Either way, Jackson is playing this smart and is going to try and hold Melo to his word of taking a pay cut and being about winning.

The only real question is what is his worth to a championship contending roster. And we all is not 20M.

yellowboy90 wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:I am not sure I agree to this line of reasoning. If his value is around 12-15M range that's what we should offer him. We can spend the othher 5M on a much more valuable upgrade so we don't have to hear him wine for another 4 years. Paying him 20 insted of 15M will not make him a better player or make us better team.

The only real question is what is his worth to a championship contending roster. And we all is not 20M.

Didn't you say a few days ago that your value is what the market sets for you?

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:I am not sure I agree to this line of reasoning. If his value is around 12-15M range that's what we should offer him. We can spend the othher 5M on a much more valuable upgrade so we don't have to hear him wine for another 4 years. Paying him 20 insted of 15M will not make him a better player or make us better team.

The only real question is what is his worth to a championship contending roster. And we all is not 20M.

Didn't you say a few days ago that your value is what the market sets for you?

Obviously market value and production value are not always the same thing.

True but I didn't see him make that distinction the other day.

dk7th wrote:it's what he is worth to the knicks, always was, always will be. he was grossly overpaid the first time around, never mind the assets given up for him. you can't pay that much for a one-way player! now look at the knicks. he owes the knicks a significant pay cut. 12-14 million is about right for the knicks to pay him if he wants to remain part of the franchise. he remains a one-way player.

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:it's what he is worth to the knicks, always was, always will be. he was grossly overpaid the first time around, never mind the assets given up for him. you can't pay that much for a one-way player! now look at the knicks. he owes the knicks a significant pay cut. 12-14 million is about right for the knicks to pay him if he wants to remain part of the franchise. he remains a one-way player.

That false sense of entitlement is really gonna kill your credibility. There's a difference between wanting him to take less (which a lot of us do) and thinking he's obligated to take less because he "owes" the Knicks.

my credibility is going to be just fine. he's a one-way player. now justify his worth to the knicks based on that FACT.

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:it's what he is worth to the knicks, always was, always will be. he was grossly overpaid the first time around, never mind the assets given up for him. you can't pay that much for a one-way player! now look at the knicks. he owes the knicks a significant pay cut. 12-14 million is about right for the knicks to pay him if he wants to remain part of the franchise. he remains a one-way player.

That false sense of entitlement is really gonna kill your credibility. There's a difference between wanting him to take less (which a lot of us do) and thinking he's obligated to take less because he "owes" the Knicks.

my credibility is going to be just fine. he's a one-way player. now justify his worth to the knicks based on that FACT.

I'm not talking about his worth. I'm clearly talking about you thinking he owes the knicks, or any team, anything. I don't know why you keep trying to steer all topics to what Melo should be paid. I'm not talking about that and have already stated that I agree with you that I want him to take less. I disagree that he owes it to me though just because I'm a knick fan.

i am thinking of what is fair, reasonable, just, and ethical. you are thinking of what melo thinks he should be getting paid, which is informed by NONE of those things.

owing and getting paid are two sides of the same coin. it takes a major case of ignorance to try and keep them separate.

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:it's what he is worth to the knicks, always was, always will be. he was grossly overpaid the first time around, never mind the assets given up for him. you can't pay that much for a one-way player! now look at the knicks. he owes the knicks a significant pay cut. 12-14 million is about right for the knicks to pay him if he wants to remain part of the franchise. he remains a one-way player.

That false sense of entitlement is really gonna kill your credibility. There's a difference between wanting him to take less (which a lot of us do) and thinking he's obligated to take less because he "owes" the Knicks.

my credibility is going to be just fine. he's a one-way player. now justify his worth to the knicks based on that FACT.

I'm not talking about his worth. I'm clearly talking about you thinking he owes the knicks, or any team, anything. I don't know why you keep trying to steer all topics to what Melo should be paid. I'm not talking about that and have already stated that I agree with you that I want him to take less. I disagree that he owes it to me though just because I'm a knick fan.

i am thinking of what is fair, reasonable, just, and ethical. you are thinking of what melo thinks he should be getting paid, which is informed by NONE of those things.

owing and getting paid are two sides of the same coin. it takes a major case of ignorance to try and keep them separate.

