D'Antoni's philosophy is to "spread the floor" with shooters, making it much more difficult for the defense to rotate to a shooter. Melo scoring efficiency this year is .438 with his weakness being 3 point shooting (.333 this year and a career of .309). Chandler is scoring at .462, Gallinari at .398 and Fields at .521. It doesn't seem likely that having Melo on the floor will improve on our shooting efficiency. I don't understand what the advantage is for us to spend a great deal more money to concentrate our scoring between Felton, Amare and Carmelo, particularly because it appears it will be at the expense of our defense, and also likely at the expense of our unselfish passing? We have 5 genuine outside scoring options on the floor all of whom are also excellent at driving the ball to the basket as well.

So please tell me again, why is it that we need Melo? We definitely needed the confidence of having Amare and Felton on the floor. I changed our team's swagger. But I can't convince myself that adding Melo will improve our team's confidence once again. Dramatically decreasing shooting attempts for the other two starters and the bench is not positive its a negative imo. I like having genuine scoring threats spread all around the floor that can drive, shoot both 2's and 3's efficiently and defend agressively.

It will be really interesting when our schedule starts matching us up with teams with winning records... .

Melo is a great scorer and he's playing a bit off his best years right now. I wouldn't push him away, but I'd definitely look to fit more pieces around him. It looks like Chandler is starting to develop into a more consistent/reliable second scorer and Gallo should keep coming along. Felton has also been much more of a scorer than most anticipated.

fishmike wrote:...Melo is a star, and many simply beleive that stars = playoff wins so you do whatever it takes. I thought Detroit proved you could do it with quality, size and depth, which considering our youth is what I favor right now.

Word to the wise Monger Mike. You always keep it real, which I appreciate. And your logic is quite compelling. With our current 10 of 11 streak, incl. numerous road wins and victories in close games, there is MUCH evidence that the cost of adding Melo via a trade Denver would like is not going to be a net benefit for the Knicks. You don't break up a team that is pwning the league.

Let's see how we do against elite teams before we take away any of our core. Melo will be available at the deadline as well as next summer, b/c he can see that the Knicks are a bonafide playoff CONTENDER, not just an 8th seed.

Moonangie wrote:

fishmike wrote:...Melo is a star, and many simply beleive that stars = playoff wins so you do whatever it takes. I thought Detroit proved you could do it with quality, size and depth, which considering our youth is what I favor right now.

Word to the wise Monger Mike. You always keep it real, which I appreciate. And your logic is quite compelling. With our current 10 of 11 streak, incl. numerous road wins and victories in close games, there is MUCH evidence that the cost of adding Melo via a trade Denver would like is not going to be a net benefit for the Knicks. You don't break up a team that is pwning the league.

Let's see how we do against elite teams before we take away any of our core. Melo will be available at the deadline as well as next summer, b/c he can see that the Knicks are a bonafide playoff CONTENDER, not just an 8th seed.

The average age of the 11 guys who have gotten any burn this year is 24 years old.

Even after the slow start we on pace to win 48 games right now.

I'm going into Walsh mode... which is super patient.

If there is a chance to get a bigtime player w/ Curry's expiring in a firesale of course you look at that, but I'm not *looking* to do anything. My #1 right now is to continue building chemistry and winning games, followed by getting certain guys who I think are keys to the future of the franchise involved. I'm think Mosgov and AR.

scoshin wrote:

fishmike wrote:because those #s dont really describe what happens in a game. They might describe what happens in a season, or in 30 games but not one. What Melo does is make it even more difficult to defend and matchup with the Knicks. Also the thought is that when you have a 2 headed monster like Amare/Melo it makes it much easier for the other guys to exploit and fill a role (we are seeing that even now w/ Amare).

Think about how much better Chandler/Gallo/Fields look w/ Amare and Felton on the floor. The "thought" is that with Melo it gets even easier.

What your seeing during this win streak is 1)Amare's dominance and 2) the Knicks depth. Melo would be an upgrade at SF. That is not up for debate. The debate is would Melo make us better considering the cost. If we give up 3 rotation guys, say Gallo/Chandler/Fields (+Curry's contract) for say Melo and Balkman (cap relief) how much better are we? I think thats a reasonable trade if you Denver, but if your the Knicks your depth is gone and your bench is very weak.

Melo is a star, and many simply beleive that stars = playoff wins so you do whatever it takes. I thought Detroit proved you could do it with quality, size and depth, which considering our youth is what I favor right now.

If Denver's asking for this much then of course we say no deal. I don't see how they would think they can get 3 of our starters though for Melo...that's absolutely absurd, and Denver doesn't have the leverage in this situation since we actually have the cap space to just sign Melo outright in the offseason.

I said it before, but I'd do any Melo deal where we only give up one of Gallo or Chandler or Fields. They get their pick of which starter they want, but they can't have 3, or even 2. Preferably, they choose Gallo since Gallo wouldn't really fit on a team with Melo.

Add in AR + TD, and maybe even Mozgov, and throw in Golden State's 2nd rounders or our future 2014 1st and I think it's a perfectly reasonable deal. If we can swap AR for a 1st rounder still, we could definitely get them to bite. I think the real holdup is that Denver doesn't want to deal him to us out of spite...and not because we can't form a suitable package.

i like the scoshin or's deal. fishmike's deal is nightmarish i'd rather play a game with jigsaw then agree to that deal.

When MDA came here Jamaal was shooting his best pct from the field (in his career) right before he was traded. This system is a offensive players dream, Larry Brown said it himself when he was quoted saying "Felton (Currently shooting career highs in fg% and 3pt fg%) may think he died an gone to Hevan"..You can't deny it, he's been very good.

When you have such a dominate player down low who can beat you from inside out, and he trust his surrounding cast..the game is easy as hell for those players.

Were not going to stop anybody consistantly unless we slow down the game, that ain't happening under MDA, you make key stops, play strong d for stretches, and dear teams to outscore you, especially if were hot.

fishmike wrote:

scoshin wrote:

fishmike wrote:because those #s dont really describe what happens in a game. They might describe what happens in a season, or in 30 games but not one. What Melo does is make it even more difficult to defend and matchup with the Knicks. Also the thought is that when you have a 2 headed monster like Amare/Melo it makes it much easier for the other guys to exploit and fill a role (we are seeing that even now w/ Amare).

Think about how much better Chandler/Gallo/Fields look w/ Amare and Felton on the floor. The "thought" is that with Melo it gets even easier.

What your seeing during this win streak is 1)Amare's dominance and 2) the Knicks depth. Melo would be an upgrade at SF. That is not up for debate. The debate is would Melo make us better considering the cost. If we give up 3 rotation guys, say Gallo/Chandler/Fields (+Curry's contract) for say Melo and Balkman (cap relief) how much better are we? I think thats a reasonable trade if you Denver, but if your the Knicks your depth is gone and your bench is very weak.

Melo is a star, and many simply beleive that stars = playoff wins so you do whatever it takes. I thought Detroit proved you could do it with quality, size and depth, which considering our youth is what I favor right now.

If Denver's asking for this much then of course we say no deal. I don't see how they would think they can get 3 of our starters though for Melo...that's absolutely absurd, and Denver doesn't have the leverage in this situation since we actually have the cap space to just sign Melo outright in the offseason.

I said it before, but I'd do any Melo deal where we only give up one of Gallo or Chandler or Fields. They get their pick of which starter they want, but they can't have 3, or even 2. Preferably, they choose Gallo since Gallo wouldn't really fit on a team with Melo.

