Knicks · What Is Scott Perry's M.O.? (page 1)

Many here have a high opinion of Scott Perry. They say he's a talented GM, who has a record of success, so we should trust his judgment in how he helps build this team. They believe him about his desire to rebuild and how "culture" is key, which is used to justify us keeping highly paid veterans on the team. And I've never understood why any of that is the case.

Just take a look at the Sacramento Kings. He helped acquire several highly paid veterans for the sake of "culture", on a rebuilding team. And yet, a few weeks ago those same veterans were reported to be disgruntled and wanted trades to contenders because they were under the impression they'd be competitng for a playoff spot. But what rebuilding team competes for a playoff spot in year 1 of a rebuild plan? Someone is lying bere and misleading others. And now George Hill is supposedly already on his way to the Cavs for cents on the dollar, with efforts being made to dump Vince Carter, Zach Randolph and Kostas Koufus. What was the point of a few months of "culture" when that money would've been invaluable in acquiring more picks and/or leveraging bad contracts to move up in the draft?

To get to my point, I've thought management was full of shit the moment the dust settled this offseason. We've done, exactly what the Kings were trying to do: get curb-stomped in the first round of the playoffs to the detriment of a youth movement. So I am skeptical of any substantive change that this front office promised. This is the same old Knicks, with the same culture that promotes the short-term to the detriment of the long-term. So expect a Kemba Walker to the Knicks for a Frank Ntilikina. Because this team is more concerned with headlines than the machinations of building a winner.

I have been following things a little in Sac and it hasn't worked out as he planned it to. But, before Perry the Kings couldn't get guys to work out for them before the draft and free agents would not consider the team. The Knicks had become that same type of organization by the time Phil left (i.e. Dennis Smith jr.). Perry brought credibility back to the team/organization. Jack, Burke, and Beasley all came in part because of Perry. Beasley also has a Rambis connection but guys committed to the Knicks because of Perry. He also brought in his own guys. Not sure what Perry is supposed to do to convince others that he isn't concerned with building a winner and just wants headlines. Not trading for Kemba, bringing in Burke definitely seems like the type of move a guy building and not chasing headlines.

The two worst franchises in the NBA are the Knicks and Kings.

DeMarcus Cousins is a top 10 NBA player and the Kings traded him for a late draft pick and a guy that’s not good enough to start. There franchise was drowning and they needed to legitimize the franchise and help its young players along. It made sense to bring in veterans, they will be able to move them easily, so not a disaster by any means.

Since he’s been here he’s executed four exceptionally strong moves.

Jack - finding a starting point guard in the scrap heap to stabilize the position, virtually impossible at that late in the game.

Beasley - one of the best value signings of the offseason, behind Evans

Melo for Kanter/Dougy - two serviceable rotation pieces without adding salary that fit into a culture.

Burke - developing someone in the G league and potentially turning them into a rotation piece very impressive.

At worst that’s a B+

Reminds me when guys were shouting down Frank after his first 8 minutes in the league. This is a rebuild, what most of us have been clamoring for the past years, now we got it we must be _patient_. Gonna take 2-3yrs before the team is ready to really contend, go 2+ rounds in the playoffs. And another 2-3yrs to get to a 'chip level team. But hell we've been waiting for decades, so what's 5-6yrs? Let's do this right for once.

Perry was assistant to Vlad Divac. He and owner sets the agenda, Perry was not the decision maker.
New arena and ex boogie era. How long was perry there?
I know we all want a guy with a proven track record too feel better.

NardDogNation wrote:Many here have a high opinion of Scott Perry. They say he's a talented GM, who has a record of success, so we should trust his judgment in how he helps build this team. They believe him about his desire to rebuild and how "culture" is key, which is used to justify us keeping highly paid veterans on the team. And I've never understood why any of that is the case.

Just take a look at the Sacramento Kings. He helped acquire several highly paid veterans for the sake of "culture", on a rebuilding team. And yet, a few weeks ago those same veterans were reported to be disgruntled and wanted trades to contenders because they were under the impression they'd be competitng for a playoff spot. But what rebuilding team competes for a playoff spot in year 1 of a rebuild plan? Someone is lying bere and misleading others. And now George Hill is supposedly already on his way to the Cavs for cents on the dollar, with efforts being made to dump Vince Carter, Zach Randolph and Kostas Koufus. What was the point of a few months of "culture" when that money would've been invaluable in acquiring more picks and/or leveraging bad contracts to move up in the draft?

To get to my point, I've thought management was full of shit the moment the dust settled this offseason. We've done, exactly what the Kings were trying to do: get curb-stomped in the first round of the playoffs to the detriment of a youth movement. So I am skeptical of any substantive change that this front office promised. This is the same old Knicks, with the same culture that promotes the short-term to the detriment of the long-term. So expect a Kemba Walker to the Knicks for a Frank Ntilikina. Because this team is more concerned with headlines than the machinations of building a winner.

