> Here's my analysis. They stink and it's going to be a long year, but it was > to be expected.
Yeah, as was written here it is all about next summer, but after reading about how we mailed it in on the first game of the season, who the Hell is going to want to play on this team. I mean Chandler and Duhon were awful, Galo is not exactly Reggie Miller as he was advertised (Tall sharp shooter) and Curry just about blew any chance of the Knicks dealing him when he injured himself again. Unless they can sell the "We are going to sign another max contract FA in 2011 when fat cells is off the books" there is no reason for Wade, Bosh, Johnson, Dirk or anyone from the FA class to come here. I mean this was the first game of the season. I can understand going through the motions after you lost 25 or 30 games, but it's a bit early to be so uninspired.
On Oct 29, 2:12 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I can understand going through the > motions after you lost 25 or 30 games, but it's a bit early to be so > uninspired.
Well, in their defense, since the Knicks obviously need some, they probably have heard nothing from the fans and media other than that 2009-2010 is already a write-off, and nobody is going to bother paying attention anyway until next season when the free agent grab begins. Of course, a team consisting of players with a modicum of pride would take this write-off as motivation to shock the world, but this cast of losers obviously doesn't consist of those kinds of personalities. Even the players with a spark of life, like Nate, are just newfangled 21st century NBA selfish losers. I don't think there's a single player on this roster worth keeping, except perhaps Wilson Chandler. I'm sick of Isiah's "great eye for talent" represented by the Lee/ Robinson duo. We need to dump them quick while the rest of the league can still be fooled into thinking they have any value.
> On Oct 29, 2:12 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > I can understand going through the > > motions after you lost 25 or 30 games, but it's a bit early to be so > > uninspired.
> Well, in their defense, since the Knicks obviously need some, they > probably have heard nothing from the fans and media other than that > 2009-2010 is already a write-off, and nobody is going to bother paying > attention anyway until next season when the free agent grab begins. > Of course, a team consisting of players with a modicum of pride would > take this write-off as motivation to shock the world, but this cast of > losers obviously doesn't consist of those kinds of personalities. > Even the players with a spark of life, like Nate, are just newfangled > 21st century NBA selfish losers. I don't think there's a single > player on this roster worth keeping, except perhaps Wilson Chandler. > I'm sick of Isiah's "great eye for talent" represented by the Lee/ > Robinson duo. We need to dump them quick while the rest of the league > can still be fooled into thinking they have any value.
> I guess as many have said this is the bad medicine of rebuilding, but does that mean the players that are there don't have to try?
<lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote: >On Oct 29, 6:35 pm, Joe Blow <joseph_blo...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> On Oct 29, 2:12 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > I can understand going through the >> > motions after you lost 25 or 30 games, but it's a bit early to be so >> > uninspired.
>> Well, in their defense, since the Knicks obviously need some, they >> probably have heard nothing from the fans and media other than that >> 2009-2010 is already a write-off, and nobody is going to bother paying >> attention anyway until next season when the free agent grab begins. >> Of course, a team consisting of players with a modicum of pride would >> take this write-off as motivation to shock the world, but this cast of >> losers obviously doesn't consist of those kinds of personalities. >> Even the players with a spark of life, like Nate, are just newfangled >> 21st century NBA selfish losers. I don't think there's a single >> player on this roster worth keeping, except perhaps Wilson Chandler. >> I'm sick of Isiah's "great eye for talent" represented by the Lee/ >> Robinson duo. We need to dump them quick while the rest of the league >> can still be fooled into thinking they have any value.
>> I guess as many have said this is the bad medicine of rebuilding, but does that mean the players that are there don't have to try?
I think they try well. Here is what I think happens for whatever reason... They get down on themselves very easily. When shots are NOT falling and they are working hard on defense and that is not working, well they kind of get down on themselves and well when that happens you can just go to the showers. This happened last season alot. Hence the reason they lost so many games by like 5 or less points. They do not have the fortitude. That is what makes teams good or bad. Weathering storms which happen all the time. This teams psyche is f*cked up! I was hoping this would change this year. Maybe it will, perhaps it is too early to say, but this is my assesment of this Knick team.
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:09:23 -0700 (PDT), Glenn Greenstein
> <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >On Oct 29, 6:35 pm, Joe Blow <joseph_blo...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Oct 29, 2:12 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> > I can understand going through the > >> > motions after you lost 25 or 30 games, but it's a bit early to be so > >> > uninspired.
