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

Rondo for Tyson
Author Thread
AnubisADL
Posts: 27382
Alba Posts: 13
Joined: 6/29/2009
Member: #2771
USA
4/23/2013  4:47 PM
martin wrote:
AnubisADL wrote:
Solace wrote:We can't get rid of Tyson. Dump Tyson and we're undersized again. I have nothing against Tyson. I'm not sure we can get fair value in a trade for him and he's a major part of our success, especially in the locker room. There's next to zero reason to trade Tyson. Trade Amar'e you can argue. Tyson, no.

This thought that Kenyon Martin can man center every game leaves us undersized and ridiculously thin. I really like Kenyon, but there are still teams in this league that play big and we always have injury concerns with older players.

Plus, at this point, if the team has found chemistry, leave it alone unless we have a trade with a clear win. Part of why we sucked for 10 years was the roster would be 100% overturned every 18 months. Guys can't learn to play well with each other with so much tweaking.

Not really. LA Clippers would be the most ideal trade partners. Deandre Jordan is young and hasnt been injury prone. He can run and finish around the rim.

Chandler and Shumpert
for
Jordan and Bledsoe

Biggest thing is the Knicks get younger and do a rebuild on the fly around Melo.

LA gets a guard who can play next to Paul and defend and a center who can make free throws. Plus Chandler and Paul are cool.

I dont see the Knicks getting better. They lost a SG/SF defender (with the possiblity of JR splitting) and the downgrade C. Bledsoe nice addition but not at that cost.

Deandre makes less money and expires at the same time as Chandler. The difference is Chandler will be 32 and Jordan will 26.

The question is who do the Knicks value more. Shumpert or Bledsoe. PG's and Centers come at a premium in this league.

NY Knicks - Retirement home for players and GMs
AUTOADVERT
martin
Posts: 76386
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
4/23/2013  4:51 PM
AnubisADL wrote:
martin wrote:
AnubisADL wrote:
Solace wrote:We can't get rid of Tyson. Dump Tyson and we're undersized again. I have nothing against Tyson. I'm not sure we can get fair value in a trade for him and he's a major part of our success, especially in the locker room. There's next to zero reason to trade Tyson. Trade Amar'e you can argue. Tyson, no.

This thought that Kenyon Martin can man center every game leaves us undersized and ridiculously thin. I really like Kenyon, but there are still teams in this league that play big and we always have injury concerns with older players.

Plus, at this point, if the team has found chemistry, leave it alone unless we have a trade with a clear win. Part of why we sucked for 10 years was the roster would be 100% overturned every 18 months. Guys can't learn to play well with each other with so much tweaking.

Not really. LA Clippers would be the most ideal trade partners. Deandre Jordan is young and hasnt been injury prone. He can run and finish around the rim.

Chandler and Shumpert
for
Jordan and Bledsoe

Biggest thing is the Knicks get younger and do a rebuild on the fly around Melo.

LA gets a guard who can play next to Paul and defend and a center who can make free throws. Plus Chandler and Paul are cool.

I dont see the Knicks getting better. They lost a SG/SF defender (with the possiblity of JR splitting) and the downgrade C. Bledsoe nice addition but not at that cost.

Deandre makes less money and expires at the same time as Chandler. The difference is Chandler will be 32 and Jordan will 26.

The question is who do the Knicks value more. Shumpert or Bledsoe. PG's and Centers come at a premium in this league.

You got to get past Miami. Who do you want, Shump and Chandler or Jordan and Bedsoe?

Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
AnubisADL
Posts: 27382
Alba Posts: 13
Joined: 6/29/2009
Member: #2771
USA
4/23/2013  5:07 PM
martin wrote:
AnubisADL wrote:
martin wrote:
AnubisADL wrote:
Solace wrote:We can't get rid of Tyson. Dump Tyson and we're undersized again. I have nothing against Tyson. I'm not sure we can get fair value in a trade for him and he's a major part of our success, especially in the locker room. There's next to zero reason to trade Tyson. Trade Amar'e you can argue. Tyson, no.

This thought that Kenyon Martin can man center every game leaves us undersized and ridiculously thin. I really like Kenyon, but there are still teams in this league that play big and we always have injury concerns with older players.

Plus, at this point, if the team has found chemistry, leave it alone unless we have a trade with a clear win. Part of why we sucked for 10 years was the roster would be 100% overturned every 18 months. Guys can't learn to play well with each other with so much tweaking.

Not really. LA Clippers would be the most ideal trade partners. Deandre Jordan is young and hasnt been injury prone. He can run and finish around the rim.

Chandler and Shumpert
for
Jordan and Bledsoe

Biggest thing is the Knicks get younger and do a rebuild on the fly around Melo.

LA gets a guard who can play next to Paul and defend and a center who can make free throws. Plus Chandler and Paul are cool.

I dont see the Knicks getting better. They lost a SG/SF defender (with the possiblity of JR splitting) and the downgrade C. Bledsoe nice addition but not at that cost.

Deandre makes less money and expires at the same time as Chandler. The difference is Chandler will be 32 and Jordan will 26.

The question is who do the Knicks value more. Shumpert or Bledsoe. PG's and Centers come at a premium in this league.

You got to get past Miami. Who do you want, Shump and Chandler or Jordan and Bedsoe?

I understand. I dont think Chandler and Shumpert get us over the top. Amare was the difference maker and he is Allan Houston status at this point.

So reloading and hoping Bledsoe blows up is a decent plan. Knicks are old and lack depth. Worse case Knicks have tradeable assets in Jordan and Bledsoe. With the new CBA S&T's are very hard to accomplish.

Making smart trades will be very important going forward with Melo making 20 million a season.

NY Knicks - Retirement home for players and GMs
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
4/23/2013  5:08 PM
martin wrote:
AnubisADL wrote:
martin wrote:
AnubisADL wrote:
Solace wrote:We can't get rid of Tyson. Dump Tyson and we're undersized again. I have nothing against Tyson. I'm not sure we can get fair value in a trade for him and he's a major part of our success, especially in the locker room. There's next to zero reason to trade Tyson. Trade Amar'e you can argue. Tyson, no.

This thought that Kenyon Martin can man center every game leaves us undersized and ridiculously thin. I really like Kenyon, but there are still teams in this league that play big and we always have injury concerns with older players.

Plus, at this point, if the team has found chemistry, leave it alone unless we have a trade with a clear win. Part of why we sucked for 10 years was the roster would be 100% overturned every 18 months. Guys can't learn to play well with each other with so much tweaking.

Not really. LA Clippers would be the most ideal trade partners. Deandre Jordan is young and hasnt been injury prone. He can run and finish around the rim.

Chandler and Shumpert
for
Jordan and Bledsoe

Biggest thing is the Knicks get younger and do a rebuild on the fly around Melo.

LA gets a guard who can play next to Paul and defend and a center who can make free throws. Plus Chandler and Paul are cool.

I dont see the Knicks getting better. They lost a SG/SF defender (with the possiblity of JR splitting) and the downgrade C. Bledsoe nice addition but not at that cost.

Deandre makes less money and expires at the same time as Chandler. The difference is Chandler will be 32 and Jordan will 26.

The question is who do the Knicks value more. Shumpert or Bledsoe. PG's and Centers come at a premium in this league.

You got to get past Miami. Who do you want, Shump and Chandler or Jordan and Bedsoe?

Shump chandler

Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
4/23/2013  5:10 PM    LAST EDITED: 4/23/2013  5:11 PM
I hate to say it, but blocks is sometimes a flawed stat. A lot of big guys get weak side blocks. Which means, the offensive player gets by him and then they block from behind. What you really want is someone who keeps the player in front of him and affects more shots rather than simply blocking. Blocks is an indication, but it can be misleading.

Along those lines, someone like Larry Sanders, I don't think he's a dominant defensive player. Miami ran a layup line dunking on the basket in game 1.

Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
4/23/2013  5:16 PM    LAST EDITED: 4/23/2013  5:21 PM
Thats a fair point problem is Tyson has been a turnstile defensively all year. You dont have to pay $14mil for that kind if production. Maybe he was saving himself from getting in foul trouble cis we were thin up front before kmart we will find out soon enough. I agree with Briggs. Niw is the time for Tyson to earn his contract.

Id like to see a major upgrade at PG

Knixkik
Posts: 35473
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #11
USA
4/23/2013  5:33 PM
I am completely against trading Chandler, however Bledsoe is the type of talent you consider trading him for because he has franchise-changing potential. I would deal Chandler, our first round pick, and cash for Bledsoe and Jordan but would not be a fan of including Shumpert. Other than that, i prefer to keep Chandler long-term.
yellowboy90
Posts: 33942
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/23/2011
Member: #3538

4/23/2013  5:41 PM    LAST EDITED: 4/23/2013  5:59 PM
Solace wrote:I hate to say it, but blocks is sometimes a flawed stat. A lot of big guys get weak side blocks. Which means, the offensive player gets by him and then they block from behind. What you really want is someone who keeps the player in front of him and affects more shots rather than simply blocking. Blocks is an indication, but it can be misleading.