Can't speak for the Kings situation. But for the Knicks the only knocks on him are moves that he hasn't done which we don't know what has been available for him. Only speculation, can't knock somebody due to speculation on what they could be doing. If he makes a move with his name on it that hurts the franchise then we can knock him for that. But knocking him for not trading someone like Lee or KOQ when we don't know what teams are offering in return isn't fair.

Finding guys like Beasley & Burke & Jack for vet min and getting out of Melo's NTC were all home runs given the situation he came into.

Every team gambles. The teams,like the Knicks, who have been missing the playoffs for years, often are forced to gamble or take risk positions more than the established teams. In the past several years, to no fault of Perry, Dolan and Mills took risks.

1/. Noah was a risk, and we missed it. It is a very costly risk.
2/. Frank was a risk. Young, questionable handle and untested against the best college players.
This could turn out favorable but there are days when I wonder
3./ THJr - here’s a risk that played out fine
4./ The choice of Phil was also a risk.
5./ thr choice of KP was a risk and we lucked out.

So aside from the favorable transactions that Perry has handled, there is much that lays ahead. In the next several months, there could be substantial roster turnover. I’m not referring to Lee, Jack, Thomas or OQuinn. Those are vets and we should try to upgrade and get choice picks or a combo of players and picks. Yet how Kanter,Wily, Beas, MCDermott and even Frank. How those are handled will tell us much about where we are headed or not. To rebuild or say F__k it, to draft a Pg or a 3 or 5. Lots abead. I think we should demonstrate some patience as Perry can’t be expected to get it all done in the next month or this Sunmer but we’ve nonetheless lots at stake.

Perry seems like an extremely patient guy and is not the kind of guy to jump into bad trades. I remember this summer when we were all desperate to trade Melo, he waited and waited and got a good return. He may be doing the same thing with Lee, KOQ, etc. He is the anti-Dolan in that sense which makes him smart.

MS wrote:The two worst franchises in the NBA are the Knicks and Kings.

DeMarcus Cousins is a top 10 NBA player and the Kings traded him for a late draft pick and a guy that’s not good enough to start. There franchise was drowning and they needed to legitimize the franchise and help its young players along. It made sense to bring in veterans, they will be able to move them easily, so not a disaster by any means.

Since he’s been here he’s executed four exceptionally strong moves.

Jack - finding a starting point guard in the scrap heap to stabilize the position, virtually impossible at that late in the game.

Beasley - one of the best value signings of the offseason, behind Evans

Melo for Kanter/Dougy - two serviceable rotation pieces without adding salary that fit into a culture.

Burke - developing someone in the G league and potentially turning them into a rotation piece very impressive.

At worst that’s a B+

While Perry was not here you need to add Tim Hardaway into that list as well. That's 5 moves this FO has made that are very good, and the TH move was something nobody here supported and he was spot on in that signing.

Paris907 are there moves NBA GMs make that dont have risk?

Perry seems like his MO will be targeting '2nd draft guys', meaning younger players who have established they are NBA players but circumstances have prevented them from breaking out. Burke is an example. Guys from age 23-25 still have upside, but many of which have been written off by other teams. This allows a unique opportunity to rebuild but still compete for the playoffs. The way the celtics got Jae Crowder from dallas in the rondo trade; that's the type of deal we need to hit on, and i think Perry is targeting these types of opportunities.

Knixkik wrote:Perry seems like his MO will be targeting '2nd draft guys', meaning younger players who have established they are NBA players but circumstances have prevented them from breaking out. Burke is an example. Guys from age 23-25 still have upside, but many of which have been written off by other teams. This allows a unique opportunity to rebuild but still compete for the playoffs. The way the celtics got Jae Crowder from dallas in the rondo trade; that's the type of deal we need to hit on, and i think Perry is targeting these types of opportunities.

That's a good tertiary strategy to have in place. The problem is that those guys usually don't pan out. There are more Derrick Williams types than Marcus Camby types. Burke at the vet minimum isn't a problem, but a situation like Okafor, where you have to pay him at the end of the season, is. Unfortunately, you can't judge Perry until we see how he manages us when we have cap space. Can't blame him too much for Sac because he's no longer there and I can't give him blame or praise for THJ signing. The only thing he can be graded on is the Melo trade and he did decently.

fishmike wrote:

MS wrote:The two worst franchises in the NBA are the Knicks and Kings.

DeMarcus Cousins is a top 10 NBA player and the Kings traded him for a late draft pick and a guy that’s not good enough to start. There franchise was drowning and they needed to legitimize the franchise and help its young players along. It made sense to bring in veterans, they will be able to move them easily, so not a disaster by any means.

Since he’s been here he’s executed four exceptionally strong moves.

