 2, 2004)

I love Camby and during his wonder year at NY, he was my absolute favourite...but he'll pen a new deal with the Nuggets and will most likely end his career there. 
I say we go all out and somehow land Dampier. The lack of post presence has been killing us. Then we also need to get someone at the SG, because Houston will never be the same player, sadly.


----------



## Max Payne (Mar 2, 2004)

Say how does landing Stephen Jackson sound to you guys ?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Max Payne</b>!
> Say how does landing Stephen Jackson sound to you guys ?


Stephen Jackson is going to want to start. With Marbury-Houston-Thomas, where would Jackson play. I doubt Jackson will be playing for the Knicks.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

hes overrated. He hit a bunch of open J's with the spurs cause of TD, and put up decent numbers on a horrible team.

we can do better then him. theres a reason nobody paid him anything last year. 

i say we go for Dampier, since Nazr isnt really good enough to start. we can trade for a good shooting guard, with Othellas and Mutombos expiring contracts and Williams who probably rose his stock a bit.

i really want to keep williams, but we barely give him minutes. He wont earn any minutes either since stephon is a star. 

what about q rich? Crawford? i dont know. but not stephen jackson.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I don't see many tradeable assets here for the Knicks. How do people expect to see trades? 

What will Kurt Thomas, Deke, Othella Harrington and Cezary net you? 

Maybe another overpaid stiff. The Knicks need to go with what they got and look to using the mid-level on a big body and the veteran's minimum on a swingman who can score off the bench like a Voshon Lenard, Wesley Person or Brian Cardinal.


----------



## inapparent (Jul 2, 2003)

i'd love to see Brian Cardinal come over; Voshon i think can command (not much) more than the vet minimum based on his shooting renaissance in denver this past season. the main problem seems to me that we're in that awful roster talent place that "nets" you a 7 seed (or say a 4 or 5 seed if we were healthy and had played together all season). to wit, there's a logjam at every position and yet almost none of the players we have are good enough. so you can't bring over an excellent shooting guard even if you could find one given H20, Fwill can't get minutes behind Marbury, Penny's unmoveable contract is already backing up both the SG and SF positions, Sweets can't get enough minutes behind KT and would be just as or more buried if Rasheed actually came and KT left, and, unless we move Deke, we're a mediocre 2 deep at C also. So yes, Center is where there may be a little daylight, and maybe GS would take Deke's expiring contract, Fwill, and Othella for a resigned Damp at say 8.25 million per (i'm not looking up the numbers so i might be a bit off on the salary matchup), but that's about it. why would Crawford or QRich come in to a situation where they couldnt be guaranteed starter's minutes or a bright postseason future? Recouping draft picks and finding a better center seems about all we can hope IT could pull off before next season--and let me add, about Dampier, that this is his first good year in a WHILE, and, natch, it's a walk year--his lack of motivation and injury-proneness would have me scared that he'd settle into his new fat contract and never put up those gaudy rebounding numbers again; plus, it's not like he's 25 and bigs age faster than the little guys--so even if our dream comes true there are warning flags. If someone can show me reasonable deals to improve at positions other than C I'd love to see them, but make sure the deal also hypothesizes how we move the player we have now who will be replaced.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> What will Kurt Thomas, Deke, Othella Harrington and Cezary net you


I agree..I dont see how we can really improve......

I am not sure I would do it,but would you trade Frank Williams and Sweetney for Crawford??

Would we want a guy like Keon Clark??

I have to admit,after watching Marbury,i am a little confused by his point guard skills..He really couldnt break down the D..Then again the Nets are verrrrry athletic


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!
> 
> 
> I have to admit,after watching Marbury,i am a little confused by his point guard skills..He really couldnt break down the D..Then again the Nets are verrrrry athletic


And the Knicks are very unathletic, and with very little perimeter shooting. It's very frustrating, because this team didn't gel at all until these last two games, and it came without Houston (perimeter shooting) and TT (athleticism).

I like to think with more offensive options the Nets defense would have been punished for trapping and sticking so close to Marbury, and Marbury's shot selection may have been better too. But as it were I still have no concept of what Steph, and this team is capable of.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truth</b>!
> 
> 
> I agree..I dont see how we can really improve......
> ...


Keon Clark would be nice because he would enhance the athleticism around the rim, but I would not pay him more than the veteran's minimum. I mean he has been out the entire season. 

Also, don't be fooled by Marbury, the Knicks had no perimeter shooting besides Penny Hardaway. When you really think about it, that means they really had no reliable outside shooting at all. Without Tim Thomas and Allen Houston, the Knicks were sunk. 

I came into these playoffs expecting Houston to play, only to find out that he is out till the next training camp. All I know is he better be healthy next year. Pisses me off that he got signed to that outrageous contract. 

I don't think Dermarr is the answer and I think they need to find a legit SG/SF type to find off the bench to help spell Houston or Thomas. Penny needs to be played sparingly during the regular season to give him legs for the playoffs like the Spurs did with Horry. 

