| Welcome to The Yankee Zone. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Knicks Eye Ilgauskas; Cavs Asking About Kurt Thomas!!! | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 12 2004, 04:35 AM (524 Views) | |
| TheOne | Jul 12 2004, 04:35 AM Post #1 |
![]()
I'm still better than you!
![]()
|
Knicks Eye Ilgauskas
starting 5: Ilgauskas sweetney crawford houston marbury main bench: penny tim thomas johnson baker mohammed (if he's still here) sh*t i'd go to battle with that team!!! :rock: |
![]() |
|
| Mattingly23 | Jul 12 2004, 10:20 AM Post #2 |
![]() ![]()
|
With the Knicks' luck, Big Z's feet would start bothering him again, resulting in around 20 games played a year. Who do you have playing the 3? Crawford? He's way too small. |
![]() |
|
| Grandy4MVP | Jul 12 2004, 10:28 AM Post #3 |
![]()
|
Oh, I'll match up with that.... Kato Gooden Hill Mobley Franchise Bench Nelson Garrity Stevenson (possibly) Turkalu (sp) (spurs probably won't match Bogans :rock: :rock: :rock: |
![]() |
|
| Strider | Jul 12 2004, 11:53 AM Post #4 |
![]()
Legend
![]()
|
As soon as I saw the title of the post I said, "Make the trade. Make the mother f'in trade!"
Ofcourse. We have terrible luck. But that's a chance you have to take. Ilgauskas gives us a big man with offense who can be a sumbitch in the low post. Remember how he killed us last season? Everytime he took a shot, you knew he was gonna score. He's a huge injury risk, but the upside is.... I didn't read the article, but does it say why Cleveland wants to trade Z? He's clearly a better player than whatever the Knicks would send them and without Boozer, they'll need someone who can bang. Is it a salary dump? Crawford is too small to be the SF. He's 6-4 and has a thin frame. We remember how Sprewell was out of position and undersized, he was 6'5". Crawford is a just a tall point guard. He's the same size as Jason Kidd. If he does start, the thinking would probably be, "He'll be overmatched on defense, but he can get his 'get back' on the offensive side." This team needed defense last season. Justin, Tim Thomas would not be coming off the bench. We have enough backup small forwards. We'd have to trade him if Crawford is to be a starter. |
![]() |
|
| Allanfan20 | Jul 12 2004, 01:09 PM Post #5 |
![]()
Greatest Poster Ever!!!!!
![]()
|
I don't even love the idea of going after Crawford, at this point. Going after Big Z, though, is good. He killed us, this season, so that takes away a threat, and he can help us out a lot. I hear Denver is in the running for Crawford too. Maybe a 3 way trade where Crawford goes to Denver and we get Camby, and Chicago gets guys like White and Skittles? eh? eh? Of course, someone would have to be taking E Rob, JYD and Shandon as well. Probably wont happen, but I can still dream of getting Camby, right? |
![]() |
|
| Strider | Jul 12 2004, 01:32 PM Post #6 |
![]()
Legend
![]()
|
Please, stop with the Marcus Camby stuff. It wouldn't have bothered me if you had said "Nene". That wouldn't happen, but atleast he'd be better for us than Camby. I'm gonna make this clear: [size=14]FUŠK MARCUS CAMBY. HE'S INJURY PRONE AND HAS NEVER BEEN ABLE TO STAY HEALTHY FOR AN ENTIRE SEASON. EVEN LAST YEAR. WE MIGHT WANNA CLAP OUR HANDS AND STOMP OUR FEET BECAUSE HE NEVER HAD TO BE PUT ON IR, BUT HE MISSED 10 GAMES. HE'S NOT DURABLE. ILGAUSKAS IS ALSO A HEALTH QUESTION, BUT NOT AS BIG, AND THE PAYOFF FOR THAT RISK IS MORE THAN IT WOULD BE WITH CAMBY. THAT sh*t YOU SAID ABOUT HIM BEING A TOP 10 IMPACT PLAYER IN THE NBA IS SOME OF THE BIGGEST FOOLISHNESS I'VE EVER HEARD. ITS JUST LIKE THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BRING MCDYESS BACK. FUŠK BOTH OF THEM. WHEN THEY WERE HERE, WE WANTED TO GET RID OF THEM. YOU DON'T WASH MUD OFF YOUR HANDS THEN GO OUTSIDE AND STICK YOUR HAND RIGHT BACK IN IT. LET'S MOVE ON![/size] |
![]() |
|
| Allanfan20 | Jul 12 2004, 02:03 PM Post #7 |
![]()
Greatest Poster Ever!!!!!
