[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

I need an example...please
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
8/31/2005  2:47 PM
My memory is rusty, but fishy and others keep talking about what we could do if we had cap room. All I can think of is the Clippers and Nuggets and Hawks. But they keep reminding me about shaq and the lakers.

So, I have a question:

Since the Lakers signed shaq (two collective bargain's and a strike shortened year ago), can you name one successfull scenario where a team with cap room made it TO the dance after signing a bonafide Free Agent not in a Sign and Trade?

I can't think of any. Can you?
all kool aid all the time.
AUTOADVERT
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
8/31/2005  2:52 PM
10 views and not one example...hmmm, where's fish and Isles when we need them.

Please lock this stupid thread.

[Edited by - rvhoss on 08-31-2005 2:59 PM]
all kool aid all the time.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
8/31/2005  3:17 PM
Posted by rvhoss:

10 views and not one example...hmmm, where's fish and Isles when we need them.

Please lock this stupid thread.

[Edited by - rvhoss on 08-31-2005 2:59 PM]
Don't lock it; it's actually a great question and a great thread. A close examination of whether getting under the cap really does always vs. usually vs rarely vs never pay off and land teams franchise players is crucial for anyone claiming we need to get under the cap if our goal is to win the championship. Based on historical evidence, I would fall in the camp that claims that getting under the cap *very rarely but occasionally* leads to obtaining a franchise player.

oohah
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/7/2005
Member: #887
8/31/2005  3:17 PM
rvhoss, are you talking about since they SIGNED Shaq or since they WON THEIR FIRST TITLE? There haven't been too many titles since the latter.

Anyway, the Bulls signed Rodman and that put them over the top. (I know, Shaq was still in Orlando.) How about this one:Spurs sign Glenn Robinson in 04/05 and they win the title. See!

oohah

Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
8/31/2005  3:20 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by rvhoss:

10 views and not one example...hmmm, where's fish and Isles when we need them.

Please lock this stupid thread.

[Edited by - rvhoss on 08-31-2005 2:59 PM]
Don't lock it; it's actually a great question and a great thread. A close examination of whether getting under the cap really does always vs. usually vs rarely vs never pay off and land teams franchise players is crucial for anyone claiming we need to get under the cap if our goal is to win the championship. Based on historical evidence, I would fall in the camp that claims that getting under the cap *very rarely but occasionally* leads to obtaining a franchise player.

Well I didn't see that this was being discussed in several other threads. If you want to lock it I won't object
toodarkmark
Posts: 21145
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/2/2004
Member: #515
USA
8/31/2005  3:38 PM
Would you consider Steve Nash such a signing? I mean he did change that team around and make them a contender.

But Im still not a fan of alot of cap space. It's nice to get under, but you still need stars on your roster and the cap space should be used to sign that one extra player.
I don't care what people think. People are stupid. - Charles Barkley
Nalod
Posts: 71898
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
8/31/2005  3:45 PM
Pistons went to finals after Signing Dice.

They were able to get Sheed and resign him. they had flex!

He was a key ROLE player, but never the less was part of the rotation.

If you look at many of the successful teams the last few years, most are near or below the cap line.

Maybe its not just about having space, but cap FLEX the is very important. And teams at or near it have it.
MS
Posts: 27063
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
8/31/2005  4:00 PM
Well NY is an exception to the rule, many players don't have the balls to really be tested and come to the toughest market on earth and be under the microscope.

But if your a free agent and your looking at living in cities like Atlanta, Utah, or playing for an owner like Donald Sterling than why bother. Frankly if the right situation arose and there was a star on a team that had cap room we wouldn't be having this discussion....

Give Charlotee one more year in the lottery I will bet someone gives singing with them serious consideration....
fishmike
Posts: 53902
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
8/31/2005  4:08 PM
How many times and how many threads do I have to answer this? Every team thats won a title has had cap space.

Lakers had Shaq
Spurs used cap space to sign Nesterovich and Ginobili
Detroit had cap space 2 years in a row. They opted to use it to resign Sheed rather than pursue other FAs. They still had the OPTION

Those are the teams that won the last 7 titles. Good enough?

Wasnt last year's MVP signed using cap space? As was Q?

Lots of good players have also moved around Bobby Simmons, Hughes, KMart, JJ, Rich named a bunch in another thread. Maybe you got tired of reading the truth.

Also lets clear something up right now. I have never said cap space should be a goal, only an option. THATS what the elite teams have done, given themselves options. THATS what teams with great management do.

Great thread... maybe this will help people understand how great teams leave their options open and manage the cap.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
8/31/2005  4:19 PM
all you need to know is that the method the Knicks have been using for the past 30 years hasn't won us any championships (though we got close in the mid 90's due to actually having a true franchise C in his prime)...a quick glance over the Knick teams of the past 6 years will tell you all you need to know about what being capped out & having very limited options & inept management will bring you.

when do fans wake up & understand there needs to be a change in the overall philosophy if you want to break out of the endless cycle?...another 30 years of no championships oughta do it i reckon...i hope i'm still alive by then.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
8/31/2005  7:36 PM
so, does this mean we will be under the cap in 3 to 4 years?


