# Lampe to be activated Monday.



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/suns/0115sunslampe0115.html



> Lampe expects to debut Monday
> 18-year-old says he'll be activated
> 
> Tim Tyers
> ...


----------



## hatnlvr (Aug 14, 2003)

Now we will begin to see the real cost of the trade. I'm interested to see how he develops.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> "We'd like to give him (Lampe) the opportunity," D'Antoni said. "If we're up by 20 or down 20, it would be nice for him to get those minutes, instead of somebody who doesn't need them. You have to give him a little sugar, a cookie."


Pity Chaney/Layden couldn't have exhibited the same logic, perhaps he'd still be here if they had.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Thank you..that is what pisses me off so much about Latden and Chaney....We should have played williams/lampe and sweetney and assessed our talent and needs..instead we rode the old horses and wound up playin .300 ball....And on top of it Dumb and Dumber got themselves fired..


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

Uh... I hate to break it to you, but the Suns are trying to REBUILD. That's why Lampe is going to be on Phoenix's active roster, and that's why he was not on NY's active roster.

Just making sure memory loss hasn't occured in the past 3 weeks since we've all been inhaling the Zeke propaganda.


----------



## shazha (Nov 20, 2002)

Man what i cant believe is how crap McDyess has gotten. I mean the guy can still rebound ok, but he misses easy layups etc. I guess he can only get better off injury.

Then again hes gone after this season, so who cares really. If he plays good maybe we can sign and trade him for a REAL shooting guard, not this Jo i should be a 3rd string but since we have no sg's i'll start and jack up crazy shots Johnson.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> Uh... I hate to break it to you, but the Suns are trying to REBUILD. That's why Lampe is going to be on Phoenix's active roster, and that's why he was not on NY's active roster.
> 
> Just making sure memory loss hasn't occured in the past 3 weeks since we've all been inhaling the Zeke propaganda.


Some of us had the vision many weks ago, when we were playing like .333 ball, that this team needed to be blown up or shaken up, as we were going nowhere fast. And by nowhere I mean not to high draft, and not to playoffs. Just trudging to nowhere. So before the hatchet should come down (should Layden ever muster the fortitude), the young players should be evaluated, to know if they're keepers or losers.

You thought that was nonsense, in a win-now environment you play your veterans and let the youth watch. Those of us who wanted a little peek have been very consitent and it has nothing to do with Zeke. How about you?


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> You thought that was nonsense, in a win-now environment you play your veterans and let the youth watch. Those of us who wanted a little peek have been very consitent and it has nothing to do with Zeke. How about you?


You lost me. Elaborate.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> You lost me. Elaborate.


For some reason you thought it important to remind us Phoenix is rebuilding, and THAT is why Lampe would play garbage time there. You also suggested that we who wanted to play him our garbage time were doing some sort of flop since coming under the spell of Isiah's propaganda.

No, we wanted to see him since long before Isiah, because we knew the Knicks needed to rebuild too, be it through draft or trade, and we wanted to know the value stock we currently had. We knew that in spite of the mandate not to rebuild, a rebuild was inevitable, because we sucked, and there was no need to putz around with playing Spoon, AND Harrington, AND Doleac. Surely one of them could take a spell on the IR. We weren't "winning now", and weren't about to, so we saw no need to cater to guys with little upside when we could be giving "THE FUTURE OF THE FRANCHISE" a whirl on the dance floor.

We also wanted to give him a little playing time to give him a feel for the game, develope some game day nerves, and... "give him a little sugar, a cookie."

What could Isiah possibly have to do with any of that?

You on the other hand, before Zeke, thought he should stay buried on the bench for a few years. You, having never seen a lick of him in the NBA, asserted there could be no good that might come from playing him, even in garbage time.

You've never seen him play in the NBA, and never wanted to before, but now that he's gone you are saying this trade in five years will be known as "the LAMPE trade". It seems to me that in your immense dislike for the hiring of Isiah (at the expense of Layden) you've turned into a Lampe fan to make the case Isiah = bad / Layden = good.

You imply Phoenix has a greater need to know and support it's youth than we did. But elsewhere you complain how old this club is and where we'll be in five years. Well we who wanted to play a little Lampe knew that, and it's why we wanted to see if he was worth sitting on, building around, or trading. You were into just festering: not playing the youth, not making trades, not changing the coach, etc. It appears as if you only care now that it's too late and you have a grudge to support.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

I have maintained all along that I wanted this team to be nuked..It made NO sense to me to draft Lampe,Sweetney and not play them in addition to having Williams ride the pine....We had every excuse in the world to play our young guys and let dyss come back slowly....But layden and chaney chose to flip flop on Eisly/ward and play the likes of Spoon....

And you were a VERY big supporter of this.....

I dont know what you mean by inhaling Isiahs propaganda,but if it meant not staying status quo,I am inhaling it deeply....If you werent going to play the rookies,even though we had a .333 winning percentage and the HIGHEST payroll in the league,then get rid of them and get the best available talent even though you mortgaged the future...

