Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Roster must stay put..Trading is not the answer

  1. #1
    Superstar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    653
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Roster must stay put..Trading is not the answer

    It just dawned on me. Why have we been struggling these past 3-4 years? Because of our player turnover. Thats is the biggest reason. Honestly it takes team a lot more than 20-30 games to get good. The Bulls took a while, Warriors took a while. Trading only brings this team back to training camp mode. Make the old guys inactive and trade them for picks and young guys.

    I am happy this team is dominating with young talent, Steph is Ok to have, he can bring some entertainment during losing times.

    Im just mad when we have all these vets and we still lose. I was very upset with LB's impatient last night with the young guys. I mean let them get their lumps. I am glad Isiah is not giving up the kids for Artest.

    No KG, No Artest, No Shaq. I want long term success with the kids. The kids have to learn to be responsible. LB can not play the vets to save the young guys. Then the young guys wont feel the true burden of losing.

    As long as Brown stays true to the young guys I can deal with the losing. Soon as he puts the vets, I expect a win. Keep true the young guys.

  2. #2
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,590
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    somewhat contradicting yourself...the roster must not stay put then if you think the veterans should be shipped. i agree we should keep our young core but i also think if the right deal comes along pull the trigger.

    we need to make moves to get better. simple as that. not saying it needs to involve the young guys BUT we need to make moves. The Warriors took a while? they werent good until they TRADED for Baron Davis. The Bulls arent even that good.

    i understand what your saying but i think trades are what will help us turn this team around (along with the development of the young guys YES)..but we do need to make moves.

  3. #3
    Superstar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    653
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by NYKnicks15
    somewhat contradicting yourself...the roster must not stay put then if you think the veterans should be shipped. i agree we should keep our young core but i also think if the right deal comes along pull the trigger.

    we need to make moves to get better. simple as that. not saying it needs to involve the young guys BUT we need to make moves. The Warriors took a while? they werent good until they TRADED for Baron Davis. The Bulls arent even that good.

    i understand what your saying but i think trades are what will help us turn this team around (along with the development of the young guys YES)..but we do need to make moves.
    I have to agree...it may sound contradicting...so let me explain. For the vets such as AD, Rose, Penny, Taylor should not play. They should be inactive. I dont think getting KG (29) or Artest (26) is the answer, in terms of saving thi season.

    Nate, Frye, Lee, Curry, Crawford, Butler, Ariza, Woods should be playing considerable minutes regardless of how bad they play. If those guys are playing all the time and the old guys just warm the bench, fans wont mind the losing as much.
    So if we trade the old guys its just ading to our young core and not trying to releard to play with each other again.

    Hope that clears things up

    Steph is great but he is not a team to build around of his is a great 2nd option. He is John Starks without a Ewing leading this team. If KG was here Steph would emerge as a constant all star. So I wouldnt mind if he goes so the Knicks can have a new image. Young image, I hope Isiah sends him to a contender.

  4. #4
    Superstar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    653
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Also with the Baron davis thing. The Warriors were up and coming. They were at the brink of being good because they played for a while they had a foundation. Baron just took them over the hump. The knicks hae to foundation amd they need to build one no matter how painful it is. The old guys are just impeding their young guys process. LB is a great teacher to set example for the young kids but he has to be patient with them.

  5. #5
    Member hoop115's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    179
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    We all want long term success but lets be honest, of our three rookies, only Frye shows great promise. I'd be willing to give up Lee, Nate, Crawford, Q or even Marbury to get an MVP type player. None of the guys will ever be considered on the same level as Artest or Garnett.

  6. #6
    Superstar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    653
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by hoop115
    We all want long term success but lets be honest, of our three rookies, only Frye shows great promise. I'd be willing to give up Lee, Nate, Crawford, Q or even Marbury to get an MVP type player. None of the guys will ever be considered on the same level as Artest or Garnett.
    You never know, Lee and Nate are rookies. They can can get better. They are talented enough they just need to be coached. Frye is smart but his money is that jump shot. Next year he better have a post game cause the scouts will figure him out.

    KG is 29. If he is here Steph must stay as well so maybe we can go for a quick run. But KG is 29 in 3 years he's 32. Might be still good but the wear and tear will set in. If he gets a big injury its hard to recover at that age (poor allan houston).

    Im just saying for the Knicks to stick to their guns for a while. Each year is a change but it takes about 2 to 3 years for a team to get really good. The constant change will only set this team back. If we can get LBJ or Carmelo....I am more inclined b/c they're young. If we had a foundation say like the Heat had before Shaq, then you go for the big move.