Along those lines, someone like Larry Sanders, I don't think he's a dominant defensive player. Miami ran a layup line dunking on the basket in game 1.

Larry Sanders has great defensive numbers not including blocks.

http://hoopchalk.com/tag/larry-sanders/



These days, Larry Sanders is everywhere. Literally and figuratively. Not only does the Milwaukee Bucks 6’11” gazelle fly all over the floor, wreaking defensive havoc with his seemingly endless wingspan and quickness that belies his size to lead the NBA in blocks. But he’s getting recognition for all that now, too, his name finally a household one after the MIT Sloan Sports Athletic Conference in Boston last weekend.

Grantland’s Kirk Goldsberry, maestro of league analysis through spacial analytics, presented a research paper at SSAC called “The Dwight Effect: A New Ensemble of Interior Defense Analytics for the NBA.” Title not withstanding, Howard isn’t the standard-bearer of Goldsberry and Eric Weiss’ innovative research; that’s Sanders, the newest bundle of length, anticipation and athleticism to take the league by defensive storm.

Using super-advanced player tracking cameras developed by SportVU, Goldsberry and Weiss create a new way to value the defensive impact of the NBA’s big men. As with all exploratory exercises, there are limitations – sample size and the cameras’ inability to account for context related to momentum, direction and the like. But that’s no fun here, and does little to diminish Sanders’ ever-obvious imprint on the game. ”The Dwight Effect” or not, he’s worthy of being mentioned among basketball’s best defenders as the blogosphere’s been shouting and exclaiming for months.

But it sure is nice when the most progressive, nuanced numbers confirm the eye-test, raw per game averages and advanced statistics. And by god, do they.

This isn’t a summary or breakdown of the work by Goldsberry and Weiss. Read the article here; it’s fantastic from every conceivable angle. For our purpose, though, what’s important is the paper’s final line and biggest revelation: “…Larry Sanders is the best interior defender in the NBA.”

Here’s why.

Sanders is as valuable for those “Oh my god! WTF!” moments as he is the much smaller ones it takes a semi-trained eye to see. He’s the league’s preeminent shot-blocker but – given Goldsberry’s analysis and confirming observations of the naked eye – he also affects, altars and even prevents more paint attempts than any other player in the NBA. The latter isn’t obvious in the above; these are just highlights that convey how dynamic Sanders is as an all-court force. How many centers are capable of completing LeBron-ish chase-down rejections at all, let alone with such a sense of ease and commonplace? It’s a one-man list. Now, that’s not to say Sanders casually sprints 80-plus feet behind a ballhandler and gets to the opposing rim/backboard before the ball does on a nightly basis. Even for him, that’s a rarity. But it sure is breathtaking to watch, and indicative of the kind of razor-sharp tools in his shed that combine to make him such an intimidating presence.

We’ll stick with the flashy stuff for now. It’s not discussed often, but Sanders’ length and quickness makes him an effective thief of dribbles, too. Few if any players can stretch to Armstrong-like proportions while cutting off penetrators to their dribble, or do the same in post-up situations. It’s actually surprising, then, that he “only” ranks 15th among centers in steals per 40 minutes. But in terms of solely swiping the opposition’s handle, it’s likely Sanders is close to leading the center pack. That’s an assumption, obviously, but based on the visuals it’s a safe one to make.

Now we’re getting to the awesome nitty-gritty, the stuff you have to look for to see. The above are defensive plays in which it takes more than a box score to convey their worth. Sanders serves as an intimidator and rim-deterrent in all six instances (five clips) here, albeit in very different ways. The first two sequences are marked by a Sanders steal and block at the end, but that’s not what makes them special. In the initial clip, Landry Fields dribbles along the right baseline toward the basket after receiving a screen. He’s pretty well defended by Luc Richard Mbah Moute, but Fields has enough momentum and the proper angle to get a fairly good shot attempt. As long as Sanders is out of the play, that is. And he should be! Sanders doesn’t make his initial move towards the action until Fields is already planting to explode; by all other human standards, Sanders is late on the weak-side help and not a factor. But Sanders is a different animal or alien, and the slightest hesitation by Fields in the air gives him enough time to leap from one side of the basket to the other and block the shot. The final result makes it all look routine – a creator forcing a shot while knowing a premier shot-blocker lurks – but the sequence is anything but. Ordinary or even good defenders aren’t supposed to close and cover ground this quickly. Larry Sanders, though, is something else.

