<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post">Who do you have in mind for our expiring contracts. I mean we're not going to get anybody like Garnett or Duncan. We might have a while new team but it's not performing nearly as well as we thought so we have to do something about it. Van Horn worked out really well with us last season there's no reason why he cant do the same. Maybe we can have the same line up we should have had. You know with Stephon Marbury at the point, Kieth Van Horn at the small forward and Allan Houston at the shooting guard. The only issue will be how healthy Van Horn is. We cant get draft picks for our expiring contracts. More often than not a team that takes expiring contracts is rebuilding and no rebuilding team will ever trade away draft picks. We can only get players with our expiring contract, players with long, and hefty contracts. But if we keep trading away expiring contracts for players we'll never get under the cap. We should hang onto at least one of the expiring contracts and see if we can get Van Horn with the other. That way we can come a little bit closer to getting under the cap and improve the team in the short term. Maybe trade Kurt Thomas for a pick or expiring contract or a young player to help us in the future and at the same time clear more play time for Sweetney. We have pleny of moves available to us, not as many and not as good as last season but good enough to be a better team next season while improving our chances of success in the future.</div> Yeah, I never thought about that. You're right we probably couldn't snag draft picks...at least not legit ones. I wouldn't mind Van Horn, but you know how teams go crazy for expiring contracts. We can get many players for expiring contracts. Why don't we trade Ariza, Sweetney, 1st rounder expiring contract for, Antoine Walker. Haha, that was a good one but, really I would want someone more estblished or maybe younger. Also, you would have to wonder what it would do to Steph and Marbury. Now that KVH knows for sure Marbury wanted him shipped out, I think it can affect them. I don't know what we should do with our contracts but whatever we do, I think it should be an effective one that will benefit us long term as well.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post"> First off Van Horn before he got injured was averaging a double double. I've never heard of anyone complain about Van Horn's contract. It's pretty reasonable in a league full of players with unreasonable contracts. And he was shooting at a very high percentage from behind the arc as well. Something like 45% which was one of highest percentages at the time. So no I wouldnt call Van Horn crappy. </div> http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story...209/nbaoverpaid http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/overpaidnba.html http://www.justbball.com/forums/showthread...hlight=overpaid If you've never heard anyone mention how overpaid he is you must have selective hearing. Great he was shooting a decent %, but does that make up for his other incredible poor qualities. He couldnt gaurd one of the maskots and he's about has court savy has elmer fud. He's overpaid and i think you're overrating him as well. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post"> I wasnt on this forum when the Van Horn trade went down but as soon as I found out about it I was sick to my stomach. Whoever thought it was even a decent trade obviously didnt know what they were talking about, too obsessed with athleticism without taking into account anything else or at the very least werent familiar with the Knicks at the time. Personally I'd rather have Van Horn and Doleac right now. </div> So you're for a trade: Nazr for Van Horn right now? TT was the same type of player has Van Horn, and was putting up similiar numbers in years past (1 or 2 less rpg) before the trade. And in 17 minutes Nazr was pulling down 5 boards and making 6.5 ppg at nearly 50% shooting with the Hawks. The deal was a solid deal for the Knicks at the time, and even with TT tanking Nazr is worth Van Horn. Sure they got the weaker of the two SF's but they got a very young, very decent 7 footer that now is a major part of your team and future since his contract is very reasonable. Nazr is better than Van Horn striaght up, AND he's in a position that's hard to come by now and days, AND without him the Knicks would be a joke in the middle. So on top of him you got a player in TT that didnt work out, but just as easily could of performed well enough to make up for most of KVH's strengths.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post"> By the way how much further downhill did you expect TT to go? It's not like he was terribly impressive before he came. He was an underachiever. Wasn't he coming off the bench? At the time I never saw one, not one, reasonably serious analyst say that trade was good or even decent. How can you call Nazr a legit center and not call Doleac a legit center when Nazr has no real edge in numbers and Doleac is a better defender? This is mind boggling to me. It's like you have no opinion of your own and you're just going along with what everyone else is saying. </div> Van Horn was an underachiever too. And TT had started every game the season he was traded, and all but 12 the season before. His numbers were pretty good (14pts, 5rbs, .443fg% and .362% from behind the arc) too, and alot of people felt that he could be motivated out of his shell by playing in the big apple. After the trade he was averaging nearly 16 points, still only 5 boards a game but he ws shooting .452 from the field and .406 from 3. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post"> It's easy to say the trade was bad when you see the outcome. But it's also easy to say the trade was a bad idea when it first happens. Noone who really knows basketball thought it was a good idea. The Knicks were playing well. Period. The pick and roll had become our deadliest play, Doleac was getting more involved in the paint, Van Horn was consistent and we were winning. I'm sorry to say the only people who thought it was a good trade at the time were people who simply didnt understand basketball. Just didnt understand the nuances of the game and thought that being athletic was what the sport was about. TT is more athletic but he cant shoot, pass or rebound with any consistency. Nazr was stronger and faster and can jump higher but Doleac knew how to play. This is a text book example of why fundamentals are better than athleticism. </div> 1) You're saying alot of JBB members dont know what they're talking about since everyone in the thread said it was a good trade, including myself. I think your bitterness towards TT has caused you to not look at the trade objectively. 2) So You're saying Doleac is better than Nazr now too? Yes or No. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post"> My friend I could care less about how he's performing for Milwuakee. We use him differently than you guys do. He was doing pretty damn good for us. He was averaging about 18ppg and 7 rpg while playing small forward for us. Maybe it's the system he's in which is why he isnt doing very well. Wasnt he coming off the bench? And dont forget he's injured as well. You cant get mad when a player gets injured, it happens. But thanks for telling me about his contract situation I wasnt aware that he got paid that much. Would you really want TT back? Because if I could, I'd give TT right back to you with cash. By the way he's a shooter as long as he can still run up and down the court and avoid serious injuries he'll be serviceable for many more years to come.</div> 1)Actually he was averaging 16.4 and 7.3 and his % were similiar to TT's. 2)How can you be arguing with me about whether or not a player is overpaid without knowing how much he makes!!!!! <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post"> By the way you guys think we can trade one of our expiring contracts for Van Horn? Maybe TT?</div> 1) Before you start in on a topic, taking such a opposing stance vs me try and find out what you're talking about. First you dont know how much money KVH makes but you say he's not overpaid. Now you're suggesting trading TT's expiring contract for KVH's expiring contract Throw in Nazr and they'd do it. <u>Are you for it....Nazr and TT for Van Horn?</u>
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Isiah Thomas acquired Tim from Milwaukee in the middle of last season, and it doesn't appear this was one of the key rebuilding moves the Knicks had hoped for. The 6-foot-10-inch forward muscles his way to 3.4 rebounds a game and adds 10.3 points, his worst numbers since the 1998-99 season. He's only 27, but he's a downgrade from his all-overpaid list buddy, Keith Van Horn</div> You're very article mentioned that, agreeing with me, Tribute, KA, and the rest of the Knick fam. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">]So you're for a trade: Nazr for Van Horn right now? And what are you talking about athleticism....niether TT, Nazr or KVH have that...so moot. TT was the same type of player has Van Horn, and was putting up similiar numbers in years past (1 or 2 less rpg) before the trade. And in 17 minutes Nazr was pulling down 5 boards and making 6.5 ppg at nearly 50% shooting. The deal was an awesome deal for the Knicks. Sure they got the weaker of the two SF's but they got a very young, very decent 7 footer that now is a major part of your team and future since his contract is very reasonable.</div> Actually, TT and Nazr are quite athletic. Are you trying to down play the KVH's stellar play in NY? He was rebounding very well for us with about 7.7rpg. Nazr was a 3rd string for the Hawks, there was another way to acquire him without giving up KVH. Even if that were the case, Mohammed didn't play so well last season. It wasn't untill, the summer he started getting better. We could have just acquired him in the offseason then. Isiah said it himself he didn't want to give up Doleac, he said he was improveing and he really was too. An awsome deal for the Knicks...NO! <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Nazr is better than Van Horn striaght up, AND he's in a position that's hard to come by now and days, AND without him the Knicks would be a joke in the middle. So on top of him you got a player in TT that didnt work out, but just as easily could of performed well enough to make up for most of KVH's strengths.</div> You're plain wrong right here. Nazr is having a good season putting uo 11 and 8 but, better than what KVH was for us, there is where you're wrong. KVH was getting to the line, he was rebounding well, shooting well and caused opponents big problems with his height and stroke. His defense was also improving in NY too. We got an extremely overpaid BUM in TT who hurts us just about every day, and a good center, for a player who was playing great and meshing perfectly, and a decent center who was meshing well. Oh and by the way, we also lost a 2nd rounder too. I think we get the short end of the trade.