CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Yea. Michael Woodson doesn't seem like a guy who has a full grasp of every element in coaching. So no he is not. Championship coach

What I don't get, and I'm being genuine here, is how does he manage to rustle up these prolonged winning streaks?- he's done it every year he's been here. It seems like his defensive schemes are terrible and he makes no adjustments, yet we've won a lot of games under him- so are we overlooking some of his strengths?

Like clockwork he always gets exposed in the playoffs. He has noticeably been out coached in every playoff series as a Knick coach.

really? which ones?

All of them.

Off the top of my head the series vs the heat it was obvious that the heat did 3 things vs us. They trapped the ball handlers off most PNR's. They played good denial and post D on melo. The last thing I remember they did vs us was any double that was not a trap came from the weak side corner. Woody did nothing to counter these moves. He force fed the ball to Melo in the post and he did not think to put the best 3pt shooter in the league(novak) in the weak side corner EVERY TIME he is on the court.

For the Indiana series he hardly made any adjustments and when he did it was the wrong one. He went big vs the Pacers which is a negative because their bigs are better than our bigs. It also meant that Hibbert would live in the paint because none of our bigs could hit a shot. He played Amare too much after coming back rusty from an injury. He did not play Cope until too late. After the Pacers beat us Frank Vogel specifically said he was glad we did not use Cope in the series. Cope would have meant hibbert could not stay in the paint all game.

Woody lets his players take too many low percentage shots. If that's on the players because they don't listen to the coach? Then we need a coach who will require that players listen to their instructions.

He got out coached in the playoffs because the ball stuck. Very weak ball movement. If you lose and are moving the ball, I am ok with it. But, if you lose going ISO/forced basketball then I blame the coach. Now I know the personnel sucked especially at guard but that is still no excuse to not require ball movement.

Watching the college game and seeing the ball movement that's coached makes me really hate the NBA (especially the knicks style).

Not sure I buy the Cope thing.

I don't buy the cope thing. Cope isn't that good. He got the start in the Celtics series and looked shook. He didn't score a point in the Celtics series. Most coaches don't get called out for not going to their undrafted league mini guy that was given a chance and couldn't produce but that was how desperate the knicks were. Cope is the 14th man on the pacers this year.
Woodson needed to call a time out last night. Last night's mistake isn't a microcosm of his entire tenure as the knick coach. The knicks need a new voice next year and a guy that can be an extension of pjax. That isn't woodson but Woodson had a lot of success as the knicks coach. Woodson has always been handicapped by injuries in the playoffs. Iman, Baron, Lin, Amare, Tyson his first year. Amare, Tyson, Shump, Kidd, Thomas, Sheed, Camby, Melo his second year. The knicks had tremendous misfortune injury wise. Can someone name a coach that overcomes that and beat a team like the world champion heat in 2012 or the pacers in 2013?

Do you think that woody is a good coach?

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Yea. Michael Woodson doesn't seem like a guy who has a full grasp of every element in coaching. So no he is not. Championship coach

What I don't get, and I'm being genuine here, is how does he manage to rustle up these prolonged winning streaks?- he's done it every year he's been here. It seems like his defensive schemes are terrible and he makes no adjustments, yet we've won a lot of games under him- so are we overlooking some of his strengths?

Like clockwork he always gets exposed in the playoffs. He has noticeably been out coached in every playoff series as a Knick coach.

really? which ones?

All of them.

Off the top of my head the series vs the heat it was obvious that the heat did 3 things vs us. They trapped the ball handlers off most PNR's. They played good denial and post D on melo. The last thing I remember they did vs us was any double that was not a trap came from the weak side corner. Woody did nothing to counter these moves. He force fed the ball to Melo in the post and he did not think to put the best 3pt shooter in the league(novak) in the weak side corner EVERY TIME he is on the court.

For the Indiana series he hardly made any adjustments and when he did it was the wrong one. He went big vs the Pacers which is a negative because their bigs are better than our bigs. It also meant that Hibbert would live in the paint because none of our bigs could hit a shot. He played Amare too much after coming back rusty from an injury. He did not play Cope until too late. After the Pacers beat us Frank Vogel specifically said he was glad we did not use Cope in the series. Cope would have meant hibbert could not stay in the paint all game.

