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

Thar's gold in them their hills!
Author Thread
Nalod
Posts: 72117
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
12/16/2015  10:08 AM
I read this some months ago and thought it might be helpful to understand why picks are important. It revolves mostly about "forward thinking Mark Cuban" and the Celtics who are also hoarding picks"

Its important when throwing in picks for our favorite trade babble ideas we not toss around draft picks like they are sweetner with no value.

The 2015 draft was supposed to be when the Celtics made their big move. They had four picks, and three in the top 33. It seemed inconceivable that they would keep all four selections with an already deep roster, and there were rumblings that Danny Ainge was working the phones like a madman (though that's nothing new).

Ainge wasn't able to move up, but it certainly wasn't for a lack of effort. He reportedly offered six picks (including four potential first rounders) in an attempt to move up to the ninth pick to select Justise Winslow. Ainge almost offered as many picks as slots he was trying to move up in the first round. To top it all off, the Hornets refused because they were enamored with, of all players, Frank Kaminsky. The Celtics hopes for the future and banner 18 have been pegged mainly on the boatload of draft picks they own the rights to. If six picks couldn't move the Celtics up seven slots, it seemed those hopes were doomed for failure.

Not so fast my friend. Those picks may not have been enough to move up in the 2015 draft, but with the way the NBA landscape is changing, it could have been a blessing in disguise that the Hornets rebuffed that gargantuan offer.

The Cap

As we have all heard by now, the cap is set for a meteoric rise thanks to the huge TV deal. This year, the cap came in higher than initial projections and will be at $70 million. Next year, projections are for the cap to be at around $89 million. Then, for the 2016-17 season, the cap could rise all the way up to the area of $108 million.

Why is this relevant when talking about draft picks? That's because as the cap rises, the rookie scale will stay the same. As Michael Schwartz writes on ESPN:


But while maximum contracts rise along with the cap in the coming years, and the middle class along with it, the rookie contracts for recently drafted players will put them under team control at under market rates through the 2018-19 season...Thus the rookies who make an impact on the court will be the best bargains in the NBA.

The Rookie Scale

The rookie scale in the NBA is the designated salary slot that each draft pick can be signed to after the draft. Let's use Terry Rozier's number 16 draft slot as an example (use table for reference).

The 16th pick's slotted salary for this season is $1,520,300. Rookie scale contracts can be negotiated down to 80% of the scale or up to 120%, but the Celtics almost always give their picks the full 120%. So for this year, Rozier will be making $1,824,360. Next year, with the full 120%, Rozier will come in at $1,906,440. In 2016-17, $1,988,520.

The scale is a little higher for the 2016 draft picks, but it is not a proportional rise along with the cap. For example, the 16th pick next year, with the 120%, will make $1,888,200 in year one, $1,973,160 in year two, and $2,058,120 in year three.

The 16th pick in the 2017 draft won't make much more, coming in at $1,954,320 in year one, $2,042,160 in year two, and $2,130,120 in year three.

http://www.celticsblog.com/2015/9/17/9341323/cuban-draft-picks-will-be-more-valuable-with-rising-salary-cap

(Note: as Schwartz says, there is a chance the rookie scale could be negotiated if either side opts out of the CBA after the 2016-17 season. However, draft picks would not be represented at those talks, so it's unlikely the scale will be changed).

Remember, these numbers are all in the context of a rising cap. Since 2005-06, the cap has come in each year between $58 million and $66 million. When Rozier is in his 3rd year in the league, the cap will be at a whopping $108 million. He'll be taking up less than 2% of the cap!

There were already several big money deals this past offseason that looked like headscratchers, but that is thinking under the parameters of the old cap. Similarly, the rookie scale was built in the context of the old cap. In just a few years, just as many of those headscratchers could turn into great value signings, these dirt-cheap rookie contracts will hold increased value as well.

AUTOADVERT
fishmike
Posts: 53902
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
12/16/2015  10:37 AM
there are so many reasons why using the draft is good and simply thank god we have management in place (for now) that values this and the future.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
12/16/2015  10:47 AM
No team has used it worse than the Knicks unfortunately. Would have been amazing to have picks the previous and this coming season.

There are a lot of stupid people in this league. Billy King might be the worst GM in the NBA giving up picks for Johnson, Pierce, Garnett and Gerald Wallace. The fact that we traded a first round pick in the conference for a scrub that didn't play or contribute was mind boggling at the time and looks even worst right now.

We really need Grant to take the next step to compete when guys like Tristan Thompson, Kris Middelton and Carrol are getting 15MM a year

meloanyk
Posts: 20768
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/5/2013
Member: #5615

12/16/2015  10:54 AM
Giving up a first rounder for Bargani was inexusable when it was known around league that Toronto was down on player and desperate to simply have someone take his $. The stench of that move is really going to set in when we watch the 17 draft. Think Grunfeld was guilty party, that will forever taint him
Nalod
Posts: 72117
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
12/16/2015  11:06 AM    LAST EDITED: 12/16/2015  11:12 AM
MS wrote:No team has used it worse than the Knicks unfortunately. Would have been amazing to have picks the previous and this coming season.

There are a lot of stupid people in this league. Billy King might be the worst GM in the NBA giving up picks for Johnson, Pierce, Garnett and Gerald Wallace. The fact that we traded a first round pick in the conference for a scrub that didn't play or contribute was mind boggling at the time and looks even worst right now.

We really need Grant to take the next step to compete when guys like Tristan Thompson, Kris Middelton and Carrol are getting 15MM a year

Billy King made a move that at the time he and his owner thought could take them over the top. Its the kind of move you make when you think you are that close. Problem of course was Deron and Brook are not substantial enough a young core to build with. Joe Johnson was not ready to step up into the sport light either.
I agree no way I do that deal but this is not a deal a GM makes without an owner pushing for it. My take is if this was Billy Kings idea or he did not try to enlighten his owner to why its could blow up he should have been fired. The fact he was not tells me King is not the driving force behind that deal. Personally I found what the nets did from moving to Brooklyn, rebranding the team as they did with a retro patina and going all in absolutely fascinating!!! Obviously hindsight tells us just how god awful those decisions actually are.

It is also my opinion Dolan, who tends to panic needed to get Melo (who was inline to be traded to Nets), got Amare and made the Bargnani deal. These moves have Dolan written all over it and typical the of deals made in the post Checketts era. Since Grunfeld was fired and Dolan took over we have have seen "Starphuchs" like this. The Isiah era capitulated this thinking. "Walsh" signing Amare seems very out of character and given the financial ramifications and the magnitude of an uninsured $100mm contract it seems equally as unlikey that Walsh did this deal. Nobody in their right mind does that 5 year contract. Walsh body might not have been right, but his mind was ok!!

Back on point, the Bargnani debacle executed by the seemingly unimpressive Grunwald is the type of deal no sound basketball mind would make. Was he fired because of it? Grunwald was Isiahs assistant and sort of left over as he still had a contract. Walsh was never allowed to bring in a successor. He wanted to bring in Chris Mullin and Dolan was not agreeable to that. GrunwaldAs we all know in it was announced that Mckinsey consulting had done a lot of work at MSG and since then we have seen massive changes in the organization which also includes the subsequent Sale of core asset Cablevision! In the Hiring of Phil had Dolan crawl out from his cave and told the world he knows little about basketball and was totally getting the hell out of the way and let phil build the organization top to bottom. While Mills is a retread the guy actually has good cred and should be a good successor to Phil. THe firing of Grunwald in October as the season was about to start was never told to us but teams rarely if ever fire its GM in October. THis was about the time Mckinsey was done and Mills was hired. Phil is president but Mills really runs the day to day of the organization which includes cap and finances. PHil is the roster. Titles don't matter here.

I don't know who to blame about Bargnani and it really don't matter as we had a huge shift in thinking and a new culture is prevalent in the Knick organization.

Rule of thumb is don't trade picks unless you can get a player that can really help you contend and your pretty darn certain its not going to be a top 10 pick!!! My goodness we are still realing from trading two no. 1 picks in the isiah era!!!!!!

