jskinny35 wrote:Doesn't matter if he was/is a HOF player if the team doesn't win in the end. Just prior to that trade - the Knicks were pretty young and exciting to watch... Wilson Chandler in particular seemed to mesh well with Amare. I also remember Denver did pretty well without him for several years and think we still could have added T. Chandler and maybe more with a deeper roster and more flexibility.

Don't quit your day job.

jskinny35 wrote:No jrodmc,
The argument was that giving up too many assets for Melo was the wrong move - and clearly didn't work out. While Melo was the best player in the deal - we didn't really win much more as a result. Keeping those guys would have allowed the opportunity to maintain flexibility for a future deal. It's not black or white - those guys likely wouldn't have won much either but those were still multiple assets that stripped us of our ability to add around Melo later on. As for my day job - we work at the same place :)

So these same assets that we shouldn't have traded, that weren't going to make us win much, are the same assets we were going to use to build around Melo. Check.

And who's "we"? I work from home. Sort of.

jrodmc wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:No jrodmc,
The argument was that giving up too many assets for Melo was the wrong move - and clearly didn't work out. While Melo was the best player in the deal - we didn't really win much more as a result. Keeping those guys would have allowed the opportunity to maintain flexibility for a future deal. It's not black or white - those guys likely wouldn't have won much either but those were still multiple assets that stripped us of our ability to add around Melo later on. As for my day job - we work at the same place :)

Take a look at the years before Melo and take a look immediately after the trade and get back to me. I get that your focusing on the third of a season of pre-broken Stat, but to say the trade "clearly didn't work out" makes no sense. And it is actually fairly black and white. Forget Denver. How many times did we make the playoffs in the years before Melo? How many 50 win seasons did we have?

So these same assets that we shouldn't have traded, that weren't going to make us win much, are the same assets we were going to use to build around Melo. Check.

And who's "we"? I work from home. Sort of.

TO be fair in the years before Melo were were void of picks and had dumped salary to clean the roster in hopes of Lebron. We bought in Amare half a season before Melo. DLee was a our empty calorie allstar. We were above .500 at the time of the trade. Sustainable? Could smaller trades also yielded entry to the playoffs with similar results? Perhaps.
One can reconstruct it any way they want. Melo was a perennial allstar and the face of the franchise. That itself demonstrates hs proficiency in the era. The mediocre results of his tenure was due in part to Amare inability to stay on the court healthy and fulfil his contract, Tyson’s autoimmune system not being up to the task, and JR Smith Low IQ on and of the court. Or simply, the knicks failure to build a strong team.

gradyandrew wrote:Amare and Melo Never figured out how to play with each other o0n the court. That's on them two.

Yeah, I would agree, it's a tough job to figure out how to get the best out of someone who constantly dribbles off his own feet.
In his defense, Stat was never the same after the injury. Wine baths, fist fights with inanimate objects, etc...

Melo was what he was. To Nalod's point though, it would have been nice to have seen him play here with some sort of prime time somebody(s) though.

knicks1248 wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:Amare and Melo Never figured out how to play with each other o0n the court. That's on them two.

That's because they both required a real PG, and once Billups was sent packing, felton fell off, and Kidd left..It was pointless to have them both..oh and then came the triangle..

Respectfully disagree. They peaked their first season together at a positive.6 points per 100 possessions. Final 3 seasons They we're always a.net negative ＜ -3 per 100.

And it showed! 4 seasons together and all they could do is clog the same real estate on the court. I'd love to know the career assists between them.

gradyandrew wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:Amare and Melo Never figured out how to play with each other o0n the court. That's on them two.

That's because they both required a real PG, and once Billups was sent packing, felton fell off, and Kidd left..It was pointless to have them both..oh and then came the triangle..

Respectfully disagree. They peaked their first season together at a positive.6 points per 100 possessions. Final 3 seasons They we're always a.net negative ＜ -3 per 100.

And it showed! 4 seasons together and all they could do is clog the same real estate on the court. I'd love to know the career assists between them.

This. Carmelo and Amare didn’t work because they used the same floor space to create offense. Carmelo earlier in his career was more of a slasher and perimeter shooter but his game had developed where he relied much more on post up by the time we got him

Philc1 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:Doesn't matter if he was/is a HOF player if the team doesn't win in the end. Just prior to that trade - the Knicks were pretty young and exciting to watch... Wilson Chandler in particular seemed to mesh well with Amare. I also remember Denver did pretty well without him for several years and think we still could have added T. Chandler and maybe more with a deeper roster and more flexibility.

So your argument is you were going to win a chip with Gallo, The Mayor, The Moz and Rayfer Felon? Because unless something is wrong with news archives, we did win with Melo. Like for years in a row. And it was exciting to you watching Pringles ride the uninsurable Stat into the ground like a 2 dollar ho? And FluTyson Chicken legs was your big FA play? What next? DLee was going to start averaging triple doubles if we just didn't trade him away?

Don't quit your day job.

I would have to agree with jskinny. Chandler had great chemistry with Stat. Chandler was the guy who always pushed Stat around in the wheelchair.

Thing that most that are so against the Melo trade seem to dismiss is that most that were for the trade ALSO agree that the trade for Melo was not enough. Not one person for the trade is claiming trading for Melo was the ONE move needed to win a chip. Lakers did not add LBJ and call it a day. Nor did they just add a few JR, Felton type players to complete the dream team. At the end of the day, Melo fans are pointing out that the Knicks failed to put a decent roster around a star player. They do not see a problem giving up questionable young assets for a chance to build around a star player. Despite the front offices failure to put the right pieces around Melo, it was enough for us to be relevant for the first time in many years. That is until Phil came around and created an elite franchise full of quality players and coaching staff.

What I really wish had happened during this era is Jeremy Lin and Carmelo getting along. Yeah they don’t win a championship but at least it would have been fun to watch

Agreed. Injuries took their toll. Would have been nice to see those two in the playoffs. That would have been one of my preferred teams to watch that never happened, along with a Spree/Marbury back court, King/Oak/Ewing front court...

Giannis is definitely better but there isn't a huge gap. Randle was second team all NBA, Giannis first. There is a gap but not a huge one. Randle is really good!

knicks1248 wrote:
I believe Randle can Take his Game to a Super star Level, I believe he has the Tools and skills to be just as good as Gannis, he just needs to keep his work ethic up, and raise his IQ

He may not be able to do all that gannis can, but he can surely raise his scoring, passing, rebonding defense IQ. Just be dominate in your own way

Run the hypothetical. In this picture, which one is Giannis and which one is Randle?