Yes I do until proven wrong. They've been consistently wrong for almost 10 years while having the biggest payroll Y-Y.

What the heck has this organization done right is the better question.

What's the difference in a 5 and 6 year contract--?
If I offered you 5 years 80mm or 6 years 121mm--what would you take?
Toronto Clev and Miami are never ever ever going to deal with us--think about it--ludicrous.

Im not saying boo hoo the Knicks struck out to something that I never thought was happening--I just hope they have sense to keep David Lee and build a team with balance--get a C/ This is a really scrwd up team right now and the prize player--Gallinari regressing game by game. I think he has the wrong coach as do the Knicks.

Don't signal me out--put your anger into the people who thought Jordan Hill was Amare Stoudemire 2.0 and Gallinari the next Bird.

what is the record the last 9 years again?

Go take some Ativan and chill by the way

PS it would be classic if D Lee took off and the Knicks were left high and dry signing Drew Gooden--now that would be entertaining. Hopefully Dolan will sell the team to someone who knows what they are doing.

WindsorPl wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:
2) Sign and trade. From a pure business standpoint, each of the Cavs, Raps and Heat are better off if they agreed to sign and trade their players in exchange for a Knick, a draft pick, etc... First, that team would receive a trade exception that would allow them to fill the void left by losing their star. For teams like the Cavs and Raptors, that would be valuable because they are capped out either way. Second, they get some form of draft pick compensation. Third, they could get up to $3M cash. From an emotional standpoint, it makes no sense for these teams to do that. From a business standpoint, they are pretty stupid not to. But, they may choose not to. In any event, even with Bird Rights, these particular players may favor a 5 year contract...keep reading below:

Which Knick and which draft pick do you propose? Keep in mind that the roster next year is Chandler, Gallo, Douglas and Curry. Furthermore, Knicks have no first rd pick in 2010, 2012 and cannot trade their 2011 and 2013 picks either.

To esnure that we signed Lebron, I would give up anyone on the roster. Also, we have rookie contract rights to JR Giddens and Bill Walker. We also have 2 second round picks this year. We also have the sign and trade rights to David Lee, Tracy McGrady, Al Harrington, Sergio Rodriguez (RFA), and Chris Duhon.

Again, to capped out teams, just the ability to get the trade exception could be worthwhile.

The N.B.A. collective bargaining agreement gives the home team a financial advantage when it comes to re-signing its own players. The starting salary is the same no matter where he signs, but Cleveland can offer one more year (six instead of five) and bigger raises (10.5 percent instead of 8 percent). This translates to an offer of $125.5 million over six years, versus the $96.1 million over five years that other teams can offer.

fishmike wrote:

WindsorPl wrote:From Larry Coon: capolgist extraordinaire

The N.B.A. collective bargaining agreement gives the home team a financial advantage when it comes to re-signing its own players. The starting salary is the same no matter where he signs, but Cleveland can offer one more year (six instead of five) and bigger raises (10.5 percent instead of 8 percent). This translates to an offer of $125.5 million over six years, versus the $96.1 million over five years that other teams can offer.

I disagree with Briggs on few things, but he is right. When comparing the max deal each team can offer, Cleveland's max deal will be about 30 Mil more than the Knicks max deal. As to what the players themselves choose or sign and trade that is yet to be determined. Usually big trades require a couple of picks, all the knicks can offer is their 2014 and 2016 picks, making their proposal less attractive than other teams that own all their picks.

dude... read what you quoted. The home team can offer 6 years. The other team 5. Its not that the team can PAY you $33 more, its that they can offer you a longer contract. If He was 32 years old this would be a factor for sure. He's not. This isnt his last contract, and its almost a sure thing if he signed w/ Knick he would opt out after 3 and sign a longer extenstion.

And it doesnt matter. He going to go where he wants to go. I can only speak for myself, but I would rather take $96mm over 5 and live where I want to live then take $125 over 6 and be somewhere I dont want to be.

I don't know what you are talking about, the difference in actual money offered is 125.5 - 96.1 = 29.4. it is in what I quoted, maybe you need to read it again.
I would take the 125 over 6 and force a trade to where I want to go.

WindsorPl wrote:

fishmike wrote:

WindsorPl wrote:From Larry Coon: capolgist extraordinaire

The N.B.A. collective bargaining agreement gives the home team a financial advantage when it comes to re-signing its own players. The starting salary is the same no matter where he signs, but Cleveland can offer one more year (six instead of five) and bigger raises (10.5 percent instead of 8 percent). This translates to an offer of $125.5 million over six years, versus the $96.1 million over five years that other teams can offer.

I disagree with Briggs on few things, but he is right. When comparing the max deal each team can offer, Cleveland's max deal will be about 30 Mil more than the Knicks max deal. As to what the players themselves choose or sign and trade that is yet to be determined. Usually big trades require a couple of picks, all the knicks can offer is their 2014 and 2016 picks, making their proposal less attractive than other teams that own all their picks.

dude... read what you quoted. The home team can offer 6 years. The other team 5. Its not that the team can PAY you $33 more, its that they can offer you a longer contract. If He was 32 years old this would be a factor for sure. He's not. This isnt his last contract, and its almost a sure thing if he signed w/ Knick he would opt out after 3 and sign a longer extenstion.

And it doesnt matter. He going to go where he wants to go. I can only speak for myself, but I would rather take $96mm over 5 and live where I want to live then take $125 over 6 and be somewhere I dont want to be.

I don't know what you are talking about, the difference in actual money offered is 125.5 - 96.1 = 29.4. it is in what I quoted, maybe you need to read it again.
I would take the 125 over 6 and force a trade to where I want to go.

how is the difference in actual money 29.4 when you are comparing a 6 year contract vs a 5 year contract? you are comparing apples and oranges.

if lebron signs with a different team this offseason he's GOING to get an optout clause in his contract that will allow him the PLAYER OPTION to make that 5 year contract into a longer one. in fact, if he resigned with the cavs, i bet he'd have to wait until after his 4th year to extend his contract. he's going to get the extra year no matter what he does.

nyk4ever wrote:

WindsorPl wrote:

fishmike wrote:

WindsorPl wrote:From Larry Coon: capolgist extraordinaire

The N.B.A. collective bargaining agreement gives the home team a financial advantage when it comes to re-signing its own players. The starting salary is the same no matter where he signs, but Cleveland can offer one more year (six instead of five) and bigger raises (10.5 percent instead of 8 percent). This translates to an offer of $125.5 million over six years, versus the $96.1 million over five years that other teams can offer.

I disagree with Briggs on few things, but he is right. When comparing the max deal each team can offer, Cleveland's max deal will be about 30 Mil more than the Knicks max deal. As to what the players themselves choose or sign and trade that is yet to be determined. Usually big trades require a couple of picks, all the knicks can offer is their 2014 and 2016 picks, making their proposal less attractive than other teams that own all their picks.

dude... read what you quoted. The home team can offer 6 years. The other team 5. Its not that the team can PAY you $33 more, its that they can offer you a longer contract. If He was 32 years old this would be a factor for sure. He's not. This isnt his last contract, and its almost a sure thing if he signed w/ Knick he would opt out after 3 and sign a longer extenstion.

And it doesnt matter. He going to go where he wants to go. I can only speak for myself, but I would rather take $96mm over 5 and live where I want to live then take $125 over 6 and be somewhere I dont want to be.

I don't know what you are talking about, the difference in actual money offered is 125.5 - 96.1 = 29.4. it is in what I quoted, maybe you need to read it again.
I would take the 125 over 6 and force a trade to where I want to go.

how is the difference in actual money 29.4 when you are comparing a 6 year contract vs a 5 year contract? you are comparing apples and oranges.

if lebron signs with a different team this offseason he's GOING to get an optout clause in his contract that will allow him the PLAYER OPTION to make that 5 year contract into a longer one. in fact, if he resigned with the cavs, i bet he'd have to wait until after his 4th year to extend his contract. he's going to get the extra year no matter what he does.

Pretty simple, Cleveland can offer a max contract of 6 years. Knicks can offer a max contract of only 5 years. If you want to compare the max contracts the teams can give out, you have to compare 6 years to 5.

This is like saying to compare 2 cars, we need to take into consideration the speed limit. One can go up to 200 MPH and one can only go up to 180 MPH, but it does not matter, they both have to go at the speed limit.

