nyk4ever wrote:On my phone but hahn is reporting that the nuggets now like fields/moz rsther than gallo

Knickoftime wrote:The question is, how long are you going to wait, satisfied with playing your first round playoff series on the road, waiting for the exact series of opportunities to come along.

it's not so much a question for how long but rather for the right opportunity. Boston and Miami both waited to strike and made sure the had the right core to be competitive and so should Knicks.

You didn't really address how the Knicks compete with MIA, CHI, LAL, OKC long term.

2012:

Amare  		 $19.9 
Melo		 $19.9 
Turiaf 		
Mozgov 		 $3.1 
TD		 $2.0 
Williams 	 $1.0 
Rautins 	 $1.0 
Fields 		 $3.0 
2011 First Round $1.0 
--------------------------		
		 $50.9

How does that compete? And how do you build that past MIA, CHI, LAL, OKC even assuming that the cap is somewhere in the mid-60's. No bench, no defense, no PG.

With all due courtesy, what trade you'd "rather" do really isn't the point. There has never been ANY evidence from anyone or anywhere that Denver would eventually cave to essentially swapping Chandler for 'Melo.

That has been wishful rationalization ("better than nothing") from the get-go.

The question is do you do the deal that is now being reported, or let 'Melo go to the Nets or stay in Denver?

I let Melo think about going to the Nets and watch him fold, meaning I pass on the deal as it is structured. It's the same reason he wants out of Denver: he knows the team can't compete.

You do the deal and you guarantee that you won't much get past the second round, not taking trade you at least still have the possibility of building to a championship.

To me it's like accepting a big mortgage for a house knowing full well that you can pay at least $1500 of the $2000 and just assuming that you can come up with the extra $500 some place. And not even taking a look at the roof (PG, bench) that is going to add an extra $300 a month for a couple of years of additional mortgage. You'll have the house for a while and be happy and then one day the bank calls and you don't have the extra cash.

martin wrote:it's not so much a question for how long but rather for the right opportunity. Boston and Miami both waited to strike and made sure the had the right core to be competitive and so should Knicks.

What opportunity?

Miami saw James, Wade and Bosh coming to the market years ago. So did the rest of the NBA.

Everyone knows who the 2012 class is.

Are you advocating "waiting" until 2013, 2014?

You didn't really address how the Knicks compete with MIA, CHI, LAL, OKC long term.

Sure I did.

I have no guarantees that Knicks will be able to compete with them for the next 3-4 years. There IS one scenario everyone has to consider - that a championship opportunity may NEVER present itself.

I also know there are no guarantees the Knicks will ever be able to get another player better than Anthony.

I also think the Knicks are in better position to get Chris Paul with this deal than otherwise.

And "flexibility" has a shelf-life.

Chandler is a free agent this off-season. Gallo, Fields and Felton the next.

Knicks "flexibility" shelf-life is this off-season and next, max. Then the bills start arriving. The pieces have to be in place by fall of 2012 or the Knicks window closes.

We know the piece in play through 2012, unless you're willing to bypass on Anthony on the hope a really good player is made available by trade and the Knicks develop the pieces to attract this player*

[* but of course ANY trade that the knicks send multiple players for one will be deemed as "gutting"]

How does that compete? And how do you build that past MIA, CHI, LAL, OKC even assuming that the cap is somewhere in the mid-60's. No bench, no defense, no PG.

I'll say it again. They immediately become better than they are now.

2012

Amare $19.9
Chandler $8.00 (pretty conservative)
Gallo $12.6 (that's just his cap hold)
Mozgov $3.1
TD $2.0
Williams $1.0
Rautins $1.0
Fields $6.0 (Fields will get the max contract available to him)
2011 First Round $1.5 (more accurate estimate)

$55.1m and no PG to speak of. You can sign Felton with his early Bird Rights of course, but then you can't add anyone else.

I GET people are reluctant because they don't think the move directly correlates to a championship.

I just want to know what better options will be out there?

You do the deal and you guarantee that you won't much get past the second round, not taking trade you at least still have the possibility of building to a championship.

