Silverfuel wrote:

THEONE723 wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

THEONE723 wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

Nalod wrote:

CashMoney wrote:To answer the question, I prefer the team as it is today as compared to the team we had. There is no way to really know what the team would look like today had he trade not gone down but comparing apples to apples we have more talent now and have a better chance to win a championship.

I don't disagree with you but one aspect that is almost fun, or tragically sad is we "Have a better chance to win a championship" but yet was are behind last years pace, and was are in a struggle to gain the 8th and final spot in the east.

ON paper we have the talent.

All that transpired this season is part of it. There are reasons and blame is assigned.

There are always "reasons" isn't there?

With the knicks, the more the roster/coaching changes the more things stay the same.

Champion caliber teams take time to put together.

In NY patience is not a virtue, its an anoyance!

Which team do you prefer, last years or this years? Just tell me that much. Because this thread is revisiting the trade so we have the benefit of hindsight.

In no way can you say the roster remains in a "Static" state.

Thus, I cannot begin to compare.

There is way too many variables.

if this does not answer your questions, I am sorry.

+1

Yeah, that's well put. It's desperate to evaluate one trade by comparing the entirety of the roster changes a year later to the roster before the trade. Other than a few Melo trade supporters here, I've never seen anyone do that to evaluate any trade.

I dont think you know what desperate means.

Everyone that said we gave up too much have no argument now because we have have enough players. We made up for PG, we made up for center that was traded away and both were an upgrade. We have last years team and we have this years team. It's obivous you don't have a point. Why else would you say we cannot compare the two rosters. What else are you going to compare?

well after this year we are gonna have issues again unless we can retain novak,baron,smith they ahve been great for us

So then we will have to discuss that when it happens.

sure but what wrong with throwing it out there now

Ok, throw it out there. No problem. But what exactly are we going to discuss? Oh, we are going to lose them, the Melo trade sucks? Really?

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:I am as big a fan of Gallo as their is here.

The team this year as it is now, is MUCH better than the team before the trades. No question. DO I like Melo? Not a big fan of him so far but this past 9 games has been a nice change from the previous 80 or so.

THEONE723 wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

THEONE723 wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

THEONE723 wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

Nalod wrote:

CashMoney wrote:To answer the question, I prefer the team as it is today as compared to the team we had. There is no way to really know what the team would look like today had he trade not gone down but comparing apples to apples we have more talent now and have a better chance to win a championship.

I don't disagree with you but one aspect that is almost fun, or tragically sad is we "Have a better chance to win a championship" but yet was are behind last years pace, and was are in a struggle to gain the 8th and final spot in the east.

ON paper we have the talent.

All that transpired this season is part of it. There are reasons and blame is assigned.

There are always "reasons" isn't there?

With the knicks, the more the roster/coaching changes the more things stay the same.

Champion caliber teams take time to put together.

In NY patience is not a virtue, its an anoyance!

Which team do you prefer, last years or this years? Just tell me that much. Because this thread is revisiting the trade so we have the benefit of hindsight.

In no way can you say the roster remains in a "Static" state.

Thus, I cannot begin to compare.

There is way too many variables.

if this does not answer your questions, I am sorry.

+1

Yeah, that's well put. It's desperate to evaluate one trade by comparing the entirety of the roster changes a year later to the roster before the trade. Other than a few Melo trade supporters here, I've never seen anyone do that to evaluate any trade.

I dont think you know what desperate means.

Everyone that said we gave up too much have no argument now because we have have enough players. We made up for PG, we made up for center that was traded away and both were an upgrade. We have last years team and we have this years team. It's obivous you don't have a point. Why else would you say we cannot compare the two rosters. What else are you going to compare?

well after this year we are gonna have issues again unless we can retain novak,baron,smith they ahve been great for us

So then we will have to discuss that when it happens.

sure but what wrong with throwing it out there now

Ok, throw it out there. No problem. But what exactly are we going to discuss? Oh, we are going to lose them, the Melo trade sucks? Really?