Beyotches!

[Edited by - rvhoss on 08-31-2005 7:37 PM]
all kool aid all the time.
fishmike
Posts: 53902
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
8/31/2005  9:51 PM
dude your a blockhead. That $48mm is for 5 players. No Sweets, Frye, Nate or Lee.

However if you dumped JEROME JAMES AND MALIK ROSE you would be under the cap.

thanks for playing
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Rich
Posts: 27410
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 12/30/2003
Member: #511
USA
8/31/2005  9:57 PM
Teams that seek to accumulate cap room tend to have worse records that enable them to get top draft picks.

But for Detroit last season, NBA championships have been dominated over the last 10+ years by Jordan, Duncan, and Shaq. Of those three, Jordan and Duncan were picked at or near the top of the draft; Shaq was signed as a free agent.

Consequently, a strategy to gain top draft picks and/or accumulating cap room seems to work.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
8/31/2005  10:18 PM
Posted by fishmike:

dude your a blockhead. That $48mm is for 5 players. No Sweets, Frye, Nate or Lee.

However if you dumped JEROME JAMES AND MALIK ROSE you would be under the cap.

thanks for playing
"Blockhead?" did you learn that on Sesame Street today? Did Big Bird teach you everything you know about basketball? That would explain a lot

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 08-31-2005 10:25 PM]
knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
8/31/2005  10:25 PM
Or just trade away future for right now, something we are use to doing.
ES
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
8/31/2005  10:28 PM
Posted by rvhoss:

so, does this mean we will be under the cap in 3 to 4 years?


Beyotches!

[Edited by - rvhoss on 08-31-2005 7:37 PM]


lol...even if the Knicks refused the options on those 4 players w/options in '07/'08 & then signed 10 players at the league minimum to fill the rest of the roster spots, they still wouldn't be under the cap until '09/'10...but what's another year, right? i mean we can always sign another crap player for the full MLE next year & keep the cycle going...who cares about contending for a championship when it's so much fun to root for also ran teams year after year?
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
8/31/2005  10:28 PM
Posted by knicks1248:

Or just trade away future for right now, something we are use to doing.
Does getting guys like Ariza, Sweetney, Q, Jamal, Frye, & Nate qualify as trading away the future for right now or do those players not count?
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
8/31/2005  10:29 PM
Posted by TMS:
Posted by rvhoss:

so, does this mean we will be under the cap in 3 to 4 years?


Beyotches!

[Edited by - rvhoss on 08-31-2005 7:37 PM]


lol...even if the Knicks refused the options on those 4 players w/options in '07/'08 & then signed 10 players at the league minimum to fill the rest of the roster spots, they still wouldn't be under the cap until '09/'10...but what's another year, right? i mean we can always sign another crap player for the full MLE next year & keep the cycle going...who cares about contending for a championship when it's so much fun to root for also ran teams year after year?
Or you could get more players like Marbury through trades who are probably better than any FA you'll sign
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
8/31/2005  10:39 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by TMS:

lol...even if the Knicks refused the options on those 4 players w/options in '07/'08 & then signed 10 players at the league minimum to fill the rest of the roster spots, they still wouldn't be under the cap until '09/'10...but what's another year, right? i mean we can always sign another crap player for the full MLE next year & keep the cycle going...who cares about contending for a championship when it's so much fun to root for also ran teams year after year?
Or you could get more players like Marbury through trades who are probably better than any FA you'll sign

i have no problem with that...i've already stated from the beginning that i was in favor of the Marbury trade...it's when Isiah signs scrubs like Jerome James to 5 year $30 million dollar deals that pisses me off to no end, because he's just repeating the same old cycle of bringing in low talent scrubs like Shandon Anderson, Travis Knight, Howard Eisley, an overweight Clarence Weatherspoon or an old washed up Vin Baker to eat up cap space instead of trying to squeeze out maximum value out of the MLE...it's as if the Knicks always choose to use the MLE just for the sake of using it because they feel compelled to do SOMETHING in the offseason, rather than being smart & considering the longterm ramifications of glutting your roster w/overpaid mediocre talent & leaving no longterm flexibility to sign bigname free agents when they become available...this is the endless cycle that i'm talking about...at a certain point you have to stop the madness & think about the longterm & the ultimate goal of winning a championship.

After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
8/31/2005  10:42 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by knicks1248:

Or just trade away future for right now, something we are use to doing.
Does getting guys like Ariza, Sweetney, Q, Jamal, Frye, & Nate qualify as trading away the future for right now or do those players not count?

If your trading Q, sweets, nate, and a #1 for a Kobe/stodimare/kg /dirk type player .





ES
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
I need an example...please
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy