This Past Season. It's been a good one.

[Crazy⑧s]

All i know is that you are an idiot if you think we can win it all with Z-Bo and Crawford. I would argue we probably still would be struggling to make the playoffs. You can have one of them, if their supporting player is really strong defensively (a defensive minded center, or PG) or your team has strong team defense. but neither is a great #1 option. Z-Bo is an decent #1. Crawford is always bottom of the league in efficiency. I don't wanna hear that he can create....So many guards in this league can create...he is more unsucessful at it than others. Don Nelson doesn't even want him. That debate is over.

One of the more noticeable trends in the NBA is teams with garbage number 1 options being garbage teams.

On the original topic: We need a legit starter. We don't have one right now.

That's why I'm plugging for a Bosh/Lee harrington trade. The Celtics had Paul Pierce throughout some really tough times. Things unfolded as best as possible and they won a title. We need something similar and given the state of Harrington's & Lee's inflated numbers it seems like a good choice for the future.

Or we could just get Z Bo Marbury Crawford & James back as some twisted pricks seem to think is a great idea.

 

[quiggle]

with a healthy Mobley the Knicks would have made the playoffs.

 

[Crazy⑧s]

with a healthy Mobley the Knicks would have made the playoffs.

He would have been handy no doubt. Don't know if he would have been that much of a difference maker. Another assumption. Still, it's a crying shame.

 

[Crazy⑧s]

So let me get this straight... you came into the season "expecting" the Knicks to NOT have a winning record? LOL!!!! You must be a JETS fan! In other words you expect to lose!!!! No wonder you think it was a good season. Where is your fight? Your unwillingness to stand for this atorscity? Your guile to combat these unacceptable performances? Jesus when is enough enough? Grow a pair please. I know our opinions differ but to exagerate the outcome is ludicrous. By your standards losing is ok if you trade bad contracts. Will that remain next yr. How about the yr after when we are going for 10 straight losing seasons? Will that be ok? When is enough enough? Stop making excuses. Your like a battered and raped girl. Stop making excuses, act like u got a pair and fight. THIS WAS NOT A GOOD SEASON! Sure we made ok moves but in terms of WINNING & LOSING WE FAILED!

Ahhhh.

I see. So if I toot my horn and wave my lolly bag around like a Mountain Gorilla, I have some fight.

I looked up atorscity too & couldn't find it. Is that English?

I'm not making any excuses for anything at all. But I'm not rubbing my nuts over a losing season. What were the boys to do? Mull over a festering heap of contracts & do nothing? No, they made up their mind to clean up a god awful mess & deal with the imminent outcome. I would have loved a winning (or less of a losing) season as much as every other fan on here. But all I'm doing (with my tiny pair of nuts & my raped anus as you so delicately put it) is trying to focus on what was good about ANOTHER losing season.

Please, enlighten us all as to what YOU would have done in the same situation, & still "In terms of winning & losing" been more successful?

For 1 (one) season that is.

Just dying to know for the sake of hindsight.

 

[OGKnickfan]

All i know is that you are an idiot if you think we can win it all with Z-Bo and Crawford. I would argue we probably still would be struggling to make the playoffs. You can have one of them, if their supporting player is really strong defensively (a defensive minded center, or PG) or your team has strong team defense. but neither is a great #1 option. Z-Bo is an decent #1. Crawford is always bottom of the league in efficiency. I don't wanna hear that he can create....So many guards in this league can create...he is more unsucessful at it than others. Don Nelson doesn't even want him. That debate is over.

One of the more noticeable trends in the NBA is teams with garbage number 1 options being garbage teams.

On the original topic: We need a legit starter. We don't have one right now.

Wow: a guy who calls himself clumsy calling others idiots. I think the truth is that you're a f'n idiot, ABCD is one of the smartest posters on this site. What he has been saying, for the longest, along with me, is that, with a new coach and a real center, ideally Brook Lopez, the Knicks could have likely made the playoffs, had they kept Jamal and Zach, with Duhon or Starchild at the point. It's a fact that we were at .500, before these trades were pulled off, and that's without a real center on our roster.

Zach Randolph and Jamal Crawford are some of the best offensive players, at their positions, and that's statistically a fact: top 10. Randolph, for the record, shot 43% during his first 11 NBA games, with the Knicks, and he went on to shoot 49% on the clippers, for the rest of the season; and he is at 47%, total, for this season. Crawford is a streaky shooter, but there have been excellent Knick guards, in our history, like Starks and Sprewell, who were also streak shooters. The difference between them and Jamal is that they lived off of #33.

Bottom line is that these guys can ball. But, just like any other players, outside of guys that can put together 5 or 6 shots in a row, consistently: Wade, Lebron and Kobe, if not given help, they're not going to succeed. All of the teams Jamal and Zach have been signed to were garbage, before they ever got to them. Instead of the Knicks adding the needed pieces: a powerful center, after a decade of not having one, they start from scratch, which is counterproductive.

So why have the Knicks, not these two guys, but the Knicks teams, failed? The Knicks, in particular, have stunk, for so long, because they bought into the hype around Camby, a guy who's a choke artist, lacks clutch and can only block the shots of small, weak players: bigger, or stronger, guys have always had his D for lunch. Since then, they've gone downhill, everyone knows that. And Zach and Jamal were not a part of any of that.

The Knicks will continue to fail, until they get a real big man, who can block shots, play help D, play the pick and roll and finish at the basket, with post moves or shooting, and dumping it off on Jamal, whose job has always been to shoot (nothing else), or any other player, i.e. Harrington, will not change that.

 

[LJ4ptplay]

^ So you honestly believe adding Brook Lopez and a different coach to last year's lineup would win us a championship?

 

[clumsy]

i think we would have been 8th seed with Brooks. I wanted Brooks over Danilo. But you still had to get rid of either Z-Bo or Crawford. Add to that we would be stuck in every sports team nightmare. No money flexibility, and we would be good enough to it in, but we would never win it all. I think a perennial 8th seed with no cap flexibility is an infinitely worse position to be in than an absolute garbage team shedding contracts for a big free agent season.

Oh yah, John Starks was overrated. Oakley and Mason had infinitely more value than them. I know you can't compare positions, but i absolutely hated Starks as a kid. That is in a time when people had higher FG%'s too because people played man more.

Sprewell at least hustled on D nights he wasn't shooting.

A Pairing of Craw/Duhon would work. A pair of Z-BO/D-Lee does not.

 

[OGKnickfan]

^ So you honestly believe adding Brook Lopez and a different coach to last year's lineup would win us a championship?

A lot of you guys just love to take people's comments and omit, add to, or embellish, them, anything to refute a statement that you don't agree with. My post said, at the very beginning, that a lineup consisting of a new coach, not Isiah, and a real center, I actually wanted Gasol, when he was available, but Brook is good enough, would have have made us a playoff team, not a championship team.

Centers are capable of having the biggest impact on a team's success. If you get beat off the dribble, they can intimidate the penetrator, so that you can recover, or simply block their shot. If you play hard D and the guy puts up a brick, they can secure the rebound or bock out a big body, so that someone else can. If you have a tough defender on you, they can set screens, to get you open or to set themselves up for an easy basket. If they can post, they get you high percentage shots. A good big can help you control a game's pace. Teams that do well, always have a good big man. You can't expect Crawford, Randolph, or even Marbury, to do well without a quality guy in the middle. This is my point.

 

[OGKnickfan]

i think we would have been 8th seed with Brooks. I wanted Brooks over Danilo. But you still had to get rid of either Z-Bo or Crawford. Add to that we would be stuck in every sports team nightmare. No money flexibility, and we would be good enough to it in, but we would never win it all. I think a perennial 8th seed with no cap flexibility is an infinitely worse position to be in than an absolute garbage team shedding contracts for a big free agent season.

Oh yah, John Starks was overrated. Oakley and Mason had infinitely more value than them. I know you can't compare positions, but i absolutely hated Starks as a kid. That is in a time when people had higher FG%'s too because people played man more.

Sprewell at least hustled on D nights he wasn't shooting.

A Pairing of Craw/Duhon would work. A pair of Z-BO/D-Lee does not.

There was no need to dump Zach or Jamal. You play Lopez at center and Zach at power forward. And, in regards to cap, our main problem has been with guys getting paid who are just not worth a dime, i.e. Larry Hughes and Q. Zach and Crawford were producing. Just because those are the guys that other people actually want, as opposed to Q, Jerome James, Hughes and Curry, because they're actually decent, doesn't make dumping them a smart decision.

