gunsnewing wrote:I gave up on trying to convince people of a true rebuild with a legitimate plan laid out a long time ago citing a the recent champions and who they drafted and the kind of players they added thru free agency. The only thing that matters is what the Knicks do and clearly they have no intention of putting together a solid plan to rebuild. Knicks fans are starving for success. They will be patient if you lay out a good plan

its akin to people saying don't wear your seat belts because they heard of someone getting in an accident, and their seat belt crushing their windpipe... well those things are so rare.. yet the many lives that have been saved by seatbelts can fill up a telephone book...

You can't take the exception and use that to defend an argument. there is so much evidence and history that tells us, going about your business in a certain way leads to better results.. yet people are so stuck on trying to defend the carmelo trade, the bargnani trade and all the knicks moves, they won't budge off the "not wearing your seatbelt" theory...

smh

Knixkik wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Hey lets see what happens when a team that has drafted 90% of its players OKC takes on the Knicks who have been pieced meal together--that will give us a better sense of what is what.

What does OKC look like today if they landed the #1 pick instead of #2 in 2007? They would have drafted Oden, no one was crazy enough to pass him up. Draft is as much luck as anything. They won the lottery when they missed out on the #1 pick.

But they had a pick.. that is the key.. what would have happened if they traded that pick?

Knixkik wrote:

tkf wrote:

y2zipper wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:And you give up a lot of assets when you trade for the player

True, but if you get the RIGHT superstar, the assets hardly matter. Here's an example...

Two first-round picks, that must be used starting in 2013 and ending by 2017
2012 second-round pick Miami received from New Orleans
Future second-round pick Heat acquired from Oklahoma City
Cleveland can also swap first round picks with the Heat in 2012
A large trade exception($15 million or so) that the Cavs must use in trades for one calendar year.

Do you know what that list is?

That's what Cleveland got from Miami in exchange for LeBron James (raise your hand if you remember this was actually a sign-and-trade), and none of these assets matter because they were traded for the right superstar.

Obviously it's MUCH better to draft your superstar(s) (because really you need more than 1 these days). The reality is, most draft picks simply don't work out. However, draft picks aren't SO invaluable that you just throw them away for cap relief.

It's also usually pretty easy to tell whether your're good or bad and can give up draft picks, but miscalculating is dangergous.

exactly, if you trade for the right superstar, but here is the key, you either have to get him early ala harden and you don't spend as much acquiring him.. teams knew he was good, but not that good... Houston took a small gamble and it paid off, I say kudos to them...

or you get colusiongate and have a lebron fall in your lap... otherwiese these "true" superstars are never traded.. Dirk, Lebron, Kobe, wade, Duncan, those guys are not getting traded in their prime, they just aren't.. no matter how much they scream and yell... teams don't trade those guys... they either leave via FA... or they stay and win....

Carmelo forced a trade, but he is not in the class with these other guys... we traded way too much to get a Allstar player.. not a superstar. and it is killing us now...

I love how to say Houston took a small gamble, even though they traded a better package than we gave for Melo. (Guaranteed lottery pick, 1 good rookie prospect, 1 SG who averaged 20+ plus per game.) and harden was what 23 when he went to Houston and Melo 26 when he went to ny. You just overexaggerate like crazy.

ah dude, your act is so played out... you so keep wanting to trash what the knicks gave up.. it is silly.. the knicks gave up a lottery pick in gallo, a talent in chandler, 4 draft picks one of them most likely a lottery pick as well... so now I guess you want to join me and 3g in big upping kevin martin now, right? rofl.. it was a small gamble because..

they were not keeping kevin martin..

They already had young talent, losing lamb was no big deal

and oh, harden was already a good talent, I meant small gamble meaning small gamble in Harden.. they knew he was good, just not how good.. so it wasn't like they were taking a long shot on an unproven talent.. harden everyone knew was good.. just not to what extent..

again, this went right over your head because you are so hell bent on trashing what the knicks gave up to get suckmelo...

get over it dude... you are fighing a losing battle..

let me ask this to show you how ridiculosly silly your post was..

Do you think getting harden was a HUGE gamble.. considering they had no plans for martin? and all you are giving up is Jeremy lamb and another pick? do you consider that a HUGE gamble for harden? You don't drain your assets, you don't cripple your cap, and you leave your team with enough talent to compete as in the evidence of their season last year..... LOL you are not built for this bro..

Bonn1997 wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Hey lets see what happens when a team that has drafted 90% of its players OKC takes on the Knicks who have been pieced meal together--that will give us a better sense of what is what.