BTW, I think next year we will see a different Tim Thomas. I expect him to come out focused and angry. This is the last time I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt. If he doesn't come out and assert himself as one of the best 7 SF's in the game, then I got a problem with him. I think though, with his manhood being challenged he might step up.

Also signing Dampier would be a mistake. He is playing for a contract just like Olowokandi was (look at what he has done for Minnesota, absolutely dick). I hope the Knicks aren't the team stupid enough to trade for him. He sucks IMO.


----------



## NYCbballFan (Jun 8, 2003)

The problem with Marbury is that he's trying to learn to be the kind of playmaker that comes naturally and instinctively to a Kidd or Penny. It's time, I think, to explore pairing Marbury more consistently with a Pippen or Snow-type to smooth out the point duties so Marbury can concentrate more on his strengths. Let him play his game. Playing F-Will, Penny and Marbury together seemed like an effective unit. 

The Knicks salvaged their pride in Games 3 and 4. They played better basketball in those 96 minutes than they have all season. The Nets set a high standard and it was an accomplishment to play the Nets as close as they did.

I'm not sure how much better the Knicks would have been with T-Thomas. He's not the most reliable player. How badly hurt is Tim Thomas that he couldn't play a single minute after his Game 1 fall? As for Houston, he's been hurt most of the season. He might have hurt more than helped even if he could shoot, if he couldn't move.

Keith Van Horn has reverted to his disappointing play-off version with the Bucks.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NYCbballFan</b>!
> 
> Keith Van Horn has reverted to his disappointing play-off version with the Bucks.


I think we all realize though that Keith Van Horn sucks. No way around it, time to admit it. He sucks. His numbers are the biggest mystery known to humankind. 

His heart must be the size of a pebble for this man to shrivel up like this in the playoffs. It is sad.


----------



## Max Payne (Mar 2, 2004)

I hate to say it, but I feel that we're suddenly in this horrible quagmire where we don't have any draft picks and are surrounded by terrible contracts with no real trade value...sheesh...Layden must have really hated the Knicks....


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

Now you guys are finally seeing what I have been saying all along. I regret TT getting hurt because it was a chance to see if he had anything when it counts...now we still don't know. I like Marbury and Williams but they are small. I like Penny at the 3 but he is getting old and is fragile. Nazr gave us nothing, really. Like I said, we'll be too good to get great picks..not talented enough to compete very far or have trade value to get someone good...

Unless IT pulls out a miracle, we are screwed for years more than we were. By the way, TT is a talker, not a do'er. No matter how pissed he is he'll be the same. Did anyone see ANYTHING from this guy while he played to make them believe he'll stand toe to toe and deliver? Not me...he was going good and disappeared before he got cheap-shotted.



Go Giants


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Alfa,I agree with most of what you said,but we were going nowhere before the marbury trade,and we did compete at a very high level the last 2 games..without our 2 main scoring options...

IT and Lenny have to figure out what marbury really is..is he an AI 2 or a pure point guard??

We were screwed for years before as lampe and no show would not have turned things around..We are in the playoffs and at least played with some heart.If nothing else Frank Williams showed some heart and talent and may be a good trading chip,even tough i have aways liked him....

A healthy h20 would have been huge...There is no doubt we would have taken 2 games if he played as opposed to Anderson..You have to believe h20 would have put up at least 15 per which is ALOT more than Scud did..It would have made the difference in game 3 and 4


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Yeah, so many question I'd hoped would be answered in the playoffs were left unanswered. I wanted to see if a healthy TT would up his anti in the post season. I wanted to see more DJ, just to know what he's got. I wanted to see Marbury carry the team on his back more than he did. I wanted to see Houston in the mix. I wanted to see what a healthy VH would do in his post season. 

All unfulfilled.

But I did see Nazr be a go to option a couple of times this year. I think 3, and I think 2 were successful. That was brabd new. And I did see this team finally gel defensively and show some heart. So I know they are not as bad as I might have possibly feared. I did see that Sweets and FWill can play and are worth keeping or there will be significant trade value (not star value, but solid emerging talent value) which also makes KT expendable. A package of KT, Fwill, and Othella, is worth looking at for several teams, for instance. This team isn't deep in starters, but it is deep on the bench. Lenny wont be playing an 11 man rotation next year, so some players will need to be moved.

Also, lets not forget we do have a second round pick. In recent times we've seen second round picks net players like Arenas, Dalembert, Bozer, and Redd... so who knows...

Cleveland will be better next year, as will Miami and others. But let's do remember, Marbury and Wilkens went better than .500 this year without Houston, and with playing no D, and exhibiting no team chemistry. Now that they're beginning to gel, and with any improvements from Houston, there is still significant chance for improvement even if no moves are made.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

OK....for the last time. I did not like Layden's "plan". I wanted to change the GM first....finish the season as a bonafide lottery team...fire the coach.

