Da Grinch

i hate to say it but it may be time to pull the plug on zach randolph .

i would trade him for ben wallace and a draft pick...because wallace is aging somewhat quickly he should not be a straight up deal, but he provides what the team needs , a tough influence, a rebounder and a lane defender and most importantly a respected leader , this team just doesn't have one. ...while giving the bulls what they need a a rugged inside scorer who can hit the outside J.

as it is now Zach is not meshing and more importantly he appears to be rubbing his teammates the wrong way , so this problem may never go away, especially with this unit who get their teeth on defense from their offense ...for some reason they need to score to defend well...curry for all his faults gets his teammates easier shots due to the amount of effort the opposing team uses to stop him, often collapsing the team into the post to strip , block and bother him.

i would then trade marbury and probably randolph morris for larry hughes and eric snow .

i would then for better or worse live with eddy curry, jamal crawford balkman or chandler, lee , ben wallace as the core of the team .

if the kings will take a balkman/nate package with salary filler (like malik or jeffries) i say do it , if not i would wait and let rose's deal become an ending deal next season and then he has more value.

i would expand balkman's role if he's not traded , let him start bringing the ball up and give him more distribution responsibilities, give him more freedom to push the ball after rebounds and to let crawford and hughes be more attack oriented on offense.

i would also spotlight lee a little more when he has mismatches.

i would bench richardson because enough is enough , if he isn't going to hit from the outside he isn't a better starter than balkman...he is right now a backup 2 and little more.

the team will likely still be in the lottery and then they can draft a top notch 3 or a point guard of which there really will be a few in the draft .

if the team trades nate , they can use the MLE to sign boykins so nate is very expendable right now.

__________________
"The country is full of good coaches. What it takes to win is a bunch of interested players."-Don Coryell, ex-San Diego Chargers Coach

Cager

[quote=Da Grinch;5196763]i hate to say it but it may be time to pull the plug on zach randolph .

i would trade him for ben wallace and a draft pick...because wallace is aging somewhat quickly he should not be a straight up deal, but he provides what the team needs , a tough influence, a rebounder and a lane defender and most importantly a respected leader , this team just doesn't have one. ...while giving the bulls what they need a a rugged inside scorer who can hit the outside J.

I think that is a great idea. Curry can still be a force but he needs to play alone. Ben will be a major help on defense and rebounding. Both Ben and Zach have issues that a team must deal with but Eddy can give the Knicks enough low post scoring and Ben doesn't demand the ball so they should co-exist better than Zach and Eddy. The Bulls already have someone that can replace much of what Ben does in Noah and they may be desperate enough to take on a bad character guy.

alphaorange

How the team you end up with contends for anything. The Bulls pick will be meaningless by seasons end, probably 16-21 range. Nobody there is going to do much to help this team. Even IT says there is only a couple of guys on this team that will be there when the team contends. BTW, Balkman was exposed as a ball handler earlier in the season. He's OK in the open court but a huge liability against pressure. This talk of him being a point forward by some folks is absolutely ridiculous. He is a role player off the bench, and a good one. It is time to admit that this team and the players IT chose as its nucleus is just not good. Nobody is winning anything building around Curry....or Zach.....or both. So where does that leave the team? Right back where we were a couple of years ago. There is NO WAY to trade and make this team a contender. Trade Curry and Zach for picks. Try to trade Marbury to a team looking for cap space next year for a bad contract and picks/or a young REAL talent. Jones goes...Nate comes off the bench....Lee starts..Balkman comes off the bench and plays 20+...Qrich goes....Rose goes(for his sake)...jeffries off the bench...JC starts (for now)....Shoot for Derrick Rose first, then Beasley/Greene if he is gone. Its only a start but it can't be done in a year.

Da Grinch

[quote=Cager;5198047] the bulls need to upgrade their talent level , the knicks need more than anything for their pieces to fit .

i like Noah , they need to just play him and live with the results until he can become consistently the player every1 envisions to be .