Next, Chandler Parsons uses a shot-fake to blow by JJ Redick in secondary transition. That’s all great; Parsons is a good finisher at the rim and a skilled passer for a player his size, too. But he’s indecisive once he puts the ball on the floor, knowing – unlike Fields, apparently – Sanders’ unique capabilities. Instead of moving up to stop the ball once Parsons is by Redick and a reaching Mike Dunleavy, Sanders stays back with arms outstretched between the awaiting Omer Asik and Thomas Robinson. Most big men couldn’t get away with this seeming inaction; Parsons would simply attack the rim with a vengeance. But Sanders knows both of his reputation and rare combination of quick-jump ability and timing, and baits Parsons into a dump-off to Asik. Of course, he’s long enough to get a hand on it and eventually initiates a Milwaukee break after corralling the loose ball. Parsons was scared, Sanders was nuanced and it’s a potential four-point swing. Somewhere, Goldsberry and Weiss nod in approval.

The following action is pretty simple. Jeremy Lin comes off an Asik ball-screen, heading left towards the rim. Sanders barely moves once Lin uses the screen, instead idling what looks like absent-mindedly just above the block. The Rockets know their scouting report well, apparently, because Lin, like Parsons, has a clear path to the hoop as he turns the corner. But instead of aggressively attacking as Sanders recovers and contests, he opts for a floater from nine feet. That’s a difficult shot any way you slice it, and one Lin isn’t particularly good at – he’s shooting just 32.6% from that awkward area of the floor this season. But look at the high, high arc he puts on the shot, too, undoubtedly weary of Sanders’ range to contest or block it. Lin, predictably, misses badly, and the Bucks are off to the races again.

We’re still with the Rockets, this time back to Harden. After smoothly spinning away from Monta Ellis, Harden has Sanders stuck between a rock and a hard place – in the middle of a 2-on-1 with he and Parsons. Harden is one of the league’s most devastating and creative finishers, and normally attacks hard in this situation. But that scouting report looms too large in his head, and he immediately slows upon seeing Sanders and confuses his timing with Parsons. Not that it matters; Harden, wanting nothing to do with Sanders, was in PUJIT mode all the way from the beginning. Like Lin before him, he misses, but that isn’t what’s most important here. The disparity in efficiency between a Harden rim attempt and pull-up is huge; getting him to opt for the latter, whether it goes in or not, is a big win for Milwaukee.

Finally, a two possession sequence in which Sanders thwarts all Houston scoring opportunities. Harden uses a screen from Asik going right, away from his strong-hand. Sanders hedges harder than in previous clips and Harden retreats as a result, resetting the action. Once things progress and Sanders follows Asik to the weak side of the paint, Harden attacks right again, this time with a sense of finality. Sanders recovers in time to contest, jumping with his right arm outstretched toward the ball and Harden’s much-preferred finishing hand. Smart guy, this Sanders. Harden, without a shot, dumps off to the sometimes stone-handed Asik, who fails to collect the ball before it bounces out of bounds off Milwaukee. Win, Sanders. There’s only 2.3 seconds left on the shot clock after Harden’s initial indecision and subsequent near-turnover, putting Houston in a difficult spot. Why Harden’s the in-bounder is anyone’s guess, but he does well to find Asik several feet from the basket in the paint’s middle. Sanders stayed low late to protect from a cross-court pass to a cutting Lin, and gives Asik room as a result. But he knows the Rockets center’s limitations and of his own speedy recovery time, and is easily back to his man to effectively contest. It’s effectively over from here, with Sanders’ arms outstretched and Asik still fumbling with the ball as the shot clock expires. Two Houston possessions, one Sanders, no shots, no points. Let’s call it “The LARRY! Effect.”

Parsing through Sanders video is like examining Georges Seurat’s A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte. His game, like pointillism, offers endless and always-growing interpretations, subtleties best appreciated over time and intricacies one must strain to best see, appreciate and fully understand. But perhaps the most brilliant, unique aspect of both he and this masterpiece is they can be admired regardless; Sanders through all those highlight-reel blocks and A Sunday Afternoon in its broad totality. The combination of rare but acceptable rotations, shots missed or not taken and infinite number of miniature dots coupled with the big-picture aspects, though, are what give Sanders and Seurat their proper due. And in that vein, the NBA world has finally come around.


http://www.sloansportsconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/The%20Dwight%20Effect%20A%20New%20Ensemble%20of%20Interior%20Defense%20Analytics%20for%20the%20NBA.pdf

gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
4/23/2013  5:43 PM
Yea sanders was credited for the bucks actually playing enough D to actually make the playoffs this year
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
4/23/2013  5:45 PM
yellowboy90 wrote:
Solace wrote:I hate to say it, but blocks is sometimes a flawed stat. A lot of big guys get weak side blocks. Which means, the offensive player gets by him and then they block from behind. What you really want is someone who keeps the player in front of him and affects more shots rather than simply blocking. Blocks is an indication, but it can be misleading.

Along those lines, someone like Larry Sanders, I don't think he's a dominant defensive player. Miami ran a layup line dunking on the basket in game 1.

Larry Sanders has great defensive numbers not including blocks.

http://hoopchalk.com/2013/03/06/appreciating-the-defensive-depths-of-larry-sanders/


http://www.sloansportsconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/The%20Dwight%20Effect%20A%20New%20Ensemble%20of%20Interior%20Defense%20Analytics%20for%20the%20NBA.pdf

Fair enough. I haven't seen him play that much. But the games where I have, I wasn't impressed. He was pretty awful in game 1, but so was the entire Bucks team. Anyway, I didn't say he was a bad defender, just I don't believe he's an elite defensive player.

Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
AnubisADL
Posts: 27382
Alba Posts: 13
Joined: 6/29/2009
Member: #2771
USA
4/23/2013  5:47 PM
Knixkik wrote:I am completely against trading Chandler, however Bledsoe is the type of talent you consider trading him for because he has franchise-changing potential. I would deal Chandler, our first round pick, and cash for Bledsoe and Jordan but would not be a fan of including Shumpert. Other than that, i prefer to keep Chandler long-term.

Chandler is highly overrated.

Chandler KILLS us on the offensive end. He has no offense outside of 5 feet from the rim. He clogs the paint and forces us to play 4 on 5 on the offensive end. Dude is still living off his Championship run with Dallas with a team of jump shooters.

Sadly we aren't getting any 2-way centers in exchange for Tyson Chandler.

NY Knicks - Retirement home for players and GMs
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
4/23/2013  5:48 PM
No but Rondo is an elite PG
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
4/23/2013  5:51 PM    LAST EDITED: 4/23/2013  5:52 PM
gunsnewing wrote:No but Rondo is an elite PG

He is, but with the Knicks style of playing the most ISOs in the league, that isn't necessarily our biggest need.

It's like in football, take a team that runs a lot and that's how they're coached, then add the best passing QB in the league. It might not have as big an impact as it should, because the QB will only get 20 throws a game? In general, sure, I might prefer Rondo. But this team has a limited window with Melo, so I'd rather focus on what makes the *team* better rather than individual players.

Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
yellowboy90
Posts: 33942
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/23/2011
Member: #3538

4/23/2013  6:04 PM
Solace wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:No but Rondo is an elite PG

He is, but with the Knicks style of playing the most ISOs in the league, that isn't necessarily our biggest need.

It's like in football, take a team that runs a lot and that's how they're coached, then add the best passing QB in the league. It might not have as big an impact as it should, because the QB will only get 20 throws a game? In general, sure, I might prefer Rondo. But this team has a limited window with Melo, so I'd rather focus on what makes the *team* better rather than individual players.

Are they the most ISO team? Also, since are secondary offense is the PnR he would help a great deal. He had the stamina to run the PnR and attack the basket for a full 48. He also is a great entry passer.

I still would not do the trade because the Knicks would still need a Center.

Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
4/23/2013  6:08 PM
yellowboy90 wrote:
Solace wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:No but Rondo is an elite PG

He is, but with the Knicks style of playing the most ISOs in the league, that isn't necessarily our biggest need.

It's like in football, take a team that runs a lot and that's how they're coached, then add the best passing QB in the league. It might not have as big an impact as it should, because the QB will only get 20 throws a game? In general, sure, I might prefer Rondo. But this team has a limited window with Melo, so I'd rather focus on what makes the *team* better rather than individual players.

Are they the most ISO team? Also, since are secondary offense is the PnR he would help a great deal. He had the stamina to run the PnR and attack the basket for a full 48. He also is a great entry passer.

