Knicks · If we dont have a decent record next 10 games.. (page 2)
The tank was useless.
nixluva wrote:It seems to me that this team has enough talent to compete as long as they are in sync and execute at the right level. They have been up and down so far but it's highly possible that they could get it together and play more consistently at a good level.They're still in the mix and that despite all the issues with new players, young players, new to the league players etc. they've won games in spite of those issues and I don't believe we've seen the best from this team yet.
I agree this team is pretty talented but are they capable of breaking bad habits? Will Jeff implement enough structure to the offense along the way? There are too many slouches and far too much confusion on the defensive end. It's a lot to overcome.
knickscity wrote:And lets make sure we're clear on one thing, there's a difference between "tanking" and "rebuilding." I don't think Boston decided to be intentionally bad to get high draft picks. Philly purposely wrecked their franchise to get the best possible draft picks.Welpee wrote:Tanking has really helped the Sixers, huh? What we should've done is found a way to GET some 1st round picks instead of always trading ours. Maybe we'd be in a situation like Boston where they are winning, have lotto picks, and didn't have to tank. Besides, if you know what you're doing you can get quality talent outside of the lottery.Not sure why people think tanking is an effective strategy.
Boston traded all of the core that won a title for them, the reason they didn't tank is because they got decent pieces back to rebuild with. The Knicks are different, they haven't won any titles and wont with this crew, but still holding on to some thinking that they could be good.
Even look at our situation, people criticized us for winning a couple of games down the stretch that dropped us to the 4th pick the year we drafted KP. Suppose we properly "tank" and ended up Okafor instead?
EnySpree wrote:We can't dwell in what happened before Phil. Right now he has restarted the Knicks and wrote his own chapter.Agreed, though I think its a bit early to say were treading water. I think we're eventually going to be a playoff team who is playing our best ball in the second half of the season (barring injuries).Right now we have Lee Noah and Thomas (oh the irony)with Bad contacts. We will still have cap space next year with Rose and Jennings coming off the books. We have all our draft picks... we are doing OK.
We are treading water now even though the talent base had improved. We can't expect greatness immediately. We gotta be patient. We are not in the red anymore.
sealy wrote:Agree with Welpee.Hard to believe how bad that Bargnani trade was.They will probably be a 6-8 seed and maybe get outta round 1.
My hope is Clips fail in 1st round and CP3 comes here next season. I think looking for interchangeable players in the 2017 draft, like the Celts always take, is what KP needs to be surrounded with. You add that to a Melo/Noah veteran presence, w/ CP3's leadership and I think you have a nice recipe for a contender.
Maybe Phil can convert the 2nd's into another 1.
Welpee wrote:knickscity wrote:And lets make sure we're clear on one thing, there's a difference between "tanking" and "rebuilding." I don't think Boston decided to be intentionally bad to get high draft picks. Philly purposing wrecked their franchise to get the best possible draft picks.Welpee wrote:Tanking has really helped the Sixers, huh? What we should've done is found a way to GET some 1st round picks instead of always trading ours. Maybe we'd be in a situation like Boston where they are winning, have lotto picks, and didn't have to tank. Besides, if you know what you're doing you can get quality talent outside of the lottery.Not sure why people think tanking is an effective strategy.
Boston traded all of the core that won a title for them, the reason they didn't tank is because they got decent pieces back to rebuild with. The Knicks are different, they haven't won any titles and wont with this crew, but still holding on to some thinking that they could be good.Even look at our situation, people criticized us for winning a couple of games down the stretch that dropped us to the 4th pick the year we drafted KP. Suppose we properly "tank" and ended up Okafor instead?
Man you are speaking the truth here. There is a large gap between crippling your franchise for five years, and maximising your future with smart trades and picks. As has been said previously teams may be keen to move first rounders due to rookie contracts going up so we must hawk In in them. Honestly then I have faith in Phil to pick the right talent, he clearly has an eye for that. He just needs to set the ball in motion with something that makes it clear we are moving forward for the next ten years with Kristaps and not regressing for five till we hit square 1.
Welpee wrote:knickscity wrote:And lets make sure we're clear on one thing, there's a difference between "tanking" and "rebuilding." I don't think Boston decided to be intentionally bad to get high draft picks. Philly purposing wrecked their franchise to get the best possible draft picks.Welpee wrote:Tanking has really helped the Sixers, huh? What we should've done is found a way to GET some 1st round picks instead of always trading ours. Maybe we'd be in a situation like Boston where they are winning, have lotto picks, and didn't have to tank. Besides, if you know what you're doing you can get quality talent outside of the lottery.Not sure why people think tanking is an effective strategy.
Boston traded all of the core that won a title for them, the reason they didn't tank is because they got decent pieces back to rebuild with. The Knicks are different, they haven't won any titles and wont with this crew, but still holding on to some thinking that they could be good.Even look at our situation, people criticized us for winning a couple of games down the stretch that dropped us to the 4th pick the year we drafted KP. Suppose we properly "tank" and ended up Okafor instead?
