ImageImageImageImageImage

Post game: No Papa Johns

Moderators: moocow007, Knickstape1214, magnumt, Capn'O, King of Canada, j4remi, Deeeez Knicks, Thorn, GONYK, NoLayupRule, mrpoetryNmotion, Thugger HBC

User avatar
Rock Bottom
Veteran
Posts: 2,723
And1: 969
Joined: Oct 12, 2010

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#261 » by Rock Bottom » Tue Dec 5, 2017 7:49 pm

I think the people saying tank in the end dont want bad things for the knicks..

But then maybe they do..
Image
User avatar
HarthorneWingo
Knicks Forum Grandpa's Law
Posts: 41,915
And1: 13,783
Joined: May 16, 2005
   

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#262 » by HarthorneWingo » Tue Dec 5, 2017 7:51 pm

Rock Bottom wrote:I think the people saying tank in the end dont want bad things for the knicks..

But then maybe they do..


I think they want nice things for the Knicks. It's just that their logic is flawed.
User avatar
IllmaticHandler
RealGM
Posts: 14,591
And1: 13,166
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: Brooklyn(Medina) NYC

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#263 » by IllmaticHandler » Tue Dec 5, 2017 7:54 pm

Before Things get outta hand and people try to rewrite things,....


Tank: A four-letter word
Paul Flannery

Players on losing teams explain why the very idea of "tanking" pisses them off.
More 'tanking' must-reads

Rebuilding isn't tanking

Tank: A four-letter word


"Tanking," as we are to understand it, is a team's intent to do less than everything it can to win. It is a concerted effort over several months (and perhaps several seasons) by a team to deliberately not be as good as it could be. It is considered cheap, disingenuous and dishonest, the byproduct of a flawed system where a team can be rewarded for being bad and where deliberately losing is thereby a strategic decision.

It's true that any game can be deliberately lost. While tanking is a mechanism usually employed with regards to the draft, the most egregious example of deliberate losing in recent history perversely had nothing to do with it. An April 2006 game between the Minnesota Timberwolves and the Memphis Grizzlies featured an overtime win for the Grizzlies that they simply did not want. They were unable to play worse than the Timberwolves, who unashamedly let Mark Madsen shoot seven three pointers in a bid to have one of the 10 worst records in the league, thereby keeping a conditional pick they owed to the Clippers. You couldn't try harder to lose, and any veneer of competitiveness was dispensed with. It was noxious. It was toxic. It was everything professional sport should not be.

The aforementioned Grizzlies victory notwithstanding, though, players (almost) always play to win. This is partly due to the pride of being a professional athlete, partly due to the instinctive nature of human competitiveness and partly because no player wants to tank their statistics. After all, this is a league in which players deliberately and persistently shoot half-court heaves a split second after the game clock expires so as to not ruin their field goal percentage.

Similarly, coaches are evaluated based on their win totals. Even coaches who are hired by bad teams knowing that they will remain bad for a short time regardless of the coach's abilities and impact can often be fired if the team loses a lot. All coaches therefore coach to win. If your coach plays the mediocre but reliably-predictable veteran over the mistake-prone young upstart, even on the way to a 25-win season, it's because he really believes it gives him the best chance to win and that winning gives him the best chance of job security. He's right about at least one of these things.

Any deliberate designs on losing, then, come from the front office. But how often does this actually happen?


A look around the NBA at the present moment does not reveal much in the way of tanking right now. Not even in the Eastern Conference, where most of the losing resides. Two of the teams at the bottom of the East --New York and Brooklyn -- infamously are not supposed to be there. The team at the very bottom, the Milwaukee Bucks, are notoriously shackled by a playoffs-every-season edict that they aren't good at actually achieving. Further back of Brooklyn with a 12-23 record is Cleveland, a team intending to start pushing for the playoffs, yet held back by a series of underwhelming signings and a worryingly poor start for their No. 1 pick. One could argue that they should be tanking, yet this week's trade for veteran all-star forward Luol Deng trade clearly indicates they are not. Charlotte is attempting to make the playoffs -- after all, they have a draft pick going elsewhere -- and were only one game below .500 as of a fortnight ago. Detroit is trying to make the best of a mishmash of talent with genuine potential, but little cohesion. Boston is in a similar situation with much lesser talent, except their coach is too good for this to be a problem.