I still would not do the trade because the Knicks would still need a Center.

Yes, the Knicks statistically run the most isos per possession in the entire league. That's why D'Antoni and Lin are not here; because that's the system that plays towards our best player's strengths. I've come to the point where I accept the system for what it is and want to play to the strengths and see where it can take us. Let's just get guys that can play with Melo rather than trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. I'm not sure if Rondo fits on this team, but we know Chandler is practically a necessity. End of story for me.

Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
yellowboy90
Posts: 33942
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/23/2011
Member: #3538

4/23/2013  6:18 PM
Solace wrote:
yellowboy90 wrote:
Solace wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:No but Rondo is an elite PG

He is, but with the Knicks style of playing the most ISOs in the league, that isn't necessarily our biggest need.

It's like in football, take a team that runs a lot and that's how they're coached, then add the best passing QB in the league. It might not have as big an impact as it should, because the QB will only get 20 throws a game? In general, sure, I might prefer Rondo. But this team has a limited window with Melo, so I'd rather focus on what makes the *team* better rather than individual players.

Are they the most ISO team? Also, since are secondary offense is the PnR he would help a great deal. He had the stamina to run the PnR and attack the basket for a full 48. He also is a great entry passer.

I still would not do the trade because the Knicks would still need a Center.

Yes, the Knicks statistically run the most isos per possession in the entire league. That's why D'Antoni and Lin are not here; because that's the system that plays towards our best player's strengths. I've come to the point where I accept the system for what it is and want to play to the strengths and see where it can take us. Let's just get guys that can play with Melo rather than trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. I'm not sure if Rondo fits on this team, but we know Chandler is practically a necessity. End of story for me.

I agree that I do not think Rondo is a perfect fit only because he does not shoot the three well. The rest of his game would fit nicely.

I like Larry Sanders but his rebounding numbers are not great and Deandre Jordan is nearly a Tyson clone without the free throw shooting ability when looking at his box score stats.

Trading Chandler is not the key. The key would be to trade for a back up and hope he grows into his replacement. The knicks need to find an Asik or Vucevic. I myself would look at Myers Leonard from the blazers and see if they will give up on him early. Problem is that the Knicks have nothing to trade with. Maybe they dump him like Sac dumped Robinson?

gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
4/23/2013  6:29 PM
You guys bring up valid points. Rondo isnt a shoot first pg but he is an elite playmaker and needs the ball in his hands. Knicks are better suited with a younger Prigioni who is there to move the ball and dump it to Melo.
loweyecue
Posts: 27468
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 11/20/2005
Member: #1037

4/23/2013  7:22 PM
Nalod wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:Or something along those lines. Dump Amare somehow. Sign a cheap center to platoon with Kmart & Camby. Knicks would be DEADLY with Melo and Rondo wow! Still hearing Celtics might move Rondo. Maybe we can get him while he is making it back from ACL

C's need a big.

Its not Melo & Paul but not too shabby imo

Since you threw it out there its fair game:

"Somehow dump Amre".............

Celts have been trying to trade Rondo because despite his talent the man is just not liked. He is tolerated.

With a blown ACL this dude is not movable for two reasons now.

Rondo dropped in the draft for good reasons relating to the fact he was not a good shooter and he is odd.

I would do it on a heartbeat. Rondo has no quit and plays 100% all the time.of course Biston would rather implode.

TKF on Melo ::....he is a punk, a jerk, a self absorbed out of shape, self aggrandizing, unprofessional, volume chucking coach killing playoff loser!!
martin
Posts: 76386
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
4/23/2013  11:47 PM
AnubisADL wrote:
Knixkik wrote:I am completely against trading Chandler, however Bledsoe is the type of talent you consider trading him for because he has franchise-changing potential. I would deal Chandler, our first round pick, and cash for Bledsoe and Jordan but would not be a fan of including Shumpert. Other than that, i prefer to keep Chandler long-term.

Chandler is highly overrated.

Chandler KILLS us on the offensive end. He has no offense outside of 5 feet from the rim. He clogs the paint and forces us to play 4 on 5 on the offensive end. Dude is still living off his Championship run with Dallas with a team of jump shooters.

Sadly we aren't getting any 2-way centers in exchange for Tyson Chandler.

Knicks are one of the best offensive teams in the league

Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
4/24/2013  12:20 AM
Rondos is indispensable to the Celtics

He is not going anywhere no time soon.

The premise of this thread avoids reality

once a knick always a knick
Rondo for Tyson

©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