What does OKC look like today if they landed the #1 pick instead of #2 in 2007? They would have drafted Oden, no one was crazy enough to pass him up. Draft is as much luck as anything. They won the lottery when they missed out on the #1 pick.

Then they'd probably have gotten rid of Oden by now, had room to keep Harden, and have a very good team still.

Who says they would have drafted Westbrook or Harden if they got Oden instead of Durant?

tkf wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

tkf wrote:

y2zipper wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:And you give up a lot of assets when you trade for the player

True, but if you get the RIGHT superstar, the assets hardly matter. Here's an example...

Two first-round picks, that must be used starting in 2013 and ending by 2017
2012 second-round pick Miami received from New Orleans
Future second-round pick Heat acquired from Oklahoma City
Cleveland can also swap first round picks with the Heat in 2012
A large trade exception($15 million or so) that the Cavs must use in trades for one calendar year.

Do you know what that list is?

That's what Cleveland got from Miami in exchange for LeBron James (raise your hand if you remember this was actually a sign-and-trade), and none of these assets matter because they were traded for the right superstar.

Obviously it's MUCH better to draft your superstar(s) (because really you need more than 1 these days). The reality is, most draft picks simply don't work out. However, draft picks aren't SO invaluable that you just throw them away for cap relief.

It's also usually pretty easy to tell whether your're good or bad and can give up draft picks, but miscalculating is dangergous.

exactly, if you trade for the right superstar, but here is the key, you either have to get him early ala harden and you don't spend as much acquiring him.. teams knew he was good, but not that good... Houston took a small gamble and it paid off, I say kudos to them...

or you get colusiongate and have a lebron fall in your lap... otherwiese these "true" superstars are never traded.. Dirk, Lebron, Kobe, wade, Duncan, those guys are not getting traded in their prime, they just aren't.. no matter how much they scream and yell... teams don't trade those guys... they either leave via FA... or they stay and win....

Carmelo forced a trade, but he is not in the class with these other guys... we traded way too much to get a Allstar player.. not a superstar. and it is killing us now...

I love how to say Houston took a small gamble, even though they traded a better package than we gave for Melo. (Guaranteed lottery pick, 1 good rookie prospect, 1 SG who averaged 20+ plus per game.) and harden was what 23 when he went to Houston and Melo 26 when he went to ny. You just overexaggerate like crazy.

ah dude, your act is so played out... you so keep wanting to trash what the knicks gave up.. it is silly.. the knicks gave up a lottery pick in gallo, a talent in chandler, 4 draft picks one of them most likely a lottery pick as well... so now I guess you want to join me and 3g in big upping kevin martin now, right? rofl.. it was a small gamble because..

they were not keeping kevin martin..

They already had young talent, losing lamb was no big deal

and oh, harden was already a good talent, I meant small gamble meaning small gamble in Harden.. they knew he was good, just not how good.. so it wasn't like they were taking a long shot on an unproven talent.. harden everyone knew was good.. just not to what extent..

again, this went right over your head because you are so hell bent on trashing what the knicks gave up to get suckmelo...

get over it dude... you are fighing a losing battle..

let me ask this to show you how ridiculosly silly your post was..

Do you think getting harden was a HUGE gamble.. considering they had no plans for martin? and all you are giving up is Jeremy lamb and another pick? do you consider that a HUGE gamble for harden? You don't drain your assets, you don't cripple your cap, and you leave your team with enough talent to compete as in the evidence of their season last year..... LOL you are not built for this bro..

YOU ARE NOT BUILT FOR THIS should be your signature since you love it so much. You are talking about me trashing what the Knicks gave up yet you are doing the complete opposite loving them and downplaying Houston's package. Houston gave up the best proven player, the best draft pick (it was a given that it was going to be lottery), and the best prospect on a brand new rookie contract. If you looked at is as a pretend GM instead of a pretend fan you would view a lot of things different. Every GM in the league takes that package over Gallo (ending rookie contract), Chandler (ending rookie contract), 2014 pick, 2016 swap, and Moz. Every one. Instead you remain obsessed with the Knicks draining assets, despite still having the 2011 pick (Shumpert), Fields, and Billups expiring contract. So how about YOU aren't built for this bro.

Knixkik wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Hey lets see what happens when a team that has drafted 90% of its players OKC takes on the Knicks who have been pieced meal together--that will give us a better sense of what is what.

What does OKC look like today if they landed the #1 pick instead of #2 in 2007? They would have drafted Oden, no one was crazy enough to pass him up. Draft is as much luck as anything. They won the lottery when they missed out on the #1 pick.

Then they'd probably have gotten rid of Oden by now, had room to keep Harden, and have a very good team still.