Each of James, Wade and Bosh took 5 years instead of 6 last time they signed contracts.

didn't that have to do with the fact that the CBA was set to expire in 2011 so they all wanted to have opt outs in time to sign new contracts under the current CBA?

WindsorPl wrote:

nyk4ever wrote:

WindsorPl wrote:

fishmike wrote:

WindsorPl wrote:From Larry Coon: capolgist extraordinaire

The N.B.A. collective bargaining agreement gives the home team a financial advantage when it comes to re-signing its own players. The starting salary is the same no matter where he signs, but Cleveland can offer one more year (six instead of five) and bigger raises (10.5 percent instead of 8 percent). This translates to an offer of $125.5 million over six years, versus the $96.1 million over five years that other teams can offer.

I disagree with Briggs on few things, but he is right. When comparing the max deal each team can offer, Cleveland's max deal will be about 30 Mil more than the Knicks max deal. As to what the players themselves choose or sign and trade that is yet to be determined. Usually big trades require a couple of picks, all the knicks can offer is their 2014 and 2016 picks, making their proposal less attractive than other teams that own all their picks.

dude... read what you quoted. The home team can offer 6 years. The other team 5. Its not that the team can PAY you $33 more, its that they can offer you a longer contract. If He was 32 years old this would be a factor for sure. He's not. This isnt his last contract, and its almost a sure thing if he signed w/ Knick he would opt out after 3 and sign a longer extenstion.

And it doesnt matter. He going to go where he wants to go. I can only speak for myself, but I would rather take $96mm over 5 and live where I want to live then take $125 over 6 and be somewhere I dont want to be.

I don't know what you are talking about, the difference in actual money offered is 125.5 - 96.1 = 29.4. it is in what I quoted, maybe you need to read it again.
I would take the 125 over 6 and force a trade to where I want to go.

how is the difference in actual money 29.4 when you are comparing a 6 year contract vs a 5 year contract? you are comparing apples and oranges.

if lebron signs with a different team this offseason he's GOING to get an optout clause in his contract that will allow him the PLAYER OPTION to make that 5 year contract into a longer one. in fact, if he resigned with the cavs, i bet he'd have to wait until after his 4th year to extend his contract. he's going to get the extra year no matter what he does.

Pretty simple, Cleveland can offer a max contract of 6 years. Knicks can offer a max contract of only 5 years. If you want to compare the max contracts the teams can give out, you have to compare 6 years to 5.

This is like saying to compare 2 cars, we need to take into consideration the speed limit. One can go up to 200 MPH and one can only go up to 180 MPH, but it does not matter, they both have to go at the speed limit.

ok so how about this. everyone wants to make mention of the 5 year contract vs the 6 year and the money differential.

if lebron signs with the cavs, he has to wait until after his 4th year to opt-out and extend his contract.

if lebron signs with any other team, he can opt out after his 3rd year where he is a year younger and will get another large payday a year sooner.

WindsorPl wrote:

fishmike wrote:so Wade, Bosh and Melo took less money then right? Because their contracts only went 5 years right? Cause they are all not playing next year while Melo is. Oh wait... what kind of cars do they drive? The speed limit?

Nice try, it is not about what players took in the past, or what they may take in the future, like anybody knows. The argument is what is the maximum offers teams can give out under the CBA. Home team can offer about 29.4 MIL more in guaranteed money over the life of the max contract, simple.
This was repeated enough for reasonable people to understand it. For those who don't, they just refuse to understand it.

Home teams can offer a longer contract, and therefore a large amount of guarenteed money at the time the contract is signed.

True

Players are walking away from $30mm by not signing with the home team

False

You (and Briggs) seems resolute in this notion that a max player needs to take $30mm less to come here or leave their team and that is

FALSE

The arguement ISNT that hometeams can offer more in guarenteed money. Everyone agrees to that. The arguement is that players are walking away from $30mm which is FALSE.

the difference in money over 5 year of a max contract between 10.5% raises and 8% raises is less than $5mm.

THATS what a player is walking away from to come here.

THATS what Bosh, James, Wade or any other FA will LOSE in NBA SALARY if they leave their team to sign with the Knicks.

They will NOT LOSE $30mm.

They only thing you can quantify is if they got hurt and didnt play again they would lose that last year. Even that is a weak arguement because a) its very rare and b) a player can opt out after 3 years for a longer extension.