VCoug wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:If you are asking would I care if the Knicks decided to spend the money, no I don't, I would love to have him on the team. If you are asking why do I point out the rational for not resigning him it is because I have read a lot about it and I don't think it was an easy decision and I also don't think it was a reactionary one. I think that kind of money makes even billionaires blink and is a ridiculous sum to pay to have a guy that has only played 25 games in the nba. Resigning the guy to trade him or use the stretch provision make no sense to me. I have no ill will for Lin but I hope Moray's poison pill contracts to Lin and Asik somehow bite him in the @ss.

But why is this time different than every other time for Dolan? And do you really think that if the opportunity presents itself we won't be spending a similar amount of money on another player or combination of players?

CrushAlot wrote:

VCoug wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:If you are asking would I care if the Knicks decided to spend the money, no I don't, I would love to have him on the team. If you are asking why do I point out the rational for not resigning him it is because I have read a lot about it and I don't think it was an easy decision and I also don't think it was a reactionary one. I think that kind of money makes even billionaires blink and is a ridiculous sum to pay to have a guy that has only played 25 games in the nba. Resigning the guy to trade him or use the stretch provision make no sense to me. I have no ill will for Lin but I hope Moray's poison pill contracts to Lin and Asik somehow bite him in the @ss.

But why is this time different than every other time for Dolan? And do you really think that if the opportunity presents itself we won't be spending a similar amount of money on another player or combination of players?

This time is different because there is a new cba that is much more punitive and restrictive.

Right, but we're going to be over the luxury tax anyway so we're not avoiding the new restrictions by not resigning Lin.

VCoug wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

VCoug wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:If you are asking would I care if the Knicks decided to spend the money, no I don't, I would love to have him on the team. If you are asking why do I point out the rational for not resigning him it is because I have read a lot about it and I don't think it was an easy decision and I also don't think it was a reactionary one. I think that kind of money makes even billionaires blink and is a ridiculous sum to pay to have a guy that has only played 25 games in the nba. Resigning the guy to trade him or use the stretch provision make no sense to me. I have no ill will for Lin but I hope Moray's poison pill contracts to Lin and Asik somehow bite him in the @ss.

But why is this time different than every other time for Dolan? And do you really think that if the opportunity presents itself we won't be spending a similar amount of money on another player or combination of players?

This time is different because there is a new cba that is much more punitive and restrictive.

Right, but we're going to be over the luxury tax anyway so we're not avoiding the new restrictions by not resigning Lin.

CrushAlot wrote:

VCoug wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

VCoug wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:If you are asking would I care if the Knicks decided to spend the money, no I don't, I would love to have him on the team. If you are asking why do I point out the rational for not resigning him it is because I have read a lot about it and I don't think it was an easy decision and I also don't think it was a reactionary one. I think that kind of money makes even billionaires blink and is a ridiculous sum to pay to have a guy that has only played 25 games in the nba. Resigning the guy to trade him or use the stretch provision make no sense to me. I have no ill will for Lin but I hope Moray's poison pill contracts to Lin and Asik somehow bite him in the @ss.

But why is this time different than every other time for Dolan? And do you really think that if the opportunity presents itself we won't be spending a similar amount of money on another player or combination of players?

This time is different because there is a new cba that is much more punitive and restrictive.

Right, but we're going to be over the luxury tax anyway so we're not avoiding the new restrictions by not resigning Lin.

I know that dollar amounts are charged at different rates for teams over the cap. I am not sure if Lin's contract specifically pushes the Knicks to a higher rate of fine. I do know that it would cost them 57 mil in year three to have him and they must have decided that he wasn't worth 57 mil for one year.

Why do any of us care how much money Dolan spends? He's richer than any of us could ever imagine and the money he spends on the Knicks adds up to about 3% of Cablevision's total revenue.

limpidgimp wrote:

Why do any of us care how much money Dolan spends? He's richer than any of us could ever imagine and the money he spends on the Knicks adds up to about 3% of Cablevision's total revenue.

Because the 99% somehow think they benefit from guarding the interests of the 1%. It makes as much sense as middle class people voting to lower taxes for the super rich.
That's fantasy basketball to a new level, as if Dolan saving money means more money in your pocket.

WOW!

For once Dolan make a SMART basketball decision and he's getting KILLED because he has a history of overpaying BUMBS. It's going to be difficult for us to make any moves in the next 3 years and would be that much more difficult if we had Lin's $14.8 to deal with.

