Draft Pick

Im not sure if this has been discussed yet but I don't understand why the draft pick to the bulls wasn't lottery protected. Did Isiah think Curry was going to be our savior? He said its not going to be a strong draft, but still there are some impact players. The two draft picks we have (Spurs and Suns I believe) won't do us much good.

Gah!

 

You have Denver's pick from Toronto, not Phoenix's. And as for your first question, I don't know if you've noticed but Isiah is not exactly a solid GM.

 

The plan was to obviously make the playoffs with Brown around. I think we definitely had a legit shot if:

a)Curry came to camp healthy and in shape
Larry Brown coached well

Hopefully Carmelo Anthony and Tim Duncan suffer from injuries this season.

 

...cause we all know its easy to coach a team of underachieving selfish type players with a history of refusing to play ANY defence and several with a history of not listening/fighting with their coaches.


Larry Browns not worth 10 mill a season, and he's not doing a good job. But call it like it is. Brown's doing a horrible job coaching a horribly made team. I dont think any coach in the league could get this team any where near .500. And thats not bagging on your team, more trying to cut Larry some degree of slack.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 02civic:</div><div class="quote_post">...cause we all know its easy to coach a team of underachieving selfish type players with a history of refusing to play ANY defence and several with a history of not listening/fighting with their coaches.


Larry Browns not worth 10 mill a season, and he's not doing a good job. But call it like it is. Brown's doing a horrible job coaching a horribly made team. I dont think any coach in the league could get this team any where near .500. And thats not bagging on your team, more trying to cut Larry some degree of slack.</div>
You keep on saying they have a history of fight/not listening etc., but that all doesn't matter. Did they do it in New York? No, so what difference does that make.

34 starting lineups in 56 games says it all. Had the Knicks played consistent basketball and didn't have to worry about their coach trashing them publicly, there record could be much better.

 

02civic..Are you serious? Larry Brown has done a terrible job and his track record shouldn't blind you from the facts.

 

Q

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting shapecity:</div><div class="quote_post">You can't cut Larry any slack, because he knew the makeup of this team prior to signing. I think his ego got the best of him and he felt he could turn this team around right away.

I read an interesting theory today. Rumors are circulating that Larry Brown is tanking this season on purpose so Isiah gets canned. The Knicks would then bring in a puppet GM, while Larry made all the changes and eventually took over the role after he retires from coaching.</div>

you're right on the Larry issue..he did know what he was getting into when he signed. I'm not sure if he actually beleived he could turn the team around....he's a hall of fame coach not superman. But i do think he was of the beleif that it would be easier than what he's finding it to be.

The team is plain broken now though. No quick fixes will do it this time, they'll have to wait a few years for contracts to expire and JUST LET THEM EXPIRE! Trades wont cut it, to many players are so overpayed that no team will take them on without shedding some of their own expensive crappy peices (read crawford, marbury, james, rose, taylor, qrich, curry)

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Psycho Drama:</div><div class="quote_post">02civic..Are you serious? Larry Brown has done a terrible job and his track record shouldn't blind you from the facts.</div>
Thank you, I couldn't have said it better myself.


So, 02civic, what's wrong with this team.

Too many attitudes? Hasn't been a problem this season.

Selfishness? The players are actually sharing too much.

Out all of the 50+ Knick games you've seen, what do you see as the problem?

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Psycho Drama:</div><div class="quote_post">02civic..Are you serious? Larry Brown has done a terrible job and his track record shouldn't blind you from the facts.</div>


I never said he was doing good...or even that he was doing alright. He IS doing badly...in many ways...but the Knicks arent a bad team with a horrible record "because" of Larry Brown. Their worse than they should be yes...but in my opinion, put any coach you want in his place and they'll still be a bad team with a horrible record.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 02civic:</div><div class="quote_post">I never said he was doing good...or even that he was doing alright. He IS doing badly...in many ways...but the Knicks arent a bad team with a horrible record "because" of Larry Brown. Their worse than they should be yes...but in my opinion, put any coach you want in his place and they'll still be a bad team with a horrible record.</div>
Please elaborate on this more. I'm thoroughly convinced if you had less than 33 starting lineups, consistent player rotations, and a coach who doesn't publicly trash his team, they would be much better.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">Thank you, I couldn't have said it better myself.


So, 02civic, what's wrong with this team.