I distinctly remember you making every excuse in the world why it was OK to have the Highest payroll in the league and have a .333 winning percentage..You liked Eisly,defended spoon,supported layden and WERE never in favor of playing the rooks..You liked our squad and management..

So what exactly are we inhaling????Enlighten me...my stance hasnt changed from day one,which is why we were always at odds...Which brings us back to....What would you have liked to see Layden do,or was satus quo playing .333 ball ok with you..I am waiting


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> You've never seen him play in the NBA, and never wanted to before, but now that he's gone you are saying this trade in five years will be known as "the LAMPE trade". It seems to me that in your immense dislike for the hiring of Isiah (at the expense of Layden) you've turned into a Lampe fan to make the case Isiah = bad / Layden = good.


I've always been a Lampe fan. It appears that nobody here can seperate their emotions from reality. Just because Lampe would not have helped the Knicks if they put him on their roster, does not mean I don't like them. And just because I did not view a very inconsistent and turnover prone PG as a godsend, does not mean that I like Howard Eisley.



> You imply Phoenix has a greater need to know and support it's youth than we did.


Imply? Phoenix is rebuilding, we are not, and never will. End of story.



> But elsewhere you complain how old this club is and where we'll be in five years.


I'm not the owner. I don't decide what the goals of this team are. The owner decided that the Knicks are trying to win. If the Knicks can make the playoffs, there is a chance they can even advance. Playoffs equals money, and mediocrity equals money. Knick fans adored Jeff Van Gundy's teams, even though they were only the 8th or 7th seed. Give NY fans a .500 record and they go ballistic. Lampe did not fit in with the goals of this team. Plain and simple.

I'm not talking 5 years either. Try 2 years.

You know what the difference between Layden and Zeke is?

Layden was under orders to make the team competitive, but he didn't want to give up the future. He was willing to do the smart thing, and wait. He was villified for it.

Zeke walks in and immediately carries out Dolan's plan, which is "Screw the future! We shall return to mediocrityyyyyyyy!" and suddenly, he's a hero.

Rather hypocritical if you ask me.

Well, when the Knicks are finally sapped of their tradable resources, Thomas won't have anything to do as GM. In that time, you better hope he reads a coaching manual, and hope he learns how, cause once the wheels fall of this team you know Lenny is gone and Isiah is in.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

This is true for many of us,But how in the world do we know what Dolan instructed Layden to do????Are you friends with Dolan????

I am guessing that when the Knicks started playing .300 ball,layden,as a business owner,Dolan looked at his investments and started getting sick to his stomach.....As we all know shiit flowe downhill and Layden was next in line....Would you let Layden have the flexibilty to make changes after his track record???

For once Rashidi you should look at the other side of the coin...Layden had an opportunity and really screwed it up..Not my opinion,a fact...His team ,with a massive payroll was losing 7 out of 10 games....His highly touted draft picks were on IL and his major piece to the puzzle,a huge medical gamble was a bust.....

And listen to your posts and look at his won lost record...Layden did NOT make this team competitive..Once again,they were playing .300 ball and had a massive payroll...Why cant you look at the won lost record and clearly see that?And who traded for Eisly,Anderson,signed Weatherspoon and overpaid H2O???That person gave up the future...

You refuse to hold Layden accountable in any way shape or form,yet have judgemnt on Isiah in his first 2 weeks of his job!!Layden had years as The Knick GM and destroyed the team..yes DESTROYED....They were playing .300 ball,his coach appeared lost and something had to give...

Layden was given EVERY opportunity to succeede or fail..He was given financial resources,lattitude to bring players and coaches in and bottom line,the Knicks did not Win ...They SUKKED..Look at their record..just once...As a CEO who is responsible to the board and shareholders,this is not acceptable...Dolan had to make changes,and Zeke was brought in to make the team "COMPETITIVE"...And 3 weeks into his tenure he is doing his best with absolutely no leeway due to the mess Layden and company got this franchise into...

You are dreming if you think a CEOs mandate changes from GM to GM...Think about it...Your ex GM is spending 90 million of your corporations money,is losing 70% of its games and you expect Dolan to say have confidence in his decision making ability????CMON,get real and give Isiah the same opportunity that Layden blew...And dont spew that Dolans mandate changed..Unless he told you so to his face,thats just nonsense...


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Imply? Phoenix is rebuilding, we are not, and never will. End of story.


I don't have the time at the moment to reply fully to your post. I'll just say for the moment that you espoused a do-nothing approach, while others espoused change. Yes, if the team were doing well, or in the unrealistic world where you have no time consraints, or fans and shareholders to answer to, you can keep your franchise future youth locked away.

And keep in mind, it appears that you are in argument with two people who supported a rebuild and youth movement will you were the one who wanted to just stay the course, whatever that course was.

But in the Knicks real world scenario, where changes, or at least *a defined game plan*, where obviously needed, one plays their youth (in garbage time) over known weak veterans to either: evaluate them, hasten their developement, or showcase them.

