gunsnewing wrote:

fishmike wrote:Any minute now TFK and DK will be done with morning cuddles and blast me for saying "Fish thinks Melo and Duncan are as good" or something equally retarded.

I'll hold the fort in the meantime. There is some delicious bait & flaws in what you wrote. I took a stab at it but they will devour that good stuff to a much larger scale in 3,2,1..

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:its a bit funny to me Bonn.. you argue against the merits of signing MElo to a max contract, you go on about the faults in his game, yet:

Even if Rose never plays again, if Melo joins the team, I think they can compete for the ECF. They might make it to the finals depending on what happens in Miami and how terrible the rest of the conference is.

you say that Melo is good enough to add to a team who has one star (Noah) a few solid role guys but cant get out of the first round, so add Melo and they can compete for a title.

kinda begs the flip side of the coin.. why not keep Melo, use cap space or expirings to put together a deal for a stud and go to the ECF or finals themselves? Why not go that route Bonn?

I do want to keep Melo - at a Duncan/Parker level salary.
I think he adds 5 or 6 wins and raises a team's playoff ceiling by about a round. That's not enough to justify a max contract, and certainly not in our case where everything else has to workout perfectly just to plausibly build a contender for Melo's 14th to 17th seasons.
For us to sign Melo to a max contract, the following would have to workout:
A) We build a very strong supporting cast. I'd give this alone maybe a 20% chance of working since most teams fail in this regard, and it will be even harder to do it in a 12 month period since we have almost no foundation right now.
B) Melo ages very well for his 14th to 17th seasons. This too is unlikely but possible.
The probability of both A and B working is the product of their individual likelihoods. In other words, it's extremely low.
For it to work for Chicago, point A is accomplished already, and they are looking to get key production from him starting right now (13th rather than 14th season). So it's a much better (or less bad) gamble for them.

And all that said, I still think their ceiling is just the ECF or potentially finals, which would still give me some hesitation to pull the deal from Chicago's perspective. (I never said I would do the deal if I ran Chicago; I only said that it could push them to a higher level within the east.)

This is exactly how I feel. I would not overpay for him, but I do think that at the right price he can push a team over the edge to winning.

However, his playoffs output and style still scare the hell out of me.

I actually wrote all that for Fish after he asked for an explanation. I thought I'd at least get a reply. Come on, Fish. You're only going to reply to me when you think you catch an inconsistency, but you're not actually interested in the explanation?

no... after 430pm when I leave work I am not really interested. But I did look now and am responding.

Hey Bonn.. thats all good and nice, but again... we live in the real world.

If you go to a nice NYC steakhouse do you order the $20 chicken? Its safe... consistent.. or do you splurge for the $50 rib eye? Now if you order the rib eye do you ask your waiter if its going to be perfect? If you will enjoy every bite? If the fat will have that nice salty char? No... you probably just order it and live with your choice?

Im not looking to splash some "you might be wrong later" post about this later and bookmark the thread. Thats not my style. You simply said that Melo could elevate a team who cant get out of the first round to an elite status (ECF or NBAF). To me that says a lot. Those are the hardest wins in the NBA to come by. Its a pretty good post by you Bonnie! 50k tries and you said something mate! Im proud.... If my limited reading skills (no math here) have this right you think Melo makes more sense as a money guy for the Bulls who are more likely to reap the rewards of that deal because they need Melo's impact right away. As opposed to the Knicks who are more likely a year or two away making a Melo money splurge more risky and put us in another Amare siutation.

A couple caveats on taking less...Tim Duncan is a poor example. When Duncan was Melo's age he signed a max contract that paid him huge money. It was not until the 12-13 season when Duncan was 36 years old did he sign a "discount" contract that everyone thinks Melo should sign. In fact when Duncan was 30, the same age Melo is now he signed the most he could get. Duncan made $117mm between the ages of 30-35. Obviously a gamble that paid very well for the Spurs, but Duncan did exactly what people are saying MElo should not.

Duncan by the years:
age salary:
30 $17mm
31 $19mm
32 $20mm
33 $22mm
34 $18mm
35 $21mm
36 $9.5mm
37 $10mm

So if there is a precedent for taking less money to allow your team flexibility to add other guys look to the Miami crew as an example. The Spurs guys, especially Duncan have been paid very well. The problem with the Miami guys is they all knew they were going there, so there was some collusion. Do you think those guys would have signed those discounted deals if the best thing on the table was Pat Riley saying "hey, Im Pat Riley and you should sign for less because Im going to get guys...."

