TMS wrote:his plan failed... end of story... time for him to enact plan B.

Eh....his plan to get Lebron failed-we all know that is what he wanted-but that was a piece to the puzzle of a way to get us competitive fast. There is no way anyone foresaw what was gonna happen, IMO. It wasn't his fault, but it is his responsibility to have alternate methods.

Personally I am hoping this sign and trade for Harrington to Orlando somehow nets us Jameer. I know I am probably wrong but Jameer is a strong PG that you can put next to a guy like Kelenna on the wings and have to good defenders in the backcourt.

Randolph
Amare
Gallo
Kelenna
Nelson

Wilson, Toney, Ronny, some vet FA's

We got $10 mil to spend or so this year while still being able to get a max next year(w/o moving Chandler).

oohah wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

Dude, there is nothing incoherent about my thought. You guys keep harping on this trade like it really set our downfall in motion. And based on your own comment here if we HADN"T made this trade we would have this same exact roster Plus Jordan Hill and a worthless lottery pick and minus any cap room. So YEA I am glad we made the trade.

Perhaps you don't understand. The Knicks traded Hill, who is not worth much, swapped a first round pick that has very little protection and traded an additional first round pick to boot. Jefrries contract is also expiring next year if I am not incorrect.

And what is the return. I believe the Knicks would have had the money to sign Stoudemire anyway. And they did not achieve their goal of signing James in addition to a max-contract player. So no I am not happy that the Knicks traded assets for a plan that did not work out. It did not work out. I hope you see that now.

oohah

I think you are the one who doesn't understand. What you are saying is the trade is bad trade because we didn't get Lebron and because we already had the money to sign Amare, right? So then if we didnt make the bad trade we would have ended up with Amare and Jordan Hill on our roster assuming we let Jeffries expire. I am not even saying Amare would sign here if we never had a shot at another max FA, but to say the trade is bad and we could sign Amare anyway means you would be OK with our roster with Amare and J HIll instead of Amare and Cap Space. And that's fine if that's how you feel about it, I personally think that's utterly ridiculous.

loweyecue wrote:

oohah wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

Dude, there is nothing incoherent about my thought. You guys keep harping on this trade like it really set our downfall in motion. And based on your own comment here if we HADN"T made this trade we would have this same exact roster Plus Jordan Hill and a worthless lottery pick and minus any cap room. So YEA I am glad we made the trade.

Perhaps you don't understand. The Knicks traded Hill, who is not worth much, swapped a first round pick that has very little protection and traded an additional first round pick to boot. Jefrries contract is also expiring next year if I am not incorrect.

And what is the return. I believe the Knicks would have had the money to sign Stoudemire anyway. And they did not achieve their goal of signing James in addition to a max-contract player. So no I am not happy that the Knicks traded assets for a plan that did not work out. It did not work out. I hope you see that now.

oohah

I think you are the one who doesn't understand. What you are saying is the trade is bad trade because we didn't get Lebron and because we already had the money to sign Amare, right? So then if we didnt make the bad trade we would have ended up with Amare and Jordan Hill on our roster assuming we let Jeffries expire. I am not even saying Amare would sign here if we never had a shot at another max FA, but to say the trade is bad and we could sign Amare anyway means you would be OK with our roster with Amare and J HIll instead of Amare and Cap Space. And that's fine if that's how you feel about it, I personally think that's utterly ridiculous.

the draft picks are meaningless?

alau53 wrote:if knicks didnt make the tmac trade theyd have everything they have today plus assets like high potential draft picks in '11 and '12 and jordan hill..yes they'd have a little less in salary cap however they could always trade hill for salary cap relief if a deal to their liking comes up..just like reily did when he traded beasley..now thats flexibility baby

This is absolutely 100% false. Before you make your wrong assumptions, show the salary cap and all of the salaries and their implications.

we are rebuilding - our front line has the potential to be dominant. not good - dominant.

we still have cap flexibility - $14M this summer or looking at $26M in cap room next summer. we now have young pieces AND cap flexibility.

Anthony Randolph would absolutely murder Jordan Hill.

Our pick swap with Houston will be even next year. I am fine with all of this.

crzymdups wrote:still fine with this trade.

we are rebuilding - our front line has the potential to be dominant. not good - dominant.
we still have cap flexibility - $14M this summer or looking at $26M in cap room next summer. we now have young pieces AND cap flexibility.

Anthony Randolph would absolutely murder Jordan Hill.

Our pick swap with Houston will be even next year. I am fine with all of this.

Agree 1000% this is an awesome start. I think if we could get a blue chip PG (I want Collison from NO) then we have the start of something big here.

alau53 wrote:

martin wrote:

alau53 wrote:if knicks didnt make the tmac trade theyd have everything they have today plus assets like high potential draft picks in '11 and '12 and jordan hill..yes they'd have a little less in salary cap however they could always trade hill for salary cap relief if a deal to their liking comes up..just like reily did when he traded beasley..now thats flexibility baby

This is absolutely 100% false. Before you make your wrong assumptions, show the salary cap and all of the salaries and their implications.

sorry martin i dont have chris broussard on speed dial..why wouldnt they be able to do what reily did by clearing up cap space when a good deal is on the table instead of trading valuable assets for a dollar and a dream

you don't need broussard on speed-dial, he doesn't know anythign anyway. there are plenty of websites, that show each teams salary cap. why don't you back up your statements by proving the facts?

nyk4ever wrote:

alau53 wrote:

martin wrote:

alau53 wrote:if knicks didnt make the tmac trade theyd have everything they have today plus assets like high potential draft picks in '11 and '12 and jordan hill..yes they'd have a little less in salary cap however they could always trade hill for salary cap relief if a deal to their liking comes up..just like reily did when he traded beasley..now thats flexibility baby

This is absolutely 100% false. Before you make your wrong assumptions, show the salary cap and all of the salaries and their implications.

sorry martin i dont have chris broussard on speed dial..why wouldnt they be able to do what reily did by clearing up cap space when a good deal is on the table instead of trading valuable assets for a dollar and a dream

you don't need broussard on speed-dial, he doesn't know anythign anyway. there are plenty of websites, that show each teams salary cap. why don't you back up your statements by proving the facts?

i dont see you or pro walsh guys showing boring salary cap figures when you make statements...show me how the knicks would not be in the same position they are today if they didnt make the briliant tmac trade..me, tms, oohah, and even wfan's evan roberts feel we would have the same team we have right now plus our draft picks the next 2 years and j hill..these additional assets would've given us more flexibility baby..please explain with salary cap figures otherwise