OGkush121 wrote:He's not the favorite, but if the Knicks record and Melo's play is good enough who's to say it can't happen?
I certainly don't expect him to be the MVP, but it'd be stupid to say he doesn't have a shot.

It's only about 15 games in (not to mention he's curently ranked #3) and the Knicks are looking like a real quality team, how and why is he already out of the Lebron-Durant race?

Bonn1997 wrote:

OGkush121 wrote:He's not the favorite, but if the Knicks record and Melo's play is good enough who's to say it can't happen?
I certainly don't expect him to be the MVP, but it'd be stupid to say he doesn't have a shot.

It's only about 15 games in (not to mention he's curently ranked #3) and the Knicks are looking like a real quality team, how and why is he already out of the Lebron-Durant race?

Currently ranked #3? You're making it sound like there's some official ranking out there.

he's top 3 in every ranking I've seen and deservingly so

if the Knicks get top seed in the East, Melo has a legit shot at the award just like when Rose won it

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:understanding? the point is the majority of the fanbase has projected this "understanding" onto the transaction. i gave my account of a logical plan in a subsequent post to this one. hence my heavy lifting is over.

now it is your turn to tell me what the plan was once they acquired melo in the manner that they did?

the easier answer would be "they didn't have a plan" but somehow i think i am going to hear the harder answer....

You're right. Dolan wanted his star to market and make money off of. But when you say built wrong - are you saying that they built this team in a way of which you dont approve or that they built the team in a way the ensures them failure?

this is a trick question based on a false dilemma. for anything of which i do not approve ensures failure-- otherwise why bother opining?

with that in mind the answer, again, is "both."

airchibundo507 wrote:Like it or not, Melo is capable of winning a championship as the best player on his team. The reality is that that 08-09 Nuggets team came within two inbounds passes of winning a championship. Hate Melo for being selfish in the past (what superstar scorer hasn't been?) or not being focused on defense, but surround Melo with shooters to generate adequate spacing, guys who can pass the rock and play off double teams, an elite defense and a coach that will keep him accountable on that end, and you have a legitimate contender in the mold of the 2010-2011 Mavericks. If Amare buys into the concept, this is an improvement of those mavs with a more diverse offense built around two legit stars that can easily put the ball in the hoop.

If you can't appreciate Melo and the success he has brought the Knicks, give up your fanhood until he's gone, but I guarantee he will be here awhile.

look i see a plan here in your description, a plan that if i squint real hard i can actually see. the reason i'm squinting is whether we are going to see melo become more dirk-like in terms of efficiency and making the right pass. the dude was awesome in his title year.

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:understanding? the point is the majority of the fanbase has projected this "understanding" onto the transaction. i gave my account of a logical plan in a subsequent post to this one. hence my heavy lifting is over.

now it is your turn to tell me what the plan was once they acquired melo in the manner that they did?

the easier answer would be "they didn't have a plan" but somehow i think i am going to hear the harder answer....

You're right. Dolan wanted his star to market and make money off of. But when you say built wrong - are you saying that they built this team in a way of which you dont approve or that they built the team in a way the ensures them failure?

this is a trick question based on a false dilemma. for anything of which i do not approve ensures failure-- otherwise why bother opining?

with that in mind the answer, again, is "both."

Haha I actually thought you were gonna say "both" after I submitted the post. The thing is: A LOT of people disapproved of the way the Heat got their team together and...well you know the rest.

the heat was an instance of collusion. it was unethical in that it harmed other parties. that's what happens when you flout the rules: you harm other parties. it's also why you have contracts. it was in essence a breach of some kind. so yes it was offensive.

the knicks situation, however, became offensive for entirely different reasons, and the results will not be the same as the heat barring catastrophic injury to lebron james. does this really need explanation? and if so will you provide one?

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

dk7th wrote:understanding? the point is the majority of the fanbase has projected this "understanding" onto the transaction. i gave my account of a logical plan in a subsequent post to this one. hence my heavy lifting is over.

now it is your turn to tell me what the plan was once they acquired melo in the manner that they did?

the easier answer would be "they didn't have a plan" but somehow i think i am going to hear the harder answer....

You're right. Dolan wanted his star to market and make money off of. But when you say built wrong - are you saying that they built this team in a way of which you dont approve or that they built the team in a way the ensures them failure?

this is a trick question based on a false dilemma. for anything of which i do not approve ensures failure-- otherwise why bother opining?

with that in mind the answer, again, is "both."