Next season I play the rookies to see what we have....jettison the worthless while keeping the valued. Get Vujanic here or trade his rights to get closure on that one. Let McD walk...another lottery....close to being able to trade big expiring contracts.


I suspect we end up with Fwill, Houston, VH, Sweetney, and Lampe with possibly Vujanic playing behind Williams and H20. We would have 2 quality picks (plus the 2nd rounders) to add depth or a possible starter. At this point we are about a year at most away from offering a real difference maker.

Tell me this team wouldn't be on the right track with an Okafor or Livingston coming in. Livingston will be a star. It was a three year plan but the team would have been exciting to watch in the mean time. Coach and GM were the keys. I believe like some, that Dolan just wants the playoff bucks . He doesn't aspire to a championship...and for NY that is a crime.

Yeah, IT made changes, but change for the sake of change is no good. We NEVER came close to being the team we were before the TT trade (for whatever reason). THAT was one trade too many. Whether VH would have folded in the playoffs, we'll never know, but we were awesome for a time...picking and popping....Marbury getting to the rim....teams paying for doubling him. Even the d was good. I, personally, would have liked to see that team finish the year.


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Max Payne</b>!
> Say how does landing Stephen Jackson sound to you guys ?



Horrible, the guy can't even dribble and thinks he should start. \


Anyway, after this rosters retooling I don't know who we can get.... this team is just weird, we have no assests that can net us anything greater in a trade, and a huge payroll.


Back to feeling the way I did during the Layden era. - Pissed.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>alphadog</b>!
> OK....for the last time. I did not like Layden's "plan". I wanted to change the GM first....finish the season as a bonafide lottery team...fire the coach.
> 
> Next season I play the rookies to see what we have....jettison the worthless while keeping the valued. Get Vujanic here or trade his rights to get closure on that one. Let McD walk...another lottery....close to being able to trade big expiring contracts.
> ...


Wish I could argue with this. Can't.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

One minor point alpha. I'm not sure where but I think I saw you write that we will be losing our first round pick next year too, due to the Marbury trade.

My understanding is that the way that pick was protected, we decide what year to give it up, up until 2010. If we haven't given it up by 2010, that will be the year they get it.

Well logic dictates that no GM will give up a pick before he has too, especially since no GM in NY can trust he'll make it to the next year. So figure we don't lose that one till 2010.

Gives us a little more room to manouevre in the forseeable future.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

Don't know if I wrote that or not. The league has a rule that says you can't trade 1st rounders in 2 consecutive years. I may have implied it...mistakenly. My point was meant to be that we will be too good for the lottery next year. I imagine a pick in the 18-22 area. Just not going to help much.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

I think we lose this year plus '06 (conditional)


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>inapparent</b>!
> i'd love to see Brian Cardinal come over;


YES! BRIAN CARDINAL!!!  Also leave Houston unprotected and pray that the Bobcats will take him.  :angel:


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>alphadog</b>!
> I think we lose this year plus '06 (conditional)



conditional to what exactly? And who decides what year it's given/taken, Knicks or Utah, who I think now owns the pick?


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

We lost 2 first rounders in that trade...this years(unconditional and Utah's,now), and the pick in '06(conditional on whether or not it is a lottery pick. I believe it is at the Knicks option...however, keeping a lottery pick in '06 is a no-brainer.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

My understanding is that it's a bit more complicated than that, and that it's protected thru '09. Still trying to find all the details though.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

Post when you find it...I didn't know that. I thought it was the usual.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Here is what I got from a very knowlegeable source. Still leaves some uncertainty, but it points to the possible complexity:

I will tell everyone the details of this pick one more time. The 2005 pick is ours no matter what because you can't trade future picks in consecative years (unless the team has another #1 in either year). The 2006 pick is protected up to #24, the 2007 pick is protected up to #23, the 2008 is protected up to #22, the 2009 pick is protected up to #21, and a pick isn't conveyed by 2009 then the Knicks lose the 2010 pick with no protections.

To which I queried again:

I'm a little denser than most, so please help me really understand this. We must keep our 2005 pick, that much I got. But I don't quite get the protection of the other years. Let's say our record will be similar to this year in 2006, so our pick would be mid-round, mid-teens, and we want to give it up that year. But it's protected up to #24. If it's the #16 pick, that is protected to 24, what happens? 

In my mind the protection only makes sense if it were the other team's right to choose when to take it. IOW, they can't take your pick in 2006 if it's better than #24. But if we are the ones who decide when to give it up, what purpose does the protection serve?

The reply was:

My understanding is the Knicks have control up to that position I stated or they lose the pick. But I was thinking what happens if the Suns put in a clause stating that the Knicks could only convey the pick unless it was at LEAST #25, #24 etc hoping that the Knicks never pick that high from 2006-2009 and get a unprotected pick in 2010. Unfortunetly, I am not privy to that info, yet.


----------