Woody lets his players take too many low percentage shots. If that's on the players because they don't listen to the coach? Then we need a coach who will require that players listen to their instructions.

He got out coached in the playoffs because the ball stuck. Very weak ball movement. If you lose and are moving the ball, I am ok with it. But, if you lose going ISO/forced basketball then I blame the coach. Now I know the personnel sucked especially at guard but that is still no excuse to not require ball movement.

Watching the college game and seeing the ball movement that's coached makes me really hate the NBA (especially the knicks style).

Not sure I buy the Cope thing.

I don't buy the cope thing. Cope isn't that good. He got the start in the Celtics series and looked shook. He didn't score a point in the Celtics series. Most coaches don't get called out for not going to their undrafted league mini guy that was given a chance and couldn't produce but that was how desperate the knicks were. Cope is the 14th man on the pacers this year.
Woodson needed to call a time out last night. Last night's mistake isn't a microcosm of his entire tenure as the knick coach. The knicks need a new voice next year and a guy that can be an extension of pjax. That isn't woodson but Woodson had a lot of success as the knicks coach. Woodson has always been handicapped by injuries in the playoffs. Iman, Baron, Lin, Amare, Tyson his first year. Amare, Tyson, Shump, Kidd, Thomas, Sheed, Camby, Melo his second year. The knicks had tremendous misfortune injury wise. Can someone name a coach that overcomes that and beat a team like the world champion heat in 2012 or the pacers in 2013?

Do you think that woody is a good coach?

mreinman wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Yea. Michael Woodson doesn't seem like a guy who has a full grasp of every element in coaching. So no he is not. Championship coach

What I don't get, and I'm being genuine here, is how does he manage to rustle up these prolonged winning streaks?- he's done it every year he's been here. It seems like his defensive schemes are terrible and he makes no adjustments, yet we've won a lot of games under him- so are we overlooking some of his strengths?

Like clockwork he always gets exposed in the playoffs. He has noticeably been out coached in every playoff series as a Knick coach.

really? which ones?

All of them.

Off the top of my head the series vs the heat it was obvious that the heat did 3 things vs us. They trapped the ball handlers off most PNR's. They played good denial and post D on melo. The last thing I remember they did vs us was any double that was not a trap came from the weak side corner. Woody did nothing to counter these moves. He force fed the ball to Melo in the post and he did not think to put the best 3pt shooter in the league(novak) in the weak side corner EVERY TIME he is on the court.

For the Indiana series he hardly made any adjustments and when he did it was the wrong one. He went big vs the Pacers which is a negative because their bigs are better than our bigs. It also meant that Hibbert would live in the paint because none of our bigs could hit a shot. He played Amare too much after coming back rusty from an injury. He did not play Cope until too late. After the Pacers beat us Frank Vogel specifically said he was glad we did not use Cope in the series. Cope would have meant hibbert could not stay in the paint all game.

Woody lets his players take too many low percentage shots. If that's on the players because they don't listen to the coach? Then we need a coach who will require that players listen to their instructions.

He got out coached in the playoffs because the ball stuck. Very weak ball movement. If you lose and are moving the ball, I am ok with it. But, if you lose going ISO/forced basketball then I blame the coach. Now I know the personnel sucked especially at guard but that is still no excuse to not require ball movement.

Watching the college game and seeing the ball movement that's coached makes me really hate the NBA (especially the knicks style).

Not sure I buy the Cope thing.

On the Cope thing I will post the stats on the games he has vs the pacers when he was in the rotation. In Feb Cope played 10 minutes and scored 13 points with 66% accuracy. In April Cope was forced to play major minutes due to Chandlers Injury. He played 34 minutes and scored 20 points with 66% accuracy . He made 4 3pters with 50% accuracy. I specifically remember Vogel saying he did not expect that performance from Cope during that April game and they could not guard him and Melo on court at the same time. Add that to Vogels happiness at Woodsons reluctance to use Cope against the pacers in the playoffs and I think it is pretty clear cut.

