My Posse's On Broadway: Official NY Knicks 2016-2017 Season Thread

[KnickstapeCity]

Very disturbing gif

 

[onelastdeath]

@Kristaps Porzingis do me a solid and don't tag any non Knicks fans in the thread breh

 

[KnickstapeCity]

@Kristaps Porzingis do me a solid and don't tag any non Knicks fans in the thread breh

:philjacksonlol:Ok, pal. You got it.

 

[JMurder]

The Knicks were garbage. That doesn't mean they tanked. If they were really tryna lose on purpose they wouldn't have put their all into beating Atlanta down the stretch (Timmy wuddup)

The Knicks definitely tanked by getting rid of most of it's tradeable assets that year. Management tanking and players trying to lose games are two different things. You think Philly players were trying to lose every game all these years??

 

[storyteller]

No one has implied or stated that tanking is a guarantee to success, that is a strawman argument. But it is a better alternative to being mediocre and not going anywhere, while other teams spend the next two years giving playing time to their young players and actually figuring it out.

For clarity here; when you put it like "tanking is a better alternative to being mediocre and not going anywhere while other teams spend the next two years giving playing time to their young players and actually figure it out" you're essentially dismissing ANY alternatives other than tank or be mediocre. So Maybe you're not implying that tanking is guaranteed, but you're absolutely implying that the Knicks don't have any alternative to tanking than mediocrity; which the crux of my what argument addressed. So just to boil it down again and avoid confusing

My theory is as simple as; a good GM will find ways to acquire talent as long as he has SOME form of flexibility. It doesn't have to be picks; it usually takes a good mix of FA's, youth pick ups and right time/right place trades...but the good ones will find a way as long as they have some room to work. .

Tanking of course involves a great degree of risk but looking at it from a cost-benefit analysis the downside risk vs. the upside tips the scale in favor of being a treadmill team. The GM is of course important in that regard, but it requires an owner and a fan base who are patient enough to build a team with the long term in mind.

Again, if you stage it as "tank or be a treadmill team" sure, it's better. But that's your own strawman as the point was that building a contender can be accomplished with flexibility that doesn't necessitate tanking. The Knicks have some of that flexibility in the form of picks (that will bring in youth even if it's not the guarantee that Fultz or Ball would be) and cap space (over 20 million in cap space to utilize this offseason). Right now, if you switch from "start building at the bottom" as a POV to "start building around KP and the pieces in place" then you have something to placate an impatient fan base and more importantly James Dolan.

James Dolan and Knick fans are a horrible combination because Dolan has been meddlesome with the Knicks in a manner he is not with the Rangers. What is the upside of the current Knick situation? I am open to hearing an argument that places them in a position where they are more than just a second round exit team within the next two-three years, I have not seen an argument being made convincingly anywhere. I think Phil has been decent although the contract he gave Noah was horrible and the NTC he gave Melo was even worse, but he has a boss who will not tolerate a rebuild so I can't fully fault him for those two contracts.

The bold is kinda why I think an all out tank fest is unrealistic. Going back to my initial argument; the Knicks can build a core without a top five pick (GS built it's entire core without a single top five pick and won a chip). Is it tougher? Maybe, but it's realistic and there are benefits to surrounding a young rising star with veterans that care about winning immediately. You put a young cat on a team that's complacent about wins and you run the risk of having an Okafor throwing KO punches at fans or a Cousins raging against the team or a quality player jumping ship for a chance to win. So again, I'm staging this as "tanking guarantees nothing and carries risks of it's own; building incrementally guarantees nothing and carries risks of it's own." Feel free to prefer tanking, but the idea that not tanking means guaranteed mediocrity is like claiming no stars can be drafted after the first few picks or that there are no other means to acquire impact players. If the Knicks don't throw 18 million at Noah and spend that elsewhere, the argument probably has more clarity but still...they have 20+ million in cap space, they WILL add a young piece to the team in the draft (three if they hit on second rounders they own rights to) and they are already developing their centerpiece with a few nice cheap developmental cats around that centerpiece (Willy being the closest to a sure thing).

 

[Mr. Jack Napier]

I promise you, you'll feel better one way or another watching the Knicks doing this.

You'll enjoy the NBA more.

Oh, I'm continue to enjoy the Knicks/NBA/basketball in general. I won't let the losers in here deter from that.

 

[Miles Davis]

The Knicks were garbage. That doesn't mean they tanked. If they were really tryna lose on purpose they wouldn't have put their all into beating Atlanta down the stretch (Timmy wuddup)

the squad that got us Porzingis was/is laughable. Y'all need to check that roster out.

 

[JMurder]

Melo and Rose were a combined -26 in a two point win. Pretty much damn near impossible. But the fans are at fault obviously.

Is it more important to draft a point guard who may or may not pan out and continue a losing culture, or to build a winning culture and introducing our star player to games that actually matter? That's really the question here

 

[storyteller]

Rose vs. Jennings: What the numbers say

Some interesting data on Rose vs BJ. I think it needs a lot closer look, but at least we have some raw numbers. I'd like to see how many minutes BJ plays with KP vs Rose and also team FG% with each on the floor tbh. I'd also like to see defensive impact comparisons. This would be a job for Herring...

 

[Youhadasparkwhenustarted]

nm

 

[DirtyD]

Yall say this like you didn't draft Porzingis after tanking, and most of you dudes wanted Okafor

No rebuttal to this though.

 

[Columbo]

Whats KP on 2k17 now?

 

[JMurder]

No rebuttal to this though.

The rebuttal is that the Knicks tanked to get Karl Anthony Towns and were forced (and lucky) to settle for Porzingawd. You go into a plan thinking everything will work out and you'll systematically find all the flaws in your reasoning by the end.

 

[DirtyD]

The rebuttal is that the Knicks tanked to get Karl Anthony Towns and were forced (and lucky) to settle for Porzingawd. You go into a plan thinking everything will work out and you'll systematically find all the flaws in your reasoning by the end.

Doesn't change the fact that most championship squads build their cores through picking high in the draft and that the Knicks got Porzingis, because they drafted high. But again agree to disagree.

 

[Trapperman Dave]

Doesn't change the fact that most championship squads build their cores through picking high in the draft and that the Knicks got Porzingis, because they drafted high. But again agree to disagree.

Need some luck and stability knicks didn't have that sometimes you need to roll the dice in either direction