Knickoftime wrote:martin wrote:the point is they didn't and they had a pathway past second round, and that's how the Knicks should deal.
Answer the question asked. It's a perfectly fair question.
It's also a bit dubious to isolate either a once-in-history free agent season (Miami) or an extremely rare gift trade (Gasol) and offer that up as the path the Knicks should try to follow.
Gasol isn't happening again, which is the biggest takeaway from your attempt at parable.
Every team should answer a trade scenario this way: 1) Does it make my team better? 2) Does it lead directly to championship contending team (ala Boston) or 3) if not #2, does it make me better while also leaving me with enough room to still build significantly (within a reasonable time period) towards a championship contending team.
IMHO, the proposed deal with NY-DEV only does #1 and hand-cuffs them because of lack of assets and cap space.
Regarding, Lakers-Memphis, I may have added in one of Bynum/Odom (but certainly not both) but demanded something a lot more from Memphis, but I also would take into account what I had on my shelf that would allow me to keep building (unless I thought that Pau minus Odom, if that were the trade, was good enough to compete).
Again, here it is,
Amare $19.9
Melo $19.9
Turiaf
Mozgov $3.1
TD $2.0
Williams $1.0
Rautins $1.0
Fields $3.0
2011 First Round $1.0
-------------------------
$50.9
Without a 2012, 2014 pick and a 36 year old expiring Chauncy, how does that team upgrade significantly enough to beat CHI, MIA, LAL, OKC, with the general assumption that those teams could also upgrade in small bits too and will compete for the same UFA's.
Knicks need to upgrade defense, starting PG, bench depth, backup PG. And we also assume that Moz and Fields are good enough starting caliber players for deep playoff team.
