Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:I outlined it in the very post you just quoted the above but you chopped it out.

Let's address the issues with your suggestions.

1.) The new CBA will likely make it more difficult for drafted, established stars to leave, or least the incentive will be altered favorably to the original team. There is even the possibility of a franchise tag.

A new CBA, and changes, are a certainty. No one knows what they will be exactly, but we do know what the owners want.

Any way you slice it, you're taking a risk forgoing an actual opportunity for a theoretical one.

2.) One of the 3 names you've mentioned has made it publicly known playing WITH the guy you're passing up is a priority. Just strikes me as oddly turning a blind eye to this fact.

3.) (And this is the more relevant one), you've built yourself a house of cards of circumstance that ALL must go your way in order for any of them to be a reality.

They are:

a.) that Chandler and Gallinari stay healthy (not a non-factor for either of them) and that both of them AND Mozgoz indeed continue to progress and establish greater consistency (something that continues to allude the first two this season) AND that the Felton of the first month and 1/2 is the truer version of the Felton of the last 2 months.

b.) that despite the fact the Knicks, if retaining Chandler this off-season, would NOT have max cap space available in 2012, that Utah, or New Orleans or Magic would be willing to deal with the Knicks; and that

c.) No other team can or will make superior offers.

So in summary, you're alternative to Melo is predicated on:

- The CBA not restricting player movement.

- One of these players wanting to come to the Knicks at all.

- One of their teams willing to trade with the Knicks despite the Knicks not having the leverage of the necessary cap room in the off season.

- The Knicks current assets progressing sufficiently to be attractive to those teams.

- No other team in the mix with superior offers.

ANY one of these factors doesn't come to pass, and your entire scenario crumbles under its own weight.

And for this speculative scenario, you want to bypass the opportunity to improve now, before the new CBA?

I'll reiterate my original point.

"You're just engaging in the common - criticizing the possible in comparison to the more attractive alternative of your fantasy."

Damn, this new guy is almost as good as TMS.

tkf wrote:good post, but the problem I have with the bolded part is that you almost make it seem as if the 3 young players won't be worth the raises. I mean I could see your point if gallo, and chandler were average players with no upside...do we know how good both guys can be or will be next year? that is the X factor.. one I am willing to wait and see, considering that we are not passing up a lebron or wade.. this is melo.. I would take that chance.. sorry, I just don't think melo is worth this much....

Not saying that at all. It was mostly just meant to illustrate this "cap flexibility" that the "knicks worked so long to get" has a shelf-life of 17 more months. Then under any reasonable scenario, it is gone for the remainder of the Stoudemire era.

I like Chandler and Gallo. I really do.

But this is also an established fact. More often than not, first round draft picks that have showed promise often get their first big contract because of projection and potential, rather than established value.

It's the reason why there are more bad contracts out there than good ones. Look at any roster. Compare what you consider good, reasonable contracts to the bad one. I'd willing to bet the ratio is no less than 3 to 1.

Chandler and Gallinari are going to get MORE than their production warrants at the time. That's simply how the market works for players 23-24 who have distinguised themselves at being a successful part of their draft class.

But we often see the shine go off a new contract VERY quickly, often the very first season.

The law of averages simply establish that giving Chandler and Gallo the contracts they'll likely command will take away the Knicks "flexibility" going forward, and not enhance it.

BlueSeats wrote:Damn, this new guy is almost as good as TMS.

I'm not TMS, I assure you BlueSeats. But if you are who I think you are, you do know me.

You just have to go back a few more years to another time ... and place.

BlueSeats wrote:

martin wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:

martin wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:Just want to make sure I understand the goal posts. Is it that BOTH of the top 2 had to be good defenders?

I think he meant both were bad/average defenders.

How many elite teams are there where both their top guys were deficient at defense.

I will say this. I have seen both Amare and Melo play good defense. It is not their specialty, but it's there. However, they both play HOF caliber offense (IOW barring catastrophic injury if either wins a chip they're in.)

In another thread I compared Melo's stats to other HOF offensive machines. I suspect history would show that HOF players give you a better chance to win than mediocre two-way role players.

The defensive acuity of this team is equally dependent on the coach at this stage of the game, IOW the kind of players they are surrounded with and the focus put on it.

