Enes Kanter interview with Howard Beck

[blueNorange]

you're only attractive at .500 when you have cap space to add someone great. but it's a catch 22, because if you don't add someone great, you have to pay the guys who got you to .500 to stay there and now you're the detroit pistons. so you might have to suck again.

or the heat post lebron.

[F N 11]

Did not read Bc I knew it will be all hate. ****

[Hes_On_Fire]

the article admits that dolan is never really around though. but people, and the media, keep repeating this so it perpetuates.

Right. And Kanter's point even seems to be that it may be more of a perception because he didn't feel Dolan's presence with the team.

If he doesn't sell, the only way it goes away is for the team to not do stupid **** for a few years and eventually start winning. Seems easy enough, right? Just look at every transaction with the lens that if it's **** stupid you shouldn't do it.

it's easy to not do stupid sh*t, it's hard to actually win though. if winning means being a real contender. otherwise everyone would tear it down, wait 3 or 4 years and now they're automatically great. luck is way more a factor than anyone seems to ever recognize when it comes to success in the nba. it's not a coincidence that the only long period of success since the 70s for the knicks came when they got lucky in the ewing draft.

but even if you mean just playing .500 basketball while keeping cap flexibility, that too is hard. because you're constantly changing players and letting guys go. if the clippers couldn't convince okc to part with george, they're in the lottery this year. they'd be a losing team. we might look at this collection of young talent a few years from now and realize that it's not good enough and need to let a lot of them go instead of being capped out and mediocre. we could do nothing stupid and be back down at the bottom. because going back down to the bottom might be smart at that time.

everyone on here seems to think they could run the knicks and be a great success easily but the truth is, it's really hard.

Owning a sports franchise is hard. There’s lots of intangibles that go along with it and you need some luck along the way.

That being said, a major part of being a competent owner is hiring the right individuals. If you consistently hire idiots (Layden, Mills, Grunwald) or big names with little success or experience (Isiah, Phil) then you have to share some of that blame. You can’t keep passing off your poor judgement on others. To give you an example, I work in real estate. If I owned a company and kept hiring lousy agents eventually I’d have to look in the mirror and and reevaluate my ability to make those decisions and maybe even enlist some help to make them. I wouldn’t just blame every lousy agent I hired and take no responsibility. Because at some point you have to realize they’re lousy. You can’t be easily manipulated in a position of power like that.

Anyway, I’m looking forward to the season because we have some decent young talent like Mitch and RJ that I would like to see play a lot and develop. That will be the fun part. I’m excited about the Rangers too. They’re actually more ahead of the rebuild than we are. They’re very promising. I feel like we need another lottery finish to draft another suitable young player this year in order to continue building a solid roster. But who knows? Maybe Randle will take a major step this year and we won’t be as far away as we thought. Whatever happens, I just want to keep going down this path. No quick fixes.

[Capn'O]

Right. And Kanter's point even seems to be that it may be more of a perception because he didn't feel Dolan's presence with the team.

If he doesn't sell, the only way it goes away is for the team to not do stupid **** for a few years and eventually start winning. Seems easy enough, right? Just look at every transaction with the lens that if it's **** stupid you shouldn't do it.

it's easy to not do stupid sh*t, it's hard to actually win though. if winning means being a real contender. otherwise everyone would tear it down, wait 3 or 4 years and now they're automatically great. luck is way more a factor than anyone seems to ever recognize when it comes to success in the nba. it's not a coincidence that the only long period of success since the 70s for the knicks came when they got lucky in the ewing draft.

but even if you mean just playing .500 basketball while keeping cap flexibility, that too is hard. because you're constantly changing players and letting guys go. if the clippers couldn't convince okc to part with george, they're in the lottery this year. they'd be a losing team. we might look at this collection of young talent a few years from now and realize that it's not good enough and need to let a lot of them go instead of being capped out and mediocre. we could do nothing stupid and be back down at the bottom. because going back down to the bottom might be smart at that time.

everyone on here seems to think they could run the knicks and be a great success easily but the truth is, it's really hard.

Owning a sports franchise is hard. There’s lots of intangibles that go along with it and you need some luck along the way.

That being said, a major part of being a competent owner is hiring the right individuals. If you consistently hire idiots (Layden, Mills, Grunwald) or big names with little success or experience (Isiah, Phil) then you have to share some of that blame. You can’t keep passing off your poor judgement on others. To give you an example, I work in real estate. If I owned a company and kept hiring lousy agents eventually I’d have to look in the mirror and and reevaluate my ability to make those decisions and maybe even enlist some help to make them. I wouldn’t just blame every lousy agent I hired and take no responsibility. Because at some point you have to realize they’re lousy. You can’t be easily manipulated in a position of power like that.

Anyway, I’m looking forward to the season because we have some decent young talent like Mitch and RJ that I would like to see play a lot and develop. That will be the fun part. I’m excited about the Rangers too. They’re actually more ahead of the rebuild than we are. They’re very promising. I feel like we need another lottery finish to draft another suitable young player this year in order to continue building a solid roster. But who knows? Maybe Randle will take a major step this year and we won’t be as far away as we thought. Whatever happens, I just want to keep going down this path. No quick fixes.

The owner's impact goes beyond that.

IIRC, one of the justifications for Allan Houston's ridiculous contract so many years ago was an edict from Dolan never to lose a player over money. In a capped **** league. Never lose a player over money. And he believed in that hair brained idea so much that he made sure it made the press. So the GMs had to play by that rule. I don't care how good you are. If you have to play by that rule things are going to go badly. You're going to inevitably overpay 2nd rate talent and not have enough left over when the stars come available. The grifter type players will come flocking on the rare chance that you do have some cash floating around. And that's exactly what happened.

Dolan had a few of those baselines that were insurmountable that he seems to have softened or abandoned in recent years. I do suspect GMs were instructed not to place a heavy value on first round draft picks when acquiring big name talent until recent years, for example. Phil Jackson didn't just come along and go "AHA!" That was something that came from his discussions with McKinsey, as was the idea to stack salary to enter various free agency periods.

[god shammgod]

you guys are totally missing the point. you keep talking about the past, i'm talking about the future. if we don't hit big on rj or mitch, or randle or dennis or whoever, than doing everything right will still lead to us tearing it down again or paying them and being mediocre. you can keep all your picks, not sign anyone stupid to long deals and still get nowhere. in fact, that's the more likely outcome.

[Hes_On_Fire]

you guys are totally missing the point. you keep talking about the past, i'm talking about the future. if we don't hit big on rj or mitch, or randle or dennis or whoever, than doing everything right will still lead to us tearing it down again or paying them and being mediocre. you can keep all your picks, not sign anyone stupid to long deals and still get nowhere. in fact, that's the more likely outcome.

Not if you have the right leadership.

I, for one, have never been ra-ra over Perry due to the Orlando debacle and definitely never supported Mills, who has been here forever. Not hating on Perry, just saying that the jury is still out.

We'll have to see how it goes but you can definitely be successful in the way that you said. You just need to be shrewd and hire the best scouts money can buy. The Nets seem to be doing that. And before you jump on me and say the Nets are/were a mediocre team, I don't deny that. But they built themselves back with zero draft picks for like a 3-4 year period. The Knicks have been there before (no draft picks) and failed miserably. It's all about the leadership.

A much better recent example: The Golden State Warriors

[god shammgod]

the right leadership is not gonna make the right pick fall in to your lap. the best scouts can find a guy they think has potential but they really can't be sure. the spurs didn't know in any way that kawhi would end up as good as he did or the warriors with curry. they liked them, they thought they had potential to be good, this good they had no idea. outside of guys like lebron or duncan who everyone was pretty sure of before they got into the league, luck is the biggest factor in drafting. you do the best to put yourself in position to get lucky but that's it. that's all you can do. you pick who you think is best available with the information you have at that point which is not gonna guarantee much of anything. if zion is the next great player and rj is just kinda good, the knicks didn't plan badly, they were just unlucky.

p.s. since you mentioned the warriors, if the knicks had moved up 1 pick the knicks and warriors might have had totally different decades. a couple years before curry got there they had the longest playoff drought in the nba. 12 years. they might be a laughing stock still.