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting mrj18:</div><div class="quote_post">You're very article mentioned that, agreeing with me, Tribute, KA, and the rest of the Knick fam. </div> I admitted he was a step down from the start?!?! At the time it wasnt a MASSIVE downgrade though....not at the time based on what was known then My point is Nazr was an upgrade over Doleac. I dont care how well you felt Doleac was playing, Nazr had all the tools to do the same and he had more of an upside. Which made the trade at least equal at the time. And knowing what we know now with TT=garbage, Van Horn=injured garbage, Doleac=series backup garbage, Nazr=potential, upside, good numbers, not garbage, the knicks still get the good end of the deal. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting mrj18:</div><div class="quote_post"> Actually, TT and Nazr are quite athletic. Are you trying to down play the KVH's stellar play in NY? He was rebounding very well for us with about 7.7rpg. Nazr was a 3rd string for the Hawks, there was another way to acquire him without giving up KVH. Even if that were the case, Mohammed didn't play so well last season. It wasn't untill, the summer he started getting better. We could have just acquired him in the offseason then. Isiah said it himself he didn't want to give up Doleac, he said he was improveing and he really was too. An awsome deal for the Knicks...NO! </div> 1) He was playing well(7.3rpg), its always risky trading a player that's playing well, but sometimes its necessary. Trade when value is high to get the most. KVH might as easily tanked if he had not of been traded...but we'll never know. there was potential for the trade to pay big dividends. If TT felt pushed by being in NY he could of really improved, beyond the numbers KVH was putting up. And Mohommed did work out just like they had hoped he would. 2)Mohommad was putting up good numbers in his playing time and it was readily excepted that he deserved more minutes. 3)Nazr didnt play well last season for you? How about 9.1 ppg on 56% shooting? How about the 7.7 boards(2.9 offensive) and 1.2 steals in 24.9 minutes? <div class="quote_poster">Quoting mrj18:</div><div class="quote_post"> You're plain wrong right here. Nazr is having a good season putting uo 11 and 8 but, better than what KVH was for us, there is where you're wrong. KVH was getting to the line, he was rebounding well, shooting well and caused opponents big problems with his height and stroke. His defense was also improving in NY too. We got an extremely overpaid BUM in TT who hurts us just about every day, and a good center, for a player who was playing great and meshing perfectly, and a decent center who was meshing well. Oh and by the way, we also lost a 2nd rounder too. I think we get the short end of the trade.</div> TT could spread the defence just as good as KVH could spread the defence! You guys are talking like he cant shoot! he's inconsistent sure, but so was KVH! You say that he was consistent once he came to the Knicks so why cant the same be true for TT....he could of become consistent. TT has nearly identical career FG and 3point % as KVH! TT is a BUM....now. He could of gotten out of it like KVH did.....but he didnt. And now KVH is a BUM.....too. But at the time, it was 2 starters for 1.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 02civic:</div><div class="quote_post">Van Horn was an underachiever too. And TT had started every game the season he was traded, and all but 12 the season before. His numbers were pretty good (14pts, 5rbs, .443fg% and .362% from behind the arc) too, and alot of people felt that he could be motivated out of his shell by playing in the big apple. After the trade he was averaging nearly 16 points, still only 5 boards a game but he ws shooting .452 from the field and .406 from 3.</div> He wasn't underacheiving in NY. He was playing very well. He averaged so much because he was the 2nd option. Houston was gone, and Nazr was playing poorly. 15.8ppg, 4.8rpg 1.4apg doesn't impress me much. His 3 pointers are overrated. He played 24 games for us but only made 26. That's just about making one 3 a game. Waaay overrated statistic. KVH had not lived up to his expectations but, he played well for us. TT hasn't lived up to his but, he hasn't. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">1) You're saying alot of JBB members dont know what they're talking about since everyone in the thread said it was a good trade, including myself. I think your bitterness towards TT has caused you to not look at the trade objectively.</div> I'm not Tribute but, I think he might be trying to say they were unaware of the outcome. Even if it proved to be decent, it was very risky. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">1)Actually he was averaging 16.4 and 7.3 and his % were similiar to TT's.</div> Could you please pull out the stats?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting mrj18:</div><div class="quote_post">He wasn't underacheiving in NY. He was playing very well. He averaged so much because he was the 2nd option. Houston was gone, and Nazr was playing poorly. 