  7. #7
    Veteran Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Bronx
    Posts
    1,472
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Good point about hanging onto the rookies BUT the Knicks don't play in Golden State. Part of playing for New York, and having a team in NYC, means that anything below the post season and high-caliber players, is considered FAILURE! The NBA, MLB, and even NFL know this well. New York sports merchandise and other income (games, networks) inject so much $ into their respected leagues. Do you think George Steinberner cares about developing youg talent? Hell No! I hate that guy, but he understands what it means to present a product to the most demanding fans and media in the world. I mean, Jesus, it only took the horrible Mets 2 seasons before becoming a prime team! Why can't we?

    As New Yorkers, and as noble Knick fans, we need to be rewarded for our investmet (support) beacause these players and teams all work for us. We fans can ruin careers and send athletes into glory by our simple consensus. So lets stop making excuses for the team, because we have waited patiently for half a decade now.

    Think about it...if we boycotted the team. Do you think Checkets and Thomas would do nothing? Rose, Taylor, James, and a few young guys would be gone by next morning's paper for an Artest, KG, or even a Pierce.

  8. #8
    Superstar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    653
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by Starks
    Good point about hanging onto the rookies BUT the Knicks don't play in Golden State. Part of playing for New York, and having a team in NYC, means that anything below the post season and high-caliber players, is considered FAILURE! The NBA, MLB, and even NFL know this well. New York sports merchandise and other income (games, networks) inject so much $ into their respected leagues. Do you think George Steinberner cares about developing youg talent? Hell No! I hate that guy, but he understands what it means to present a product to the most demanding fans and media in the world. I mean, Jesus, it only took the horrible Mets 2 seasons before becoming a prime team! Why can't we?

    As New Yorkers, and as noble Knick fans, we need to be rewarded for our investmet (support) beacause these players and teams all work for us. We fans can ruin careers and send athletes into glory by our simple consensus. So lets stop making excuses for the team, because we have waited patiently for half a decade now.

    Think about it...if we boycotted the team. Do you think Checkets and Thomas would do nothing? Rose, Taylor, James, and a few young guys would be gone by next morning's paper for an Artest, KG, or even a Pierce.
    I think thats a myth. Yes its NY it maybe upsetting not getting into the playoffs but I think Knick fans (smartest fans in the world) know young teams dont have immediate success and post season may not played in msg for a 2-3 years..so long as its a young athletic excitin promising team.
    And to run with ur point about being a NY team. If we some how keep the young guys rid ourselves of the old guys and show promise free agents would be inclined to come here because its NY. Knick fans are smart. We are impatient with losing cuz Steph (one of the better players in the league) increases our expectation. Where as if all the old guys were gone Knicks fans would jus patiently watch this team grow.

  9. #9
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    21
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Blumatic, I agree w/ you wholeheartedly. I believe in the long term development of our young players; which is something that was never explored in Knick History (or to my young recollection)...

    Start the young jacks ! Jason Kidd had a few seasons with a young unit, and they went to the finals twice !!!

    Start the young jacks ! More fun to watch, and in the long term would be cheaper>.....................

  10. #10
    Member Knicks-player's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    France
    Posts
    61
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    that's right knicks have to build up!!!

  11. #11
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,665
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    [quote="Blumatic"][quote="Starks"]
    Steph (one of the better players in the league) increases our expectation.

    one of the better players in the league... what league are u looking at???

    maybe in the 'starbury' league, but certainly not in the nba...

    good player... yes he is... does he make the players around him better??.. definitely not...

    to quote rosen.. ''the only way marbury ever improved a team is to leave it''

    no truer word have ever been spoken...

  12. #12
    Superstar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    653
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    [quote="paris401"][quote="Blumatic"]
    Originally Posted by Starks
    Steph (one of the better players in the league) increases our expectation.

    one of the better players in the league... what league are u looking at???

    maybe in the 'starbury' league, but certainly not in the nba...

    good player... yes he is... does he make the players around him better??.. definitely not...

    to quote rosen.. ''the only way marbury ever improved a team is to leave it''

    no truer word have ever been spoken...
    Lets define better...Talent wise, the boy can ball, he can play, he cant win. thats all.

Similar Threads

  1. Roster space problems
    By thwax in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: Jun 28, 2006, 18:23
  2. 5 bodies, 2 roster spots...
    By portega1968 in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Oct 19, 2005, 10:54
  3. Replies: 13
    Last Post: Jul 23, 2005, 13:09
  4. Roster Moves
    By NYKnicks15 in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: Feb 13, 2005, 11:29
  5. PLAYOFF ROSTER
    By kevin in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Apr 02, 2004, 15:58

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •