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

Undo the Melo Trade- what would our record be right now?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum


Author Poll
franco12
Posts: 14069
Joined: 2/19/2004
Member: #599
USA
The Knicks are 7 & 12 with Melo. If we could travel back in time and undo the melo trade, what would the old Knick's record be through those same 19 games?
Worse - 6 & 13 or worse
About the same - 7 or 8 wins - we struggled before, and that wouldn't change
About the same - 7 or 8 wins - but we would have seen Defense and effort and things would be more positive
Better - 9-10 wins, still 500, but not struggling and definitely looking up
11+ wins - I hate the trade that much!
View Results


Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
franco12
Posts: 34069
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/19/2004
Member: #599
USA
3/28/2011  12:51 PM
In writing this poll, I realized our record with the old group probably would not be that dramatically different - these teams have given us problems (Orlando, Cavs), but things would be better in terms of balance & depth - and there would have been no drama still about the trade.
AUTOADVERT
AnubisADL
Posts: 27382
Alba Posts: 13
Joined: 6/29/2009
Member: #2771
USA
3/28/2011  1:11 PM
Pretty sure we'd be worse. Amare is worn out and looking very pedestrian.
NY Knicks - Retirement home for players and GMs
JrZyHuStLa
Posts: 25677
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/5/2007
Member: #1241
3/28/2011  1:13 PM
AnubisADL wrote:Pretty sure we'd be worse. Amare is worn out and looking very pedestrian.

I agree. Maybe just a game or two better because of chemistry. But the previous squad was more than capable of a big losing streak like this one.
Nalod
Posts: 71159
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
3/28/2011  1:13 PM
Lift the uncertainty of trade rumors and I think the team Plays better down the stretch.

How much? Dunno.......

This is about the long term. Second guessing gonna take a few years.
Juice
Posts: 21742
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2009
Member: #2968
3/28/2011  1:14 PM
Probably .500 maybe 1 gm or 2 above. Still not spectacular but much better than where we are.

We'd have bigs/defenders and depth to play in Gallo/Moz/Chandler
JrZyHuStLa
Posts: 25677
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/5/2007
Member: #1241
3/28/2011  1:15 PM
Juice wrote:Probably .500 maybe 1 gm or 2 above. Still not spectacular but much better than where we are.

We'd have bigs/defenders and depth to play in Gallo/Moz/Chandler

And we'd lose in the first round just like the post Melo trade.
AnubisADL
Posts: 27382
Alba Posts: 13
Joined: 6/29/2009
Member: #2771
USA
3/28/2011  1:17 PM
Juice wrote:Probably .500 maybe 1 gm or 2 above. Still not spectacular but much better than where we are.

We'd have bigs/defenders and depth to play in Gallo/Moz/Chandler

Gallo/Moz/Chandler werent stopping anyone man. Teams were running layup drills on us ALL season.

NY Knicks - Retirement home for players and GMs
Juice
Posts: 21742
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2009
Member: #2968
3/28/2011  1:18 PM
JrZyHuStLa wrote:
Juice wrote:Probably .500 maybe 1 gm or 2 above. Still not spectacular but much better than where we are.

We'd have bigs/defenders and depth to play in Gallo/Moz/Chandler

And we'd lose in the first round just like the post Melo trade.

True....then we'd have cap space and picks(assets) to make trades during the draft and/or Free Agency to improve. Now all we have is the MLE until we figure out the new CBA and what we're going to do with Billups
JrZyHuStLa
Posts: 25677
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/5/2007
Member: #1241
3/28/2011  1:19 PM
Juice wrote:Probably .500 maybe 1 gm or 2 above. Still not spectacular but much better than where we are.

We'd have bigs/defenders and depth to play in Gallo/Moz/Chandler

We didn't give away defensive stoppers, nor did we give up a big that was intimidating opposing players.

We gave up role players, deal with it.
Juice
Posts: 21742
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2009
Member: #2968
3/28/2011  1:23 PM
AnubisADL wrote:
Juice wrote:Probably .500 maybe 1 gm or 2 above. Still not spectacular but much better than where we are.

We'd have bigs/defenders and depth to play in Gallo/Moz/Chandler

Gallo/Moz/Chandler werent stopping anyone man. Teams were running layup drills on us ALL season.

We probably still lose to Bucks/Cavs but we get Charlotte/Pacers/Detroit 2 or 3 of these 4 games.