I forgot, did Phil overtly endorse Oka4 as his pick? I know he liked Russell, but with pick 4 that would have been logical.
Really, it takes 5 years to fully evaluate a past draft.
Gaines was fully pounding Phil to take KP at one if we had it. I would have taken Towns still as the safe pick still but at the 2 it would have been interesting to see what Phil would have done.
Seems like Oka4 is bit tainted with his outburst last year off the court and his injury, especially in the face of Embiid unlikey return as the player he is showing to be, but this may be more a function of the team he is on vs. his talent. Russell is also immature and with Kobe gone he can grow a bit as well.
Don't get me wrong, Im very happy with KP both with his skill set, potential and his maturity on and off the court!!!!!
Tanking ensures little.
Welpee wrote:knickscity wrote:And lets make sure we're clear on one thing, there's a difference between "tanking" and "rebuilding." I don't think Boston decided to be intentionally bad to get high draft picks. Philly purposing wrecked their franchise to get the best possible draft picks.Welpee wrote:Tanking has really helped the Sixers, huh? What we should've done is found a way to GET some 1st round picks instead of always trading ours. Maybe we'd be in a situation like Boston where they are winning, have lotto picks, and didn't have to tank. Besides, if you know what you're doing you can get quality talent outside of the lottery.Not sure why people think tanking is an effective strategy.
Boston traded all of the core that won a title for them, the reason they didn't tank is because they got decent pieces back to rebuild with. The Knicks are different, they haven't won any titles and wont with this crew, but still holding on to some thinking that they could be good.
How's that Hinkie approach working out for Philly? Like watching those 10-20 wins a season? There's always tomorrow...
Nalod wrote:We'll probably never know now but Okafor was portrayed has the most NBA ready, safest pick in the draft. At the very worst you knew you had a guy who was going to get you close to 18-20 ppg a night. His ceiling was the question mark because that might be all you're getting from him. I viewed him like Big Dog Robinson when he came out. We knew you were guaranteed 20 ppg from that guy. But was he going to be a franchise changing player like Grant Hill or Jason Kidd?Welpee wrote:knickscity wrote:And lets make sure we're clear on one thing, there's a difference between "tanking" and "rebuilding." I don't think Boston decided to be intentionally bad to get high draft picks. Philly purposing wrecked their franchise to get the best possible draft picks.Welpee wrote:Tanking has really helped the Sixers, huh? What we should've done is found a way to GET some 1st round picks instead of always trading ours. Maybe we'd be in a situation like Boston where they are winning, have lotto picks, and didn't have to tank. Besides, if you know what you're doing you can get quality talent outside of the lottery.Not sure why people think tanking is an effective strategy.
Boston traded all of the core that won a title for them, the reason they didn't tank is because they got decent pieces back to rebuild with. The Knicks are different, they haven't won any titles and wont with this crew, but still holding on to some thinking that they could be good.Even look at our situation, people criticized us for winning a couple of games down the stretch that dropped us to the 4th pick the year we drafted KP. Suppose we properly "tank" and ended up Okafor instead?
I forgot, did Phil overtly endorse Oka4 as his pick? I know he liked Russell, but with pick 4 that would have been logical.
Really, it takes 5 years to fully evaluate a past draft.
Gaines was fully pounding Phil to take KP at one if we had it. I would have taken Towns still as the safe pick still but at the 2 it would have been interesting to see what Phil would have done.Seems like Oka4 is bit tainted with his outburst last year off the court and his injury, especially in the face of Embiid unlikey return as the player he is showing to be, but this may be more a function of the team he is on vs. his talent. Russell is also immature and with Kobe gone he can grow a bit as well.
Don't get me wrong, Im very happy with KP both with his skill set, potential and his maturity on and off the court!!!!!
Tanking ensures little.
As much as I wasn't a fan of Okafor or Russell, it would've taken a lot of guts not drafting those two with picks 2 or 3. Heck, it took guts drafting KP at 4 and I wasn't happy with the selection at the time (I wanted Mudiay).
9 new players, bench inexperienced in the NBA, 3 new starters, new coach and one of the core three players missed most of training camp.
Slow start to be expected.
First order is to get to .500.
First order is to still get the rotation set. If players are improving, that's not an easy thing. Willy and KOQ are not really set are they? They are inconsistent.
What does Noah have in the tank? how to best manage his minutes?
Protecting the Unicorn? Overplay we might break him. Under play him he does not develop fully.
Triangle or not. Its obvious if you run it exclusively the team will fail in the short term. It might not even gel this year. Read phils books, he had that with his laker teams. Some years yes, others they deviate.
How much of it do you run?
Until Phil and the many coach's and advisors they have have answered them, I don't think "tanking" is in the vocabulary.
Nalod wrote:Nalod thoughts:+19 new players, bench inexperienced in the NBA, 3 new starters, new coach and one of the core three players missed most of training camp.
Slow start to be expected.
First order is to get to .500.