That leaves only Orlando and Philadelphia, both teams committed to a youth movement and not long removed from trading quality stars, as the potential "tankers."


Meanwhile, in the West, there are only six sub-.500 teams. Memphis and the Lakers are where they are because of injuries, not through tanking. In trading two first-round picks for Jrue Holiday and spending all their flexibility on Tyreke Evans, the Pelicans emphatically signaled an intent to end their losing days, even if it hasn't strictly worked out yet. Minnesota is half a game below .500 and a preseason playoff pick, slightly behind the curve due to Ricky Rubio's slow start. Sacramento is losing due to a confused, duplicating roster and remarkably poor team defense, yet their recent trade for Rudy Gay signifies their intent to not tank their way out of it.

Then, there's Utah. While the Jazz are certainly mired in an asset gathering/youth movement phase, they are absolutely, correctly (and finally) playing said youth.

Is what Utah are doing really tanking? And if so, what is wrong with it?

It needn't be examined as to whether front offices have tanked in the past. Of course, they have -- egregious examples include multiple efforts by the Timberwolves in the Kevin Garnett era to keep hold of the pick they recklessly traded for Marko Jaric, and the Warriors's 5-22 end to the 2011-12 season (one which had started with a playoff guarantee) that enabled them to keep the pick that became Harrison Barnes that otherwise would have gone to the Jazz.

But keep in mind this reality: Executives, too, are often on short term contracts. They too are accountable to a team's on-court performance. Only in circumstances of supreme and unfound loyalty born out of the NBA's nepotism and old boys networks do we see executives survive at the head after lengthy periods of moribund play. "Tanking" teams, as evidenced by those outlined above, are usually new regimes brought in to rectify previously-unsuccessful ones. Sam Hinkie in Philadelphia didn't make the franchise-altering Andrew Bynum trade, Rob Hennigan in Orlando wasn't the one who wasted the Dwight Howard years, and Dennis Lindsey in Utah neither assembled nor deconstructed the Deron Williams/Carlos Boozer years.

Indeed, because of their short term contracts and high job turnover, executives are instead more prone to quick fixes and instant gratification. Even now, rare is the instance where ownership and executive relationships are so harmonious and trusting that the owners can accept the GM playing the long game. The NBA has come a long way in this regard over the last decade, as greater awareness of team building and strategy have passed into the public conscience (and thus team accountability), yet often a disconnect remains.

You would expect, then, for management and ownerships to not want their teams to be bad. And that does not reconcile readily with the concept of a league-wide tanking epidemic.

Usatsi_7651216

Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports

Even if these executives are indeed free to take the long view, are they "tanking?" Were Orlando and Utah tanking when they traded for so many young players and future first-round draft picks? Surely that is only true if all the priority is given to the present. Yet if these teams really were tanking as emphatically as they could, they could do it much better than this. The Jazz, for example, are 11-12 with Trey Burke starting and rapidly becoming too good to be bad. They are mediocre, with a lot of internal growth yet to come. They acquired one of the best players in a weak draft, in doing so taking themselves out of the running for drafting right at the top of an extremely strong one. If this keeps up, Trey Burke might cost them Andrew Wiggins.


Paul Flannery
From 2006-10, the Pacers were a nondescript, capped-out team in a small market with unfavorable draft picks and little hope of getting better. How things have changed.

If the Jazz were specifically trying their best to lose this year, in a draft when doing so would behoove them far more potential superstar talents than the previous one did, they would have trodden water for longer. They didn't. They capitalized on the weak perception of the 2013 draft and traded up to land one of the best players in it for a minimal cost. The 76ers did something similar; they paid a slightly higher cost, but also created a foundation in 2013 with Nerlens Noel and the best rookie in the NBA, Michael Carter-Williams. And Orlando could have picked Noel, have him miss the season, continued to trade away anyone looking vaguely useful and been even worse for the 2014 draft, whereby they could then flank the returning Noel with a superstar talent and be half way back up the Ziggeraut again. But they took Victor Oladipo, perhaps the most NBA-ready high lottery pick in last year's draft, instead.

The worst team in the NBA, it must be remembered, is one who tried to be good.

Perhaps it is the case that the supposed tankers are actually just better managed, better at asset accumulation and management, better at strategizing, better at building a team that'll last. That sounds like a team trying to win, not lose. And one step backwards can mean three steps forwards.