> >> Well, in their defense, since the Knicks obviously need some, they > >> probably have heard nothing from the fans and media other than that > >> 2009-2010 is already a write-off, and nobody is going to bother paying > >> attention anyway until next season when the free agent grab begins. > >> Of course, a team consisting of players with a modicum of pride would > >> take this write-off as motivation to shock the world, but this cast of > >> losers obviously doesn't consist of those kinds of personalities. > >> Even the players with a spark of life, like Nate, are just newfangled > >> 21st century NBA selfish losers. I don't think there's a single > >> player on this roster worth keeping, except perhaps Wilson Chandler. > >> I'm sick of Isiah's "great eye for talent" represented by the Lee/ > >> Robinson duo. We need to dump them quick while the rest of the league > >> can still be fooled into thinking they have any value.
> >> I guess as many have said this is the bad medicine of rebuilding, but does that mean the players that are there don't have to try?
> I think they try well. Here is what I think happens for whatever > reason... They get down on themselves very easily. When shots are NOT > falling and they are working hard on defense and that is not working, > well they kind of get down on themselves and well when that happens > you can just go to the showers. This happened last season alot. Hence > the reason they lost so many games by like 5 or less points. They do > not have the fortitude. That is what makes teams good or bad. > Weathering storms which happen all the time. This teams psyche is > f*cked up! I was hoping this would change this year. Maybe it will, > perhaps it is too early to say, but this is my assesment of this Knick > team.
Then you are saying it is the coaching. Sorry, I don't buy it.
On Oct 29, 6:35 pm, Joe Blow <joseph_blo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'm sick of Isiah's "great eye for talent" represented by the Lee/ > Robinson duo. We need to dump them quick while the rest of the league > can still be fooled into thinking they have any value.
They were both only inked to one year contracts as placeholders for this throwaway season -- they're gone along with the rest of these guys next year. Why bother trading them now?
Also remember they were both RFAs all summer and they got a whopping total of zero offers between them from every other team in the league. Nobody's going to be fooled.
<lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote: >On Oct 29, 11:07 pm, Syfo-Dyas <Syfo-D...@nomail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:09:23 -0700 (PDT), Glenn Greenstein
>> <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >On Oct 29, 6:35 pm, Joe Blow <joseph_blo...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> On Oct 29, 2:12 pm, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > I can understand going through the >> >> > motions after you lost 25 or 30 games, but it's a bit early to be so >> >> > uninspired.
>> >> Well, in their defense, since the Knicks obviously need some, they >> >> probably have heard nothing from the fans and media other than that >> >> 2009-2010 is already a write-off, and nobody is going to bother paying >> >> attention anyway until next season when the free agent grab begins. >> >> Of course, a team consisting of players with a modicum of pride would >> >> take this write-off as motivation to shock the world, but this cast of >> >> losers obviously doesn't consist of those kinds of personalities. >> >> Even the players with a spark of life, like Nate, are just newfangled >> >> 21st century NBA selfish losers. I don't think there's a single >> >> player on this roster worth keeping, except perhaps Wilson Chandler. >> >> I'm sick of Isiah's "great eye for talent" represented by the Lee/ >> >> Robinson duo. We need to dump them quick while the rest of the league >> >> can still be fooled into thinking they have any value.
>> >> I guess as many have said this is the bad medicine of rebuilding, but does that mean the players that are there don't have to try?
>> I think they try well. Here is what I think happens for whatever >> reason... They get down on themselves very easily. When shots are NOT >> falling and they are working hard on defense and that is not working, >> well they kind of get down on themselves and well when that happens >> you can just go to the showers. This happened last season alot. Hence >> the reason they lost so many games by like 5 or less points. They do >> not have the fortitude. That is what makes teams good or bad. >> Weathering storms which happen all the time. This teams psyche is >> f*cked up! I was hoping this would change this year. Maybe it will, >> perhaps it is too early to say, but this is my assesment of this Knick >> team.
>Then you are saying it is the coaching. Sorry, I don't buy it.
Not really but the coaching is not good. Now you can buy it or sell it. It really doesn't matter glen, however the facts are the facts. Choose to do with them as you like.
On Oct 30, 4:31 pm, Noah <dontsendmeyers...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Also remember they were both RFAs all summer and they got a whopping > total of zero offers between them from every other team in the > league. Nobody's going to be fooled.
Yes, right. Actually, "trade them" was a stand-in for "make sure they're not on this team next year."
