If that conflict was with Melo, the team kind of sealed Tyson's fact by re-upping Melo. Speculation? Sure, but probable I'd say. So, even if he still had value, they had to trade him by some point if they wanted to reboot.

The big question is probably not whether the Knicks would be better right now, but did they make the right trade?

F500ONE wrote:Tyson Chandler said he was the Scapegoat or Escapegoat Last Year

Some good quotables here

http://espn.go.com/dallas/nba/story/_/id/11935677/tyson-chandler-felt-scapegoat-s-new-york-knicks

Chandler will face the Knicks on Wednesday night for the first time since the trade to Dallas. Chandler, considered a leader in the Mavericks' locker room and a negative influence in the Knicks', thinks the difference is his teammates' tolerance for his attempts to hold them accountable.

"I think people can take it differently and make it what they want to make it," Chandler said when asked whether his leadership attempts were lost in translation in New York. "It also depends on where your mind is. If everybody is locked in and they want to win and they know I'm in it 100 percent and they're in it 100 percent, nobody's sensitive. But if there's other agendas, it's going to make things sensitive."

Knicks players, including star Carmelo Anthony, have mentioned a lack of finger-pointing as evidence of improved chemistry this season. The Mavs targeted Chandler on the trade market in part because of the character he displayed during his previous stint in Dallas, when he was considered the emotional leader of the 2010-11 NBA champions.

Chandler is averaging 10.3 points and 10.3 rebounds for the 10-5 Mavs entering his reunion game with the 4-11 Knicks.

"Yeah, he's such a horrible influence, I can see why they got rid of him," Mavs owner Mark Cuban said sarcastically.

"He's been a great help, great impact on the court, off the court. Everything we thought he was, he was."

Chandler readily admits being disappointed in his performance last season, when he had to work his way back into shape after his injury. He excelled in his first two seasons in New York after signing a four-year, $55.4 million deal after the 2011 lockout, when Cuban made the salary-cap-influenced decision not to make him a multiyear offer.

Chandler was the NBA's defensive player of the year in 2011-12 and an All-Star in 2012-13, helping the Knicks reach the playoffs in both seasons and advance a round in the second. In September, Chandler expressed his displeasure with comments from Jackson that he considered "a shot at [his] character of professionalism."

"I just wanted to air it out," Chandler said. "Honestly, after that, I was done with it. My agent is like a big brother to me. He gave me a phone call and was like, 'Are you done?' I was like, 'Yeah, I'm done.'

"In all honesty, I'm so focused on the Mavericks that the Knicks are in my rearview mirror. I don't mean that in a negative way, but it's in the past, and I'm moving forward."

ToddTT wrote:I was glad when we signed him.

Got tired of worrying about his health every single game.

VCoug wrote:God, that trade looks worse and worse everyday.

VCoug wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

VCoug wrote:God, that trade looks worse and worse everyday.

Someone else mentioned it earlier but look at how desperately the Cavs could use a double double, defensively oriented center right now.

Yeah, good point we absolutely could have gotten a better deal from Cleveland right now. We sold so low on one of our only real assets.

Would he have looked the same in the triangle or would his numbers drop like Sal. No sal is not the player Tyson is but he is below his shooting norms. So what if Tyson was shooting 49% from the field and was not motivated on D?

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

VCoug wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

VCoug wrote:God, that trade looks worse and worse everyday.

Someone else mentioned it earlier but look at how desperately the Cavs could use a double double, defensively oriented center right now.

Yeah, good point we absolutely could have gotten a better deal from Cleveland right now. We sold so low on one of our only real assets.

Would he have looked the same in the triangle or would his numbers drop like Sal. No sal is not the player Tyson is but he is below his shooting norms. So what if Tyson was shooting 49% from the field and was not motivated on D?

He'd be playing more min and probably averaging more rbs and blocks. I doubt they'd use the triangle all the time. It's not like it's working well anyway! I'm skeptical of the idea that the system used has a huge impact on player production anyway. If Cole Aldrich can average 8 points per 36, I'm sure Tyson would be well ahead of that.
It's a contract year. You can't seriously think he'd be unmotivated. But even if he was, worse case scenario, I'm sure we could trade him for a mediocre player with a longer contract anyway.

Rebounds sure given the more minutes blks I seriously doubt it. I honestly don't know what Tyson would be in this system even in a contract year. I'm not a Tyson fanboy but I think I've always had a decent idea about his value and was one of the ones that thought Tyson still had high value. However, in a non High PnR offense I am just not sure what Tyson would look like if he is not getting spoon fed baskets. A tyson that is not catching alleys is a Tyson that sulks and complains.

