|
|
Post by jbnewyork162 on Nov 20, 2009 18:57:01 GMT -5
So if Iverson will stunt the growth of guys that may not be resigned at his position anyways in Duhon and Nate isnt that an oxymoron?
Only Douglas will last past 2010 and to me you wanted to make the playoffs so why didnt we add Iverson on that basis?
Now if you say he will be a lockeroom or emotional cancer and you been there and done then cool but if you didnt make this decision by talking to Allen and asking him if he will behave how was this decision to make? Iverson would have given Harrington and Gallo better kick out look i thought anyway when wasnt driving.
At the end of the day it what it is, but when Walsh says he had to defer to Dolan then that almost makes me wary of Walsh if cant make his own regime and legacy himself with already what i thought was Dolan's blessing to total autonomy. Now when u defer to a blithering idiot that makes me wonder, if will waffle when Lebron is around or Wade is around next summer.
I will be dissapointed heavily in the whole Knicks brand if we dont get WADE or LEBRON or Bosh and have to settle for just second tier all the way. What a blow that would be to every fans pysche' next summer if we dont any of the big three. Lets hope Walsh has action that goes with this grand plan of his. I envy the Nets in only one area as they have the best GM in the business in Thorn. Savvy with the picks he has fleeced other teams with and his drafts the last few have been astounding. He traded away every problem and flipped garbage in some promise despite their losing record at present. If we had Thorn there's no doubt we'd be an even bigger force in the NBA than we are going to be post 2010 as it stands
-Jason
|
|
|
|
Post by ironman95 on Nov 20, 2009 19:04:20 GMT -5
Do you think including Ryan Anderson in the Vince Carter trade was a smart move? I don't. Thorn is a good GM, but he made a mistake there.
|
|
|
|
Post by irish2u2 on Nov 20, 2009 19:09:11 GMT -5
Wow!!!
Some really outstanding thoughts/comments in this thread and way too numerous to single out.
There will NEVER be a time James Dolan doesn't meddle but at least this time it seems like he listened to Walsh. Baby steps my friends. Baby steps. ; )
Walsh has to continue to take the heat for D'Antoni. He wanted Iverson so he might win some games. It's best for the franchise to develop young guys. It's best for the franchise for Walsh to take it in the head from the media and fans.
Could Gallinari be hurt? I noted his non-hustle the other night too but that isn't typical of him. He stayed out most of the second half and he lays down doing those damns stretching exercises. Growing pains? I remember it was said he might eventually make it to 7' when he was through growing.
Back to AI it's a great point that if you are going to play Harrington and Hughes a lot then AI seems like the perfect fit. On the other hand Hughes starting job lasts only as long as he a) plays well and/or b) someone young starts to play a bit better. Harrington is already relegated to the bench so maybe in the long run AI is better off playing for somebody else. Orlando?
I'd like to see what Curry can do. Give him 10 games, no more than 20, and then re-visit the various trade proposals.
Great job to all the posters in this thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by jbnewyork162 on Nov 20, 2009 19:35:43 GMT -5
Do you think including Ryan Anderson in the Vince Carter trade was a smart move? I don't. Thorn is a good GM, but he made a mistake there. Iron C'mon. First, I was judging his whole body of work not what happened last summer alone. He traded Kidd past his prime and got Harris who we made the same trade and Harris back we'd already have a PG of the future. If drafted Douglas Roberts who was available to us that draft and replaced Nate for him we would have a better bench player at 2 or wouldn't need to have Chandler playing there. If we had drafted Brook Lopez by acquiring another pick along with Gallo it wouldn't matter what Curry does or doesn't do so we can trade him as we'd have one the better young centers with an almost complete traditional center game to boot. Courtney Lee plays with a chip on his shoulder with Chandler's skill set to boot so even he is an upgrade. I don't like the Nets brand but I can admire from afar a better leader in the front office and it would have been cool to see if we could pry him away before signing Walsh is all I'm saying. Aside from Miller, Artest and the Davis boys I wasn't really impressed with much the Pacers had to offer as far as depth because their depth were veterans others team drafted and used better after they left or before they came to Indiana. Sorry Ryan Anderson was a deal breaker for you. Even as I hate the Nets with a passion, they will unless we trade Jeffries or Curry, will have an extra 1-2 million than us in cap room 3 picks in the draft with yet another one scheduled to be in the lottery this year and a better 1, 2 and 5 than us the three most important positions. Whats not to be impressed about Thorn with? Wish he was our GM but he isn't and that was my only point. -Jason |
|
|
|
Post by ironman95 on Nov 20, 2009 21:32:14 GMT -5
I like Thorn too. My point is that everyone makes mistakes. Walsh has made them, and Thorn has made at least one big one. I still like him as a GM. I still don't like the Rims. Just like you. I could point out other mistakes Thorn has made too. Drafting Marcus Williams comes to mind. Clearing out the high-priced contracts was a real good move, and the timing was near-perfect. On the negative, you've got the firing of Byron Scott and sticking with Lawrence Frank. Are those good moves? I'll let you decide! He's crafty, but far from total excellence. No matter how much cap room, I believe the Knicks will win out over the Nets when it comes to signing free agents. They will have to build from the draft mostly, I think, but he is good at keeping and acquiring draft picks, unlike the Knicks. These two teams are on different paths, and have vastly different Karma. The allure of the Garden is worth a lot. Look at all the players who said they wanted to play at the Garden this year. I'd rather build from the draft, like the Nets, but it is what it is, and the Knicks are saddled with the albatross of previously awful GM decisions. Now lets make that deal with Houston!