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Yea. Michael Woodson doesn't seem like a guy who has a full grasp of every element in coaching. So no he is not. Championship coach

What I don't get, and I'm being genuine here, is how does he manage to rustle up these prolonged winning streaks?- he's done it every year he's been here. It seems like his defensive schemes are terrible and he makes no adjustments, yet we've won a lot of games under him- so are we overlooking some of his strengths?

Like clockwork he always gets exposed in the playoffs. He has noticeably been out coached in every playoff series as a Knick coach.

really? which ones?

All of them.

Off the top of my head the series vs the heat it was obvious that the heat did 3 things vs us. They trapped the ball handlers off most PNR's. They played good denial and post D on melo. The last thing I remember they did vs us was any double that was not a trap came from the weak side corner. Woody did nothing to counter these moves. He force fed the ball to Melo in the post and he did not think to put the best 3pt shooter in the league(novak) in the weak side corner EVERY TIME he is on the court.

For the Indiana series he hardly made any adjustments and when he did it was the wrong one. He went big vs the Pacers which is a negative because their bigs are better than our bigs. It also meant that Hibbert would live in the paint because none of our bigs could hit a shot. He played Amare too much after coming back rusty from an injury. He did not play Cope until too late. After the Pacers beat us Frank Vogel specifically said he was glad we did not use Cope in the series. Cope would have meant hibbert could not stay in the paint all game.

Woody lets his players take too many low percentage shots. If that's on the players because they don't listen to the coach? Then we need a coach who will require that players listen to their instructions.

He got out coached in the playoffs because the ball stuck. Very weak ball movement. If you lose and are moving the ball, I am ok with it. But, if you lose going ISO/forced basketball then I blame the coach. Now I know the personnel sucked especially at guard but that is still no excuse to not require ball movement.

Watching the college game and seeing the ball movement that's coached makes me really hate the NBA (especially the knicks style).

Not sure I buy the Cope thing.

I don't buy the cope thing. Cope isn't that good. He got the start in the Celtics series and looked shook. He didn't score a point in the Celtics series. Most coaches don't get called out for not going to their undrafted league mini guy that was given a chance and couldn't produce but that was how desperate the knicks were. Cope is the 14th man on the pacers this year.
Woodson needed to call a time out last night. Last night's mistake isn't a microcosm of his entire tenure as the knick coach. The knicks need a new voice next year and a guy that can be an extension of pjax. That isn't woodson but Woodson had a lot of success as the knicks coach. Woodson has always been handicapped by injuries in the playoffs. Iman, Baron, Lin, Amare, Tyson his first year. Amare, Tyson, Shump, Kidd, Thomas, Sheed, Camby, Melo his second year. The knicks had tremendous misfortune injury wise. Can someone name a coach that overcomes that and beat a team like the world champion heat in 2012 or the pacers in 2013?

Do you think that woody is a good coach?

Its hard to say. I think Grunwald being fired sabotaged any authority woodson had. The guy was told who to keep on his team, who he could play, who he should start, and how many minutes guys could play. I think that makes it pretty hard to be effective. He won a lot prior to this year and the team does go on win streaks when he is the coach. I do think that the coach needs to be hired by the gm in place to make things work. I also think that with pjax the knicks need to have a new coach. If grunwald was gm I think this season would have been different and I would endorse woodson as coach for next year.

did you like Grunwald as the GM? Isn't he the won who amnestied billups for chandler and made that disaster bargs trade?

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Yea. Michael Woodson doesn't seem like a guy who has a full grasp of every element in coaching. So no he is not. Championship coach

What I don't get, and I'm being genuine here, is how does he manage to rustle up these prolonged winning streaks?- he's done it every year he's been here. It seems like his defensive schemes are terrible and he makes no adjustments, yet we've won a lot of games under him- so are we overlooking some of his strengths?

Like clockwork he always gets exposed in the playoffs. He has noticeably been out coached in every playoff series as a Knick coach.

really? which ones?

All of them.

Off the top of my head the series vs the heat it was obvious that the heat did 3 things vs us. They trapped the ball handlers off most PNR's. They played good denial and post D on melo. The last thing I remember they did vs us was any double that was not a trap came from the weak side corner. Woody did nothing to counter these moves. He force fed the ball to Melo in the post and he did not think to put the best 3pt shooter in the league(novak) in the weak side corner EVERY TIME he is on the court.

