The Thomas Trades: Turning Weatherspoon into Wine
Intro: The Book of Isiah: Unraveling The Biggest Myth in Sports
Chapter 1: The Roster: Worst in Sports History?
Chapter 2: The Past: Rewriting Isiah’s Resume
Chapter 3: The Salary Cap Myth: Pure Media Madness
Chapter 4: The "Mistakes": Mountains from Mole Hills
Chapter 5: The Drafting Genius: Isiah the Prophet
Chapter 6: The Trades: Turning Weatherspoon Into Wine
CHAPTER 6
The Trades: Turning Weatherspoon into Wine
Pop Quiz: Which currently RETIRED player should Isiah NOT have traded for young talent?
Media Backlash: The Eddy Curry trade has been called “the worst trade in the history of sports”; the Steve Francis backlash makes folks believe that Trevor Ariza is Kobe Bryant; and the media endlessly reports on Jalen Rose’s salary instead of the trade’s draft pick that turned into Renaldo Balkman.
Analysis: Let’s get this out of the way. While overhauling an entire roster in three years Thomas made at least one bad trade of any significance. Forget salary. This is simply a bad trade because Trevor Ariza was more valuable to the Knicks than Francis, who were already loaded at the shooting guard position. Ariza is emerging as a defensive specialist with a solid all-around game. Francis, and his declining knee, is just not the same athlete from a couple of years ago. In summary, Thomas made one bad trade. Any media critic who obsesses too long over this mistake should consider that another GM probably would not have stolen Trevor Ariza in the draft’s 2nd round in the first place, and be soothed that he was able to parlay Francis and Channing Frye into Zach Randolph. Final translation: 8th pick (Frye) and 43rd pick (Ariza) for Zach Randolph.
4) Antonio Davis becomes Renaldo Balkman (via draft pick acquired with Jalen Rose)
Analysis:
Each trade that you see listed above received criticism from the short-sighted media during its time. These trades boil down to the Knicks trading Kurt Thomas (now 34), and a bunch of AARP members for a cadre of young promising players ages 22 -27 that form the nucleus of a Knicks youth movement for the next 10 years. While the media was loudly portraying Thomas as a dunce for absorbing expensive contracts (see Malik and Jalen Rose), Thomas was quietly collecting first round draft picks as part of these deals. And when it comes to drafting quality, Thomas is the best in the business. The media was too busy perpetuating the myth of the salary cap to notice that the Thomas strategy was turning old into young, retirees into rookies, and hopelessness into hope.Media Hypocrisy: Let’s set the record sraight. Isiah’s media critics will now often give high praise to Thomas’ DRAFTING of David Lee, Renaldo Balkman, and Mardy Collins. But to this very day Thomas will rarely receives any credit for TRADING for those draft picks that landed these players. In fact, Thomas is STILL often RIPPED for making both the Malik Rose and Jalen Rose trades that landed those picks. The media simply cannot have it both ways. This bears repeating for those slow on the uptake: Thomas traded Nazi Mohammed and Antonio Davis for David Lee, Renaldo Balkman, and Mardy Collins! Because it is hard to conceive that so many media members are THAT dumb, like the salary cap issue, one can only conclude that there is personal anti-Isiah bias at work in their reporting.
Dec. 2007 UPDATE on Part C: "The Signature Trades". It is fair to say with two additional months hindsight this portion of the column has been turned on its head. Marbury went AWOL after a game 5 benching and has never really returned and the Knicks have never recovered; Eddy Curry has not developed in 2007, and the acquisition of Randolph (a steal on paper) has helped to stunt Curry’s growth and that of other young players. Ultimately, it is the outcome of "the signature trades" that will overshadow all of the excellent trades in Part B — as it should.
C. The Signature Trades
Marbury Trade Analysis: Depending on his performance the next two years, the Marbury trade looks like either a very good one or an average one. Marbury has emerged as floor leader that his critics previously doubted he could. Unfortunately, this trade could probably never be fully evaluated because Thomas gave up two #1 picks. Two #1 picks in Isiah’s hand have much more value than when being held by another GM. Still a good trade?: Most likely. Great trade?: Only, if Marbury leads the Knicks into title contention in the next few years. No complete assessment can be made prior to the 2010 draft pick.
Curry Trade Analysis: At best this will be a great trade for the Knicks or more likely a win-win for both the Knicks and the Bulls since Ty Thomas and Joakim Noah have great potential. Ultimately, this trade will be decided on whether Isiah is right about Curry’s recently emerging development as “the tip of the iceberg”. At this point, there is little reason to doubt Thomas here. Finally, any fair discussion of the Curry trade must also include the Knicks addition of Balkman who would not have been acquired without the pick-up of Antonio Davis’ expiring contract. After the media has ignored this fact for over a year, credit is given to New York Post bloggers for urging that this be reported (*see retraction below).
*Update - October 5: While on the excellent blog The Knix Fix[1] yesterday, this passage was critiqued through the following cited point (Hat Tip to Adam L) by commenter MattyKay[2] "Balkman should not be considered part of the Curry trade even though he was acquired for Antonio Davis’s contract, because the Knicks also gave up Tim Thomas’s expiring contract in the Curry deal. Therefore, it’s reasonable to assume that the Knicks would have just traded Tim Thomas to Toronto." This point about Tim Thomas’ similar contract is absolutely correct had not been previously considered. With that sound logic readers should now subtract Renaldo Balkman from the equation. The trade now becomes: Eddy Curry and Wilson Chandler for Ty Thomas and Joakim Noah. While not as lopsided as yesterday, it is safe to say that there are too many unknowns about all four players future potential to render a verdict right now. The jury is out.
(Keeping in line with our "truth in reporting policy" if any reader can clearly show any factual error in any COSELLOUT column we will print the retraction for all to see and credit the source. We are beholden to no employer, advertiser or ego. The truth is our only master.)
Randolph Trade Analysis: Channing Frye, whose post-up game would never develop in an Eddy Curry centered offense should work better in Portland. Randolph’s brings rebounds and a midrange game that might complement Curry well and will always leave the Knicks with a post-up force on the floor. Critics who are concerned about interior defense, as am I, need to remind themselves that Channing Frye wasn’t reminding anyone of Patrick Ewing on D. In the worst case scenario where the post isn’t big enough for Curry and Randolph, one can always obtain value in a trade. In the final analysis, this trade is a straight-up steal.
4) Roster Depth and Versatility
The Knicks have incredible roster depth and versatility, in fact, maybe too much depth. This “problem”, which includes many young players, may open up possibilities for at least one more significant trade. Their versatility of different players may also make them a difficult playoff opponent where match-ups can be manipulated and adjusted across a 7 game series. Stay tuned.
Final Verse: Media critics will argue that the Knicks haven’t made the playoffs yet, but ignore the bigger picture and the stable of young talent he has amassed. They will argue that millions have been spent and we have argued that it is not their money to worry about. Nitpicking critics will also argue about deficiencies on court “chemistry”, but those critics never had Othella Harrington as trade bait. While one can point to many quality young players that Thomas exchanged for warm bodies on the shuffle-board circuit, there is not ONE-SINGLE EXCHANGE that in its final translation that can be definitively described as a bad trade. (His one clear mistake was also rectified as Steve Francis’ contract helped net Zach Randolph). The fact of the matter is that Thomas and Dolan’s dollars have done the impossible to the Knick’s bench: Turn Spike Lee into David Lee. While impatient and biased journalists were looking at the house "as-is", Thomas, like any smart business person was looking at "what the house could become". As stated elsewhere the Knicks will likely become title contenders in 2 - 3 years.
——————————————————————————————————–
[1] While I have come across many solid Knicks blogs over the last couple of days, perhaps none was more impressive than the New York Newsday’s "The Knix Fix". The commenters on the blog flat out know their Knicks. Fair warning: If you decide to engage, you better do your homework first, otherwise we suggest that you go back and play with the other kids in the sandbox known as the ESPN Conversation comments section.
[2] MattyKays point was originally made by Dan Zink from Knicks Clicks whose entire article contains both point of agreement and disagreement.
End Note: For a comprehensive detailed overview of ALL transactions (trades, draft, free agency) of Isiah thomas anf Scott Layden before him go to this post at by Michael j. Liston Knicksonline.com
Related: Starbury and Sarah: American Retail Revolutionaries
Sphere: Related Content
Good Stuff. I can hardly wait for your chapter 10 on the reasons. I’ve mentioned some casually a few years ago in some posts any www.knicks4life.com.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:50 pmI’d say it’s a combination of racism (and I very, very carefully and very rarely say that is cause) - becuase there is something that off-puts sportswriters about a sucessful black executive, that Isiah was a member of the hated “Bad Boys” and really, sort of a prick as a competitor and they remember that. Isiah is also a bit smug and insincere, and while tolerated among other execs, he just gets blasted for it. Finally, the perceived “anti-white” comments (whether true or not, they are believed to be racist by many, and if they were, he deserves flack, but people do some dumb crap when younger)against league hero Larry Bird. Also, Isiah was rumored to have treated Jordan badly as a rookie at the all star game, and while Jordon can be as arrogant as anyone, some remember that Isiah was rude to the NBA’s patron saint. Mix them all up, shake well and there you have it. Oh wait, forgot to mention - the herd mentality of most sportswriters and the sensationlist nature of sportswriting (jounalism in general)over the last 5 years. If one writers comes out with a strong, strident anti-Isiah piece, the race among a bevy of not-that-original writers is on. I guess they cash the checks lazy or not.
Awsome read man, and i totally agree with you 100%
October 3rd, 2007 at 10:11 pmbuzzard- i just discovered knicks4life today and I am glad I did. You have definitely touched upon some points that I will explore in chapter 10. But in general there is “the New York media factor” (which doesn’t explain the national media though), the sensationalism factor, the Larry brown factor (many old guard writers were close friends with Brown including Lupica), and of course there is the higher standard for a black executive factor.
Now as you mention Isiah is not one to kiss the media’s ass (nor should he) and has never been one of those guys who is “just happy to be there” type of guys (nor should he be). The fact is, Thomas believes that he is smarter and more astute than all of the writers and experts, but guess what , he IS smarter than everyone else. Smarter than the experts who chanted Ed O’bannon’s name in 1995, smarter than the “experts” who ridiculed him for taking Renaldo balkman over marcus williams, and smarter than all of these ESPN NBA website stat wonks who keep talking about the salary cap even though the rules don’t apply to the Knicks. There is most definitely a racial component to it all, particularly when you consider how many terrible white GMs get treated with kid gloves. Imagine for a second if Isiah, ala Larry Bird traded for Mike Dunleavy and Troy Murphy for Al Harrington and S. jackson. Or if he had drafted Shawnee Williams with the 18th pick (when Indiana was the team that needed the PG like Marcus Williams or Rondo). The ridicule would be endless. Kevin Mchale? Don’t get me started. You may as well call it “the Isiah rules”. I’ll stop now before actually writing Chapter 10! Anyway, thanks for stopping by.
Knicksfan - thx
October 3rd, 2007 at 10:34 pmYou definitely overrated the Marbury trade and failed to take into account wins and losses, where to Knicks haven’t done well under Thomas.
October 4th, 2007 at 7:27 amVery well written article. It’s sad that Thomas, who’s close to 50 now, is still fighting to be respected because of his color and where he came from.
October 4th, 2007 at 1:26 pmExcellent stuff, you are totally correct. The fool that knocks Marbury is well, a fool. He is our best player for 4 years now who is finally getting some help. That trade was excellent as well. By the way Curry trade was a steal too, Curry will be a 10 time allstar while Tyrus and Noah can be good but not that good. One thing you forgot to mention about this trade and some others is the fact that Curry was playing for us for 1 season before the Bulls got Ty, and Noah hasn’t played for them yet. The genius Isiah got Curry’s production yesterday for FUTURE picks of tomorrow. That also makes a lot of difference. LB couldn’t do much with it though.
October 4th, 2007 at 2:31 pmBy the way Curry trade was a steal too, Curry will be a 10 time allstar while Tyrus and Noah can be good but not that good. One thing you forgot to mention about this trade and some others is the fact that Curry was playing for us for 1 season before the Bulls got Ty, and Noah hasn’t played for them yet. The genius Isiah got Curry’s production yesterday for FUTURE picks of tomorrow.
Yeah, and Curry’s god-like production led us to those awesome 23-59 and 33-49 seasons. I’d say that production was pretty much completely wasted.
There’s more to basketball than PPG. Curry is a horrible defender, doesn’t block shots and doesn’t rebound. He can score pretty efficiently, and sure, that has value, but he is far from an elite center.
October 4th, 2007 at 2:59 pmYou forgot to mention how three of the teams (Phoenix, Chicago, & Orlando) became playoff teams thanks to Isiah.
October 4th, 2007 at 3:26 pmThe thing is, each individual move has not been bad. He usually trades for a player that is better than what he is giving up. The problem is it is not a video game where your collective talent adds up together to give you a great rating and turnout. A team needs pieces, and there is simply not enough shots to go around for this team, and no one besides Balkman and Lee plays defense and does the little things that help you win games. Isiah has too many win the battles, but lose the war trades. He gets players with more talent, but as the Jailblazers of the past showed, having the most “talent” on a team does not work if players do not have roles, do not have chemistry, and if everyone thinks they are “the man”
October 4th, 2007 at 4:01 pmUnfortunately, you seem to have missed a critical point in all this. This is real live basketball with things like chemistry, cohesion, roles, team strategy, etc. You have evaluated all of Thomas trades with the Knicks as if you were playing NBA Live. The NBA isn’t that simple, teams like Pheonix are a marvel because of how well their roster FITS together. A player like Shawn Marion is one of the best ten players in the NBA because of his role on that team. Boris Diaw can be the type of point center he naturally is because of their system. If you look at other teams like the Spurs, the Mavericks, and the Pistons you can see some of the same things. By the way, you are paying Stephon Marbury 17 Million Dollars this year, let me say that again 17 MILLION Dollars this year. How much is Steve Nash (3 time MVP) getting? 10 Million, Tony Parker, about the same. Soooooooooooooooooooooo Thomas is paying Stephon Marbury as much as Tim Duncan to not make the all star team, the playoffs, or recieve honorable mention in MVP voting, Awesome. By the way so he can draft? I’m sorry but the NBA draft has TWO Rounds! TWO ROUNDS! I know there are Darko MIliceks out there but he has to make TWO picks!!!!!!!! Think about that in relation to the NFL or MLB.
October 4th, 2007 at 4:10 pm– Rush - while the jury is out, I do believe that the Curry trade will be a steal, since one must factor in that the Knicks would never have obtained Renaldo balkman without Antonio Davis. And I do believe Ty Thomas could also be a great player. There is no shame in a win-win trade. I think the bigger point is that Isiah has never made a terrible trade that was lopsided against him. Few GMs could make this claim. His only bad trade (Francis) was rectified through the Randolph trade.
– JK, the thing about Curry is that he is still young and still improving. He will never be a rebounder or shot-blocker, but if he could cut down his turnovers, he will be completely unstoppable, particularly with Jamaal crawford in the game. Lee, Randolph, and Balkman can make up the difference for Curry on the boards. But i would say he will be an elite center by default to some degree.
– Justin, I agree with some of your “battle vs. war” points” but what exactly did Isiah have to work with in order to get the perfect fit? Also, don’t forget Q-Rich and Mardy Collins as solid defenders. Finally, those Trailblazers that you mention came within one Game 7 4th quarter from upending the lLakers and most likely breezing through the championship.
October 4th, 2007 at 4:20 pmThis is so idiotic its almost unbelievable. You just don’t understand salaries and the salary cap and how the NBA works. On one hand you praise Thomas for picking up an expiring contract that led to Balkman. But then, while evaluating other trades, you write off the expiring contracts (very valuable trading pieces in the NBA) as “AARP members” or simply eliminate them from the equation. The Knicks have consistently traded contracts that will be expiring the next year for long-term massive contracts attached to bad players (see Malik Rose trade, the Crawford and Jerome Williams trade, and the Quentin Richardson for Kurt Thomas trade).
The Knicks will never be good if they continue to trade draft picks (particularly unprotected ones) and expiring contract (valuable at least to other teams, if not the Knicks, for the future salary cap flexibility they offer) for overpaid players who do not bring anything new to the roster and are just selfish scorers who need the ball in their hands (and have long-term contracts).
October 4th, 2007 at 4:35 pmGC:
“By the way, you are paying Stephon Marbury 17 Million Dollars this year, let me say that again 17 MILLION Dollars this year.”
This may offend your personal sensibilities, but as a fan, if James Dolan will foot the bill, I really don’t care… nor do i care that Roger Clemens get 1M per start. I just hope that he wins this weekend…. As far as chemistry goes, the additions of David Lee, Balkman, and Collins are all “chemistry guys”. If the Curry-Zach experiment fails, then that can be fixed too.
Bobby - Thank you for your kind words. I support every trade that you have mentioned. The Malik Rose trade was a STEAL since it also netted the draft picks for David Lee and Mardy Collins! Or do you really miss Nazi Mohammed that much? They gave up nothing for Crawford, and Q Rich is still valuable as Kurt Thomas is now breaking down. But if you read my post on “The Salary Cap Myth”, you will understand that all your concerns about adding extra contracts are unfounded no matter how much the NYC tabloids tell you otherwise.
October 4th, 2007 at 4:55 pmWow; very interesting read.
For starters, let me just say that I’m very impressed with what you have put together thus far. I’ve not really looked at the entire picture from this standpoint, so it is very interesting to read some of your viewpoints.
However, I must say that I’m not really sure that I agree with everything you said. I understand the facts but don’t necessarily agree with the way that you have portrayed the information. Salary is an important consideration and the Knicks ability to take on salary (good or bad) allows them to make trades other teams can’t make. I’m a Yankees fan too, so I totally understand working within the system set forth before you (i.e., the Knicks ability to take on contracts and go over the luxury tax threshold).
I’ve never been an Isiah fan; but I will grant you one thing - the players seem to love playing for him and going to battle for him.
To that same point, I really love this group of players (with the exception of Marbury). They all seem like great guys (again, with the exception of Marbury) and guys like Lee, Crawford, Balkman, etc. are easy to root for. Q Rich is easily my favorite player on the team and I really think he is heart and soul of the team (especially based on all of the accounts I’ve read of how respected he is in the locker room).
Anyway, great analysis and an interesting read. I don’t agree with everything you said, but it makes me think more about bashing Isiah.
October 4th, 2007 at 5:03 pmThat Blazers team got close once, and that was before they traded for Shawn Kemp, signed Derek Anderson (solid player, not needed) and Ruben Patterson and drafted Zach Randolph. That team was shady, but they had not started the downward spiral that killed them.
I agree that Layden was unbelievably bad, but trading for Marbury, Crawford, Rose and Francis made little sense. If he had tried to build through the draft, with his eye for talent (which he also had in Toronto) and simply let their bad contracts run out, they might not any better right now, but they would have a future that they currently do not, because the current roster is not built to win in the NBA, its built to win a fantasy league.
Dolan deserves the blame for letting this all happen, but I think a GM like John Paxson or Portland’s current one (drawing a blank) have shown that you can assemble talent through the draft if you take the right players- I understand the Blazers haven’t done anything yet, but they had a brighter future than the Knicks before they got Oden, and Paxson was able to clear salary while building a contender and overturning the entire roster.
Paxson’s one mistake was the Wallace signing, but I think Chandler needed a change of scenery.
Love the article’s dedication though, and the depth- it makes points I had not thought of….. need any contributors in the future?
October 4th, 2007 at 6:37 pm“I agree that Layden was unbelievably bad, but trading for Marbury, Crawford, Rose and Francis made little sense.”
We agree on Francis and reasonable people can disagree on Marbury (which we do), but Crawford and Rose are not even debateble. We basically got Crawford for 75 year-old Mutombo! And before Crawford got injured he and Eddy Curry had beautiful chemistry. Now I don’t know which “Rose” that you are talking about, but BOTH Rose trades netted us draft picks that landed great young players.
