Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
I think most of the board agrees with you. The Knicks are run as a profit-driven corporation and have historically emphasized immediate profits above long-term success. We can only hope that has changed. It's not that fans need to be patient. It's that we want MSG to be willing to take a short-term financial hit in order to have long-term sustainable success. Clearly, *right now* Irving brings in more money than Ntilikina or a 2020 draft pick. Do MSG shareholders care about how good the 2020 pick might be by say, 2022 or 2023? Are they even planning to still hold shares in the company by then? That's the problem with a profit-driven corporation running a team.
BRIGGS wrote:Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
The many sides of Briggs........
Is this a self affirmation or advice?
BRIGGS wrote:Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
Precursor thread for Briggs many draft pick threads. A dream come true for him. Lol
yes which was what we had before we trade for CA
or
what Philly/Lakers and even Kings right now have
Boston can continue to improve and just about trade for ANYONE with their assets
While TWOLVES changed it around this summer
BRIGGS wrote:Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
I agree. I am tired of people who counts a team's success based on how many "stars" it had on the roster. This all out starfukk is just reset, rinse repeat
BRIGGS wrote:Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
The problem is the Knicks don't have any cap space for the next 2 years. The other problem is the Knicks chances of building through the draft has been compromised by losing the 2016 pick. Kyrie brings credibility to the Knicks, probably brings FA's
RonRon wrote:yes which was what we had before we trade for CAor
what Philly/Lakers and even Kings right now have
Boston can continue to improve and just about trade for ANYONE with their assets
While TWOLVES changed it around this summer
Twolves are on their way. Towns is an unbelievable talent, he could of been oura
BRIGGS wrote:Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
Briggs, how you suffer for your genius and clarity of thought!
I, for one, appreciate you.
meloshouldgo wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
I agree. I am tired of people who counts a team's success based on how many "stars" it had on the roster. This all out starfukk is just reset, rinse repeat
That's a valid preference but if we're to cross-reference success with Finals wins/appearances, the evidence for "stars" is overwhelming.
But there is indeed other, different measures of success.
BRIGGS wrote:Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
Again, that's a 100% valid preference.
What it isn't is a proven formula for consistent success.
The anecdotal success stories can be measured against failures in equal measure.
Knickoftime wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
I agree. I am tired of people who counts a team's success based on how many "stars" it had on the roster. This all out starfukk is just reset, rinse repeat
That's a valid preference but if we're to cross-reference success with Finals wins/appearance, the evidence for "stars" is overwhelming.
But there is indeed other, different measures of success.
But who counts as a "star"? I don't read what Briggs is writing and assume that he wouldn't like to have KD or Curry. A lot of people here including me don't think of Irving as a superstar though. I think Briggs is writing more about starphucking than acquiring legit, 2 way versatile superstars.
Bonn1997 wrote:Knickoftime wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
I agree. I am tired of people who counts a team's success based on how many "stars" it had on the roster. This all out starfukk is just reset, rinse repeat
That's a valid preference but if we're to cross-reference success with Finals wins/appearance, the evidence for "stars" is overwhelming.
But there is indeed other, different measures of success.
But who counts as a "star"? I don't read what Briggs is writing and assume that he wouldn't like to have KD or Curry. A lot of people here including me don't think of Irving as a superstar though. I think Briggs is writing more about starphucking than acquiring legit, 2 way versatile superstars.
No build up a team where the last piece(for example maybe a 34 year old Lebron James) see's that we have size shooting defense all in place and we saved a $ spot at a maximum level for him to walk right into as the final piece. Is there a lot of these players--no. And even if they dont come--kind of like Detroit early 2000's you build a team that just jells on its own and gets the final spare parts from FA (while more ancillary) you may need instead of star.
Bonn1997 wrote:Knickoftime wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
I agree. I am tired of people who counts a team's success based on how many "stars" it had on the roster. This all out starfukk is just reset, rinse repeat
That's a valid preference but if we're to cross-reference success with Finals wins/appearance, the evidence for "stars" is overwhelming.