No, you're projecting what you want him to do onto this belief that would paint him in a bad light if he didn't adhere to it. Just, ethics, fairness - they're all of matter of your opinion at the end of the stay with the way you state them, seeing as how it's been pointed out that you change the rules for certain players.

And the way you put, they're not on the same coin. If Melo wants to stay with the Knicks, Jackson has said that it'd be wise and beneficial for him to take a pay cut. He has never said that he owes it to anyone. That's your sense of entitlement.

who, exactly, has pointed out that i change the rules? is it someone who has divergent values from my own? if it is, then why hide behind that?

i say if anyone has been operating from a sense of entitlement it's carmelo anthony. do you know what it means to overvalue yourself? it means you feel OWED.

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:it's what he is worth to the knicks, always was, always will be. he was grossly overpaid the first time around, never mind the assets given up for him. you can't pay that much for a one-way player! now look at the knicks. he owes the knicks a significant pay cut. 12-14 million is about right for the knicks to pay him if he wants to remain part of the franchise. he remains a one-way player.

That false sense of entitlement is really gonna kill your credibility. There's a difference between wanting him to take less (which a lot of us do) and thinking he's obligated to take less because he "owes" the Knicks.

my credibility is going to be just fine. he's a one-way player. now justify his worth to the knicks based on that FACT.

I'm not talking about his worth. I'm clearly talking about you thinking he owes the knicks, or any team, anything. I don't know why you keep trying to steer all topics to what Melo should be paid. I'm not talking about that and have already stated that I agree with you that I want him to take less. I disagree that he owes it to me though just because I'm a knick fan.

i am thinking of what is fair, reasonable, just, and ethical. you are thinking of what melo thinks he should be getting paid, which is informed by NONE of those things.

owing and getting paid are two sides of the same coin. it takes a major case of ignorance to try and keep them separate.

No, you're projecting what you want him to do onto this belief that would paint him in a bad light if he didn't adhere to it. Just, ethics, fairness - they're all of matter of your opinion at the end of the stay with the way you state them, seeing as how it's been pointed out that you change the rules for certain players.

And the way you put, they're not on the same coin. If Melo wants to stay with the Knicks, Jackson has said that it'd be wise and beneficial for him to take a pay cut. He has never said that he owes it to anyone. That's your sense of entitlement.

who, exactly, has pointed out that i change the rules? is it someone who has divergent values from my own? if it is, then why hide behind that?

i say if anyone has been operating from a sense of entitlement it's carmelo anthony. do you know what it means to overvalue yourself? it means you feel OWED.

Overvaluing yourself and wanting the most money you can get are different things. Monta Ellis "have it all" is overvaluing himself. Carmelo's "I didn't wanna be stuck in limbo with the impending lockout" just wanted to get the most money he could.

he has been a non-contender his entire career but one. time to take a huge salary hit to stay in new york since they are in worse shape than other teams he might be interested in. hence if he takes what he is actually worth to the knicks they can build a winner sooner.

or he can take a little more money to play for a team closer than the knicks already and perhaps win sooner. either scenario he is not going to get the most money available and that is a good thing.

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:it's what he is worth to the knicks, always was, always will be. he was grossly overpaid the first time around, never mind the assets given up for him. you can't pay that much for a one-way player! now look at the knicks. he owes the knicks a significant pay cut. 12-14 million is about right for the knicks to pay him if he wants to remain part of the franchise. he remains a one-way player.

That false sense of entitlement is really gonna kill your credibility. There's a difference between wanting him to take less (which a lot of us do) and thinking he's obligated to take less because he "owes" the Knicks.

my credibility is going to be just fine. he's a one-way player. now justify his worth to the knicks based on that FACT.

I'm not talking about his worth. I'm clearly talking about you thinking he owes the knicks, or any team, anything. I don't know why you keep trying to steer all topics to what Melo should be paid. I'm not talking about that and have already stated that I agree with you that I want him to take less. I disagree that he owes it to me though just because I'm a knick fan.

i am thinking of what is fair, reasonable, just, and ethical. you are thinking of what melo thinks he should be getting paid, which is informed by NONE of those things.

owing and getting paid are two sides of the same coin. it takes a major case of ignorance to try and keep them separate.