– John Paxson or Portland comparisons just won’t work here. Paxson walked into a fine nucleus of young talent ON DAY ONE, and there is not one single Isiah mistake that is as large as the Chandler-wallace one. Portland did not have an incredible bright future prior to Oden. If you haven’t already please check out “The Roster: Worst in History?” for why future GM comparisons should come from similar starting points.
Guest Contributers are always welcome so long as their argument is tight.
October 4th, 2007 at 7:14 pmWow, I was just arguing with a colleague last night about how Isiah has been unfairly maligned. I’m sending him the link to this series of articles right now. Outstanding work!
October 4th, 2007 at 9:02 pmModi just wait for this last draft to materialize. Isiah had one draft pick but he got four (4) players. When Morris starts playing like Duncan, Chandler like Pippen, Nicholl like Rice and Jordan (if he makes it) like Nash then everybody will understand who Isiah really is.
October 4th, 2007 at 9:05 pmAll the people who question Isiah just be quiet. All of you have a child like understanding of a team concept. All you can point to is wins and losses. Modi qualified his position by saying that it takes a few years to bring in the right people and build chemistry. It’s not about getting Kobe and Shaq and win a championship. Does not work this way even with Kobe and Shaq. Get it? Besides you cant get them anyway. Just wait for this season to start and you will see how wrong you were about Isiah. The team that he is building will be the greatest team you ever saw. Bar none. Remember where you heard it.
October 4th, 2007 at 9:31 pmFYI the team Isiah is building is a power and athletic inside out, half court type that can win in the playoffs and the only teams in recent history with that moniker are Shag and Kobe Lakers and Shag and Wade Heat. In addition our bench is a perfect change of pace and is a run and gun bench all the way. We already a top rebounding team and it will only improve with Zach. So this is whats in store for us in the near future. Besides I thought we were the most exciting team last season just not the winning team but with Zach it will be a totally different result. You will all see it very soon.
October 4th, 2007 at 9:57 pmrush, you have just written the next chapter in The Book of Isiah!!! …But I’m a good sport, so I’ll play. This year I expect to see a 6 - 8 playoff seed, and title contention in 2-3 years. I also expect to see at lest one more significant trade.
But forget all that Rush, here is a personal assignment that you might be able to perform depite your child-like understanding of any analogous concept. Find a similar NBA team in quality to the 2003 Knicks Roster and how long a new GM took to turn them around. Barring the luck of a major #1 pick, I doubt that you will find anything. But I’ve done enough research on this. Your turn now. I am eagerly waiting…
kevdog - thanks, but don’t forget to send your friend the last three posts by Rush!!!
October 4th, 2007 at 10:10 pmMy biggest problem with all of the naysayers is that they all use the same “20/20 hindsight” logic. “Isiah should have done this which would have turned into that..” There is no proof that if he had done as you wished that this situation would have been any better, infact it could have been worse. There are already rumblings that Tyrus Thomas is a problem child and already has had his coach openly criticize him in the press more than once. How could he have added to the chemestry of this knick team?
October 5th, 2007 at 12:31 pmExcellent myth debunktion work MODI!!!
October 5th, 2007 at 12:53 pmBumby, welcome and thanks for responding in depth to Nenad in the other post, I share your sentiments about “so many great moments” last year despite their terrible record. I mean, we probably lost 6-7 games to injuries, but what about all those exciting comebacks that just fell short at the end? I’ve gotta believe that with growth and maturity of a young team, they will become wins. I think that many of us are excited at “what the house can become”. As for Ty Thomas, I saw flashes last year that make me believe that he will be a helluva player. But I think the big point is that there is absolutely nothing wrong with a win-win trade which is my best guess on how this will shape up. Isiah picked Balkman whose game is very similar to Thomas. But Eddy Curry just might become an irreplaceable low post threat.
– sports diva, I wasn’t sure if debunktion was an actual word or just a divaism. Although dictionary.com won’t sign off on it, a google entry will find that it is commonly used…
October 5th, 2007 at 1:31 pmActually MODI, I assumed it wasn’t quite a ‘certified’ word. But it rolled well off the keys and tongue and expressed what I meant. But I’ll claim it as a divaism all day!! LOL
I commented on this chapter but the entire ‘book’ is amazing. I printed the whole thing (great reading on the train), copied it and gave it to some folks. Some were myth feeders and believers, some weren’t and needed the piece to validate what they already thought because they hadn’t put in the incredible amount of work you did.
Kudos again!
October 6th, 2007 at 3:47 pmModi I don’t pay much attention to other bad teams. Just the fact that they seem to remain bad for very long stretches would indicate that it’s not easy to build a winner. Alot of teams go from bad to worse Minnesota, TrailBlazers Clippers Sonics etc. come to mind along with with the Eastern teams we all know about. Alot of losing teams are young and athletic now and they will all get better but Knicks are on a fast track for sure. Isiahs genius is how he finds players with a very high upside who are yet inconsistent and makes them more consistent. The scoring talent is always there and the power, speed and athleticism are there too. We can play with anybody.
With regard to Ty Thomas and Noah, they are high energy defensive players that are nice, but can’t do much on offense and don’t demand a double team. Neither one of them would even slow Curry down in the low post, unless they double him. So what does it all mean? It means they gonna get their asses waxed when we play them and that’s all. How good of trade was that? Pretty damn good.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:59 pmI hope your right about that. I do like the Curry trade, but I still believe the jury is out because there are still so many unknowns with Ty Thomas, Joakim Noah, and Wilson Chandler. However, one thing we already know because of Curry is that it will never be a really BAD trade. A BAD trade is usually qualified when your team receives little in return. We’ll see.
– Thanks diva
October 6th, 2007 at 11:26 pmModi Just the fact that we got 20 and 7 from Curry last season makes it a win. What did the Bulls get from Ty? Not much, just a taste perhaps but he is a 15pt player at best. If that. And Noah is a 12pt player at best. They’re not in Curry’s league. Chandler may be a better player then both of them.
October 7th, 2007 at 9:06 amCurry was game planned against by every team we faced and double teamed all the time. Does anybody forsee people game planning against that “fierce attack” by Noah? or Ty Thomas? Having one move between them both and maybe a 5 foot range on a jumper, those two don’t scare anybody. All their points come on rebounds and tip ins. It’s not like they are real bangers with any significant power either. It’s not even close. I’m done on this trade.
October 7th, 2007 at 9:24 amrush, your points are well-taken and I tend to agree with you, especially with the factor that Curry draws double teams. All I am saying is that there are a lot of unknowns in the mix. But if you are asking me: “who would I rather have Curry and Chandler or Thomas and Noah”, I’m definitely going with the first one.
October 7th, 2007 at 11:40 amWhen is the rest of the book coming out?! i can’t wait, especially for the part on that wienie, mike lupica! This is some of the greatest sports writing i’ve ever read and certainly the most impressive. it covers everything i’ve been thinking for years, but i never would have been able to get it to the masses, so i just had to sit here and suffer silently through all the lies. you also did it in a much more thorough, knowledgable and researched way than i ever could have. much love to you! this book is remarkable!
i hate mike lupica’s guts! along with cowherd, gotleib, mannix, jt the trick, bobby v, vaccaro, frank isiah-hater, mark ferman, peter testes and itch lawrence to a lesser degree because they completely ignore the facts of thomas’ tenure with the knicks and the long list of people, including pat riley, who praise the job he has done as knicks president in order to push their petty personal agendas against him to get him fired!
ferman, testes and isiah-hater have toned down a bit recently though. anyone who bashes the job thomas has done with the knicks instantly loses all credibility with me because there is no way that it can be based on anything but pure hate!
that is why i can’t wait for you to get into why these a-holes rip thomas so much! you have to expose these lazy, vindictive, unprofessional slobs for what they are! they are all stealing money for their lack of research and lack of original, fact based and honest reporting!
all that being said, isiah has to win! anyone who is not retarded, mentally challenged, can see that the knicks current starting five and entire team is infinitely more talented than the one that started the day isiah took over, but that doesn’t amount to a hill of beans if the team doesn’t pull it all together and make it to the playoffs!
ultimately, we can do all the apologizing we want for isiah, but it just hit me that all he has to do is win!
him winning will do more for his legacy than any billion internet posts and radio talk show call-ins will. once the winning starts, these bandwagon-riding, blowhard pricks will be forced lay down their flags! it is just that, because of the frenzy they create by spewing hate and lies, isiah
is always, it seems to me, walking a fine line between when he may get fired and when the team he built will come together and start winning, and that always makes me nervous.
briefly on the harassment case: any idiot can see that a civil verdict is far less convincing than a criminal one!
there are five less jurors to convince, and the burden of proof is more likely than not instead of beyond a reasonable doubt!
even with the higher, criminal standard, innocent people go to jail all the time. that is why organizations like the innocence project successfully exist. if twelve jurors with a beyond a reasonable doubt burden of proof make mistakes, it is common sense that a trial with a smaller number of jurors to convince to a much less certain degree will make more mistakes. That is common sense to me!
arguing that this civil verdict is irreproachable, as lupica has, and thus immediate cause for thomas’ firing is, again, so illogical that the argument of such can only be taken as the revelation of other unrelated, deep-seated hate and bias against thomas.
but this is the same wienie prick who has blamed thomas and called for him to be fired for everything but the selling of the stock exchange to dubai inc.
i’m not saying whether isiah harassed sanders or not.
i wasn’t there, and neither were you. the side you take only reveals your pre-existing biases in a case like this.
in conclusion, go knicks! i love the team and would love even more to see all of the isiah-haters i just mentioned and many more have to swallow all the lies they have written and said about him over the years and be forced against their will to write and say great things about him because the team is winning even though it makes them puke to do so! for what they have done to his name and reputation, and knowing how much they hate his guts, i would say that this is more than fair punishment!
ahhh. i feel much better now that i’ve vented, call it keyboard release therapy.
October 10th, 2007 at 9:48 pmBert, welcome and thank you for the very kind words. Rest assured that the release therapy you experienced was multipled exponentially while writing this. I’m looking to get out the Lupica piece next week, but will probably get some stuff out on “The Draft Pick” of Renaldo Balkman before then. I will promise you that the upcoming Lupica piece will be an indictment of the highest order. The plan is for almost all the chapters to trickle in between now and December.
The most troubling aspect of the isiah media treatment is that all the haters that you just named still have jobs.
October 10th, 2007 at 10:44 pmGreat! Don’t rush it though. Make sure you do it right.
I don’t know what can be done about the haters’ employment, but i do know that they need to be called out, challenged and held accountable in some way for their actions.
October 10th, 2007 at 11:19 pmalso, if you’re still in a debunking mood, how about the “every team got better after marbury left” myth?
people portray it as if stephon left, no other changes were made, and the team got better because he was gone. well, let’s take a look at it, shall we?
1. minnesota didn’t get better after he left. he had them in the first round of the playoffs. they would not reach the second round until five years after he was gone.
2. new jersey got better after he left and all in the same season, 2001, they drafted richard jefferson and jason collins and kerry kittles returned to play after being out injured for about two seasons. yes, the team got better after he left, and three starters were added to it.
3. the suns? i’ll concede that one, but that is still not even close to “every team” getting better after he left. that is only one out of three, but don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story!
October 11th, 2007 at 4:35 amModi,
You may have read my mini on the CBA debacle. It is really worthwhile to debunk that myth.
I’m glad to know that you have another job where you make a living and earn coins ;-). But this passion of yours is INFECTIOUS. I feel like a slug to see efforts by people like you and Starburyfan. God’s speed and continued blessings.
KFL
October 11th, 2007 at 10:24 amBert,
Don’t concede shit! You’re King of the F’n hill. If we put our heads together, we can fix or spin it. The media “cosellouts” do it all the time and they’re not “Just bloggin’” either. They get major coins for their dribel.
KFL
October 11th, 2007 at 10:27 amBert, I have had the marbury myth argument 1000 times already. And Steady is right, don’t concede the Suns. (gotta love Steady’s spirit!)
A) You can’t be THAT selfish and average 8 assists for your career. B) he has never played with any great supporting cast outside of KG. C) Has been an unlucky victim of the fact that after he left his team that Jason Kidd and Steve Nash followed him. Now we can all agree that Kidd and Nash are not only better than Marbury but are future Hall-of-Famers that are the best PGs that our generation has to offer (who will both be supplanted by Chris Paul and Derron Williams in two years). Marbury is not them, but there is absolutely no shame in that. D) Kidd and Nash clearly benefitted from the growth of young stars on the rise. Keep in mind that Marbury’s only full season with both Amare Stoudemire and Kenyon Martin were their rookie seasons. The Nets also benifitted from adding Richard Jefferson the following year as you mention. Marbury’s career is riddled with terrible timing. E) Outside of Minnesota in his young years I see no roster that Marbury should have won in the playoffs. F) We will be proven right about Marbury’s play during the next two years.
It is even far more bothersome that Marbury’s off-court goodwill is sometimes doubted in media as “public relations”. He has just brought it to a whole other level that last couple of years. It has been an EVOLUTION not some sort of epiphany like the media somehow makes it out to be. This is who he is. Which I have already covered at some length in Starbury & Sarah: American Retail Revolutionaries http://www.cosellout.com/?p=11
———————————–
Steady, I think that I did read your piece on the CBA, although I can’t remember exactly where. I will reconsider the previous concession, but it just didn’t seem like something that I wanted to go tit-for-tat on when the whole situation was too fuzzy to me. Perhaps i was wrong to do so. But truth is truth, so if you can reprint your “mini” here in this comment section, it would be highly appreciated.
