Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

babyKnicks wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote: To be fair fish you do seem to jump all over someone if they dotn agree with your opinion. I mean if someone is even a fraction critical of melo you go ape**** lol. Believe me i wish we could sign anyone without restrictions but unfortunetly in the cap world you need to limit the max contracts and focus on the draft. I mean look at the Spurs. they are a world class organization because they dotn overpay and they draft well. So far Phil has done a fantastic job. The Mavs trade was a steal and im lookign forward to the rest of his moves and next years draft

i disagree...there are some madmen out there throwing out statements like "two bad shoulders", ".450 player", etc.

I mean, i've had my historical battles with fish, but he's definitely not of the islefan or bonn proportions...i mean, Bonn definitely disagrees to disagree and when he's boxed in says "i'll wait and see".

I'm waiting until the decision to see where all the madness falls out.

The should melo stay or go poll has it overwhelmingly for him to stay (even with a haircut), so to still have the far reaching opinions that melo is a bum, when the rest of hte world sees melo as the second best available Free Agent (and we all know lebron isn't really available) is what is the most frustrating.

Should we all sit back and let our best player, one year removed from the scoring champion and 54 wins, be killed for asking for a raise?

First off i ignore posters who either have a agenda or like a player too much and are never critical. Bonn is a pretty fair fan he may not be a big melo fan but he is objective. I've said all along i wouldnt mind having melo back BUT he must take a decent paycut to help the team especially at his age, i mean he isnt 26/27 anymore. I've always been fair with melo he is a great scorer and a good rebounder for his position BUT he has hoels in other parts of the game taht you cant ignore and hanst had a successful playoff record either.

Thanks; I do like Melo though and would love to have him back at a Parker/Duncan/Ginobili even Harden salary but nowhere near what most people are talking about here. I think we're on the same page.

The only reason for signing him to the max is that barring major injury, he is a very tradeable asset. You don't seem to be considering this.

Teams never give out 5 year max contracts just to trade the player. That's a big gamble. Has a team ever done that? There are tons of examples of teams letting very good players walk rather than giving out bad contracts but I can't think of any teams doing what you're talking about. It's just too big a gamble. Assuming he steadily declines as most players with his wear and tear do and the team plays still at a disappointing level, I see his value diminishing.
It certainly *could* work out well if we're signing him just to trade him but it could also be a monumental disaster.

I agree that it is a risk but so is letting him walk for zilch. Sux to be a GM, no?

There is a reason why we offered him the max and I am sure that it is not because he is worth that to us but his value on the open market is extremely high.

As we have discussed before, the market sets the price even if that price includes stupidity.

I am sure that a big part of the reason that we retain him at any cost is resale value.

Yeah, they're both risks but they're not comparable risks - him walking and us having a blank slate in a year vs. us being screwed until 2020? We should have traded him during the season when we had all the leverage. Now the best thing you can do is butter him up ("we're grateful for everything you've done the past 4 years") and encourage him to cooperate in an S & T. I'm sure he too would prefer an S & T over signing elsewhere and it doesn't carry the risk that a 5 year max deal does.

Regarding your last sentence, Phil was a great coach but I'm not starting with the premise that he does (or doesn't) know what he's doing as a GM. They're very different jobs.

Of course we should have traded him during the season, it was moronic that we didn't. What the heck was the plan there? His value was at an all time high. Its always that the trades that we did not do are the ones that we should have, not stupid Bargs!!

And yes, we should hope for a good S&T but I don't think that letting him walk for nothing is a good idea. I think that we bite the bullet and give him the max (if he does not do the smart thing and take less) and then we trade him next season. Chances are that his value will just as high and teams will be willing to give a way more in a playoff race.

So again, the point of contention is not what his actual worth is but what he can bring us in a trade and what he is worth to other teams.

I am sure that many teams have sign players knowing that the player will/may have significant trade value.

But what about signing the player *only* for his trade value? We're talking about signing a player that you specifically do not want to have at the price you're signing him at

I would not say "only" for his trade value. I think that his value is about 18 million so the over payment would be for the trade value.

If you would ask me what I would pay him with a no trade clause? I would say no more than 15-18.

