# Tonight - Yuk



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

That performance was Chaneyesque. Where was the energy for retribution? I thought they were supposed to be pumped. Yah, for one quarter. Now we see how this team performs against good defense.

No penetration. What happened to the good perimeter ball movement? Why walk the ball up if you don't have a post presence?

I thought Van Horn was supposed to be versatile? When will he put it on the floor. When you have Houston on the team, who shoots .433 from behind the arc, why is VH doing so much popping from back there @ .358?

Double teaming Marbury up top kills this team.


----------



## Tapseer (Jun 13, 2002)

Van Horn 3-13 from the field, K.Thomas 3-12, Houston 4-11, Marbury 3-8. This is how our team shot for the night. This has got to stop. The same things that killed us in the first game against Houston, came back to haunt us. Too many missed jumpers, and the shots you did take inside were rushed...


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

The Knicks have yet to beat a single good team under the reign of Isiah, or Marbury, or Wilkins.

Remind me again why Scott Layden and Don Chaney could not have beaten cupcake teams without their best players again?

And for what it's worth, tonight's game displayed why the Knicks are nothing more than first and out this april, Marbury and all. They still don't have a dependable center. And from all accounts, they aren't looking to obtain one either, now or in the near future.

Pity, since there were a couple decent centers to be taken in this year's lottery.

But don't worry! We cut Slavko Vranes and replaced him with Bruno Sundov! Thomas is on top of these things.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> The Knicks have yet to beat a single good team under the reign of Isiah, or Marbury, or Wilkins.


Now now, that's propoganda. Their schedule hasn't included many good teams. Granted they lost to Houston twice, the first with barely a practice under Stephon and Penny. They took Dallas to overtime, and beat Seattle and Milwaukee. Everyone else just happened to be a creampuff team. They just play the games, not write the schedule.



> Remind me again why Scott Layden and Don Chaney could not have beaten cupcake teams without their best players again?


Because Layden/Chaney would still be starting Howard Eisley.



> And for what it's worth, tonight's game displayed why the Knicks are nothing more than first and out this april, Marbury and all. They still don't have a dependable center. And from all accounts, they aren't looking to obtain one either, now or in the near future.


"From all accounts" they weren't looking for Marbury either.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Now now, that's propoganda. Their schedule hasn't included many good teams.


Now THATS propaganda. They've lost to Houston twice, New Jersey, Dallas, and Minnesota. The only teams they've beaten are either lottery teams, teams playing without their star, or both.

Like I've been saying *all season long* - the beginning of the season was a hellish schedule, which gave the Knicks a bad record. Why is it that the Isiah/Marbury/Wilkins Knicks are supposedly better, but get a free pass when they lose to good teams? The Layden/McDyess/Chaney Knicks lost to the Lakers twice, Detroit twice, Indiana twice, San Antonio, and New Jersey. They also beat the Kings, T'Wolves and Hornets.

The Layden Knicks were 3-8 against good teams.
The Thomas Knicks are 0-5 against good teams.

The Thomas Knicks have beaten the following teams.
Miami twice minus Dwyane Wade.
Toronto minus Vince Carter.
Orlando twice, once without Tracy McGrady

Memphis, Milwuakee, Seattle, Chicago, and Cleveland is hardly some murderers run. The Thomas Knicks are 4-2 against these teams. 

Their next 8 games are against Atlanta, Miami (without Wade again), San Antonio, Boston, Phoenix, Indiana, Miami again (maybe Wade will play this time), and the Clippers. So after the Knicks go 4-4 (losing to San Antonio and Indiana, and going 4-2 in the 6 games vs cupcake teams), will you still be making excuses for them losing to good teams?

Unlikely.



> Because Layden/Chaney would still be starting Howard Eisley.


That didn't stop them from winning games. Notice that despite all the criticism those Knicks took, they were still on the doorstep of the playoffs. Yes, I'm sure it's all due to Isiah, Marbury, and Wilkins that the Knicks were the 8th seed for a day.



> "From all accounts" they weren't looking for Marbury either.


"From all accounts" the Knicks had the assets to trade for Marbury. They don't have the assets to trade for a center now. They obviously don't have the assets to draft one either.

Let's skim the list of available centers in the league.