No, you're projecting what you want him to do onto this belief that would paint him in a bad light if he didn't adhere to it. Just, ethics, fairness - they're all of matter of your opinion at the end of the stay with the way you state them, seeing as how it's been pointed out that you change the rules for certain players.

And the way you put, they're not on the same coin. If Melo wants to stay with the Knicks, Jackson has said that it'd be wise and beneficial for him to take a pay cut. He has never said that he owes it to anyone. That's your sense of entitlement.

who, exactly, has pointed out that i change the rules? is it someone who has divergent values from my own? if it is, then why hide behind that?

i say if anyone has been operating from a sense of entitlement it's carmelo anthony. do you know what it means to overvalue yourself? it means you feel OWED.

Overvaluing yourself and wanting the most money you can get are different things. Monta Ellis "have it all" is overvaluing himself. Carmelo's "I didn't wanna be stuck in limbo with the impending lockout" just wanted to get the most money he could.

he has been a non-contender his entire career but one. time to take a huge salary hit to stay in new york since they are in worse shape than other teams he might be interested in. hence if he takes what he is actually worth to the knicks they can build a winner sooner.

or he can take a little more money to play for a team closer than the knicks already and perhaps win sooner. either scenario he is not going to get the most money available and that is a good thing.

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:it's what he is worth to the knicks, always was, always will be. he was grossly overpaid the first time around, never mind the assets given up for him. you can't pay that much for a one-way player! now look at the knicks. he owes the knicks a significant pay cut. 12-14 million is about right for the knicks to pay him if he wants to remain part of the franchise. he remains a one-way player.

That false sense of entitlement is really gonna kill your credibility. There's a difference between wanting him to take less (which a lot of us do) and thinking he's obligated to take less because he "owes" the Knicks.

my credibility is going to be just fine. he's a one-way player. now justify his worth to the knicks based on that FACT.

I'm not talking about his worth. I'm clearly talking about you thinking he owes the knicks, or any team, anything. I don't know why you keep trying to steer all topics to what Melo should be paid. I'm not talking about that and have already stated that I agree with you that I want him to take less. I disagree that he owes it to me though just because I'm a knick fan.

i am thinking of what is fair, reasonable, just, and ethical. you are thinking of what melo thinks he should be getting paid, which is informed by NONE of those things.

owing and getting paid are two sides of the same coin. it takes a major case of ignorance to try and keep them separate.

No, you're projecting what you want him to do onto this belief that would paint him in a bad light if he didn't adhere to it. Just, ethics, fairness - they're all of matter of your opinion at the end of the stay with the way you state them, seeing as how it's been pointed out that you change the rules for certain players.

And the way you put, they're not on the same coin. If Melo wants to stay with the Knicks, Jackson has said that it'd be wise and beneficial for him to take a pay cut. He has never said that he owes it to anyone. That's your sense of entitlement.

who, exactly, has pointed out that i change the rules? is it someone who has divergent values from my own? if it is, then why hide behind that?

i say if anyone has been operating from a sense of entitlement it's carmelo anthony. do you know what it means to overvalue yourself? it means you feel OWED.

Overvaluing yourself and wanting the most money you can get are different things. Monta Ellis "have it all" is overvaluing himself. Carmelo's "I didn't wanna be stuck in limbo with the impending lockout" just wanted to get the most money he could.

he has been a non-contender his entire career but one. time to take a huge salary hit to stay in new york since they are in worse shape than other teams he might be interested in. hence if he takes what he is actually worth to the knicks they can build a winner sooner.

or he can take a little more money to play for a team closer than the knicks already and perhaps win sooner. either scenario he is not going to get the most money available and that is a good thing.

Is this even a response to what I said? I've already agreed that it would be nice if he took less money.

yes it's a very pointed and coherent response. if you don't agree with it then explain why. if you don't understand it then ask about that which you don't understand. i am a pretty smart guy.

meantime, i ask for the second time a direct question: who is this person who has pointed out to me that i change the rules?

And I'd obviously have to go look but there was a prior discussion about Melo and Amare where the situations were compared and what not. I remember you and I were discussing it and some people chimed in but I don't remember everyone who posted about it.