**Official '11 NYK LOCKOUT thread*** lockout over
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by pr0phecy718,
- Start date
king x riece
Banned
- Oct 4, 2010
- 6,289
- 10
- Mar 29, 2008
- 26,575
- 3,662
Melo was fouled on that 3
- Dec 25, 2003
- 43,266
- 28,613
Originally Posted by xbiker47
Melo was fouled on that 3
- Nov 4, 2003
- 29,630
- 1,863
I will take the Johnson phntom foul on the 3 over the real melo foul
that video was great. Better than most crap on ESPN. But he didn't destroy dantoni until the very end. I remember that inexplicable timeout though we talked about it here. Seeing jefferies not even make a legit shot pissed me off so much.
TD got sonned over and over in that video. Missing wade open men, rondo taking a dump on him. I hope that was due to the barely talked about inujury
that video was great. Better than most crap on ESPN. But he didn't destroy dantoni until the very end. I remember that inexplicable timeout though we talked about it here. Seeing jefferies not even make a legit shot pissed me off so much.
TD got sonned over and over in that video. Missing wade open men, rondo taking a dump on him. I hope that was due to the barely talked about inujury
- Apr 12, 2001
- 930
- 76
Is that the video where they talk about Pringles using his last timeout IMMEDIATELY after Doc's full TO?
#@#+ Pringles
#@#+ Pringles
- Apr 8, 2005
- 11,640
- 506
Pic's of our throwbacks?Originally Posted by KING x RIECE
Uniform change , word is the throwbacks are gonna become our main. Can't wait to see the white joint
- Jun 21, 2009
- 49,898
- 51,376
Originally Posted by KingJay718
Originally Posted by CoupeIt88
KING x RIECE wrote:
From the looks of it we did change our logo , got rid of the blackour throwbacks are probably gonna be our main uniforms now can't wait to see the white one hopefully our court will have blue in the paint like in the 90's
Nice, hopefully we did get rid of the black. Now all we need is to put the orange Yankee NY logo back on the shorts and were good.
I was with you until you suggested the Yankee logo.
Why is that? The NYK donned the NY logo for decades, it was so sleek. Rumor is they took it off there jerseys because Mets fans (
Then it changed to the Knicks logo on the bottom left
I guess at the end of the day it's all good, we have to keep the Met fans happy
|A-Man|
formerly atgd7154xbbxmz
- Jan 5, 2011
- 17,340
- 2,011
I want a jersey with that NY logo and "Knicks" in cursive on the front; strictly orange, blue and white.
I also want a black alt uni.
I also want a black alt uni.
king x riece
Banned
- Oct 4, 2010
- 6,289
- 10
Originally Posted by nycknicks105
Pic's of our throwbacks?Originally Posted by KING x RIECE
Uniform change , word is the throwbacks are gonna become our main. Can't wait to see the white joint
- Jul 22, 2004
- 4,991
- 454
if the Suns trade nash that means they are officially rebuilding. which means Starver will want to save money. Which means Childress has to be dealt too.
- Apr 20, 2007
- 4,058
- 11
i dont understand taking the black out of the logo if were not gonna do it in the unis. I dont mind it nearly as much in the logo, kinda like it actually.
I also dont mind black in the unis, we just $%!*$% it all up in like 02 or whatever. The jerseys from like 96-01 were !%*%$%# sick. If we keep black its gotta look like that or else just go back to the throwbacks... in white also
but whatever i dont mind taking the black outta the unis at all, hopefully we move towards throwback jerseys. I dont know why were going for such a light orange and a light blue lately, thats my only critique really. Royal blue with solid orange and call it a night
anyway i wouldnt mind Nash i guess, however i dont think bringing him is SO important where we would take back Childress' contract. Billups has almost the same exact deal and can fill the gap just fine plus play defense. No point in taking back bad contracts to make a coach happy who shouldnt even be here anyway... rather trade for Flynn for less value.
Also i may be in the minority BUT i wouldnt mind Selby at all at 17. I wouldnt say hes my #1 choice at that pick, but in terms of potential i would say he definitley is meaning that out of all the players who will be available imo he by far has the highest ceiling... however with all that being said if we use that !%*%$%# draft pick on him he BETTER reach at LEAST 75% of that potential, run an effective offense at point, play defense like a !%*%$%# dog and either be good enough to become our franchise PG or anchor a trade to New Orleans to bring CP3 over here.
I dont feel that we are dumb enough to make a pick JUST to appease Melo, it may play a part but if we draft Selby you know its with the intention of turning him into something special.
Also if we take !%*%$%# Vucevic at 17 ill lose it. I like him, i like the idea of taking the legit 7 footer with the inside/outside game but we need somebody more athletic than him. At 17 we gotta go bigger than that. However i am ALL FOR trading for the Buls pick at #30 like it was rumored and selecting him there if hes still available which he very well may be. 17 is just a reach imo with all our other needs.
In other news the 2 guys being talked about in our trade talks (Nash/Flynn) are apparently now being talked about amongst each other (Phoenix/Minnesota), apparently Phoenix really wants Derrick Williams. Maybe we can make it a 3 way and get more assets that any 2 way
I also dont mind black in the unis, we just $%!*$% it all up in like 02 or whatever. The jerseys from like 96-01 were !%*%$%# sick. If we keep black its gotta look like that or else just go back to the throwbacks... in white also
but whatever i dont mind taking the black outta the unis at all, hopefully we move towards throwback jerseys. I dont know why were going for such a light orange and a light blue lately, thats my only critique really. Royal blue with solid orange and call it a night
anyway i wouldnt mind Nash i guess, however i dont think bringing him is SO important where we would take back Childress' contract. Billups has almost the same exact deal and can fill the gap just fine plus play defense. No point in taking back bad contracts to make a coach happy who shouldnt even be here anyway... rather trade for Flynn for less value.
