Knicks · Other games thread.......Place to chat about games on TV not Knicks. (page 223)
TeamBall wrote:tkf wrote:this team was thrown together, and if woodson had any input on it, they should never ask him again.... Dk's point was that this team was put together with little thought, I believe that 100% and if they did have to think about putting this senior citizen roster together, then we are in deep trouble for years to come...dk7th wrote:at this point it seems like chandler has missed as many games as gallinari. i could be wrong. your "building around" statement is questionable. the team is an extension of the coach's approach and will. they found players they wanted that fit the style of the coach. that's smart. gallinari should be better than he is and it's that 3-point shot that is holding him back. to get to the next level he has to achieve 40% from three. then he an all-star. meanwhile his long-range shooting could prove fatal in the playoffs. but then he isn't alone. lawson and iguodala need to tighten up their games too. good news is they are all still young.and the knicks? they didn't take the denver route of coaching style dictating roster. they acquired talent willy-nilly with no thought to the coach's style of play and no thought to find talent that fits or core players who are even capable of meshing. they behaved like monkeys flinging their poopy at a blank canvas. someone came along and called it "art" and many people take it as such.
This is what DK said. The bold is what I disagreed with. Hes clearly saying the Knicks put this roster together with no regard for what Woodson wanted or needed to be successful (assuming hes talking about Woodson. He never answered my question). Im asking him how he believes that when Woodson worked with Grunwald to put this roster together.
and i did respond. i said whenever you're ready to compare apples to apples.
what that means is that walsh was clearing roster space for a shot at lebron james. when that failed walsh decided that he was going to build a roster based on d'antoni's needs, starting with stoudemire as a pick and roll finisher who can hit a midrange jumper when necessary-- yes he was a flawed backup plan, emphasis on "plan," but then walsh was going to upgrade at point guard ASAP. felton was an interim stopgap until something better became available. that's why that contract was so good for the knicks, two years and a few million dollars.
this was a discernible plan, and was worth investing two full years in allowing to come to fruition, especially after two years of sacrifice via roster flush. yes, d'antoni was paid for those two years, but he was paid to try to put a competitive team out there knowing full well it was an impossible task to eke out more than 25-30 wins for those two years while walsh kept clearing cap space.
as soon as dolan stepped in all plans were scrapped. gallinari, chandler, mozgov, felton all traded. walsh "retired." stoudemire marginalized. fields marginalized.
now fast forward. you have 2 huge contracts locked up in two players who cannot thrive or mesh. that's willy-nilly part 1 AND INFORMS EVERY OTHER DECISION. and that's dolan. dolan closed a deal that walsh was unwilling to close so it's dolan. dolan's ugly interference. DUI
you amnesty an aging point guard to acquire an aging center with no offensive skills and expect the 3 biggest contract players to mesh. basically it's pick your poison. you need a defender badly but sacrifice a point guard to do it. that's willy-nilly part 2, with a soupcon of lateral move.
you then refuse to keep a promising young point guard who clearly has orchestrating skills-- dolan ugly interference again DUI-- and re-acquire the same interim-stopgap point guard walsh himself was ready to upgrade as soon as a better guard became available. this interim stopgap point guard has no discernible orchestrating skills and will never succeed in getting the three-headed 55 million dollar monster to cohere not in a million years. that's willy-nilly part3 and brings us to the summer of 2012.
now you are saying that grunwald sat down with his coach in late july 2012 and asks "what do you need? i have 15 million dollars to spend." 
dk7th wrote:and i did respond. i said whenever you're ready to compare apples to apples.what that means is that walsh was clearing roster space for a shot at lebron james. when that failed walsh decided that he was going to build a roster based on d'antoni's needs, starting with stoudemire as a pick and roll finisher who can hit a midrange jumper when necessary-- yes he was a flawed backup plan, emphasis on "plan," but then walsh was going to upgrade at point guard ASAP. felton was an interim stopgap until something better became available. that's why that contract was so good for the knicks, two years and a few million dollars.
this was a discernible plan, and was worth investing two full years in allowing to come to fruition, especially after two years of sacrifice via roster flush. yes, d'antoni was paid for those two years, but he was paid to try to put a competitive team out there knowing full well it was an impossible task to eke out more than 25-30 wins for those two years while walsh kept clearing cap space.
as soon as dolan stepped in all plans were scrapped. gallinari, chandler, mozgov, felton all traded. walsh "retired." stoudemire marginalized. fields marginalized.