Its scary but its a move that I think that most or all GM's would make. Sometimes you have to roll the dice and hold your nose.

jrodmc wrote:Fan boards are apparently filled with GM wannabes who are more tied to their own view of how to run the team than the actual team itself.
It's fun watching that be re-explained away over and over again, though. Like some say on here, it's the discussion that really matters.

And clicking the ad banners.

Exactly

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

babyKnicks wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote: To be fair fish you do seem to jump all over someone if they dotn agree with your opinion. I mean if someone is even a fraction critical of melo you go ape**** lol. Believe me i wish we could sign anyone without restrictions but unfortunetly in the cap world you need to limit the max contracts and focus on the draft. I mean look at the Spurs. they are a world class organization because they dotn overpay and they draft well. So far Phil has done a fantastic job. The Mavs trade was a steal and im lookign forward to the rest of his moves and next years draft

i disagree...there are some madmen out there throwing out statements like "two bad shoulders", ".450 player", etc.

I mean, i've had my historical battles with fish, but he's definitely not of the islefan or bonn proportions...i mean, Bonn definitely disagrees to disagree and when he's boxed in says "i'll wait and see".

I'm waiting until the decision to see where all the madness falls out.

The should melo stay or go poll has it overwhelmingly for him to stay (even with a haircut), so to still have the far reaching opinions that melo is a bum, when the rest of hte world sees melo as the second best available Free Agent (and we all know lebron isn't really available) is what is the most frustrating.

Should we all sit back and let our best player, one year removed from the scoring champion and 54 wins, be killed for asking for a raise?

First off i ignore posters who either have a agenda or like a player too much and are never critical. Bonn is a pretty fair fan he may not be a big melo fan but he is objective. I've said all along i wouldnt mind having melo back BUT he must take a decent paycut to help the team especially at his age, i mean he isnt 26/27 anymore. I've always been fair with melo he is a great scorer and a good rebounder for his position BUT he has hoels in other parts of the game taht you cant ignore and hanst had a successful playoff record either.

Thanks; I do like Melo though and would love to have him back at a Parker/Duncan/Ginobili even Harden salary but nowhere near what most people are talking about here. I think we're on the same page.

The only reason for signing him to the max is that barring major injury, he is a very tradeable asset. You don't seem to be considering this.

Teams never give out 5 year max contracts just to trade the player. That's a big gamble. Has a team ever done that? There are tons of examples of teams letting very good players walk rather than giving out bad contracts but I can't think of any teams doing what you're talking about. It's just too big a gamble. Assuming he steadily declines as most players with his wear and tear do and the team plays still at a disappointing level, I see his value diminishing.
It certainly *could* work out well if we're signing him just to trade him but it could also be a monumental disaster.

I agree that it is a risk but so is letting him walk for zilch. Sux to be a GM, no?

There is a reason why we offered him the max and I am sure that it is not because he is worth that to us but his value on the open market is extremely high.

As we have discussed before, the market sets the price even if that price includes stupidity.

I am sure that a big part of the reason that we retain him at any cost is resale value.

Yeah, they're both risks but they're not comparable risks - him walking and us having a blank slate in a year vs. us being screwed until 2020? We should have traded him during the season when we had all the leverage. Now the best thing you can do is butter him up ("we're grateful for everything you've done the past 4 years") and encourage him to cooperate in an S & T. I'm sure he too would prefer an S & T over signing elsewhere and it doesn't carry the risk that a 5 year max deal does.

Regarding your last sentence, Phil was a great coach but I'm not starting with the premise that he does (or doesn't) know what he's doing as a GM. They're very different jobs.

Of course we should have traded him during the season, it was moronic that we didn't. What the heck was the plan there? His value was at an all time high. Its always that the trades that we did not do are the ones that we should have, not stupid Bargs!!

And yes, we should hope for a good S&T but I don't think that letting him walk for nothing is a good idea. I think that we bite the bullet and give him the max (if he does not do the smart thing and take less) and then we trade him next season. Chances are that his value will just as high and teams will be willing to give a way more in a playoff race.

So again, the point of contention is not what his actual worth is but what he can bring us in a trade and what he is worth to other teams.