First order is to still get the rotation set. If players are improving, that's not an easy thing. Willy and KOQ are not really set are they? They are inconsistent.
What does Noah have in the tank? how to best manage his minutes?
Protecting the Unicorn? Overplay we might break him. Under play him he does not develop fully.
Triangle or not. Its obvious if you run it exclusively the team will fail in the short term. It might not even gel this year. Read phils books, he had that with his laker teams. Some years yes, others they deviate.
How much of it do you run?Until Phil and the many coach's and advisors they have have answered them, I don't think "tanking" is in the vocabulary.
Maybe Phil has something. I do like that the players spoke up about the BS triangle.
If they are 5 & 5 over the next ten, you don't blow it up.
Maybe if they are 2 & 8, you start to consider it, but they are starting to make moves in the right direction.
Its early, but slowly they are starting to look like the team that the rose colored glass wearing fans think can win 40-50 games.
Nalod wrote:Nalod thoughts:9 new players, bench inexperienced in the NBA, 3 new starters, new coach and one of the core three players missed most of training camp.
Slow start to be expected.
First order is to get to .500.
First order is to still get the rotation set. If players are improving, that's not an easy thing. Willy and KOQ are not really set are they? They are inconsistent.
What does Noah have in the tank? how to best manage his minutes?
Protecting the Unicorn? Overplay we might break him. Under play him he does not develop fully.
Triangle or not. Its obvious if you run it exclusively the team will fail in the short term. It might not even gel this year. Read phils books, he had that with his laker teams. Some years yes, others they deviate.
How much of it do you run?Until Phil and the many coach's and advisors they have have answered them, I don't think "tanking" is in the vocabulary.
Add: 6th man LT been hurt since the get go.
franco12 wrote:I've been as big a fan of rebuilding the right way - but I liked what I saw against Atlanta and the other games as well.Maybe Phil has something. I do like that the players spoke up about the BS triangle.
If they are 5 & 5 over the next ten, you don't blow it up.
Maybe if they are 2 & 8, you start to consider it, but they are starting to make moves in the right direction.
Its early, but slowly they are starting to look like the team that the rose colored glass wearing fans think can win 40-50 games.
I've never understood this type of comment. There are several types of ways to rebuild and not one of them is the exact, gold standard solution.
KP4Life wrote:do we all agree we should just tank? This next draft is very good. It just makes sense to tank, sadly. We need to look to the future guys. Lets get us a Josh Jackson or Fultz. The draft can completely change a teams future. What if we didn't tank and get KP? We would be in an even worse position now then before.
Like you just said, this next draft is very good so why should we have to tank if we can still get a good players in the 15-22 range??
Knicks67 wrote:Okay for my mind, we have till January. If things are bleak, pull the pin. Move Melo to a contender and take in all the assets you can, young players, first rounders I'd be pleased with either. What this does is allow us to tank for a season for a good pick, drop Rose, and move forward with Kristaps. It benefits everyone in my opinion, Melo can go and have a better hope of a ring or finals appearance and Knicks get a future with Kristaps. In my opinion, a team that should be talked to is the Hawks, if we could take Schroder and/or Bazemore with a couple picks I'd take it. Hawks get a legit scorer to add to their already strong team. Anyway just what I'd be doing if I were Phil.
How can anyone not know by now that Melo isn't going anywhere? He's not gonna waive his no trade clause especially now that Phil has this team in a good spot with players and draft picks......MELO IS NOT GOING ANYWHERE!!!! Did you hear that??
The only "bad" contract we have might be Noah.
The only way I consider a "tank" is if come trade deadline a team, or combo of such makes a strong push for some of our players in return for potential type assets.
By that, someone wants Derrick rose for a big push and has assets, then I would consider it. For example, a lottery pick. Sounds silly, but if we are not playoff bound, or on the bubble, and deem Rose not resignable for a myriad of reasons, then I agree.
or If the Deandre Jordan is slow to recover from an injury and they want Noah, and Willy is able to step in, then Im OK.
I suppose there are lots of tangibles.
Nalod wrote:This notion that "Since the present won't yield a desirable result, then "Tank" for a better tomorrow"....Is interesting, but this is not how we are constructed.
The only "bad" contract we have might be Noah.The only way I consider a "tank" is if come trade deadline a team, or combo of such makes a strong push for some of our players in return for potential type assets.
By that, someone wants Derrick rose for a big push and has assets, then I would consider it. For example, a lottery pick. Sounds silly, but if we are not playoff bound, or on the bubble, and deem Rose not resignable for a myriad of reasons, then I agree.or If the Deandre Jordan is slow to recover from an injury and they want Noah, and Willy is able to step in, then Im OK.
I suppose there are lots of tangibles.
Agreed, you just don't tank to tank. Teams try it every year, most fail. We lucked into KP for a variety of factors. Usually luck is involved with adding young talent and turning it into wins. We need to stay the course and build continuity. It's a better situation for KP. We have our draft picks and can draft good players whether we tank or not.