Rockets called our bluff. We folded. At least Grunny was not gasping in the closet!

CrushAlot wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:Reason is because it was personal, not business

+10000000000000000000

and you know this how...because it was in the papers? Unless you heard it from Dolan or, your a mind reader, you don't know what your talking about. Like I said before, lots of telepaths posting here.

because people are judge on there past not there future (in most cases) they said they would match and they had every intentions on doing that until it became personal...

My agent tells me that the knicks are big on me and I believe they'll match anything. my agent calls the rockets and tells them, hey if your serious about retaining my client, you may have to up the $ cause your wasting your ink with that contract thats going to be match in the blink of an eye, I figure if you add a few more $ you will atleast have them 2nd guessing themselves..

The rockets lose nothing cause they can waive him in the 3rd year, trade him, or if he plays upto the potential, they have a franchise player..

it was a business move on the rockets part, and a personal decision on the knicks part..

why would the knicks commit to 3 pgs before committing to lin ?

Because they weren't going cost close to 50 mil dollars for a guy who broke down after 25 games...

I don't know about that..The guy goes from not playing at all to playing close to 40 mins 5 times a wk..with almost no rest in between time, no adjustment period..

MDA PGs during his knick tenure where breaking down after 3/4 months regardless..

fields was the only player to play 66 games on the knicks roster last season..

57.85 mil in year 3, no sign and trades, any trade has to be dollar for dollar so no relief from year three of that contract unless the knicks waive Lin and stretch the cost out over several years. Those numbers and the limited options the Knicks had after commiting to that contract are why it was ummatchable from a business prospective. I assume the commitment to 3 point guards includes Pablo's 1 year deal at 488,000. I would just take that right out of your argument. The Knicks got Pablo because they wanted him and he cost them nothing. Kidd was obtained to mentor Lin and both his and Felton's contracts are much more reasonable in my opinion.

knicks1248 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:Reason is because it was personal, not business

+10000000000000000000

and you know this how...because it was in the papers? Unless you heard it from Dolan or, your a mind reader, you don't know what your talking about. Like I said before, lots of telepaths posting here.

because people are judge on there past not there future (in most cases) they said they would match and they had every intentions on doing that until it became personal...

My agent tells me that the knicks are big on me and I believe they'll match anything. my agent calls the rockets and tells them, hey if your serious about retaining my client, you may have to up the $ cause your wasting your ink with that contract thats going to be match in the blink of an eye, I figure if you add a few more $ you will atleast have them 2nd guessing themselves..

The rockets lose nothing cause they can waive him in the 3rd year, trade him, or if he plays upto the potential, they have a franchise player..

it was a business move on the rockets part, and a personal decision on the knicks part..

why would the knicks commit to 3 pgs before committing to lin ?

Because they weren't going cost close to 50 mil dollars for a guy who broke down after 25 games...

I don't know about that..The guy goes from not playing at all to playing close to 40 mins 5 times a wk..with almost no rest in between time, no adjustment period..

MDA PGs during his knick tenure where breaking down after 3/4 months regardless..

fields was the only player to play 66 games on the knicks roster last season..

57.85 mil in year 3, no sign and trades, any trade has to be dollar for dollar so no relief from year three of that contract unless the knicks waive Lin and stretch the cost out over several years. Those numbers and the limited options the Knicks had after commiting to that contract are why it was ummatchable from a business prospective. I assume the commitment to 3 point guards includes Pablo's 1 year deal at 488,000. I would just take that right out of your argument. The Knicks got Pablo because they wanted him and he cost them nothing. Kidd was obtained to mentor Lin and both his and Felton's contracts are much more reasonable in my opinion.

did you ever think Joe johnson would be traded with that contract..EVERY CONTRACT in the NBA is tradable

