Cheech Tremendous

Yeah that deal just sounds crazy to me. You have to get at least one all-star back in a deal for Garnett. And I'm not so sure that deal even works under salary cap rules.

I've read this post about a half dozen times and still can't figure out what you are trying to ask.

That belt is hideous.

I'd say that the chances of that trade happening happening are somewhere between 0% and 0.00000000000000000001%.

Baseball Prospectus has released their 2006 list of the top 50 prospects in baseball. Link below: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4774

I'm thinking that the player to be involved would have to be Penny to make the salaries equal, right? I don't think Crawford or anyone else make enough. I don't like this trade for the Knicks, but I don't hate it as much beccause I think it will help them a bit more in the short term than Francis would have. Now they have a legitimate PF who plays defense and rebounds to go next to Curry. Adding Watson finally gives them a PG and allows Marbury to fit more comfortable into the two position. Big contracts for players who don't deserve them, blah, blah. I don't feel like getting into the argument again so I'll call it a wash for NY.

I have seen the light. Bring back the Heart Throbs! Show those same videos on Raw and these would of been the two most over guys on the roster.

The funny thing is, most of the biography is wrong if I remember correctly. Yeah? I didnt know that. What were the factual errors? If I had a tape, I would watch it again and post the errors. I haven't seen the original in years. I'm sure Meltzer did a write-up on it at one time or another. Maybe someone could pull the old issue and give a quick rundown.

Crazy trade idea: Why don't the Bulls offer something like Ben Gordon, Tim Thomas and their two first round picks this year for Kevin Garnett? Wouldn't this be something that could help out both teams? Minnesota would have a good, young player, two lottery picks and plenty of cap room heading into the summer. It's not like they are going to compete anytime soon... why not let Garnett go have a chance somewhere else and get out from the weight of his contract?

I miss the old days when the Trailblazers would sign fuck-ups who at could at least win some ballgames.

The Raiders are in total disarray. They've won 13 games in the three years since that Superbowl appearance. They are on their third coach. They are in cap hell. They scout and draft terribly. They have no QB, an overpaid RB, no defense and a headcase WR.

The Pistons did it their way, the Spurs did it theirs, the Pacers are successful with theirs, maybe we'll be fortunate with our way. You will not be successful this way. Wait, what exactly is your way? Francis, Marbury, Curry, Rose and whatever else are not going to win you a championship. Channing Frye could turn into Tim F'n Duncan and this team wouldn't be good. You know why? They have no flexibility. They have no way of adding role players or specialty guys off the bench because Isiah is too busy spending $125 million on the world's shittiest Rotisserie team.

Getting Francis isn't going to take away minutes from anyone. And the Dolan stuff, getting to the playoffs gets them more money. And Isiah didn't inherit a playoff team. They made the playoffs the year that Isiah got there, didn't they?

And trading for either Odom, Artest or Harrington would have done nothing for the team either. Odom puts it on cruise control when he's not the focus of the team. Harrington's contract is up at the end of the year. Artest probably would have murdered someone if he was put in that situation. There aren't any good trades out there for this team because they don't have tradeable pieces.

He inherited a playoff team that he quickly turned into the worst team in the NBA. It's been said before, all the Dolans care about is making that $1.7 million each night.

I can't think of one team that has as little to look forward to in the future as the Knicks do.

Ok, so if Isiah is this master at evaluating talent and drafting well, wouldn't it have made sense to horde picks, let some of the bad contracts run out, find a coach that could develop young players and start building to something 2-3 years down the road. There is no way they would be any worse off then they are now. Isiah's moves are completely contradictory to the method you think they should employ. The young guys are blocked by aging veterans with terrible contracts and no upside. You have to go one way or the other.