My point: I think we have a better chance to win a championship with these two than without. There are always opportunity costs, but there is no current calculus that can project us from a .500 team to a championship overnight. You seem to be inferring you have one up your sleeve. Lets see it.

I think this post of mine def got lost in all of the threads, so I am reposting.

http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=38137&page=3#830127

Here is a better plan than the one for Melo:

Let's make assumption that Chandler is $8M next year.

I am also going to assume that at the beginning of next year the Knicks, if they stay together as a whole, are mostly the same team roster wise. I will make a slight assumption that the team as a whole are better than this year: They will have had a year together; Chandler, Gallo, Moz, Fields still have growing room (IMHO Moz and Fields will get significantly better and also recall that this past offseason was really the first the both Chandler and Gallo could practice for an entire off-season). Before next season, 2011 pick is up, and Donnie has slight maneuverability with AR to upgrade his backup PG spot, which is the Knicks' weakest position. I think those are all reasonable things.

Without the need to figure out his rotations and starting lineup, MDA and team have an advantage over year 2010/2011 in terms of how to attach season. Moz settles down from last year and is OK enough to start full time. I think this alleviates Turiaf from starting and playing minutes towards which he will get hurt; ie, he plays the role of back as he should.

The Knicks as a team are better *and* more importantly individuals like Gallo, Chandler, Moz, Fields are also better than before because of the extra year of experience. This would increase their values some. Not sure how much. I don't think this is too much of a stretch.

CP3 or Deron come up. I believe that if Orlando tanks in playoffs Dwight will grumble enough and may scare his ownership ****less.

Those are 3 guys you can target while growing your team internally.

If Utah wants value for a departing Deron: Chandler(or Gallo)/Felton/TD/2011 pick, 2013 pick. Utah will need a starting PG to replace Deron and don't think Hayward is ready to be a starter yet. Utah can be competitive for another year or 2 with Jefferson, Millsap, Chandler/Gallo, Felton, Raja, Okur, Gordan, CJMiles and they can also rebuild after that.

Same deal with CP3. Or if NO wants cap relief: CP3/OK4: Chandler/Felton/Moz/Turiaf/2013 pick.

For Dwight, I may give up a lot cause I think a front line of Dwight, Amare, Felton can compete against anyone: Moz/Turiaf/Gallo/Chandler/picks.

Dwight has indicated either NY or LA. I think LA has a better shot at him IF they want to break up a team that just won 3 championships, I think they win this year.

Blue, Amare and Melo are nowhere in the same league as LeBron/Wade defensively, and yet Miami's duo can match offense with Amare/Melo all day. And Miami has Bosh to boot.

I am beginning to think that Durant/Westbrook can match the output of Amare/Melo and be better defends and their team has many more legit starters and bench then the Knicks would after Denver deal.

My point: I think we have a better chance to win a championship with these two than without.

The team with Melo/Amare definitely is better than today's team. But how does it get past the second round?

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

Without a 2012, 2014 pick and a 36 year old expiring Chauncy, how does that team upgrade significantly enough to beat CHI, MIA, LAL, OKC, with the general assumption that those teams could also upgrade in small bits too and will compete for the same UFA's.

Knicks need to upgrade defense, starting PG, bench depth, backup PG. And we also assume that Moz and Fields are good enough starting caliber players for deep playoff team.

What am I missing, I don't think swapping Deron, CP3 or Howard projects us to a championship either, and who's to say we wont get played just as bad in those negotiations?

There are no guarantees. Winning a Chip requires more than just a strategy, it also requires great luck. You have to do things that put you in a position to contend for one. Being a perennial second round of playoffs is getting there. Then you can be in a position where a DeBusschere can put you over the top. How do you get that player? Who knows: get lucky in the draft, the MLE, a good trade...you gotta get lucky.

But languishing at .500 and pining for longer shots than the one at hand doesn't position you any better.

It's a bit like chess. While in the end the difference of one pawn can decide the game at the end, you don't have to know exactly which pawn it will be when in the mid-game you're deciding if you should sacrifice a knight and bishop to capture a queen.

Again, I have no problem with you not liking Melo or not liking whatever package you are assuming we are giving up, but this idea that you don't do anything unless this one move makes you a champ is silly, and you can post your above post ad infinitum, but it ain't in it either, nor do you know you could get it done.