Usatsi_7645086__1_

Dennis Wierzbicki-USA TODAY Sports

Keep this in mind now that we've reached the point of the season where so-called "tanking" begins in earnest. By now, teams have evaluated what they have and where they are going. Some of them won't like it. Some will identify a core of players, identify the tradeable remainder and pawn off that which is pawnable. They might weaken their current product in exchange for future flexibility and assets. That is not mere terminology talking: That really is what happens. This is exactly what the Deng trade was for Chicago. And there will be more of this. Teams out of the hunt will look to the future.

Is that tanking? Is that deliberate losing? Sure, if deliberate losing and tanking are hereby defined as the weakening of the chances of winning the next game.

But no matter how important or attainable the short term goals are, the big picture is always present. It is not an endemic problem permeating the entire league. It is a strategy shift teams adopt if circumstances demand it. Often times, it is the best strategy there is.

And without a truly free market, it will stay so.
ORLANDO MAGIC

C: G. Dieng | R. Holmes
PF J. Green | C. Diallo
SF B. Ingram | Cool Beas
SG K. Middleton | 2K Ferg
PG M. Fultz | T. Rozier

JC | D Reed | I. Whitehead | W. Ellington |B. Johnson
Jeff Van Gully
RealGM
Posts: 11,616
And1: 5,413
Joined: Jul 31, 2010
Location: Harlem
       

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#264 » by Jeff Van Gully » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:06 pm

dakomish23 wrote:
Jeff Van Gully wrote:
dakomish23 wrote:
For me personally, I’d probably be done with the sprint to the top of the lottery once we get one more stud. Definitely if we land Doncic.

Then I’d focus on adding high end role players. I think we have two of those guys already in THJ & either Kanter or WHG. Probably add one mor3 guy (Noel is my choice).

If we had traded for Mitchell I wouldn’t be as in on the tank this year.


i feel you on this. i think if we land doncic, no more excuses. but couldn't you see the tank army staying just as strong?

that said, doncic would have to pan out and be what we hope he is. there's always that.

i'm good on noel. hahaha. but i see the logic. long, rangy, defender. won't ask for the ball. catch some oops if healthy. dude wants his paper tho. carlisle is making sure this dude asking price stay low.


Yeah there is the question of Doncic living up to his potential, but I’d be fine to go into the season trying to win as much as possible with that core.

There was an article saying how KP is the ideal fit next to a guy like Kanter. I think the same applies to Noel. Plus he can easily fit next to Kanter or WHG. Let KOQ be the 3rd C.

It’s a pipe dream. We won’t be bad enough to land Doncic, we probably won’t sell high on vets taking cap space so we can’t sign Noel (no BR due to QO) and we’ll likely let KOQ go.


doncic is my dream draft player too. i would feel really good about him joining this group as a wing. frank, tim, luka, kp... young hogs to run with.

and the tank isn't dead. losing tim for an extended period of time could really hurt. but KP is trying to make this all-star team, so i don't see him missing extended time before the break at least.

i like that same group with kanter retained. but noel makes sense for the defense. then billy to play the kanter role when you need interior scoring. i feel it.
que sera sera
Jeff Van Gully
RealGM
Posts: 11,616
And1: 5,413
Joined: Jul 31, 2010
Location: Harlem
       

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#265 » by Jeff Van Gully » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:08 pm

IllmaticHandler wrote:Before Things get outta hand and people try to rewrite things,....


Tank: A four-letter word
Paul Flannery

Players on losing teams explain why the very idea of "tanking" pisses them off.
More 'tanking' must-reads

Rebuilding isn't tanking

Tank: A four-letter word


"Tanking," as we are to understand it, is a team's intent to do less than everything it can to win. It is a concerted effort over several months (and perhaps several seasons) by a team to deliberately not be as good as it could be. It is considered cheap, disingenuous and dishonest, the byproduct of a flawed system where a team can be rewarded for being bad and where deliberately losing is thereby a strategic decision.