Zyrdunas Ilgauskas, Scot Pollard, Nazr Mohammed, Theo Ratliff, Antonio Davis.

The only ones on the list that are a good fit for the Knicks is Theo Ratliff, and Nazr Mohammed, and the Knicks don't have anything Atlanta would want.

Looks like Cezery Trybanski and Bruno Sundov are the centers of the future.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

The Knicks other win streak was with Frank Williams at the point not Eisley. That came under Isiah's watch. But Minnesota and NJ were before the Marbury era began. That is the defining moment. Better teams are coming and then we will see.

Anyway, time will tell. I'm not out to convince you it will all turn out great, I have my doubts too, but I think one needs to give it more than 2-3 weeks. Layden was given 3-4 years to show he couldn't make the playoffs.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

One last thing, then I'll probably leave you uncontested a while. Try not to trash the place.

NOW what we need is a center. Before the Marbury deal we needed a center and a PG. Layden left us with a lot of holes, with a busted cap. I don't think it's fair to expect Isiah to cure all that ails this team in 3 weeks.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> NOW what we need is a center. Before the Marbury deal we needed a center and a PG. Layden left us with a lot of holes, with a busted cap. I don't think it's fair to expect Isiah to cure all that ails this team in 3 weeks


A center should have been priority. The Knicks made the finals with Charlie Ward and Chris Childs as their PGs. They could have gotten by with Ward, Eisley, and Williams, as well as Vujanic next year. I'll take Ward/Eisley/Williams over Mutombo/Doleac/Trybanski/Sundov. Mutombo is going to retire after next season, and Doleac is likely gone via trade or free agency. If he doesn't bring back a backup center, that leaves the team with Trybanski and Sundov.

Let's suppose Layden was not canned.

C - Mutombo, Ha Seung Jin
PF - Sweetney, Harrington, Weatherspoon, Lampe
SF - Van Horn, Anderson
SG - Houston, Vujanic
PG - Williams, Eisley
Coach - Donny Soft

With Thomas, assuming no more deals are made

C - Mutombo, Trybanski, Sundov
PF - Thomas, Harrington, Sweetney
SF - Van Horn, Anderson
SG - Houston, Hardaway
PG - Marbury, Norris, Williams
Coach - Lenny Soft

Team 2 is marginally better, and horribly equiped for the future.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Rashidi,you do realise you are a madman..The Knicks lose one game and you start in with your Pro Layden/Chaney anti Thomas/Wilkins posts..In fact it was predictable,but i did not think a 4 and one record would e enuff for even you to start moaning...

Once again,do you like the Isiah signing???Ill assume NO
Do you like the Marbury trade???

What do you like????

The Knicks are more successful this year under Thomas than layden....Wilkins has won more games than he lost since he is here...marbury has looked great....

Are you stating that you likie the layden,Chaney eisly team better???

i KNOW YOU WERE AGAINST REBUILDING...Thats clear from your early posts...But ONCE again,the layden team missed the playoffs and sukkked this year..There was no energy..Correction,other than when Frank Williams started and the Knicks trounced their opponents the Knicks have looked Lethargic

If you hate Thomas,Wilkins and Marbury just say it..But dont wait for the guys first loss and start with the sarcasm...They have been playing well..How can you fault them??

I think its time you accept the fact that Layden,chaney and Eisly are NEVER coming back...You and layden chose not to rebuild,we lost,you have been proven wrong and layden is fired...

Cheer up


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Rashidi,you do realise you are a madman..The Knicks lose one game and you start in with your Pro Layden/Chaney anti Thomas/Wilkins posts..In fact it was predictable,but i did not think a 4 and one record would e enuff for even you to start moaning...


I said this in previous posts, I guess this was the first one you actually read. The new Knicks have not beaten any quality opponents, maybe you finally noticed because the Knicks finally DID play a quality opponent and lost.



> i KNOW YOU WERE AGAINST REBUILDING...Thats clear from your early posts...


Incorrect. On the contrary, most other people were in favor of rebuilding, but jumped ship as soon as the Knicks got Marbury.

Perhaps you misread my earlier posts... no, you definitely did misread my earlier posts.

I never rarely say if I like or dislike anything. That does not mean I am not allowed to point out the Knick reasoning behind their moves, it seems. It is obviously a crime to say something in defense of Scott Layden. People were crying about why the Knicks couldn't just gut the whole team and rebuild from scatch and the like. And I told them it was because Dolan wants a team that will make the playoffs.