And being an eighth seed is better than not going to the playoffs at all. You get the eighth seed, and you build from there: add pieces, hungry players that might be underrated, as well as proven guys. Look at the Mike Taylor, for example: great pick up by the Clippers. Look at the rockets, they picked up Von Wafer, a guy that played in our summer league, amongst other talented guys that we didn't sign, and he's putting up great numbers.

And John Starks and Spre were good players, they provided scoring and perimeter D, other guys provided what they had to offer. That's the point of my post, you can't expect a guy known for scoring to block easy layups or intimidate penetrators, score a turn around hook in the lane, or pull down key rebounds. And when an easy bucket is not obtainable, or a key offensive rebound is gained by the opposition, you have to be perceptive enough to understand what the problem really is.

 

[LJ4ptplay]

A lot of you guys just love to take people's comments and omit, add to, or embellish, them, anything to refute a statement that you don't agree with. My post said, at the very beginning, that a lineup consisting of a new coach, not Isiah, and a real center, I actually wanted Gasol, when he was available, but Brook is good enough, would have have made us a playoff team, not a championship team.

Centers are capable of having the biggest impact on a team's success. If you get beat off the dribble, they can intimidate the penetrator, so that you can recover, or simply block their shot. If you play hard D and the guy puts up a brick, they can secure the rebound or bock out a big body, so that someone else can. If you have a tough defender on you, they can set screens, to get you open or to set themselves up for an easy basket. If they can post, they get you high percentage shots. A good big can help you control a game's pace. Teams that do well, always have a good big man. You can't expect Crawford, Randolph, or even Marbury, to do well without a quality guy in the middle. This is my point.

I undertstand your point. Do you understand mine? To me, holding onto Crawford and Zach would have only gotton us to the playoffs (maybe). My point is about championships. It's going to take some patience while we rebuild a championship calliber team. I would prefer to have a championship in a couple of years, than having a mediocre team just making the playoffs.

I agree with you about Lopez, and to a certain extent, D'Antoni. I wanted a defensive coach. But, there is no sense in crying about the past and I've learned to accept it and in many ways embrace it. We should get the players that will best fit D'Antoni's style. Crawford and Zach don't do that in my opinion, and obviously in D'Antoni's either.

I understand what Walsh is doing. Dumping salary and bringing in a well respected coach that all players want to play for. This alone will lure many good free-agents in 2010.

Remember, D'Antoni was essentially 1 game away from winning a championship. Had Amare not been suspended for Game 7, they could have possibly won that series. And they would have beaten Cleveland in the finals that year.

I think it's possible for D'Antoni's system to win a championship. With the right players (2 superstars and the right PG) he can do it. And that's what this is all about. Winning a championship. Holding onto Crawford and Zach would have killed that opportunity.

 

[abcd]

All i know is that you are an idiot if you think we can win it all with Z-Bo and Crawford. I would argue we probably still would be struggling to make the playoffs. You can have one of them, if their supporting player is really strong defensively (a defensive minded center, or PG) or your team has strong team defense. but neither is a great #1 option. Z-Bo is an decent #1. Crawford is always bottom of the league in efficiency. I don't wanna hear that he can create....So many guards in this league can create...he is more unsucessful at it than others. Don Nelson doesn't even want him. That debate is over.

One of the more noticeable trends in the NBA is teams with garbage number 1 options being garbage teams.

On the original topic: We need a legit starter. We don't have one right now.

All I know is you're an idiot, because you didn't read any of my posts.

Dumbass, I never said Crawford and Randolph could win it all.

I just said that had the Knicks drafted Brook Lopez, and had they kept Crawford, Randolph, AND MARBURY, the Knicks would have made the playoffs.

That's a fact.

Anyone with half a brain knows that Quentin Richardson and Eddy Curry were the real cancers on the Knicks.

Let me point it out for you, since you're so ignorant.

Last year's team

2007-2008
Starting Lineups:
PG Mardy Collins and sometimes Nate Robinson
SG Jamal Crawford
SF Quentin Richardson
PF Zach Randolph
C Eddy Curry

2008-2009

Starting Lineups:
PG Stephon Marbury
SG Jamal Crawford
SF Wilson Chandler
PF Zach Randolph
C Brook Lopez

The 2008-2009 Lineup has an upgrade at 3 positions.