He's just pointing out the reasons why they fell and how that won't really help the Knicks. The Spurs drafted Parket and Ginobli. They understand the foreign market better than any other team and they are masters at maximizing their late round picks. Tayshaun Prince went to a team with a good structure where he could learn and develop his game with coaches and strong management. The Knicks don't really have a system that would foster this sort of development. Guys like Spree, Lewis and Arenas would have crumbled under the NY pressure. What exactly do guys like Robinson and Lee offer that is so fantastic? Wouldn't it be better to get a stud at the top of the draft than maximizing the chance to get a contributor at the end?

Actually, the Bulls could have been a hell of a lot better than that. They could have had a starting five of Hinrich, Hassell, Artest, Brand and Miller. But they had a piss poor GM who was hell bent on rebuilding his way and they were relegated to bottom feeders until Paxson came around. The pattern is that Nowitzki and O'Neal are good players with bright futures who were pegged as future stars by the teams that acquired them. The Knicks trade for overpriced junk.

It's not just getting under the cap, it's having manageable contracts that can be moved in later deals. The Knicks keep getting older and bringing back guys that no other team in the league will touch at that kind of money. The Pistons didn't just trade for Ben Wallace and Rip Hamilton, they got rid of Grant Hill and Jerry Stackhouse (overpaid players hitting the wrong side of 30). Rasheed was an expiring contract. They used late round picks to supplement the team, not build one. You also need to draft players that franchises can be built around. The Spurs have Tim Duncan. The Mavs have Dirk Nowitzki. The Pacers have Jermaine O'Neal. The Heat have Dwayne Wade. There is a pattern here. The Bulls sucked for seven years because they tried to build around young guys who you really couldn't build around (Williams, Crawford, Curry, Chandler) and overpaid junk (Rose, Davis). Funny how that sounds real similar. None of these teams have situations like the Knicks. They have real GMs who are patient, know how to draft and make trades that benefit the team now and in the future. The Knicks aren't following that model. They aren't following the Hawks or the Clippers model either. They aren't following any model. They have no plan. They keep throwing shit at the wall hoping something might stick.

Here's a little snippet I found in Sports Illustrated preview for the 2003-04 Knicks (the team that Isiah would inherit part way through the year). They were coming off a 37-45 season. "How long will they keep riding the treadmill? At some point, the Knicks are going to have to rebuild for real. The question is how long they can go on importing high-priced 30-somethings before they have to pay the piper. To general manager Scott Layden's credit, he did make the Knicks a bit younger in the offseason by drafting Sweetney and Lampe and gaining five years in the Van Horn trade. But besides the rookies there isn't a key player younger than 28. The point guard is 30, the shooting guard is 32 and the key backup is 30, and the best healthy power forward is 33. Those four are signed through 2006, and their bloated contracts combine to eat up nearly the entire salary cap. In other words, unless the current group ages unusually well or the Knicks find some young guys who can play, this thing could get real ugly. Until now New York's main response to the need to rebuild has been to import even more veterans and delay the process for as long as possible. That has failed the past two years, and as all the key players age, the odds of success aren't likely to improve. Since they're capped out anyway, the Knicks will be tempted to keep trying this approach for the next four years, and it might help them win, say, 34 games instead of 30. But if McDyess can't make it back, the Knicks would be well advised to nuke the roster and start over. The question is whether they have the willpower to make that decision, or if a deal for another declining veteran will tempt them to forestall it further." By the way, I quickly scanned their projected lineup for that year, and nearly every bad contract on that team would have been off the books by the end of 2006. I fail to see how Isiah has done one thing, any thing, to make this team even marginally better during his run.

Thanks naiwf. Now I don't have to waste another 20 minutes at work trying to say the same thing.

Spending 7 mil/year > spending 16 mil/year Steve Francis is a talented player. He has a "name." He does a lot of things well on the floor. However, he just mirrors what you have in Stephon Marbury. A backcourt of two undersized gunners with bad attitudes who think that they are superstar point guards doesn't sound like a winning formula. Why take on a contract like that when it won't make you any better whatsoever. Besides, I thought Lee was part of this "youthful core" that NY fans are always screaming about.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.