Anyway, I didn't enter this thread to argue with you. I simply stated that if the Knicks had thrown the kid a cookie he might still be here, or we might not be lamenting his loss. If he made a buzz Thomas might not have wanted to rock the happiness boat. If he sucked we wouldn't be saying we lost a future championship by moving him. Is that really so controversial?


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

i am not trying to argue with you either...I just dont understand how you can dog Isiah after 2 weeks but support layden after 2 years???

And to be honest,I have read all your posts and i am really not sure what you think Dolan should have done..I know initially you were a big supporter of the team,Layden and Chaney..You felt it was a playoff squad..

I was a NUKER and rebuilder,but if that wasnt possible,I was thrilled to see Layden get fired..I think layden put us in a terrible position and one that require desperate measures...

At least Isiah isnt selling us a bill of goods


----------



## knicksfan (Jan 4, 2003)

Rashidi, 

Layden was a guy who didnt know what in the world he is doing. That fits the bill for cheaney too. AND DOLAN. You guys are placing a lot of blame on layden and chaney, like i do as well but remember one thing please. someone here said, " look at layden's track record" I tell you look at dolan's track record. He currently runs not one but TWO FAILING New York sports franchises. Both of them have one common trait, during dolans run. OVERPAYED, OLD FORMER SUPERSTARS. Yes old, and overpayed superstars. Dolan runs both of those franchises, i think looking at that you gotta give dolan some blame here, one way or the other. I think the knicks wont ever be as succesfull as they possibly can, until dolan sells that team! same thing goes for the Rangers, too. Just my two cents of course, take it for what its worth!


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

I posted that a long time ago,how both the rangers and knicks seriously overpay aging players who were once superstars...The only commonanilty is Dolan runs both those teams and therefore must have something to do with the miserable record of teams with mega payrolls...With that said,I think a guy like Isiah,with a huge ego will do things his way,kind of like Riley..And thats what you need with a guy like Dolan....


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> And listen to your posts and look at his won lost record...Layden did NOT make this team competitive..Once again,they were playing .300 ball and had a massive payroll...Why cant you look at the won lost record and clearly see that?And who traded for Eisly,Anderson,signed Weatherspoon and overpaid H2O???That person gave up the future...


Why don't you listen to my posts and look at the NBA schedule? The Knicks played plenty of tough teams early. Since Zeke and Marbury's arrival, the Knicks have played cupcake teams. Look up my earlier posts. I clearly stated many times that the schedule got much much easier after the 2nd week in December. Isn't that around the time that Isiah Thomas guy was hired? Should we blame Scott Layden for the Knicks going winless against the Lakers? Or should we blame him for the injuries to Houston and Van Horn. Or should I just rename myself "broken record"?

Hey, guess what! The only 4 good teams the Knicks have played in their last 12 games (Zeke's reign) are the T'Wolves, Mavs, Rockets, and Nets. Guess how many games the Knicks won from those four? ZERO. Looks like nothing has really changed from Pre-Layden to Post-Layden. The Knicks STILL have a poor record against good teams.

Suddenly the Knicks beat Miami twice, Orlando twice, Memphis, and Milwuakee, and they are IMPROVED under Isiah? Combined, these teams have a record of 56- 89. You think they couldn't have won these games with Layden in the general manager spot? Use your noodle.



> You refuse to hold Layden accountable in any way shape or form,yet have judgemnt on Isiah in his first 2 weeks of his job!!


Isiah has a lot more control than Layden did. Zeke is putting his signature on all his moves, therefore he takes the credit or criticism. Why is it that I am not allowed to criticize him? You would have no problem if I were praising the ground he walks on. If you want credit (which Zeke obviously does) it has to come with the good and bad.

Now ask yourself, how many of Layden's "moves" REALLY had his signature on them. Most of them did not. Shandon Anderson and Howard Eisley wouldn't be in the picture if Glen Rice wasn't around in the first place. Other than those two, how many other moves did Layden really have anything to do with. Once again you bring up Houston's contract. My name REALLY MUST BE "broken record". James Dolan, James Dolan, James Dolan.



> Layden had years as The Knick GM and destroyed the team..yes DESTROYED....


*COUGHES in Grunfeld and Checkett's general direction*

I could have sworn Checketts was the one who decided to trade Ewing... you know, the beginning of the Knicks so called misery?

I suppose it is Layden's fault he inherited a team with 2 shooting guards, no point guard, no small forward, and an aging center with a fragile backup? I suppose that makes my name "broken record".



> They were playing .300 ball,his coach appeared lost and something had to give...


I didn't know 10-18 was .300 ball. Quick, where's my calculator?

Cleveland and Chicago are 12-27 and both of them are playing .308.

Hmm, it seems you should get that memory bank checked out if you can't remember me saying all that stuff. Or I should change my name to "broken record".


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

Broken Record.

That's B-R-O-K-E-N space R-E-C-O-R-D.

Write it, read it, and say it out loud. The three keys to never forgetting. Perhaps I should re-post all my previous posts for the benefit of our readers?


----------

