CrushAlot wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:^Ron You forgot about Dantoni. He challenged him and things did not end well. Leading to the hiring of Woodson

I think once Walsh was gone things were not going to end well for D'Antoni. Amnestying his point guard to bring in a big man was a pretty anti-D'Antoni move. Hiring a defensive assistant head coach after making that move kind of indicated that there was a guy in waiting if Mike D. couldn't win with his 55 million dollar front line.

On the amnesty of Billups,
Actually that was under Glen Grunwald's regime, after watching The Dallas Mavericks win a RING without many defensive players, he thought Tyson Chandler would be the player that could provide the defense/rebounding that STAT and CA lacked

Well, he wasn't completely wrong, as we do need a shot blocker/center to patrol the paint if we were going to be contenders but the way the team was built with STAT and CA, we needed a PG to initiate the offense of a high caliber, especially if Dantoni was the coach, well that changed with Glen's theory as well...

CP3 was always the plan from Walsh to Dantoni, while hoping to upgrade/add talent for him to start filling his roster till CP3 would be available
Essentially it was Dolan that traded for CA, trumping Walsh and Walsh would leave right after he was disrespected and was unable to complete his vision of the team that he patiently waited for....

On Billups and CA, both Walsh and Dantoni didn't even want CA at the price that Denver wanted us to pay and that was why Uri and CA both went to target Walsh
Uri held both CA and Dolan by the balls, working with rumors with The Nets to send him to Bklyn instead
With rumors of The Nets willing to send 6 1st (TOTAL BS) rounders for CA
On the other hand Walsh said the opposite, says we have leverage, and we do not have to pay that much, and thus the CHICKEN game was played

Uri played his hand well, not admitting he had no leverage and Dolan sucked in as he waited patiently for 2 years but Lebron, Wade, and Bosh dissed Walsh and NYK, especially Lebron, saying why should he go to NYK and he doesn't believe in no defense....

Uri knew CA wanted his money and with the CBA with the new rules, CA did not know how much money he was actually going to earn less
It turns out though it was NOT signifigant at all because although the % would be less, by finishing out the year and signing the next team it would be % of his final year which was never opted out off anyway
And that extra year that he wanted, well it was used to OPT out this past summer, so basically we traded for CA for no reason but to give Denver assets for no reason at all
We were on pace to make the play offs already and we could not have possibly done worse than getting swept by Boston with or without CA...

So if CA would have threatened to play it cool and say IT DOESN'T MATTER, I will only resign with NYK's
Uri would have no choice but to trade him to NYK with 1 1st rounder, 1 player (Gallo or Wilson Chandler), Curry's expiring, and no Billups/Felton/Shelden Williams/Balkaman swap, maybe add in a swap or 1 2 2nd round picks (not GS's 2nd rounders but ours because GS sucked at the time and their 2nd rounders were worth much more as a were predicted to be high 2nd rounders)

Instead Dolan felt the need to step in and get an ALL STAR to fill the Garden
However, at the price we payed, it was just nearly impossible to recover
We saved Denver 60m in salaries, with about 40m on contracts, and taxes and Curry's exiring went to Twolves for AR and Koufus went to Denver
That is a lot of money to save and in todays CBA, what would that be worth? 3 1st rounders or even more....

Also we must remember that the Amnesty did no exist when we made the deal for CA, it was made after we already picked up Billups contract
CP3 was suppose to be a FA in 2 years but we were suppose to keep enough assets/cap space to push a trade for him
Also we would have either had a MLE or Bi Annual Exemption somewhere to add talent as well....

dk7th wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

OAK wrote:Thoughts?

Deion Sanders has been called the best "pure cover corner" in NFL history.

While Rod Woodson ( arguably of course) has long been seen as one of the best overall cornerbacks in NFL history.

Woodson was rare for his era, he had size, he had speed, he could cover, he could defend the run, he was a smart player, his athleticism was off the charts, his fundamentals were elite.

Sanders though, could lock down half the field by himself, but if you wanted a guy to give you elite level press coverage or a sure tackler or an imposing run defender, or someone who could slide over to safety seamlessly, he probably wasn't your guy.

The point is, complimenting that you do one thing well doesn't always translate to you being the kind of player that does many of the core things that helps your team win.

I don't think anyone here discounts Melo's lethality as an isolation one vs one basketball offensive player. I don't think anyone here will argue that Melo is offensively complete from a natural standpoint. He can do it all, hit from three, take you at midrange, with his back the basket, in transition, with either hand, against size or speed, even against many double teams.

The general arguments about Melo's game here are about leadership, skill set translating to being more than just a gunner/scorer, lack of defense, lack of general BB IQ, his conditioning, his inability to handle the press well, his inability to make players around him better, his problems reading a basic defensive set ( which is not one vs one basketball) and his, at times, low efficiency play.

What is Paul Pierce saying here that most people here don't already acknowledge. Melo is an elite one vs one isolation player. In a single matchup, he's deadly.

What Paul Pierce is NOT SAYING is that trait alone means Melo is above the criticisms he receives as a player in general. From some Knicks fans and from general basketball/NBA fans.

