Is Your Pick Two Team Better than When it Started?

[indeedproceed]

Keeping my comments from last night in mind, I love the Songaila selection. Hard nosed, physical, a banger.

And my girlfriend says i can't listen.....

And Wright, if he has indeed turned a corner, could be a nice source of threes off the bench. He's 24, and yet this is his 6th season. Snakebit with injuries, but with luck, he'll stay healthy for you, IP.

Yeah man, I said it earlier to I think WW, but I see him as a kind of 3/4 version of Tony Allen. Still young enough to turn it around, but with a lot of bad luck and immaturity (lucky for him, his immaturity was in the form of his play on the court, not off it too) in his track record.

Picking DeMar DeRozen instead of Wright had me spooked because it was Wright I wanted all along. I was lucky to get both, and nab an extra 8th round pick out of it as well as Songaila

[Lucky17]

Yeah man, I said it earlier to I think WW, but I see him as a kind of 3/4 version of Tony Allen. Still young enough to turn it around, but with a lot of bad luck and immaturity (lucky for him, his immaturity was in the form of his play on the court, not off it too) in his track record.

Picking DeMar DeRozen instead of Wright had me spooked because it was Wright I wanted all along. I was lucky to get both, and nab an extra 8th round pick out of it as well as Songaila

Slight regret passing on DeRozan. I think T-Williams is a fantastic athlete, but plays more of a 3/4 than a 2/3, which is what I think may be the greater need for my roster right now.

[celticsclay]

This is where this kind of debate can get a little dicey. PLamb and the knicks, what I meant by hater was that I was not intentionally trying to pick apart your team for the sake of argument. I honestly was trying to give my evaluation and opinion, not just get a rise out of you. I know I think my team is better then other people do, and thats kind of the nature of this game.

 To answer your question about the wings, yea some of those guys I would rather have then Hill. Grant Hill is a great player, but I think he is about 36 or 37. Unless you really think that team is constructed to win the title this season or next, he doesn't really fit with the team as presently constructed. Kind of same line of thinking with Allen.
You have some really good players and a few borderline allstars. However, the team has three players that 35 or older and is seemingly built around a guy that has been kicked to the curb twice in his brief nba career.

 If you look at the title teams of the last 15 years all of them with the exception of detroit had an MVP calibar player they were built around (some could argue Billups played at an nba calibar level that year). The lakers with Kobe. The Celtics with both Pierce and Garnett. The spurs every time they won with Duncan. Then going back to Shaq in his prime with the lakers etc. Your best player your building around is Randolph?

So this leaves the question of whether your team is built to content for the title this year or next or whether it is built to win in the future? Finally I will reiterate that this is just my opinion and that was the whole point of the thread. If a lot of other posters come forward and make strong arguments about this team winning 50 games, I would certainly read them and be interested. I may even change my mind if people point out things i have not thought of. As of now I just dont see it...

[PLamb]

Knicks

Starters

PG: George Hill
SG: Ray Allen
SF: Grant Hill
PF: Zach Randolph
C:  Nene Hilario

Bench

PG: Ty Lawson
SG: Anthony Parker, Quentin Richardson
SF: Matt Barnes
PF: Kenyon Martin
C:  Louis Amundson

What do you think so far Mr Who?

Who would have thought it?  George Hill is your first player to have an off the court distraction.


I see disaster with this team in NY.  I don't buy the Randolph sudden change in behavior.  I think it is only a matter of time.  And by throwing him in there with Martin where they are fighting for minutes, well, that could be an interesting fight.

What matters is I do buy it regarding Randolph, his change and this team's ability to work together

Also, Greg Oden was caught with naked pics too

So I guess Roy Hobbs and the Thunder got a bad apple and personality issue too, huh

I don't think anybody was calling George Hill a bad apple or a personality issue... just funny that on a team with Kenyon Martin and Zach Randolph, he was the first with his name in the paper for the wrong reason.

Not enthralled with the athleticism of the team - Nene is your only great athlete relative to his position.

I don't know about the team.  I wonder where you'll get your offense - I'm not sure Randolph is good enough to be a first banana.  By that, I'd expect you to have a good defensive team, but I don't think you're any more than solid on that side of the ball either.

It's a team with good depth, and it should be able to give several different looks to its opponent.  In the end, though, I see it as a slightly above .500 team with no particular focus on winning now or in the future.

Here's something I don't get

What does being a top athlete relative to your position have to do with being a great basketball player or  blending into a team

Was Larry Bird a great athlete relative to his position

Could he fly around dunking and blocking shots

Or was he just a great basketball player

Was, Luke Walton, Derek Fisher, Vladimir Radmanovic or Pau Gasol great athletes relative to their position when they won a title sttarting games last year for the Lakers

How many titles do great athletes Lebron James, Karl Malone, Dominique Wilkins and others have

I judge basketball players by how well they play basketball and basketball teams by how well they play basketball

Atlanta has been one of the more athletic teams in the league the last three years, how many titles do they have


While this is pertinent to my defense of my team, it is a bit of a pet peeve of mine

I don't get the whole need to be super athletic bit I do get the need to be a great basketball player

That I get

[wdleehi]

Knicks

Starters

PG: George Hill
SG: Ray Allen
SF: Grant Hill
PF: Zach Randolph
C:  Nene Hilario

Bench

PG: Ty Lawson
SG: Anthony Parker, Quentin Richardson
SF: Matt Barnes
PF: Kenyon Martin
C:  Louis Amundson

What do you think so far Mr Who?

Who would have thought it?  George Hill is your first player to have an off the court distraction.


I see disaster with this team in NY.  I don't buy the Randolph sudden change in behavior.  I think it is only a matter of time.  And by throwing him in there with Martin where they are fighting for minutes, well, that could be an interesting fight.

What matters is I do buy it regarding Randolph, his change and this team's ability to work together

Also, Greg Oden was caught with naked pics too

So I guess Roy Hobbs and the Thunder got a bad apple and personality issue too, huh

I don't think anybody was calling George Hill a bad apple or a personality issue... just funny that on a team with Kenyon Martin and Zach Randolph, he was the first with his name in the paper for the wrong reason.

Not enthralled with the athleticism of the team - Nene is your only great athlete relative to his position.

I don't know about the team.  I wonder where you'll get your offense - I'm not sure Randolph is good enough to be a first banana.  By that, I'd expect you to have a good defensive team, but I don't think you're any more than solid on that side of the ball either.

It's a team with good depth, and it should be able to give several different looks to its opponent.  In the end, though, I see it as a slightly above .500 team with no particular focus on winning now or in the future.

Here's something I don't get

What does being a top athlete relative to your position have to do with being a great basketball player or  blending into a team

Was Larry Bird a great athlete relative to his position

Could he fly around dunking and blocking shots

Or was he just a great basketball player

Was, Luke Walton, Derek Fisher, Vladimir Radmanovic or Pau Gasol great athletes relative to their position when they won a title sttarting games last year for the Lakers

How many titles do great athletes Lebron James, Karl Malone, Dominique Wilkins and others have

I judge basketball players by how well they play basketball and basketball teams by how well they play basketball

Atlanta has been one of the more athletic teams in the league the last three years, how many titles do they have


While this is pertinent to my defense of my team, it is a bit of a pet peeve of mine

I don't get the whole need to be super athletic bit I do get the need to be a great basketball player

That I get

Ok.


So besides Ray, who has won an NBA title?  Because I don't see a KG from two years ago. 

[Truck Lewis]

Who would have thought it?  George Hill is your first player to have an off the court distraction.

Plamb should pray the photos help george hills career half as much as Kim Kardashians or Paris Hiltons  

[wdleehi]

Who would have thought it?  George Hill is your first player to have an off the court distraction.

Plamb should pray the photos help george hills career half as much as Kim Kardashians or Paris Hiltons  

Poor guy.  He went from SA to the media capital of the world.   

[PLamb]

This is where this kind of debate can get a little dicey. PLamb and the knicks, what I meant by hater was that I was not intentionally trying to pick apart your team for the sake of argument. I honestly was trying to give my evaluation and opinion, not just get a rise out of you. I know I think my team is better then other people do, and thats kind of the nature of this game.

 To answer your question about the wings, yea some of those guys I would rather have then Hill. Grant Hill is a great player, but I think he is about 36 or 37. Unless you really think that team is constructed to win the title this season or next, he doesn't really fit with the team as presently constructed. Kind of same line of thinking with Allen.
You have some really good players and a few borderline allstars. However, the team has three players that 35 or older and is seemingly built around a guy that has been kicked to the curb twice in his brief nba career.

 If you look at the title teams of the last 15 years all of them with the exception of detroit had an MVP calibar player they were built around (some could argue Billups played at an nba calibar level that year). The lakers with Kobe. The Celtics with both Pierce and Garnett. The spurs every time they won with Duncan. Then going back to Shaq in his prime with the lakers etc. Your best player your building around is Randolph?

So this leaves the question of whether your team is built to content for the title this year or next or whether it is built to win in the future? Finally I will reiterate that this is just my opinion and that was the whole point of the thread. If a lot of other posters come forward and make strong arguments about this team winning 50 games, I would certainly read them and be interested. I may even change my mind if people point out things i have not thought of. As of now I just dont see it...

The team was built to be better than the current team

Take a look at where I drafted Allen and Hill

There wasn't a lot of players that I liked that was picked after either of them that was there for people to start

You and I were in a similar situation, our keeper players weren't wings

Most of the best starter quality wings that were young and talented were kept

The pickings were slim thereafter

Are you really happy with a soon to be 32 year rapidly declining(a lot faster than Allen and Hill)Marion, a small backup SG in Barbosa and Roger Mason as your wings

I tried to build the best team I could to win as many games as they could given what I started out with which was the current NYKs, yuck

I think they win 50

Some agree with me, some won't

This isn't a keeper league or real life so what does the future matter

[Edgar]

thank god we dont have a debate place here

[indeedproceed]

thank god we dont have a debate place here

Dwight Howard Sux and Rashard Lewis is overrated. Bring it on!