We tanked and got a franchise changing talent. This has not happened in 30 years!!!!!!
If patient we might one day contend. Key is what does it mean to be patient?

crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
12/16/2015  11:06 AM
meloanyk wrote:Giving up a first rounder for Bargani was inexusable when it was known around league that Toronto was down on player and desperate to simply have someone take his $. The stench of that move is really going to set in when we watch the 17 draft. Think Grunfeld was guilty party, that will forever taint him

That move was forced on Glen Grunwald by CAA and it is why he quit. Bargnani was a CAA client and they convinced someone on the Knicks, probably Mills and Melo and Dolan, that Bargnani was the stretch 4 that could keep Melo at the 3 and that Bargnani just needed a change of scenery to blossom.

Ironically, it was the same thinking that led to the KP draft pick, which is part of the reason I disliked the idea at the time.

Grunwald was a very good GM though. He got sort of screwed over.

¿ △ ?
mreinman
Posts: 37827
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/14/2010
Member: #3189

12/16/2015  11:08 AM
crzymdups wrote:
meloanyk wrote:Giving up a first rounder for Bargani was inexusable when it was known around league that Toronto was down on player and desperate to simply have someone take his $. The stench of that move is really going to set in when we watch the 17 draft. Think Grunfeld was guilty party, that will forever taint him

That move was forced on Glen Grunwald by CAA and it is why he quit. Bargnani was a CAA client and they convinced someone on the Knicks, probably Mills and Melo and Dolan, that Bargnani was the stretch 4 that could keep Melo at the 3 and that Bargnani just needed a change of scenery to blossom.

Ironically, it was the same thinking that led to the KP draft pick, which is part of the reason I disliked the idea at the time.

Grunwald was a very good GM though. He got sort of screwed over.

That move makes his an epic failure. And the Billups amnesty was also a disaster.

so here is what phil is thinking ....
crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
12/16/2015  11:14 AM
mreinman wrote:
crzymdups wrote:
meloanyk wrote:Giving up a first rounder for Bargani was inexusable when it was known around league that Toronto was down on player and desperate to simply have someone take his $. The stench of that move is really going to set in when we watch the 17 draft. Think Grunfeld was guilty party, that will forever taint him

That move was forced on Glen Grunwald by CAA and it is why he quit. Bargnani was a CAA client and they convinced someone on the Knicks, probably Mills and Melo and Dolan, that Bargnani was the stretch 4 that could keep Melo at the 3 and that Bargnani just needed a change of scenery to blossom.

Ironically, it was the same thinking that led to the KP draft pick, which is part of the reason I disliked the idea at the time.

Grunwald was a very good GM though. He got sort of screwed over.

That move makes his an epic failure. And the Billups amnesty was also a disaster.

The Billups move was his worst. Picking up Billup's option before the lockout only to amnesty him right after the lockout was terrible. It did lead to the Knicks getting Tyson though.

I wouldn't be surprised if as part of the Melo deal to convince Billups to come, the Knicks promised to pick up his option year.

I think Grunwald was a good GM, but as always with the Knicks, the chain of command was fcked and he could be overruled all too often.

Grunwald got dinner with Lin after the Houston meeting and was prepared to match the Houston offer before he was overruled... probably by Dolan? Who knows.

It's one reason I am thrilled to have Phil here - if he makes mistakes, at least you know the team is being built with one singular vision instead of a bunch of cooks in the kitchen and a bunch of differing agendas.

¿ △ ?
Nalod
Posts: 72117
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
12/16/2015  11:15 AM
mreinman wrote:
crzymdups wrote:
meloanyk wrote:Giving up a first rounder for Bargani was inexusable when it was known around league that Toronto was down on player and desperate to simply have someone take his $. The stench of that move is really going to set in when we watch the 17 draft. Think Grunfeld was guilty party, that will forever taint him

That move was forced on Glen Grunwald by CAA and it is why he quit. Bargnani was a CAA client and they convinced someone on the Knicks, probably Mills and Melo and Dolan, that Bargnani was the stretch 4 that could keep Melo at the 3 and that Bargnani just needed a change of scenery to blossom.

Ironically, it was the same thinking that led to the KP draft pick, which is part of the reason I disliked the idea at the time.

Grunwald was a very good GM though. He got sort of screwed over.

That move makes his an epic failure. And the Billups amnesty was also a disaster.

Yet we hailed it as "Exec of the year type move" as knicks won 54 games with Tyson who we could not sign without the buyout!!!!
Few teams have the kind of cheddah that can buy out Billups at 14mil, and sign Tyson with the space. Cost Knicks $28 for Tyson that year!!!!

Grunwald have that kind of clout? Who writes the check? Dolan.

crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
12/16/2015  11:15 AM
On the other hand, Phil's Tyson trade is looking better all the time.

¿ △ ?
Nalod
Posts: 72117
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
12/16/2015  11:16 AM
crzymdups wrote:
mreinman wrote:
crzymdups wrote:
meloanyk wrote:Giving up a first rounder for Bargani was inexusable when it was known around league that Toronto was down on player and desperate to simply have someone take his $. The stench of that move is really going to set in when we watch the 17 draft. Think Grunfeld was guilty party, that will forever taint him

That move was forced on Glen Grunwald by CAA and it is why he quit. Bargnani was a CAA client and they convinced someone on the Knicks, probably Mills and Melo and Dolan, that Bargnani was the stretch 4 that could keep Melo at the 3 and that Bargnani just needed a change of scenery to blossom.

Ironically, it was the same thinking that led to the KP draft pick, which is part of the reason I disliked the idea at the time.

Grunwald was a very good GM though. He got sort of screwed over.

That move makes his an epic failure. And the Billups amnesty was also a disaster.

The Billups move was his worst. Picking up Billup's option before the lockout only to amnesty him right after the lockout was terrible. It did lead to the Knicks getting Tyson though.

I wouldn't be surprised if as part of the Melo deal to convince Billups to come, the Knicks promised to pick up his option year.

I think Grunwald was a good GM, but as always with the Knicks, the chain of command was fcked and he could be overruled all too often.

Grunwald got dinner with Lin after the Houston meeting and was prepared to match the Houston offer before he was overruled... probably by Dolan? Who knows.

It's one reason I am thrilled to have Phil here - if he makes mistakes, at least you know the team is being built with one singular vision instead of a bunch of cooks in the kitchen and a bunch of differing agendas.

That lin deal would have been awful. I loved Linsanity as much as anyone.

crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
12/16/2015  11:21 AM
Nalod wrote:
crzymdups wrote:
mreinman wrote:
crzymdups wrote:
meloanyk wrote:Giving up a first rounder for Bargani was inexusable when it was known around league that Toronto was down on player and desperate to simply have someone take his $. The stench of that move is really going to set in when we watch the 17 draft. Think Grunfeld was guilty party, that will forever taint him

That move was forced on Glen Grunwald by CAA and it is why he quit. Bargnani was a CAA client and they convinced someone on the Knicks, probably Mills and Melo and Dolan, that Bargnani was the stretch 4 that could keep Melo at the 3 and that Bargnani just needed a change of scenery to blossom.

Ironically, it was the same thinking that led to the KP draft pick, which is part of the reason I disliked the idea at the time.

Grunwald was a very good GM though. He got sort of screwed over.

That move makes his an epic failure. And the Billups amnesty was also a disaster.

The Billups move was his worst. Picking up Billup's option before the lockout only to amnesty him right after the lockout was terrible. It did lead to the Knicks getting Tyson though.

I wouldn't be surprised if as part of the Melo deal to convince Billups to come, the Knicks promised to pick up his option year.

I think Grunwald was a good GM, but as always with the Knicks, the chain of command was fcked and he could be overruled all too often.

Grunwald got dinner with Lin after the Houston meeting and was prepared to match the Houston offer before he was overruled... probably by Dolan? Who knows.

It's one reason I am thrilled to have Phil here - if he makes mistakes, at least you know the team is being built with one singular vision instead of a bunch of cooks in the kitchen and a bunch of differing agendas.

That lin deal would have been awful. I loved Linsanity as much as anyone.