[god shammgod]

p.s. if durant doesn't come back at 90 percent or better of what he used to be, they're f*cked

[Deeeez Knicks]

The good well run teams don’t rely on luck. They make their own luck. They make good decisions and build something sustainable, and eventually good things will happen. They put themselves in a position to get lucky.

When you are a poorly run team, luck won’t matter much. You can draft a superstar, and if you are not doing things right they will be out.

It all comes down to the Knicks have made bad decisions, and Dolan put the wrong people in charge. All the good luck in the world was not going to help us. We made our own bad luck.

Now, hopefully things have changed with Mills/Perry. If they make good decisions, it can help change our luck fast. If they make bad decisions, it will be more of the same. Its also possible they could make good decisions and things still dont work out. But I think we should be able to tell and see a difference. There should still be positive results.

[god shammgod]

The good well run teams don’t rely on luck. They make their own luck. They make good decisions and build something sustainable, and eventually good things will happen. They put themselves in a position to get lucky.

When you are a poorly run team, luck won’t matter much. You can draft a superstar, and if you are not doing things right they will be out.

It all comes down to the Knicks have made bad decisions, and Dolan put the wrong people in charge. All the good luck in the world was not going to help us. We made our own bad luck.

Now, hopefully things have changed with Mills/Perry. If they make good decisions, it can help change our luck fast. If they make bad decisions, it will be more of the same. Its also possible they could make good decisions and things still dont work out. But I think we should be able to tell and see a difference. There should still be positive results.

and that will be because, they were unlucky. that's my whole point. if zion is the next big star in the nba and rj aint, was that a lack of planning ? if the celtics got duncan that year and the spurs got billups, they're probably still just the 3rd franchise in texas that nobody really cares about and the celtics have more than the 1 title since 86. the spurs fire popovich and he never becomes a big time coach.

and even with the wrong people in charge, had the knicks ended up with curry instead of jordan hill things would have been very different for those 2 franchises i imagine. do you need to put yourself in a position to get lucky ? it certainly helps but it doesn't make you lucky. it doesn't create luck. it just gives you an extra spin or two of the wheel. it's still up to chance mostly.

[Deeeez Knicks]

The good well run teams don’t rely on luck. They make their own luck. They make good decisions and build something sustainable, and eventually good things will happen. They put themselves in a position to get lucky.

When you are a poorly run team, luck won’t matter much. You can draft a superstar, and if you are not doing things right they will be out.

It all comes down to the Knicks have made bad decisions, and Dolan put the wrong people in charge. All the good luck in the world was not going to help us. We made our own bad luck.

Now, hopefully things have changed with Mills/Perry. If they make good decisions, it can help change our luck fast. If they make bad decisions, it will be more of the same. Its also possible they could make good decisions and things still dont work out. But I think we should be able to tell and see a difference. There should still be positive results.

and that will be because, they were unlucky. that's my whole point. if zion is the next big star in the nba and rj aint, was that a lack of planning ? if the celtics got duncan that year and the spurs got billups, they're probably still just the 3rd franchise in texas that nobody really cares about and the celtics have more than the 1 title since 86. the spurs fire popovich and he never becomes a big time coach.

and even with the wrong people in charge, had the knicks ended up with curry instead of jordan hill things would have been very different for those 2 franchises i imagine. do you need to put yourself in a position to get lucky ? it certainly helps but it doesn't make you lucky. it doesn't create luck. it just gives you an extra spin or two of the wheel. it's still up to chance mostly.

If that happens and we have bad luck, but make the best of it with good management decisions we will still see a difference. There have been plenty of teams that have built good teams without getting crazy lucky in the draft. What the Knicks have had is bad luck and bad management. I do think the bad management has brought bad luck or even negated the times we have gotten lucky. For example, we got lucky with KP and it still didn’t work out. I def agree luck plays a part, but you also need good management. The good management is the one you can control and more important though.