![]()
|
Strider, I'm not getting into another arguement with you on basketball. The Knicks need a guy like Camby. There isn't another player in the league like him, when he's healthy. I have confidence that he will remain healthy. And I don't go by this "The Knicks have the worst luck bullcrap." That's when Layden was in town, making stupid deal after stupid deal. Camby is a big time upgrade over EVERYONE on the Knicks frontcourt. If you can get him, you get him, unless if you are giving up Marbury or Sweetney. It's that simple. I don't want him plain and simply b/c I like him (Even though I do). I want him b/c he will put up wins and even have us competing for the East. It's that simple. |
![]() |
|
| Mattingly23 | Jul 12 2004, 02:06 PM Post #8 |
![]() ![]()
|
Camby signed a 6-year, $60 million deal to stay in Denver. He's not being traded this offseason. |
![]() |
|
| Allanfan20 | Jul 12 2004, 02:06 PM Post #9 |
![]()
Greatest Poster Ever!!!!!
![]()
|
And I stand by my word. Carmello is not the only reason Denver made it to the playoffs and held their own against the Wolves. It's not foolishness. Strider, you may know a ton about football and baseball, but I know my basketball just as well as anyone, and that's without me having cable. Don't call me foolish when it comes to basketball. |
![]() |
|
| Allanfan20 | Jul 12 2004, 02:08 PM Post #10 |
![]()
Greatest Poster Ever!!!!!
![]()
|
and he didn't sign it yet. I know this isn't happening. It's just an idea, b/c I know Denver is also in the hunt for Jamal Crawford (Who is very overrated). |
![]() |
|
| Mattingly23 | Jul 12 2004, 02:13 PM Post #11 |
![]() ![]()
|
He signed it. It just can't be announced until Wednesday. His agent was already quoted as saying it's done, and I don't mean in a Carlos Boozer type of done. I would have liked to have Camby back too, but odds are he will never stay as healthy as he did this past season for Denver. |
![]() |
|
| Strider | Jul 12 2004, 03:01 PM Post #12 |
![]()
Legend
![]()
|
Yes they do. Just not "Marcus Camby" himself. They need a tall athlete who can play defense. They just don't need the question marks.
Wrong! Kevin Garnet. I can name you a bunch of guys who are athletic, can block shots, and rebound. If you mean there isn't another guy who has been as fragile, then you have a point.
Why are you confident? He hasn't given you reason to believe that. Look at his career. The Knicks do have bad luck. Its not just the bad signings, its misfortune too. One of those 2-in-1 bad contract + bad luck acquisitions would be taking on Camby's $60M and paying him $10M per season for 42 games played.
No question. Its a team effort and I'd be an idiot to think that 21 ppg can completely carry a team to a Western Conference playoff berth. Camby did contribute. He had a good season and I know that the numbers don't show it all. BUT, I don't want him back here. I don't want that constant worry. After kinda weathering the Layden storm and making progress, the last thing I'd want is to take a step back by having a guy miss half the season with injuries. No matter how you slice it, Camby is an injury risk. We're better off just not taking that chance.
I'm not discounting your basketball knowledge or calling you foolish. I just think that its foolish to have such a hard-on for Camby. |
![]() |
|
| TheOne | Jul 12 2004, 05:13 PM Post #13 |
![]()
I'm still better than you!
![]()
|
ok crawford can't be the 3 so who do you put at that spot and strider i don't think the knicks can trade tim thomas cause of his contract so they are stuck with him!!! :peace: |
![]() |
|
| Mattingly23 | Jul 12 2004, 05:14 PM Post #14 |
![]() ![]()
|
Well that's the problem. See my comments in one of the other Crawford threads. Crawford only makes a lot of sense if Houston continues to be hampered by injuries. I expanded on this in the other thread. |
![]() |
|
| NYFanYGRK83 | Jul 12 2004, 05:22 PM Post #15 |
![]()
|
Why would you have tim thomas on the bench? I rather have him start than sweetney. |
![]() |
|
| TheOne | Jul 12 2004, 05:25 PM Post #16 |
![]()
I'm still better than you!
![]()
|
the knicks plan to start sweetney if kurt thomas is traded, tim thomas would be part of that whole 10 million guard rotation they have going on!!! :no1: |
![]() |
|
| TheOne | Jul 12 2004, 05:26 PM Post #17 |
![]()
I'm still better than you!
![]()
|
:thumbup: |
![]() |
|
| NYFanYGRK83 | Jul 12 2004, 05:29 PM Post #18 |
![]()
|
That would be dumb! So why the hell did they trade van horn for then if they want this guy coming off the bench! If you traded van horn for him then he should be starting! |
![]() |
|
| Mattingly23 | Jul 12 2004, 05:31 PM Post #19 |
![]() ![]()
|
I don't buy that. If they trade KT and don't get another PF in return, they will give Sweetney a shot at the 4. Tim Thomas will be the 3. Crawford will be the 6th man. Tim Thomas is what, 6'9"? He's not going to be getting any time at the 2, especially if Houston and Crawford are both on the active roster. |
![]() |
|
| TheOne | Jul 12 2004, 05:36 PM Post #20 |
![]()
I'm still better than you!