October 11th, 2007 at 10:58 amAsked and delivered:
Steady Says:
At a site where NYK fans are portrayed as “wacky”, a poster cloaked under Orange & Blue provided useful intelligence on the CBA debacle. While I find some merits in your conclusion that IT failed with the CBA, I view the experience from a different vantage point–call them rose-colored lenses if you will. I’m not one who blindly endorses or supports others just because. I’m steady until proven otherwise. I’m also a NYer and always know that there’s 8 million stories in the great big city.
Saying that IT failed with the CBA conjures thoughts about what we’ve read recently about the role of Judas in Jesus’ life. The revisionists now tell us that, as Jesus’ best friend and the one who understood Him the most, Judas drew the honor of being the one to sell Jesus out and betray Him to Pontius Pilate. Far analogy here and I’m not calling IT Jesus or Judas so try to follow me anyway.
Fact of the matter is that IT was among (if not) the first to suggest to the Lil’ General 5* (Stern) that the NBA needs a minor league similar to MLB and NHL. IT had to acquire the CBA in order to deliver his vision and plan to the NBA for the development of the NBDL. As CEO/President, he “layed down” the CBA and its owners in order for the NBA and the owners to build the NBDL in their image. How else could some of those owners acquire teams in markets that otherwise were locked out to NBA owners. The CBA had to become insolvent and the owners sold (ALL AT A PROFIT) to NBA dollars. Sure, some CBA owners wanted to stay in the game. But consider what happens when a developer needs your modest HOME to build a multi-million dollar condo-hotel bringing tax revenues, restaurant receipts, and trips to the parallel market. When they can’t take it by eminent domain, they show you all the rat holes and faulty structure so that you will be encouraged to move. And then they make you an offer you can’t refuse including paying your relocation cost to Phoenix, Arizona or a mansion near Disney in Orlando, FL (with some money in your pocket). IT was needed to deliver the CBA to the NBA and for that, he will be always a star in their eyes.
IT was also a major proponent of the NBA age limit and dress code for players. He has done many things to ingratiate himself to the league (and other owners) to a point where during his playing days, players wondered whether he was pro-players or pro-management (owners). Thus began the rift/beef between IT and the Big Fella. My NY read says that IT has designs on ownership or getting another star on his shoulders (he’s a Lil General now 4*) to become a 5-star General (as in becoming the next David Stern). Vecsey outed IT about the incident involving the Pistons owner and thereby killing that media-pupil relationship (if there ever was one). Vecsey may have considered IT dead too soon. What folks need to understand is that IT is small, came out of the trash and filth of the Chicago projects where big dogs die and cockroaches and ants live forever. IT is going to the place that he desires and when he’s good and ready. I would not bet against him and his exit strategies.
KFL
October 9th, 2007 at 9:17 pm
October 11th, 2007 at 12:15 pmMODI,
C and F are disconnects for me. I will not agree to see–especially when Kidd admits that in a one-on-one, SM is probably better than he. I heard Kidd and saw him purse his lips to say it. If SM is not a first ballot HOF it will be because of media bias or based on some bad finish in NY. Eventually, SM will be a HOF because of his Big O-like numbers. I need to confirm if Nash or Kidd has those attributes to date. SM can play both the PG/SG positions. Nash can’t do that. But your comment was about PGs so I won’t go there. As a b-baller, I can’t see how SM is not a 1st ballot HOF. With your COSELLOUT series, I think the media push that is now linked to all HOF ballots will be useful for the SM cause.
Say, what’s good with putting some media kick for GreyGoose54 to get in the HOF?
KFL
October 11th, 2007 at 12:27 pmYFL
MODI,
I asked one of the more “mature” bloggers from the other site for some insights about what went down with IT in TO and he submitted the following:
Steady,
If I recollect correctly,in 94 or 95 Thomas was signed on as Exec. VP with the Raptors and Given 9 or 10 percent ownership, basically a minority postion. At the time, the Raptors were owned by this Kat who’s name starts with a B and another majority owner who’s name was slaigt or something like that. A couple of years later Isiah expressed interest in a majority position just when the team was talking about building the Air Canada Centre and I believe they had an agreement, but this slaigt character decided against it maintained majority ownership until he sold it to the Maple Leafs Ltd that currently owns both teams (hockey).
I believe financing for the new arena was one issue, Thomas’s financing was weak was stated an another (don’t know if that is true), and the other was I believe a Canadian entity maintaining ownership, but more likely the other owners (mainly Davidson was against it).
I would have Modi check my facts or research any articles Michael Wilbon may have written in the Wash Post in the late 90’s regarding the matter, since he and Zeke are Homies..
Steady, I hope I have been of some help to you and my man Modi.
Comment by cooleyhigh — October 10, 2007 @ 4:18 am
I would add to that post that IT was essentially “used” by the Canadians to get instant credibility from the NBA owners and be allowed to play in. What better story line can you have: a former player, Top 50 Greatest, a MINORITY OWNER (to prove that the Lil General, 5*) can share the coins with the denizen punk player/athletes, not to mention pressure from JJ (”The poverty Pimp”) who was going at all pro sports to open ownership and coaching/management to minorities.
Yo, MODI–you’re on to something HUGE. You should make major coins from this effort. be careful that a Lupica or another cat from Post does not beat you to the publisher. SEND YOUR PROPOSAL TODAY (if you have not already done so).
KFL
October 11th, 2007 at 12:53 pmSteady,
–thanks for all this info, and while coin would be nice for the unpaid effort and research I’ve been putting in, I highly doubt that there is much coin in the future for defending people who are only profitable as villains. The fact is people buy and read what they want to buy and read, and that is why Lupica is king of the tabloids. He knows to write a book on the “Summer of ‘98″, and know that trashing Bonds keeps him popular. White paying consumers simply do not want to pay to read that a black executive is smarter than the journalists that cover him, smarter than so many of their NBA executive colleagues, and by extension, and also smarter than them — especially after all three groups mocked him for so long. I see little coin in this effort, but could only hope to add some truth to the matter for those that wish to seek it.
–Thank you for the information on the CBA which is helpful, but still worth additional research. O & B’s home developer analogy (which was what I read the first time) is an excellent way to view it in simple terms.
– Finally, I don’t consider JJ to be a “poverty pimp” at all, but will need the adequate space of a future article to explain it. In many respects, like isiah, the media has also done a hitjob on JJ too.