It's true that any game can be deliberately lost. While tanking is a mechanism usually employed with regards to the draft, the most egregious example of deliberate losing in recent history perversely had nothing to do with it. An April 2006 game between the Minnesota Timberwolves and the Memphis Grizzlies featured an overtime win for the Grizzlies that they simply did not want. They were unable to play worse than the Timberwolves, who unashamedly let Mark Madsen shoot seven three pointers in a bid to have one of the 10 worst records in the league, thereby keeping a conditional pick they owed to the Clippers. You couldn't try harder to lose, and any veneer of competitiveness was dispensed with. It was noxious. It was toxic. It was everything professional sport should not be.

The aforementioned Grizzlies victory notwithstanding, though, players (almost) always play to win. This is partly due to the pride of being a professional athlete, partly due to the instinctive nature of human competitiveness and partly because no player wants to tank their statistics. After all, this is a league in which players deliberately and persistently shoot half-court heaves a split second after the game clock expires so as to not ruin their field goal percentage.

Similarly, coaches are evaluated based on their win totals. Even coaches who are hired by bad teams knowing that they will remain bad for a short time regardless of the coach's abilities and impact can often be fired if the team loses a lot. All coaches therefore coach to win. If your coach plays the mediocre but reliably-predictable veteran over the mistake-prone young upstart, even on the way to a 25-win season, it's because he really believes it gives him the best chance to win and that winning gives him the best chance of job security. He's right about at least one of these things.

Any deliberate designs on losing, then, come from the front office. But how often does this actually happen?


A look around the NBA at the present moment does not reveal much in the way of tanking right now. Not even in the Eastern Conference, where most of the losing resides. Two of the teams at the bottom of the East --New York and Brooklyn -- infamously are not supposed to be there. The team at the very bottom, the Milwaukee Bucks, are notoriously shackled by a playoffs-every-season edict that they aren't good at actually achieving. Further back of Brooklyn with a 12-23 record is Cleveland, a team intending to start pushing for the playoffs, yet held back by a series of underwhelming signings and a worryingly poor start for their No. 1 pick. One could argue that they should be tanking, yet this week's trade for veteran all-star forward Luol Deng trade clearly indicates they are not. Charlotte is attempting to make the playoffs -- after all, they have a draft pick going elsewhere -- and were only one game below .500 as of a fortnight ago. Detroit is trying to make the best of a mishmash of talent with genuine potential, but little cohesion. Boston is in a similar situation with much lesser talent, except their coach is too good for this to be a problem.

That leaves only Orlando and Philadelphia, both teams committed to a youth movement and not long removed from trading quality stars, as the potential "tankers."


Meanwhile, in the West, there are only six sub-.500 teams. Memphis and the Lakers are where they are because of injuries, not through tanking. In trading two first-round picks for Jrue Holiday and spending all their flexibility on Tyreke Evans, the Pelicans emphatically signaled an intent to end their losing days, even if it hasn't strictly worked out yet. Minnesota is half a game below .500 and a preseason playoff pick, slightly behind the curve due to Ricky Rubio's slow start. Sacramento is losing due to a confused, duplicating roster and remarkably poor team defense, yet their recent trade for Rudy Gay signifies their intent to not tank their way out of it.

Then, there's Utah. While the Jazz are certainly mired in an asset gathering/youth movement phase, they are absolutely, correctly (and finally) playing said youth.

Is what Utah are doing really tanking? And if so, what is wrong with it?

It needn't be examined as to whether front offices have tanked in the past. Of course, they have -- egregious examples include multiple efforts by the Timberwolves in the Kevin Garnett era to keep hold of the pick they recklessly traded for Marko Jaric, and the Warriors's 5-22 end to the 2011-12 season (one which had started with a playoff guarantee) that enabled them to keep the pick that became Harrison Barnes that otherwise would have gone to the Jazz.

But keep in mind this reality: Executives, too, are often on short term contracts. They too are accountable to a team's on-court performance. Only in circumstances of supreme and unfound loyalty born out of the NBA's nepotism and old boys networks do we see executives survive at the head after lengthy periods of moribund play. "Tanking" teams, as evidenced by those outlined above, are usually new regimes brought in to rectify previously-unsuccessful ones. Sam Hinkie in Philadelphia didn't make the franchise-altering Andrew Bynum trade, Rob Hennigan in Orlando wasn't the one who wasted the Dwight Howard years, and Dennis Lindsey in Utah neither assembled nor deconstructed the Deron Williams/Carlos Boozer years.