It's hilarious that so many on this board are so irrate over Lin's departure based on 7 games! Those 7 games make most forget that the kid turned the ball over a ton and didn't play againt many of the top flight PG's in the league. When he did play against talent at the PG position the kid got roasted. However, let's forger about that because 7 games negates the 18 games where he didn't play like a future HOF'er.

When people point out that his numbers declined after "LINSANITY" with MDA and under Woodson it's "He's young, he'll get better, who gives a crap it's Dolan's money...blah, blah, blah."

Felton put up numbers similar to Lin's while with the Knicks but he's fat and we all know that his number were inflated due to MDA's system. However, Lin lovers are so blinded by 7 games that it's inconceivable that the kid may have just put together a good run and his numbers may have been a result of him dominating the ball.

Personally, I'm over it. He can enjoy getting his $$$$ in Houston and being THE MAN on a lottery team.

Best of luck to Lin....I'm good with Ray running point and LET's GO KNICKS!!!!!

limpidgimp wrote:

Why do any of us care how much money Dolan spends? He's richer than any of us could ever imagine and the money he spends on the Knicks adds up to about 3% of Cablevision's total revenue.

Because the 99% somehow think they benefit from guarding the interests of the 1%. It makes as much sense as regular people voting to lower taxes for the super wealthy. That really takes fantasy basketball to a new level, as if Dolan saving money means more money in your own pocket.

Back in the feudal days (or Game of Thrones, whichever world you prefer) filled with kings and knights, the small folk would expect their king to spend lavishly on jousting tournaments, huge festivals, and bountiful banquets. That's what kings do: they provide entertainment for the people and spend lots on it. If a king can't even provide that, then he's just a little man collecting taxes (higher ticket prices each year!) to fatten himself up.

I don't thonk there is anyone on this board that didn't really want Lin back. Linsanity was amazing and the buzz around the team was awesome. However, I think you are way off when you say some are trying to protect Dolan/the 1%. I think a lot of people are ignoring the new cba and how punitive and restrictive it is for teams over the cap. You don't need to post about fuedal lords, just link to Larry Coon's salary site under other stuff or google him or the Lin contract. Lin got his but in doing so the Knicks were put in a position where they could not match the contract. The facts regarding how restrictive and financially punitive his contract would be to the Knicks. Thats why they call year 3 a 'poison pill'. It is a fault with the new cba. Super bad analogy with the fuedal stuff. Knowledge equals power. Read Larry Coon's stuff. The guy has an amazing ability to explain the entire cba and he said the Knicks should resign Lin despite all of the punitive and restrictive consequences of that move.

knicks1248 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:Reason is because it was personal, not business

+10000000000000000000

and you know this how...because it was in the papers? Unless you heard it from Dolan or, your a mind reader, you don't know what your talking about. Like I said before, lots of telepaths posting here.

because people are judge on there past not there future (in most cases) they said they would match and they had every intentions on doing that until it became personal...

My agent tells me that the knicks are big on me and I believe they'll match anything. my agent calls the rockets and tells them, hey if your serious about retaining my client, you may have to up the $ cause your wasting your ink with that contract thats going to be match in the blink of an eye, I figure if you add a few more $ you will atleast have them 2nd guessing themselves..

The rockets lose nothing cause they can waive him in the 3rd year, trade him, or if he plays upto the potential, they have a franchise player..

it was a business move on the rockets part, and a personal decision on the knicks part..

why would the knicks commit to 3 pgs before committing to lin ?

Because they weren't going cost close to 50 mil dollars for a guy who broke down after 25 games...

I don't know about that..The guy goes from not playing at all to playing close to 40 mins 5 times a wk..with almost no rest in between time, no adjustment period..

MDA PGs during his knick tenure where breaking down after 3/4 months regardless..

fields was the only player to play 66 games on the knicks roster last season..

57.85 mil in year 3, no sign and trades, any trade has to be dollar for dollar so no relief from year three of that contract unless the knicks waive Lin and stretch the cost out over several years. Those numbers and the limited options the Knicks had after commiting to that contract are why it was ummatchable from a business prospective. I assume the commitment to 3 point guards includes Pablo's 1 year deal at 488,000. I would just take that right out of your argument. The Knicks got Pablo because they wanted him and he cost them nothing. Kidd was obtained to mentor Lin and both his and Felton's contracts are much more reasonable in my opinion.

did you ever think Joe johnson would be traded with that contract..EVERY CONTRACT in the NBA is tradable

If you are trading him in year 3, why sign him in the first place???...

because you get him for a great bargain in years 1 and 2!!!...