For example, we have seen a lot of teams get lucky in the draft and it not work out. The Pelicans drafted a superstar in AD and still messed it up. Zion can be a superstar, but if they make bad decisions they wont go far and he will eventually leave like AD. Griffin looks like he’s on the right track so far though. OKC drafted 3 MVPs and didn’t win anything. The Raptors are a team that made their own luck, and didn’t need to luck out into a superstar in the draft. They made good decisions to build there team over many years and cashed out at the perfect time for Kawhi. It was luck how it worked out, but it was mostly great management that put them in that position.

GS got lucky with Curry, but they made the pick and built a great team along with a style of play. If the Knicks drafted Curry, they probably would have screwed that one up too. We see how other players and coaches like Melo, Marbury, D’Antoni, Larry Brown, etc worked out here. Its been an endless era of dysfunction here that has been the biggest issue.

Spurs got lucky with Duncan, but it was more then luck to build so many different great teams in different eras. The Spurs know what they are doing and that is the key to their success. The Knicks have been clueless and that has been there demise. Luck can only take you so far and at some point you need to build a team that works and make good decisions. If we can finally put together a good, solid team that fits while not painting ourselves in a corner then I think the luck will follow. Even if we don’t find superstar in the draft, we can keep putting pieces together and start from somehwere. We can’t worry too much about luck, and just need to focus on making good decisions. It remains to be seen if the Knicks can do that.

[Hes_On_Fire]

The good well run teams don’t rely on luck. They make their own luck. They make good decisions and build something sustainable, and eventually good things will happen. They put themselves in a position to get lucky.

When you are a poorly run team, luck won’t matter much. You can draft a superstar, and if you are not doing things right they will be out.

It all comes down to the Knicks have made bad decisions, and Dolan put the wrong people in charge. All the good luck in the world was not going to help us. We made our own bad luck.

Now, hopefully things have changed with Mills/Perry. If they make good decisions, it can help change our luck fast. If they make bad decisions, it will be more of the same. Its also possible they could make good decisions and things still dont work out. But I think we should be able to tell and see a difference. There should still be positive results.

and that will be because, they were unlucky. that's my whole point. if zion is the next big star in the nba and rj aint, was that a lack of planning ? if the celtics got duncan that year and the spurs got billups, they're probably still just the 3rd franchise in texas that nobody really cares about and the celtics have more than the 1 title since 86. the spurs fire popovich and he never becomes a big time coach.

and even with the wrong people in charge, had the knicks ended up with curry instead of jordan hill things would have been very different for those 2 franchises i imagine. do you need to put yourself in a position to get lucky ? it certainly helps but it doesn't make you lucky. it doesn't create luck. it just gives you an extra spin or two of the wheel. it's still up to chance mostly.

You're essentially chalking up the worst record in the NBA since 2001 to luck not going our way.

While I understand your point - luck is a factor with anything in life - there is a reason why the Knicks have failed miserably for 20 years and it's not just because they were 'unlucky'.

Funny how the Clippers were 'unlucky' with Donald Sterling, then he sold the team and they've done a complete 180. Same for the sorry Warriors, who like you mentioned earlier were an awful organization who were sold to good ownership and became one of the best organizations in the NBA. I don't call that luck, I call that leadership.

[Hes_On_Fire]

Also Jerry West has had success building 3 different franchises into contenders. Definitely not all luck.

[god shammgod]

The good well run teams don’t rely on luck. They make their own luck. They make good decisions and build something sustainable, and eventually good things will happen. They put themselves in a position to get lucky.

When you are a poorly run team, luck won’t matter much. You can draft a superstar, and if you are not doing things right they will be out.

It all comes down to the Knicks have made bad decisions, and Dolan put the wrong people in charge. All the good luck in the world was not going to help us. We made our own bad luck.