Not saying that Howard is a perfect player, but he would bring some things to this team that we are sorely missing, and make everyone around him better with his defensive presence.

martin wrote:Knickoftime, your turn to show me how the Knicks, after the constructed DEN-NY trade can upgrade their roster enough to compete with LAL, MIA, CHI, OKC, and as you put it: "and [if] your answer is I have no idea, I just like the IDEA that maybe they might be able to sometime in the future, then you lose credibility."

Martin, I've answered this question before clearly.

I'm perfectly willing to acknowledge that given the once-in-history Miami situation, the fact that the stars could very well be aligning for Howard to wind up in LA, that the Oklahoma/Seattle and Chicago were SO brutal for so long and both have lucked into a string of good high draft choices, that a championship window may NEVER open for the Knicks in the next 3-5 years.

That's just pragmatism.

But I don't advocate the Knicks sitting on the sidelines not trying to improve, waiting for some grand slam to maybe materialize.

I've been clear. I don't know if 'Melo leads to a championship. I just know he may be their last, best chance to get a player of his caliber, because we KNOW it won't be through the draft. And the new CBA could disqualify free agency as well.

I don't know if the Yankees giving Soriano all that money to be a set-up man is going to lead to them overtaking the Phillies, but I don't think the Yankees should have sat on their hands and did NOTHING until they figured out a way to get Felix Hernandez and Josh Johnson.

(and please don't tell me baseball doesn't have a cap so it isn't the same, I get that. I'm not illustrating that the do-nothing-to-improve-if-it-doesn't-guarantee-you-a-championship is a platitude built on a pipe dream.

So I've answered your question - bird-in-the-hand, to be straightforward. You do what's available to you and then try to strive to advance from there.

And I'll also say if they get 'Melo, despite the inherent difficulties of pulling it off, I think they actually have a better chance at getting Paul than if not.

I think the odds of Stat/'Melo/Paul are in fact somewhat greater than Stat/Paul.

Howard I don't see any likely at all.

Williams I have little sense of.

Knickoftime wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:Damn, this new guy is almost as good as TMS.

I'm not TMS, I assure you BlueSeats. But if you are who I think you are, you do know me.

I'm easy, I've only gone by two names: SonOfOakley and BlueSeats

You just have to go back a few more years to another time ... and place.

I'm dying to know...

Paladin55 wrote:
So you believe that Howard, exchanged for Melo as a trade addition, would give us the same kind of team?!? I'd probably trade the guys on the table now for Howard and Jameer Nelson, if that was the offer. You don't think that adding Howard, alone, to this Knicks team would drastically alter our situation?

Not saying that Howard is a perfect player, but he would bring some things to this team that we are sorely missing, and make everyone around him better with his defensive presence.

Pally, I love Howard, one of my favorite players in the league. Can't say the same for Melo. But I wouldn't wait on him.

1. You don't know you'd get him.
2. You don't know what it would take, and how tradable Chandler would be at a new salary, or Felton at a pending new salary.
3. You don't know how well he'd work with Amare and/or how well D'Antoni could utilize him.
4. I wouldn't project the addition of Howard to make us better than Heat/Celts/Lakers which is the context of the discussion with Martin.

I just don't think it's viable to pretend if we don't go for Melo we will get Howard (It's not like both are dangled before us now for the picking. We don't even know Howard wants to leave,) and that with him we'd thusly be true contenders.

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:I think I may have missed it before, your answer to my question. Is it the above or something past that (I am a bit confused)? Could you re-iterate if it's not the above?

My answer is my my last post to you. I'll summarize

I don't know that the Knicks can and am not bound to your personal criteria.

I just think the Knicks have to seize opportunities to improve available to them, and not just sit on the sidelines hoping a lottery ticket falls in their lap in the next 17 months.

OK, no problem. It's too bad that you had to attach this to your previous post: "and [if] your answer is I have no idea, I just like the IDEA that maybe they might be able to sometime in the future, then you lose credibility." when asking me to come up with some scenarios; I guess an in kind response is too much to ask.

BlueSeats wrote:That much I figured, but I don't remember anyone as voluminous as you. And why the anonymity?

No reason. Was just curious if a name would occur, or recur, to you.

Powerforward99, in a former life.

Knickoftime wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:That much I figured, but I don't remember anyone as voluminous as you. And why the anonymity?

No reason. Was just curious if a name would occur, or recur, to you.

Powerforward99, in a former life.

I didn't dare to hope. So happy to see you.