The first deal - 3yr $15M would've been fine. He went back to Houston a second time and got more money. That's when the deal became awful. I think if the Knicks had aggressively pursued him and offered the 3yr $15M as soon as they could, they could've had him. There were differing voices in the organization - we pretty much know that Melo didn't want to bring Lin back because he didn't fit the "family"... it made sense for 2012-3 season... but I think you can make the case that Lin has been better over the past three years than any PG we've had here. Anyway, water under the bridge.

But that's the sort of situation I think having a leader in the organization like Phil - he would've been able to sit Melo and Lin down together and got it to work. At the time, there was no chain of command. Grunwald was the GM, Woodson the lame duck coach, Steve Mills was president of operations or something, Dolan was recording blues songs, Melo and CAA were trying to build a family. Too many different agendas. All of them could have meant well, but it was a mess. That's why the Phil era has been a breath of fresh air to me and I fear what'll happen once he moves on.

¿ △ ?
mreinman
Posts: 37827
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/14/2010
Member: #3189

12/16/2015  11:35 AM
Nalod wrote:
mreinman wrote:
crzymdups wrote:
meloanyk wrote:Giving up a first rounder for Bargani was inexusable when it was known around league that Toronto was down on player and desperate to simply have someone take his $. The stench of that move is really going to set in when we watch the 17 draft. Think Grunfeld was guilty party, that will forever taint him

That move was forced on Glen Grunwald by CAA and it is why he quit. Bargnani was a CAA client and they convinced someone on the Knicks, probably Mills and Melo and Dolan, that Bargnani was the stretch 4 that could keep Melo at the 3 and that Bargnani just needed a change of scenery to blossom.

Ironically, it was the same thinking that led to the KP draft pick, which is part of the reason I disliked the idea at the time.

Grunwald was a very good GM though. He got sort of screwed over.

That move makes his an epic failure. And the Billups amnesty was also a disaster.

Yet we hailed it as "Exec of the year type move" as knicks won 54 games with Tyson who we could not sign without the buyout!!!!
Few teams have the kind of cheddah that can buy out Billups at 14mil, and sign Tyson with the space. Cost Knicks $28 for Tyson that year!!!!

Grunwald have that kind of clout? Who writes the check? Dolan.

Chandler was a FA that was overpriced (at the time) and really had no bites around the league. It was a TERRIBLE move especially that he left an MDA team with a PG name toney douglass.

so here is what phil is thinking ....
crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
12/16/2015  11:40 AM
mreinman wrote:
Nalod wrote:
mreinman wrote:
crzymdups wrote:
meloanyk wrote:Giving up a first rounder for Bargani was inexusable when it was known around league that Toronto was down on player and desperate to simply have someone take his $. The stench of that move is really going to set in when we watch the 17 draft. Think Grunfeld was guilty party, that will forever taint him

That move was forced on Glen Grunwald by CAA and it is why he quit. Bargnani was a CAA client and they convinced someone on the Knicks, probably Mills and Melo and Dolan, that Bargnani was the stretch 4 that could keep Melo at the 3 and that Bargnani just needed a change of scenery to blossom.

Ironically, it was the same thinking that led to the KP draft pick, which is part of the reason I disliked the idea at the time.

Grunwald was a very good GM though. He got sort of screwed over.

That move makes his an epic failure. And the Billups amnesty was also a disaster.

Yet we hailed it as "Exec of the year type move" as knicks won 54 games with Tyson who we could not sign without the buyout!!!!
Few teams have the kind of cheddah that can buy out Billups at 14mil, and sign Tyson with the space. Cost Knicks $28 for Tyson that year!!!!

Grunwald have that kind of clout? Who writes the check? Dolan.

Chandler was a FA that was overpriced (at the time) and really had no bites around the league. It was a TERRIBLE move especially that he left an MDA team with a PG name toney douglass.

Tyson was coming off a season where he won a ring and posted .220 WS48 in Dallas. He came to New York and posted two straight .220 WS48 seasons here, too, winning DPOY. How in the hell was he overpaid? How in the hell was that a bad move? Does WS48 only make a player good when you want it to?