I am sure that many teams have sign players knowing that the player will/may have significant trade value.

But what about signing the player *only* for his trade value? We're talking about signing a player that you specifically do not want to have at the price you're signing him at

I would not say "only" for his trade value. I think that his value is about 18 million so the over payment would be for the trade value.

If you would ask me what I would pay him with a no trade clause? I would say no more than 15-18.

Its scary but its a move that I think that most or all GM's would make. Sometimes you have to roll the dice and hold your nose.

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

babyKnicks wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote: To be fair fish you do seem to jump all over someone if they dotn agree with your opinion. I mean if someone is even a fraction critical of melo you go ape**** lol. Believe me i wish we could sign anyone without restrictions but unfortunetly in the cap world you need to limit the max contracts and focus on the draft. I mean look at the Spurs. they are a world class organization because they dotn overpay and they draft well. So far Phil has done a fantastic job. The Mavs trade was a steal and im lookign forward to the rest of his moves and next years draft

i disagree...there are some madmen out there throwing out statements like "two bad shoulders", ".450 player", etc.

I mean, i've had my historical battles with fish, but he's definitely not of the islefan or bonn proportions...i mean, Bonn definitely disagrees to disagree and when he's boxed in says "i'll wait and see".

I'm waiting until the decision to see where all the madness falls out.

The should melo stay or go poll has it overwhelmingly for him to stay (even with a haircut), so to still have the far reaching opinions that melo is a bum, when the rest of hte world sees melo as the second best available Free Agent (and we all know lebron isn't really available) is what is the most frustrating.

Should we all sit back and let our best player, one year removed from the scoring champion and 54 wins, be killed for asking for a raise?

First off i ignore posters who either have a agenda or like a player too much and are never critical. Bonn is a pretty fair fan he may not be a big melo fan but he is objective. I've said all along i wouldnt mind having melo back BUT he must take a decent paycut to help the team especially at his age, i mean he isnt 26/27 anymore. I've always been fair with melo he is a great scorer and a good rebounder for his position BUT he has hoels in other parts of the game taht you cant ignore and hanst had a successful playoff record either.

Thanks; I do like Melo though and would love to have him back at a Parker/Duncan/Ginobili even Harden salary but nowhere near what most people are talking about here. I think we're on the same page.

The only reason for signing him to the max is that barring major injury, he is a very tradeable asset. You don't seem to be considering this.

Teams never give out 5 year max contracts just to trade the player. That's a big gamble. Has a team ever done that? There are tons of examples of teams letting very good players walk rather than giving out bad contracts but I can't think of any teams doing what you're talking about. It's just too big a gamble. Assuming he steadily declines as most players with his wear and tear do and the team plays still at a disappointing level, I see his value diminishing.
It certainly *could* work out well if we're signing him just to trade him but it could also be a monumental disaster.

I agree that it is a risk but so is letting him walk for zilch. Sux to be a GM, no?

There is a reason why we offered him the max and I am sure that it is not because he is worth that to us but his value on the open market is extremely high.

As we have discussed before, the market sets the price even if that price includes stupidity.

I am sure that a big part of the reason that we retain him at any cost is resale value.

Yeah, they're both risks but they're not comparable risks - him walking and us having a blank slate in a year vs. us being screwed until 2020? We should have traded him during the season when we had all the leverage. Now the best thing you can do is butter him up ("we're grateful for everything you've done the past 4 years") and encourage him to cooperate in an S & T. I'm sure he too would prefer an S & T over signing elsewhere and it doesn't carry the risk that a 5 year max deal does.

Regarding your last sentence, Phil was a great coach but I'm not starting with the premise that he does (or doesn't) know what he's doing as a GM. They're very different jobs.

Of course we should have traded him during the season, it was moronic that we didn't. What the heck was the plan there? His value was at an all time high. Its always that the trades that we did not do are the ones that we should have, not stupid Bargs!!

And yes, we should hope for a good S&T but I don't think that letting him walk for nothing is a good idea. I think that we bite the bullet and give him the max (if he does not do the smart thing and take less) and then we trade him next season. Chances are that his value will just as high and teams will be willing to give a way more in a playoff race.