No... so be very careful with examples of other star guys taking less to join a winner. Duncan got paid... bigtime. What Duncan didnt do was ask for Kobe money when he's 35-36 years old, but he sure as hell got the money when he was Melo's age now!

Only part of the possibility of reaching elite status within the east would be attributable to Melo. The combination of adding Melo AND having better luck in a small sample of games, better luck in terms of opponents' health, better luck in terms of what happens in Miami, etc. would all be needed for the team to reach elite status within the east.
If Duncan at age 32 was worth $22 mil, then Melo in his early 30s should only be worth around $13 mil anyway. Your #s don't really help your case.

Yea Duncan at 30 made $17m Melo made $23 this year. So those numbers definitely doesn't help melo's cause. Duncan got a pay increase in his mid 30's then Probably realized he had to go back to taking less. It worked because he just win his 5th ring

I don't expect Melo to accept a low ball offer but he should not be paid anything north of $20m. He is not worth that kind of money. Too many flaws. He's not Duncan, Shaq, Jordan or Kobe or KG. In his mind and in some fans mind he is. But those are people who are narrowed minded and only value PPG. Everything else like making plays for others, playing championship failed defense, moving without the ball be damned

If you're giving Melo $20 mil a year, you're basically ruling out a big 3. And Melo isn't good enough to be part of a championship-winning two-some unless a) the other player is Lebron or Durant or b) we have a truly extraordinary supporting cast, which is unlikely for any team to begin with but even more unlikely since we have few picks and no foundation.
IMO Melo should be given 1/3 of what the cap is minus a reasonable amount of money for nice role players. That's probably going to leave about $15 mil a year. I highly doubt he would accept that though. In that case at this point, letting him walk is better than badly overpaying him. Even if Melo stays, this is still just an older version of a .450 team anyway.

Which is why I said under $20m not over

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:its a bit funny to me Bonn.. you argue against the merits of signing MElo to a max contract, you go on about the faults in his game, yet:

Even if Rose never plays again, if Melo joins the team, I think they can compete for the ECF. They might make it to the finals depending on what happens in Miami and how terrible the rest of the conference is.

you say that Melo is good enough to add to a team who has one star (Noah) a few solid role guys but cant get out of the first round, so add Melo and they can compete for a title.

kinda begs the flip side of the coin.. why not keep Melo, use cap space or expirings to put together a deal for a stud and go to the ECF or finals themselves? Why not go that route Bonn?

I do want to keep Melo - at a Duncan/Parker level salary.
I think he adds 5 or 6 wins and raises a team's playoff ceiling by about a round. That's not enough to justify a max contract, and certainly not in our case where everything else has to workout perfectly just to plausibly build a contender for Melo's 14th to 17th seasons.
For us to sign Melo to a max contract, the following would have to workout:
A) We build a very strong supporting cast. I'd give this alone maybe a 20% chance of working since most teams fail in this regard, and it will be even harder to do it in a 12 month period since we have almost no foundation right now.
B) Melo ages very well for his 14th to 17th seasons. This too is unlikely but possible.
The probability of both A and B working is the product of their individual likelihoods. In other words, it's extremely low.
For it to work for Chicago, point A is accomplished already, and they are looking to get key production from him starting right now (13th rather than 14th season). So it's a much better (or less bad) gamble for them.

And all that said, I still think their ceiling is just the ECF or potentially finals, which would still give me some hesitation to pull the deal from Chicago's perspective. (I never said I would do the deal if I ran Chicago; I only said that it could push them to a higher level within the east.)

This is exactly how I feel. I would not overpay for him, but I do think that at the right price he can push a team over the edge to winning.

However, his playoffs output and style still scare the hell out of me.

I actually wrote all that for Fish after he asked for an explanation. I thought I'd at least get a reply. Come on, Fish. You're only going to reply to me when you think you catch an inconsistency, but you're not actually interested in the explanation?

no... after 430pm when I leave work I am not really interested. But I did look now and am responding.

Hey Bonn.. thats all good and nice, but again... we live in the real world.

If you go to a nice NYC steakhouse do you order the $20 chicken? Its safe... consistent.. or do you splurge for the $50 rib eye? Now if you order the rib eye do you ask your waiter if its going to be perfect? If you will enjoy every bite? If the fat will have that nice salty char? No... you probably just order it and live with your choice?

Im not looking to splash some "you might be wrong later" post about this later and bookmark the thread. Thats not my style. You simply said that Melo could elevate a team who cant get out of the first round to an elite status (ECF or NBAF). To me that says a lot. Those are the hardest wins in the NBA to come by. Its a pretty good post by you Bonnie! 50k tries and you said something mate! Im proud.... If my limited reading skills (no math here) have this right you think Melo makes more sense as a money guy for the Bulls who are more likely to reap the rewards of that deal because they need Melo's impact right away. As opposed to the Knicks who are more likely a year or two away making a Melo money splurge more risky and put us in another Amare siutation.

