- Sep 21, 2008
- 49,029
- 61,333
We should've drafted bayless a couple years ago...
.
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by pr0phecy718,
- Start date
- Sep 30, 2008
- 4,404
- 11
Bayless would be the perfect future PG for this team.
- Apr 20, 2007
- 4,058
- 11
pshhhhh ill take the 6'10 SF with the SWEET stroke over the 6'3 SG
- Jan 29, 2007
- 7,084
- 45
im in lala land, real talk.
leave me alone. give me something to hope for.
leave me alone. give me something to hope for.
- Sep 21, 2008
- 49,029
- 61,333
Yea your right
- Jul 13, 2005
- 36,014
- 27,586
i see bayless coming to us or going to the lakers
- Jan 29, 2007
- 7,084
- 45
^lakers? why, because their gm is mitch?
they already have brown, farmar, and fisher. my boy shannon brown has way too much talent for them to give up, and i think farmar is already in the doghouse.
we need bayless more then them. didnt portland want dlee at some point?
ill give them dlee+nate for bayless+filler to make contracts work out. (serious proposal this time)
they already have brown, farmar, and fisher. my boy shannon brown has way too much talent for them to give up, and i think farmar is already in the doghouse.
we need bayless more then them. didnt portland want dlee at some point?
ill give them dlee+nate for bayless+filler to make contracts work out. (serious proposal this time)
yeeupp
Banned
- Sep 3, 2009
- 5,697
- 166
Lee+Nate is too much for Bayless when he didnt increased his valueOriginally Posted by BangDak
^lakers? why, because their gm is mitch?
they already have brown, farmar, and fisher. my boy shannon brown has way too much talent for them to give up, and i think farmar is already in the doghouse.
we need bayless more then them. didnt portland want dlee at some point?
ill give them dlee+nate for bayless+filler to make contracts work out. (serious proposal this time)
How would we get rid of Jeffries and/or Curry then?
- May 3, 2003
- 1,063
- 10
Anyone know where I can get that knicks tmobile hoodie separately?
- Jul 11, 2002
- 2,165
- 11
any ticket holders in here? what games ya going to?
- Mar 24, 2009
- 1,785
- 48
Bayless for Nate makes the most sense. Their contracts are pretty much the same give or take a mil. Bayless & Hughes in the backcourt wouldn't be toobad.
I still hope Nate stays, but I swear to God Duhon needs to be dealt first before anyone else.
I still hope Nate stays, but I swear to God Duhon needs to be dealt first before anyone else.
- Jan 29, 2007
- 7,084
- 45
if bayless comes, i wouldnt mind duhon staying, ASSUMING bayless gets the starting pg role, but i doubt it, since this coach is an *$+#$*%
^^, im thinking about going to the clippers game next friday, but i got to find a good deal first
^^, im thinking about going to the clippers game next friday, but i got to find a good deal first
- Sep 1, 2004
- 25,596
- 742
so SOME of yall didnt want BJ because he is a score 1st PG but would take Bayless?.... LMAO!!!!
- Jan 3, 2008
- 12,102
- 1,411
yeah..
When we get a new PG next year, I want just that, a PG.
Toney Douglas should handle that 6th man combo guard role for a while here.
When we get a new PG next year, I want just that, a PG.
Toney Douglas should handle that 6th man combo guard role for a while here.
- Apr 4, 2008
- 75,415
- 24,803
I would love to see Nate traded for Bayless.
- Jan 29, 2007
- 7,084
- 45
portland would never do it.
lets face it. although it would be interesting to see an roy and nate combo, the only thing nate has over bayless is his expiring.
you seen some of the offers portland got offered last year? they wouldnt budge an inch
lets face it. although it would be interesting to see an roy and nate combo, the only thing nate has over bayless is his expiring.
you seen some of the offers portland got offered last year? they wouldnt budge an inch
yeeupp
Banned
- Sep 3, 2009
- 5,697
- 166
[h1]Forbes: Lakers Replace KnicksAs Most Valuable NBA Franchise[/h1]
Dec 09, 2009 8:38 PM EST
The Lakers are the NBA's mostvaluable team, and 12 franchises lost money in the 2008-09 season, according to Forbes magazine.
In its annual listing of the value of NBA franchises, Forbes finds Lakers to be worth $607M, up 4 percent for the league champions. Second are the Knicks at$586M, but that is a 4 percent drop. The Knicks led the rankings for the four previous seasons, according to the ESPN.com report.