> If you hate Thomas,Wilkins and Marbury just say it..But dont wait for the guys first loss and start with the sarcasm...


First loss? Are you talking about Wilkins? I have seen very little difference between him and Chaney so far. Wilkins so far has coached as much as Herb Williams did in the Orlando game. The Knicks are still running the same game plan as usual, just they have a PG throwing behind the back passes on pick and rolls now.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Incorrect. On the contrary, most other people were in favor of rebuilding, but jumped ship as soon as the Knicks got Marbury.
> 
> Perhaps you misread my earlier posts... no, you definitely did misread my earlier posts.
> 
> I never rarely say if I like or dislike anything.


This is why you get people arguing with you. Did you see the direct questions asked of you that you try to dodge with your double dribble? Look at the deception: I never rarely... What is never rarely? It's true, you do never rarely take a consitent position, (try to follow your thoughts on Miles for one) you just snip criticism at everyone elses posts, then if you are proven wrong you say you never said it, or they did not read you, or misinterpreted you. It's gamesmanship to try to always be right, without taking a stance.

As best as I can tell, you never said what you wanted from Layden, you just wanted him to keep doing it, as long as it takes. We all know where he was going with this team, re-signing Dyess and trading for Ostertag. That's his kind of center. Wait, that's his center, period.

I've really got to get out of here.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Rashidi,you do realise you are a madman..The Knicks lose one game and you start in with your Pro Layden/Chaney anti Thomas/Wilkins posts..In fact it was predictable,but i did not think a 4 and one record would e enuff for even you to start moaning...


I said this in previous posts, I guess this was the first one you actually read. The new Knicks have not beaten any quality opponents, maybe you finally noticed because the Knicks finally DID play a quality opponent and lost. 



> i KNOW YOU WERE AGAINST REBUILDING...Thats clear from your early posts...


Incorrect. On the contrary, most other people were in favor of rebuilding, but jumped ship as soon as the Knicks got Marbury. 

Perhaps you misread my earlier posts... no, you definitely did misread my earlier posts. 

I never rarely say if I like or dislike anything. That does not mean I am not allowed to point out the Knick reasoning behind their moves, it seems. It is obviously a crime to say something in defense of Scott Layden. People were crying about why the Knicks couldn't just gut the whole team and rebuild from scatch and the like. And I told them it was because Dolan wants a team that will make the playoffs. 



> If you hate Thomas,Wilkins and Marbury just say it..But dont wait for the guys first loss and start with the sarcasm...


First loss? Are you talking about Wilkins? I have seen very little difference between him and Chaney so far. Wilkins so far has coached as much as Herb Williams did in the Orlando game. The Knicks are still running the same game plan as usual, just they have a PG throwing behind the back passes on pick and rolls now. Other than that, it's mostly been Marbury breaking down things himself. Wilkens himself said he wasn't going to change anything... 

Don Chaney is pretty much the Taliban. The US appointed government that replaced the Taliban is philosphically identical to the government that preceded it. The only difference is one is backed by America, and one was not (well actually, it was until the year 2000, but that's a whole other story). Lenny is backed by NY, and Chaney was not, but that doesn't mean anything has changed.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

when will you learn we are living in America,a corporate society???

Produce or get out....In defense of Dolan he was very fair to Chaney..We were losing,the garden was dead and in case you havent noticed

Dolan and the parent corporation have 90 million bucks invested in a franchise that just plain out stinks!!!!!

Someone had to be fired.....Thats corporate America..Like it or not,thats the way it is


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Dolan and the parent corporation have 90 million bucks invested in a franchise that just plain out stinks!!!!!


In case you haven't noticed, he still has.



> when will you learn we are living in America,a corporate society???
> 
> Produce or get out....


When will you learn that the NBA does not work like corporate america? Losses does not mean you are not producing.


----------



## NYKBaller (Oct 29, 2003)

No low post threat, our front court straight up sucks...