Well I dont remember saying the trade sucks i mean you gotta a little ahead of yourself there i was just talking about those guys because they have been important. No need to defend melo i wasn't bashing him jesus

gunsnewing wrote:I would take Lin, Chandler & Melo over Howard or Dwill. The only way I would be happy not having acquired Melo is if we got BOTH Howard & Dwill which is a longshot. Separately they can't win you a championship. See Howard's playoff woes compared to Melo, Amare & Tyson and his FT woes. And last I saw Dwill couldn't carry the Jazz too far either

+1.

Melo, Chandler, and Lin are quite the core to build around. Takes me back to the Sprewell, Houston, Camby days with all that talent, youth, and upside. Building around this group properly, we could have a good 5-6 year window starting next season.

eViL wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

eViL wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:a) What do you mean that the roster doesn't remain static? Are you saying we would have signed a PG and a center while we already had Felton and Mozgov? Why would we sign other players if we don't need to fill those positions.
b) The whole point was to compare the two teams. Since you said you cannot begin to compare we have nothing to discuss.

there's a conceivable scenario where the Knicks would still get Chandler and Lin. you think the Knicks would have stuck with Mosgov if they knew they could sign Tyson? you think it's impossible the Knicks might add Lin as a backup if he gets cut? he was on their radar regardless alread. they worked him out before his draft.

ultimately, we can't undo the past and we will never see how the old team would have played out. right now. i kinda don't care because the team has been winning. but we all know this team is about playoff performance. if they don't get past the first round and compete hard in the second -- i think it's fair to say they underachieved.

It is my position that Chandler came here to run with Melo and Amare. I don think he would come here to roll with Gallo and Amare.

We had Felton and Douglass playing PG. We might have signed Lin but are you telling me we would want Lin to start over Felton? Not us, not the coach, not the media. No one would ask MDA to start Lin over Felton. MDA didn't want to play him even though we didn'thave a PG. The fact is, we have a team that is better than the team prior to the trade. We made those moves because of the trade.

If we are without Amare, I don't think we are going to far. Minus the trade, it would mean we would be without Gallo and Amare both for this part of the season. That means we are missing the playoffs for sure.

there's no real way to prove what would have happened. maybe Amare never hurts his back in the first place. maybe Gallo doesn't get hurt this year if he's playing here.

all i said was that our performance after the trade is all that we can go on. and if we don't get to the second round and compete hard, people will have the right to say this team was worse off from the trade.

it was a win-now move. i'm not expecting titles right now, but losing in the first round is not an option. and i don't give an F about playoff position. this team hasn't played well enough to have good playoff position. it's their own fault. now, they gotta make it up. can then? i hope so! it's an uphill battle but i saw the Giants benefit from an increased intensity at the end of their regular season.

don't get me wrong. i'm happy winning right now. but we have to keep winning. because that's what this team is supposed to do.

eViL wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

eViL wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:a) What do you mean that the roster doesn't remain static? Are you saying we would have signed a PG and a center while we already had Felton and Mozgov? Why would we sign other players if we don't need to fill those positions.
b) The whole point was to compare the two teams. Since you said you cannot begin to compare we have nothing to discuss.

there's a conceivable scenario where the Knicks would still get Chandler and Lin. you think the Knicks would have stuck with Mosgov if they knew they could sign Tyson? you think it's impossible the Knicks might add Lin as a backup if he gets cut? he was on their radar regardless alread. they worked him out before his draft.

ultimately, we can't undo the past and we will never see how the old team would have played out. right now. i kinda don't care because the team has been winning. but we all know this team is about playoff performance. if they don't get past the first round and compete hard in the second -- i think it's fair to say they underachieved.

It is my position that Chandler came here to run with Melo and Amare. I don think he would come here to roll with Gallo and Amare.

We had Felton and Douglass playing PG. We might have signed Lin but are you telling me we would want Lin to start over Felton? Not us, not the coach, not the media. No one would ask MDA to start Lin over Felton. MDA didn't want to play him even though we didn'thave a PG. The fact is, we have a team that is better than the team prior to the trade. We made those moves because of the trade.

