gunsnewing wrote:His basketball IQ sucks that why he has bounced around. Tyson is definitely more sound but when you look at the contracts I much rather have Dalembert

Let's face it. Tyson quit on the Knicks a long time ago. It would not surprise me if he played well for 28mins in Dallas in a contract year.

My guess is players ratted Tyson out for not being a team player and pointing fingers while not accepting responsibility. Mainly Melo & Woodson who he went after for lack of ball movement. He was right but you are suppose to keep those things in house. Woodson & Melo were constantly defending themselves in the media over Tyson's comments

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Dalembert's basketball IQ sucks that why he has bounced around. Tyson is definitely more sound but when you look at the contracts I much rather have Dalembert

Let's face it. Tyson quit on the Knicks a long time ago. It would not surprise me if he played well for 28mins in Dallas in a contract year.

My guess is players ratted Tyson out for not being a team player and pointing fingers while not accepting responsibility. Mainly Melo & Woodson who he went after for lack of ball movement. He was right but you are suppose to keep those things in house. Woodson & Melo were constantly defending themselves in the media over Tyson's comments

Yeah, I think that's probably all accurate.
I just couldn't agree with the idea that Dalembert was better in any sense on offense than Tyson.

It's unclear how the trade will impact the imminent free agency of Carmelo Anthony, who counts Chandler as a close friend and teammate, both with the Knicks and the gold-medal winning U.S. Olympic team in 2012.

"During exit interviews, Melo told Phil that Tyson was the teammate he trusted most," according to a person familiar with the conversation.

Looks like Melo and Guns might have a Toretto moment. " I never narc'd on nobody"

Papabear wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:anyone who thinks that the knicks didn't pretty much rape the mavs on this deal needs to check themselves. an aging center with lots of miles on his body and getting beat up all the time in the paint and no jump shot no free throw shooting skills and no passing out of the paint??? defensive rebounds are not worth that much!!!!!!!!! let's not forget that for 2 months he's pretty much out of commission during NY's winter.

and really people complaining about jose calderon's deal at 7 mill per? anyone here think he's not at least twice as good as fatboy felon? better decision making, better shooting and is not interested in challenging big guys in the paint at his age only makes him a smarter player with better mileage. look at dwayne wade... he's becoming a fraction of his championship self before our very eyes due to his crash in the paint type of play in the earlier years. miami is not going to resign him at the same salary as lebron, book it.

ok jose does not play defense and neither does ray ray.
if this deal was simply fluson and fatboy for calderon, i'd have been happy of addition by subtraction. but on top that, we get larkin, ellington, 2 picks...

these are all assets to be used in upcoming moves.... stay tuned! all hail Phil Jackson!

Your optimism is completely unfounded. I love how everything we traded was awful but everything we gained was impeccable. Unless you're dealing with the Hornets or Cavs, that is never the case when dealing with another team. So clearly you are overestimating what we are getting and underestimating what we gave the Mavs.

clearly YOU are underestimating Phil Jackson. I am not overestimating what we got at all. I know very little about Ellington or Larkin. But like I said... Calderon by himself to me is a deal I'd make for Chandler and Felton. Chandler's contract was expiring next year, but how many teams would be interested in giving us even this much for him after he spends Mid December to Mid Feb drinking TheraFlu at home??

I am not hailing Calderon as Chris Paul.... he is still light years smarter and better orchestrator and shooter than Felton. He definitely FITS way better.

If you truly feel that what we traded away was not awful, back it up by reasons as opposed to simply bashing what I said. smh.

Quite honestly, I've stated my reasons on several occasions earlier in the trade. I only responded to yours because it seemed a little snobbish- as if the contrarians to your opinion are wrong simply because they disagree with your own opinion. Just to quickly rehash why I'm not a fan of this trade:

1.) Jose Calderon is 33 years old and owed $22 million over 3 years. It's ridiculous to me how you all want to characterize Tyson Chandler as ailing and declining but overlook that fact for Calderon. Dude is a bench player at this point in his career. Is he better than Raymond Felton? Yes but so is every ****ing PG in the league, so there is little consolation in that fact for me.

2.) Omer Asik got the Rockets a 1st round pick from a lottery team. Is this really the best we could do for a recent Defensive Player of the Year that is still better than Asik in most respects of the game? People are doing backflips for Shane Larkin but the dude was the 18th pick in one of the worst drafts in professional sporting history. That means that 17 teams thought that there were 17 flavors of **** that were better than him. And considering the washout rate for 5"11' guards in the league, I find it difficult to take solace in that or some 2nd round picks (albeit in a draft I'm actually excited about).

3.) Why are we assuming long-term money? Wasn't it sacrilege just a week ago to do that? And for what? A 33 year old PG that has been a fringe starter for his career?

Papabear Says

I agree with you. If Omer Asik got a his team a number draft pick and Chandler is better. How come we didn't get a 1 st rounder for Chandler. 33 year old point guard. Hey I thought we were getting younger. What happened?