Indeed, because of their short term contracts and high job turnover, executives are instead more prone to quick fixes and instant gratification. Even now, rare is the instance where ownership and executive relationships are so harmonious and trusting that the owners can accept the GM playing the long game. The NBA has come a long way in this regard over the last decade, as greater awareness of team building and strategy have passed into the public conscience (and thus team accountability), yet often a disconnect remains.

You would expect, then, for management and ownerships to not want their teams to be bad. And that does not reconcile readily with the concept of a league-wide tanking epidemic.

Usatsi_7651216

Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports

Even if these executives are indeed free to take the long view, are they "tanking?" Were Orlando and Utah tanking when they traded for so many young players and future first-round draft picks? Surely that is only true if all the priority is given to the present. Yet if these teams really were tanking as emphatically as they could, they could do it much better than this. The Jazz, for example, are 11-12 with Trey Burke starting and rapidly becoming too good to be bad. They are mediocre, with a lot of internal growth yet to come. They acquired one of the best players in a weak draft, in doing so taking themselves out of the running for drafting right at the top of an extremely strong one. If this keeps up, Trey Burke might cost them Andrew Wiggins.


Paul Flannery
From 2006-10, the Pacers were a nondescript, capped-out team in a small market with unfavorable draft picks and little hope of getting better. How things have changed.

If the Jazz were specifically trying their best to lose this year, in a draft when doing so would behoove them far more potential superstar talents than the previous one did, they would have trodden water for longer. They didn't. They capitalized on the weak perception of the 2013 draft and traded up to land one of the best players in it for a minimal cost. The 76ers did something similar; they paid a slightly higher cost, but also created a foundation in 2013 with Nerlens Noel and the best rookie in the NBA, Michael Carter-Williams. And Orlando could have picked Noel, have him miss the season, continued to trade away anyone looking vaguely useful and been even worse for the 2014 draft, whereby they could then flank the returning Noel with a superstar talent and be half way back up the Ziggeraut again. But they took Victor Oladipo, perhaps the most NBA-ready high lottery pick in last year's draft, instead.

The worst team in the NBA, it must be remembered, is one who tried to be good.

Perhaps it is the case that the supposed tankers are actually just better managed, better at asset accumulation and management, better at strategizing, better at building a team that'll last. That sounds like a team trying to win, not lose. And one step backwards can mean three steps forwards.

Usatsi_7645086__1_

Dennis Wierzbicki-USA TODAY Sports

Keep this in mind now that we've reached the point of the season where so-called "tanking" begins in earnest. By now, teams have evaluated what they have and where they are going. Some of them won't like it. Some will identify a core of players, identify the tradeable remainder and pawn off that which is pawnable. They might weaken their current product in exchange for future flexibility and assets. That is not mere terminology talking: That really is what happens. This is exactly what the Deng trade was for Chicago. And there will be more of this. Teams out of the hunt will look to the future.

Is that tanking? Is that deliberate losing? Sure, if deliberate losing and tanking are hereby defined as the weakening of the chances of winning the next game.

But no matter how important or attainable the short term goals are, the big picture is always present. It is not an endemic problem permeating the entire league. It is a strategy shift teams adopt if circumstances demand it. Often times, it is the best strategy there is.

And without a truly free market, it will stay so.


yeah. we talking semantics. i embrace the Ls or the Ws so long as it's true to the youngsters. i think for the most part that's where we are, so i don't trip over either.

the veterans who are playing aren't here for ephemeral win totals. they're here for the kids, really. boyz II men. and i like the vets we have.
que sera sera
User avatar
j4remi
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 31,958
And1: 8,248
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
         

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#266 » by j4remi » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:10 pm

K P 6 wrote:Tanking is purposely losing which no NBA team does. Tanking is fandom hoping their team loses for better position in the draft.