[PLamb]

Knicks

Starters

PG: George Hill
SG: Ray Allen
SF: Grant Hill
PF: Zach Randolph
C:  Nene Hilario

Bench

PG: Ty Lawson
SG: Anthony Parker, Quentin Richardson
SF: Matt Barnes
PF: Kenyon Martin
C:  Louis Amundson

What do you think so far Mr Who?

Who would have thought it?  George Hill is your first player to have an off the court distraction.


I see disaster with this team in NY.  I don't buy the Randolph sudden change in behavior.  I think it is only a matter of time.  And by throwing him in there with Martin where they are fighting for minutes, well, that could be an interesting fight.

What matters is I do buy it regarding Randolph, his change and this team's ability to work together

Also, Greg Oden was caught with naked pics too

So I guess Roy Hobbs and the Thunder got a bad apple and personality issue too, huh

I don't think anybody was calling George Hill a bad apple or a personality issue... just funny that on a team with Kenyon Martin and Zach Randolph, he was the first with his name in the paper for the wrong reason.

Not enthralled with the athleticism of the team - Nene is your only great athlete relative to his position.

I don't know about the team.  I wonder where you'll get your offense - I'm not sure Randolph is good enough to be a first banana.  By that, I'd expect you to have a good defensive team, but I don't think you're any more than solid on that side of the ball either.

It's a team with good depth, and it should be able to give several different looks to its opponent.  In the end, though, I see it as a slightly above .500 team with no particular focus on winning now or in the future.

Here's something I don't get

What does being a top athlete relative to your position have to do with being a great basketball player or  blending into a team

Was Larry Bird a great athlete relative to his position

Could he fly around dunking and blocking shots

Or was he just a great basketball player

Was, Luke Walton, Derek Fisher, Vladimir Radmanovic or Pau Gasol great athletes relative to their position when they won a title sttarting games last year for the Lakers

How many titles do great athletes Lebron James, Karl Malone, Dominique Wilkins and others have

I judge basketball players by how well they play basketball and basketball teams by how well they play basketball

Atlanta has been one of the more athletic teams in the league the last three years, how many titles do they have


While this is pertinent to my defense of my team, it is a bit of a pet peeve of mine

I don't get the whole need to be super athletic bit I do get the need to be a great basketball player

That I get

Ok.


So besides Ray, who has won an NBA title?  Because I don't see a KG from two years ago. 

What's your point

All I am saying is that players should be judged as players not athletes

Would you rather have a team of 12 Tony Allens or 12 Shane Battiers

Allen is unquestionably the better athlete relative to his position, you want a team of 12 Tony's or 12 Shanes

How about a team of 12 Glen Davis's or 12 Sean Williams

[Roy Hobbs]

Would you rather have a team of 12 Tony Allens or 12 Shane Battiers

Since both teams would suck, I'll go with the 12 Tonys.  It would be fairly entertaining, I think.  Which team would have the security staff to deal with all of the death threats, though?

How about a team of 12 Glen Davis's or 12 Sean Williams

Um...  neither?  Are we arguing that either of these is a good option?

[wdleehi]

What's your point

All I am saying is that players should be judged as players not athletes

Would you rather have a team of 12 Tony Allens or 12 Shane Battiers

Allen is unquestionably the better athlete relative to his position, you want a team of 12 Tony's or 12 Shanes

How about a team of 12 Glen Davis's or 12 Sean Williams

None of them.  I want to keep my GM job.  



You want us to compare your team to Larry Bird.  


But you are lead by a guy that was a joke the last time he was in NY (last season)  


You do not have the young talent the current Knick's team has.

I don't even know if you have the cap space next year the current Knicks have.  

And we are suppose to buy this team as a playoff team?

[PLamb]

Would you rather have a team of 12 Tony Allens or 12 Shane Battiers

Since both teams would suck, I'll go with the 12 Tonys.  It would be fairly entertaining, I think.  Which team would have the security staff to deal with all of the death threats, though?

How about a team of 12 Glen Davis's or 12 Sean Williams

Um...  neither?  Are we arguing that either of these is a good option?

Thanks for completely defusing my point

LOL

You would really take 12 Tony's over 12 Shane's

The Shanes will win every time because the Tony's can't count high enough to keep the proper score

The Shanes will win by default

[indeedproceed]

Okay now the New Jersey Nheyts are starting to really shape out. This is the team as I envisioned it..mostly.

Devin Harris/Will Bynum
Thabo Sefelosha/Wes Matthews
Omri Casspi/Dorrell Wright
Luis Scola/Ersan Ilyasova/Darius Songaila
Brook Lopez

Rational behind trading Lee and 9(1) for Scola and 8(11)

David Lee is a good option, but I wanted a more traditional 4. I started out with Nene, then went to Lee, and now I'm at Scola. Scola isn't the rebounding monster Lee is, but he's a natural 4, and he's much the same type of player the rest of my boys are. He's a banger, he's physical. He takes charges, he rebounds, and he's got some sweet post moves. Beyond that he's got a legitimate midrange jumper where Lee's was inconsistent at best. He'll allow Lopez room to operate if he needs it, and on top of that he can still bang in the post for buckets if need be. I'd say he's as good or better a defender as Lee.

Still have 2 picks next round and I'm done.