¿ △ ?
mreinman
Posts: 37827
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/14/2010
Member: #3189

12/16/2015  11:43 AM
crzymdups wrote:
mreinman wrote:
Nalod wrote:
mreinman wrote:
crzymdups wrote:
meloanyk wrote:Giving up a first rounder for Bargani was inexusable when it was known around league that Toronto was down on player and desperate to simply have someone take his $. The stench of that move is really going to set in when we watch the 17 draft. Think Grunfeld was guilty party, that will forever taint him

That move was forced on Glen Grunwald by CAA and it is why he quit. Bargnani was a CAA client and they convinced someone on the Knicks, probably Mills and Melo and Dolan, that Bargnani was the stretch 4 that could keep Melo at the 3 and that Bargnani just needed a change of scenery to blossom.

Ironically, it was the same thinking that led to the KP draft pick, which is part of the reason I disliked the idea at the time.

Grunwald was a very good GM though. He got sort of screwed over.

That move makes his an epic failure. And the Billups amnesty was also a disaster.

Yet we hailed it as "Exec of the year type move" as knicks won 54 games with Tyson who we could not sign without the buyout!!!!
Few teams have the kind of cheddah that can buy out Billups at 14mil, and sign Tyson with the space. Cost Knicks $28 for Tyson that year!!!!

Grunwald have that kind of clout? Who writes the check? Dolan.

Chandler was a FA that was overpriced (at the time) and really had no bites around the league. It was a TERRIBLE move especially that he left an MDA team with a PG name toney douglass.

Tyson was coming off a season where he won a ring and posted .220 WS48 in Dallas. He came to New York and posted two straight .220 WS48 seasons here, too, winning DPOY. How in the hell was he overpaid? How in the hell was that a bad move? Does WS48 only make a player good when you want it to?

market .... supply / demand.

And Tyson was a really really good player but its stupid and worthless to have a really good player(s) without a PG. They needed Lowry who was on Houstons bench.

so here is what phil is thinking ....
GustavBahler
Posts: 42864
Alba Posts: 15
Joined: 7/12/2010
Member: #3186

12/16/2015  11:49 AM
crzymdups wrote:
meloanyk wrote:Giving up a first rounder for Bargani was inexusable when it was known around league that Toronto was down on player and desperate to simply have someone take his $. The stench of that move is really going to set in when we watch the 17 draft. Think Grunfeld was guilty party, that will forever taint him

That move was forced on Glen Grunwald by CAA and it is why he quit. Bargnani was a CAA client and they convinced someone on the Knicks, probably Mills and Melo and Dolan, that Bargnani was the stretch 4 that could keep Melo at the 3 and that Bargnani just needed a change of scenery to blossom.

Ironically, it was the same thinking that led to the KP draft pick, which is part of the reason I disliked the idea at the time.

Grunwald was a very good GM though. He got sort of screwed over.

I thought it was being pressured to sign Chris Smith to a pro deal just to make JR happy.

crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
12/16/2015  11:50 AM
mreinman wrote:
crzymdups wrote:
mreinman wrote:
Nalod wrote:
mreinman wrote:
crzymdups wrote:
meloanyk wrote:Giving up a first rounder for Bargani was inexusable when it was known around league that Toronto was down on player and desperate to simply have someone take his $. The stench of that move is really going to set in when we watch the 17 draft. Think Grunfeld was guilty party, that will forever taint him

That move was forced on Glen Grunwald by CAA and it is why he quit. Bargnani was a CAA client and they convinced someone on the Knicks, probably Mills and Melo and Dolan, that Bargnani was the stretch 4 that could keep Melo at the 3 and that Bargnani just needed a change of scenery to blossom.

Ironically, it was the same thinking that led to the KP draft pick, which is part of the reason I disliked the idea at the time.

Grunwald was a very good GM though. He got sort of screwed over.

That move makes his an epic failure. And the Billups amnesty was also a disaster.

Yet we hailed it as "Exec of the year type move" as knicks won 54 games with Tyson who we could not sign without the buyout!!!!
Few teams have the kind of cheddah that can buy out Billups at 14mil, and sign Tyson with the space. Cost Knicks $28 for Tyson that year!!!!

Grunwald have that kind of clout? Who writes the check? Dolan.

Chandler was a FA that was overpriced (at the time) and really had no bites around the league. It was a TERRIBLE move especially that he left an MDA team with a PG name toney douglass.