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

True,MSG makes money....But i really dont think you understand how corporate America works...If you want to argue for the sake of arguing,feel free to do it...

i am not going to get into another blind scout discussion,or a talk about upper body strength and its value

Just once why dont you try come up with a constructive argument...Dolan has invested 90 million of cablevisions money into a vastly underperforming franchise..It still produces revenue,but as the CEO he does have an obligation to maximise the return on equity of the parent..There are shareholder meetings and he is being held accountable,very much the same way Layden and Chaney were...

So,as the CEO who has invested 90 million into a team that plays sub .500 ball and does not make the playoffs,what would you suggest he do...Sell the team??Is that your suggestion?

Give me a well thought out answer,as opposed to your smug sarcasm

And to clarify,the fact that MSG is profitable does not exonerate the GM and coach from having to win...You are confusing two issues...I never said MSG is not a very profitable entity under CableVision.

Seriously,use your noodle and strop being so argumentative...

Do you think Dolan walks up to Chaney and Layden and tells them as long as MSG is has a positive ROE not to worry about winning???Thats what you are implying

I have no problem with you liking the way Layden and Chaney ran the Knicks..Thats your perrogative...And its your perrogative to knock Wilkens after his ONE loss....I just find it highly inconsistent that you praise 2 guys who ran the Knicks into the ground,yet criticise Wilkens who has won 3 of four...


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> True,MSG makes money....But i really dont think you understand how corporate America works...If you want to argue for the sake of arguing,feel free to do it...


No, I was talking about the roster. Teams that lose are rewarded.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

Hold it Hold it guys. Instead of venting on the coaches and Players. let's discuss what has to be adjusted in the game plan. I did want the 4th quarter of that Houston game so in clutch time, some plays have to go and the game also showed that a player is a loser no matter what.

1) I see them running Hoston on the post, with Marbury up top and Penny on the weak side.

But if u have to post up a guard, do it with Penny Hardaway. Penny has the best lowpost moves for the Knicks. okay, Houston will get just a few jap step and jumper out of the post once in a while but he wont be making his teammates better or contribute in a way that the Knicks will win game because of him. That's why you see a large losing record b4 the trade.

We should post up Penny Hardaway in the post, forget reputation, forget the numbers, do what the best for the team. Penny was never known as a scorer, but he is a playmaker. The guy in his career always make good plays espeically out of the post. I understand that no one in the world would play Penny as the focal point of the offense now because of the hypes Marbury, the long timne existence of Allen Houston, but I would be using Penny more as a playmaker instead of standing on the weak side to be a jump shooter instead, Penny was never a good shooter by the way.

Now, Marbury is the first piece we need to get rid of if we are to win a championship. Watch the guy play? Demands the ball in clutch, poor shot selection, lack of scoring repitore in clutch for us to win games after games. On one play, when he did nothing but hoist a 3 pointer when the team was down by like 11. On other play, yeat he ran into the lane, he couldnt do nothing there, if in that situation, Carter could have got a makable shot, kobe could have got a makeable shot, Iverson also could have got a makeable shoot, but Marbury passed the ball back to Doleac(sp?) it looks like you are making a potential assist to your big men, but in a clutch time like this? Is he trying to put pressure on one scrub to win the game for us, or to keep the game close for us? That was I have been saying Marbury is so overrated and he will never be the loser. Casual fans say he was making wide open shot for his teammates just that they didnt step up, but yeah I understand sometimes you are being double team and your teammates have to hit a few shots here and there but in that situation, marbury if he was in the Level with Kobe, Vince or even Iverson could have get a makeable shot instead of passing the ball to the big man where he wasnt to take the shot in the spot he gets the ball but had to in the situation.

So Marbury is just a loser afterall.


----------



## NYKBaller (Oct 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> 
> No, I was talking about the roster. Teams that lose are rewarded.



Ofcourse they are rewarded with high draft picks for top players, how are they suppose to get better than?


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Ofcourse they are rewarded with high draft picks for top players, how are they suppose to get better than?


That's my point. The NBA is not corporate america. In corporate america, losers are not rewarded, they go out of business. Corporate america isn't about trying to instill parity, it's about trying to be the Yankees.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

CMON rashidi,throw me a $%##$% bone.....

My point was obvious and you just love to be argumentative...

Being a GM is just like being in corporate America...Its about producing,winning vs losing..Thats why Layden was going to get canned sooner or later....Do your job or someone else will...

Why in the world are you bringing up a team being rewarded with high selection in the draft for losing records?????