15.8ppg, 4.8rpg 1.4apg doesn't impress me much. His 3 pointers are overrated. He played 24 games for us but only made 26. That's just about making one 3 a game. Waaay overrated statistic. KVH had not lived up to his expectations but, he played well for us. TT hasn't lived up to his but, he hasn't.</div> Right KVH wasnt underachieving in NY, and i believe it was hoped that TT would also get out of his underachieving ways, because he had all the tools to be as good and better than KVH if he just played more consistently. Maybe your system didnt use him right. Thats the arguement Tribute used to defend why Van Horn blew for the Bucks so i'll try it here. End of the day TT has the same career 3% while shooting 150 more than KVH. Its kind of hard to have overrated statistics based over several years and 1,550 attempts. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting 02civic:</div><div class="quote_post"> 1) You're saying alot of JBB members dont know what they're talking about since everyone in the thread said it was a good trade, including myself. I think your bitterness towards TT has caused you to not look at the trade objectively.</div> <div class="quote_poster">Quoting mrj18:</div><div class="quote_post"> I'm not Tribute but, I think he might be trying to say they were unaware of the outcome. Even if it proved to be decent, it was very risky.</div> Thats the point...EVERYONE was unaware of the outcome. Time travel is yet to be mastered so every trade is a risk. At the time it was risky...it could of been a HUGE bust, it could of equalled out, or it could of been a HUGE knick advantage. How good would TT be if he did play with heart? If the NY media, orginization and fans, did make him work hard? Very good. And Nazr did work out HUGE so thats great. End of the day now you've got a real center (dont give me no Doleac garbage Tribute). TT didnt work this year but he was good last year, almost has good has KVH. And look how you guys did at the end of the season, in part thanks to these guys. But TT could of worked. So at the time it looked like a good trade....knowing what we know...i'd still say it was to the Knicks advantage by a bit. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting mrj18:</div><div class="quote_post"> Could you please pull out the stats?</div> sure http://www.nba.com/playerfile/keith_van_horn/index.html All i can say is that its easy to poo-poo trades after the fact. But i gaurentee if TT had of worked out you guys wouldnt of voiced your dislike of the trade, and you certainly wouldnt let it be known that when the trade was first done you thought it sucked. Whether its officiating or past trades or coaching, you shouldnt harp to much on it and use it has a cruch. Almost every game the Knicks have lost someone's made a comment about the officiating being horrible. And since Herb became coach people have been saying good things one day, and bad things the next. I'll exit this arguement now. But i want to know one thing. Would you trade TT and Nazr for KVH?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post"> How mature....I very politely asked you not to speak to me in a certain way and you turned it into something personal for absolutely no reason. While I'm tempted to flame and insult you back it's a little beneath me to do so, so I'll just let it go.</div> I'm really sorry, I've been cranky lately and little things that I normally wouldn't care about start to piss me off. Don't want any beef with you, bud.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 02civic:</div><div class="quote_post">Right KVH wasnt underachieving in NY, and i believe it was hoped that TT would also get out of his underachieving ways, because he had all the tools to be as good and better than KVH if he just played more consistently. Maybe your system didnt use him right. Thats the arguement Tribute used to defend why Van Horn blew for the Bucks so i'll try it here. End of the day TT has the same career 3% while shooting 150 more than KVH. Its kind of hard to have overrated statistics based over several years and 1,550 attempts.</div> It was hoped he lost his underachieving ways. That is what made it dumb. TT gave no one any reason to think that, plus he had a bad attitude. He does have talent but, what good is talent if you don't utilize it? There were many talanted players selected first in the draft but, they ended up as huge busts and very regrettable for their respectable franchise. I think if Eddy Curry played more consistently and worked he could be better than someone like say...Chris Bosh. But, is he? First off, bringing up that 3 point percentage I think it shows how 1 dimensional he is. You mentioned he has the same percentage, and yet over his career he averages 11.8ppg, while Van Horn averages 17.0ppg. TT also averages more 3 point attempts than freethrow attempts! That?s pretty bad especially considering he has all of those ?tools? you mention. If our system didn't fit him right, why trade for him? Second off, if our system isn?t working out for TT why would we trade for him? KVH and Doleac were very consistent and were improving in NY. They had great chemistry and just finished beating the team with the best record, the Pacers. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">sure http://www.nba.com/playerfile/keith_van_horn/index.html</div> That only shows his stats as a Buck and his overall average that season. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">All i can say is that its easy to poo-poo trades after the fact. But i gaurentee if TT had of worked out you guys wouldnt of voiced your dislike of the trade, and you certainly wouldnt let it be known that when the trade was first done you thought it sucked. Whether its officiating or past trades or coaching, you shouldnt harp to much on it and use it has a cruch. Almost every game the Knicks have lost someone's made a comment about the officiating being horrible. And since Herb became coach people have been saying good things one day, and bad things the next. I'll exit this arguement now.</div> Of course not, because it would have been a miracle. The trade already looked bad, but if it worked out we can?t complain. If you trade a bad player for a star but, your team starts playing well with the bad player, can you argue? No one can. Me, Tribute, KA, BobbyEscobar, TNG Impact, KnicksUK, Penny, Platehpus, Tha Knick, and most of us weren?t even around to comment on the trade. We didn?t register with JBB so how were we to express our discontent. Almost every Knick game there is something bad about the Knicks being said by you. Why haven?t you ever said anything good about them? I?ll exit this argument now. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">But i want to know one thing. Would you trade TT and Nazr for KVH?</div> I wouldn?t. KVH is more valuable for us. It was a last minute deadline thing without thinking. We could have gotten Nazr in the summer.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 02civic:</div><div class="quote_post">^ and what was the verdict on these forums?</div> It was mainly between me and Tribute. I thought the trade was decent and he thought it was bad. Now that I look back at it SUCKED. That was a while ago. Since then I have really come a long way.
I've been peeking at this thread ocassionally. I've decided not to comment since everyone knows exactly what I'd say. But I have some questions: Is anyone surprised? And does anyone here actually think that Isiah couldn't have gotten Mohhamed differently? I mean, really.
Exactly what i said Knicks Analyst, Mohammed was a 3rd string C in Atlanta, of course we didn't have to give up one of our most consistent players, our second leading rebounder, our 3rd leading scorer (Behind Houston's and Marbury's 20ish). I mean come on, either Isiah didn't like KVH, Isiah is a fool, or Marbury influenced the trade. It's got to be one of the three!
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 02civic:</div><div class="quote_post">I admitted he was a step down from the start?!?! At the time it wasnt a MASSIVE downgrade though....not at the time based on what was known then My point is Nazr was an upgrade over Doleac. I dont care how well you felt Doleac was playing, Nazr had all the tools to do the same and he had more of an upside. Which made the trade at least equal at the time. And knowing what we know now with TT=garbage, Van Horn=injured garbage, Doleac=series backup garbage, Nazr=potential, upside, good numbers, not garbage, the knicks still get the good end of the deal. 1) He was playing well(7.3rpg), its always risky trading a player that's playing well, but sometimes its necessary. Trade when value is high to get the most. KVH might as easily tanked if he had not of been traded...but we'll never know. there was potential for the trade to pay big dividends. If TT felt pushed by being in NY he could of really improved, beyond the numbers KVH was putting up. And Mohommed did work out just like they had hoped he would. 2)Mohommad was putting up good numbers in his playing time and it was readily excepted that he deserved more minutes. 3)Nazr didnt play well last season for you? How about 9.1 ppg on 56% shooting? How about the 7.7 boards(2.9 offensive) and 1.2 steals in 24.9 minutes? TT could spread the defence just as good as KVH could spread the defence! You guys are talking like he cant shoot! he's inconsistent sure, but so was KVH! You say that he was consistent once he came to the Knicks so why cant the same be true for TT....he could of become consistent. TT has nearly identical career FG and 3point % as KVH! TT is a BUM....now. He could of gotten out of it like KVH did.....but he didnt. And now KVH is a BUM.....too. But at the time, it was 2 starters for 1.</div> Ah the brilliant logic, it was two starters for one. Never mind the chemistry or the fact that the bench player was the one who finished games. Nevermind the fact that one of the two starters was a third stringer in the graveyard of the NBA. All you're doing is looking at the numbers. You're not taking anything else into consideration. I did say that anyone who thought the trade was a good idea at the time didnt understand basketball. But I also said, "or at the very least werent familiar with the Knicks". And you're showing that you werent familiar with them. You said that Van Horn was inconsistent but he was consistent when he was in New York. But you'd have to watch the games to know that. Most of the posters who supported the Van Horn deal obviously werent familiar with the Knicks at the time. All you're proving is that the numbers said the deal should be good. But there's more to the game than numbers. You have to take into account how their