You are assuming he will be a great bargain at 5 mil per...He has zero track record to say this will be the case...Lin does not want to play here, if he wanted to be a Knick, he would still be a Knick...We all know this...He wants his own stage..He doesn't want to share it with Melo or Amare...Let's hope McHale run an offense for him to take 30 shots per game so he can revive Linsanity in Houston...Meanwhile we have the Heat, Boston and the rest of the hard charging East to worry about...Can't wait for the season to start....

I can't believe your saying that..this is the most humble guy on the planet, with a bunch of greedy agents who know business..How could a guy in the d-league 9 months ago want his own stage..

The stage was right here..it's alright for a pg to shoot 30 times if he has 12 dimes to go with it...and a win

He certainly is likeable and presents as humble. However, he did fire his agent and go with sharks and he had to be aware of the contract he was signing. I think its somewhere in the middle. Lin seized the day and got his but he put the Knicks in a position where he had to know they at least had to consider not matching. He isn't a dummy and year three of that deal jumps up 9 million dollars. I don't think the harvard grad was so naive that he didn't see the jump in salary and recognize the impact it would have on the Knicks. Its a business and he got his money. Melo did the same thing and the Knicks went all in. They chose not to this time but Lin put them in the same position only the cost and restrictions were much greater if they chose to match the deal and the risk was much greater in regards to the player.

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm

Like many other people, I think this whole thing was personal, not financial. If the decision wasn't personal but financial, then why would they say they'd "match up to a billion dollars" and not match in the end? If you want to think of the decision as strictly business, then it seems pretty clear to me that the FO was trying to lowball him by scaring other teams into making offers. If they really wanted to keep him with a fair contract, they would have offered him a contract from the beginning instead of forcing him to test the market. Lin cannot sign a Knicks contract that doesn't exist, yet he is blamed for not signing it! It boggles the mind.

Fuck I'm sick of talking about this, but it does piss me off when people spread bull**** about Lin being a money chaser with no loyalty. If your boss tried to lowball your ass, then called YOU disloyal, wouldn't that be ridiculous?

VCoug wrote:

martin wrote:

VCoug wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

VCoug wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:If you are asking would I care if the Knicks decided to spend the money, no I don't, I would love to have him on the team. If you are asking why do I point out the rational for not resigning him it is because I have read a lot about it and I don't think it was an easy decision and I also don't think it was a reactionary one. I think that kind of money makes even billionaires blink and is a ridiculous sum to pay to have a guy that has only played 25 games in the nba. Resigning the guy to trade him or use the stretch provision make no sense to me. I have no ill will for Lin but I hope Moray's poison pill contracts to Lin and Asik somehow bite him in the @ss.

But why is this time different than every other time for Dolan? And do you really think that if the opportunity presents itself we won't be spending a similar amount of money on another player or combination of players?

This time is different because there is a new cba that is much more punitive and restrictive.

Right, but we're going to be over the luxury tax anyway so we're not avoiding the new restrictions by not resigning Lin.

your double negative is a little hard to follow but it does boil down to this: what Crush pointed out is correct and there are new restrictions in place and a LOT higher luxury tax formula IF Lin was resigned.

Yeah, that wasn't very clear. My point was, with or without Lin, we will be over the luxury tax.

so, just because MSG is already in debt, why try to show any further fiscal responsibility....yeah, makes perfect sense.

I don't think what they did was disrespectful by allowing him to test the market and we'd just match it. Perhaps what might have been offensive to him was the very verbal nature that we'd match it which would have discouraged bidding and kept offers limited.

Again, this all in hindsight. If we got to him early with a 5-6mm offer quick could that have done it? Maybe.

I thought his agent was quickly over his head as Linsanity created huge opportunities that a larger firm could only provide.
I would hope his agent remained somewhat financially linked to him out of loyalty. We'll never really know.

I think he was as humble as any 23 year old could be who finds himself a global sensation. He admits it got to him. Its like a freaking Disney movie going from obscurity to "linsanity"!

I don't blame him for taking the money and grabbing security. The life span of a player can be 10 days, 10 months aor 10 years in the NBA.

The guy was able to perform in the bright lights and was clutch. MDA ran him hard and with the schedule we had he played a lot and was not in the kind of shape to maintain starters minutes. Breaking down was not unexpected.

Waiving off Melo or Amare where he had the ball and was getting it done I thought was fine. He made mistakes and turnovers but I think he would have had to dial his game back and become a better player all around. I think a kid with the kind of stones to do what he did was a worth while investment. It would have been a risk.

I get both sides. Im disappointed he won't be in a knick uniform but financially I understand.