IMHO, nothing Pierce says changes the basic narrative - That Melo is just good enough to help you be just good enough to be a treadmill team. That you need to be more than just a lethal one vs one isolation offensive juggernaut to actually win playoff ball and lead your team to championship.

great post though i have a few minor quibbles and a few not insignificant points to add or perhaps rephrase.

1) his footwork is awful-- and he has never developed it, which is stupid or shows his lack of ambition. he lacks this skill.

2) his ballhandling skills, which should work "hand and foot" with his feet, is simply lousy-- does anybody notice that he is incapable of changing direction??? he lacks this skill too.

points (1) and (2) are euphemised and glossed over-- even lauded-- as "bully ball." i call it "bvllsh!t ball"

3) he has poor court vision-- this is not a skill but a natural gift, or as some might say a "talent."

4) his decison-making (bbiq) is horrible. this last one is a bit tougher to qualify because often bbiq is a combination or outcome of properly developed skills as well as the gift or talent of court vision.

leadership and defense? laughable

Yea those are the exact flaws that have prevented Melo from taking his game to the next level. It's been brought up countless times and I've yet to see any improvement. $24mil per warrants improvements imo. At$15-18mio you live with it. Roughly $10mil of cap money you can spend on covering those flaws

Bonn1997 wrote:Playing ability and player evaluation ability aren't necessarily correlated. No one demonstrated this better than Isiah Thomas.
This is like assuming the oldest person in the room knows the most about health and medicine

Bonn1997 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Playing ability and player evaluation ability aren't necessarily correlated. No one demonstrated this better than Isiah Thomas.
This is like assuming the oldest person in the room knows the most about health and medicine

Is the oldest person in the room highly respected and an nba finals mvp?

Are we still talking about Isiah?

dk7th wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Playing ability and player evaluation ability aren't necessarily correlated. No one demonstrated this better than Isiah Thomas.
This is like assuming the oldest person in the room knows the most about health and medicine

are you expressing some doubt on the validity of pierce's evaluation of carmelo anthinay? and if so what is it about his comments that you take issue with?

This is the kind of thinking that gets Melo into trouble and makes him overvalue himself and he and the team suffers

gunsnewing wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

OAK wrote:Thoughts?

Deion Sanders has been called the best "pure cover corner" in NFL history.

While Rod Woodson ( arguably of course) has long been seen as one of the best overall cornerbacks in NFL history.

Woodson was rare for his era, he had size, he had speed, he could cover, he could defend the run, he was a smart player, his athleticism was off the charts, his fundamentals were elite.

Sanders though, could lock down half the field by himself, but if you wanted a guy to give you elite level press coverage or a sure tackler or an imposing run defender, or someone who could slide over to safety seamlessly, he probably wasn't your guy.

The point is, complimenting that you do one thing well doesn't always translate to you being the kind of player that does many of the core things that helps your team win.

I don't think anyone here discounts Melo's lethality as an isolation one vs one basketball offensive player. I don't think anyone here will argue that Melo is offensively complete from a natural standpoint. He can do it all, hit from three, take you at midrange, with his back the basket, in transition, with either hand, against size or speed, even against many double teams.

The general arguments about Melo's game here are about leadership, skill set translating to being more than just a gunner/scorer, lack of defense, lack of general BB IQ, his conditioning, his inability to handle the press well, his inability to make players around him better, his problems reading a basic defensive set ( which is not one vs one basketball) and his, at times, low efficiency play.

What is Paul Pierce saying here that most people here don't already acknowledge. Melo is an elite one vs one isolation player. In a single matchup, he's deadly.

What Paul Pierce is NOT SAYING is that trait alone means Melo is above the criticisms he receives as a player in general. From some Knicks fans and from general basketball/NBA fans.

IMHO, nothing Pierce says changes the basic narrative - That Melo is just good enough to help you be just good enough to be a treadmill team. That you need to be more than just a lethal one vs one isolation offensive juggernaut to actually win playoff ball and lead your team to championship.

great post though i have a few minor quibbles and a few not insignificant points to add or perhaps rephrase.

1) his footwork is awful-- and he has never developed it, which is stupid or shows his lack of ambition. he lacks this skill.

2) his ballhandling skills, which should work "hand and foot" with his feet, is simply lousy-- does anybody notice that he is incapable of changing direction??? he lacks this skill too.

points (1) and (2) are euphemised and glossed over-- even lauded-- as "bully ball." i call it "bvllsh!t ball"

3) he has poor court vision-- this is not a skill but a natural gift, or as some might say a "talent."

4) his decison-making (bbiq) is horrible. this last one is a bit tougher to qualify because often bbiq is a combination or outcome of properly developed skills as well as the gift or talent of court vision.

leadership and defense? laughable

Yea those are the exact flaws that have prevented Melo from taking his game to the next level. It's been brought up countless times and I've yet to see any improvement. $24mil per warrants improvements imo. At$15-18mio you live with it. Roughly $10mil of cap money you can spend on covering those flaws

Melo is a finisher.
He needs team which works the ball to hit him for scoring.
He never get this settings in his carrier.
Hopefully Phil will arrange this for Melo... they have no other choice.