Haha I actually thought you were gonna say "both" after I submitted the post. The thing is: A LOT of people disapproved of the way the Heat got their team together and...well you know the rest.

the heat was an instance of collusion. it was unethical in that it harmed other parties. that's what happens when you flout the rules: you harm other parties. it's also why you have contracts. it was in essence a breach of some kind. so yes it was offensive.

the knicks situation, however, became offensive for entirely different reasons, and the results will not be the same as the heat barring catastrophic injury to lebron james. does this really need explanation? and if so will you provide one?

No explanation necessary. I just dont see a team that the Knicks could have fielded with or without Melo that could be better than that Miami team. Whether we made the trade for Melo or not, Lebron and the Heat would still be a significant roadblock.

LeBron himself said it best..."he isn't into saving franchises".

No bigger slap to a master plan that everyone knew of than that.

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

knickscity wrote:

Uptown wrote:

tkf wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

tkf wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

tkf wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

tkf wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:He's the leading scorer on a team doing very well. Rightly or wrongly, if that continues, he will definitely get MVP consideration. I've never disputed that. The MVP voting is usually distributed simply among the top scorers on each of the 3 or 5 top teams in the league.

He's not on the list because he's the leading scorer on a team doing very well. He's there because he's the best player on a team doing very well.

Clippers have Jamal Crawford and Blake Griffin who are scoring more points than Chris Paul, but Paul is the one in the MVP race.

The sooner you understand that its about the impact guys have rather than points, the better.

oh, we understand that.. but it is a combination of things, because if we talk impact with the knicks, then jason kidd has to be in the mix then...

Yea, because 8 PPG and 3 APG is deserving of an MVP award.

you said impact right? does kidd not have a huge impact on this team? maybe the biggest so far? so really it is a combination of things.. which is why bonn mentioned that he is leading scorer and mainly why you and a few others may feel he should get a look at mvp... if we are looking at impact, I think jason kidd impact has been larger this year..

8 and 3 can only impact your team so much. Sure, he's been a nice impact. He brings tremendous leadership, something that cannot be measured by statistics.

But you have to put up numbers for this award. It's the most prestigious single season award.

This is why guys like Jordan, Malone, Bryant, etc. have won it.

8 and 3 are role players numbers son. Not MVP.

YOU ARE NOT FOLLOWING... bonn said carmelo is being considered because he leads the team in scoring.. you said,it was because he was the best player on the team and then pointed out impact moreso than numbers... but what I am trying to tell you is that carmelo's impact is probably no more than kidds at this point, so if he is going to get any recognition it will be because of his numbers and that just won't be enough because he is not on par with the likes of durant and lebron..

I am not saying kidd will win mvp bro....

If Carmelo's impact hasn't been more than Kidd's, why is Kidd not on any MVP candidates list?

lol this is too easy.

you are lost... candidates list.. dude these made up list are not official. there are two real candidates... carmela isn't one of them.....

Comments like this just show that you cant be objective when discussing Melo.

Nah, comments like that just shows how much basketball common sense he doesn't have.

Kidd is a role player, a very good one though, Melo is the best player on the team.

The Knicks can win games without Kidd, they can't win squat over a season without Melo, not the way the team is built.

well then that tells you that the team is not built well...

want to talk basketball sense, only a few of the homers here are talking mvp after 4 games.. as if durant and lebron retired... you not only lack baskeball sense, but league pass.. try watching other games for a change..

one need only look at the heat-spurs game, splitter et. al. notwithstanding, to see the difference between a genuine mvp candidate and carmelo. even if the voting is somewhat whimsical and subjective there is no mistaking lbj's performance.

i think as the years go by even the most thick-headed voters have to look at the ability to make others better as the deciding factor over and above mere scoring ability or the sophomoric approach of "best player on the winningest team" that seems to characterize the latter-day stern era fanbase.