now fast forward. you have 2 huge contracts locked up in two players who cannot thrive or mesh. that's willy-nilly part 1 AND INFORMS EVERY OTHER DECISION. and that's dolan. dolan closed a deal that walsh was unwilling to close so it's dolan. dolan's ugly interference. DUI
you amnesty an aging point guard to acquire an aging center with no offensive skills and expect the 3 biggest contract players to mesh. basically it's pick your poison. you need a defender badly but sacrifice a point guard to do it. that's willy-nilly part 2, with a soupcon of lateral move.
you then refuse to keep a promising young point guard who clearly has orchestrating skills-- dolan ugly interference again DUI-- and re-acquire the same interim-stopgap point guard walsh himself was ready to upgrade as soon as a better guard became available. this interim stopgap point guard has no discernible orchestrating skills and will never succeed in getting the three-headed 55 million dollar monster to cohere not in a million years. that's willy-nilly part3 and brings us to the summer of 2012.
now you are saying that grunwald sat down with his coach in late july 2012 and asks "what do you need? i have 15 million dollars to spend."
I apologize. You did respond
However, your first point doesnt support your argument very well because D'antoni didnt want Amare. Amare threw D'antoni under the bus after he left Phoenix and because of that they had to have a meeting to "clear the air" after he was signed. Also, didnt it recently come out that he didnt even want Amare but wanted to keep Lee?
Im not gonna get into the Melo trade.
Now, I obviously dont know what conversation went on with Woodson and Grunwald but I do this its fairly obvious that this is a roster he wanted. The fact that he was able to reach out to Sheed and bring him out of retirement for us doesnt exactly seem like Grunwald was making all the decisions and Woodson had to just watch. I agree, the Knicks didnt work with D'antoni to get him the team he needed but they did with Woodson. Why do you not believe that?
TeamBall wrote:dk7th wrote:and i did respond. i said whenever you're ready to compare apples to apples.what that means is that walsh was clearing roster space for a shot at lebron james. when that failed walsh decided that he was going to build a roster based on d'antoni's needs, starting with stoudemire as a pick and roll finisher who can hit a midrange jumper when necessary-- yes he was a flawed backup plan, emphasis on "plan," but then walsh was going to upgrade at point guard ASAP. felton was an interim stopgap until something better became available. that's why that contract was so good for the knicks, two years and a few million dollars.
this was a discernible plan, and was worth investing two full years in allowing to come to fruition, especially after two years of sacrifice via roster flush. yes, d'antoni was paid for those two years, but he was paid to try to put a competitive team out there knowing full well it was an impossible task to eke out more than 25-30 wins for those two years while walsh kept clearing cap space.
as soon as dolan stepped in all plans were scrapped. gallinari, chandler, mozgov, felton all traded. walsh "retired." stoudemire marginalized. fields marginalized.
now fast forward. you have 2 huge contracts locked up in two players who cannot thrive or mesh. that's willy-nilly part 1 AND INFORMS EVERY OTHER DECISION. and that's dolan. dolan closed a deal that walsh was unwilling to close so it's dolan. dolan's ugly interference. DUI
you amnesty an aging point guard to acquire an aging center with no offensive skills and expect the 3 biggest contract players to mesh. basically it's pick your poison. you need a defender badly but sacrifice a point guard to do it. that's willy-nilly part 2, with a soupcon of lateral move.
you then refuse to keep a promising young point guard who clearly has orchestrating skills-- dolan ugly interference again DUI-- and re-acquire the same interim-stopgap point guard walsh himself was ready to upgrade as soon as a better guard became available. this interim stopgap point guard has no discernible orchestrating skills and will never succeed in getting the three-headed 55 million dollar monster to cohere not in a million years. that's willy-nilly part3 and brings us to the summer of 2012.
now you are saying that grunwald sat down with his coach in late july 2012 and asks "what do you need? i have 15 million dollars to spend."
I apologize. You did respondHowever, your first point doesnt support your argument very well because D'antoni didnt want Amare. Amare threw D'antoni under the bus after he left Phoenix and because of that they had to have a meeting to "clear the air" after he was signed. Also, didnt it recently come out that he didnt even want Amare but wanted to keep Lee?
Im not gonna get into the Melo trade.
1)Now, I obviously dont know what conversation went on with Woodson and Grunwald but I do this its fairly obvious that this is a roster he wanted.
2)The fact that he was able to reach out to Sheed and bring him out of retirement for us doesnt exactly seem like Grunwald was making all the decisions and Woodson had to just watch.