Dec 09, 2009 8:38 PM EST
In its annual listing of the value of NBA franchises, Forbes finds Lakers to be worth $607M, up 4 percent for the league champions. Second are the Knicks at$586M, but that is a 4 percent drop. The Knicks led the rankings for the four previous seasons, according to the ESPN.com report.
yeeupp
Banned
- Sep 3, 2009
- 5,697
- 166
How the hell were even the most valuable franchise with four losing seasons?
Imagine when we get Bron
Imagine when we get Bron
- Jan 29, 2007
- 7,084
- 45
loyal fans, msg already is an HUGE factor.
our fan attendence is in the top10 almost every year.
our fan attendence is in the top10 almost every year.
- Sep 29, 2008
- 397
- 10
Originally Posted by YEEUPP
How the hell were even the most valuable franchise with four losing seasons?
Imagine when we get Bron
Word. I always thought the Lakers were more valuable than the Knicks. They got Kobe, all those championship, city of LA.
What do we have that made us so valuable?
- Jul 16, 2002
- 31,002
- 6,069
Originally Posted by YEEUPP
How the hell were even the most valuable franchise with four losing seasons???!!!!
- Sep 29, 2008
- 397
- 10
| 2009-10 | NBA | New York Knickerbockers | 7 | 15 | .318 | 3 | |||||
| 2008-09 | NBA | New York Knickerbockers | 32 | 50 | .390 | 5 | |||||
| 2007-08 | NBA | New York Knickerbockers | 23 | 59 | .280 | 5 | |||||
| 2006-07 | NBA | New York Knickerbockers | 33 | 49 | .402 | 4 | |||||
| 2005-06 | NBA | New York Knickerbockers | 23 | 59 | .280 | 5 | |||||
| 2004-05 | NBA | New York Knickerbockers | 33 | 49 | .402 | 4 | |||||
| 2003-04 | NBA | New York Knickerbockers* | 39 | 43 | .476 | 3 | |||||
| 2002-03 | NBA | New York Knickerbockers | 37 | 45 | .451 | 5 | |||||
| 2001-02 | NBA | New York Knickerbockers | 30 | 52 | .366 | 7 | |||||
| 2000-01 | NBA | New York Knickerbockers* | 48 | 34 | .585 |
[/th] [th=""]
[/th] [th=""]
[/th] [th=""]
[/th] [th=""]
[/th]
No wonder Dolan ain't willing to sell the Knicks.
Sigh, looking at those records made me realize how much time I wasted watching the Knicks lose.
Yet we all still here rooting for the Knicks.
Loyalty.
- May 11, 2004
- 4,524
- 218
damn lookin at those records for this decade, i think its the perfect cue for this pic
yeeupp
Banned
- Sep 3, 2009
- 5,697
- 166
We are 298-440 this decade, not including this season
,
but...we're valuable
but...we're valuable
- Feb 7, 2008
- 67,371
- 37,342
From the T'Wolves thread...
No matter how many PGs we took last year, we won't be passing on John Wall. But of course, we are the Minnesota Timberwolves, and we have never moved up orhad the #1 pick in our time being a NBA franchise. I don't look for that to change...
Way to early for draft talk anyway. It's my favorite day of the year as a Timberwolves fan though
If you're still looking for a PG come draft day...hope that Minnesota draws that first pick.Originally Posted by JPZx
You better be sure...if we end up with that #1 envelope on lottery night...he'll be gone in the blink of an eye. He might just have a future in NY...so if the Knicks don't end up with the #1 selection I would advise you to hope the Timberwolves do.Originally Posted by BangDak
flynn is going to be something serious.
damn you kahn.
Wall's potential will be higher than Rose's ever was (and that's saying something) come Summer time.
And it almost pains me to talk about this, because I love Jonny Flynn. He's really making huge jumps every night in terms of scoring, dishing, and just his overall knowledge of the game. Great personality too. I just don't see how we could pass up on Wall if we happen to get the first pick though. Obviously, we have greater needs, but when you have a chance to draft a once in a blue moon type of prospect like John Wall...you just cannot pass that up. We'd be able to fill our needs via trade with Flynn, Rubio (who I think will never don a T'Wolves uniform, I secede Knick fans, bad pick), Nikola Pekovic, etc.
All of this is "what-ifs". Why am I even giving it any time?
No matter how many PGs we took last year, we won't be passing on John Wall. But of course, we are the Minnesota Timberwolves, and we have never moved up orhad the #1 pick in our time being a NBA franchise. I don't look for that to change...
Way to early for draft talk anyway. It's my favorite day of the year as a Timberwolves fan though