– Finally, I’ve got no doubt that Marbury is better than Kidd or Nash one on one, but the greatness of those two guys is their ability to see the whole floor and elevate their teammates. Now let me state again, that is NOT a knock on Marbury. Kidd and Nash are just THAT good. And it was just very unlucky that Marbury had to be followed by the greatest two PG’s of our generation. But again, there is absolutely NO SHAME in being behind those two. Ewing is a first ballot HOFer and the greatest Knick of all-time IMO, but I’ll be the first to admit that Hakeem was superior. That is no knock as Hakeem probably was the quickest and had the best footwork of any true center who ever played in the history of the game. Having said all that, if Marbury leads this team into title contention two years from now we should have the HOF discussion. Now that he finally has a supporting cast we can judge him accordingly. …let’s remember that before the great Kidd came to the Nets, he never made it out of the first round of the playoffs either… Great players need other great players… stay tuned
October 11th, 2007 at 6:06 pmYeah, I have to chime in on the last point: Kidd especially is no joke. He’s the best point in the game (despite the media’s pimping of Nash)… the triple-double he averaged in the series against the Raptors alone should be sufficient evidence of his greatness. And that’s coming from someone who has written many times about Marbury’s good deeds and how the media loves to abuse him, paint him the fool, etc. If you’re talking about the game, and just the game… I love my boy from Coney Island, but Kidd is the best.
October 11th, 2007 at 8:17 pmThank you for expertly articulating everything i have been saying to my knick-hating friends for the past 2+ years. The New York sports media is a joke, especially when it comes to IT.People do not seem to be able to read an article critically. They just lap up the same follishness that is printed in every newspaper.This is the year of reconing.I hope all the IT bashers will give thomas his due when the knicks advance to the second round this year.
October 12th, 2007 at 11:53 amKidd’s career has been better than Marbury and Nash’s. I think Marbury’s career on an individual level has been better than Nash’s. I think Nash is arguably the best in the league with Kidd probably a close second depending on what you need from your point guard. That alone is amazing since Kidd was in the convo as the best point in the league since the mid 90s!
October 12th, 2007 at 6:29 pmVery interesting, you definately opened my eyes to some of the myths surrounding Isiah.
However, in the NBA you are judged by wins and losses. Isiah has yet to win in New York (granted he inherited a bad roster and had injuries last year)
The bottom line is this, in my opinion, if in 2-3 years, as you seem to expect, the Knicks are title contenders (i.e. play in a conference championship series) I will give Isiah his due. If on the other hand 2-3 years from now, his team hasn’t made it out of the first round, I believe some criticism is in order. Because by then, I believe despite the achievements you’ve listed, most GM’s would have been able to accomplish the same thing (as defined by wins and losses) given the resources that Isiah has had at his disposal.
So I will withhold judgement/criticism for a couple years and revisit this topic in 2010.
October 26th, 2007 at 5:04 pmJones, yes, that is a completely fair stance to take! Deal!
October 26th, 2007 at 5:32 pmThis article is correct about the 2003 roster being awful. That is why Layden was one of the worst GM’s in history. However, you fail to grasp the fundamental concept about winning titles in the NBA, you need a bonafide superstar, or a roster of all-stars who excel defnsively. For all of Isiah’s trades and picks, he has yet to acquire a bonafide superstar to build around.
Without a doubt, the best means to acquire such a player is through the draft. Isiah is without a doubt one of the best evaluator’s of pre-NBA talent. That is why the Marbury trade was a mistake as well as the Curry trade.
The Marbury trade brought the talent level up enough to make the playoffs whereas the Knicks would have probable won only 28 games without him. So, instead of a top 7 pick where Isiah could have drafted Luol Deng, he traded the pick that became Robert Swift. Plus, the Knicks still owe a pick in 2010.
The Curry trade was equally poor. Curry can’t play defense, block shots or rebound. He can score. Curry, at his best, is Joe Barry Carroll or another Kevin Duckworth. The last I checked, neither player won anything. Curry is the classic tease player in that you think he can be great, but he lacks the footwork and defensive instincts to be a true centerpiece. So, instead of being truly patient, the Knicks lost out on LaMarcus Aldridge, who can already outrebound and out shot block Curry, plus the chance for Isiah to have a second lottery pick.
A great GM needs to understand his strengths and limitations. Isiah’s clear strength is his drafting skills. He should havetrying to maximize that ability by acquiring lottery picks to try and acquire a bonafide superstar.
BTW, the Frye pick was a mistake. He should have drafted Bynum, who might be a star, but should be better than Curry at the worst. Isiah managed to turn the mistake into Zach Randolph, however, which was an excellent trade.
In reviewing the Isiah trades, it is easy to figure out the mistakes versus the good trades. Every trade where he aquires a draft pick was good and every trade where he gave up a pick was bad.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:26 pmHawk, thanks for your thoughtful reply, not something I’m not really used to when people are critical of Isiah.
– Your commentary on Marbury has some merit since 2 first-rounders in Isiah’s hand is awfully valuable. Ultimately the pick was used by the Jazz for Kirk Humphries. And while there is no way that I see the Knicks pulling a top 7 pick that year without Marbury, it isn’t unreasonable to expect a top 10-15 pick. In summary, I will not battle too hard for those who question the Marbury trade. I myself have reservations about it.
– I have a far better outlook on the evloution of Eddy Curry than you which goes far beyond JBC and Duckworth. I expect his game to grow and time will tell. His value is also increased in an era that lacks low post centers I won’t argue with you about his poor rebounding, D, and shot-blocking. I think the key is to surround him with people that complement those weaknesses (ironically, isn’t he exactly what the defensive Bulls are missing right now?). With ZBo and Lee the Knicks are a great rebounding team, but they lack interior D and shot-blocking — aconcern I share. Should the Curry and Zbo experiment fail, I do not think the sky will fall as one can still be traded (Curry would have high value at $9 mil a year). In my mind the jury is out on this one too.
– A side note: When Isiah made the Curry trade, I was ecstatic. The Knicks had hired Larry Brown and I never expected them to end with 23 wins in a million years (neither did Isiah). Had Isiah known that LB would use 42 line-ups, call out players in the press, start David Lee one day and give him a DNP the next, leave jackie Butler in the 4th quarters with Curry on the bench, etc., then isiah might not have made the trade. We all thought that it was going to be an 18th pick or something. ANYONE who defends Brown’s tenure simply did not watch the games and his mad scientist ways. Now of couse Isiah is to blame for taking this chance AND hiring Brown, but I thought that this background is necessary into understanding that #2 pick.
Overall, I think that all your points have merit. However, when I include those points with the trades that brought David Lee, Balkman, Collins, Nate (who is vastly improved this year), Q, Crawford, and Randolph then I have to give him overall high marks on the trade front which I believe should be judged in its entirety. And I simply do not think that he is done yet. They have young depth and a couple of expiring contracts in the next two years that may become that final one or two pieces. His first task was turning old folks into young promising folks. He has done that. The final adjustments will address any chemistry issues. Addressing talent AND chemistry is difficult to do at the same time when you have a roster of Howard Eisleys. …again, thank for your comments
November 5th, 2007 at 1:38 pmMODI,
I am not debating the debacle of Larry Brown, who was an unmitigated disaster. I too tought that Brown would turn a 33 win team into a 42 win team. I did not expect him to turn that team into a 23 win team.
