and there is certainly such a thing as “destined to lose”, see NY or CLE in the Finals against the Spurs for two perfect examples.

the sad thing is that this ‘luck’ path is our only chance of contending at this point, unless somehow a better ‘superstar’ shows up miraculously. get two guards who are at least league average starters, get a few solid bench players, get to the playoffs and hope to get exceedingly lucky.

(and even Dallas was really lucky to get out of the first round against Portland, some stunningly unfair officiating handed them game 1, 19-2 FTs for Dallas in the fourth quarter despite Portland dominating points in the paint. if that game is called fairly, there’s a very good chance Dallas is out in the first round.)

Exactly! Dallas, the eventual champion, almost lost in the first round. Therefore, there is no such thing as “destined to lose.” Some teams get lucky, some teams don’t. If you’re good enough to get to the Conference Finals, you’re good enough to win the Finals. You just need luck to go your way. You just need two of your four best players not to get suspended for leaving the bench when a player on the other team clotheslines your best player. You just need your #3 scorer not to get clotheslined and taken out just in time for the Conference Finals. You just need Kevin Garnett not to get hurt right before the playoffs (Boston in 200…9?). You just need the refs not to give the seventh game of the Conference Finals to the other team (like the Kings in 200…2?).

Obviously it is not “just getting to the playoffs” – but if you’re one of the best teams in the Conference going into the Playoffs – you have a real chance to win it all. If you’re not, then yeah, just making the playoffs is not enough.

Brian Cronin (@Brian_Cronin):
I also call BS on the “destined to lose” argument for Denver and Phoenix. If you’re good enough to make the Conference Finals, you’re good enough to win. Think about Dallas last year. They got all the same “destined to lose” stuff…and then they didn’t.

I call BS on your BS, it’s a question of percentages. you could extend the same argument to say “If you’re good enough to make the playoffs, you’re good enough to win the title”, when probably 10-12 of the teams that make the playoffs have a close to zero chance of winning it all. yes, the 2011 Mavericks managed to win three straight series where they were underdogs, but besides them and the 2004 Pistons, that virtually never happens in the NBA.

(and even Dallas was really lucky to get out of the first round against Portland, some stunningly unfair officiating handed them game 1, 19-2 FTs for Dallas in the fourth quarter despite Portland dominating points in the paint. if that game is called fairly, there’s a very good chance Dallas is out in the first round.)

Maybe you could get Stephen Curry.

Maybe you could get Jeff Teague and Josh Smith.

I play SSOL ball with this team up until the trade deadline. If I can find a good offer for Amaré, I take it. If not, I move Chandler for the best stretch four I can get. If Howard has been traded by then, maybe we could get Ryan Anderson and contracts for Chandler.

Now you have a team that is built to play around Amaré. He will put up numbers, and the Knicks will be a decent team.

Play like this through the end of the season. Amaré will be much better. THEN you trade Amaré for more young assets. Between those three trades, the Knicks could get a few solid picks in the next few drafts (at least enough to make up for the ones they gave away). They would look a bit like the 2010 Knicks without Eddy Curry and Jared Jeffries’ bad contracts. That’d actually have a shot of being a very good team 2-3 years down the line.

Eternal OptiKnist:
Well, we didn’t win…but did anyone expect a win?Few thoughts: 1) are the Heat that good in transition defense, or do we just not know how to run the fast break? 2) Chris Bosh looks like a raptor 3) Despite the dunk-a-thon, we held them to 5 pts below their average and almost 300 basis points below their FG%…not too shabby 4) Eddy Curry’s number was called, but he was on Collins street eating a Cuban sandwich 5) Turnovers killed us 6) They shut STAT down and made the rest of the team beat them… i dont put too much on STAT..he tried to 1-on-1 a few times with poor results so he stopped..which is a good thing.

For all you people that want D’antoni gone, this team is not even close to quitting.I don’t care what the sports cliches say to the contrary, this was a moral victory; but i get it…we do need wins.Melo should have sat down two weeks ago.We would have either proved the ball-movement theory by winning or we could have had an excuse for all the losing; in either case he would have been getting healthy while we played crappy teams.Unfortunately that didn’t happen and we’re getting killed in the papers and the pressure is mounting which is NOT GOOD for a team already lacking confidence.A healthy Melo would have helped tonight.

i totally agree with you check out my blog which i pretty much said the same thing but added some helpful hints for the coaching staff

http://my.nba.com/go/thread/view/80733/28879627/What_do_you_think_the_Knicks_need_to_do_with_current_roster_and_coaches.