A couple caveats on taking less...Tim Duncan is a poor example. When Duncan was Melo's age he signed a max contract that paid him huge money. It was not until the 12-13 season when Duncan was 36 years old did he sign a "discount" contract that everyone thinks Melo should sign. In fact when Duncan was 30, the same age Melo is now he signed the most he could get. Duncan made $117mm between the ages of 30-35. Obviously a gamble that paid very well for the Spurs, but Duncan did exactly what people are saying MElo should not.

Duncan by the years:
age salary:
30 $17mm
31 $19mm
32 $20mm
33 $22mm
34 $18mm
35 $21mm
36 $9.5mm
37 $10mm

So if there is a precedent for taking less money to allow your team flexibility to add other guys look to the Miami crew as an example. The Spurs guys, especially Duncan have been paid very well. The problem with the Miami guys is they all knew they were going there, so there was some collusion. Do you think those guys would have signed those discounted deals if the best thing on the table was Pat Riley saying "hey, Im Pat Riley and you should sign for less because Im going to get guys...."

No... so be very careful with examples of other star guys taking less to join a winner. Duncan got paid... bigtime. What Duncan didnt do was ask for Kobe money when he's 35-36 years old, but he sure as hell got the money when he was Melo's age now!

Only part of the possibility of reaching elite status within the east would be attributable to Melo. The combination of adding Melo AND having better luck in a small sample of games, better luck in terms of opponents' health, better luck in terms of what happens in Miami, etc. would all be needed for the team to reach elite status within the east.
If Duncan at age 32 was worth $22 mil, then Melo in his early 30s should only be worth around $13 mil anyway. Your #s don't really help your case.

Yea Duncan at 30 made $17m Melo made $23 this year. So those numbers definitely doesn't help melo's cause. Duncan got a pay increase in his mid 30's then Probably realized he had to go back to taking less. It worked because he just win his 5th ring

I don't expect Melo to accept a low ball offer but he should not be paid anything north of $20m. He is not worth that kind of money. Too many flaws. He's not Duncan, Shaq, Jordan or Kobe or KG. In his mind and in some fans mind he is. But those are people who are narrowed minded and only value PPG. Everything else like making plays for others, playing championship failed defense, moving without the ball be damned

If you're giving Melo $20 mil a year, you're basically ruling out a big 3. And Melo isn't good enough to be part of a championship-winning two-some unless a) the other player is Lebron or Durant or b) we have a truly extraordinary supporting cast, which is unlikely for any team to begin with but even more unlikely since we have few picks and no foundation.
IMO Melo should be given 1/3 of what the cap is minus a reasonable amount of money for nice role players. That's probably going to leave about $15 mil a year. I highly doubt he would accept that though. In that case at this point, letting him walk is better than badly overpaying him. Even if Melo stays, this is still just an older version of a .450 team anyway.

Melo is at the top of his game. He's had one losing season in the NBA with a lot of mediocre casts, so Im not sure where the .450 is coming from. I would say with good management making competent moves the Knicks with a healthy-ish Melo should at the very worst be in the 48-52 range whic is typical of MElo's career. To me I will take that while I work to rebuild the bottom of the roster. After Melo's deal expires Im finally out from owing #1 picks from stupid trades and one would hope the Knicks are run properly and get away from this formula of dumping picks.

Bonn, I dont disagree with your points. I do think you sell Melo's impact to Knicks short and it seems to be based off one bad year (last) where everything that could go wrong did, as oppossed to all the other years prior.

Im actually with you in terms of (fiscal responsibility) and Gun in terms of rebuilding. Just not now. Bring back the max guy. Let the bad trades that took our picks become a thing of the past and clean slate in 4 years when we have the tools to do that properly.

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:its a bit funny to me Bonn.. you argue against the merits of signing MElo to a max contract, you go on about the faults in his game, yet:

Even if Rose never plays again, if Melo joins the team, I think they can compete for the ECF. They might make it to the finals depending on what happens in Miami and how terrible the rest of the conference is.

you say that Melo is good enough to add to a team who has one star (Noah) a few solid role guys but cant get out of the first round, so add Melo and they can compete for a title.

kinda begs the flip side of the coin.. why not keep Melo, use cap space or expirings to put together a deal for a stud and go to the ECF or finals themselves? Why not go that route Bonn?