Exactly! This was a desperate man's move that Phil made, which is peculiar because it alone will not get Melo to stay. If that's the case, why are we committing $22 million to a 33 year old PG and the hope that unknowns like Larkin and Ellington could make something of themselves? This is a bad move on so many levels.

meloshouldgo wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

fishmike wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

fishmike wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

nyvector16 wrote:The only negative of the deal for the Knicks is the extra salary...
Let's break that down...

Next Season - 15/16 Season - 16/17 Season
Felton - 4.3M - 4.5M -
Calderon - 7M - 7.4M - 7.7M

Difference: 2.7M - 2.9M - 7.7M

This amount to a total of 13.3M total....
And we got a 2013 1st rounder, TWO 2014 2nd rounders , and a big upgrade at Point guard

I don't see how this was anything but a steal....

It's because you're playing the short game and have not taken into consideration the long term ramifications of the deal. This is the type of dumb moves we made in the past that led us to Amar'e Stoudemire and squandered Melo's prime.

no it isn't. Does Calderon have bad knees? No. Has he had previous surgeries? No. Is his game predicated on athleticism? No. He's a heady floor general and a shooter.

Please tell me what the long term ramifications are? Seriously, Jose has a great contract. He's paid probably below market value. Jose is making 7.7mm at 36. Not $25mm. I cant see what the issue is with having this guy around for that price. Honestly... what is your concern?

Calderon is 33 years old. That is exactly when the wheels fall off for guards unless your name is Jason Kidd, Steve Nash or John Stockton, who had tons of game to spare in their advanced age. Calderon is a role player at best, however, so I'm not expecting him to maintain his current level of play, which wasn't that impressive to begin with (11ppg, 4.7apg and 2.4apg). At this point in his career, he is a bench player for a contender but at $7 million/yr, he is more of a hindrance than an asset. Just for perspective, Manu Ginobili, a guy who will be in the HOF one day is making $7 million/yr coming off the bench. Calderon is no Ginobili and I don't even like Ginobili at this stage of his career.

What does Manu have to do with this? Nothing. Who are all these guards that drop off at 33? Hell... how many of us would love to have Prigioni only 5 years younger. This is one of the most efficient players ever. His assist to TO ratio is otherworldly. His shooting is among all time greats. The guy has a great skill set.

Hey... if you dont like the deal or the player its fine. Im exact opposite. Go look at Felton's splits from this year. In wins he's good. In losses he's terrible. Its that simple. WE need heady and consistent guard play. That is the one and only difference between 54 wins and 37 wins.

I pointed to Manu Ginobili because you establish the market value of a player by comparing him to his contemporaries. We established that Calderon is a bench player, we know Ginobili is a bench player, we know Ginobili makes $7 million per year. Therefore, Calderon is overpaid because he makes the same as Ginobili and is an inferior player.

You establish market value by what the market is willing to pay for you. If one person in the Marley values you far above every other person and is willing to pay that value then that person sets your market value.

That's not how things operate in the league and is exactly why big men with any semblance of talent get paid 8 figures off the bat, while it's iffy for perimeter players.

gunsnewing wrote:Dalembert is a little more skilled offensively. Dalembert might be bought out though.

I'd like to get our hands on Spencer Hawes. Center who can shoot. Even shoot 3's and rebound. Maybe Cleveland would like to get out of his 6.5m contract

I like varejao too but he is always injured and not on the same level offensively

Oh yeah, name me one thing Dalembert does on offense that doesn't involve him being force-feed passes or off putbacks. When you can't come up with an answer, also note that Tyson Chandler can do those same things but does it at better than a 60% clip.

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:He actually has offensive moves. Tyson has none just dunks. Defenses game plan to stop the lob and he is rendered useless offensively as we've seen on numberous occasions against good teams. The few good teams that actually bother to make defensive adjustments

He has moves but he still only manages 6 PPG and 0.5 assists? Imagine how bad he'd be without moves. All else being equal, I'd rather have the guy who gives 4 more points, 0.5 more assists but "has no moves." The "moves" are more important than the actual scoring results. I'm sure defenses see Dalembert as a liability and plan around that too.

Wait no per 36 numbers. I'm shocked.

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:He actually has offensive moves. Tyson has none just dunks. Defenses game plan to stop the lob and he is rendered useless offensively as we've seen on numberous occasions against good teams. The few good teams that actually bother to make defensive adjustments

He has moves but he still only manages 6 PPG and 0.5 assists? Imagine how bad he'd be without moves. All else being equal, I'd rather have the guy who gives 4 more points, 0.5 more assists but "has no moves." The "moves" are more important than the actual scoring results. I'm sure defenses see Dalembert as a liability and plan around that too.

Wait no per 36 numbers. I'm shocked.

Fair enough. PER 36, Tyson has the advantage in efficiency, assists, and turnovers but Dalembert has an advantage in total points actually (1.4 more).

blks and rebs go to Sam. I actually agree with you though.