Too many attitudes? Hasn't been a problem this season.

Selfishness? The players are actually sharing too much.

Out all of the 50+ Knick games you've seen, what do you see as the problem?</div>


The problem in my opinion is that this team's peices dont fit, and never wit. Not enough role players, to many pure scorers, no one willing to even feign interest in defence, not enough hustle players, a generally undersized team even by eastern conference standards, and far to many players that need the ball in their hands to score.

I havent seen all of the 50+ Knicks games this season...probably more like 20-25, so i make no claims of "knowing it all", but that said, it doesnt take a genious to say that the Knicks lineup is just a clump of skilled players with no real sense of "team" play.

Frye is a talent for sure, Lee has hustle and Nate is coming along well....the Knicks can have a good future but first they need to realize that its better to suck for a few years in order to be great, than to go years and years being mediocre.

To quote a saying "you have to walk throught the darkness to get to the light"

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">Please elaborate on this more. I'm thoroughly convinced if you had less than 33 starting lineups, consistent player rotations, and a coach who doesn't publicly trash his team, they would be much better.</div>


100% right..they would be doing better than they are now. All i'm saying is that while LB IS doing a bad job, to many talk about it as if LB is all thats wrong with the team. As if getting a new coach would be the difference between night and day and this team would be in the playoffs.
I'm just disagreeing with those people. LB is doing a suffeciently bad enough job to deserve getting fired, however this team at most might be good for another 3-6 wins over an 82 game season with Avery Johnson, Mike D or Flip.


Summary..the coach is sh!t, coaching like sh!t, acting like sh!t, but he's not the only reason this team isnt performing.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">You keep on saying they have a history of fight/not listening etc., but that all doesn't matter. Did they do it in New York? No, so what difference does that make.
</div>

But they are doing it in New York. Their not yelling and screaming publicly but they are clearly not listening to their coach. The wont play defence, and i know Larry is preaching that 95% of the day..and yet look at how the players are out on the floor. Sure they've had tons of lineups in far to short a time span and that hurts alot. In a more stable situation the players could communicate more on offense/defense, they'd know what the others are going to do and make better decisions based on that. But that said, there's no excuse whatsoever for the Knicks players total and absolute lack of effort


sorry for the triple post i has missed this MrJ post and wanted to better explain what i was trying to say.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 02civic:</div><div class="quote_post">The problem in my opinion is that this team's peices dont fit, and never wit. Not enough role players, to many pure scorers, no one willing to even feign interest in defence, not enough hustle players, a generally undersized team even by eastern conference standards, and far to many players that need the ball in their hands to score.

I havent seen all of the 50+ Knicks games this season...probably more like 20-25, so i make no claims of "knowing it all", but that said, it doesnt take a genious to say that the Knicks lineup is just a clump of skilled players with no real sense of "team" play.

Frye is a talent for sure, Lee has hustle and Nate is coming along well....the Knicks can have a good future but first they need to realize that its better to suck for a few years in order to be great, than to go years and years being mediocre.

To quote a saying "you have to walk throught the darkness to get to the light"</div>
One of the reasons why Jalen Rose was brought in was because of his ability to score. One of the issues facing the Knicks was their inability to score, so I don’t know what you mean by they’re too many scorers. The Knicks actually need more people who can put the ball in the basket. The defense has been a concern, but it makes it even worse when you play so inconsistently. It takes players more of a time to get into the flow of the game defensively when they’re completely confused on their role.

You say the Knicks need some hustle players, but David Lee is a hustle player and barely logs any minutes for Larry Brown. Same thing goes for Trevor Ariza when he was with us. He would give us energy dive on the floor and play great defense, but Brown never gave him any minutes.

They’re lineup has no team play? Which one of the 33?

You mentioned three great rookies we have which don’t get consistent burn because of Larry Brown. Every single rookie has been more effective than Malik Rose, Maurice Taylor, and Antonio Davis (when he played here), but Brown still didn’t play them.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 02civic:</div><div class="quote_post"> 100% right..they would be doing better than they are now. All i'm saying is that while LB IS doing a bad job, to many talk about it as if LB is all thats wrong with the team. As if getting a new coach would be the difference between night and day and this team would be in the playoffs. I'm just disagreeing with those people. LB is doing a suffeciently bad enough job to deserve getting fired, however this team at most might be good for another 3-6 wins over an 82 game season with Avery Johnson, Mike D or Flip.

Summary..the coach is sh!t, coaching like sh!t, acting like sh!t, but he's not the only reason this team isnt performing.</div>
Okay, with only 3-6 more wins you’re basically saying that Larry Brown’s 33 different starting lineups in 56 games basically don’t have an effect on the players. Or the trashing he does to the media. Or their lack of a set rotation still 56 games into the season. How can you say Brown is doing a bad enough job to get fired than say this team at best would win 3-6 more games? That means he did a pretty good job.

Also, let’s note the fact that when Marbury and Curry play the Knicks are 15-20. That’s still a bad record, but pretty close to .500. We’re also not taking into consideration how many times Marbury has played with one shoulder, or Curry on one leg.

I actually think the Knicks would be much better with Mike D’Antoni. Just look at their roster, everyone can run the floor. The Knicks are discouraged by Larry Brown to get fast break points despite the fact the team is best suited for that. Their scoring problem is also attributed to the lack of easy buckets they can get in transition.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 02civic:</div><div class="quote_post">But they are doing it in New York. Their not yelling and screaming publicly but they are clearly not listening to their coach. The wont play defence, and i know Larry is preaching that 95% of the day..and yet look at how the players are out on the floor. Sure they've had tons of lineups in far to short a time span and that hurts alot. In a more stable situation the players could communicate more on offense/defense, they'd know what the others are going to do and make better decisions based on that. But that said, there's no excuse whatsoever for the Knicks players total and absolute lack of effort


sorry for the triple post i has missed this MrJ post and wanted to better explain what i was trying to say.</div>
Well, defense hasn’t been a strong point for us this season, but you have to note the improvements. Marbury has become a pretty decent defender this year and Richardson has been very much improved since he played in Phoenix. How can you say their ridiculous lineup changes hurts a lot then say at best they’re good for another 3-6 wins. That means the lineup changes don’t have much of an effect at all.

The 33 lineups in 56 games have players confused and also takes away their confidence. This is the first time any of them in their careers have been in such a situation. Just like shape said, if you play 30 minutes one game and 0 the next you will be confused and it will be very, very challenging adjusting to that pattern because most players need to find a rhythm within the game. With Brown calling players “delusional” and saying they can’t understand something because they went to an engineering school, it will take away just about all the confidence you have, especially for the rookies. Many times the Knicks have shown a lack of effort, but their lack of confidence is due to this as well.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">One of the reasons why Jalen Rose was brought in was because of his ability to score. One of the issues facing the Knicks was their inability to score, so I don?t know what you mean by they?re too many scorers. The Knicks actually need more people who can put the ball in the basket. The defense has been a concern, but it makes it even worse when you play so inconsistently. It takes players more of a time to get into the flow of the game defensively when they?re completely confused on their role.</div>

This team should never have a hard time scoring..pre Jalen Rose. They werent scoring alot no. Thats partially Larry's system and partially the fact that it was essentially a 2 on 5 on offence. 2 Knicks would do some sort of a pick and role while the other 3 stood there with their hands on their knees. I would contend that the Knicks lack of scoring opportunities isnt due to a lack of scorers, but becuase to many of the current scorers on the team need the ball in their hands to be of any use at all on the offensive end.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">
You say the Knicks need some hustle players, but David Lee is a hustle player and barely logs any minutes for Larry Brown. Same thing goes for Trevor Ariza when he was with us. He would give us energy dive on the floor and play great defense, but Brown never gave him any minutes.

They?re lineup has no team play? Which one of the 33? </div>

Agreed. Lee should be getting all his current minutes plus any they give to Malik or Taylor. Those 2 shouldnt play. Ariza also should of gotten considerable minutes, i know there were some issues their between him and Brown..not sure what came of that really.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">
You mentioned three great rookies we have which don?t get consistent burn because of Larry Brown. Every single rookie has been more effective than Malik Rose, Maurice Taylor, and Antonio Davis (when he played here), but Brown still didn?t play them.</div>

Again ya they should be getting 90% of that burn. Antonio Davis would be the only player their who was deserving of minutes. And thats only because a) the team needed toughness badly i'd rather have Davis taking backup 5 spot minutes than J. James



<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">
Okay, with only 3-6 more wins you?re basically saying that Larry Brown?s 33 different starting lineups in 56 games basically don?t have an effect on the players. Or the trashing he does to the media. Or their lack of a set rotation still 56 games into the season. How can you say Brown is doing a bad enough job to get fired than say this team at best would win 3-6 more games? That means he did a pretty good job.</div>

not really. I'd say the biggest problem i have with larry isnt the losses, its the way the teams loosing. Its the number of points you guys are getting hammered by and the slow starts/sloppy endings to quarters/games.
3-6 wins isnt all that bad, but no its not significant really. I think with a new coach more suited to the style you'd get maybe 5 more wins but the team would peform more consistently, and the losses would be much much closer.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">
Also, let?s note the fact that when Marbury and Curry play the Knicks are 15-20. That?s still a bad record, but pretty close to .500. We?re also not taking into consideration how many times Marbury has played with one shoulder, or Curry on one leg.</div>

True. Althought injuries are part of every teams season you do have to take them into account.

Offtopic: at times i look at Curry and think he's gunna be something, but then right afterwards i ask if i'd trade a possible #1 pick for him. Why Why didnt he try to protect that pick.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">
I actually think the Knicks would be much better with Mike D?Antoni. Just look at their roster, everyone can run the floor. The Knicks are discouraged by Larry Brown to get fast break points despite the fact the team is best suited for that. Their scoring problem is also attributed to the lack of easy buckets they can get in transition.</div>

I'm not totally sure Larry discourages the fast break. The team doesnt do it as much as others do true...but also you have to remember that with the Knicks high opponent fg% and the Knicks low rebounding #'s the opportunities for fast breaks are significanly less than those other running teams.
That said...I do agree LB should push the ball more than he is, as much as possible. Larry's to used to playing the halfcourt grinding type of game, and this team just isnt cut out for that.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">
The 33 lineups in 56 games have players confused and also takes away their confidence. This is the first time any of them in their careers have been in such a situation. Just like shape said, if you play 30 minutes one game and 0 the next you will be confused and it will be very, very challenging adjusting to that pattern because most players need to find a rhythm within the game. With Brown calling players ?delusional? and saying they can?t understand something because they went to an engineering school, it will take away just about all the confidence you have, especially for the rookies. Many times the Knicks have shown a lack of effort, but their lack of confidence is due to this as well.</div>


Ya i hear ya. its sort of the chicken or the egg. What came first, the players being lazy and having a lack of effort or the hit to their confidence they took from Larry moving them around?

I think larry's frequent and drastic lineup changes are horrible...i'm not really sure what he's doing alot of the time actually. But even with the lineup craziness, the players need to be willing to show up for a game their getting paid 10's of thousands of dollars to PLAY.

I think the Knicks situation is an example of both the players and the coach being of equal blame. Only solution is to kill off the dead weight, hire a cheerleader to coach in place of LB and send Malik, Taylor, Crawford and James down to the D-league for some humble pie.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting shapecity:</div><div class="quote_post">I think this is a great example of how dysfunctional and frustrating it's been for the players.</div>

agreed, very odd

 

Hey MrJ I have a question for you and anyone else who thinks Larry Brown is doing a lousy job. Who has to lose with this team before you admit that this team cant win no matter who is the coach? Scott Skiles? Phil Jackson? Rick Carlisle? Van Gundy? Flip Saunders? Popovich? I said it in the preseason this team was bad and no coach living or dead in the history of sports could get this team anywhere near .500. Brown definetely had an idea of what he was getting into but he can only do his best with what he has to work with. You can have the greatest brain surgeon in the world but if he doesnt have the tools to perform the surgery than there's nothing he can do. That doesnt make him a bad brain surgeon it means that the surgery simply cant be done.

I said it before the season began and I'll say it again: Larry Brown is not Jesus Christ. He cannot walk on water and he cant perform miracles like getting this sorry team anywhere near the playoffs. We've had a former coach of the year, the winningest coach in history, a nice prospect and now we have the best coach in the NBA. The only constant has been the team and of course Isiah Thomas. Brown has gone to the finals in back to back years and been a winner everywhere he has gone and now that he's coaching the Knicks he's all of a sudden a bad coach? I dont think so. Any coach who tries to coach this team of losers will lose. This team makes any coach regardless of how good they may actually be look bad. So tell me again guys who has to fail with this collection of misfits and losers for you to realize that the team is the problem not the coach?


Anyway I think Isiah Thomas should be fired.