So again, the point of contention is not what his actual worth is but what he can bring us in a trade and what he is worth to other teams.

I am sure that many teams have sign players knowing that the player will/may have significant trade value.

But what about signing the player *only* for his trade value? We're talking about signing a player that you specifically do not want to have at the price you're signing him at

I would not say "only" for his trade value. I think that his value is about 18 million so the over payment would be for the trade value.

If you would ask me what I would pay him with a no trade clause? I would say no more than 15-18.

Its scary but its a move that I think that most or all GM's would make. Sometimes you have to roll the dice and hold your nose.

If the value is $18 mil now, how gigantic is the overpayment going to be each year as he ages? What's a reasonable prediction for his value in his 17th season? Obviously a lot less than now, right?

I don't think his value is 18 next year, I think its the max. I do believe that as he ages his value will decline. I can't predict where he will be but that also depends if he continues his wild bulldozer style. That style is not sustainable. I think that he can thrive in a system and last far longer.

My gut tells me that Phil trades him now or next year (if Melo insists on the max).

Let me ask you ... do you not think that his value will be as high or even higher at the trade deadline?

I could be wrong but that is my prediction.

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

babyKnicks wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote: To be fair fish you do seem to jump all over someone if they dotn agree with your opinion. I mean if someone is even a fraction critical of melo you go ape**** lol. Believe me i wish we could sign anyone without restrictions but unfortunetly in the cap world you need to limit the max contracts and focus on the draft. I mean look at the Spurs. they are a world class organization because they dotn overpay and they draft well. So far Phil has done a fantastic job. The Mavs trade was a steal and im lookign forward to the rest of his moves and next years draft

i disagree...there are some madmen out there throwing out statements like "two bad shoulders", ".450 player", etc.

I mean, i've had my historical battles with fish, but he's definitely not of the islefan or bonn proportions...i mean, Bonn definitely disagrees to disagree and when he's boxed in says "i'll wait and see".

I'm waiting until the decision to see where all the madness falls out.

The should melo stay or go poll has it overwhelmingly for him to stay (even with a haircut), so to still have the far reaching opinions that melo is a bum, when the rest of hte world sees melo as the second best available Free Agent (and we all know lebron isn't really available) is what is the most frustrating.

Should we all sit back and let our best player, one year removed from the scoring champion and 54 wins, be killed for asking for a raise?

First off i ignore posters who either have a agenda or like a player too much and are never critical. Bonn is a pretty fair fan he may not be a big melo fan but he is objective. I've said all along i wouldnt mind having melo back BUT he must take a decent paycut to help the team especially at his age, i mean he isnt 26/27 anymore. I've always been fair with melo he is a great scorer and a good rebounder for his position BUT he has hoels in other parts of the game taht you cant ignore and hanst had a successful playoff record either.

Thanks; I do like Melo though and would love to have him back at a Parker/Duncan/Ginobili even Harden salary but nowhere near what most people are talking about here. I think we're on the same page.

The only reason for signing him to the max is that barring major injury, he is a very tradeable asset. You don't seem to be considering this.

Teams never give out 5 year max contracts just to trade the player. That's a big gamble. Has a team ever done that? There are tons of examples of teams letting very good players walk rather than giving out bad contracts but I can't think of any teams doing what you're talking about. It's just too big a gamble. Assuming he steadily declines as most players with his wear and tear do and the team plays still at a disappointing level, I see his value diminishing.
It certainly *could* work out well if we're signing him just to trade him but it could also be a monumental disaster.

I agree that it is a risk but so is letting him walk for zilch. Sux to be a GM, no?

There is a reason why we offered him the max and I am sure that it is not because he is worth that to us but his value on the open market is extremely high.

As we have discussed before, the market sets the price even if that price includes stupidity.

I am sure that a big part of the reason that we retain him at any cost is resale value.

Yeah, they're both risks but they're not comparable risks - him walking and us having a blank slate in a year vs. us being screwed until 2020? We should have traded him during the season when we had all the leverage. Now the best thing you can do is butter him up ("we're grateful for everything you've done the past 4 years") and encourage him to cooperate in an S & T. I'm sure he too would prefer an S & T over signing elsewhere and it doesn't carry the risk that a 5 year max deal does.

