Yeah, we'd be getting the better talent but there are so many other factors that hold equal weight in trades. It's how a team like the Pacers could get Evan Turner for an expirer and how the Cavs were able to get Spencer Hawes for an expirer of their own. More importantly, chemistry, not talent, wins games, which is why the Cavs are out of the playoffs and the Bobcats and Hawks made it. So why do the Cavs make the deal?

They are desperate to build a winner to appease Kyrie and acquiring a guy like Tyson helps to further that end (especially when you consider the defensive lapses they have). With Loul Deng, Jarrett Jack and (potentially) Tyson, they'd have the opportunity to develop that culture, necessary to take the next step. When you also consider that Chandler is a superior player to Anderson Varejao (e.g. better pick and roll player, just as good a rebounder, a better help defender, a better man defender, has been healthier in recent years, etc.), the deal is a wash in their favor.

The Shumpert-Waiters aspect of the deal though is clearly a wash in our own favor. Even so, the Cavs benefit because Shumpert is a far better FIT at the 2 spot next to Irving. Considering how dynamic Kyrie is, all you need is a guy that can shoot the ball and defend his position, which Shumpert provides in spades. With some minor tinkering, I think we'd have the framework for a deal.

So either we get fleeced or we fleeced?

The only way Cleveland makes this move is if the hired GG as GM and he has a stroke.

mreinman wrote:Now you are talking

So either we get fleeced or we fleeced?

The only way Cleveland makes this move is if the hired GG as GM and he has a stroke.

At this point, it feels as though you're trolling. You didn't even try to attempt to elaborate on your position.

NardDogNation wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:Do it. I am a big waiters fan. Getting a good big for Tyson is a win. Tyson's game has declined, the number of games he plays seems to decrease annually and he trashes his team/coach when he plays poorly.

I like Varejao but I think that Chandler has more of an impact on the game. I don't know if we'd be improving with him necessarily but I do think that Anderson is the better fit because of his passing ability. We'd seriously need to beef up the defenders on this team though because he won't be able to protect the rim like Tyson could (assuming that Tyson isn't half-assing it).

As for Waiter's, I don't know what to make of him. I didn't like his game initially but have started to come around. I still question his ability to play within a team concept considering his M.O. To be honest, I'd be more interested in building up his trade value to package in a future deal. Do you prefer him more than THJr?

I think Waiters has more talent and upside. With Waiters the concern is attitude and maturity. You don't have those with hardaway

Seriously, thats the kind of trade that belongs in the past- we're hopefully going in a new, smarter direction.

yellowboy90 wrote:You either trade Tyson for picks or for a player that has a good history but had a bad year recently. I think the best move might be to assist other teams in a 3-way deal if it is possible.

No qualms with that plan? Would something like this qualify as "a player with a good history but bad year"?

NardDogNation wrote:

smackeddog wrote:The only thing I love more than when the Knicks trade for a player with a horrific injury past, is when we trade for selfish ball chuckers with bad attitudes that don't fit the rest of the roster. SIGN ME UP!

Seriously, thats the kind of trade that belongs in the past- we're hopefully going in a new, smarter direction.

That's the thing, in our predicament, we won't be able to improve the team around Melo outright without a gamble. Fortunately with this one, it is a low-risk/high reward. If it doesn't work out, then we go about our merry plans for 2015. If it does work out, we'd have an additional trade asset to improve the team in that offseason. I sincerely think that Waiters could go on a JR Smith like tear and have people think he's some kind of star, long enough to fool some desperate GM looking to make a splash (e.g. Bryan Colangelo and the Rudy Gay trade).

Melo, JR and Waiters cannot co-exist. Add Amar'e in there too, and you just have complaints about shots all season long. It's time to do a proper rebuild- Number 1 is establish a system first.

NardDogNation wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:You either trade Tyson for picks or for a player that has a good history but had a bad year recently. I think the best move might be to assist other teams in a 3-way deal if it is possible.