Now, hopefully things have changed with Mills/Perry. If they make good decisions, it can help change our luck fast. If they make bad decisions, it will be more of the same. Its also possible they could make good decisions and things still dont work out. But I think we should be able to tell and see a difference. There should still be positive results.

and that will be because, they were unlucky. that's my whole point. if zion is the next big star in the nba and rj aint, was that a lack of planning ? if the celtics got duncan that year and the spurs got billups, they're probably still just the 3rd franchise in texas that nobody really cares about and the celtics have more than the 1 title since 86. the spurs fire popovich and he never becomes a big time coach.

and even with the wrong people in charge, had the knicks ended up with curry instead of jordan hill things would have been very different for those 2 franchises i imagine. do you need to put yourself in a position to get lucky ? it certainly helps but it doesn't make you lucky. it doesn't create luck. it just gives you an extra spin or two of the wheel. it's still up to chance mostly.

You're essentially chalking up the worst record in the NBA since 2001 to luck not going our way.

While I understand your point - luck is a factor with anything in life - there is a reason why the Knicks have failed miserably for 20 years and it's not just because they were 'unlucky'.

Funny how the Clippers were 'unlucky' with Donald Sterling, then he sold the team and they've done a complete 180. Same for the sorry Warriors, who like you mentioned earlier were an awful organization who were sold to good ownership and became one of the best organizations in the NBA. I don't call that luck, I call that leadership.

to begin with, i don't care about the worst record since 2001 or a pretty good record that doesn't win a title. anybody can put together a pretty good team that has no chance of actually winning it all. it's all meaningless to me unless you win. when it comes to actually winning it all the chance of doing it without a top 5 talent in the league is remotely small. and drafting one of them is mostly luck. you can put the smartest people in charge, run your organization perfectly and all that. you still need one of those top 5 guys.

and also, the clippers haven't done anything yet since sterling was fired. unless you consider a bunch of first round exits a great success. and if kawhi was born in kalamazoo instead of la, they would be @ssed out still.

[god shammgod]

The good well run teams don’t rely on luck. They make their own luck. They make good decisions and build something sustainable, and eventually good things will happen. They put themselves in a position to get lucky.

When you are a poorly run team, luck won’t matter much. You can draft a superstar, and if you are not doing things right they will be out.

It all comes down to the Knicks have made bad decisions, and Dolan put the wrong people in charge. All the good luck in the world was not going to help us. We made our own bad luck.

Now, hopefully things have changed with Mills/Perry. If they make good decisions, it can help change our luck fast. If they make bad decisions, it will be more of the same. Its also possible they could make good decisions and things still dont work out. But I think we should be able to tell and see a difference. There should still be positive results.

and that will be because, they were unlucky. that's my whole point. if zion is the next big star in the nba and rj aint, was that a lack of planning ? if the celtics got duncan that year and the spurs got billups, they're probably still just the 3rd franchise in texas that nobody really cares about and the celtics have more than the 1 title since 86. the spurs fire popovich and he never becomes a big time coach.

and even with the wrong people in charge, had the knicks ended up with curry instead of jordan hill things would have been very different for those 2 franchises i imagine. do you need to put yourself in a position to get lucky ? it certainly helps but it doesn't make you lucky. it doesn't create luck. it just gives you an extra spin or two of the wheel. it's still up to chance mostly.

If that happens and we have bad luck, but make the best of it with good management decisions we will still see a difference. There have been plenty of teams that have built good teams without getting crazy lucky in the draft. What the Knicks have had is bad luck and bad management. I do think the bad management has brought bad luck or even negated the times we have gotten lucky. For example, we got lucky with KP and it still didn’t work out. I def agree luck plays a part, but you also need good management. The good management is the one you can control and more important though.

For example, we have seen a lot of teams get lucky in the draft and it not work out. The Pelicans drafted a superstar in AD and still messed it up. Zion can be a superstar, but if they make bad decisions they wont go far and he will eventually leave like AD. Griffin looks like he’s on the right track so far though. OKC drafted 3 MVPs and didn’t win anything. The Raptors are a team that made their own luck, and didn’t need to luck out into a superstar in the draft. They made good decisions to build there team over many years and cashed out at the perfect time for Kawhi. It was luck how it worked out, but it was mostly great management that put them in that position.