__________________
"The country is full of good coaches. What it takes to win is a bunch of interested players."-Don Coryell, ex-San Diego Chargers Coach

Da Grinch

is there some magic portal available to show you, because we've gone through this on other subjects and you tend to become rather unreasonable and your behavoir often gets annoying.

but ok i'll give you the benefit of the doubt and explain.

none of Zeke's offenses require a true pg , so a grouping of hughes balkman and crawford(along with mardy, nate and snow) all taking turns at the point depending of how they are playing and matchups should work out fine all have various degrees of experience at playing the 1.

balkman's ballhandling responsibilities would be done at times when it helps the knicks , not just because i want to see him with the ball.

there is a world of difference between bringing the ball up on occasion and being a point forward i dont know who you are talking about with the point forward talk. I've seen tim Duncan bring the ball up , but I would call him a point center.

balkman bringing the ball upcourt against guards pressuring him can be a problem ...but there are few small forwards in the league that are any good at all at pressuring a dribble upcourt , its just not something they are trained to do....so at small forward balkman bringing the ball up shouldn't be a problem at all, and if a team wants to put a guard on balkman fine he doesn't have to bring the ball up, crawford and hughes would take most 3's in the league off the dribble easily and balkman can punish that guard on the offensive boards, like i said previously its not about making him the point guard its about using his skills to help from a team concept and to keep him involved on offense .

the bulls won 47 games a few years ago with every1 touting them to be the future of the east with curry as a centerpiece so i dont know if its wise to say any1 cant win with him, because its surely possible...most bulls fans realize that curry instead of the 2 lotto picks they got for him would make their future brighter.

if the season ended now the bulls would be picking 10th , nbadraft.com has oj mayo in that slot. i actually think they'll be closer to 16 when all is said and done but with 2 decent picks and Thomas' history as a drafter I'm not too concerned with who they can get especially since its jan. 6th right now and the draft is almost 6 months away , no sane person thinks its written in stone yet , as long as they get value for the their picks and they fit into the team or are traded for people who are, its good enough.

you may like the idea of gutting a team for picks/cap space whatever , i dont , i think its a far bigger crapshoot especially if you dont get the 1st few picks in the draft , all the surefire star bigs are usually taken very early.

i cant remember the last time a team gave away a REAL young talent for cap space , thats usually why they wanted cap space in the 1st place , so they would be in position to aquire 1, generally the talent they do trade is 1 they have tired of having and want to start over with some1 else, so i dont know how viable your idea of trading marbury for that is, what teams did you have in mind alpha?

richardson is untradeable, his back is uninsured and his production is so far below his paycheck he is a knick until his contract is an ending deal...if even then because of his surgery risk, the only way to get rid of him is to cut him , and even so he'd still be on the cap until his deal expires.

__________________
"The country is full of good coaches. What it takes to win is a bunch of interested players."-Don Coryell, ex-San Diego Chargers Coach

alphaorange

toward building a contender, you're a fool. Guess what? The season isn't ending today and the Bulls will not pick 10th. Who the hell said anything about other SFs bringing the ball up? I simply said Balkman's handle is much overrated. JC and Hughs leading the league in 3's is no formula for big success either. Neither is a consistent bomber. That means some great games...some average games...and a lot of duds. When the Bulls won 47, who was saying that Curry was the foundation, or even one of the top two hubs? I'm not suggesting we will reap any big rewards for trading our crap. Thats why I wrote picks/young talent...may have to settle for picks.
Let me recap: Your idea wastes more years while we find out that team can't win more than 40-45 games and a 2nd round exit. This insures crappy picks, the possible loss of the only talent we have as they leave via FA, and facing rebuilding process 3 years removed from where it should be. I'll take being in Portlands position, or Seattles position any day.

While you belittle my knowledge of the game, remember this: I said the team wouldn't win with Marbury, I said that Curry would not ever rebound or play defense, and that he would fade when needed most. I said that Nate was a bench player at best because of his 10 cent head.I said Zach was a negative move and that he and Curry would not exist in a positive way. I also said both would declining numbers. I also predicted this team would be brutal. I said that Frye was being misused and would be a productive player. I also said Lee had to play big minutes as he furnished things we desperately needed. You, on the other hand, predicted us to be an average defensive team and an offensive juggernaut. I don't really think you have been right on enough....if anything..to tell me I don't understand the game. You keep touting Thomas as this great judge of talent. You mean like Fred Jones at 14? His no-brainer pick of Camby? Stoudamire? Who else WAS there to pick? Frye over Bynum? Lee was a good pick..better than IT thought. Nate? bench player who was not the best player on the board and a non-need. Balkman? Collins? Passed on Williams, Gibson, Boone, Lowery, and Rondo. Let's not give him too much credit, shall we? He is generally good at borderline draft positions but has blown some big ones.