But there is indeed other, different measures of success.
But who counts as a "star"? I don't read what Briggs is writing and assume that he wouldn't like to have KD or Curry. A lot of people here including me don't think of Irving as a superstar though. I think Briggs is writing more about starphucking than acquiring legit, 2 way versatile superstars.
I don't know. I don't believe Briggs mentioned stars. That is a reply to meloshoulgo.
BRIGGS wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Knickoftime wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
I agree. I am tired of people who counts a team's success based on how many "stars" it had on the roster. This all out starfukk is just reset, rinse repeat
That's a valid preference but if we're to cross-reference success with Finals wins/appearance, the evidence for "stars" is overwhelming.
But there is indeed other, different measures of success.
But who counts as a "star"? I don't read what Briggs is writing and assume that he wouldn't like to have KD or Curry. A lot of people here including me don't think of Irving as a superstar though. I think Briggs is writing more about starphucking than acquiring legit, 2 way versatile superstars.
No build up a team where the last piece(for example maybe a 34 year old Lebron James) see's that we have size shooting defense all in place and we saved a $ spot at a maximum level for him to walk right into as the final piece. Is there a lot of these players--no. And even if they dont come--kind of like Detroit early 2000's you build a team that just jells on its own and gets the final spare parts from FA (while more ancillary) you may need instead of star.
Again, picking the ONE team that achieved success that way is a perfectly valid preference, it just isn't a sound argument.
Knickoftime wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Knickoftime wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
I agree. I am tired of people who counts a team's success based on how many "stars" it had on the roster. This all out starfukk is just reset, rinse repeat
That's a valid preference but if we're to cross-reference success with Finals wins/appearance, the evidence for "stars" is overwhelming.
But there is indeed other, different measures of success.
But who counts as a "star"? I don't read what Briggs is writing and assume that he wouldn't like to have KD or Curry. A lot of people here including me don't think of Irving as a superstar though. I think Briggs is writing more about starphucking than acquiring legit, 2 way versatile superstars.
I don't know. I don't believe Briggs mentioned stars. That is a reply to meloshoulgo.
Well same thing. I don't think he's saying he'd turn down KD if KD wanted to sign here. He just didn't add qualifications to his statement. I could be wrong and he doesn't want legit stars either, though.
Bonn1997 wrote:Knickoftime wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Knickoftime wrote:meloshouldgo wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Save a year where we can have max space
Than you join free agent stR to ready made young team
Trading multiple young players and picks is a grave mistake
Fans need to be patient
I agree. I am tired of people who counts a team's success based on how many "stars" it had on the roster. This all out starfukk is just reset, rinse repeat
That's a valid preference but if we're to cross-reference success with Finals wins/appearance, the evidence for "stars" is overwhelming.
But there is indeed other, different measures of success.
But who counts as a "star"? I don't read what Briggs is writing and assume that he wouldn't like to have KD or Curry. A lot of people here including me don't think of Irving as a superstar though. I think Briggs is writing more about starphucking than acquiring legit, 2 way versatile superstars.
I don't know. I don't believe Briggs mentioned stars. That is a reply to meloshoulgo.
Well same thing. I don't think he's saying he'd turn down KD if KD wanted to sign here. He just didn't add qualifications to his statement. I could be wrong and he doesn't want legit stars either, though.
That seems too subjective to advance as a philosophy. Entirely dependent on who an individual thinks is a "star" and not a star.
Knickoftime wrote:RonRon wrote:yes which was what we had before we trade for CA
No.
Not even close.
Oh sure we did. Gallo/Mayor/Moz was the three-pronged unicorn of 2010. And we had Amare starring as McDyess Part 2.
All we needed to do was not get CA, sign Lin, and it would have been chip city.
Revisionist history. Gotta love it, never gets old.