GS got lucky with Curry, but they made the pick and built a great team along with a style of play. If the Knicks drafted Curry, they probably would have screwed that one up too. We see how other players and coaches like Melo, Marbury, D’Antoni, Larry Brown, etc worked out here. Its been an endless era of dysfunction here that has been the biggest issue.

Spurs got lucky with Duncan, but it was more then luck to build so many different great teams in different eras. The Spurs know what they are doing and that is the key to their success. The Knicks have been clueless and that has been there demise. Luck can only take you so far and at some point you need to build a team that works and make good decisions. If we can finally put together a good, solid team that fits while not painting ourselves in a corner then I think the luck will follow. Even if we don’t find superstar in the draft, we can keep putting pieces together and start from somehwere. We can’t worry too much about luck, and just need to focus on making good decisions. It remains to be seen if the Knicks can do that.

i'm not arguing against good management and making smart decisions though. i'm not. you guys keep pushing me onto that side of the discussion. that's a given. i'm arguing that without luck that won't amount to much. that's how this discussion started. luck is the genesis of all these success stories. sure, they had to not f*ck it up and lots of people do f*ck it up. but without that initial spark of luck it's meaningless.

[Hes_On_Fire]

and that will be because, they were unlucky. that's my whole point. if zion is the next big star in the nba and rj aint, was that a lack of planning ? if the celtics got duncan that year and the spurs got billups, they're probably still just the 3rd franchise in texas that nobody really cares about and the celtics have more than the 1 title since 86. the spurs fire popovich and he never becomes a big time coach.

and even with the wrong people in charge, had the knicks ended up with curry instead of jordan hill things would have been very different for those 2 franchises i imagine. do you need to put yourself in a position to get lucky ? it certainly helps but it doesn't make you lucky. it doesn't create luck. it just gives you an extra spin or two of the wheel. it's still up to chance mostly.

You're essentially chalking up the worst record in the NBA since 2001 to luck not going our way.

While I understand your point - luck is a factor with anything in life - there is a reason why the Knicks have failed miserably for 20 years and it's not just because they were 'unlucky'.

Funny how the Clippers were 'unlucky' with Donald Sterling, then he sold the team and they've done a complete 180. Same for the sorry Warriors, who like you mentioned earlier were an awful organization who were sold to good ownership and became one of the best organizations in the NBA. I don't call that luck, I call that leadership.

to begin with, i don't care about the worst record since 2001 or a pretty good record that doesn't win a title. anybody can put together a pretty good team that has no chance of actually winning it all. it's all meaningless to me unless you win. when it comes to actually winning it all the chance of doing it without a top 5 talent in the league is remotely small. and drafting one of them is mostly luck. you can put the smartest people in charge, run your organization perfectly and all that. you still need one of those top 5 guys.

and also, the clippers haven't done anything yet since sterling was fired. unless you consider a bunch of first round exits a great success. and if kawhi was born in kalamazoo instead of la, they would be @ssed out still.

Well, in my honest opinion that's just a weird way of thinking about it.

Yes, sports is about winning it all and if you don't you're a failure. But as a sports fan it's hard to sit and pretend like 15-67 seasons are the same to you as 67-15 seasons. Sports is about entertainment too. It's about excitement and competition. There's nothing entertaining, exciting or competitive about watching a sorry ass team. So, in that respect, losing matters.

Like I mentioned earlier, there are plenty of successful executives who have worked for multiple franchises and won. Chalking an executives' success to pure 'luck' is an insult to everyone working in basketball operations. If that's the case then we should spin a wheel like Wheel of Fortune and let the wheel decide what trades/signings to do. You're implying that the outcome would be the same as hiring someone with a great basketball acumen like a Jerry West, or Greg Popovich, or Masai Ujiri, or whomever.