Regarding your last sentence, Phil was a great coach but I'm not starting with the premise that he does (or doesn't) know what he's doing as a GM. They're very different jobs.

Of course we should have traded him during the season, it was moronic that we didn't. What the heck was the plan there? His value was at an all time high. Its always that the trades that we did not do are the ones that we should have, not stupid Bargs!!

And yes, we should hope for a good S&T but I don't think that letting him walk for nothing is a good idea. I think that we bite the bullet and give him the max (if he does not do the smart thing and take less) and then we trade him next season. Chances are that his value will just as high and teams will be willing to give a way more in a playoff race.

So again, the point of contention is not what his actual worth is but what he can bring us in a trade and what he is worth to other teams.

I am sure that many teams have sign players knowing that the player will/may have significant trade value.

But what about signing the player *only* for his trade value? We're talking about signing a player that you specifically do not want to have at the price you're signing him at

I would not say "only" for his trade value. I think that his value is about 18 million so the over payment would be for the trade value.

If you would ask me what I would pay him with a no trade clause? I would say no more than 15-18.

Its scary but its a move that I think that most or all GM's would make. Sometimes you have to roll the dice and hold your nose.

If the value is $18 mil now, how gigantic is the overpayment going to be each year as he ages? What's a reasonable prediction for his value in his 17th season? Obviously a lot less than now, right?

I don't think his value is 18 next year, I think its the max. I do believe that as he ages his value will decline. I can't predict where he will be but that also depends if he continues his wild bulldozer style. That style is not sustainable. I think that he can thrive in a system and last far longer.

My gut tells me that Phil trades him now or next year (if Melo insists on the max).

Let me ask you ... do you not think that his value will be as high or even higher at the trade deadline?

I could be wrong but that is my prediction.

Probably not. I think the team will be disappointing and the $130 mil he's owed will look like a lot. He'll undoubtedly have some value but I don't think it's huge. How much are you going to get for him in a trade? Maybe one bad contract, one good player and two mid to late 1st round picks? Meanwhile you're going to overpay him by $50 mil. So you're basically paying $50 mil for two mid to late 1st round picks? (And I think it's overpaying by more like $70 mil.)

Well ... we value him differently. I think that we are overpaying by about 30 million but to Dolan he is not overpaying at all since Melo has proven to be a huge cash cow.

I think that his trade value mid season will be far higher than a bad contract and 2 late firsts. Remember, there are many desperate GM's out there.

Why do you think that Phil offered him the max (if true)?

Do the clippers stand a chance with Paul making $30mil? You can resign Blake but what about the other 12 roster spots?

gotta love fans

gunsnewing wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:What do we get for keeping him? A .450 team with $30 mil less in cap space?

no you get the team you had 2 years ago, for starters

Only if you go out and grab 5 or 6 great role players, but we're in a much better situation if we do that regardless of what happens with Melo.

Who were our five/six "great" role players that year?

JR I guess and Kidd for part of the season. Who else?

Get ready for the great explanation of how we would have 2 or 3 chips by now (or at least be sitting on great cap space and yoots and draft picks) had we only stayed with Gallo, Wilson, Moz and AR. That's four! And the invisible great players we would have made with our tremendous draft expertise! There's 5 and 6!

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

The real issue is that we could have gotten him as a FA, used the players we traded for him in other ways, if we chose to, and have the picks we gave up to draft or trade.

Anthony squeezed us to make a trade and seriously reduced our ability to surround him with the best possible complimentary players back then, and by opting out, he is again squeezing the team and potentially threatening our ability to surround him with the best possible complimentary players.

Gallinari would have been a decent compliment to Anthony, and nobody can say if he would have been injured had he remained here. Mosgov would be an excellent backup center and spot starter if he had remained here, and who knows if Felton would have ballooned up and shown such a steep decline. I'm not a Felton fan, but he was having a career season when we traded him, and liked it here.

But none of this played out because we had to make the trade for Anthony and not compete for him as a FA.

If he returns it should be on terms that also help the team, not just him.

