The Knicks always seem to make a little noise right after a big shakeup. But as time goes on, their lack of talent or cohesion ultimately takes over, and they start sucking again.
exactly - and they have spent money on Campbell's and Uncle Cliffy's deals - OK, so Mo makes 17 million over the next two years - ... who else are you going to get now
It's not because of him though. He's a good player but he's not the guy that's gonna be the main reason a team wins or loses. He's only played for 2 teams prior to the Knicks, you make it sound like he's the reason for the Rockets and Clippers losing. That's complete crap to say "losing follows him" when he's played for a total of 3 teams and the Knicks he just joined.
Come on Xiki, you know better than this. The Clippers? I don't think anyone has ever won with the Clips. The Rockets only had 1 losing season with MoT and that had nothing to do with MoT. And the Knicks are actually 5-1 since the deal. Like posted above, its not like MoT is the reason for the losing. But good for MoT. I hope he has success in NYK.
You know Howard is shooting less than 2% better this year for us than MoT was doing. You know last year Mo shot a higher % than Howard did last year with Orlando or than JH has this year with us. Howard is a modestly better, significantly older, version of MoT. But we are not talking about a world of difference, JVG has admitted as much. MoT was a bad fit b/c we had JH, and b/c MoT has an inflated contract. But MoT would be a good 7th man, bringing an offensive punch, for a lot of teams. Corliss Williamson, an even more 1 dimensional player without the shooting range, seems to be "celebrated" as such a player. The problem with MoT is that he was overpayed. But we will see how we like contracts of JH or guys like Williamson when they hit their mid 30s and their contracts are peaking. At one time JH was despised b/c of his contract too, but he was never a bad player.