"Possibility" = "hope" without any notion of any real specifics.

You want to knowingly NOT make the team better just so you can dream of some bolt of lightning hitting sometime in the next 500 days, you're more than entitled.

But it is what it is. Clinging to a dream.

*Nets not going to meet with Melo

*Melo says that after his meeting on the CBA...doesn't see going into FA as a "big risk" (in other words...hey Denver, I am gone one way or another....)

*NYT reports Melo is telling people he will not sign with the Nets...

Lots of leaks....all seeming to put the pressure right back on Denver...don't know what it all means; but, like the direction it is going...a lot!!!

the phoenix teams were historically good on offense while being middle of the road defensively... those teams would be good enough to win the east this year..

nixluva wrote:

ItalianStallion wrote:It's over guys. It's freaking over. If this deal gets done we are dooming ourselves to becoming another version of the Atlanta Hawks. We'll win 50 games and go out in the 1st or 2nd round every year. WE won't have the assets or cap space left to fill glaring holes defensively, rebounding, and ultimately at PG too. In 2-3 years after that becomes obvious to everyone, we'll be having the same conversations about how we can rebuild in 2016.

Why so down on this? The Hawks don't have 2 ELITE players on their roster. Heck not even ONE. The comparison is off base. The last time Mike had players of this kind of caliber, he was winning 60 games!!! It's a mistake to think that it won't be a huge improvement as you improve the talent from avg. players to having 2 Elite players in your starting lineup.

Also we actually don't lose anything at the PG spot. In fact Billups has more experience and pure PG skills. He may not be young and speedy, but he knows how to play winning basketball and was part of the reason the Nuggets improved since he arrived. We'll be able to fill the holes we have in our roster and in fact it should be easier to convince guys to come here and try to win a title now that we'd have 2 Superstars. This is just step 2 in the overall plan. We get the 2 superstars we set out to get and IMO the rest is actually easier to accomplish.

Are you kidding me? Have you seen Josh Smith? We have no player like him. And the Hawks are still just a playoff team. Not a contending team.

FistOfOakley wrote:the phoenix teams were historically good on offense while being middle of the road defensively... those teams would be good enough to win the east this year..

Totally disagree.

nixluva wrote:All I know is that there were those who doubted the impact that Amar'e would have on the team and now we see just how much of a difference it makes having a stud. If we had consistent play at the other positions, this team would be competing at a much higher level. Amar'e is doing what he's supposed to do every night, but we can't depend on some other key guys. This kind of deal is made to change that. Yeah it's a heavy cost, but it's hard to know just how much of an impact having another consistently high performer would make. My guess is that it will make a huge difference.

All of a sudden you have your 2 best players taking the bulk of the shots and being more productive doing it. Those scoring droughts become fewer. We lose a bit of D, but probably not enough to make a noticeable difference. Besides the key is to be more efficient than your opponent and that's how Mike's teams usually win. With this roster, we're never going to be a shutdown defensive team. No sense pretending. They've decided to double down on offense, which is our strength. If we went after a C, a rebounding PF and a PG perhaps you could say they're at least trying to improve the D. But they clearly are trying to improve offensively.

babyKnicks wrote:

nixluva wrote:All I know is that there were those who doubted the impact that Amar'e would have on the team and now we see just how much of a difference it makes having a stud. If we had consistent play at the other positions, this team would be competing at a much higher level. Amar'e is doing what he's supposed to do every night, but we can't depend on some other key guys. This kind of deal is made to change that. Yeah it's a heavy cost, but it's hard to know just how much of an impact having another consistently high performer would make. My guess is that it will make a huge difference.

All of a sudden you have your 2 best players taking the bulk of the shots and being more productive doing it. Those scoring droughts become fewer. We lose a bit of D, but probably not enough to make a noticeable difference. Besides the key is to be more efficient than your opponent and that's how Mike's teams usually win. With this roster, we're never going to be a shutdown defensive team. No sense pretending. They've decided to double down on offense, which is our strength. If we went after a C, a rebounding PF and a PG perhaps you could say they're at least trying to improve the D. But they clearly are trying to improve offensively.