Of all the moves IT has made

[BRIGGS]

there is no doubt in my mind--taking Frye over Bynum is going to go down as the absolute worst. He's starting to play like a franchise type player and his upside is championship caliber superstar franchise player. To miss out on that is the worst--all of these other terrible moves the MLE the crazy trades/contracts could almost be forgiven if we had Bynum. The BS that Bynum wouldnt have developed in NY is crp. Bynum has his own trainer--got himself into shape when he was 17--he's a very good FT shooter already for a very big guy. He's going to be automatic 25-12-3 for a long time

[yungal07]

Trading the pick that could have been Lamarcus Aldridge was also a pretty poor move too.

[BRIGGS]

Trading the pick that could have been Lamarcus Aldridge was also a pretty poor move too.

That was bad too. That was crazy because Chicago was trying to give Curry 20mm to retire. Ending up forking over 4 draft picks to a team that was trying to retire a player---well what can be said.

[richard]

how is that a crap argument? he was coached by kareem, played with kobe, and coached more by phil. ny doesn't offer any of that.

[Slimpack]

Nah the Knicks couldn't have drafted Bynum. If they had then the fans would have booed him into being a bad player.

[yungal07]

how is that a crap argument? he was coached by kareem, played with kobe, and coached more by phil. ny doesn't offer any of that.

so it's your assertion that the coaching staff is sub-par? if so, that's a valid point, and if its true, then there's only one direction you can really point the finger at...

[KrAzY DeMoN]

He would be useless in NY, when was the last time we developed a player. Look at Q Brick starting over Chandler when he is useless.

[drj]

there is no doubt in my mind--taking Frye over Bynum is going to go down as the absolute worst. He's starting to play like a franchise type player and his upside is championship caliber superstar franchise player. To miss out on that is the worst--all of these other terrible moves the MLE the crazy trades/contracts could almost be forgiven if we had Bynum. The BS that Bynum wouldnt have developed in NY is crp. Bynum has his own trainer--got himself into shape when he was 17--he's a very good FT shooter already for a very big guy. He's going to be automatic 25-12-3 for a long time

If you are going to look at things with hindsight (which of course is 20/20), then I can see your argument. Though we do have to see if Bynum will keep it up. You can't simply assume that "He's going to be automatic 25-12-3 for a long time", especially since there were lots of rumors that at 17 he already had the knees of an old man...

But if you look at things from what was known at the time, Bynum was a very high risk question mark, and Frye was considered a good pick. Indeed before Eddy Curry came in Frye was looking like a future all-star, playing pick-and-pop all day with Marbs.

If we hadn't made the Curry trade we could potentially have had a frontcourt rotation of Frye-Aldridge-Lee, with Gay starting at the 3. That's a nice solid core.

The bottom line is that Isiah has made so many blunders it is hard to pick his worst one!

[mjhp911]

Briggs had this called from the start. He was Bynum's biggest proponent here. But I don't think it's Zeke's worst move. I think Curry is Zeke's worst move. Followed by Marb. And then Bynum. But I also do somewhat agree with the others, including Zeke, who feel Bynum would likely not have developed properly here. I hope that's changed now, and we'll draft the best player available in this draft, without regard to experience or future development.

[TheBluest]

Briggs had this called from the start. He was Bynum's biggest proponent here. But I don't think it's Zeke's worst move. I think Curry is Zeke's worst move. Followed by Marb. And then Bynum. But I also do somewhat agree with the others, including Zeke, who feel Bynum would likely not have developed properly here. I hope that's changed now, and we'll draft the best player available in this draft, without regard to experience or future development.

Bynum wasn't necessarily BPA during his draft class and our pick position. He clearly was a talent with probably the biggest upside at our pick. BPA usually means a player who's drafted who can contribute right away vs his draft competition. Take for instance if the assumed talents enter the draft this yr, we have the number 3 pick do we take BPA with say Deandre Jordan, O.J Mayo, or Eric Gordon still on board? Well BPA says it's Eric Gordon at this point in time or do we go the project route and select a hopeful Bynum/Stoudemire talent in Jordan?

[TheBluest]

Oh and EY Curry was BY A WIDE MARGIN the worst move he's made. It's set the franchise back so far. Especially when you consider the Climate of the EC. We had a chance to build a dynasty. We'd be putting the finishing touches on it probably this off-season, but I SAY UGH sold this bright future for not Man Up, but Belly Up Curry.

[BornLoser]

I think the Zach Randolph trade is the worst move. He has completly torn apart this team. His selfishness has corrupted almost all of our team play.

I have never in my life seen a player who cares so little about team and so much about himself. You put Randolph back on the Blazers and they are not much better than us now. Randolph would have shut down Aldridge's development and torn that team apart as well.

We gave up way way too much on the Curry trade but hindsight is always 20/20. The Zach trade was a bad move from day one. Its a repeat of the Francis trade but Randolph is more of a cancer with a longer contract.

The Curry trade set us back because we lost two high picks, but I am betting Isiah would have drafted Thomas anyway, and there was no one around where the Bulls picked last year that is too impressive. So the damage is not as bad as people make it out to be. As for the Bynum pick I think Isiah made the right call drafting Frye. It has not worked out but at the time it was the right choice.

As for the Zach trade we did not lose much but we have four years of Randolph preventing this team from doing anything. We could get Beasley, Mayo and Rose and as long as Zach was starting we would not make the playoffs. Until we move Zach I hope you like bad chemistry because I live in Portland and I know the damage Zach can cause.

[Knick 4ever]

You guys don't get it. It is not the player you draft, it is the supportive cast you have around to develop that player. We have a chaotic atmosphere in N.Y. that does not allow any young kid to develop, drafting Bynum would have been destroyed all of his talents. The LA franchise ensures to have excellent coaches around to invest in their young talents. Look at Phill's bench, you will see that all of his assistants are capable of coaching the respective positions they are hired to coach.

[TKF]

Briggs, I will give you credit for calling this to some degree, but You really wanted Bynum over frye, I agree, you did call that, but not because you thought bynum was some franchise player, you just thought he was more of the player we needed, and you just didn't like frye..

I will give more credit for noticing nate robinson in the draft as a first round pick and a guy with talent, when no one really had him on their radar....

[chitownsports4ever]

Hindsight is a trip there was no way any of you wouldve taken Bynum in June knowing you would be also be chasing Larry brown to coach especially after what had just happened with Darko in Detroit.

If you take into account all aspects of the decision you wouldve come to the same conclusion. Now maybe you dont take Frye but no way do you bring in a kid from hs hoping brown is gonna develop him.

[mjhp911]

-= original quote snipped =-
Bynum wasn't necessarily BPA during his draft class and our pick position. He clearly was a talent with probably the biggest upside at our pick. BPA usually means a player who's drafted who can contribute right away vs his draft competition. Take for instance if the assumed talents enter the draft this yr, we have the number 3 pick do we take BPA with say Deandre Jordan, O.J Mayo, or Eric Gordon still on board? Well BPA says it's Eric Gordon at this point in time or do we go the project route and select a hopeful Bynum/Stoudemire talent in Jordan?

No, there's already a 'compromise' in what you are describing. 'Best player available' means the best player, period. Without regard to position, experience, signability, or ability to contribute right away. The best player, period. Flashback to '96. If you were sitting in the 5th draft slot, Ray-Ray could have contributed sooner, but Kobe was the best player in that draft. We should pick the best player at our draft slot. I don't care if he's a PF, PG, or C. We NEED a franchise talent, like yesterday.

[method]

-= original quote snipped =-



No, there's already a 'compromise' in what you are describing. 'Best player available' means the best player, period. Without regard to position, experience, signability, or ability to contribute right away. The best player, period. Flashback to '96. If you were sitting in the 5th draft slot, Ray-Ray could have contributed sooner, but Kobe was the best player in that draft. We should pick the best player at our draft slot. I don't care if he's a PF, PG, or C. We NEED a franchise talent, like yesterday.

[chrbal]

Most pointless move- Trading Moochie Norris, Vin Baker, and a 2nd for Maurice Taylor...the same day they traded for Malik Rose. Rose brought two 1st round picks...Taylor brought meh. Taylors contract was one year longer then Vin and Moochie.

Most obvious worst use of the MLE- Jerome James. Guy was coming off a 4th straight season of about 5 pts, 3.5 rebs, and 1.5 blks...Knicks were in competition with NO ONE for his services, so naturally Isiah saw fit to offer him 5 years.