I believe the Nets were under the cap and that allowed them to make the move for Johnson. In the Knicks case they could definitely trade Lin but that isn't the problem. With the new cba teams over the cap have to take back the same amount in salary dollar for dollar. The poison pill could not be avoided because they would have to take back 14.8 mil if they did the trade after the second year of his contract. If you are suggesting keep him for a year and hope that another team could absorb that poision pill and trade him later it might work. I think though then you have to ask yourself is it worth it to develop a guy for a year in hopes that you can trade him? I think the Knicks are trying to win now and want stability and chemistry. The Lin thing sucked but I think it is more about the new cba, and Morey then it is an emotional reaction by Dolan.

knicks1248 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:Reason is because it was personal, not business

+10000000000000000000

and you know this how...because it was in the papers? Unless you heard it from Dolan or, your a mind reader, you don't know what your talking about. Like I said before, lots of telepaths posting here.

because people are judge on there past not there future (in most cases) they said they would match and they had every intentions on doing that until it became personal...

My agent tells me that the knicks are big on me and I believe they'll match anything. my agent calls the rockets and tells them, hey if your serious about retaining my client, you may have to up the $ cause your wasting your ink with that contract thats going to be match in the blink of an eye, I figure if you add a few more $ you will atleast have them 2nd guessing themselves..

The rockets lose nothing cause they can waive him in the 3rd year, trade him, or if he plays upto the potential, they have a franchise player..

it was a business move on the rockets part, and a personal decision on the knicks part..

why would the knicks commit to 3 pgs before committing to lin ?

Because they weren't going cost close to 50 mil dollars for a guy who broke down after 25 games...

I don't know about that..The guy goes from not playing at all to playing close to 40 mins 5 times a wk..with almost no rest in between time, no adjustment period..

MDA PGs during his knick tenure where breaking down after 3/4 months regardless..

fields was the only player to play 66 games on the knicks roster last season..

57.85 mil in year 3, no sign and trades, any trade has to be dollar for dollar so no relief from year three of that contract unless the knicks waive Lin and stretch the cost out over several years. Those numbers and the limited options the Knicks had after commiting to that contract are why it was ummatchable from a business prospective. I assume the commitment to 3 point guards includes Pablo's 1 year deal at 488,000. I would just take that right out of your argument. The Knicks got Pablo because they wanted him and he cost them nothing. Kidd was obtained to mentor Lin and both his and Felton's contracts are much more reasonable in my opinion.

did you ever think Joe johnson would be traded with that contract..EVERY CONTRACT in the NBA is tradable

If you are trading him in year 3, why sign him in the first place???...

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:Reason is because it was personal, not business

+10000000000000000000

and you know this how...because it was in the papers? Unless you heard it from Dolan or, your a mind reader, you don't know what your talking about. Like I said before, lots of telepaths posting here.

because people are judge on there past not there future (in most cases) they said they would match and they had every intentions on doing that until it became personal...

My agent tells me that the knicks are big on me and I believe they'll match anything. my agent calls the rockets and tells them, hey if your serious about retaining my client, you may have to up the $ cause your wasting your ink with that contract thats going to be match in the blink of an eye, I figure if you add a few more $ you will atleast have them 2nd guessing themselves..

The rockets lose nothing cause they can waive him in the 3rd year, trade him, or if he plays upto the potential, they have a franchise player..

it was a business move on the rockets part, and a personal decision on the knicks part..

why would the knicks commit to 3 pgs before committing to lin ?

Because they weren't going cost close to 50 mil dollars for a guy who broke down after 25 games...

I don't know about that..The guy goes from not playing at all to playing close to 40 mins 5 times a wk..with almost no rest in between time, no adjustment period..

MDA PGs during his knick tenure where breaking down after 3/4 months regardless..

fields was the only player to play 66 games on the knicks roster last season..

57.85 mil in year 3, no sign and trades, any trade has to be dollar for dollar so no relief from year three of that contract unless the knicks waive Lin and stretch the cost out over several years. Those numbers and the limited options the Knicks had after commiting to that contract are why it was ummatchable from a business prospective. I assume the commitment to 3 point guards includes Pablo's 1 year deal at 488,000. I would just take that right out of your argument. The Knicks got Pablo because they wanted him and he cost them nothing. Kidd was obtained to mentor Lin and both his and Felton's contracts are much more reasonable in my opinion.

did you ever think Joe johnson would be traded with that contract..EVERY CONTRACT in the NBA is tradable

If you are trading him in year 3, why sign him in the first place???...

because you get him for a great bargain in years 1 and 2!!!...

earthmansurfer wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:Reason is because it was personal, not business

+10000000000000000000

and you know this how...because it was in the papers? Unless you heard it from Dolan or, your a mind reader, you don't know what your talking about. Like I said before, lots of telepaths posting here.

The top financial analysts were mostly stating that Dolan should NOT sign him but he would probably not have the discipline to refrain.

I don't buy it. Lin more than paid for the next two years of his contract already, last year. The kid was a cash cow. This has personal written all over it. To put all the blame on the 3rd year of his contract is ridiculous, especially considering all the expirings we will have then.

conspiracy theorists will never be satisfied. Most just want a reason to bitch and moan. Dude is gone already, will be be talking about this 6months from now. The buthurt should have worn off by now

Where did I mention men conspiring together regarding Lin? I think it was pretty much one idiot of an owner. Man,you are trying to close the discussion by bring tin foil hats into this. Great rebuttal.

Look at all the forums. There are a lot of unhappy campers regarding Lin and it's not just hurt feelings. I still think we have a great team, I just think our championship hopes went down as we could have used all we could obtain to have any chance against Miami and then OKC.

Crushalot - Had we been hard for money and not owned by a billionaire AND not paid and wasted more money in the past on players like Jerome James, your argument would be meaningful. We are talking about the best pg we have had in years, not a marginal and overpaid player. Anyway, Lin pays for the taxes himself. If Stat picks up his play then he helps as well.

The best PG we've had in years is now back on the team at a very reasonable contract.

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:Reason is because it was personal, not business

+10000000000000000000

and you know this how...because it was in the papers? Unless you heard it from Dolan or, your a mind reader, you don't know what your talking about. Like I said before, lots of telepaths posting here.

because people are judge on there past not there future (in most cases) they said they would match and they had every intentions on doing that until it became personal...

My agent tells me that the knicks are big on me and I believe they'll match anything. my agent calls the rockets and tells them, hey if your serious about retaining my client, you may have to up the $ cause your wasting your ink with that contract thats going to be match in the blink of an eye, I figure if you add a few more $ you will atleast have them 2nd guessing themselves..

The rockets lose nothing cause they can waive him in the 3rd year, trade him, or if he plays upto the potential, they have a franchise player..

it was a business move on the rockets part, and a personal decision on the knicks part..

why would the knicks commit to 3 pgs before committing to lin ?

Because they weren't going cost close to 50 mil dollars for a guy who broke down after 25 games...

I don't know about that..The guy goes from not playing at all to playing close to 40 mins 5 times a wk..with almost no rest in between time, no adjustment period..

MDA PGs during his knick tenure where breaking down after 3/4 months regardless..

fields was the only player to play 66 games on the knicks roster last season..

57.85 mil in year 3, no sign and trades, any trade has to be dollar for dollar so no relief from year three of that contract unless the knicks waive Lin and stretch the cost out over several years. Those numbers and the limited options the Knicks had after commiting to that contract are why it was ummatchable from a business prospective. I assume the commitment to 3 point guards includes Pablo's 1 year deal at 488,000. I would just take that right out of your argument. The Knicks got Pablo because they wanted him and he cost them nothing. Kidd was obtained to mentor Lin and both his and Felton's contracts are much more reasonable in my opinion.

did you ever think Joe johnson would be traded with that contract..EVERY CONTRACT in the NBA is tradable

If you are trading him in year 3, why sign him in the first place???...

because you get him for a great bargain in years 1 and 2!!!...

If Lin's first 2 years at $5 million and $5.2 are a bargain than what would you call Felton's deal at $4 million and $4.1 million for the first 2 years?