Da Grinch

see this is what i'm talking about , I think you think this message board is some sort of back alley rumble spot for your basketball ramblings.

any core of decent players can be built up for title contention...if some1 around 2000-2002 said rip hamilton and billups would form the best backcourt in the league, champs and be perenial all stars by 2007 they would have been laughed at seeing how their careers were going at that point, billups a career vagabond and rip some1 his GM basically gave away because his contract demands (something in the 6 yrs 50 mil. range) were seen as ridiculous considering the kind of player he was thought to be...and at the time of the deal it wasn't seen as a bad one at all.

you think gibson is a better player than balkman or collins ?

thats your opinion but if he were on a regular team like the raptors or even the bobcats do you think he could run it?

not from what i've seen , he is basically a modern day john paxson , too small to play the 2, too unskilled to run pg in a fulltime fashion and needs a superstar and other ballhandlers to help him run a team...if not for pavlovic hughes and especially James he would be rotting on the bench or in the D-league trying to hone his skills.

he's a system player at this point and a darn good one all he's asked to do is bring the ball up, play some D and hit open shots anything else he does is gravy....some very mediocre players have been asked to do the same thing and have been well rewarded with professional success , nice contracts and many other nice things , but no one should confuse gibson with a good player at this , in time maybe, but all he is now is a role player who gets to start because he is hitting his shots while damon jones and eric snow aren't.

its also worth noting that you have failed to mention any team that would take marbury now for cap space after next season , who they would possibly send back or why they knicks would even want who'd they would send back?

its easy to attack others for their opinions but all i have ever seen from you are vague, regurgitated theorums and snide comments , lets hear your solutions in full detail for once.

there are 2 sides to the spectrum , i have alot of respect for many posters here because they put their thoughts out here for the world to see, any1 can say " they cant do it " when watching a losing team.

even though i rarely agree with kiyaman his thoughts are his own not something he is expousing from somewhere else and he is a solution minded person , a person who wants things to go in a positive direction .

there are also other posters of whom i have varying degrees of agreement on their plans but at least i know its their plans so i can respect that .

i dont get that from you...so i want to see whats going on in that head of yours.

what makes you think gutting the team for picks will work any better for the knicks than the majority of the bottom 3rd of the league which is seemingly constantly gutting their teams searching for that right superstar to lead them who almost never comes to them?

if not the draft then what player will come to the knicks on a gutted team that is so good he can tun a frnachise around , but somehow will take less money to be a knick because his own team can give him more , or is basically been told by his team they dont want him at that price ?

i will respond to the rest of your post when you can start on this .

__________________
"The country is full of good coaches. What it takes to win is a bunch of interested players."-Don Coryell, ex-San Diego Chargers Coach

alphaorange

What they should not do...even before they did it. Don't get Marbury (as far back as the old board), don't trade Frye (he has a real value, even as a back-up), Don't get Randolph...or Miles. Basically, we wouldn't be in this mess if I had been making the moves. So now you want to know how I would fix crap that an idiot created....OK.

Let Marbury expire or trade him for something that works for us or buy him out next year. Trade Zach for whatever you can get as long as a pick is included. Provided we get a top 5 this year, get Rose or Greene, and start Lee. I would try to accumulate a late first next year so we can try to trade our '09 first(probable lotto) to a lotto team's '08 pick....possible because there are more bigs available next years lottery. So I plan on filling two slots with young guys this year. Rose, Greene, Beasley, Gordon, Jordan etc. Everything hinges on getting that 2nd lotto pick. I'm sure they can do it IF they are committed to it. Its worth taking a bad contract back if it gets us that pick. Figure next years pick to be a high pick so the swap of picks is possible. Keeping Curry and redefining his role depends on how the picks end up. There are some attractive FAs that are either unrestricted or restricted that could be signed and traded. Smith, Frye, Childress, O'Bryant. We don't need a bunch just the right kind of guys to fill out the team with potential and effort guys. Might consider trying to get Nichols back as he had good chemistry with the young guys and would add a needed quality, since only Nate is shooting well from three....the rest of the team is a disaster. Doesn't make much sense to try to get more detailed since one decision is based on the ones preceding it and without knowing what can be actually done, details are just fantasy.

I think if you go back and check, you will find that Kiyaman and I have been nearly parallel in most of our views. Biggest difference is he thinks (or seems to) that the players can be shuffled on this team so that they function very well. I don't. We both think that chemistry and player usage is horrible, and that IT sucks as coach.