Teams don't tank this early. January and more likely the trade deadline is where you spot tanking (might be able to make a case that LA was just straight up tanking from the offseason last year as a very rare exception). I don't think the Knicks dealt JR Smith and Shumpert to win in that season, they essentially took mulligan on that season and just started experimenting for the next.
BAF Knicks
PG - Payton/Taylor/Goodwin
SG - Ntilikina/L Williams/G. Clavell(0)
SF - MKG/Bogdanovich
PF - Saric/Zbo/Bertans
C - Gobert/Olynyk

Ex A. Kaba(0) Monte Morris(0) Hartenstein(0)

Finally a Recaps Stash:
https://medium.com/@j4remi
User avatar
K P 6
RealGM
Posts: 32,208
And1: 10,259
Joined: Jun 27, 2006
Location: Getting over screens with Gusto.
Contact:
 

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#267 » by K P 6 » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:15 pm

Red Vines wrote:
K P 6 wrote:Tanking is purposely losing which no NBA team does. Tanking is fandom hoping their team loses for better position in the draft.

Read on Twitter

I didnt listen but thats crazy
Image
Ntilikina Gang. SMFPB CMFGB SMFMB KMFPB FMFNB
amit wrote:Frank prime will be like 10 ppg. Hes not that kind of PG and we knew it since he got drafted. Thats why scorers players around frank will be the bast for him
dakomish23
RealGM
Posts: 22,507
And1: 11,642
Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Location: Empire State
     

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#268 » by dakomish23 » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:16 pm

Play the kids. Maximize their development. Nobody cares about the L’s.

If that’s called tanking, oh well.
Dkillanyk4lyf wrote:Melo is the reason why we are in the mess we are in now. Acquiring him was the biggest mistake in knicks history.


blueNorange wrote:good thing knicks have kanter because willy looking pedestrian af
User avatar
GONYK
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 51,056
And1: 15,332
Joined: Jun 27, 2003
Location: Frankie N Baby
   

Re: RE: Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#269 » by GONYK » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:25 pm

j4remi wrote:
GONYK wrote:
IllmaticHandler wrote:Mofos needs to STFU with the word tanking. Simply losing does not mean Tanking. It just means you are not good enough to win on a consistent basis. Tanking only happens when the mandate is from above. Until KP and THJ are healthy and are purposely held out of games....dont talk to me about tanking. There was a time in the NBA, when losing was simply called losing...smh
Bingo.

Which is why there will be a lot of broken hearts when the team gets healthy again.

Management is evaluating the roster and the coach. Until they feel that they have all the info they need, they will let the chips fall where they will.


I agree that this isn't a tank but I could see this converting from inadvertent tanking to a real tank if KP/THJ don't get right fast. The schedule gets brutal in a couple of weeks and this is the soft spot where they're supposed to make room for those L's. Screwing up this section of the schedule could leave them far enough out of the race by mid-January to switch gears with a month to find trades. So it's not a tank, but if the playoffs look like a long shot I'm guessing the original "we're focused on developing the youth" stuff will come back with a vengeance (IE: selling off some pieces and revamping the rotation).


I agree, and think that would be appropriate.

I'm speaking more towards the desire for management to prematurely pull this team apart just for lottery seeding when the team was winning games, Porzingis was making strides as a foundation player, and the team was responding to the coaching.

If the circumstances of the season become such that it makes more sense in the long term to evaluate youth and sell off pieces, that is fine, but we haven't reached that point yet.

Winning 38 games can still be beneficial if KP, THJ and Frank make strides, we find out Kanter and Doug are keepers, and the defense improves.
User avatar
god shammgod
Knicks Forum Crazy Board Uncle
Posts: 81,832
And1: 34,770
Joined: Feb 18, 2006
Location: mpharris love jarrett jack

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#270 » by god shammgod » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:27 pm

call it what you will. you have a better chance to pick a great player at 1-3 than at 8-10. and that's the bottom line. because shammgod said so.
Image
All Praise Due to Im Coming Home!
dakomish23
RealGM
Posts: 22,507
And1: 11,642
Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Location: Empire State
     

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#271 » by dakomish23 » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:38 pm

Jeff Van Gully wrote:
dakomish23 wrote:
Jeff Van Gully wrote:
i feel you on this. i think if we land doncic, no more excuses. but couldn't you see the tank army staying just as strong?

that said, doncic would have to pan out and be what we hope he is. there's always that.

i'm good on noel. hahaha. but i see the logic. long, rangy, defender. won't ask for the ball. catch some oops if healthy. dude wants his paper tho. carlisle is making sure this dude asking price stay low.


Yeah there is the question of Doncic living up to his potential, but I’d be fine to go into the season trying to win as much as possible with that core.