I don't share your optimism that these 1 year contracts for Lee and Robinson necessarily mean they won't be here next year. Nate-the- Grate is a fan favorite, unfortunately (I think I just heard Dustin Hoffman confess tonight that Nate is his favorite). And so is David Lee, to a slightly lesser extent. They might keep them around for that reason alone, and I think that's the real reason they were brought back for this irrelevant season of basketball. I'm afraid that they're actually liked by the people that matter; namely, not you or I. They got no offers on the FA market because their financial demands were outrageous.
Also, I don't think it's completely nonsensical to trade them should a reasonable offer for them be made. If another team is willing to give up a player or two that Walsh and D'Antoni forsee could be a part of the mix for the next few years, why not begin that process right now instead of wasting time with the foregone conclusions named Nate and Dave (if in fact they are that)?
On Oct 31, 8:35 pm, Joe Blow <joseph_blo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I don't share your optimism that these 1 year contracts for Lee and > Robinson necessarily mean they won't be here next year.
I wouldn't go so far as to say that, either. If all the prize free agents go elsewhere, they may well get re-signed. But unless the tactics really switch, I don't see the new-look Knicks management looking to sign them for a bunch more than the market seems to be bearing for them (unlike the old Knicks managements). Walsh seems aware that if these two slip away over the summer, it's not the end of the world (as evidenced by the fact that neither one was signed until about a week before training camp this year). Another losing season with those two as the team's "stars" is only going to further cement that.
> Nate-the- > Grate is a fan favorite, unfortunately (I think I just heard Dustin > Hoffman confess tonight that Nate is his favorite).
Any "favorite" picked off the current roster could probably be criticized in and out of itself...
> And so is David > Lee, to a slightly lesser extent. They might keep them around for > that reason alone, and I think that's the real reason they were > brought back for this irrelevant season of basketball.
I think they were brought back, honestly, because they, along with perhaps Al Harrington (and maybe now we can say Gallinari, too, if his back holds up) are really the ONLY offense on the team as currently constructed. Duhon and Chandler may have their nights but no one else is really capable of doing much scoring, I don't think. While this may be a throwaway season, I think Walsh is going to get into deep doo doo with Dolan regardless if every game is lost by 50 points and the Garden is completely empty every night (as opposed to half full). So they were brought back A) to keep the Knicks vaguely interesting to those who aren't looking too deeply at them, just while we get through this year, and B) to try and entice them into signing next year for much less if a D-Wade or LeBron or whoever signs up and they have a chance to really do something. Remember how quickly the Celtics went from being a laughingstock to a team everyone was willing to take a pay cut to play with, by just adding one guy?
> I'm afraid > that they're actually liked by the people that matter; namely, not you > or I. They got no offers on the FA market because their financial > demands were outrageous.
Yeah, but there weren't even any reports of them being *offered* non- outrageous money.
> Also, I don't think it's completely nonsensical to trade them should a > reasonable offer for them be made. If another team is willing to give > up a player or two that Walsh and D'Antoni forsee could be a part of > the mix for the next few years, why not begin that process right now > instead of wasting time with the foregone conclusions named Nate and > Dave (if in fact they are that)?
The problem is that the oft-touted cap room -- the whole plan here -- is shrinking. Because of the economy and other concerns, the league has already hinted that the salary cap could be scaled back to $50-55M. If that happens, and they can't get rid of Curry or Jeffries for expirings, the Knicks have already committed $27M to next season ($17M for Curry and Jeffries, $10M spread between the four draftees [Gallinari, Hill, Douglas, and Chandler]). So that realistically leaves $27M in cap space. If we cut into that further by trading Lee and Robinson's expiring $11M between them for something more long term, might as well put all the LeBron signs away and forget about it -- LeBron's not coming to play here at a discount, that's for sure, and neither are any of the other elite free agents.
I personally don't hate what you propose, since I think the chances of getting one of the two REALLY elite free agents (LeBron or Wade) are poor, and the consolation of getting the next tier down (Bosh or Stoudemire) isn't much, since while both of those guys are really good players, neither has ever been able to carry a team singlehandedly (unlike LeBron and Wade). But given all the hype of the 2010 plan and fans' expectations and the rest of it, I think the Knicks have no choice but to put themselves in the running for the top agents. When that fails, then perhaps people will be amenable to stop swinging for the fences and just being happy with a few base hits (like trading Nate and Lee for a few moderately priced, worthwhile role players).
|