Tyson was coming off a season where he won a ring and posted .220 WS48 in Dallas. He came to New York and posted two straight .220 WS48 seasons here, too, winning DPOY. How in the hell was he overpaid? How in the hell was that a bad move? Does WS48 only make a player good when you want it to?

market .... supply / demand.

And Tyson was a really really good player but its stupid and worthless to have a really good player(s) without a PG. They needed Lowry who was on Houstons bench.

No argument here about their lack of PG. I don't know why this team seems completely unable to get a good PG. Part of why I didn't love the way the Lin thing was handled.

¿ △ ?
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
12/16/2015  12:18 PM
crzymdups wrote:
mreinman wrote:
crzymdups wrote:
mreinman wrote:
Nalod wrote:
mreinman wrote:
crzymdups wrote:
meloanyk wrote:Giving up a first rounder for Bargani was inexusable when it was known around league that Toronto was down on player and desperate to simply have someone take his $. The stench of that move is really going to set in when we watch the 17 draft. Think Grunfeld was guilty party, that will forever taint him

That move was forced on Glen Grunwald by CAA and it is why he quit. Bargnani was a CAA client and they convinced someone on the Knicks, probably Mills and Melo and Dolan, that Bargnani was the stretch 4 that could keep Melo at the 3 and that Bargnani just needed a change of scenery to blossom.

Ironically, it was the same thinking that led to the KP draft pick, which is part of the reason I disliked the idea at the time.

Grunwald was a very good GM though. He got sort of screwed over.

That move makes his an epic failure. And the Billups amnesty was also a disaster.

Yet we hailed it as "Exec of the year type move" as knicks won 54 games with Tyson who we could not sign without the buyout!!!!
Few teams have the kind of cheddah that can buy out Billups at 14mil, and sign Tyson with the space. Cost Knicks $28 for Tyson that year!!!!

Grunwald have that kind of clout? Who writes the check? Dolan.

Chandler was a FA that was overpriced (at the time) and really had no bites around the league. It was a TERRIBLE move especially that he left an MDA team with a PG name toney douglass.

Tyson was coming off a season where he won a ring and posted .220 WS48 in Dallas. He came to New York and posted two straight .220 WS48 seasons here, too, winning DPOY. How in the hell was he overpaid? How in the hell was that a bad move? Does WS48 only make a player good when you want it to?

market .... supply / demand.

And Tyson was a really really good player but its stupid and worthless to have a really good player(s) without a PG. They needed Lowry who was on Houstons bench.

No argument here about their lack of PG. I don't know why this team seems completely unable to get a good PG. Part of why I didn't love the way the Lin thing was handled.

I actually think Phil is trying to fix the PG issue. I really like Jerian, despite these early struggles. He has the right game to excel in this system. He can drive and kick and once he gets confidence in his jumper he'll be a different player. We just need to allow time for him to develop and continue to look for another quality PG to add to the mix.

Nalod
Posts: 72117
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
12/16/2015  12:29 PM
Anyone want Felton back? Calderone was a conceptual upgrade and injuries aside a better player.
Felton is a good back up on Dallas, as should Calderone be a good back up if we had a better alternative.

I'd rather have 27 year old Rolo than Flue Tyson. To me this was the trade. Throw in Clearanthony who has yet to pan out (not looking good).
Second round picks are gambles and few stick.

Melo was not into Tyson, and visa versa.

crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
12/16/2015  1:04 PM
Nalod wrote:Anyone want Felton back? Calderone was a conceptual upgrade and injuries aside a better player.
Felton is a good back up on Dallas, as should Calderone be a good back up if we had a better alternative.

I'd rather have 27 year old Rolo than Flue Tyson. To me this was the trade. Throw in Clearanthony who has yet to pan out (not looking good).
Second round picks are gambles and few stick.

Melo was not into Tyson, and visa versa.

Oh yeah, Tyson had to go once he and Melo started feuding. I think Phil made the decision to try to sign Melo, so Tyson had to be shipped.

It was sort of sad that he thought Dalembert could cover for Tyson though.

¿ △ ?
Thar's gold in them their hills!

©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