![]()
|
your right 23, they will probably start thomas and make crawford come off the bench as the 6th man, all i know is that they will definitely have sweetney starting, he's doing great in the summer league, they say he is in shape and ready to go to the next level!!! :rock: |
![]() |
|
| NYFanYGRK83 | Jul 12 2004, 05:38 PM Post #21 |
![]()
|
my point is this guy was suppose to be a great player and now you got him coming off the bench. When Van horn was here, he was doing just fine and isiah traded him because he wanted the knicks to be more atheletic. Now you got the guy he traded for coming off the bench and fat mike sweetney starting. But then again it doesn't matter because they will find a way to have another miserable season! :no1: |
![]() |
|
| Mattingly23 | Jul 12 2004, 05:46 PM Post #22 |
![]() ![]()
|
Isiah wanted his own guys in here. Van Horn could have played out of his mind all season, but Isiah would have traded him no matter what. He's been purging the roster of everyone who had anything to do with Scott Layden. That's why I am surprised they are supposedly holding onto Sweetney, although I am glad it appears they might. Frank Williams seems to be a goner soon though. Forget Van Horn, I wish Spree were never traded. |
![]() |
|
| MastaR316 | Jul 12 2004, 05:46 PM Post #23 |
![]()
C-C-C-C-C-Combo Breaker
![]()
|
What the hell is it with putting Tim Thomas on the bench???? The man was our most clutch player last season, when that bastard wanted to be healthy. He is our starter, end of the f*cking story. Crawford could play 30 minutes off the bench in his 1st season. |
![]() |
|
| TheOne | Jul 12 2004, 05:49 PM Post #24 |
![]()
I'm still better than you!
![]()
|
i made a mistake having thomas on the bench, he will probably be starting even though he's not that great (IMO), sweetney is in shape now (and even when he wasn't in great shape last season he still showed flashes of being a pretty good player) so i think he'll be pretty good next season!!! |
![]() |
|
| Mattingly23 | Jul 12 2004, 05:49 PM Post #25 |
![]() ![]()
|
I think Tim Thomas should start, if still here, but explain to me how he was clutch. |
![]() |
|
| vdfebduderocks | Jul 12 2004, 06:14 PM Post #26 |
![]()
King of NYC
![]()
|
if TT was a clutch player last season, then he would have been on the floor during the playoffs and win us a game instead of yapping his mouth about fighting K-mart. He was never a clutch player, unless you think shooting free throws or dunking over people is clutch. Besides, that dunk was during a blowout. Anyway, once TT learns to rebound like a real 6'10 player, then he should be guaranteed a full time starter. JC also has to stay consistent as well. Right now, if Crawford comes, Wilkens has an option of putting TT on the bench or JC. Remember, TT made 10 million bucks sitting on the bench half the time in Milwaukee. If the team goes with the 3 guard situation, then TT sits. If TT starts, then Crawford or Houston will sit. WHo cares if we have 10 million dollar players on the bench. We're already over the cap until 2010. If we're going to win in either situation, then it's fine to keep either JC, H20, or TT on the bench. |
![]() |
|
| Mattingly23 | Jul 12 2004, 06:18 PM Post #27 |
![]() ![]()
|
IT is not the coach, at least not yet. I think LW will make the decisions on who starts at each position. |
![]() |
|
| champ4life | Jul 12 2004, 06:22 PM Post #28 |
![]()
|
And I'm fairly sure he'll make the wrong decision. :thumbdown: |
![]() |
|
| Mattingly23 | Jul 12 2004, 06:24 PM Post #29 |
![]() ![]()
|
I'm not a huge Lenny fan, but I do not want IT ever taking over as coach. I don't want a President/Coach situation. I want those roles to remain separate. I only hope Steve Mills and James Dolan have the balls to tell Isiah no if he ever approaches them about taking over on the sidelines. |
![]() |
|
| vdfebduderocks | Jul 12 2004, 06:49 PM Post #30 |
![]()
King of NYC
![]()
|
what's wrong with president/coach? There's nothing wrong with that. At least the coach must have a say in the team's direction or the players they wanna acquire. Look at Pat Riley before he stepped down as coach. Don Nelson and Rudy T were great examples. Was there anything wrong with the team or management? NO. Their teams were still successful. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · NY Knicks - ORL Magic · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
3:37 PM Jul 11
|
| Member Legend |
|
Administrator | Moderator | Member | Validating | |
| Please Visit Our Affiliates |


edge created by tiptopolive of ifsz
















3:37 PM Jul 11