There was an article saying how KP is the ideal fit next to a guy like Kanter. I think the same applies to Noel. Plus he can easily fit next to Kanter or WHG. Let KOQ be the 3rd C.

It’s a pipe dream. We won’t be bad enough to land Doncic, we probably won’t sell high on vets taking cap space so we can’t sign Noel (no BR due to QO) and we’ll likely let KOQ go.


doncic is my dream draft player too. i would feel really good about him joining this group as a wing. frank, tim, luka, kp... young hogs to run with.

and the tank isn't dead. losing tim for an extended period of time could really hurt. but KP is trying to make this all-star team, so i don't see him missing extended time before the break at least.

i like that same group with kanter retained. but noel makes sense for the defense. then billy to play the kanter role when you need interior scoring. i feel it.


You’re going to give a folks a heart attack with that 4 letter word :lol:

You know why I love what I’ve seen of Doncic? His passing is next level, on top of all the other great things he does great on offense. We need as many good playmakers for others we can get our hands on.

This the team I would build out from here:

Frank Melton Baker
THJ Dotson
Doncic MCD
Noel
KP WHG KOQ

It would look a whole lot better if we could get one more high level guard in the mix
Dkillanyk4lyf wrote:Melo is the reason why we are in the mess we are in now. Acquiring him was the biggest mistake in knicks history.


blueNorange wrote:good thing knicks have kanter because willy looking pedestrian af
User avatar
Iron Mantis
RealGM
Posts: 11,470
And1: 2,726
Joined: Aug 12, 2006
   

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#272 » by Iron Mantis » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:43 pm

god shammgod wrote:call it what you will. you have a better chance to pick a great player at 1-3 than at 8-10. and that's the bottom line. because shammgod said so.

Truth be told.
Jeff Van Gully
RealGM
Posts: 11,616
And1: 5,413
Joined: Jul 31, 2010
Location: Harlem
       

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#273 » by Jeff Van Gully » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:44 pm

K P 6 wrote:
Red Vines wrote:
K P 6 wrote:Tanking is purposely losing which no NBA team does. Tanking is fandom hoping their team loses for better position in the draft.

Read on Twitter

I didnt listen but thats crazy


and they will be rewarded with a loser like DSJ.

:o :o :o
que sera sera
Jeff Van Gully
RealGM
Posts: 11,616
And1: 5,413
Joined: Jul 31, 2010
Location: Harlem
       

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#274 » by Jeff Van Gully » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:45 pm

dakomish23 wrote:
Jeff Van Gully wrote:
dakomish23 wrote:
Yeah there is the question of Doncic living up to his potential, but I’d be fine to go into the season trying to win as much as possible with that core.

There was an article saying how KP is the ideal fit next to a guy like Kanter. I think the same applies to Noel. Plus he can easily fit next to Kanter or WHG. Let KOQ be the 3rd C.

It’s a pipe dream. We won’t be bad enough to land Doncic, we probably won’t sell high on vets taking cap space so we can’t sign Noel (no BR due to QO) and we’ll likely let KOQ go.


doncic is my dream draft player too. i would feel really good about him joining this group as a wing. frank, tim, luka, kp... young hogs to run with.

and the tank isn't dead. losing tim for an extended period of time could really hurt. but KP is trying to make this all-star team, so i don't see him missing extended time before the break at least.

i like that same group with kanter retained. but noel makes sense for the defense. then billy to play the kanter role when you need interior scoring. i feel it.


You’re going to give a folks a heart attack with that 4 letter word :lol:

You know why I love what I’ve seen of Doncic? His passing is next level, on top of all the other great things he does great on offense. We need as many good playmakers for others we can get our hands on.

This the team I would build out from here:

Frank Melton Baker
THJ Dotson
Doncic MCD
Noel
KP WHG KOQ

It would look a whole lot better if we could get one more high level guard in the mix


you talking about shake milton?
que sera sera
User avatar
Clyde_Style
RealGM
Posts: 21,607
And1: 6,634
Joined: Jul 12, 2009

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#275 » by Clyde_Style » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:47 pm

god shammgod wrote:call it what you will. you have a better chance to pick a great player at 1-3 than at 8-10. and that's the bottom line. because shammgod said so.