For the Indiana series he hardly made any adjustments and when he did it was the wrong one. He went big vs the Pacers which is a negative because their bigs are better than our bigs. It also meant that Hibbert would live in the paint because none of our bigs could hit a shot. He played Amare too much after coming back rusty from an injury. He did not play Cope until too late. After the Pacers beat us Frank Vogel specifically said he was glad we did not use Cope in the series. Cope would have meant hibbert could not stay in the paint all game.

Woody lets his players take too many low percentage shots. If that's on the players because they don't listen to the coach? Then we need a coach who will require that players listen to their instructions.

He got out coached in the playoffs because the ball stuck. Very weak ball movement. If you lose and are moving the ball, I am ok with it. But, if you lose going ISO/forced basketball then I blame the coach. Now I know the personnel sucked especially at guard but that is still no excuse to not require ball movement.

Watching the college game and seeing the ball movement that's coached makes me really hate the NBA (especially the knicks style).

Not sure I buy the Cope thing.

I don't buy the cope thing. Cope isn't that good. He got the start in the Celtics series and looked shook. He didn't score a point in the Celtics series. Most coaches don't get called out for not going to their undrafted league mini guy that was given a chance and couldn't produce but that was how desperate the knicks were. Cope is the 14th man on the pacers this year.
Woodson needed to call a time out last night. Last night's mistake isn't a microcosm of his entire tenure as the knick coach. The knicks need a new voice next year and a guy that can be an extension of pjax. That isn't woodson but Woodson had a lot of success as the knicks coach. Woodson has always been handicapped by injuries in the playoffs. Iman, Baron, Lin, Amare, Tyson his first year. Amare, Tyson, Shump, Kidd, Thomas, Sheed, Camby, Melo his second year. The knicks had tremendous misfortune injury wise. Can someone name a coach that overcomes that and beat a team like the world champion heat in 2012 or the pacers in 2013?

Do you think that woody is a good coach?

Its hard to say. I think Grunwald being fired sabotaged any authority woodson had. The guy was told who to keep on his team, who he could play, who he should start, and how many minutes guys could play. I think that makes it pretty hard to be effective. He won a lot prior to this year and the team does go on win streaks when he is the coach. I do think that the coach needs to be hired by the gm in place to make things work. I also think that with pjax the knicks need to have a new coach. If grunwald was gm I think this season would have been different and I would endorse woodson as coach for next year.

did you like Grunwald as the GM? Isn't he the won who amnestied billups for chandler and made that disaster bargs trade?

I think Grunwald was a great gm. He was a global thinker and great scout. He brought in Cope and prigs for undrafted league mini deals. He brought in Lin after the rockets waived him and kept him when contracts would be guaranteed despite his coach not wanting to keep him. He was the guy that found Moz just ask his agent. Currently the msg stance on grunwald is that he didn't agree with what the organization wanted to do with player development. Pretty hard to see where that is coming from when Grunwald signed the most desireable player in cj leslie immediately after the draft and later signed Jeremy Tyler to a two year deal after his summer league performance. Apparently not seeing eye to eye on player development involved organizational decisions regarding Chris Smith.
In regards to Billups, Walsh picked up his option. Grunwald chose Tyson over Billups. Had the knicks let Billups walk and not signed Tyson maybe they get cp3 but walsh signed him and grunwald decided he wanted to move on and buid a traditional team. In regards to the bargs trade, I thought glen made it because it freed up more cap space in 2015 and because Bargs could provide a second option on offense to melo. Later it was reported that bargs was acquired because he was caa and that that was part of why glen was let go. I don't hate the bargs trade and I do think glen might do it just for the cap space and potential talent.

you don't hate the bargs trade? who doesn't hate the bargs trade?

Also, the billups chandler was as big of a disaster move that we made.

CrushAlot wrote:The picks aren't in play yet. The second rounder that was traded from this years draft currently is the 59th out of 60 picks. F the Knicks scout guys projected to go at 59 there is a pretty good chance that one of them might be available after one more pick is taken.

