ronoranina
Fundamentally Sound
You are seriously retarded..
Nobody is spinning. Just because a team has yet to win w three max players, that doesn't mean it can't happen.
You asked me "What team has won w/out the contribution of their front court?".. I answered your question w the obvious answer. Amare is in our front court, so we would obviously get an awful good contribution from there in addition to however our center performs. But then you have to take to the ultra dumb level and try to explain to me that C is a part of the front court.. No shet, genius. W Amare (along w Melo and Paul) in you front court all you need is a guy at the 5 who can be a presence, clog the middle and finish the odd put-back or lay-in/ dunk. You don't get this.. I've said it too many times and you just act like the words are not there in front of you. It's because you can't see it. You have no vision because your basketball acumen is shet..
Next, define for me what you're idea of a "viable" center is. Does Dalembert fit the bill? What about Aaron Gray? What if Jerome Jordan could fill this role for us in a yr? Would these C's satisfy you're insatiable need for bigs. Is Turiaf viable? What if Jorts could step in and give us 20 good minutes from the 5?? Would a combination of any of these guys be enough to shut you up?
Do you have any idea what the new CBA will look like?? Because I don't. Neither does anyone else. #3 = total nonsense
Thank you Red for clearing that up for me.
And YOU are the king of spin my dude.. How can can one simultaneously say they'd rather get a center, draft picks and Raymond Felton of all people, but then say at the same time "I'm not saying I don't want him" and "If you can get him you do it".
You DON'T want Paul. You want your flexibility and your "viable" big. I wonder what that comes from? Did the years under Isiah and Layden scar you that much?? Did all of the years of losing w a great bigman on the team skew your sense of reality?? And those Knicks teams were beaten by a Bulls team w/out a great center, not even really good one. Go back and look at the production the Bulls got from the center position. They bucked the basketball trend of needing the great, or even really good big, six times because their core was so potent. We can have that kind of core, or something close to it in Amare, Melo and Paul. Is your vision getting clearer? Shet, if Money hadn't retired the Knicks wouldn't have even gotten to the finals that one yr.
Maybe at one point in your life you had a firm grip on basketball logic..
The NBA is about players. You get the best players FIRST, then you worry about all of that other little shet you're bitching and moaning about incessantly.
Here's another pure basketball point:
If you can get the great core a, ie a combo of Amare, Melo and Paul, to put yourself in a position for legit contention year in and yr out for a (multiple yrs, like 4-6) period of years, damn financial flexibilty. YOU HAVE IT ALL ASS BACKWARDS..
If you can get Paul to go w Amare and Melo. You get the discounts on talented role-players. You get the dominant seasons and deep playoff runs w a serious chance at getting to the mountain top multiple times. You sacrifice your precious flexibility for that. Then when the window of contention closes, you blow up the team. But to get the window open, you do what you have to. This is what you're missing.
I wonder what you'll say if/when we get Paul and during our rather long championship window of contention we should win a title or two or three? I wonder how that will F w your mind if we did it w three shetty centers platooning? Will you be able to admit how wrong you were?
Paul is the missing piece to the Knicks puzzle. He is a dogged leader and one of the 5 best players in the league. Why are you so afraid of having a truly great team?? :gony:
Putting together those three guys is the start of that.
Thank you Ron, I read your post.
1. As I said, name a team who won WITH 3 max contract players and...
you couldn't. "MAX TYPE" players fits YOUR argument. Max as in spending money fits mine. But nice try.
Nobody is spinning. Just because a team has yet to win w three max players, that doesn't mean it can't happen.
2. Front court means PF & C Ron. Comprehend?
You asked me "What team has won w/out the contribution of their front court?".. I answered your question w the obvious answer. Amare is in our front court, so we would obviously get an awful good contribution from there in addition to however our center performs. But then you have to take to the ultra dumb level and try to explain to me that C is a part of the front court.. No shet, genius. W Amare (along w Melo and Paul) in you front court all you need is a guy at the 5 who can be a presence, clog the middle and finish the odd put-back or lay-in/ dunk. You don't get this.. I've said it too many times and you just act like the words are not there in front of you. It's because you can't see it. You have no vision because your basketball acumen is shet..
Next, define for me what you're idea of a "viable" center is. Does Dalembert fit the bill? What about Aaron Gray? What if Jerome Jordan could fill this role for us in a yr? Would these C's satisfy you're insatiable need for bigs. Is Turiaf viable? What if Jorts could step in and give us 20 good minutes from the 5?? Would a combination of any of these guys be enough to shut you up?
3. It does matter how we acquire the talent Ron, because there are cap ramifications and bird rights (historically) to consider. smh.
Do you have any idea what the new CBA will look like?? Because I don't. Neither does anyone else. #3 = total nonsense
4. Amare is on a max contract Ron, get a clue.
Thank you Red for clearing that up for me.
And YOU are the king of spin my dude.. How can can one simultaneously say they'd rather get a center, draft picks and Raymond Felton of all people, but then say at the same time "I'm not saying I don't want him" and "If you can get him you do it".
You DON'T want Paul. You want your flexibility and your "viable" big. I wonder what that comes from? Did the years under Isiah and Layden scar you that much?? Did all of the years of losing w a great bigman on the team skew your sense of reality?? And those Knicks teams were beaten by a Bulls team w/out a great center, not even really good one. Go back and look at the production the Bulls got from the center position. They bucked the basketball trend of needing the great, or even really good big, six times because their core was so potent. We can have that kind of core, or something close to it in Amare, Melo and Paul. Is your vision getting clearer? Shet, if Money hadn't retired the Knicks wouldn't have even gotten to the finals that one yr.
Maybe at one point in your life you had a firm grip on basketball logic..
The NBA is about players. You get the best players FIRST, then you worry about all of that other little shet you're bitching and moaning about incessantly.
Here's another pure basketball point:
If you can get the great core a, ie a combo of Amare, Melo and Paul, to put yourself in a position for legit contention year in and yr out for a (multiple yrs, like 4-6) period of years, damn financial flexibilty. YOU HAVE IT ALL ASS BACKWARDS..
If you can get Paul to go w Amare and Melo. You get the discounts on talented role-players. You get the dominant seasons and deep playoff runs w a serious chance at getting to the mountain top multiple times. You sacrifice your precious flexibility for that. Then when the window of contention closes, you blow up the team. But to get the window open, you do what you have to. This is what you're missing.
I wonder what you'll say if/when we get Paul and during our rather long championship window of contention we should win a title or two or three? I wonder how that will F w your mind if we did it w three shetty centers platooning? Will you be able to admit how wrong you were?
Paul is the missing piece to the Knicks puzzle. He is a dogged leader and one of the 5 best players in the league. Why are you so afraid of having a truly great team?? :gony:
Putting together those three guys is the start of that.
Last edited: