ekstarks94 wrote:Please do not put words....in my mouth....I never said Riley talked James into a bad deal....they won two Chips...what Riley did was close the deal...and that he did

Your exact words were new car salesman, which means he sold James on Miami.

Riley facilitated the deal. He was in the guy in the finance department to play out the analogy.

He didn't sell anyone on anything.

Also check you facts Sir....it was common knowledge that the Knicks would have the space to sign him....if you recall...or maybe you don't ...the new CBA was being worked out the following summer and Melo was concerned about getting paid....

I'm well aware of my facts. Two of the players they traded for him - Wilson and Mosgov, they would have had to renounce (as a RFA) and trade in order to create the cap space.

This is the continued fallacy of the trade, that if Anthony came in free agency they would have had Gallinari, Wilson, Mosgov and Anthony, and that is simply not accurate.

And just because we're on the subject, Denver didn't even wind up swapping the 2016 pick with NY, because their return in the deal has done nothing but make them worse than the Knicks.

So I'll ask again, what future did they mortgage?

The oft-injured Gallinari who plays the same position as Melo? And the 2014 12th pick?

That's was the whole future???

What is the point? We had nothing to offer in 2010...now we do.....that all it is...our previous mismanagement and bad deals hampered the franchise for years....the fact is we have KP....we control all our firsts....

I'm not arguing your point, I'm arguing some of your statements you made to illustrate your point.

ekstarks94 wrote:I said new car salesman in terms of making the pitch...he sold Wade put it in his ear...Riley closed it....trust me without Riles I dunno if that deal gets done....mainly because what Riley is promoting...stability and a winning culture....without that not sure the big three happens..

Trusting you or not is irrelevant, you don't have any inside information.

You described Riley as a salesperson, your words.

He was not. Didn't need to be. Again, it's documented.

I believe you are mistaken...

What you believe is beside the point. Math and the facts are what's relevant.

I'm very versed in the facts. Knicks were well short of a max projected into that offseason. If you'd like to challenge that math, challenge it with facts, not beliefs.

If we had to renounce all of them then it would make sense to do the deal we did with no problem....your recollection is factually inaccurate and misguided....I am sure you can go back on some of the posts from that time and revisit history.

I didn't say they had to renounce all of them. I said they'd have to renounce Wilson and shed Mozgov. They could have kept Gallinari.

Yes, they paid MORE obtaining him in a trade, more being Gallinari and the 2014 pick. I'm not arguing that.

Of course they shed Felton and got back Billups too, which in turn allowed them to get Chandler.

Again, all I've said is THAT is the difference between the trade and free agency.

Fans who still think they had a max cap space opening up that offseason with the roster they had are flat out wrong.

So again, instead of assuming I'm mistaken, why not take a second to prove it?

Oft injured is still an asset....exhibit A....the trade we just made...And the 2014 12th pick? .....my friend a pick is stil a pick....teams were paying 2 mill for second round picks this draft...any asset is an advantage...

Indeed, and again, an asset they got back, Billups, they were able to turn into cap space, which allowed them to sign Chandler.

Wouldn't have worked with Felton as Billups contract was much larger.

So to argue that only gave up "assets" and didn't get any back is another fallacy.

Once again, I'll I'm arguing is the "mortgage the future" line is a tried on born out of ignorance.

Worse, people continue to cling to it despite it being false because it's their preferred version of reality.

My point was that we are in a better position...

And I'm simply saying you could have made it better, without the fallacies you cited.

Knickoftime wrote:

ekstarks94 wrote:I said new car salesman in terms of making the pitch...he sold Wade put it in his ear...Riley closed it....trust me without Riles I dunno if that deal gets done....mainly because what Riley is promoting...stability and a winning culture....without that not sure the big three happens..

Trusting you or not is irrelevant, you don't have any inside information.

You described Riley as a salesperson, your words.

He was not. Didn't need to be. Again, it's documented.

I believe you are mistaken...

What you believe is beside the point. Math and the facts are what's relevant.

I'm very versed in the facts. Knicks were well short of a max projected into that offseason. If you'd like to challenge that math, challenge it with facts, not beliefs.

If we had to renounce all of them then it would make sense to do the deal we did with no problem....your recollection is factually inaccurate and misguided....I am sure you can go back on some of the posts from that time and revisit history.

I didn't say they had to renounce all of them. I said they'd have to renounce Wilson and shed Mozgov. They could have kept Gallinari.

Yes, they paid MORE obtaining him in a trade, more being Gallinari and the 2014 pick. I'm not arguing that.

Of course they shed Felton and got back Billups too, which in turn allowed them to get Chandler.

Again, all I've said is THAT is the difference between the trade and free agency.

Fans who still think they had a max cap space opening up that offseason with the roster they had are flat out wrong.

So again, instead of assuming I'm mistaken, why not take a second to prove it?