B _ c a u s _
S h _ m g _ d
S _ i d
S _
...............................................................................Image
User avatar
Capn'O
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 38,241
And1: 21,138
Joined: Dec 16, 2005
Location: Let's stop and get a hot dog
 

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#276 » by Capn'O » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:47 pm

god shammgod wrote:call it what you will. you have a better chance to pick a great player at 1-3 than at 8-10. and that's the bottom line. because shammgod said so.


True. But you also suck.
Image
User avatar
IllmaticHandler
RealGM
Posts: 14,591
And1: 13,166
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: Brooklyn(Medina) NYC

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#277 » by IllmaticHandler » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:50 pm

dakomish23 wrote:Play the kids. Maximize their development. Nobody cares about the L’s.

If that’s called tanking, oh well.


How about its called rebuilding...Heads want to rename every simple term. :lol:

Losing is Losing.

Rebuilding is Rebuilding.
ORLANDO MAGIC

C: G. Dieng | R. Holmes
PF J. Green | C. Diallo
SF B. Ingram | Cool Beas
SG K. Middleton | 2K Ferg
PG M. Fultz | T. Rozier

JC | D Reed | I. Whitehead | W. Ellington |B. Johnson
User avatar
Clyde_Style
RealGM
Posts: 21,607
And1: 6,634
Joined: Jul 12, 2009

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#278 » by Clyde_Style » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:51 pm

HarthorneWingo wrote:
Rock Bottom wrote:I think the people saying tank in the end dont want bad things for the knicks..

But then maybe they do..


I think they want nice things for the Knicks. It's just that their logic is flawed.


Image
...............................................................................Image
User avatar
3toheadmelo
RealGM
Posts: 17,293
And1: 10,567
Joined: Feb 15, 2015
 

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#279 » by 3toheadmelo » Tue Dec 5, 2017 8:54 pm

dakomish23 wrote:
Jeff Van Gully wrote:
dakomish23 wrote:
Yeah there is the question of Doncic living up to his potential, but I’d be fine to go into the season trying to win as much as possible with that core.

There was an article saying how KP is the ideal fit next to a guy like Kanter. I think the same applies to Noel. Plus he can easily fit next to Kanter or WHG. Let KOQ be the 3rd C.

It’s a pipe dream. We won’t be bad enough to land Doncic, we probably won’t sell high on vets taking cap space so we can’t sign Noel (no BR due to QO) and we’ll likely let KOQ go.


doncic is my dream draft player too. i would feel really good about him joining this group as a wing. frank, tim, luka, kp... young hogs to run with.

and the tank isn't dead. losing tim for an extended period of time could really hurt. but KP is trying to make this all-star team, so i don't see him missing extended time before the break at least.

i like that same group with kanter retained. but noel makes sense for the defense. then billy to play the kanter role when you need interior scoring. i feel it.


You’re going to give a folks a heart attack with that 4 letter word :lol:

You know why I love what I’ve seen of Doncic? His passing is next level, on top of all the other great things he does great on offense. We need as many good playmakers for others we can get our hands on.

This the team I would build out from here:

Frank Melton Baker
THJ Dotson
Doncic MCD
Noel
KP WHG KOQ

It would look a whole lot better if we could get one more high level guard in the mix

we can get ourselves a rip off doncic :lol:
Image
Cavs

PG: Dennis Smith Jr/A Brooks/D Will
SG: Josh Jackson/Dwayne Bacon/Bryn Forbes
SF: Jayson Tatum/Shabazz Muhammad/Glenn Robinson III
PF: Skal Labissiere/Caleb Swanigan/Long
C: Bam Adebayo/Dwight Powell/Justin Patton

Image
User avatar
Knicksfan1992
Head Coach
Posts: 7,343
And1: 5,427
Joined: Jun 14, 2012
         

Re: Post game: No Papa Johns 

Post#280 » by Knicksfan1992 » Tue Dec 5, 2017 9:01 pm

Oh great another post game thread with a debate about tanks and no actual analysis. Fun!
Build A Franchise - OKC
G-Isaiah Thomas
G-Pat Beverley
F- Robert Covington
F- Tobias Harris
C- Marc Gasol

6th man- DWade
- Tristan Thompson
-Justin Holiday
-Ron Baker
-KJ McDaniels
-Tyler Dorsey
-Darell Arthur
-Nemanja Bjelica
-Jeff Withey
-Edmond Sumner

Return to New York Knicks