Are you agreeing with tkf that the team is built wrong or are you just commenting on the mvp process? I think you could give lbj the mvp every year and make a great argument that he deserved it. Same thing with MJ and Shaq for several years. people should take a look at some of the numbers mike jordan was putting up while being nominated defensive player of the year or all-nba defensive team.

last things first: lbj should win the mvp every year and is there really any argument against this, other than falsely spreading the wealth or kowtowing to whimsy and subjectivity ? yes no question shaq and mj and before that magic and bird. include duncan and hakeem while we're at it. only injury should preclude any of them winning. others here apparently disagree with me but what do they all have in common above all else?: they make/made others better.

as to the first issue my answer is "both." i don't know if it is necessary to go into what our thoughts are as to whether the team is built wrong. but just for the record... i don't believe we have built a champion here and that gnaws at me. and it gnaws at me because i believe walsh had a genuine plan to build a champion. and that plan and the man behind it were swept aside for reasons i don't approve of, as i felt it was done in violation of my values.

very well said.. i have had several conversations with other posters off site, and honestly since the changes some of them feel the same way both of us do... the last sentence hit the nail on the head for me...

My understanding of the plan was clear cap to sign lbj and another free agent. Can either of you expand on this championship plan that existed after he missed out on lbj and how it was foiled?

understanding? the point is the majority of the fanbase has projected this "understanding" onto the transaction. i gave my account of a logical plan in a subsequent post to this one. hence my heavy lifting is over.

now it is your turn to tell me what the plan was once they acquired melo in the manner that they did?

the easier answer would be "they didn't have a plan" but somehow i think i am going to hear the harder answer....

the knicks, once they had been duped, fell back on the only choice they had, especially when d'antoni had already been paying his two years of dues with successive roster flush seasons. we conveniently forget that he had to endure two seasons of guaranteed shyte. so in a rare instance of where commerce and public relations ought to trump a more patient approach, they sign stoudemire july 9th. they had to do it. could walsh have opted to pass and keep the team without a "franchise face?" no he could not have. he came on to achieve two years of demolition to be in a place of building around the only player worth trading a a team for. when that plan is dashed you alter strategy and go with amare.

now from there walsh had the right idea: try to sign a point guard to audition for two years until chris paul becomes available, or else get the best possible point guard available. stoudemire wanted ridnour... i am not sure he was wrong. instead they acquired felton. ho-hum. two year-audition on a dirt cheap contract.

and in terms of rebuilding these are the initial/catalyzing first step and it's natural second step, which by nature must be best at complementing the first step, are what the knicks had here initially.

what happened next went against the next logical step in a logical plan. dolan stepped in.

instead of getting a complementary third piece they traded for a redundant second second piece. free agency could have been acceptable if somewhat repugnant. but no more than that.

from there things go awry, and frankly it offends me-- like an unruly relative or a bad presidential candidate.

Is this the plan that you are referring to? Wait two years for Chris Paul? Two years out and Amare's career might be over. And the reality with that is that his career has followed the timeline expectancy for guys with microfracture surgery. I disagree with all the steps you are taking. The Knicks traded away essentially an unprotected first round pick and their lottery pick to be in the game for a second star. Walsh was in a compromised position in every deal he did because the other gms knew what his goal was. Maybe he got tired of giving away everything including the kitchen sink in every trade and decided to put his foot down with Denver. Whatever. If you can get a franchise player that is going crosstown if you don't do you not pull the trigger because you want to keep Moz, Felton? Maybe if you still have your picks but you moved those to have cap space so you have to do the deal. As far as the coach being the loyal soldier that needed to be rewarded I call bs on that. Guy had a huge contract and took his second year off.

As far as my plan goes I don't think I could have executed a better one than Grunwald. Of course the Knicks could have saved their amnesty and gotten the cap space and amnestied Amare but then he never would have been ther to fulfill Walsh's championship plan b.

the plan you see lacks a certain dimension in that it does not include a spiral upward by constantly replacing the player with his best possible successor. you keep a sense of cohesion and continuity that way. at the time that was upgrading at point guard over felton.

and what if amare self-destructs? we would have had lots of candidates to replace his skills for pick and rolls or an occasional elbow play. the last thing you do is load up on a player who is redundant and compound the matter by disposing of solid rotation players? you hold on to felton for another season and unload him or put him in a trade for an upgrade over himself.

the fact that they can't coexist PROVES that they are REDUNDANT.

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

knickscity wrote:

Uptown wrote:

tkf wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

tkf wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

tkf wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

tkf wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:He's the leading scorer on a team doing very well. Rightly or wrongly, if that continues, he will definitely get MVP consideration. I've never disputed that. The MVP voting is usually distributed simply among the top scorers on each of the 3 or 5 top teams in the league.

He's not on the list because he's the leading scorer on a team doing very well. He's there because he's the best player on a team doing very well.

Clippers have Jamal Crawford and Blake Griffin who are scoring more points than Chris Paul, but Paul is the one in the MVP race.

