NBA Discussion Thread Pt. II
View Single Post
07-19-2013, 05:42 AM
Join Date: Dec 2005
Originally Posted by
I live in the real world. Things can always go wrong. Houston had the second best offense in basketball, but the third worst defense last year. Adding a defensive beast like Howard should make them contenders, I believe it does, but I also admit the possibility that something unexpected could happen. But they now at least have the raw talent on their roster to contend. You can't truthfully say the same thing about the Knicks.
Houston was one of the worst teams in the WC in opposing 3 point FG % and FG% from the outside. They were also dead least in the NBA in turnovers. Dead last and by a massive marive (almost a full turnover a game more than No. 29)
If you watched Houston last year and in the postseason, their interior defense wasn't the problem as much as their transition and perimeter defense was.
How an oft-injured center like Howard improves their ability to protect the ball and defend the outside and transition is something I'll believe when I see.
First off, Asik is a very good starting center. Just because they jumped to add a franchise player at his position when they had the chance (as any sane franchise would) doesn't make him any less of a player.
Last year was his first as a starter. He signed the contract as a backup.
Picking up Asik and Lin was savvy from their end because it allowed them to add talent to their roster without creating a salary cap mess or costing them any of the talent or assets already on their roster. One franchise can let a guy go and one franchise can pick up the same guy and it can be a good gamble for both teams. In fact that's kind of the point of a poison pill contract.
There's nothing "savvy" about paying Jeremy Lin 30 million bucks to sit on a bench lat ein games, and shoot 25% from the floor with 3 turnovers a game in the postseason.
Gee GWOW, I had no idea that competent teams use all three methods of player acquisition. The Heat drafted Wade and kept him and drafted Butler and then dealt him for Shaq? I had no idea. It's not like I pointed all of this out at some point.
I like how you changed your stance on trading draft picks and signing free agents. So now it's OK for every other team to do it, except the Knicks. Wade was a 5th overall pick. The Heat have been nothing more than a mediocre franchise since he was drafted without Shaq and Lebron.
So now you get to be arbiter of how everyone else should enjoy sports. Good to know.
No, I'm just calling you out as a phony. You won't admit what team you root for, but openly bash the Knicks, then you drop a Disingenuous line like "I don't have a problem with the Knicks".
Please. You pull the same crap on the baseball board with Yankee bashing. Oh what a surprise -- a disgruntled Mets fan who will never back down from a chance to bash the Yankees for spending and steroids.
No. Silly Knicks for betting on Stoudemire's health. Silly Knicks for throwing gobs of cash at everything that moves and expecting it to fix everything. Silly Knicks for treating cap space like it something they have to immediately dispose of whether there's someone worth using it on or not.
Silly Knicks for improving their roster and becoming a good team with a core 30 or younger, which is what all their moves have done.
I like how you keep discrediting their growth from a 25-win team to a 54-win team and No. 2 seed in just three seasons. Keep exposing and discrediting yourself. The fact that you refuse to admit what team you root for makes iyou argument against the Knicks even more laughable and sad.
Yes, the Knicks have flaws. Yes, the Knicks have a short window. But to discredit the rebuilding they've done after over a decade of misery makes you look small.
Yes, they've piled up a lot of wins against weak Eastern Conference teams and constructed a roster that's perpetual second round fodder or third round fodder if they get supremely lucky.
Another lame, typical, knee-jerk argument from the average disgruntled sports fan.
"Well...Team A doesnt deserve credit because they had a weak schedule....Even though they had their best season in 12 years, they're really not that good."
Now you're just being petty. You're schedule argument has already been discredited since they finished with a winning record against the top six teams in the NBA this season, including 5-1 against the Heat and Spurs combined.
"Third round fodder"...So teams who make the CF aren't contenders now?
I'm having a deja vu feeling. Something about how the Knicks' flaw is that they over-commit to free agency, not that they should over-commit to something else instead. It also had something to do with my point being you shouldn't just flush picks away on crap like Bargnani when you don't have to. And you're right: Shumpert was a good pick. It's too bad that unless Hardaway proves himself, he's the only one on the roster.
It's almost like the Western Conference has a lot of really, really strong teams or something. It's almost like the Knicks record, which was good enough for the second seed in the East last year, would've only been good enough for the sixth seed in the West.
Man, you're showing your hand again as a guy who really doesn't understand the NBA.
5th and 6th seeds dont contend. In the WC, they never contend. Go do your HW and come back to the discussion.
History is not supporting your argument. The last NBA team lower than a 4 seed to make the CF was the 1999 Knicks.
LOL....Now I'm waiting to hear you say WC teams who are 5 or 6 seeds and lose in the 1st or 2nd round are still considered "contenders".....Oh, I forgot...you changed it to "possible contenders"
The Knicks aren't contenders because when they miss out on the true franchise altering talent, they go ahead and flush their assets for the next best thing rather than waiting for another true franchise altering talent. That's how you wind up with over $30 million in cap space committed to Stoudemire and Bargnani.
So guys who are top-3 in MVP voting and lead the NBA in scoring aren't "franchise-altering" players?
You keep shooting yourself in the foot with these absurd statements. For all his shortcomings, saying Carmelo Anthony isn't a franchise player who has made the Knicks one of the better teams in the NBA is just another example of you coming across like some sort of obsessed Knick hater. Like I said before, you do the same thing with the Yankees.
What happens if the Rondo/Love/Aldridge group doesn't make it to free agency or they all decide to go elsewhere? Will the Knicks finally be bright enough to not get an itchy trigger finger? Or will they once again take the plunge on the next best thing? You have no idea. Franchise history doesn't point to them making the smart big picture play.
They will have cap space to do a number of things -- retain and build around their current core or revamp. It's called flexibility.
Another scenario: What happens if Rondo/Love/Aldridge/someone equally valuable hits the trade market between now and 2015? The Knicks have no way to go out and get that guy because they don't have anything to trade for him.
Thanks, Commissioner Stern for stopping by to inform us that the Knicks are banned from the NBA trade process, and any attempts to acquire prescious late 1st and 2nd rounder from now until 2015 is strictly prohibited.
Last edited by DM23BK30: 07-19-2013 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by DM23BK30