Add in AR + TD, and maybe even Mozgov, and throw in Golden State's 2nd rounders or our future 2014 1st and I think it's a perfectly reasonable deal. If we can swap AR for a 1st rounder still, we could definitely get them to bite. I think the real holdup is that Denver doesn't want to deal him to us out of spite...and not because we can't form a suitable package.

its not absurd, because Denver thinks Melo is a top 10 player and a franchise guy, as do several posters around here. The thought is get Melo no matter what the cost, then you just fill in the pieces around Amare/Melo/Felton and your winning 55+ games for the next 5 years. That may be true... all of it. Who knows. I just favor a different way. Plus I simply like our players

Show me one franchise-level trade where a team gave up 3 producing starters (on a winning team no less) for that one player. Vince Carter didn't command this much. Neither did Pau. Or even KG. Moreover, we actually have leverage over Denver, so yes, it would be absurd if Denver really thinks they can command that much value in a Melo trade. Even NJ isn't willing to give up that much (Favors + a 1st is worse than a Gallo/Chandler/Fields package), and that team is absolutely desperate to get Melo, and knows they can't really wait to FA.

that would be to good to be true

I think PHX was always one player short of having a wing that can create. Nash was great and Amare early did not have that outside shot. Shawn marion was streaky.

Im on the fence about Melo and prefer we get him as free agent but while on paper he does not make us better I think its WHEN he can create that matters. He comes here his scoring avg may drop but his assists should go up.

We are seeing why MDA is a players coach. Just need the right players. We getting there.

fishmike wrote:

scoshin wrote:

fishmike wrote:

scoshin wrote:

fishmike wrote:because those #s dont really describe what happens in a game. They might describe what happens in a season, or in 30 games but not one. What Melo does is make it even more difficult to defend and matchup with the Knicks. Also the thought is that when you have a 2 headed monster like Amare/Melo it makes it much easier for the other guys to exploit and fill a role (we are seeing that even now w/ Amare).

Think about how much better Chandler/Gallo/Fields look w/ Amare and Felton on the floor. The "thought" is that with Melo it gets even easier.

What your seeing during this win streak is 1)Amare's dominance and 2) the Knicks depth. Melo would be an upgrade at SF. That is not up for debate. The debate is would Melo make us better considering the cost. If we give up 3 rotation guys, say Gallo/Chandler/Fields (+Curry's contract) for say Melo and Balkman (cap relief) how much better are we? I think thats a reasonable trade if you Denver, but if your the Knicks your depth is gone and your bench is very weak.

Melo is a star, and many simply beleive that stars = playoff wins so you do whatever it takes. I thought Detroit proved you could do it with quality, size and depth, which considering our youth is what I favor right now.

If Denver's asking for this much then of course we say no deal. I don't see how they would think they can get 3 of our starters though for Melo...that's absolutely absurd, and Denver doesn't have the leverage in this situation since we actually have the cap space to just sign Melo outright in the offseason.

I said it before, but I'd do any Melo deal where we only give up one of Gallo or Chandler or Fields. They get their pick of which starter they want, but they can't have 3, or even 2. Preferably, they choose Gallo since Gallo wouldn't really fit on a team with Melo.

Add in AR + TD, and maybe even Mozgov, and throw in Golden State's 2nd rounders or our future 2014 1st and I think it's a perfectly reasonable deal. If we can swap AR for a 1st rounder still, we could definitely get them to bite. I think the real holdup is that Denver doesn't want to deal him to us out of spite...and not because we can't form a suitable package.

its not absurd, because Denver thinks Melo is a top 10 player and a franchise guy, as do several posters around here. The thought is get Melo no matter what the cost, then you just fill in the pieces around Amare/Melo/Felton and your winning 55+ games for the next 5 years. That may be true... all of it. Who knows. I just favor a different way. Plus I simply like our players

Show me one franchise-level trade where a team gave up 3 producing starters (on a winning team no less) for that one player. Vince Carter didn't command this much. Neither did Pau. Or even KG. Moreover, we actually have leverage over Denver, so yes, it would be absurd if Denver really thinks they can command that much value in a Melo trade. Even NJ isn't willing to give up that much (Favors + a 1st is worse than a Gallo/Chandler/Fields package), and that team is absolutely desperate to get Melo, and knows they can't really wait to FA.

Heat traded Butler/Odom/Grant + picks for Shaq

Butler/Odom, sure, but Grant actually had negative value for the Heat since he was such a large non-expiring contract. It's as if Eddy Curry had 2-3 years left instead of one...we'd have to give up more to get Denver to swallow his contract if that were the case.