I do want to keep Melo - at a Duncan/Parker level salary.
I think he adds 5 or 6 wins and raises a team's playoff ceiling by about a round. That's not enough to justify a max contract, and certainly not in our case where everything else has to workout perfectly just to plausibly build a contender for Melo's 14th to 17th seasons.
For us to sign Melo to a max contract, the following would have to workout:
A) We build a very strong supporting cast. I'd give this alone maybe a 20% chance of working since most teams fail in this regard, and it will be even harder to do it in a 12 month period since we have almost no foundation right now.
B) Melo ages very well for his 14th to 17th seasons. This too is unlikely but possible.
The probability of both A and B working is the product of their individual likelihoods. In other words, it's extremely low.
For it to work for Chicago, point A is accomplished already, and they are looking to get key production from him starting right now (13th rather than 14th season). So it's a much better (or less bad) gamble for them.

And all that said, I still think their ceiling is just the ECF or potentially finals, which would still give me some hesitation to pull the deal from Chicago's perspective. (I never said I would do the deal if I ran Chicago; I only said that it could push them to a higher level within the east.)

This is exactly how I feel. I would not overpay for him, but I do think that at the right price he can push a team over the edge to winning.

However, his playoffs output and style still scare the hell out of me.

I actually wrote all that for Fish after he asked for an explanation. I thought I'd at least get a reply. Come on, Fish. You're only going to reply to me when you think you catch an inconsistency, but you're not actually interested in the explanation?

no... after 430pm when I leave work I am not really interested. But I did look now and am responding.

Hey Bonn.. thats all good and nice, but again... we live in the real world.

If you go to a nice NYC steakhouse do you order the $20 chicken? Its safe... consistent.. or do you splurge for the $50 rib eye? Now if you order the rib eye do you ask your waiter if its going to be perfect? If you will enjoy every bite? If the fat will have that nice salty char? No... you probably just order it and live with your choice?

Im not looking to splash some "you might be wrong later" post about this later and bookmark the thread. Thats not my style. You simply said that Melo could elevate a team who cant get out of the first round to an elite status (ECF or NBAF). To me that says a lot. Those are the hardest wins in the NBA to come by. Its a pretty good post by you Bonnie! 50k tries and you said something mate! Im proud.... If my limited reading skills (no math here) have this right you think Melo makes more sense as a money guy for the Bulls who are more likely to reap the rewards of that deal because they need Melo's impact right away. As opposed to the Knicks who are more likely a year or two away making a Melo money splurge more risky and put us in another Amare siutation.

A couple caveats on taking less...Tim Duncan is a poor example. When Duncan was Melo's age he signed a max contract that paid him huge money. It was not until the 12-13 season when Duncan was 36 years old did he sign a "discount" contract that everyone thinks Melo should sign. In fact when Duncan was 30, the same age Melo is now he signed the most he could get. Duncan made $117mm between the ages of 30-35. Obviously a gamble that paid very well for the Spurs, but Duncan did exactly what people are saying MElo should not.

Duncan by the years:
age salary:
30 $17mm
31 $19mm
32 $20mm
33 $22mm
34 $18mm
35 $21mm
36 $9.5mm
37 $10mm

So if there is a precedent for taking less money to allow your team flexibility to add other guys look to the Miami crew as an example. The Spurs guys, especially Duncan have been paid very well. The problem with the Miami guys is they all knew they were going there, so there was some collusion. Do you think those guys would have signed those discounted deals if the best thing on the table was Pat Riley saying "hey, Im Pat Riley and you should sign for less because Im going to get guys...."

No... so be very careful with examples of other star guys taking less to join a winner. Duncan got paid... bigtime. What Duncan didnt do was ask for Kobe money when he's 35-36 years old, but he sure as hell got the money when he was Melo's age now!

Only part of the possibility of reaching elite status within the east would be attributable to Melo. The combination of adding Melo AND having better luck in a small sample of games, better luck in terms of opponents' health, better luck in terms of what happens in Miami, etc. would all be needed for the team to reach elite status within the east.
If Duncan at age 32 was worth $22 mil, then Melo in his early 30s should only be worth around $13 mil anyway. Your #s don't really help your case.