How is that related in any way to our discussion????

Unless you think owners walk up to GMs and say Ild like to win,but if you get the #1 lottery pick this year Ill extend your contract and throw in losing incentive bonuses....


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

And just in case you dont think basketball Is CORPORATE america,then go get a prospectus from BBPLC



BCLP, through its subsidiaries, holds investment assets and holds a minority interest in the assets and operations of the Boston Celtics. BCLP's most significant operating asset is its indirect investment in Celtics Basketball, which owns and operates the Boston Celtics. The Boston Celtics derive their revenues principally from the sale of tickets to home games, the licensing of television, cable network and radio rights, and promotional and novelty revenues.

sounds very much like a Corporation or Limited partnership to me


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

*Hide and seek*

So,as the CEO who has invested 90 million into a team that plays sub .500 ball and does not make the playoffs,what would you suggest he do...Sell the team??Is that your suggestion?

Give me a well thought out answer,as opposed to your smug sarcasm


rashidi,care to STATE what you think Dolan should have done...

Or just remain the sniper that you are..its cool..At least i understand your posts now...


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

Truth writes


> when will you learn we are living in America,a corporate society???
> 
> *Produce or get out....*In defense of Dolan he was very fair to Chaney..*We were losing*,the garden was dead and in case you havent noticed


Rashidi writes


> When will you learn that the NBA does not work like corporate america? *Losses does not mean you are not producing.*


Truth writes


> True,MSG makes money....But i really dont think you understand how corporate America works...





> CMON rashidi,throw me a $%##$% bone.....
> 
> My point was obvious and you just love to be argumentative...


No, my point was obvious, you just missed it.



> How is that related in any way to our discussion????


OUR discussion? It looks like you are talking to yourself more than you are to me. I'm talking about the Knicks missing out on a center by trying to win, and you're talking about the team losing under Layden and corporate america. You right about one thing though. Layden was fired as a result of corporate america. In corporate america, there are people known as FALL GUYS.



> And just in case you dont think basketball Is CORPORATE america,then go get a prospectus from BBPLC


What the hell does this have to do with getting a center in the draft? And you accuse ME of arguing with myself?



> So,as the CEO who has invested 90 million into a team that plays sub .500 ball and does not make the playoffs,what would you suggest he do...Sell the team??Is that your suggestion?


What does he do? I don't know, why don't you ask Latrell Sprewell, when he comes back to NY next season? As a visitor, of course.

Last I checked, Dolan isn't exactly losing billions of dollars either. Nor are the Knicks his only sports franchise.

Oh wait, that's right, I remember now. What Dolan does is give orders to the GM and sign off on all the deals. Layden was pretty much fired because he was under orders to build for now, but at the same time was unwilling to give up the future (It was also done to take the magnifying glass off of Dolan, who has seemingly disappeared from the newspapers since Isiah's hiring). Thomas has shown absolutely no restraint in doing the bidding of Dolan and trading every future asset the Knicks have.

I seem to recall on draft night that people were chanting "Fire Layden" and when Layden drafted Sweetney, the chanting stopped, and turned to cheers. Then they chanted it again at pick #30. Then NY took Lampe. And the chanting stopped. The cheering began again. They were cheering the future that the Knicks had gotten. Now they are dealing that future away for a 1st round exit, and the people are cheering louder. Sounds a bit bandwagonish if you ask me.

You accuse Rashidi of being wishy washy? Rashidi just opposes the wishy washiness of other new yorkers (like yourself). First you say rebuild. Now it's go all the way. One week Dikembe is a hero, the next week he's slow. One week Houston is an elite scorer, the next week he is a one-dimensional scrub. Don't get me started on Keith Van Horn. The Knicks turn the ball over too much, let's start a turnover prone backup to fix that. Don Chaney is too soft on players, let's hire the equally soft Lenny Wilkins and call it an upgrade. It looks like I'm a lot more consistent than everybody else.



> Or just remain the sniper that you are..its cool..


Taking shots in the open doesn't make you any more of a man. How exactly am I a sniper when you've repeatedly accused me of *standing by* the likes of Scott Layden, Don Chaney, and Howard Eisley? Snipers don't stand in the open. On the contrary, I'm making myself a sitting duck, and YOU are the one that is taking the shots.


----------