Who says they would have drafted Westbrook or Harden if they got Oden instead of Durant?

Why not just assume that not only does OKC draft Oden but several other twists happen and Dolan buys the Thunder organization? Usually for arguments sake, you change one factor but assume all else being equal. If you can't make that assumption, you can't have a productive discussion.

BRIGGS wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Hey lets see what happens when a team that has drafted 90% of its players OKC takes on the Knicks who have been pieced meal together--that will give us a better sense of what is what.

What does OKC look like today if they landed the #1 pick instead of #2 in 2007? They would have drafted Oden, no one was crazy enough to pass him up. Draft is as much luck as anything. They won the lottery when they missed out on the #1 pick.

What? Well the team who drafted Oqen also followed the build by draft and happens to be the best team in basketball. Are you saying the Knicks are better than Portland? Theyd kill us 4-0 in a series.

Yes they would, but what about last year? Would they kill us? And if Portland is the best team in basketball right now, then i guess that made us the best team in basketball this time last year as well.

Bonn1997 wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Hey lets see what happens when a team that has drafted 90% of its players OKC takes on the Knicks who have been pieced meal together--that will give us a better sense of what is what.

What does OKC look like today if they landed the #1 pick instead of #2 in 2007? They would have drafted Oden, no one was crazy enough to pass him up. Draft is as much luck as anything. They won the lottery when they missed out on the #1 pick.

What? Well the team who drafted Oqen also followed the build by draft and happens to be the best team in basketball. Are you saying the Knicks are better than Portland? Theyd kill us 4-0 in a series.

Yes they would, but what about last year? Would they kill us? And if Portland is the best team in basketball right now, then i guess that made us the best team in basketball this time last year as well.

Yeah but our peak was last year. This is just the beginning for their young team.

They were very close to trading Aldridge and blowing it up and starting over around Lillard. Things change in a hurry.

That being said, i agree with you they did it right. But for every Portland, OKC, and Indiana there are way more Sacramentos, Charlottes, Torontos out there that can't get it right and each year draft players who can't get them out of the basement. I do believe in building assets so you can trade them for the right player when they come around. I thought Melo was the right player. Last year he was, this year he was not, so the jury is still out about if we made the right move or not, no one can know for sure. I thought we should have pushed for Bledsoe this summer, who is now on the verge of stardom. We missed an opportunity there to grab a future star to pair with Melo. There are missed oppportunities to build a good team all over the place, not just in the draft.

y2zipper wrote:

tkf wrote:

y2zipper wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:And you give up a lot of assets when you trade for the player

True, but if you get the RIGHT superstar, the assets hardly matter. Here's an example...

Two first-round picks, that must be used starting in 2013 and ending by 2017
2012 second-round pick Miami received from New Orleans
Future second-round pick Heat acquired from Oklahoma City
Cleveland can also swap first round picks with the Heat in 2012
A large trade exception($15 million or so) that the Cavs must use in trades for one calendar year.

Do you know what that list is?

That's what Cleveland got from Miami in exchange for LeBron James (raise your hand if you remember this was actually a sign-and-trade), and none of these assets matter because they were traded for the right superstar.

Obviously it's MUCH better to draft your superstar(s) (because really you need more than 1 these days). The reality is, most draft picks simply don't work out. However, draft picks aren't SO invaluable that you just throw them away for cap relief.

It's also usually pretty easy to tell whether your're good or bad and can give up draft picks, but miscalculating is dangergous.

exactly, if you trade for the right superstar, but here is the key, you either have to get him early ala harden and you don't spend as much acquiring him.. teams knew he was good, but not that good... Houston took a small gamble and it paid off, I say kudos to them...

or you get colusiongate and have a lebron fall in your lap... otherwiese these "true" superstars are never traded.. Dirk, Lebron, Kobe, wade, Duncan, those guys are not getting traded in their prime, they just aren't.. no matter how much they scream and yell... teams don't trade those guys... they either leave via FA... or they stay and win....

Carmelo forced a trade, but he is not in the class with these other guys... we traded way too much to get a Allstar player.. not a superstar. and it is killing us now...

James Harden isn't in the class of those players either.

The Melo trade isn't the issue. The Amare contract is. Donnie Walsh made a horrendous signing in 2010 when that money could have been better spent. That's the issue with the team.

The appropriate price was paid for harden tho, and considering that he is young with his best years ahead of him, that makes sense..

Amare contract is not the issue as he was here first.. the problem is everything we have done since the amare trade including the carmelo trade, the amnesty of billups and giving chandler a huge deal, a guy who has had a history of injuries...