3)I agree, the Knicks didnt work with D'antoni to get him the team he needed but they did with Woodson. 4)Why do you not believe that?
identify who "the knicks" are in sentence (3) please. names like walsh, grunwald, dolan will do.
a difference between apples and oranges is that with apples you have an owner who is not able to coerce the gm. this is not the case with oranges.
dk7th wrote:TeamBall wrote:dk7th wrote:and i did respond. i said whenever you're ready to compare apples to apples.what that means is that walsh was clearing roster space for a shot at lebron james. when that failed walsh decided that he was going to build a roster based on d'antoni's needs, starting with stoudemire as a pick and roll finisher who can hit a midrange jumper when necessary-- yes he was a flawed backup plan, emphasis on "plan," but then walsh was going to upgrade at point guard ASAP. felton was an interim stopgap until something better became available. that's why that contract was so good for the knicks, two years and a few million dollars.
this was a discernible plan, and was worth investing two full years in allowing to come to fruition, especially after two years of sacrifice via roster flush. yes, d'antoni was paid for those two years, but he was paid to try to put a competitive team out there knowing full well it was an impossible task to eke out more than 25-30 wins for those two years while walsh kept clearing cap space.
as soon as dolan stepped in all plans were scrapped. gallinari, chandler, mozgov, felton all traded. walsh "retired." stoudemire marginalized. fields marginalized.
now fast forward. you have 2 huge contracts locked up in two players who cannot thrive or mesh. that's willy-nilly part 1 AND INFORMS EVERY OTHER DECISION. and that's dolan. dolan closed a deal that walsh was unwilling to close so it's dolan. dolan's ugly interference. DUI
you amnesty an aging point guard to acquire an aging center with no offensive skills and expect the 3 biggest contract players to mesh. basically it's pick your poison. you need a defender badly but sacrifice a point guard to do it. that's willy-nilly part 2, with a soupcon of lateral move.
you then refuse to keep a promising young point guard who clearly has orchestrating skills-- dolan ugly interference again DUI-- and re-acquire the same interim-stopgap point guard walsh himself was ready to upgrade as soon as a better guard became available. this interim stopgap point guard has no discernible orchestrating skills and will never succeed in getting the three-headed 55 million dollar monster to cohere not in a million years. that's willy-nilly part3 and brings us to the summer of 2012.
now you are saying that grunwald sat down with his coach in late july 2012 and asks "what do you need? i have 15 million dollars to spend."
I apologize. You did respondHowever, your first point doesnt support your argument very well because D'antoni didnt want Amare. Amare threw D'antoni under the bus after he left Phoenix and because of that they had to have a meeting to "clear the air" after he was signed. Also, didnt it recently come out that he didnt even want Amare but wanted to keep Lee?
Im not gonna get into the Melo trade.
1)Now, I obviously dont know what conversation went on with Woodson and Grunwald but I do this its fairly obvious that this is a roster he wanted.
2)The fact that he was able to reach out to Sheed and bring him out of retirement for us doesnt exactly seem like Grunwald was making all the decisions and Woodson had to just watch.
3)I agree, the Knicks didnt work with D'antoni to get him the team he needed but they did with Woodson. 4)Why do you not believe that?identify who "the knicks" are in sentence (3) please. names like walsh, grunwald, dolan will do.
a difference between apples and oranges is that with apples you have an owner who is not able to coerce the gm. this is not the case with oranges.
In my opinion, Grunwald did a better job of working with Woodon than Walsh did of working with D'antoni. Honestly man I dont think Isiah could have even talked Dolan out of trading all those guys for Melo.
EDIT: So Walsh (and of course Dolan because of the Melo trade only) would be "the Knicks" in 3
ffs.
Anji wrote:If the Lakers lose to the Mavs tonight, they have about a 25% chance of making the play
So far Lakers are playing like they want it. Kobe is playing like he should by making his teammates better in addition to getting his own shots. When Kobe plays like that the Lakers have a very good record. When he slips back into selfish mode they suffer.
Kobe has to feed D12 to make him happy and then he plays hard. It's a leadership thing that Kobe doesn't always adhere to, but it's how they got back into the playoff race.
nixluva wrote:Anji wrote:If the Lakers lose to the Mavs tonight, they have about a 25% chance of making the playSo far Lakers are playing like they want it. Kobe is playing like he should by making his teammates better in addition to getting his own shots. When Kobe plays like that the Lakers have a very good record. When he slips back into selfish mode they suffer.
Kobe has to feed D12 to make him happy and then he plays hard. It's a leadership thing that Kobe doesn't always adhere to, but it's how they got back into the playoff race.
Lakers looked really good in the first half. Nice humble speech from Kobe at the half for shaq. Crowder continues to be very impressive. It's hard to believe Dallas and the lakers could both miss the playoffs. "WE WANT PHIL!"