"any1 can say " they cant do it " when watching a losing team." Uh...I made my statements long before this team was the loser it is

"even though i rarely agree with kiyaman his thoughts are his own not something he is expousing from somewhere else and he is a solution minded person , a person who wants things to go in a positive direction .there are also other posters of whom i have varying degrees of agreement on their plans but at least i know its their plans so i can respect that ." Whose thoughts do you think I'm posting? All mine, right or wrong.

"what makes you think gutting the team for picks will work any better for the knicks than the majority of the bottom 3rd of the league which is seemingly constantly gutting their teams searching for that right superstar to lead them who almost never comes to them?" There are plenty of teams in the bottom third that I would trade the Knicks for...including last years big loser Portland. Gotta believe I'm not alone there.

"if not the draft then what player will come to the knicks on a gutted team that is so good he can tun a frnachise around , but somehow will take less money to be a knick because his own team can give him more , or is basically been told by his team they dont want him at that price ?" Where did I say we need a superstar? Especially via FA. I believe our best chance is in the draft.

"its also worth noting that you have failed to mention any team that would take marbury now for cap space after next season , who they would possibly send back or why they knicks would even want who'd they would send back?" I really don't know that there is one, just like you don't know if there isn't. I said I would explore that. Portland got rid of Zach, didn't they?

"you think gibson is a better player than balkman or collins ?" Funny how you talk about Gibson, who was merely one name on the list..in fact you spend a great deal on him...like that is the heart of my response. Is he better than Collins? Who knows? Maybe....he is younger (just 22), healthier, and shoots the ball much better. I hardly think you make the obvious point you seem to think you do.

"any core of decent players can be built up for title contention...if some1 around 2000-2002 said rip hamilton and billups would form the best backcourt in the league, champs and be perenial all stars by 2007 they would have been laughed at seeing how their careers were going at that point, billups a career vagabond and rip some1 his GM basically gave away because his contract demands (something in the 6 yrs 50 mil. range) were seen as ridiculous considering the kind of player he was thought to be...and at the time of the deal it wasn't seen as a bad one at all." Guess the GM was wrong, huh? Comparing what can happen to Hamilton and Billups is an exercise in fantasy. Besides Rip was very, very good. If you're suprised he turned out so good, it is very telling of you. He was a 20ppg guy and very young. You sound like the guy who was always saying how Curry was going to really expand his game.....The fact is that not many guys, in fact very few, ever get much better after several years in the league. So tell me, which players in your scenario do you think are going to really improve? And more to the point, since you have to KNOW the team you just constructed goes nowhere...ever....how is starting over any worse?

Did I miss any of your questions? BTW, its no rumble for me, Although I love to argue as much as the next guy, I prefer to have at it with serious, realistic opponents. So far, I haven't seen much here except pipe dreams, which, by the way, indicate the desperation the fans feel. Asking for finely detailed plan is an ignorant request since all that can done is speculation based on a general outline or concept. You ought to know that.

Gotham2krazy

Bring Back Gundy.
Demote Zeke to Head of Scouting.
Hire Kiki as GM.
Start a front court of either Lee and Curry or Zach and Morris.
Give Nate more minutes.
Promote Mardy to starting point guard.
Trade Stephon for a bag of skittles.

__________________
The Return to Mecca

alphaorange

Van Gundy's style is no longer effective. Up tempo offense is the word. Just playing defense is not enough anymore. I like Jeff but his style of play won't get it done anymore. Rather have Colangelo than Kiki. Curry and Zach are problems, not solutions to problems. Nate?....maybe. Collins may not be talented enough to be a starter. Marbury?..agree except get a pick, too.

jimmybean

Let Isaiah play PG!

nymoorestx

First you have to admit that this team is going to the lottery, and right now it's about damage control, so you retool the starting five:

Marbury - though I hate to admit it he is still the best player on the squad

Crawford - more productive as a starter

Chandler - see what the rookie has

Lee - need someone to offset Curry on the boards

Curry - don't give up on him yet.

Your bench:

Robinson - to spell Marbury, and a good scorer
Balkman - to spell Nichols or Lee
Rose - to spell Lee
Morris - to spell Curry

Trade:

Zach - maybe we can come up with a package to get Artest
James - may have to buy him out or ride him out on the bench
Q - I think he is shot. Trade him it you can, but not much value there.

Let Herb or Marc take over as coach for the rest of the season. Call it an audition if you'd like.

nymoorestx