Oft injured is still an asset....exhibit A....the trade we just made...And the 2014 12th pick? .....my friend a pick is stil a pick....teams were paying 2 mill for second round picks this draft...any asset is an advantage...

Indeed, and again, an asset they got back, Billups, they were able to turn into cap space, which allowed them to sign Chandler.

Wouldn't have worked with Felton as Billups contract was much larger.

So to argue that only gave up "assets" and didn't get any back is another fallacy.

Once again, I'll I'm arguing is the "mortgage the future" line is a tried on born out of ignorance.

Worse, people continue to cling to it despite it being false because it's their preferred version of reality.

My point was that we are in a better position...

And I'm simply saying you could have made it better, without the fallacies you cited.

Time to drop the Mic....read your facts.....great debate....but semantics are overboard at this point....

Some easy reading below...provide facts on your side of the argument...if you can find them

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1822498-where-would-ny-knicks-be-if-carmelo-anthony-trade-had-never-happened

http://keepingscore.blogs.time.com/2011/02/22/did-new-york-pay-too-much-for-melo/

ekstarks94 wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

ekstarks94 wrote:More than even renounce....you trade your assets to fit Melo in the salary slot....why give up 4 players 2 picks...when you sign Melo and you have give up somebody...you trade for a pick no salary back....future asset...

Make up you mind.

Could the Knicks have fit $18.5m in salary under the cap with the cap space they were projected to have, or not?

It's a simple, straightforward question.

To answer your question...YES....we could have signed Melo and still had assets moving forward....show me the facts that say otherwise KOT

Which "assets?"

I gave you the exact cap figures the Knicks were dealing with in 2011.

How could they have signed Melo to $18.5m AND retained Wilson and Mosgov under a $58m cap.

It's a simple, mathematical question.

Knickoftime wrote:You know what, I'll help.

https://web.archive.org/web/20101125193336/http://hoopshype.com/salaries/new_york.htm

Cap was $58m in 2011-12.

Find $18.5m in cap space.

Don't forget empty roster slot caps holds and Shumpert's rookie slot for 2011.

And don't forget Chandler QO was just that. The second he signed an offer sheet that became his cap hold.

Don't write it link it....you said we did not have space to sign Melo....show me the facts that support you math..

Knickoftime wrote:

ekstarks94 wrote:Facts...baby....show me something...

You are the historian....lay out the catalog

Ummm, I already did.

https://web.archive.org/web/20101125193336/http://hoopshype.com/salaries/new_york.htm

$58m - $42,469,302 - $916,100 (Bill Walker's team option) + $1,680,360 (Imam Shumpert's #17 rookie slot) + $427,500 (minimum roster hold)= $14,338,938.

Melo made $17,149,243 in the 2010-2011 season under the final year of his Nuggets deal. The maximum salary for a 7-9 year player in 2011-2012 was $15,506,632 ... OR ... 105% of a player's previous salary, whichever is greater. Which means Melo's maximum was $18m + change even on a new contract with a new team, without the benefit of an extension of his existing contract and the extra year and the better raises.

So I'll ask again, find me $18m+. Because the Knicks only had $14.3m.

any of u guys watch that movie the boss with Melissa McCarthy . well peter dinklage is in it he is freaking hilarious
oh man

Knickoftime wrote:

ekstarks94 wrote:Facts...baby....show me something...

You are the historian....lay out the catalog

Ummm, I already did.

https://web.archive.org/web/20101125193336/http://hoopshype.com/salaries/new_york.htm

$58m - $42,469,302 - $916,100 (Bill Walker's team option) + $1,680,360 (Imam Shumpert's #17 rookie slot) + $427,500 (minimum roster hold)= $14,338,938.

Melo made $17,149,243 in the 2010-2011 season under the final year of his Nuggets deal. The maximum salary for a 7-9 year player in 2011-2012 was $15,506,632 ... OR ... 105% of a player's previous salary, whichever is greater. Which means Melo's maximum was $18m + change even on a new contract with a new team, without the benefit of an extension of his existing contract and the extra year and the better raises.

So I'll ask again, find me $18m+. Because the Knicks only had $14.3m.

the link you sent me has the 42 mill all in. That leaves 16 mill add in shump ..cut billy walker and move Gallo for a pick....that gives you 18 mill .....any cap gymnastics at that point.would be minimal....that is why I said it is common knowledge that the Knicks could sign Melo outright....granted...I will give you there had to be some movement of small salaries but it is not like giving up a 1st round pick to move several mill....

Gallo was going....regardless the issue. Is that instead of trading him for Melo we could have gotten another asset in addition of Melo instead of Denvers trash...

That is the point....you we would have our assets and could built the team around Melo and stat and start from a better position than the trade we did....like it was mentioned earlier Dolan got cold feet thinking that he may miss out and we got raked on this trade..