And yes, nobody is not acknowledging that everyone needs luck - including the aforementioned executives - and that sometimes those guys have huge misses and epic fails too. But usually they're more on point than not. And that's what you are looking for in an executive - someone who's positives outweigh the negatives. Nobody's perfect. Everyone needs luck. But you also need to be competent, smart, rational and have an understanding on building a professional team. Some people have those characteristics and some don't. I'd venture to guess that everyone we've hired to this point (Perry aside) hasn't had those characteristics.

[god shammgod]

in general, human beings have a hard time accepting the randomness of life. people like to think they manifest their own destiny when so much is actually chance. life on this planet is likely itself a random event.

[Jalen Bluntson]

and that will be because, they were unlucky. that's my whole point. if zion is the next big star in the nba and rj aint, was that a lack of planning ? if the celtics got duncan that year and the spurs got billups, they're probably still just the 3rd franchise in texas that nobody really cares about and the celtics have more than the 1 title since 86. the spurs fire popovich and he never becomes a big time coach.

and even with the wrong people in charge, had the knicks ended up with curry instead of jordan hill things would have been very different for those 2 franchises i imagine. do you need to put yourself in a position to get lucky ? it certainly helps but it doesn't make you lucky. it doesn't create luck. it just gives you an extra spin or two of the wheel. it's still up to chance mostly.

If that happens and we have bad luck, but make the best of it with good management decisions we will still see a difference. There have been plenty of teams that have built good teams without getting crazy lucky in the draft. What the Knicks have had is bad luck and bad management. I do think the bad management has brought bad luck or even negated the times we have gotten lucky. For example, we got lucky with KP and it still didn’t work out. I def agree luck plays a part, but you also need good management. The good management is the one you can control and more important though.

For example, we have seen a lot of teams get lucky in the draft and it not work out. The Pelicans drafted a superstar in AD and still messed it up. Zion can be a superstar, but if they make bad decisions they wont go far and he will eventually leave like AD. Griffin looks like he’s on the right track so far though. OKC drafted 3 MVPs and didn’t win anything. The Raptors are a team that made their own luck, and didn’t need to luck out into a superstar in the draft. They made good decisions to build there team over many years and cashed out at the perfect time for Kawhi. It was luck how it worked out, but it was mostly great management that put them in that position.

GS got lucky with Curry, but they made the pick and built a great team along with a style of play. If the Knicks drafted Curry, they probably would have screwed that one up too. We see how other players and coaches like Melo, Marbury, D’Antoni, Larry Brown, etc worked out here. Its been an endless era of dysfunction here that has been the biggest issue.

Spurs got lucky with Duncan, but it was more then luck to build so many different great teams in different eras. The Spurs know what they are doing and that is the key to their success. The Knicks have been clueless and that has been there demise. Luck can only take you so far and at some point you need to build a team that works and make good decisions. If we can finally put together a good, solid team that fits while not painting ourselves in a corner then I think the luck will follow. Even if we don’t find superstar in the draft, we can keep putting pieces together and start from somehwere. We can’t worry too much about luck, and just need to focus on making good decisions. It remains to be seen if the Knicks can do that.

i'm not arguing against good management and making smart decisions though. i'm not. you guys keep pushing me onto that side of the discussion. that's a given. i'm arguing that without luck that won't amount to much. that's how this discussion started. luck is the genesis of all these success stories. sure, they had to not f*ck it up and lots of people do f*ck it up. but without that initial spark of luck it's meaningless.

Proper preparation prevents poor performance. Luck...has been said to be a bi product of this. If teams aren't doing the right things...luck can be meaningless more often than not. So...yeah....chicken or egg. I would prefer we were a well run organization whenever that luck pops up.

[god shammgod]

If that happens and we have bad luck, but make the best of it with good management decisions we will still see a difference. There have been plenty of teams that have built good teams without getting crazy lucky in the draft. What the Knicks have had is bad luck and bad management. I do think the bad management has brought bad luck or even negated the times we have gotten lucky. For example, we got lucky with KP and it still didn’t work out. I def agree luck plays a part, but you also need good management. The good management is the one you can control and more important though.