Wilson Chandler and Brook Lopez both can score and play defense.

Please read before you open your mouth and swallow Mike D'Antoni and Donnie Walsh's testicles.

 

[TunerAddict]

That's a fact.

Actually, that isn't fact.

 

[abcd]

Actually, that isn't fact.

What's not a fact, corey? Did you completely lose your ability to read, after Metro finished crushing you? Let me walk your slow ass through the comment... "I just said that had the Knicks drafted Brook Lopez, and had they kept Crawford, Randolph, AND MARBURY, the Knicks would have made the playoffs.

That's a fact."

The statement is basically explaining what I had previously said, as opposed to the misquote posted by CUMsy.

I guess you enjoy the taste of another man too much to resist running your mouth. I'll try to be more understanding.

 

[TunerAddict]

What's not a fact, corey? Did you completely lose your ability to read, after Metro finished crushing you? Let me walk your slow ass through the comment... "I just said that had the Knicks drafted Brook Lopez, and had they kept Crawford, Randolph, AND MARBURY, the Knicks would have made the playoffs.

That's a fact."

The statement is basically explaining what I had previously said, as opposed to the misquote posted by CUMsy.

I guess you enjoy the taste of another man too much to resist running your mouth. I'll try to be more understanding.

fact

  <script type="text/javascript"> var interfaceflash = new LEXICOFlashObject ( "http://cache.lexico.com/d/g/speaker.swf", "speaker", "17", "15", "

", "6"); interfaceflash.addParam("loop", "false"); interfaceflash.addParam("quality", "high"); interfaceflash.addParam("menu", "false"); interfaceflash.addParam("salign", "t"); interfaceflash.addParam("FlashVars", "soundUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fcache.lexico.com%2Fdictionary%2Faudio%2Fluna%2FF00%2FF0007100.mp3&clkLog=http%3A%2F%2Fwzqa01oak%2Fi%2Fb.html%3Ft%3Da%26d%3Dd%26s%3Ddi%26c%3Da%26ti%3D1%26ai%3D51359%26l%3Ddir%26o%3D0%26sv%3D00000000%26ip%3D%26u%3Daudio"); interfaceflash.write(); </script><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://cache.lexico.com/d/g/speaker.swf" id="speaker" quality="high" loop="false" menu="false" salign="t" flashvars="soundUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fcache.lexico.com%2Fdictionary%2Faudio%2Fluna%2FF00%2FF0007100.mp3&clkLog=http%3A%2F%2Fwzqa01oak%2Fi%2Fb.html%3Ft%3Da%26d%3Dd%26s%3Ddi%26c%3Da%26ti%3D1%26ai%3D51359%26l%3Ddir%26o%3D0%26sv%3D00000000%26ip%3D%26u%3Daudio" align="texttop" width="17" height="15"><noscript> </noscript>  /f?kt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [fakt] Show IPA ?noun <table class="luna-Ent"> <tbody><tr> <td class="dnindex" width="35">1.</td> <td>something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact. </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"> <tbody><tr> <td class="dnindex" width="35">2.</td> <td>something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact. </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"> <tbody><tr> <td class="dnindex" width="35">3.</td> <td>a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth. </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"> <tbody><tr> <td class="dnindex" width="35">4.</td> <td>something said to be true or supposed to have happened: The facts given by the witness are highly questionable. </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dnindex" width="35">5.</td> <td>Law. Often, facts. an actual or alleged event or circumstance, as distinguished from its legal effect or consequence. Compare question of fact, question of law.</td></tr></tbody></table>

Opinions are not facts. Just because you got your GED on the 3rd try doesn't mean you're intelligent...:teeth:

 

[LJ4ptplay]

Opinions are not facts. Just because you got your GED on the 3rd try doesn't mean you're intelligent...:teeth:

I don't think he has a GED yet. He posts like a 13 year old.

 

[Crazy⑧s]

Opinions are not facts. Just because you got your GED on the 3rd try doesn't mean you're intelligent...:teeth:

They're not opinions, they're all wayward assumptions. Poor little Gaybcd really is in dire need of being re-educated. He's still just a little bit grumpy because he misses Stephony.

His separation anxiety has turned him into a raging homosexual man milker.