The sooner you understand that its about the impact guys have rather than points, the better.

oh, we understand that.. but it is a combination of things, because if we talk impact with the knicks, then jason kidd has to be in the mix then...

Yea, because 8 PPG and 3 APG is deserving of an MVP award.

you said impact right? does kidd not have a huge impact on this team? maybe the biggest so far? so really it is a combination of things.. which is why bonn mentioned that he is leading scorer and mainly why you and a few others may feel he should get a look at mvp... if we are looking at impact, I think jason kidd impact has been larger this year..

8 and 3 can only impact your team so much. Sure, he's been a nice impact. He brings tremendous leadership, something that cannot be measured by statistics.

But you have to put up numbers for this award. It's the most prestigious single season award.

This is why guys like Jordan, Malone, Bryant, etc. have won it.

8 and 3 are role players numbers son. Not MVP.

YOU ARE NOT FOLLOWING... bonn said carmelo is being considered because he leads the team in scoring.. you said,it was because he was the best player on the team and then pointed out impact moreso than numbers... but what I am trying to tell you is that carmelo's impact is probably no more than kidds at this point, so if he is going to get any recognition it will be because of his numbers and that just won't be enough because he is not on par with the likes of durant and lebron..

I am not saying kidd will win mvp bro....

If Carmelo's impact hasn't been more than Kidd's, why is Kidd not on any MVP candidates list?

lol this is too easy.

you are lost... candidates list.. dude these made up list are not official. there are two real candidates... carmela isn't one of them.....

Comments like this just show that you cant be objective when discussing Melo.

Nah, comments like that just shows how much basketball common sense he doesn't have.

Kidd is a role player, a very good one though, Melo is the best player on the team.

The Knicks can win games without Kidd, they can't win squat over a season without Melo, not the way the team is built.

well then that tells you that the team is not built well...

want to talk basketball sense, only a few of the homers here are talking mvp after 4 games.. as if durant and lebron retired... you not only lack baskeball sense, but league pass.. try watching other games for a change..

one need only look at the heat-spurs game, splitter et. al. notwithstanding, to see the difference between a genuine mvp candidate and carmelo. even if the voting is somewhat whimsical and subjective there is no mistaking lbj's performance.

i think as the years go by even the most thick-headed voters have to look at the ability to make others better as the deciding factor over and above mere scoring ability or the sophomoric approach of "best player on the winningest team" that seems to characterize the latter-day stern era fanbase.

Are you agreeing with tkf that the team is built wrong or are you just commenting on the mvp process? I think you could give lbj the mvp every year and make a great argument that he deserved it. Same thing with MJ and Shaq for several years. people should take a look at some of the numbers mike jordan was putting up while being nominated defensive player of the year or all-nba defensive team.

last things first: lbj should win the mvp every year and is there really any argument against this, other than falsely spreading the wealth or kowtowing to whimsy and subjectivity ? yes no question shaq and mj and before that magic and bird. include duncan and hakeem while we're at it. only injury should preclude any of them winning. others here apparently disagree with me but what do they all have in common above all else?: they make/made others better.

as to the first issue my answer is "both." i don't know if it is necessary to go into what our thoughts are as to whether the team is built wrong. but just for the record... i don't believe we have built a champion here and that gnaws at me. and it gnaws at me because i believe walsh had a genuine plan to build a champion. and that plan and the man behind it were swept aside for reasons i don't approve of, as i felt it was done in violation of my values.

very well said.. i have had several conversations with other posters off site, and honestly since the changes some of them feel the same way both of us do... the last sentence hit the nail on the head for me...

My understanding of the plan was clear cap to sign lbj and another free agent. Can either of you expand on this championship plan that existed after he missed out on lbj and how it was foiled?

understanding? the point is the majority of the fanbase has projected this "understanding" onto the transaction. i gave my account of a logical plan in a subsequent post to this one. hence my heavy lifting is over.

now it is your turn to tell me what the plan was once they acquired melo in the manner that they did?

the easier answer would be "they didn't have a plan" but somehow i think i am going to hear the harder answer....

the knicks, once they had been duped, fell back on the only choice they had, especially when d'antoni had already been paying his two years of dues with successive roster flush seasons. we conveniently forget that he had to endure two seasons of guaranteed shyte. so in a rare instance of where commerce and public relations ought to trump a more patient approach, they sign stoudemire july 9th. they had to do it. could walsh have opted to pass and keep the team without a "franchise face?" no he could not have. he came on to achieve two years of demolition to be in a place of building around the only player worth trading a a team for. when that plan is dashed you alter strategy and go with amare.

now from there walsh had the right idea: try to sign a point guard to audition for two years until chris paul becomes available, or else get the best possible point guard available. stoudemire wanted ridnour... i am not sure he was wrong. instead they acquired felton. ho-hum. two year-audition on a dirt cheap contract.

and in terms of rebuilding these are the initial/catalyzing first step and it's natural second step, which by nature must be best at complementing the first step, are what the knicks had here initially.

what happened next went against the next logical step in a logical plan. dolan stepped in.

instead of getting a complementary third piece they traded for a redundant second second piece. free agency could have been acceptable if somewhat repugnant. but no more than that.

from there things go awry, and frankly it offends me-- like an unruly relative or a bad presidential candidate.

Is this the plan that you are referring to? Wait two years for Chris Paul? Two years out and Amare's career might be over. And the reality with that is that his career has followed the timeline expectancy for guys with microfracture surgery. I disagree with all the steps you are taking. The Knicks traded away essentially an unprotected first round pick and their lottery pick to be in the game for a second star. Walsh was in a compromised position in every deal he did because the other gms knew what his goal was. Maybe he got tired of giving away everything including the kitchen sink in every trade and decided to put his foot down with Denver. Whatever. If you can get a franchise player that is going crosstown if you don't do you not pull the trigger because you want to keep Moz, Felton? Maybe if you still have your picks but you moved those to have cap space so you have to do the deal. As far as the coach being the loyal soldier that needed to be rewarded I call bs on that. Guy had a huge contract and took his second year off.

As far as my plan goes I don't think I could have executed a better one than Grunwald. Of course the Knicks could have saved their amnesty and gotten the cap space and amnestied Amare but then he never would have been ther to fulfill Walsh's championship plan b.

the plan you see lacks a certain dimension in that it does not include a spiral upward by constantly replacing the player with his best possible successor. you keep a sense of cohesion and continuity that way. at the time that was upgrading at point guard over felton.

and what if amare self-destructs? we would have had lots of candidates to replace his skills for pick and rolls or an occasional elbow play. the last thing you do is load up on a player who is redundant and compound the matter by disposing of solid rotation players? you hold on to felton for another season and unload him or put him in a trade for an upgrade over himself.

the fact that they can't coexist PROVES that they are REDUNDANT.

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

knickscity wrote:

Uptown wrote:

tkf wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

tkf wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

tkf wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

tkf wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:He's the leading scorer on a team doing very well. Rightly or wrongly, if that continues, he will definitely get MVP consideration. I've never disputed that. The MVP voting is usually distributed simply among the top scorers on each of the 3 or 5 top teams in the league.

He's not on the list because he's the leading scorer on a team doing very well. He's there because he's the best player on a team doing very well.

Clippers have Jamal Crawford and Blake Griffin who are scoring more points than Chris Paul, but Paul is the one in the MVP race.

The sooner you understand that its about the impact guys have rather than points, the better.

oh, we understand that.. but it is a combination of things, because if we talk impact with the knicks, then jason kidd has to be in the mix then...

Yea, because 8 PPG and 3 APG is deserving of an MVP award.

you said impact right? does kidd not have a huge impact on this team? maybe the biggest so far? so really it is a combination of things.. which is why bonn mentioned that he is leading scorer and mainly why you and a few others may feel he should get a look at mvp... if we are looking at impact, I think jason kidd impact has been larger this year..

8 and 3 can only impact your team so much. Sure, he's been a nice impact. He brings tremendous leadership, something that cannot be measured by statistics.

But you have to put up numbers for this award. It's the most prestigious single season award.

This is why guys like Jordan, Malone, Bryant, etc. have won it.

8 and 3 are role players numbers son. Not MVP.

YOU ARE NOT FOLLOWING... bonn said carmelo is being considered because he leads the team in scoring.. you said,it was because he was the best player on the team and then pointed out impact moreso than numbers... but what I am trying to tell you is that carmelo's impact is probably no more than kidds at this point, so if he is going to get any recognition it will be because of his numbers and that just won't be enough because he is not on par with the likes of durant and lebron..

I am not saying kidd will win mvp bro....

If Carmelo's impact hasn't been more than Kidd's, why is Kidd not on any MVP candidates list?

lol this is too easy.

you are lost... candidates list.. dude these made up list are not official. there are two real candidates... carmela isn't one of them.....

Comments like this just show that you cant be objective when discussing Melo.

Nah, comments like that just shows how much basketball common sense he doesn't have.

Kidd is a role player, a very good one though, Melo is the best player on the team.

The Knicks can win games without Kidd, they can't win squat over a season without Melo, not the way the team is built.

well then that tells you that the team is not built well...

want to talk basketball sense, only a few of the homers here are talking mvp after 4 games.. as if durant and lebron retired... you not only lack baskeball sense, but league pass.. try watching other games for a change..

one need only look at the heat-spurs game, splitter et. al. notwithstanding, to see the difference between a genuine mvp candidate and carmelo. even if the voting is somewhat whimsical and subjective there is no mistaking lbj's performance.

i think as the years go by even the most thick-headed voters have to look at the ability to make others better as the deciding factor over and above mere scoring ability or the sophomoric approach of "best player on the winningest team" that seems to characterize the latter-day stern era fanbase.

Are you agreeing with tkf that the team is built wrong or are you just commenting on the mvp process? I think you could give lbj the mvp every year and make a great argument that he deserved it. Same thing with MJ and Shaq for several years. people should take a look at some of the numbers mike jordan was putting up while being nominated defensive player of the year or all-nba defensive team.

last things first: lbj should win the mvp every year and is there really any argument against this, other than falsely spreading the wealth or kowtowing to whimsy and subjectivity ? yes no question shaq and mj and before that magic and bird. include duncan and hakeem while we're at it. only injury should preclude any of them winning. others here apparently disagree with me but what do they all have in common above all else?: they make/made others better.

as to the first issue my answer is "both." i don't know if it is necessary to go into what our thoughts are as to whether the team is built wrong. but just for the record... i don't believe we have built a champion here and that gnaws at me. and it gnaws at me because i believe walsh had a genuine plan to build a champion. and that plan and the man behind it were swept aside for reasons i don't approve of, as i felt it was done in violation of my values.

very well said.. i have had several conversations with other posters off site, and honestly since the changes some of them feel the same way both of us do... the last sentence hit the nail on the head for me...

My understanding of the plan was clear cap to sign lbj and another free agent. Can either of you expand on this championship plan that existed after he missed out on lbj and how it was foiled?

understanding? the point is the majority of the fanbase has projected this "understanding" onto the transaction. i gave my account of a logical plan in a subsequent post to this one. hence my heavy lifting is over.

now it is your turn to tell me what the plan was once they acquired melo in the manner that they did?

the easier answer would be "they didn't have a plan" but somehow i think i am going to hear the harder answer....

the knicks, once they had been duped, fell back on the only choice they had, especially when d'antoni had already been paying his two years of dues with successive roster flush seasons. we conveniently forget that he had to endure two seasons of guaranteed shyte. so in a rare instance of where commerce and public relations ought to trump a more patient approach, they sign stoudemire july 9th. they had to do it. could walsh have opted to pass and keep the team without a "franchise face?" no he could not have. he came on to achieve two years of demolition to be in a place of building around the only player worth trading a a team for. when that plan is dashed you alter strategy and go with amare.

now from there walsh had the right idea: try to sign a point guard to audition for two years until chris paul becomes available, or else get the best possible point guard available. stoudemire wanted ridnour... i am not sure he was wrong. instead they acquired felton. ho-hum. two year-audition on a dirt cheap contract.

and in terms of rebuilding these are the initial/catalyzing first step and it's natural second step, which by nature must be best at complementing the first step, are what the knicks had here initially.

what happened next went against the next logical step in a logical plan. dolan stepped in.

instead of getting a complementary third piece they traded for a redundant second second piece. free agency could have been acceptable if somewhat repugnant. but no more than that.

from there things go awry, and frankly it offends me-- like an unruly relative or a bad presidential candidate.

Is this the plan that you are referring to? Wait two years for Chris Paul? Two years out and Amare's career might be over. And the reality with that is that his career has followed the timeline expectancy for guys with microfracture surgery. I disagree with all the steps you are taking. The Knicks traded away essentially an unprotected first round pick and their lottery pick to be in the game for a second star. Walsh was in a compromised position in every deal he did because the other gms knew what his goal was. Maybe he got tired of giving away everything including the kitchen sink in every trade and decided to put his foot down with Denver. Whatever. If you can get a franchise player that is going crosstown if you don't do you not pull the trigger because you want to keep Moz, Felton? Maybe if you still have your picks but you moved those to have cap space so you have to do the deal. As far as the coach being the loyal soldier that needed to be rewarded I call bs on that. Guy had a huge contract and took his second year off.