Also, I doubt that they would change the offense for Tyson either. If they wanted to scrap the offense they could have done that already. Plus, the triangle is working better than last year offense and is ranked near the middle of the pack. By the way If Dalembert goes back to the norm they can always flip him without having to configure such a high match in salary. Dals other numbers are pretty good given his minutes so if he combines his recent/career shooting or efficiency the knicks would be able to sell him off easy. They also have Calderon who they can flip if they want to. Contenders will value his shooting.

CrushAlot wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

VCoug wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

VCoug wrote:God, that trade looks worse and worse everyday.

Someone else mentioned it earlier but look at how desperately the Cavs could use a double double, defensively oriented center right now.

Yeah, good point we absolutely could have gotten a better deal from Cleveland right now. We sold so low on one of our only real assets.

Would he have looked the same in the triangle or would his numbers drop like Sal. No sal is not the player Tyson is but he is below his shooting norms. So what if Tyson was shooting 49% from the field and was not motivated on D?

He'd be playing more min and probably averaging more rbs and blocks. I doubt they'd use the triangle all the time. It's not like it's working well anyway! I'm skeptical of the idea that the system used has a huge impact on player production anyway. If Cole Aldrich can average 8 points per 36, I'm sure Tyson would be well ahead of that.
It's a contract year. You can't seriously think he'd be unmotivated. But even if he was, worse case scenario, I'm sure we could trade him for a mediocre player with a longer contract anyway.

Don't you think he needed to go after a year of finger pointing, whispering in the gms ear, playing badly, being injury prone, having a weak immune system and needing repeated 'personal days' during the stretch run last spring?
I am not down on what the Knicks acquired in that deal at all. Early, Thanasis, Larkin and Acy(Ellington) all are good prospects in my opinion. I also like Sam but even if the Knicks didn't like him he has a great contract in terms of being able to trade him. I think Calderon will be a very good player for the Knicks and I think they needed to upgrade the point. Too bad the Knicks didn't somehow get Lavoy Allen or Maurice Speights or some other scrub that always had a career night against Chandler in the package as well.

Bonn and I didn't say he never should have been traded, hell, I've been making fake Tyson trades for the past three seasons and i think he was our best player. We both said the value we got back was poor and we should have been able to get more.

smackeddog wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

VCoug wrote:God, that trade looks worse and worse everyday.

Someone else mentioned it earlier but look at how desperately the Cavs could use a double double, defensively oriented center right now.

So what exactly do you want from the Cavs that would have matched salaries and offloaded Felton at the same time? Why would you want to make an eastern rival even stronger?

As much as I can't stand Felton I don't see why dumping him is a requirement of any Tyson trade.

CrushAlot wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

VCoug wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

VCoug wrote:God, that trade looks worse and worse everyday.

Someone else mentioned it earlier but look at how desperately the Cavs could use a double double, defensively oriented center right now.

Yeah, good point we absolutely could have gotten a better deal from Cleveland right now. We sold so low on one of our only real assets.

Would he have looked the same in the triangle or would his numbers drop like Sal. No sal is not the player Tyson is but he is below his shooting norms. So what if Tyson was shooting 49% from the field and was not motivated on D?

He'd be playing more min and probably averaging more rbs and blocks. I doubt they'd use the triangle all the time. It's not like it's working well anyway! I'm skeptical of the idea that the system used has a huge impact on player production anyway. If Cole Aldrich can average 8 points per 36, I'm sure Tyson would be well ahead of that.
It's a contract year. You can't seriously think he'd be unmotivated. But even if he was, worse case scenario, I'm sure we could trade him for a mediocre player with a longer contract anyway.

Don't you think he needed to go after a year of finger pointing, whispering in the gms ear, playing badly, being injury prone, having a weak immune system and needing repeated 'personal days' during the stretch run last spring?
I am not down on what the Knicks acquired in that deal at all. Early, Thanasis, Larkin and Acy(Ellington) all are good prospects in my opinion. I also like Sam but even if the Knicks didn't like him he has a great contract in terms of being able to trade him. I think Calderon will be a very good player for the Knicks and I think they needed to upgrade the point. Too bad the Knicks didn't somehow get Lavoy Allen or Maurice Speights or some other scrub that always had a career night against Chandler in the package as well.

smackeddog wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

VCoug wrote:God, that trade looks worse and worse everyday.

Someone else mentioned it earlier but look at how desperately the Cavs could use a double double, defensively oriented center right now.

So what exactly do you want from the Cavs that would have matched salaries and offloaded Felton at the same time? Why would you want to make an eastern rival even stronger?

The weather is warmer in Dallas. He dosen't catch too many colds.