Well the 2014 pick from the melo trade was not in play until this year and we all seen how that worked out. Not valuing picks is a main component on why we are lacking assets now. Drafting is not the only thing you can do with draft picks. You can bundle multiple of them for a higher one. I am sorry we can not just say who cares about draft picks if they are not this years. Even if you trade for the player after pick is taken you will be giving up more assets to get an asset you already gave up.

Clean wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Yea. Michael Woodson doesn't seem like a guy who has a full grasp of every element in coaching. So no he is not. Championship coach

What I don't get, and I'm being genuine here, is how does he manage to rustle up these prolonged winning streaks?- he's done it every year he's been here. It seems like his defensive schemes are terrible and he makes no adjustments, yet we've won a lot of games under him- so are we overlooking some of his strengths?

Like clockwork he always gets exposed in the playoffs. He has noticeably been out coached in every playoff series as a Knick coach.

really? which ones?

All of them.

Off the top of my head the series vs the heat it was obvious that the heat did 3 things vs us. They trapped the ball handlers off most PNR's. They played good denial and post D on melo. The last thing I remember they did vs us was any double that was not a trap came from the weak side corner. Woody did nothing to counter these moves. He force fed the ball to Melo in the post and he did not think to put the best 3pt shooter in the league(novak) in the weak side corner EVERY TIME he is on the court.

For the Indiana series he hardly made any adjustments and when he did it was the wrong one. He went big vs the Pacers which is a negative because their bigs are better than our bigs. It also meant that Hibbert would live in the paint because none of our bigs could hit a shot. He played Amare too much after coming back rusty from an injury. He did not play Cope until too late. After the Pacers beat us Frank Vogel specifically said he was glad we did not use Cope in the series. Cope would have meant hibbert could not stay in the paint all game.

Woody lets his players take too many low percentage shots. If that's on the players because they don't listen to the coach? Then we need a coach who will require that players listen to their instructions.

He got out coached in the playoffs because the ball stuck. Very weak ball movement. If you lose and are moving the ball, I am ok with it. But, if you lose going ISO/forced basketball then I blame the coach. Now I know the personnel sucked especially at guard but that is still no excuse to not require ball movement.

Watching the college game and seeing the ball movement that's coached makes me really hate the NBA (especially the knicks style).

Not sure I buy the Cope thing.

On the Cope thing I will post the stats on the games he has vs the pacers when he was in the rotation. In Feb Cope played 10 minutes and scored 13 points with 66% accuracy. In April Cope was forced to play major minutes due to Chandlers Injury. He played 34 minutes and scored 20 points with 66% accuracy . He made 4 3pters with 50% accuracy. I specifically remember Vogel saying he did not expect that performance from Cope during that April game and they could not guard him and Melo on court at the same time. Add that to Vogels happiness at Woodsons reluctance to use Cope against the pacers in the playoffs and I think it is pretty clear cut.

This.

It was so bad Vogel made fun of Woodson. When do you ever see that?

CrushAlot wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:The picks aren't in play yet. The second rounder that was traded from this years draft currently is the 59th out of 60 picks. F the Knicks scout guys projected to go at 59 there is a pretty good chance that one of them might be available after one more pick is taken.

What about the other two picks? You're OK with giving up 3 picks to clear a total of $3 mil in cap space as long as one of them is a very late 2nd round pick? That doesn't strike you as an absurd exchange rate? I'm sure this off-season we could clear the $40 mil we owe Tyson and Amare if we used 40 draft picks to entice other teams to take them off our hands. I'll even stipulate that 1/3 of the picks are very late 2nd round, 1/3 ordinary 2nd rounders, and 1/3 first round picks. Then we could keep Melo and sign max FAs this off-season and/or enjoy the trade advantages of teams with cap space. And it would only take giving up 40 picks. You're OK with that exchange rate?

The Knicks gave up their lottery pick and a top 3 protected pick to dump Jeffries and gain cap space. Two second round picks and a first round pick that Denver has the right to swap in 2016. Yeah jam ok with that compromised pick being moved for space. I think grunwald was thinking that he would have a 32 year old melo when that pick is used and the guy taken would be a late first rounder that probably doesn't make an impact until melo is 35.