No qualms with that plan? Would something like this qualify as "a player with a good history but bad year"?

Not in my opinion. Waiters doesn't have any game history that would support that he is a good player and Verejao has okay history but is on the decline probably due to injury plus he is 31 so none of that is good.
Back to Waiters, who would you think he gets time over, Hardaway or Smith? Both players are better, imo, so to me he has not upgraded the roster.

Larry Sanders and Ilyasvo would be candidates although both are very high risk candidates. Larry Sanders had a very good defensive year and seemed like he was improving offensively(not great but improving) but regressed this year. The regression could be due to a lot of reasons like injury, system, team cohesion, or maybe he is not that good. Do you want to pay 11M for rim protection and rebounding with poor pffensive skills and suspect one on one D?
Ilyasova is hard to figure too because his value is related to his ability to hit the three which was very bad again. Even his numbers from 2 where down this year which hurts even worse because he was not able to supplement the low numbers with the 3 ball. He is a pretty good rebounder and defensive player so he does have added value there but to be a starter he needs the long ball. Is he another Bargs or was it just one bad year?

yellowboy90 wrote:Not in my opinion. Waiters doesn't have any game history that would support that he is a good player and Verejao has okay history but is on the decline probably due to injury plus he is 31 so none of that is good.
Back to Waiters, who would you think he gets time over, Hardaway or Smith? Both players are better, imo, so to me he has not upgraded the roster.

I agree with you. I'm moreso looking at the deal as a tool to open up means to another. But when it comes to upside, I tend to think that THJr is the better bet....which is why I'd look to trade him (possibly for a guy like Greg Monroe) while I develop Waiters' value in his stud. Blasphemy, I know but we don't have very many assets and need to maximize their value when possible (turning one productive player into 2, essentially).

yellowboy90 wrote:Larry Sanders and Ilyasvo would be candidates although both are very high risk candidates. Larry Sanders had a very good defensive year and seemed like he was improving offensively(not great but improving) but regressed this year. The regression could be due to a lot of reasons like injury, system, team cohesion, or maybe he is not that good. Do you want to pay 11M for rim protection and rebounding with poor pffensive skills and suspect one on one D?
Ilyasova is hard to figure too because his value is related to his ability to hit the three which was very bad again. Even his numbers from 2 where down this year which hurts even worse because he was not able to supplement the low numbers with the 3 ball. He is a pretty good rebounder and defensive player so he does have added value there but to be a starter he needs the long ball. Is he another Bargs or was it just one bad year?

We pay Tyson $14 million to be just that so yes, I'd roll the dice on Sanders, lol. +/-$11 million/year is the going rate for rim protectors that are also rebounders (see Omer Asik, DeAndre Jordan, Kendrick Perkins, etc.). I wonder how good he'd be in the triangle though. I also wonder how bad is the prognosis for his injuries.

I kinda feel the same about Ersan Ilyasova, an early favorite of mine. He's had some bad years but then again, the Bucks have been a mess during that period of time. If he is offered some organizational stability, maybe he might return to form. I only do a deal for both of those guys if we get Brandon Knight, who is a perfect fit at PG for us in the triangle; OJ Mayo and a 2nd round pick or two. Even if those guys (Sanders and Ilyasova) aren't good fifs, I could easily see us unloading Larry Sanders to the Kings for expirers and Ilyasova to the Pistons or Rockets for those same contracts.

NardDogNation wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:No thanks I will keep Shumpert especially with Phil here

Shumpert's been overrated ever since his MCL injury. I don't think the guy is anything to write home about, which is why I'd prefer to move him ASAP before he turns into another Landry Fields, Channing Frye, Nate Robinson, Ronaldo Balkman, Toney Douglas, etc.

Shumpert has always been overrated. He has always been an extremely inefficient offender. He partially makes that up with his defense.

Waiters seems like another inefficient chucker that we should not really be taking a chance on.

I am hoping the knicks will be looking for low key diamond in the rough type of players that play efficient basketball.