BigRedDog wrote:Why is an ETO bad? Most people that hate the signing feel that Melo will be falling apart, on the downhill making the max at age 35. So if he leaves a yr early wouldn't that be good for the knicks???

It shouldn't be an outrageous issue since people already knew he got a 5 yr deal to bein with. They already made the claims of why its bad. I guess this could mean that if he is still valuable he could opt out and get more money possibly.

mreinman wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:

Knicks22 wrote:
Houston, Amare, and now this one. Contracts that will cripple the franchise for years....

Seriously?

It is 2M more than the rumored deal and now we are doomed?

no trade and an ETO?

Can some of you just say "damn that sucks"?

You can say that and still think he is a top player.

"Houston, Amare, and now this one. Contracts that will cripple the franchise for years...."

I mean, really?

None of those players are at Melo's level and this contract doesn't cripple us like those did at their times.

H20's contract seemed to be driven on having a guy with a Max contract to make it seem like we had a franchise player, which he wasn't.

Amar'e was a very good player who had injury problems in the past. We took the risk because Walsh wanted to make the Knicks relevant and attractive to LeBron. We know how that ended.

Melo is a great scorer that is underrated in the other areas he brings to the game, especially what he has done the last few seasons, looking more active on defense and grabbing more rebounds while playing out of position at PF.

While I don't love the deal, to say that it cripples us and bring horrible contracts as comparison is way off base.

Melo does come off as "all-talk, no-show" because this is a very small discount for a man that said was willing to take less to have a winner in NY. This deal says "its all about my family and our security", which is ok but faaaaar away from "making sacrifices to win a championship".

BigRedDog wrote:

Dagger wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:Why is an ETO bad? Most people that hate the signing feel that Melo will be falling apart, on the downhill making the max at age 35. So if he leaves a yr early wouldn't that be good for the knicks???

Because if he's falling apart he's not going to exercise the ETO...it is only there to help Melo.

So if he's healthy but still 34yrs old, on the decline , making the max and opts out, I would think people would be happy.

I disagree, if he's playing well and very healthy without much decline I don't think people will want him gone.

Simply the ETO means that if he is playing poorly, injured, or declining rapidly he can stay making the Max and if he is thriving he can leave our team and search for more money or a better situation elsewhere without netting us any assets. We would have been much better off if this was a team option. The ETO doesn't bother me that much, it's the no-trade clause that it is really the kicker.

For all the faith fans have had on Phil, you have to believe that he still knows what he is doing with this deal. You have to believe that the "discount" given will indeed give Phil enough room to sign a second star next year, although, there may be a new angle here.

Many have wondered about the availability of stars next year. Most talk about Gasol and he would be the target. But maybe Phil will focus more on using the contracts of Amar'e and Bargnani to bring the supporting cast for Melo through trade.

Whatever the case, you have to hope Phil still has a plan that included a contract like this.

I have to add this: With this contract, Melo still comes out as an opportunist and a money-first player instead of the win-first player he set himself to be with his comments in February.

anrst wrote:

Dagger wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:Why is an ETO bad? Most people that hate the signing feel that Melo will be falling apart, on the downhill making the max at age 35. So if he leaves a yr early wouldn't that be good for the knicks???

Because if he's falling apart he's not going to exercise the ETO...it is only there to help Melo.

if he's falling apart he's staying the last year, opt out or not. don't be irrational.

That's what I said in my post...

I'm just explaining that the ETO does not help the Knicks at all, as it seemed Clifford the BigRedDog was implying it would

Dagger wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:Why is an ETO bad? Most people that hate the signing feel that Melo will be falling apart, on the downhill making the max at age 35. So if he leaves a yr early wouldn't that be good for the knicks???

Because if he's falling apart he's not going to exercise the ETO...it is only there to help Melo.

CrushAlot wrote:

Dagger wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:Why is an ETO bad? Most people that hate the signing feel that Melo will be falling apart, on the downhill making the max at age 35. So if he leaves a yr early wouldn't that be good for the knicks???

Because if he's falling apart he's not going to exercise the ETO...it is only there to help Melo.

Like Amare.

Yup

Knicksfan wrote:One thing about this: Phil Jackson offered this deal.
you have to believe that he still knows what he is doing with this deal. You have to believe that the "discount" given will indeed give Phil enough room to sign a second star next year

Example of how his contract could look meeting salary rules under CBA

Year 1: $22,500,000 (starting salary)
Year 2: $22,668,750 (0.75% increase)
Year 3: $24,368,906 (7.5% increase)
Year 4: $26,196,574 (7.5% increase)
Year 5: $28,161,317 (7.5% increase)
Total: $123,895,548

Is there really such a thing as a discount when you still get a raise?