If we are without Amare, I don't think we are going to far. Minus the trade, it would mean we would be without Gallo and Amare both for this part of the season. That means we are missing the playoffs for sure.

there's no real way to prove what would have happened. maybe Amare never hurts his back in the first place. maybe Gallo doesn't get hurt this year if he's playing here.

all i said was that our performance after the trade is all that we can go on. and if we don't get to the second round and compete hard, people will have the right to say this team was worse off from the trade.
it was a win-now move. i'm not expecting titles right now, but losing in the first round is not an option. and i don't give an F about playoff position. this team hasn't played well enough to have good playoff position. it's their own fault. now, they gotta make it up. can they? i hope so! it's an uphill battle but i saw the Giants benefit from an increased intensity at the end of their regular season.

don't get me wrong. i'm happy winning right now. but we have to keep winning. because that's what this team is supposed to do.

You are settings yourself up to be disappointed. This team is not going anywhere in the playoffs if Amare is injured. You have to set realistic expectations.

Silverfuel wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

Nalod wrote:

CashMoney wrote:To answer the question, I prefer the team as it is today as compared to the team we had. There is no way to really know what the team would look like today had he trade not gone down but comparing apples to apples we have more talent now and have a better chance to win a championship.

I don't disagree with you but one aspect that is almost fun, or tragically sad is we "Have a better chance to win a championship" but yet was are behind last years pace, and was are in a struggle to gain the 8th and final spot in the east.

ON paper we have the talent.

All that transpired this season is part of it. There are reasons and blame is assigned.

There are always "reasons" isn't there?

With the knicks, the more the roster/coaching changes the more things stay the same.

Champion caliber teams take time to put together.

In NY patience is not a virtue, its an anoyance!

Which team do you prefer, last years or this years? Just tell me that much. Because this thread is revisiting the trade so we have the benefit of hindsight.

In no way can you say the roster remains in a "Static" state.
Thus, I cannot begin to compare.

There is way too many variables.

if this does not answer your questions, I am sorry.

a) What do you mean that the roster doesn't remain static? Are you saying we would have signed a PG and a center while we already had Felton and Mozgov? Why would we sign other players if we don't need to fill those positions.
b) The whole point was to compare the two teams. Since you said you cannot begin to compare we have nothing to discuss.

You can compare the players - really hard to compare teams because they in fact do not remain static.

Who is to say that we would not have traded the very same pieces for DWil or DHow or Tyson.

There really is no way to know how it would have turned out. I personally believe there would have been a myriad of other moves if the Melo trade did not go down.

That would be venturing into the unknown. We can speculate but what will that do? You have last years team and this years team.

If you want to compare players, go ahead. Bring up Gallo and Melo. Bring up Lin and felton. Bring up Mozgov and Tyson. I will discuss that.

Bonn1997 wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

Nalod wrote:

CashMoney wrote:To answer the question, I prefer the team as it is today as compared to the team we had. There is no way to really know what the team would look like today had he trade not gone down but comparing apples to apples we have more talent now and have a better chance to win a championship.

I don't disagree with you but one aspect that is almost fun, or tragically sad is we "Have a better chance to win a championship" but yet was are behind last years pace, and was are in a struggle to gain the 8th and final spot in the east.

ON paper we have the talent.

All that transpired this season is part of it. There are reasons and blame is assigned.

There are always "reasons" isn't there?

With the knicks, the more the roster/coaching changes the more things stay the same.

Champion caliber teams take time to put together.

In NY patience is not a virtue, its an anoyance!

Which team do you prefer, last years or this years? Just tell me that much. Because this thread is revisiting the trade so we have the benefit of hindsight.

In no way can you say the roster remains in a "Static" state.
Thus, I cannot begin to compare.

There is way too many variables.

if this does not answer your questions, I am sorry.

a) What do you mean that the roster doesn't remain static? Are you saying we would have signed a PG and a center while we already had Felton and Mozgov? Why would we sign other players if we don't need to fill those positions.
b) The whole point was to compare the two teams. Since you said you cannot begin to compare we have nothing to discuss.

You can compare the players - really hard to compare teams because they in fact do not remain static.

Who is to say that we would not have traded the very same pieces for DWil or DHow or Tyson.

There really is no way to know how it would have turned out. I personally believe there would have been a myriad of other moves if the Melo trade did not go down.

That would be venturing into the unknown. We can speculate but what will that do? You have last years team and this years team.