My main problem is that the Marbury trade was a win now trade. Any reasonable view of the 2003 roster would realize that to think of winning immediately with that team was unrealistic. The wise choice would be to dump those contracts as fast as one could for as many picks as possible.
As I noted above, Isiah’s mistakes have come from failing to realize himself what a good draft evaluator he truly is. When one looks back and realizes that we could have had Deng if we had kept the pick we traded for Marbury, then the trade is a disaster. Deng is the Bulls best player right now and has a chance to be a true superstar. We missed that chance on the fool’s gold of competing while rebuilding.
Personally, I loved the Jalen Rose trade precisely because we got an extra pick. I liked the Kurt Thomas trade even though it was a short term loss because we got a pick. I admittedly did not understand the Nazr for Malik Rose trade at first because the picks we acquired were very late 1st rounders and we were left without any size. However, Isiah proved even better at drafting than I tought by drafting Lee and Collins with the picks.
However, I hated the Curry trade from the get go because Curry cannot play defense. He lacks any semblance of lateral quickness and consistently reacts late to the play. He will never be a shot blocker because he has slow hops. Watch him defend the pick and roll. A good big will step to the side and drop back so that the guard can recover from the pick. This is called hedging. Curry never hedges. Curry is actually the biggest reason why the Knicks cannot defend the 3. Because he does not hedge, the guards have to go under the picks instead of over. Also, because Curry cannot block shots, the guards have to protect against penetration which also leaves the 3 open.
Isiah gets a bum rap because he is an excellent drafter, but his two signature trades have set back the franchise by at least five years IMHO.
November 5th, 2007 at 2:15 pmI don’t think the Knicks are really going to get hurt that bad by Curry’s lack of defense because IMO as long as you keep one defensive big in there you can afford to have another be poor. Curry is kind of like Brad Miller(not in the way he scores, just that he’s an offensive specialist) except he’s younger and can be expected to develop some kind of defensive ability.
November 5th, 2007 at 3:17 pmHawk,
I don’t think Marbury was a “win-now” trade. I think Isiah made that trade to create interest in the Knicks. Knicks fans were totally demoralized by the Layden years. Layden’s teams were not only bad, but deathly boring also. The Marbury trade galvanized the fan base, at least in the short term, and signalled that it was time to start paying attention to the Knicks again.
November 5th, 2007 at 7:30 pmHawk, your points are well taken but I just don’t see them getting as high as the 7th pick (deng) in 2004 even if they did not sign marbury. Also David’s points about morale were also well taken.
November 6th, 2007 at 2:16 amI agree that morale was low and that Marbury acted like a band aid in that respect. However, that team barely made the playoffs and were then swept. The role of the GM is to look at the long term future of a franchise and not sacrifice the long term in favor of a quick fix.
So, of course the trade was a win-now trade. Even if just for morale purposes, it was a win-now trade. What was important then and is still important is that Isiah maximize his draft choices to increase the odds that he will be able to draft a true star. By trading Marubury, he delayed that process. The Curry trade has further delayed the process.
The strong counter-example to Isiah is Ainge. Ainge stripped the team of talent to acquire as many draft choices as possible. By doing so, he acquired enough high value young players that he was able to acquire both Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett in one off-season. As a result, the Celtics are now contenders. Morale was awful in Boston, but now there is true excitement because the fans know they have a contender in the East. If Isiah had spent the last four years dumping players for draft picks only, we could have been contenders for Garnett. Because we traded for Marbury and Curry, we missed that window of opportunity.
Isiah needs to follow that path now while these players have value. Marbury is on the wrong side of 30. By the time this team is ready to contend, Marbury will likely be done as a player. The smart move will be to trade Marbury to a contending team after the season for a pick before he begins to lose value.
November 6th, 2007 at 11:39 amYou make good points on marbury. As I’ve said, I’m not going to hang Isiah’s rep on the marbury trade, but his trades in their totality.
Having stated that, I DON’T thing ainge is a good example of anything. Ainge simply lucked up on KG because him and Mchale are boys. It’s pretty much as simple as that. Minny could have easily gotten a better package from the Bulls. besides isiah would have gotten crushed if he ever did a Telfair for Brandon Roy trade. Ainge made up for it, but creidt goes to Mchale.
November 6th, 2007 at 9:21 pmModi, I hate to say it because you have made a ton of excellent points, but… the latest Marbury incident has proven my original analysis of the Marbury trade to be correct. It was the wrong trade and wrong strategy to try and build the team around such a self-centered player.
Steph’s latest bizarre behavior further confirms that Isiah made a critical mistake in trading picks for Marbury and Curry. When a team is bad, the smartest way to rebuild is to always go for the draft. If you are lucky enough to get a true superstar, you can then build a team around that player.
Isiah never gave the Knicks a chance to use his best asset (drafting) to its maximum potential. Now the team is heading toward a disaster because of Steph’s selfishness.
November 14th, 2007 at 4:09 pmHawk, I admit that this trade is not looking so good right now. hell, I would completely concede the point but I’ll still hold out some perhaps unrealistic hope that a resurgence is made similar to last year after he had a horrible November. But I’m pretty much ready to concede your Marbury point. It would have been great if he hit that 3 tonight with under a minute left. That would have been a nice story.
I’ll hold off on the “headed toward disaster” analysis and remind myself that this is still a marathon.
November 15th, 2007 at 2:31 amWow. What stuff you and others wrote way back in Nov.,
March 1st, 2008 at 4:18 pmthough you had the audacity to REPEAT it, “Isiah is a GREAT drafter” ..even in December…when it was clear to everyone
but YOU that this team, this coach, this franchise, this owner..was, is and will be a DISASTOR as long as Isiah is involved. Doubt me . Check the facts, the record. Case CLOSED.
steven, actually, Isiah IS a great drafter. Staring with Toront, just look at his body of work and compare it to virtually any other GM relative to their drafting position. His Channing Frye pick represents his only clearly bad pick at this point. Most GMs who have picked as many times and Isiah have multiple bad picks — even the best GMs.
While I’ve downgrade Isiah’s performance because all three of his signature trades have not worked out, the disaster that is this season can be directly attributed to first the Zach Randolph trade and secondly, a truly horrible coaching performance for the ages (from December: http://www.cosellout.com/?p=192). Starting with his mishandling of the Marbury situation (Marbury is the only true point), to his refusal to break up the Zach-Eddy starting pair, to his refusal to bench Q, to his refusal to start defenseive guys, to his refusal to develop young guys, it has been a disaster… we just disagree as to why…
March 1st, 2008 at 4:55 pm