For example, we have seen a lot of teams get lucky in the draft and it not work out. The Pelicans drafted a superstar in AD and still messed it up. Zion can be a superstar, but if they make bad decisions they wont go far and he will eventually leave like AD. Griffin looks like he’s on the right track so far though. OKC drafted 3 MVPs and didn’t win anything. The Raptors are a team that made their own luck, and didn’t need to luck out into a superstar in the draft. They made good decisions to build there team over many years and cashed out at the perfect time for Kawhi. It was luck how it worked out, but it was mostly great management that put them in that position.

GS got lucky with Curry, but they made the pick and built a great team along with a style of play. If the Knicks drafted Curry, they probably would have screwed that one up too. We see how other players and coaches like Melo, Marbury, D’Antoni, Larry Brown, etc worked out here. Its been an endless era of dysfunction here that has been the biggest issue.

Spurs got lucky with Duncan, but it was more then luck to build so many different great teams in different eras. The Spurs know what they are doing and that is the key to their success. The Knicks have been clueless and that has been there demise. Luck can only take you so far and at some point you need to build a team that works and make good decisions. If we can finally put together a good, solid team that fits while not painting ourselves in a corner then I think the luck will follow. Even if we don’t find superstar in the draft, we can keep putting pieces together and start from somehwere. We can’t worry too much about luck, and just need to focus on making good decisions. It remains to be seen if the Knicks can do that.

i'm not arguing against good management and making smart decisions though. i'm not. you guys keep pushing me onto that side of the discussion. that's a given. i'm arguing that without luck that won't amount to much. that's how this discussion started. luck is the genesis of all these success stories. sure, they had to not f*ck it up and lots of people do f*ck it up. but without that initial spark of luck it's meaningless.

Proper preparation prevents poor performance. Luck...has been said to be a bi product of this. If teams aren't doing the right things...luck can be meaningless more often than not. So...yeah....chicken or egg. I would prefer we were a well run organization whenever that luck pops up.

nobody is arguing against that. do you believe i am arguing for a badly run organization ? that i would prefer that.

all i did, days ago before someone decided to bump this (not you), is argue that we can do everything right, as we seemingly are right now, and it could still lead nowhere all that great. in fact, that's the more likely outcome.

i'm not saying not to do it or that's there's some better alternative. just that there's no easy to follow path to winning it all. the most likely outcome for all nba franchises, whether they are run well or badly, is failure.

[Capn'O]

you guys are totally missing the point. you keep talking about the past, i'm talking about the future. if we don't hit big on rj or mitch, or randle or dennis or whoever, than doing everything right will still lead to us tearing it down again or paying them and being mediocre. you can keep all your picks, not sign anyone stupid to long deals and still get nowhere. in fact, that's the more likely outcome.

It's very unlikely to be consistently good in short order period. "Doing everything right" involves a longer tack. Some lesser teams that I think do it right include the Jazz, Pacers, and Rockets. Morey took about 6 years to revamp from TMac/Yao before he found the Harden trade and then Mike D to go with him. Maybe that was lucky but they were always in position to make a move and never too terrible. That was by design. The latter two are just always solid teams. Never more than a 2 year drought or so from the playoffs in decades. The point being here, those team are always in position to do something for thing being right. And if the Jazz or Pacers were in a different market they'd be more likely to make the moves that could push them over the top. Though with different pressures to move more quickly.

I don't think or expect that you can do better than that but you have to be in position. If you're capped out with no picks AND you suck there are fewer outs. Far fewer ways to get lucky. And that's where ownership and managers matter.

i'm not arguing against good management and making smart decisions though. i'm not. you guys keep pushing me onto that side of the discussion. that's a given. i'm arguing that without luck that won't amount to much.

Correct me if I'm wrong on where you currently stand but you have been on the side that ownership doesn't really matter. I disagree entirely. I do agree that no magic formula = championship but the Knicks haven't just been unlucky and ownership has absolutely played a role in the teams extended poor performance.