If you want to compare players, go ahead. Bring up Gallo and Melo. Bring up Lin and felton. Bring up Mozgov and Tyson. I will discuss that.

But you're the one venturing into the unknown. The validity of your claims that Lin and Chandler (esp. Chandler) would not be here without the Melo trade is unknown. The only knowns are the players traded, the picks traded, and future dollars owed to each player.

eViL wrote:

Knixkik wrote:This argument in general in a no-brainer. When comparing team pre melo and during melo, knowing what we know, it isn't even close.

Chandler, Stoudemire, Melo, Fields, Lin, Shumpert, Novak, Smith, Davis, Jeffries >>> Mozgov, Stoudemire, Gallo, Fields, Felton, Chandler, Turiaf, Randolph, Walker.

but you can't compare what you know now to what you know about then. to be fair, you'd actually have to compare what you know now to what you know about an alternate reality where the trade didn't take place. there's no telling what would have happened. it's all speculation. you're vision of what could have happened is as good as mine.

but if you do have to know, this is what i think would have happened:

Knicks would have went past the trade deadline with no moves and closed the regular season strong after having the trade drama behind them. they would have beaten Orlando in the first round, and Chicago in the second round before being overwhelmed by Miami in a hard fought 4-2 ECF.

DONNIE WALSH WOULD NOT HAVE QUIT. MDA WOULD HAVE BEEN EXTENDED.

the Knicks would have still drafted Iman Shumpert a few spots later than 17 and Harrellson in the second round. the Knicks would amnesty Turiaf and finally the plan Donnie Walsh had would be set in place:

the Knicks would sign Melo outright as a free agent. they trade Gallo and Felton (both having beasted in the playoffs) and picks and a trade exemption to New Orleans for Chris Paul. the Knicks would then sign and trade Wilson Chandler, Fields and Anthony Randolph to Dallas for Tyson Chandler. Wilson gets a one-year deal from Dallas at a nice pay raise, Dallas gets a couple of young prospects that Mark Cuban would love and the Knicks get Tyson on the same deal he has right now.

the Knicks then finish the off-season by adding Jeffries, Novak and Lin at their minimum payscale, and picked up JR Smith with the $2.5M exception:

PG: CP3 / Lin / Douglas
SG: Shumpert / Smith
SF: Melo / Novak
PF: Amare / Jeffries / Harrellson
C: Chandler / Mosgov / Jordan

with a solid front office regime that backs it's coach and all the right pieces in place, the Knicks would have steamrolled the league to 4 straight titles!

PROVE ME WRONG!!!

Silverfuel wrote:

eViL wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:I see what you tried to do there. But sorry, its not going to work. We know the following, without the Melo trade you had one team and with the Melo team you have the present team.

you can't freeze time and say that if there was no trade, that's all the team would have been. that makes no sense.

Who is freezing time? You can only compare facts not compare facts and speculation because speculation will always look better. I will specualte we could have waited till this offseason and signed Dwill and Dwight and paired them up with Kevin Durant!

my point is you can't compare. your facts have no opposite counterpart to compare to. the team today would be completely different if there were no trade. the only true way to compare would be to compare the team today v. the alternate reality team where the trade didn't occur but subsequent moves that we can't accurately predict did occur.

that's why i'm focusing on performance. if the team performs well and wins in the next few seasons, it's a good trade. until then, juries out.

eViL wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:

eViL wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:I see what you tried to do there. But sorry, its not going to work. We know the following, without the Melo trade you had one team and with the Melo team you have the present team.

you can't freeze time and say that if there was no trade, that's all the team would have been. that makes no sense.

Who is freezing time? You can only compare facts not compare facts and speculation because speculation will always look better. I will specualte we could have waited till this offseason and signed Dwill and Dwight and paired them up with Kevin Durant!

my point is you can't compare. your facts have no opposite counterpart to compare to. the team today would be completely different if there were no trade. the only true way to compare would be to compare the team today v. the alternate reality team where the trade didn't occur but subsequent moves that we can't accurately predict did occur.

that's why i'm focusing on performance. if the team performs well and wins in the next few seasons, it's a good trade. until then, juries out.