The NBA Offseason Thread

[Ripper 0]

Nate Robinson appears to be a dynamic player because of who he plays for. Much like Earl Boykins can take over a game at points, so can Nate. But I don't think you would call Earl a dynamic player either.

 

Niether are as good on defense as they should be. I don't mean getting posted up either, I mean staying in front of the ball. Nate gambles on passing lanes alot, so he does get steals, but that isn't exactly good defense either.

 

I will say that he will crash the offensive boards like no ones business and could be a spark for some people, but dude is just to in his own world too often and that would piss a coach off. Especially one that has other options at his position.

[Brett Favre 0]

Nate Robinson is better than Earl Boykins. Boykins gets most of his points on jump shots. There are few people who can finish like Nate Robinson, especially considering he's like 5'9 at most. And it's tough to post up on Nate cause he's pretty strong. He'll become a better defender if he has a coach who stresses it cause he's quick and strong.

[Ripper 0]

Nate Robinson is about as 5'9" as me. And that is compliment to what he can do on the court. That dude is 5'7 tops. And thats stretching it.

 

Yeah, he is better than Boykins because while he isn't great defensively, he doesn't suck ass either, but Boykins also is tough to post up because he is strong as a fucking ox. And Boykins does score off jumpers but most of his points are those floaters in the lane. Nate finishes right at the rim. But 2 points is two poitns and both guys are likely to go off for 20+ points on any given night, but niether are exaclty point guards and can hurt you on just as many nights as they help you.

[Precious Roy 0]

If you have the right players and right role for Robinson he can be really valuable. He can be really valuable to the Knicks, they just need that big all-around PG to allow Nate to play his game. Someone like Andre Miller or Jason Kidd would be perfect, just that type of PG who has some size and strength to guard a 2 and is a natural on offense. Ideally he would be the 6th man, looked at as a primary scorer, play around 25-30 minutes a game, and could be paired with Crawford or the theoretical point guard or a 3 guard lineup depending on matchups. He's definitely a guy who needs to be managed and coached and put in the right situations, and some might say he's not worth the hassle, but he's a legit weapon, there's nobody else like him in the league.

[TheOriginalOrangeGoblin 0]

A Jamal Crawford for TJ Ford would be ideal in my opinion (as a Raptors fan ). Helps both teams out with what they need. Ford owuld be great with D'Antoni.

[Brett Favre 0]

I wouldn't mind that deal but it depends on who we draft. If we draft Michael Beasley, that'd be perfect.

[Precious Roy 0]

Fuck TJ Ford. Major injury risk and he's undersized.

[Ripper 0]

And he is a better guard than anyone on the Knicks.

 

 

[TheOriginalOrangeGoblin 0]

And he'd be perfect running a D'Antoni offence.

[Steviekick 0]

Who do you guys see going for the Phoenix coaching gig?

[Steviekick 0]

According to Marc Stein over at ESPN.com, Rick Carlisle has made a verbal agreement with Dallas.

[Precious Roy 0]

Who do you guys see going for the Phoenix coaching gig?

 

Mike Fratello?

[alfdogg 0]

Pat Riley, obv.

[Brett Favre 0]

Mike Woodson.

[Jorge Gorgeous 0]

Who do you guys see going for the Phoenix coaching gig?

 

Basketball Genius Kevin Duckworth.

[naiwf 0]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/bask...f=si_topstories

 

Apparently D'Antoni took the Knicks job (4 yrs for $24 million). I don't like that decision at all considering our roster doesn't have his kind of players.

[Guest College Party]

John Paxson can't even succeed at getting a bad coach. It's as if the Bulls wanted to replace the Blackhawks as the most inept sports team in the city.

[PUT THAT DICK IN MY MOUTH! 0]

a bad coach.

 

what

[Brett Favre 0]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/bask...f=si_topstories

 

Apparently D'Antoni took the Knicks job (4 yrs for $24 million). I don't like that decision at all considering our roster doesn't have his kind of players.

 

The Knicks are blowing it up.

[naiwf 0]

I hope the Dolans are OK with that. Had they done that after the Layden era we'd be in good shape now instead of stuck with a roster that has guys who are limited at what they can do because we've traded one bad contract for 2 or 3 others repeatedly for the last 5+ years. If the team is going to suck with us trying to improve it, let it REALLY suck, get rid of the bad deals, and start over again in 2-3 years. The perpetual cycle of being in salary cap hell with a lousy 25-35 wins a year isn't cutting it.

 

[bobobrazil1984 0]

I'm confused about something.

 

Why does everyone seem to think the Knicks are still going to have the same players by mid-season? I don't think Donnie Walsh took that job to "roll with Isiah's team".

 

the idea behind having a system, is that it allows you narrow your search and target players to fit your system, and because at times you need niche role players, those players are more attainable.

 

They're obviously gonna try to blow it up, so why is everybody saying "these players dont fit d'antoni's system"???

[Fökai 0]

You might want to take a look at their contract situation first; the players they want to keep are the ones with the meager contracts, the expiring contracts (Marbury, Rose) are ones that the Knicks obviously want to hold onto, and the big contracts (Randolph, Curry, Jefferies, Q-Rich & James) are so bad that no team will touch them.