CrushAlot wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:Reason is because it was personal, not business

+10000000000000000000

and you know this how...because it was in the papers? Unless you heard it from Dolan or, your a mind reader, you don't know what your talking about. Like I said before, lots of telepaths posting here.

because people are judge on there past not there future (in most cases) they said they would match and they had every intentions on doing that until it became personal...

My agent tells me that the knicks are big on me and I believe they'll match anything. my agent calls the rockets and tells them, hey if your serious about retaining my client, you may have to up the $ cause your wasting your ink with that contract thats going to be match in the blink of an eye, I figure if you add a few more $ you will atleast have them 2nd guessing themselves..

The rockets lose nothing cause they can waive him in the 3rd year, trade him, or if he plays upto the potential, they have a franchise player..

it was a business move on the rockets part, and a personal decision on the knicks part..

why would the knicks commit to 3 pgs before committing to lin ?

Because they weren't going cost close to 50 mil dollars for a guy who broke down after 25 games...

I don't know about that..The guy goes from not playing at all to playing close to 40 mins 5 times a wk..with almost no rest in between time, no adjustment period..

MDA PGs during his knick tenure where breaking down after 3/4 months regardless..

fields was the only player to play 66 games on the knicks roster last season..

57.85 mil in year 3, no sign and trades, any trade has to be dollar for dollar so no relief from year three of that contract unless the knicks waive Lin and stretch the cost out over several years. Those numbers and the limited options the Knicks had after commiting to that contract are why it was ummatchable from a business prospective. I assume the commitment to 3 point guards includes Pablo's 1 year deal at 488,000. I would just take that right out of your argument. The Knicks got Pablo because they wanted him and he cost them nothing. Kidd was obtained to mentor Lin and both his and Felton's contracts are much more reasonable in my opinion.

did you ever think Joe johnson would be traded with that contract..EVERY CONTRACT in the NBA is tradable

If you are trading him in year 3, why sign him in the first place???...

because you get him for a great bargain in years 1 and 2!!!...

You have to take back the same amount of salary anyway as a team over the cap (repeat offender?) the restrictions and penalties stay in place.

Your argument only makes sense if we are going to be under the luxury tax in 2014-15; we won't be. According to hoopshype we have $72M in salary committed to that year and that's not including Camby, JR, or any free agents or draft picks we sign in the meantime. We are going to be over the luxury tax threshold no matter what that season so keeping Lin wouldn't have made a difference in terms of penalties.

CashMoney wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:Reason is because it was personal, not business

+10000000000000000000

and you know this how...because it was in the papers? Unless you heard it from Dolan or, your a mind reader, you don't know what your talking about. Like I said before, lots of telepaths posting here.

because people are judge on there past not there future (in most cases) they said they would match and they had every intentions on doing that until it became personal...

My agent tells me that the knicks are big on me and I believe they'll match anything. my agent calls the rockets and tells them, hey if your serious about retaining my client, you may have to up the $ cause your wasting your ink with that contract thats going to be match in the blink of an eye, I figure if you add a few more $ you will atleast have them 2nd guessing themselves..

The rockets lose nothing cause they can waive him in the 3rd year, trade him, or if he plays upto the potential, they have a franchise player..

it was a business move on the rockets part, and a personal decision on the knicks part..

why would the knicks commit to 3 pgs before committing to lin ?

Because they weren't going cost close to 50 mil dollars for a guy who broke down after 25 games...

I don't know about that..The guy goes from not playing at all to playing close to 40 mins 5 times a wk..with almost no rest in between time, no adjustment period..

MDA PGs during his knick tenure where breaking down after 3/4 months regardless..

fields was the only player to play 66 games on the knicks roster last season..

57.85 mil in year 3, no sign and trades, any trade has to be dollar for dollar so no relief from year three of that contract unless the knicks waive Lin and stretch the cost out over several years. Those numbers and the limited options the Knicks had after commiting to that contract are why it was ummatchable from a business prospective. I assume the commitment to 3 point guards includes Pablo's 1 year deal at 488,000. I would just take that right out of your argument. The Knicks got Pablo because they wanted him and he cost them nothing. Kidd was obtained to mentor Lin and both his and Felton's contracts are much more reasonable in my opinion.

did you ever think Joe johnson would be traded with that contract..EVERY CONTRACT in the NBA is tradable

If you are trading him in year 3, why sign him in the first place???...

because you get him for a great bargain in years 1 and 2!!!...