Yea Duncan at 30 made $17m Melo made $23 this year. So those numbers definitely doesn't help melo's cause. Duncan got a pay increase in his mid 30's then Probably realized he had to go back to taking less. It worked because he just win his 5th ring

I don't expect Melo to accept a low ball offer but he should not be paid anything north of $20m. He is not worth that kind of money. Too many flaws. He's not Duncan, Shaq, Jordan or Kobe or KG. In his mind and in some fans mind he is. But those are people who are narrowed minded and only value PPG. Everything else like making plays for others, playing championship failed defense, moving without the ball be damned

If you're giving Melo $20 mil a year, you're basically ruling out a big 3. And Melo isn't good enough to be part of a championship-winning two-some unless a) the other player is Lebron or Durant or b) we have a truly extraordinary supporting cast, which is unlikely for any team to begin with but even more unlikely since we have few picks and no foundation.
IMO Melo should be given 1/3 of what the cap is minus a reasonable amount of money for nice role players. That's probably going to leave about $15 mil a year. I highly doubt he would accept that though. In that case at this point, letting him walk is better than badly overpaying him. Even if Melo stays, this is still just an older version of a .450 team anyway.

Im following you... but now your in the grey zone. I dont subscribe to us being a .450 team. That was once. I 100% agree with you that "building around Melo" isnt a plan that is going to yield a title. You need more. I dont think a big 3 is feasable... we did that remember? Tyson/Melo/Amare. Two all stars and a defensive player of the year.

Melo is at the top of his game. He's had one losing season in the NBA with a lot of mediocre casts, so Im not sure where the .450 is coming from. I would say with good management making competent moves the Knicks with a healthy-ish Melo should at the very worst be in the 48-52 range whic is typical of MElo's career. To me I will take that while I work to rebuild the bottom of the roster. After Melo's deal expires Im finally out from owing #1 picks from stupid trades and one would hope the Knicks are run properly and get away from this formula of dumping picks.

Bonn, I dont disagree with your points. I do think you sell Melo's impact to Knicks short and it seems to be based off one bad year (last) where everything that could go wrong did, as oppossed to all the other years prior.

Im actually with you in terms of (fiscal responsibility) and Gun in terms of rebuilding. Just not now. Bring back the max guy. Let the bad trades that took our picks become a thing of the past and clean slate in 4 years when we have the tools to do that properly.

I was basing the .450 on last year's team. For a variety of reasons, I don't attribute much of that to Woodson. It's what most of the statistical models thought we'd win before the season. If we have a magnificent supporting cast, we can get back to a 50 win team but that will eat up all the cap and I don't see how we'd get from that level to the 60+ championship level. It strikes me as too low in probability, especially since we're dealing with limited time in Melo's prime years. I know that you are generally concerned about spending wisely, Fish, but I don't think you can make "one time exceptions" to that policy. Worst case scenario, if Melo walks and we don't get any superstars in 2015, I think we can get multiple players who together contribute as much as he does for the $20 to 25 mil that his salary would be.

there are teams, a few, but there are some that can absorb taking a chance on carmelo, those teams are much closer to winning and are set up salary wise, talent, and age... to win now and in the next couple of years.. We are just not one of them, and for us keeping carmelo at any salary near 20 mil even at 18 mil, with the assets we have, which are limited, a new coach, and really no prime time players is too much of a risk... by time we are in position to start building a contender, carmelo will be inching towards 34... by then I think his game takes a tremendous dip... that is just not the recipe for a winning team...

Bringing him back because some FEEL he is a star and you MUST have one on your team is not smart... as you said, we can go with multiple young players, on cheaper deals who not only contribute as much, but contribute a whole lot more and gives us flexiblity ,and multiple assets in which to deal with in the future..

Guess they are all haters too

Jmpasq wrote:

tkf wrote:
there are teams, a few, but there are some that can absorb taking a chance on carmelo, those teams are much closer to winning and are set up salary wise, talent, and age... to win now and in the next couple of years.. We are just not one of them, and for us keeping carmelo at any salary near 20 mil even at 18 mil, with the assets we have, which are limited, a new coach, and really no prime time players is too much of a risk... by time we are in position to start building a contender, carmelo will be inching towards 34... by then I think his game takes a tremendous dip... that is just not the recipe for a winning team...

Bringing him back because some FEEL he is a star and you MUST have one on your team is not smart... as you said, we can go with multiple young players, on cheaper deals who not only contribute as much, but contribute a whole lot more and gives us flexiblity ,and multiple assets in which to deal with in the future..

What about a team like the 76ers with loads of cap room and already have plenty of young players and draft picks

dude it is funny that you mention that. I was having a discussion with someone last night and the sixers came up.. MCW already has a year under his belt and he has star potential, but we were not talking carmelo. we were talking Lebron instead. We were saying it would be nice to see lebron take on a challenge like that.. but yea, the sixers are loaded with assets.. but adding carmelo who is not a leader at all to a team like that would be a mess IMO... A team with some vets and a strong willed head coach is needed for carmelo....