This has been discussed for years. People are just to hard headed and narrow index to fully understand the long term impact of that trade.

Hey that's ok...if they understood they'd probably be league insiders and not arguing on a forum

some sensible posters are coming out of the woodwork lately, who seem to endorse the views that tkf and me have been propounding for years. this is encouraging. Walt is 100% correct. excellent summation by him.

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

babyKnicks wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote: To be fair fish you do seem to jump all over someone if they dotn agree with your opinion. I mean if someone is even a fraction critical of melo you go ape**** lol. Believe me i wish we could sign anyone without restrictions but unfortunetly in the cap world you need to limit the max contracts and focus on the draft. I mean look at the Spurs. they are a world class organization because they dotn overpay and they draft well. So far Phil has done a fantastic job. The Mavs trade was a steal and im lookign forward to the rest of his moves and next years draft

i disagree...there are some madmen out there throwing out statements like "two bad shoulders", ".450 player", etc.

I mean, i've had my historical battles with fish, but he's definitely not of the islefan or bonn proportions...i mean, Bonn definitely disagrees to disagree and when he's boxed in says "i'll wait and see".

I'm waiting until the decision to see where all the madness falls out.

The should melo stay or go poll has it overwhelmingly for him to stay (even with a haircut), so to still have the far reaching opinions that melo is a bum, when the rest of hte world sees melo as the second best available Free Agent (and we all know lebron isn't really available) is what is the most frustrating.

Should we all sit back and let our best player, one year removed from the scoring champion and 54 wins, be killed for asking for a raise?

First off i ignore posters who either have a agenda or like a player too much and are never critical. Bonn is a pretty fair fan he may not be a big melo fan but he is objective. I've said all along i wouldnt mind having melo back BUT he must take a decent paycut to help the team especially at his age, i mean he isnt 26/27 anymore. I've always been fair with melo he is a great scorer and a good rebounder for his position BUT he has hoels in other parts of the game taht you cant ignore and hanst had a successful playoff record either.

Thanks; I do like Melo though and would love to have him back at a Parker/Duncan/Ginobili even Harden salary but nowhere near what most people are talking about here. I think we're on the same page.

The only reason for signing him to the max is that barring major injury, he is a very tradeable asset. You don't seem to be considering this.

Teams never give out 5 year max contracts just to trade the player. That's a big gamble. Has a team ever done that? There are tons of examples of teams letting very good players walk rather than giving out bad contracts but I can't think of any teams doing what you're talking about. It's just too big a gamble. Assuming he steadily declines as most players with his wear and tear do and the team plays still at a disappointing level, I see his value diminishing.
It certainly *could* work out well if we're signing him just to trade him but it could also be a monumental disaster.

I agree that it is a risk but so is letting him walk for zilch. Sux to be a GM, no?

There is a reason why we offered him the max and I am sure that it is not because he is worth that to us but his value on the open market is extremely high.

As we have discussed before, the market sets the price even if that price includes stupidity.

I am sure that a big part of the reason that we retain him at any cost is resale value.

Yeah, they're both risks but they're not comparable risks - him walking and us having a blank slate in a year vs. us being screwed until 2020? We should have traded him during the season when we had all the leverage. Now the best thing you can do is butter him up ("we're grateful for everything you've done the past 4 years") and encourage him to cooperate in an S & T. I'm sure he too would prefer an S & T over signing elsewhere and it doesn't carry the risk that a 5 year max deal does.

Regarding your last sentence, Phil was a great coach but I'm not starting with the premise that he does (or doesn't) know what he's doing as a GM. They're very different jobs.

Of course we should have traded him during the season, it was moronic that we didn't. What the heck was the plan there? His value was at an all time high. Its always that the trades that we did not do are the ones that we should have, not stupid Bargs!!

And yes, we should hope for a good S&T but I don't think that letting him walk for nothing is a good idea. I think that we bite the bullet and give him the max (if he does not do the smart thing and take less) and then we trade him next season. Chances are that his value will just as high and teams will be willing to give a way more in a playoff race.

So again, the point of contention is not what his actual worth is but what he can bring us in a trade and what he is worth to other teams.

I am sure that many teams have sign players knowing that the player will/may have significant trade value.

But what about signing the player *only* for his trade value? We're talking about signing a player that you specifically do not want to have at the price you're signing him at

I would not say "only" for his trade value. I think that his value is about 18 million so the over payment would be for the trade value.

If you would ask me what I would pay him with a no trade clause? I would say no more than 15-18.

Its scary but its a move that I think that most or all GM's would make. Sometimes you have to roll the dice and hold your nose.

If the value is $18 mil now, how gigantic is the overpayment going to be each year as he ages? What's a reasonable prediction for his value in his 17th season? Obviously a lot less than now, right?

I don't think his value is 18 next year, I think its the max. I do believe that as he ages his value will decline. I can't predict where he will be but that also depends if he continues his wild bulldozer style. That style is not sustainable. I think that he can thrive in a system and last far longer.

My gut tells me that Phil trades him now or next year (if Melo insists on the max).

Let me ask you ... do you not think that his value will be as high or even higher at the trade deadline?

I could be wrong but that is my prediction.

Probably not. I think the team will be disappointing and the $130 mil he's owed will look like a lot. He'll undoubtedly have some value but I don't think it's huge. How much are you going to get for him in a trade? Maybe one bad contract, one good player and two mid to late 1st round picks? Meanwhile you're going to overpay him by $50 mil. So you're basically paying $50 mil for two mid to late 1st round picks? (And I think it's overpaying by more like $70 mil.)

Well ... we value him differently. I think that we are overpaying by about 30 million but to Dolan he is not overpaying at all since Melo has proven to be a huge cash cow.

I think that his trade value mid season will be far higher than a bad contract and 2 late firsts. Remember, there are many desperate GM's out there.

Why do you think that Phil offered him the max (if true)?

Well I doubt Phil knows anything about the advanced stats. He probably thinks Melo is an impact player because he has a high PPG total and a good reputation. I don't think being a great coach and GM have much to do with each other.
Even if you're saying he's worth $18 mil for 5 years, that's overpaying by $40 mil.

Huh? You can't be serious, right? I assume that you said this in jest.

Phil is one of the smartest guys ever in the NBA. You assume that he "doesn't know anything about advanced stats"?

Of course he knows about advanced stats, everybody does at this point.

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

babyKnicks wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote: To be fair fish you do seem to jump all over someone if they dotn agree with your opinion. I mean if someone is even a fraction critical of melo you go ape**** lol. Believe me i wish we could sign anyone without restrictions but unfortunetly in the cap world you need to limit the max contracts and focus on the draft. I mean look at the Spurs. they are a world class organization because they dotn overpay and they draft well. So far Phil has done a fantastic job. The Mavs trade was a steal and im lookign forward to the rest of his moves and next years draft

i disagree...there are some madmen out there throwing out statements like "two bad shoulders", ".450 player", etc.

I mean, i've had my historical battles with fish, but he's definitely not of the islefan or bonn proportions...i mean, Bonn definitely disagrees to disagree and when he's boxed in says "i'll wait and see".

I'm waiting until the decision to see where all the madness falls out.

The should melo stay or go poll has it overwhelmingly for him to stay (even with a haircut), so to still have the far reaching opinions that melo is a bum, when the rest of hte world sees melo as the second best available Free Agent (and we all know lebron isn't really available) is what is the most frustrating.

Should we all sit back and let our best player, one year removed from the scoring champion and 54 wins, be killed for asking for a raise?

First off i ignore posters who either have a agenda or like a player too much and are never critical. Bonn is a pretty fair fan he may not be a big melo fan but he is objective. I've said all along i wouldnt mind having melo back BUT he must take a decent paycut to help the team especially at his age, i mean he isnt 26/27 anymore. I've always been fair with melo he is a great scorer and a good rebounder for his position BUT he has hoels in other parts of the game taht you cant ignore and hanst had a successful playoff record either.

Thanks; I do like Melo though and would love to have him back at a Parker/Duncan/Ginobili even Harden salary but nowhere near what most people are talking about here. I think we're on the same page.

The only reason for signing him to the max is that barring major injury, he is a very tradeable asset. You don't seem to be considering this.