Always talking about testicles and jizz and pregnant men. "The taste of another man" as he quoted (probably eying a poster of Marbury's sweaty body at the time) so lustfully.

Hey, Gaybcd, don't worry sweety they'll find a cure for aids.

As well as really ****ing stupid.

 

[Crazy⑧s]

A lot of you guys just love to take people's comments and omit, add to, or embellish, them, anything to refute a statement that you don't agree with. My post said, at the very beginning, that a lineup consisting of a new coach, not Isiah, and a real center, I actually wanted Gasol, when he was available, but Brook is good enough, would have have made us a playoff team, not a championship team.

Centers are capable of having the biggest impact on a team's success. If you get beat off the dribble, they can intimidate the penetrator, so that you can recover, or simply block their shot. If you play hard D and the guy puts up a brick, they can secure the rebound or bock out a big body, so that someone else can. If you have a tough defender on you, they can set screens, to get you open or to set themselves up for an easy basket. If they can post, they get you high percentage shots. A good big can help you control a game's pace. Teams that do well, always have a good big man. You can't expect Crawford, Randolph, or even Marbury, to do well without a quality guy in the middle. This is my point.

I'll definitely agree with that.

Especially if you're in a predicament similar to our own.

You do however definitely need a big man who can lock down the paint if you have some defensive muppets like Lee & Duhon on your team.

A good passing big man Like Yao or Gasol is even handier on offense.

Now that's a fact.

 

[OGKnickfan]

I'll definitely agree with that. But, it's a bit of an over generalization. Luc Longley & Rodman weren't exactly defensive stalwarts. Not saying Rodman was a crap defender, he was awesome, but he was no shot blocker.

I'm just saying, that if the Cavs were to win this years finals (which is highly likely) it would be a case of the calabre of a smaller player. Much the same as it was with the Bulls. It's rare I'll admit that, but it's not impossible. Verajoau (spelling) & Ilgauskus are decent bigs and play their positions well, but a point man (Mo) and a sg/sf/pf in Lebron can definitely get it done.

It's not as necessary as you make it seem to have a big man unless you're in a predicament similar to our own. We just have a crap/small team. Sad but true.

You do however definitely need a big man who can lock down the paint if you have some defensive muppets like Lee & Duhon on your team.

Now that's a fact.

You haven't really proven your point: Ilgauskas is the most consistent playoff player on the cavs, Mo Williams is unproven and Lebron breaks down, often, in playoff games: sometimes he shows up, sometimes he vanishes. Actually, his career playoff numbers are spotty. The cavs, in my opinion, are unlikely to win the title, just because of that.

As for Kobe, the fact that his team was trash, until the acquisiton of Gasol, one of the best bigs in this league, speaks for itself. Wade lost his big man: Shaq, and, though he's good enough to get them into the post-season, they're probably going to get bumped in the first round. Michael Jordan is the greatest, ever... period. The guy could have played with bums, and he did: Pippen is one of the most overrated players ever, and would have still crushed the rest of the NBA. What made him great was his ability to string together numerous difficult shots, in bunches, in the span of a few minutes, until the other team would just fall apart.

The general rule is that you can't win without a competent big man. Every team that's competitive has one. Dumping some of the best offensive talent, without providing them with a stable middle to play around, offends my conscience, as a former player and former coach.

 

[OGKnickfan]

Actually, that isn't fact.

A lot of you guys just love to take people's comments and omit, add to, or embellish, them, anything to refute a statement that you don't agree with.

Tuner, you, along with crazyh8, have just proven what I previously said. From ABCD's post, it's obvious that he's saying that IT is a FACT that HE did not say the Knicks would win a championship with Lopez, Crawford and Randolph, that what he said was they'd make the playoffs with them.

The fact he speaks of pertains to what he actually wrote out as his opinion, as opposed to the lie that clumsy represented as his opinion. He's saying that it is a fact that he said something else. It's obvious that ABCD was not calling his personal opinion fact. Since you don't seem capable of understanding this, I think you're the one in need of a GED, or maybe you're just confused, after the whipping that Metro handed you.

As an educator, I'm seriously beginning to question the academic credentials you've claimed on this site.

 

[LJ4ptplay]

Which is more important?

Being a mediocre team for many years and just making the playoffs?

or

Winning a championship in 2 years?