|
|
|
|
Post by jbnewyork162 on Nov 20, 2009 23:13:05 GMT -5
That Houston deal needs to happen ASAP and that Scott firing after 2 consecutive finals appearances and Frank keeping his job is just plain beyond vocabulary... but asinine is a word I'd use.
And I agree that if and when 2010 hits it will be hard for Thorn to sell thee armpit as an amenity and more landfills on the East coast than anyone in a postcard.
To change the subject for a minute, does anyone know if Pat Ewing Jr is still planning to play in the NBA and is he no longer hurt and is he worth another look next year to fill roster space.
|
|
|
|
Post by whensly on Nov 21, 2009 6:31:10 GMT -5
My suspicion is that when Walsh spoke to Iverson or Iverson's people
he heard something he didn't like (at all) and new that trouble would be around the corner.
All that happened so fast, must have been "a tell" in the conversations that screamed "this is not going to work"
|
|
|
|
Post by whensly on Nov 21, 2009 6:51:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ironman95 on Nov 21, 2009 15:04:12 GMT -5
I could not find any information about Patrick Ewing Jr., this year. He is not listed on the NBDL player list at all. Don't know about Europe or elsewhere. It was a pretty serious knee problem that he had, so he may just be rehabbing right now. On another note the Warriors signed Chris Hunter. Remember him?
|
|
|
|
Post by whensly on Nov 21, 2009 20:15:55 GMT -5
interesting that this summer Walsh made serious offers for real money to Kidd and Hill,
but now won't take AI for vet minimum..
I guess Kidd is one of most unselfish players, and hill such a "character guy"
and Iverson is not famous for either of those traits
but stilll...
|
|
|
|
Post by whensly on Nov 22, 2009 0:54:08 GMT -5
I'd still prefer a 35 year old Iverson to the mental midget Nate.
|
|
|
|
Post by ironman95 on Nov 22, 2009 1:13:32 GMT -5
Nate must have ADD or something similar.
|
|
|
|
Post by irish2u2 on Nov 22, 2009 2:57:43 GMT -5
Nate is Peter Pan, the perpetual kid. Did you see him trying to actually explain himself after taking that knucklehead shot at his own basket today?
Nate doesn't have ADD. He has STOOPID. ; )
|
|
|
|
Post by whensly on Nov 22, 2009 13:01:58 GMT -5
< Nate doesn't have ADD. He has STOOPID. ; ) >>
you made me laugh out loud.
I could not agree more.
back to Iverson,
I also will pose the question,
i the wake of the T_Mac talk,
does anyone think T-Mac is better than AI?
I think T Mac may be the new Penny Haradaway-after all the injuries.
|
|
|
|
Post by ironman95 on Nov 22, 2009 13:44:17 GMT -5
It's not a question as the whether T-Mac is better than AI, although I think he is when healthy. It's addition by subtraction. In my proposed deal of Eddy, the Mobley contract and Nate for T-Mac and Budinger, both teams get something they need. The Knicks get cap relief 1 year earlier, the Rockets get the big man they need until Yao gets back, and they get a side show and monetary benefits. The Knicks get that outside sharp-shooter in Budinger, and he plays decent defense, plus T-Mac, who would at least be a better version of Harrington. Forget showcasing Jeffries, we need to showcase Eddy pronto. Signing Iverson would do nothing for the future, just give us two side-shows. He plays hard, he scores, but he is a volume shooter, who feels the need to hoist it up 30-40 times per game. Do we really want that at this point in time? It sounds like T-Mac is both unhappy and chomping at the bit to play. Both teams need to make that deal, or something similar.
|
|
