Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by Knicksfan:

Posted by BRIGGS:

---> Briggs, then its all about the money for him and that makes him less desirable on my team.


What the hll does that mean? It's all about the money with almost every player--he's less desirable because he wants to make top dollar?--go back to fantasy land.

First of all, I can't go back to fantasy island, no place for me with you always there. Come back to earth, Mr.Know it all.
What my comment meant was that by no means NY is giving him a bad deal if you consider all aspects. Maybe in this capitalist world we only find money to be the motivation for someone to take professional decisions, but when your profession is also your passion, you put elements of it in balance. There sure are guys who wouldn't mind earning 6 millions to be a backup or third string guard, something Sessions would probably be in LA. But when you think about earning a little less while getting a better chance at improving your game in a leading position for a team with a young nucleus and s really big market, wouldn't that be a better situation even it its a little less money? You can debate it as both scenarios have their pros and cons, but if in the end its all about a million and a half and he takes more money instead of arguably the better situation, then we are better off looking elsewhere for our starting PG.

There is one reality for sports more money more money more money--thats sports in a nuthsell and I don't blame them. Anyone who follows sports knows its almost always about the money. Passion for their work? Are you talking about the American Red Cross--this is basketball! Read what you wrote a few times--it wasnt written by Drew Rosenhaus---anyone will play hard--that has nothing to do with it--there is nothing else to it it's solely about $

Fine, I won't argue with that thought since I know the world is like that, but even if my logic seems to be better suited for your fantasy land, let me remind you that we are talking about a small difference in millions, a better system for his stats, and a better chance at starting, which you still ignore and its significant but hey, for stubborns you are king so won't go there again while discussing with you.

Remember we offered more money recently to the veteran FAs? They still picked other teams. Oh, and never in sports history has a player taken a LITTLE LESS (making emphasis here to remind you that's the case here) to be on the situation he likes best? Haha, right, you know your sports history so won't go there with you.

And another thing, Sessions was in his rookie contract of a second round pick, so he didn't even make a million. His raise will be huge even though he still hasn't started for a whole season and is a considerable risk for any team that signs him and gives him a prominent role. So wanting to sign him at little less than the MLE is the right way to go for a team committed on signing players at their right amount and not over paying like they did before.

(Note: we still have no team, not even LA, rumored to go full MLE for 5 years, so why bid against yourself when your whole offer is better than the others?)

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by WOODMANnYk:

Knicks want to have enough cap space to sign 2 suerstars, not just one. If lebron 's coming here then he wants to come with another star..

Signing Sessions could jeopardized us from signing 2 elite players unles we all know jeffries and Curry will get traded..

Wont happen--not even close--fantasy land and the math doesnt work. We have cap space for one max player

the bottom line is we are locked[for now]

We are basically locked into 27mm and lets say Sessions is 6mm=33mm. Current cap is 57--even if it goes down 10% we have space for the more expensive max contract that Lebron could get. We cannot get to another max contract for 2010--wont happen--math doesnt work. Sessions contract measn nothing--I mean think about it--it is obvious we are offering him around 4-4.5 mm per year on multi years right----now whats another 1-2mm$$$??? think about it? We could buy Jefferies and Curry out next year and save 2mm$ easy

Who are these players anyway????????? Names???

Now please remember this--we TRIED to give J Kidd three years full MLE at 37 years old--we offered him that money--so what was the 2010 FA plan then? The bottom line is they are indecisive and are going to blow this.

[Edited by - BRIGGS on 08-07-2009 12:43 AM]

Posted by SupremeCommander:

If this team can't get a player better than Ramon Session, we're all ****ed

Personally I am hoping another team swoops in and overpays. Signing Ramon Sessions to a long term deal is like bringing a peanut butter and jelly sandwich to a steak and lobster banquet

Posted by SupremeCommander:

Posted by orangeblobman:

Posted by SupremeCommander:

If this team can't get a player better than Ramon Session, we're all ****ed

Personally I am hoping another team swoops in and overpays. Signing Ramon Sessions to a long term deal is like bringing a peanut butter and jelly sandwich to a steak and lobster banquet

Sessions looks to be a future near-star player, man. But I admit I'm just going by his statistics. Still, he's not bad at all, and he's the best available this off-season. I would rather we long-term Sessions than sign a dinosaur like G. Hill, J. Kidd, or J. Stackhouse-- then we would be really f'ed.

He can't shoot, defend. Granted, he can dribble and pass. What I'm going on is Scott Skiles would have him ride pine after his statistical outbursts. Yes, the Bucks are trying to save $$$ but if they thought Sessions was worth a damn they could have easily resigned him, drafted a guy like Tyler Hansborough and dumped Andrew Bogut for the same price as the Richard Jefferson special. The Milwaukee Bucks castoffs don't get me too excited

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by SupremeCommander:

If this team can't get a player better than Ramon Session, we're all ****ed

Personally I am hoping another team swoops in and overpays. Signing Ramon Sessions to a long term deal is like bringing a peanut butter and jelly sandwich to a steak and lobster banquet

I personally think he has all star like qualities. If you have seen him play you would know what I mean. He gets into the lane at will with excellent size and finds the open man. He is aggressive taking it to the hoop like Tony Parker. He is fasthe is strong and he doesnt turn the ball over. He can play at the rim he can rebound score and really pass and make teammates better. This stuff that he cannot defend is stupid--it's like saying IO dont want steve nash because he cant defend. Im not comparing the two but he has all the ability in the world to be a really great player in this league--I think the Knicks are perfect for him and my God--who exactly is on the horizon at PG for us? Were not paying him 12-14mm a year--an MLE is 4-5 years of roughly 6mm per.

This a great opportunity to get a really good solid young PG who should continue to get better--hes only 23.

Posted by Ira:

I'm not against signing Sessions, but I don't consider it that important. If he were such hot stuff, he wouldn't be available for the taking at the mle. My problem with the Nash comparison is that Nash can not only shoot, he's one of the best shooters in the league. My problem with the Parker comparison is that Parker's a good defender.

Session brings some good things to the table. His penetrating, passing and ball handling are great assets, but he has deficiencies in the game. Signing him would be a nice addition, but not at the full mle. $5 mill per year works for me.