As far as my plan goes I don't think I could have executed a better one than Grunwald. Of course the Knicks could have saved their amnesty and gotten the cap space and amnestied Amare but then he never would have been ther to fulfill Walsh's championship plan b.

the plan you see lacks a certain dimension in that it does not include a spiral upward by constantly replacing the player with his best possible successor. you keep a sense of cohesion and continuity that way. at the time that was upgrading at point guard over felton.

and what if amare self-destructs? we would have had lots of candidates to replace his skills for pick and rolls or an occasional elbow play. the last thing you do is load up on a player who is redundant and compound the matter by disposing of solid rotation players? you hold on to felton for another season and unload him or put him in a trade for an upgrade over himself.

the fact that they can't coexist PROVES that they are REDUNDANT.

Every asset the Knicks could trade was traded and Amare did break down. It was his back but D'Antoni rode him like secretariat. If point guard was the position to target why did the Knicks spend most of that season targeting Melo? There were reports out that Walsh didn't even know DWill was available. The solid rotation players you talk about were all that was left after the McGrady trade so you had to move something. Also, Knicks lost some solid rotation players this past season and they were able to replace them. You can replace rotation players but there are only about 10-15 franchise guys in the league. The Knicks have one.

i am going to familiarize you with my take on this "riding a player like he was Secratariat" stuff. i just plain disagree with this accounting. stoudemire was essentially an isolation player. just look at the numbers that season and you will see his problem was he became an isolation player. and why? because the point guard is not up to the task.

56.5% TS which is just slightly better than average but nowhere close to 60-62% which is what you want from him. (not having a point guard good enough will do that to a player.)
31% USG is too high for a player with his limited playmaking skills.
more turnovers than assists lowers his effectiveness even more.
13.2% AST as i understand the stat is that he participated in an assisted play that resulted in a score for another player. not sure that is reliable but it was a jump from his time in phoenix, though once again... not nearly enough.

carmelo thus far

57.8% TS that is a very good number and a major ingredient to his being an effective player.
34.2% USG is astronomical and i mean that in a bad way. it MUST go down.
11.3% AST as i understand the stat is criminally low and conveys a certain level of selfishness that hurts a team in the long run. this stat MUST go up.

don't believe me? have a look at the ratio of these terms by dividing USG by AST and lets call it the "facilitating measure" or "FM" for short"

nash's 1:3 is on one end of the facilitating measure and with a 62% TS it makes him a special player-- on offense.
cp3 1:2 FM
kidd 1:2
magic 6:11
stockton 3:8
lin 2:3
pierce 1.45:1
lbj .93:1 notice the equilibrium here
bryant 1.33:1 which i find surprising
jordan 1.34:1
durant 2.16:1 which has been trending lower every year of his career. what saves him is his TS% IMO.
bird 1.07:1 notice the equilibrium here, along with lebrons.
dirk 2.07:1 for his career
stat 2.30:1
melo 1.97:1
wilkins 2.50:1
king 1.74:1
frazier .93:1 notice the equilibrium here again. it's part of what made frazier special, along with his sublime defensive skills
duncan 1.68:1
hakeem 2.24:1
barkely 1.42:1
erving 1.51:1
felton 1.17:1 and that is on the wrong side of the balance sheet right there
wade 1:1 and by this measure wade is a special player which means i may need to revise my opinion of his game for the better.

now here is the thing: this season melo's FM is a frightening 3:1. this is not what the knicks need.

Melo is a scorer so what does FM have to do with the price of tea in China?

Melo has never or ever will be a high assist guy but that doesn't mean he doesn't make the right pass. Does he always pass when he should? Nope in the same way he does not get credit for an assist on every pass.

The bottom line is that Melo is a scorer. At the end of the day I really don't care about sabermetrics just the amount of W's.

Seriously, what is the big deal with Melo being mentioned as a MVP candidate? I would think Knicks fans would be proud to have a MVP represent us. Is it that far fetched that if we finish the season as a #1 seed that Melo couldn't win it?

All I want is a big shiny gold top rounded trophy in Melo's hands at the end of the year.