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Yea. Michael Woodson doesn't seem like a guy who has a full grasp of every element in coaching. So no he is not. Championship coach

What I don't get, and I'm being genuine here, is how does he manage to rustle up these prolonged winning streaks?- he's done it every year he's been here. It seems like his defensive schemes are terrible and he makes no adjustments, yet we've won a lot of games under him- so are we overlooking some of his strengths?

Like clockwork he always gets exposed in the playoffs. He has noticeably been out coached in every playoff series as a Knick coach.

really? which ones?

All of them.

Off the top of my head the series vs the heat it was obvious that the heat did 3 things vs us. They trapped the ball handlers off most PNR's. They played good denial and post D on melo. The last thing I remember they did vs us was any double that was not a trap came from the weak side corner. Woody did nothing to counter these moves. He force fed the ball to Melo in the post and he did not think to put the best 3pt shooter in the league(novak) in the weak side corner EVERY TIME he is on the court.

For the Indiana series he hardly made any adjustments and when he did it was the wrong one. He went big vs the Pacers which is a negative because their bigs are better than our bigs. It also meant that Hibbert would live in the paint because none of our bigs could hit a shot. He played Amare too much after coming back rusty from an injury. He did not play Cope until too late. After the Pacers beat us Frank Vogel specifically said he was glad we did not use Cope in the series. Cope would have meant hibbert could not stay in the paint all game.

Woody lets his players take too many low percentage shots. If that's on the players because they don't listen to the coach? Then we need a coach who will require that players listen to their instructions.

He got out coached in the playoffs because the ball stuck. Very weak ball movement. If you lose and are moving the ball, I am ok with it. But, if you lose going ISO/forced basketball then I blame the coach. Now I know the personnel sucked especially at guard but that is still no excuse to not require ball movement.

Watching the college game and seeing the ball movement that's coached makes me really hate the NBA (especially the knicks style).

Not sure I buy the Cope thing.

Or does Dolan give Woodson players who take too many low percentage shots? It's not like these players started doing this under Woodson.
You might find this analysis interesting since appreciate the metrics.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748703506904575592363492225220
Basically, nearly all of the coaches from the past three decades had no impact on their teams' records. You could just take the historical wins produced from each of the individual players on the team, add them up, and figure out how many games the team would win. In the rare cases where a coach had a significant impact, he was consistently either good or bad to a point that was obvious. It wasn't like there were some years where his teams overachieved and some where they underachieved (like Woodson), which would seem to just be random variation.

Interesting. I would love to see more data.

Yeah, the analysis doesn't make Matt Goukas look good.

Then there's Matt Guokas, who compiled a .430 winning percentage in seven years as head coach. He's the only person in this sample to make his players significantly worse.

Bonn1997 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:The picks aren't in play yet. The second rounder that was traded from this years draft currently is the 59th out of 60 picks. F the Knicks scout guys projected to go at 59 there is a pretty good chance that one of them might be available after one more pick is taken.

What about the other two picks? You're OK with giving up 3 picks to clear a total of $3 mil in cap space as long as one of them is a very late 2nd round pick? That doesn't strike you as an absurd exchange rate? I'm sure this off-season we could clear the $40 mil we owe Tyson and Amare if we used 40 draft picks to entice other teams to take them off our hands. I'll even stipulate that 1/3 of the picks are very late 2nd round, 1/3 ordinary 2nd rounders, and 1/3 first round picks. Then we could keep Melo and sign max FAs this off-season and/or enjoy the trade advantages of teams with cap space. And it would only take giving up 40 picks. You're OK with that exchange rate?

The Knicks gave up their lottery pick and a top 3 protected pick to dump Jeffries and gain cap space. Two second round picks and a first round pick that Denver has the right to swap in 2016. Yeah jam ok with that compromised pick being moved for space. I think grunwald was thinking that he would have a 32 year old melo when that pick is used and the guy taken would be a late first rounder that probably doesn't make an impact until melo is 35.

Well you didn't answer my question with the Amare/Chandler example. (And I made no claim that the Knicks' past decisions were smart.) But how about this:
Let's say in a future year where you already had over $50 mil in projected cap space, if a team asked you to take on a $3 mil contract and offered you 3 picks to do so (one completely unprotected 1st round pick from a historically terrible franchise, one mid 2nd round, and a very late 2nd round), you'd say no?