| Author | Thread |
| AUTOADVERT |
|
Knickoftime
Posts: 24159 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 1/13/2011 Member: #3370 |
2/22/2011 11:19 PM
Childs2Dudley wrote:He seems to be a douchebag. You don't know the half of it... |
|
CrushAlot
Posts: 59764 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 7/25/2003 Member: #452 USA |
2/22/2011 11:41 PM
Knickoftime wrote:foosballnick wrote:Says this board. Only point of reference that matters in this debate. Maybe just a pick or maybe just Hill or maybe just a pick and the right to swap picks. Hill is starting to play very well for Houston. He essentially lost his rookie year and when he was traded to Houston Battier noted this fact last year. Hill was mishandled in NY. If he got the love Moz got here he might still be in NY or the Knicks might still have a first round pick. This topic has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum. I'm tired,I'm tired, I'm so tired right now......Kristaps Porzingis 1/3/18
|
|
Knickoftime
Posts: 24159 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 1/13/2011 Member: #3370 |
2/23/2011 12:34 AM
Markji wrote:A fair trade - giving the Rockets Jeffries; $3 mil; plus the #8 seed in the draft in Jordan Hill should have been enough if they knew how to negotiate. We took TMac and his high salary off their hands. Adding all of the extra picks is an Isiah/Dolan move. The picks are assets which were treated very poorly. If we had the 2012 1st round pick, we wouldn't have needed to give our 2014 1st round pick now. I'll get to why this is relevant in a sec. But that said, Houston had to pay Jeffries this year, to the tune of $6.8m. Plus his salary alone puts him approximately $3.5m over the luxury tax threshold, which is another #3.5m added to the bill. That's a pretty high "take a flyer on Jordan Hill tax" if you ask me. Also recall Houston worked NY into a trade already developed with Sacramento and presumably diverted Sergio Rodriquez their way. Given the swap is looking irrelevant, and anticipating the position of the 2012 pick, it just seems like a little overreaction to question the trade. I also think it's fairly comical for fans of one team to assume with such certainty what the front office of another team would ultimately, as if you can determine their opinions and predict their actions based on YOUR opinion of fair value. More times is wasted on fan forums on this than anything else, but a wide margin. That all said. THIS is what intrigues me. A while back, Donnie Walsh gave an interview and said of the trade that he generally doesn't like making financial trades, doesn't like trading drat picks, and while the trade worked out and would do it again, said he'd always have second thoughts about it. This has been interpreted since that Walsh was making it publicly known he didn't like the trade and regretted it, with the implication it was a Dolan trade. Fast forward to today, and Donnie Walsh fully endorses the 'Melo trade, and directly rejects the idea Dolan did it himself and he wasn't involved and approved. But THIS too interpreted as Donnie Walsh just being a good soldier. He reacts in two entirely different manners, but to some fans, his different reactions equal the same exact thing. I just can't ignore the selective, fluid logic involved. |
|
martin
Posts: 76237 Alba Posts: 108 Joined: 7/24/2001 Member: #2 USA |
2/23/2011 12:45 AM
Knickoftime wrote:Markji wrote:A fair trade - giving the Rockets Jeffries; $3 mil; plus the #8 seed in the draft in Jordan Hill should have been enough if they knew how to negotiate. We took TMac and his high salary off their hands. Adding all of the extra picks is an Isiah/Dolan move. The picks are assets which were treated very poorly. If we had the 2012 1st round pick, we wouldn't have needed to give our 2014 1st round pick now. I never got a whiff of that implication. I both thought and got the sense from media that he meant that he didn't like the trade cause he 1) had to give up future assets and 2) had to negotiate with his back against a wall with the upcoming 2010 Summer of Fun. Never that it was a Dolan trade. Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
|
|
Knickoftime
Posts: 24159 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 1/13/2011 Member: #3370 |
2/23/2011 12:56 AM
martin wrote:I never got a whiff of that implication. I both thought and got the sense from media that he meant that he didn't like the trade cause he 1) had to give up future assets and 2) had to negotiate with his back against a wall with the upcoming 2010 Summer of Fun. Never that it was a Dolan trade. Fair enough. This was raised in response to this. "There is no way to know what Donnie felt about the trade. However we do have experience to draw upon. Facing similar pressure to salary dump in order to make room for a potential LBJ signing - Donnie gave up too much in the Hill trade. Therefore a rational person could surmise that given a pressure situation of potentially losing Melo to the Nets (whether it was a bluff or not) Donnie in fact would be agreeable to do the Melo trade based upon previous experience with the Knicks." I could be wrong, but the implication I drew from this was Dolan was the "pressure" behind both trades. |