I know it's tough to deal Anibus but you're a tough guy you'll get through this win or lose.
crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
3/28/2011  1:29 PM
we'd be 83-0. worst trade ever!
¿ △ ?
crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
3/28/2011  1:33 PM
realistically, I think we'd have gone about 11-7 and Amar'e would still be looking worn out and we'd probably be heading towards a first round exit.

the real test with this trade will be to see if Walsh (and lordy i hope it's walsh) can build up the team around Melo and Amar'e over the next two years and we can do something substantially better with the team than we could have with the old group of guys.

the naysayers will say there are no assets to make the team better, but they have a draft pick this summer, we're not sure what the cap is and whether there will be a mid-level exception, we have flexibility with billups and walsh has been good at maximizing bought first rounders, second round picks and free agents - see Toney Douglas, Mozgov, Fields, Shawne Williams, etc. all of which we can still add to the team this summer.

i want to see Jerome Jordan in summer league.

¿ △ ?
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
3/28/2011  2:06 PM    LAST EDITED: 3/28/2011  2:06 PM
JrZyHuStLa wrote:
Juice wrote:Probably .500 maybe 1 gm or 2 above. Still not spectacular but much better than where we are.

We'd have bigs/defenders and depth to play in Gallo/Moz/Chandler

And we'd lose in the first round just like the post Melo trade.


The only reason they're making the playoffs is the play of the pre-Melo Knicks. 7-12 doesn't project anywhere near playoff territory. The Melo-Knicks have played at lottery team level.
orangeblobman
Posts: 27269
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/1/2009
Member: #2539
Nauru
3/28/2011  2:10 PM
It would be better than this.
WE AIN'T NOWHERE WITH THIS BUM CHOKER IN CARMELO. GIVE ME STARKS'S 2-21 ANY DAY OVER THIS LACKLUSTER CLUSTEREFF.
JrZyHuStLa
Posts: 25677
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/5/2007
Member: #1241
3/28/2011  2:29 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
JrZyHuStLa wrote:
Juice wrote:Probably .500 maybe 1 gm or 2 above. Still not spectacular but much better than where we are.

We'd have bigs/defenders and depth to play in Gallo/Moz/Chandler

And we'd lose in the first round just like the post Melo trade.


The only reason they're making the playoffs is the play of the pre-Melo Knicks.

...Or just the pre-melo Amar'e.
orangeblobman
Posts: 27269
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/1/2009
Member: #2539
Nauru
3/28/2011  2:29 PM
JrZyHuStLa wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
JrZyHuStLa wrote:
Juice wrote:Probably .500 maybe 1 gm or 2 above. Still not spectacular but much better than where we are.

We'd have bigs/defenders and depth to play in Gallo/Moz/Chandler

And we'd lose in the first round just like the post Melo trade.


The only reason they're making the playoffs is the play of the pre-Melo Knicks.

...Or just the pre-melo Amar'e.

yea, because Amar'e played 1 on 5 for 54 games.

WE AIN'T NOWHERE WITH THIS BUM CHOKER IN CARMELO. GIVE ME STARKS'S 2-21 ANY DAY OVER THIS LACKLUSTER CLUSTEREFF.
JrZyHuStLa
Posts: 25677
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/5/2007
Member: #1241
3/28/2011  2:31 PM
orangeblobman wrote:
JrZyHuStLa wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
JrZyHuStLa wrote:
Juice wrote:Probably .500 maybe 1 gm or 2 above. Still not spectacular but much better than where we are.

We'd have bigs/defenders and depth to play in Gallo/Moz/Chandler

And we'd lose in the first round just like the post Melo trade.


The only reason they're making the playoffs is the play of the pre-Melo Knicks.

...Or just the pre-melo Amar'e.

yea, because Amar'e played 1 on 5 for 54 games.

You're starting to get it.
MSG3
Posts: 22788
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/2/2009
Member: #2476
USA
3/28/2011  2:33 PM
I voted we'd have a better record and wouldn't be struggling as much, but we still wouldn't be a left contender this year or next year.
markvmc
Posts: 21995
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/6/2008
Member: #1797
3/28/2011  3:14 PM
Pre trade team had just come through the roughest part of the season's schedule (Jan/Feb) at 2 games over .500. With one or two exceptions, they were beating the teams they were supposed to beat (witness the "who have they beaten?" dismissive comments during their best stretch). With the relatively easy schedule we've had since then, there's no reason to think they would have been less than .500 over those 19 games.

As for how tired Amare looks, in part that's because he's having to work harder for his shots now that our spacing isn't what it was, and in part because losing does that to a player. Give him a couple of wins and there'd be more of a spring in his step.
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
3/28/2011  3:21 PM
Sorry that this happened. This is part Dantoni s fault for somehow not getting Mosgov and randolph into a scheme. He moved Randolph into the 3 pt corner and started Mosgov to start the season. using Randolph and Mosgov wisley wouldve saved Amare from breaking downa dn prevernetd this God-awful disaster trade.


for anyone to sit here with a straight face and say the club we have now is better or superior to the situation we had--is insane--literally f insane. You're just trying to justify a poor decision that many had thought was the ticket.

RIP Crushalot😞
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Undo the Melo Trade- what would our record be right now?
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