particular styles of play mesh. How and why they get their points is just as important as the points themselves. Van Horn didnt need the ball in his hands to be effective but TT does. Van Horn was also our second best rebounder on the team. Van horn stretches defenses(TT doesnt command enough respect to stretch defenses). Van Horn and Doleac were better freethrow shooters and freethrow shooting as all Knick fans know decide close games. There is more stuff like that, and when all of that stuff is put together it's called chemistry. mrj18 and myself constantly tell you that Doleac was being more aggressive in the paint but since you arent familiar with Knicks you didnt know that. Your personal opinions of Doleac aside, he was a great center for us. Because of the way we used him he was a good center. Nazr didnt have the tools to be at least as good as Doleac. He doesnt have a good jumper. That is what we wanted because the pick and roll was our most effective play. Neither Doleac or Nazr are shot blockers but Doleac could at least draw charges. It isnt about who's the better player, all that matters is who's the better player for the team. Van Horn and Doleac were simply better for the team. The Knicks werent as good after that trade. We had been climbing through the standings before the trade. Then afterwards we went straight to hell. It took a combination of Houston coming back way too soon and other teams having injuries for us to squeak into the playoffs. The team lost chemistry after that trade which is why it should have been considered a bad trade from the get go. But people just considered the players, nothing else, and assumed it was a good trade. Isiah broke one of the commandments of sports and life in general: Dont fix what isnt broken! And now Knicks fans know why that rule should not be broken. Because after Isiah broke that rule the Knicks were not the same again.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 02civic:</div><div class="quote_post">Thats the point...EVERYONE was unaware of the outcome. Time travel is yet to be mastered so every trade is a risk. At the time it was risky...it could of been a HUGE bust, it could of equalled out, or it could of been a HUGE knick advantage. How good would TT be if he did play with heart? If the NY media, orginization and fans, did make him work hard? Very good. And Nazr did work out HUGE so thats great. End of the day now you've got a real center (dont give me no Doleac garbage Tribute). TT didnt work this year but he was good last year, almost has good has KVH. And look how you guys did at the end of the season, in part thanks to these guys. But TT could of worked. So at the time it looked like a good trade....knowing what we know...i'd still say it was to the Knicks advantage by a bit.</div> Why do that?? If you are wining games because of great chemistry, including a recent stretch 6 of 5 win stretch including one to the best team in the league without Houston, why would you do it. That's how strong their chemistry was. You're whole justification of the trade is based mostly on if's. If I'm trying to make a run at the playoffs, and my team is already looking good, why trade away a successful team based on IF. In that case, why don't we trade Crawford, Ariza, and Sweetney to Chicago for Curry because if the NY media makes him work really hard, he can develop into his draft projection as Shaq. Doleac crap? While Doleac may not be as good as Mohammed he's not a bad player. He was a solid backup for us who has improved tremendously. The Knicks played him in close games and that pick and roll was lethal especially when Kurt Thomas was on the floor too, also KVH spread the floor and caused a nice distraction. The opposition had no idea what to do. Doleac was playing great basketball for us, he is not crap! TT was no where near as good as KVH was last year. Please I hope this was a joke.
Though New York got Nazr, when they traded Van Horn, I laughed because Van Horn is better than Tim Thomas. Yes TT will no some nicer dunks, but Van Horn is a better scorer, just as good a shooter, better rebounder, and they're both bad defenders, so their's no loss there. TT is one of the most underachieving players ever, Van Horn doesn't have the same athleticism, so you can't really hate on him much for not getting any better, but Thomas is big, tall and athletic and still sucks.
You said Van Horn was better than TT at pretty much everything...but that they both suck at defense. While that is true, let me just say that Tim Thomas' defense is twice as bad as Van Horn's. Van Horn got pumped in games and really clung to his man, I wouldn't say that he would ocassionally 'shut his man down' but he was pretty good ocassionally. Tim Thomas is just bad all the time. You laughed when the Knicks made the trade, I cried.
Um........when did I say KVH for TT straight up was a good deal. I do believe that the knicks also got Nazr Mohammed. Mohammed is above avg. for a big man, thats a big deal, especially in the East. Big deal, KVH can avg. 18pts and 7rebs a game in his prime, SO WHAT? How many players average that? And they sure as hell don't get paid over $14,000,000. You pay $14,000,000 to a franchise player. Someone you can build around, KVH is a role player, he can provide some instant offense, and thats it. He has zero defense, and he can't carry his own weight, let alone a team. HE STINKS!