 

Crawford is the one movable piece I see. His contract can't be paired with someone else, lest they lose someone of worth to their team, or lose an expiring.

 

Best case scenario for Donnie Walsh is a decent team in 2009-2010 season. He has to accept this roster for another season.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

Starbury is the only one who is going to be hellish for the Knicks to move/get ride of. I believe Zach Randolph or Eddy Curry can and will be traded (just one of them though). The rest of the roster can be made to work. The Knicks desperately need a direction and they have it. From now on, with a GM in charge who isn't an idiot, they will be targeting players who fit their coach's system. David Lee, Q Richardson, Balkman, even Jamal Crawford and little Nate, these guys imo will be just fine in D'Antoni's system as long as they're there. I'm declaring it right now, by the end of the 2008-09 season, TWO of the undesirable 3 (Marbury, Curry, Randolph) will be gone. I think one will be bought out and one traded.

 

in fact i just read this from espn:

Walsh told D'Antoni he was committed to giving him the players he needs to succeed. He even went through each player on the roster with his coach-to-be, discussing who would be a good fit and who wouldn't.

 

Sure sounds like Walsh is planning on remaking that team to fit D'Antoni's system.

[Mr. S£im Citrus 0]

I remember hearing on Kornheiser's show last week that Elton Brand's agent is trying to get him back to the eastern conference. If Walsh is worth his paycheck, he'll try to arrange a trade of Zee-bo for Brand.

[Precious Roy 0]

I don't know about D'Antoni and the Knicks

 

On one hand I'm happy because it truely signals a fresh start for the franchise, Donnie Walsh a former executive of the year hiring D'Antoni a former coach of the year and lead practitioner of the style de jour in the NBA right now, a istyle the Knicks as a franchise haven't employed, well, in a long time if ever. Also, I think he's a guy who players around the league look at and say, "I want to play for him". He's a players coach with a free, open style, but he's also a guy with a bit of a temper and a short leash. That could play well with this group, well, most of it anyway, there's a couple guys who might be too far gone for anyone to reach.

 

Also, I think the knock about D'Antoni teams not being able to play defense is a bit reactionary based on the personnel he had. I think, given his pedigree in the Euro leagues, that D'Antoni knows how to preach defense, but his two best players in Phoenix just aren't naturally gifted on that end, and he had them expending so much energy on offense that it was futile to try and get them to expend that energy on defense. He found a rhythm that worked, and he had Bell and Marion playing 1-1 D, so they rolled with it.

 

I actually think his penchant for a short rotation could be a good thing, as Brown/Thomas had so many rotation changes and so much fluctuation in minutes that some of the younger players and veteran bench players didn't know if they were coming or going. The Knicks are actually pretty deep talent wise, so some guys may get the short end of it, but ultimately it would be good to have a solid 8-9 man rotation with defined roles and units for everyone.

 

On the other hand, he had more talent in Phoenix than he'll probably ever get in New York, and he couldn't get over the hump there, got exposed by the Spurs year after year. So even if he does well in New York, I think ultimately he's coaching to develop players and a put a culture in place where the next guy can succeed, because really that's all you can expect right now with this team, and I question hiring such a high profile name to such a big contract where undue pressure to instantly succeed will just come naturally from the fanbase and the media. The hiring of D'Antoni says "we can compete right now and be among the contenders in 3-4 years" and I'm not sure if that's the right message for Walsh to send, though surely he's already feeling some internal pressure to succeed just because Dolan & co. are completely fucking backetball retarded.

 

In short, I'm not ready to write him off as a one dimensional coach that needs an exact replica of the talent he had in Phoenix to succeed, but I also need to see him prove that he can adjust with a different roster, he's got a ton of pressure on him IMO,

[Jorge Gorgeous 0]

So... Zach Randolph is the new Amare Stoudemire.

[Guest College Party]

a bad coach.

 

what

A bad coach for the Bulls as currently constituted

[PUT THAT DICK IN MY MOUTH! 0]

Oh ok. I'd still argue that he's probably better for that team than just about anyone else currently on the market, though.

[teke184 0]

Apparently, Baron Davis is suffering from an inflated sense of entitlement, which is no surprise to a Hornets fan...

 

 

Davis and his representatives are pissing and moaning that the Warriors' negotiations for an extension, with rumblings that they'll opt out by the June 30 deadline for his one-year player option and enter free agency.

 

 

If he opts out, expect him to go looking for either the biggest sugar-daddy on the market (Sonics?) or to one of the LA teams, most likely the Clippers.

 

 

 

 

IMHO, he'd be extremely stupid to do so, as he'd be leaving a 1-year offer of about $18 million from the Warriors.

 

He's better off playing out his player option with the Warriors and then entering free agency next year, but I can see his ego getting out of control to the point where he takes a big financial risk by entering free agency this year.

[Ripper 0]

You could blame Baron Davis if it werent for the Warriors FO once again being called cheapskates by players they are trying to resign. So its been, who now, Baron, Matt Barnes, and Pietrus that all have felt that they have been low balled. i am starting to think its not coincidence.

 

And its a bigger risk playing out the contract. If he can sign with someone some where for say 4 years, 40 million, it would be better to do than one year with 18 mil and no guarentees and risk of injury.

 

Or in Barons case....injury.