If Lin's first 2 years at $5 million and $5.2 are a bargain than what would you call Felton's deal at $4 million and $4.1 million for the first 2 years?

CrushAlot wrote:

VCoug wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:Reason is because it was personal, not business

+10000000000000000000

and you know this how...because it was in the papers? Unless you heard it from Dolan or, your a mind reader, you don't know what your talking about. Like I said before, lots of telepaths posting here.

because people are judge on there past not there future (in most cases) they said they would match and they had every intentions on doing that until it became personal...

My agent tells me that the knicks are big on me and I believe they'll match anything. my agent calls the rockets and tells them, hey if your serious about retaining my client, you may have to up the $ cause your wasting your ink with that contract thats going to be match in the blink of an eye, I figure if you add a few more $ you will atleast have them 2nd guessing themselves..

The rockets lose nothing cause they can waive him in the 3rd year, trade him, or if he plays upto the potential, they have a franchise player..

it was a business move on the rockets part, and a personal decision on the knicks part..

why would the knicks commit to 3 pgs before committing to lin ?

Because they weren't going cost close to 50 mil dollars for a guy who broke down after 25 games...

I don't know about that..The guy goes from not playing at all to playing close to 40 mins 5 times a wk..with almost no rest in between time, no adjustment period..

MDA PGs during his knick tenure where breaking down after 3/4 months regardless..

fields was the only player to play 66 games on the knicks roster last season..

57.85 mil in year 3, no sign and trades, any trade has to be dollar for dollar so no relief from year three of that contract unless the knicks waive Lin and stretch the cost out over several years. Those numbers and the limited options the Knicks had after commiting to that contract are why it was ummatchable from a business prospective. I assume the commitment to 3 point guards includes Pablo's 1 year deal at 488,000. I would just take that right out of your argument. The Knicks got Pablo because they wanted him and he cost them nothing. Kidd was obtained to mentor Lin and both his and Felton's contracts are much more reasonable in my opinion.

did you ever think Joe johnson would be traded with that contract..EVERY CONTRACT in the NBA is tradable

If you are trading him in year 3, why sign him in the first place???...

because you get him for a great bargain in years 1 and 2!!!...

You have to take back the same amount of salary anyway as a team over the cap (repeat offender?) the restrictions and penalties stay in place.

Your argument only makes sense if we are going to be under the luxury tax in 2014-15; we won't be. According to hoopshype we have $72M in salary committed to that year and that's not including Camby, JR, or any free agents or draft picks we sign in the meantime. We are going to be over the luxury tax threshold no matter what that season so keeping Lin wouldn't have made a difference in terms of penalties.

My point was that because the Knicks are over the cap they can't trade him in year 3 to lower their cap. They have to take back the same amount of salary so the 57 mil that it would cost to have Lin at 14.8 mil would be 57 mil spent on someone else. Any deal a repeat cap offender does has to match dollar for dollar.

But why do you, or anyone else, care? We're going to be over the luxury tax regardless, who cares how far over we are as long as it helps us win?

CrushAlot wrote:If you are asking would I care if the Knicks decided to spend the money, no I don't, I would love to have him on the team. If you are asking why do I point out the rational for not resigning him it is because I have read a lot about it and I don't think it was an easy decision and I also don't think it was a reactionary one. I think that kind of money makes even billionaires blink and is a ridiculous sum to pay to have a guy that has only played 25 games in the nba. Resigning the guy to trade him or use the stretch provision make no sense to me. I have no ill will for Lin but I hope Moray's poison pill contracts to Lin and Asik somehow bite him in the @ss.

But why is this time different than every other time for Dolan? And do you really think that if the opportunity presents itself we won't be spending a similar amount of money on another player or combination of players?