Also i may be in the minority BUT i wouldnt mind Selby at all at 17. I wouldnt say hes my #1 choice at that pick, but in terms of potential i would say he definitley is meaning that out of all the players who will be available imo he by far has the highest ceiling... however with all that being said if we use that !%*%$%# draft pick on him he BETTER reach at LEAST 75% of that potential, run an effective offense at point, play defense like a !%*%$%# dog and either be good enough to become our franchise PG or anchor a trade to New Orleans to bring CP3 over here.
I dont feel that we are dumb enough to make a pick JUST to appease Melo, it may play a part but if we draft Selby you know its with the intention of turning him into something special.
Also if we take !%*%$%# Vucevic at 17 ill lose it. I like him, i like the idea of taking the legit 7 footer with the inside/outside game but we need somebody more athletic than him. At 17 we gotta go bigger than that. However i am ALL FOR trading for the Buls pick at #30 like it was rumored and selecting him there if hes still available which he very well may be. 17 is just a reach imo with all our other needs.
In other news the 2 guys being talked about in our trade talks (Nash/Flynn) are apparently now being talked about amongst each other (Phoenix/Minnesota), apparently Phoenix really wants Derrick Williams. Maybe we can make it a 3 way and get more assets that any 2 way
- Jul 16, 2002
- 30,805
- 5,820
whoops, forgot to sign in lol...i'll c u pro
- Nov 4, 2003
- 29,630
- 1,863
that NY on the shorts would be copped in both colors
- Apr 8, 2005
- 11,640
- 506
Those jerseys are actually pretty sweet. The white ones are also as nice.Originally Posted by KING x RIECE
Originally Posted by nycknicks105
Pic's of our throwbacks?Originally Posted by KING x RIECE
Uniform change , word is the throwbacks are gonna become our main. Can't wait to see the white joint
I prefer they leave them this way and not put in a V-neck.
- Mar 14, 2009
- 183
- 10
^those are classic.
- Jul 13, 2005
- 35,507
- 27,148
idc what anyone says Nash would be make this team 10x better running the point than Billups can. i'd give the suns 17, fields, TD, walker, chauncy for nash, lopez, and pietrus/hill
great offense > great defense
great offense > great defense
- Apr 20, 2007
- 4,058
- 11
possibly removing the side colored panels on the jerseys.
finally
Knicks should make an updated version of those OG shorts with the NY logo on one leg and the player's jersey # on the other... freshhh
- Apr 20, 2007
- 4,058
- 11
i dont necessarily even disagree with you here, except formaybe the offense > defense part which i will debate. but i do thinkthat a GREAT offense and +%%$ defense >>> good offense, bad defense which a Nash trade would bring us so i would be downfor it to go through. However ill take a great defensive team over agreat offensive team any day of the week.
I would be hesitant to give up fields AND Douglas AND the 17 just toget Nash over here really. Would probably want to leave Fields or 17out of the trade. But if we could get back Lopez AND Grant Hill in thedeal that would probably do it for me.
however Phoenix is not trading Nash to NY anytime soon... book that
king x riece
Banned
- Oct 4, 2010
- 6,289
- 10
I agree , yall seen what that great Chicago D did to Miami right ? Nothing. Only thing you need are players willing to play defense and a great rebounding/shot blocking big man down low and a potent offense. Miami couldn't outscore Dallas nor out tough them all because of Tyson Chandler and J.Kidd's clutch D down the stretch and damn sure couldn't beat them in a shooting contest .
Modeling your team after the Mavs >>>>>>>> The Bulls
- Nov 4, 2003
- 29,630
- 1,863
great offense ain't better than great D. The bulls don't HAVE an offense
- Oct 8, 2005
- 9,957
- 7,159
honestly, put me in the category of ppl that would rather have a better defense. our d is laughable in and out of the league and i'm tired of us getting disrespected when it comes to this.
i want our team to play hard and not be so soft.
i want our team to play hard and not be so soft.
- Apr 12, 2001
- 930
- 76
There are the exceptions but history proves that 7-8 times out of 10 D is gonna triumph offense, I'll take my gamble and tell whoever is running this team to focus on that. Using the Bulls as a model is no comparison. For the most part the Bulls played decent D on Miami. Miami happened to play better D on Chicago though...
Say what you want about Lebron's shotmaking ability to close that series but it was all facilitated by Miami's ability to lock down Rose, who happened to be their point guard, who happened to be their only player who could create his own shot on offense, and who late in the series was Chicago's only offense.
IMO if anything the Mavs just proved the whole defense>offense argument. They've been that soft, give up +100 a night team for the last 10 years (us right now) They bring in guys like Marion, Chandler, Stevenson, Kidd, play some more D, buy into Carlise's philosophies and they win the chip. They already were a offensive juggernaut (STAT & Melo
- Jul 13, 2005
- 35,507
- 27,148
i wouldnt say that Jordans Bulls, Showtime Lakers, and even this years Mavs were that great on defense (real good yes not great). The Pistons "bad boys" were one of the better defensive teams they have 1 championship, even us during the 90s and we didnt win *%@#. Besides for the spurs/pistons the better offensive teams usually won the championship in last 30 years.
- Mar 14, 2009
- 183
- 10
^I agree with that. I think we need to work on becoming a good defensive team, not too sure if we need to be Great to win a championship. Right now we are awful and need to work on becoming an OK defensive team. Our offense will be there. I hope we can pick up a player that can change our mindset on D, kinda like Chandler for the mavs. One player that takes pride in D can motivate his teammates to try and do the same.