[kosmovitelli]

there is no doubt in my mind--taking Frye over Bynum is going to go down as the absolute worst.

Isiah Thomas is an awful General Manager, he really has no clue but I give him a pass for Frye.
Let's not act like Bynum was an obvious choice at #7 that year.
Isiah selected Frye and we were all happy with that choice.

Drafting is not an easy task, there is lot of scouting needed but also luck and other things you can't control. Isiah kept the pick and took his chances with the best player available, I give him credit for that. No problem here. I don't blame GMs for bad draft picks. It happens every time, you see every year teams pass on a player and that guy ends up a bonafide stud. It happens. You can't blame a GM for that. You could trash Isiah if he traded the pick and we came up empty handed in that draft but it's not the case we got Frye who was a good prospect at the time. We took our chances but Frye had limitations. He's skilled but he's not a fierce competitor and at PF you need a hungry guy; someone who will give it all on a daily basis. At PG and SG, skills may be enough but at PF and C you need more than that or you'll get beaten up. You need to stand your ground, you need to be hungry and I feel Frye is too sfot to be an all star at PF. I don't blame Isiah Thomas for not being able to see that early on, hindsight is always 20/20.

Selecting Frye over Bynum is absolutely not the worst thing Isiah has done as GM of the Knicks. Get real man !

Marbury, the trade that started the downward spiral, is Isiah's worst transaction. And by far. Not only he completely miscalculated (we still owe a pick that may become a lotto pick in 2010) but he also brought a perennial malcontent, a bad fit for the team and moreover someone who would pump up the fans (and the owner) and make them believe we were one player away from being a great team. Before Isiah traded for Marbury, we were all happy rebuilding and trying to get better gradually. Marbury changed everything. It led Isiah to think we were close from being a good team, he traded Van Horn for Tim Thomas and Nazr and traded a bunch of expirings for Jamal Crawford and JYD's garbage contract in the off-season.
Another terrible consequence of the Marbury trade is the fact that it set a precedent around the league amongst GMs. When Isiah inquired about Curry, Paxson asked for what ? One unprotected 1st round pick, one conditional 1st round pick and two second rounders. In terms of draft picks, that's almost exactly what Isiah surrendered in the Marbury trade. Paxson used Marbury as a blueprint for the Curry trade.

Marbury is definitely Isiah's worst trade. If we surrender a top 5 pick to the Jazz in 2010 then it will go down as one of the worst trades ever made.

[TheBluest]

-= original quote snipped =-



No, there's already a 'compromise' in what you are describing. 'Best player available' means the best player, period. Without regard to position, experience, signability, or ability to contribute right away. The best player, period. Flashback to '96. If you were sitting in the 5th draft slot, Ray-Ray could have contributed sooner, but Kobe was the best player in that draft. We should pick the best player at our draft slot. I don't care if he's a PF, PG, or C. We NEED a franchise talent, like yesterday.

That's hindsight because no one knew Kobe would be that good. What if Bynum turned out to be a Bust?




There are many different variations. Like from this example. Mine is #1 yours apears to be #2


http://football.calsci.com/DraftPC3.html

Round 1: take the BPA on your top level plateau which is a FS even though you have a perceived need for a DE. You might have a pretty good FS on your roster but this player was just too good to pass on. The only DE on your list will mean a costly move up by trade and you determine it is not worth the move up.

Round 2: take the speedy WR with a lot of upside even though he might not represent the BPA criteria in the strict measure of definition. You have decent to good receivers but have a desire for some speed in this area. There are other players on your list such that you can still get a good player the next round.

Round 3: you go after the best DE on the board filling the need you had. This is a needs based selection.

Round 4: you get that TE even though fans will question your sanity because your TE just went to the Pro Bowl.

Round 5: maybe you have two selections in this round and you get another DE which is a need area and is flooding that position. With the second selection you then go after the BPA on the board regardless of position. He might be a QB, a RB or a LB, it makes no difference to you. You just added the best talent available.

Round 6: again the BPA approach is most likely used by most teams here but you change it up a little. You have a DE - LB and an OG on the board. You have a need down the road for that OG but that DE is very intriguing. You take a couple of calls for your selection just in case someone is offering a good deal. You decide to take the OG. To most fans this is strange, as they think you are set at OG