Jack - finding a starting point guard in the scrap heap to stabilize the position, virtually impossible at that late in the game.

Beasley - one of the best value signings of the offseason, behind Evans

Melo for Kanter/Dougy - two serviceable rotation pieces without adding salary that fit into a culture.

Burke - developing someone in the G league and potentially turning them into a rotation piece very impressive.

At worst that’s a B+

While Perry was not here you need to add Tim Hardaway into that list as well. That's 5 moves this FO has made that are very good, and the TH move was something nobody here supported and he was spot on in that signing.

Paris907 are there moves NBA GMs make that dont have risk?

To answer that question is relatively easy. Resigning your star players falls under the no brainer category. Likewise, securing the services of expiring contracts requires relatively little risk as well. Let’s not forget 10 day contracts. Hope that answers your question

I really like the moves he has made thus far. he got good value from a no win situation with Carmelo. He signed Burke who could end up being a steal. Remember, we have Burke for this year and next. That should be enough time to determine his value more accurately than just a few games. He signed Beasley to veterans minimum which has been a steal. I like the fact that Lee and KOQ have had their trade value dramatically increased. He also made the right moves by releasing Kuz and Sessions (no one has picked up either of them). Now he has to pull a rabbit out of the hat and find a way to get out of Noah's contract.

Paris907 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

MS wrote:The two worst franchises in the NBA are the Knicks and Kings.

DeMarcus Cousins is a top 10 NBA player and the Kings traded him for a late draft pick and a guy that’s not good enough to start. There franchise was drowning and they needed to legitimize the franchise and help its young players along. It made sense to bring in veterans, they will be able to move them easily, so not a disaster by any means.

Since he’s been here he’s executed four exceptionally strong moves.

Jack - finding a starting point guard in the scrap heap to stabilize the position, virtually impossible at that late in the game.

Beasley - one of the best value signings of the offseason, behind Evans

Melo for Kanter/Dougy - two serviceable rotation pieces without adding salary that fit into a culture.

Burke - developing someone in the G league and potentially turning them into a rotation piece very impressive.

At worst that’s a B+

While Perry was not here you need to add Tim Hardaway into that list as well. That's 5 moves this FO has made that are very good, and the TH move was something nobody here supported and he was spot on in that signing.

Paris907 are there moves NBA GMs make that dont have risk?

To answer that question is relatively easy. Resigning your star players falls under the no brainer category. Likewise, securing the services of expiring contracts requires relatively little risk as well. Let’s not forget 10 day contracts. Hope that answers your question

like Melo? That was a no brainer? I do think it was a move Phil had to make but no.. I mean I guess? Basically doing nothing carries little risk, agree.

fishmike wrote:

Paris907 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

MS wrote:The two worst franchises in the NBA are the Knicks and Kings.

DeMarcus Cousins is a top 10 NBA player and the Kings traded him for a late draft pick and a guy that’s not good enough to start. There franchise was drowning and they needed to legitimize the franchise and help its young players along. It made sense to bring in veterans, they will be able to move them easily, so not a disaster by any means.

Since he’s been here he’s executed four exceptionally strong moves.

Jack - finding a starting point guard in the scrap heap to stabilize the position, virtually impossible at that late in the game.

Beasley - one of the best value signings of the offseason, behind Evans

Melo for Kanter/Dougy - two serviceable rotation pieces without adding salary that fit into a culture.

Burke - developing someone in the G league and potentially turning them into a rotation piece very impressive.

At worst that’s a B+

While Perry was not here you need to add Tim Hardaway into that list as well. That's 5 moves this FO has made that are very good, and the TH move was something nobody here supported and he was spot on in that signing.

Paris907 are there moves NBA GMs make that dont have risk?

To answer that question is relatively easy. Resigning your star players falls under the no brainer category. Likewise, securing the services of expiring contracts requires relatively little risk as well. Let’s not forget 10 day contracts. Hope that answers your question

like Melo? That was a no brainer? I do think it was a move Phil had to make but no.. I mean I guess? Basically doing nothing carries little risk, agree.

If we had our own draft picks im not sure he resigns Melo

CrushAlot wrote:I have been following things a little in Sac and it hasn't worked out as he planned it to. But, before Perry the Kings couldn't get guys to work out for them before the draft and free agents would not consider the team. The Knicks had become that same type of organization by the time Phil left (i.e. Dennis Smith jr.). Perry brought credibility back to the team/organization. Jack, Burke, and Beasley all came in part because of Perry. Beasley also has a Rambis connection but guys committed to the Knicks because of Perry. He also brought in his own guys. Not sure what Perry is supposed to do to convince others that he isn't concerned with building a winner and just wants headlines. Not trading for Kemba, bringing in Burke definitely seems like the type of move a guy building and not chasing headlines.

Right, and you know this how?