Teams never give out 5 year max contracts just to trade the player. That's a big gamble. Has a team ever done that? There are tons of examples of teams letting very good players walk rather than giving out bad contracts but I can't think of any teams doing what you're talking about. It's just too big a gamble. Assuming he steadily declines as most players with his wear and tear do and the team plays still at a disappointing level, I see his value diminishing.
It certainly *could* work out well if we're signing him just to trade him but it could also be a monumental disaster.

I agree that it is a risk but so is letting him walk for zilch. Sux to be a GM, no?

There is a reason why we offered him the max and I am sure that it is not because he is worth that to us but his value on the open market is extremely high.

As we have discussed before, the market sets the price even if that price includes stupidity.

I am sure that a big part of the reason that we retain him at any cost is resale value.

Yeah, they're both risks but they're not comparable risks - him walking and us having a blank slate in a year vs. us being screwed until 2020? We should have traded him during the season when we had all the leverage. Now the best thing you can do is butter him up ("we're grateful for everything you've done the past 4 years") and encourage him to cooperate in an S & T. I'm sure he too would prefer an S & T over signing elsewhere and it doesn't carry the risk that a 5 year max deal does.

Regarding your last sentence, Phil was a great coach but I'm not starting with the premise that he does (or doesn't) know what he's doing as a GM. They're very different jobs.

Of course we should have traded him during the season, it was moronic that we didn't. What the heck was the plan there? His value was at an all time high. Its always that the trades that we did not do are the ones that we should have, not stupid Bargs!!

And yes, we should hope for a good S&T but I don't think that letting him walk for nothing is a good idea. I think that we bite the bullet and give him the max (if he does not do the smart thing and take less) and then we trade him next season. Chances are that his value will just as high and teams will be willing to give a way more in a playoff race.

So again, the point of contention is not what his actual worth is but what he can bring us in a trade and what he is worth to other teams.

I am sure that many teams have sign players knowing that the player will/may have significant trade value.

But what about signing the player *only* for his trade value? We're talking about signing a player that you specifically do not want to have at the price you're signing him at

I would not say "only" for his trade value. I think that his value is about 18 million so the over payment would be for the trade value.

If you would ask me what I would pay him with a no trade clause? I would say no more than 15-18.

Its scary but its a move that I think that most or all GM's would make. Sometimes you have to roll the dice and hold your nose.

If the value is $18 mil now, how gigantic is the overpayment going to be each year as he ages? What's a reasonable prediction for his value in his 17th season? Obviously a lot less than now, right?

I don't think his value is 18 next year, I think its the max. I do believe that as he ages his value will decline. I can't predict where he will be but that also depends if he continues his wild bulldozer style. That style is not sustainable. I think that he can thrive in a system and last far longer.

My gut tells me that Phil trades him now or next year (if Melo insists on the max).

Let me ask you ... do you not think that his value will be as high or even higher at the trade deadline?

I could be wrong but that is my prediction.

Probably not. I think the team will be disappointing and the $130 mil he's owed will look like a lot. He'll undoubtedly have some value but I don't think it's huge. How much are you going to get for him in a trade? Maybe one bad contract, one good player and two mid to late 1st round picks? Meanwhile you're going to overpay him by $50 mil. So you're basically paying $50 mil for two mid to late 1st round picks? (And I think it's overpaying by more like $70 mil.)

Well ... we value him differently. I think that we are overpaying by about 30 million but to Dolan he is not overpaying at all since Melo has proven to be a huge cash cow.

I think that his trade value mid season will be far higher than a bad contract and 2 late firsts. Remember, there are many desperate GM's out there.

Why do you think that Phil offered him the max (if true)?

Well I doubt Phil knows anything about the advanced stats. He probably thinks Melo is an impact player because he has a high PPG total and a good reputation. I don't think being a great coach and GM have much to do with each other.
Even if you're saying he's worth $18 mil for 5 years, that's overpaying by $40 mil.

Huh? You can't be serious, right? I assume that you said this in jest.

Phil is one of the smartest guys ever in the NBA. You assume that he "doesn't know anything about advanced stats"?

Of course he knows about advanced stats, everybody does at this point.