[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Idiots who liked the Mo Taylor trade manup!
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 5 of 19 « First‹ Previous 3  4  5  6  7 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
VDesai
Posts: 42803
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
3/20/2005  1:53 PM
I think you can make an argument that Vin and Moochie's expiring contracts are more valuable than Taylor's, not only because they are expring a year sooner, but because smaller contracts are a lot easier to trade. You can stack them together for a solid mid-level player (like Crawford) or add them to one of the bigger contracts to help deals fit under the cap. Smaller deals are also MUCH easier to buy out if the team wishes to do so to add a roster spot. Adding Taylor wasn't adding a valuable asset, it was adding yet another underachiever eating up roster space for an extra year, who CANNOT help this team. His contract/level of production is just as bad as Shandon Anderson, and possibly worse since we already have a million power forwards....
AUTOADVERT
tomverve
Posts: 21407
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/4/2005
Member: #878
3/20/2005  1:59 PM
Posted by gunsnewing:

My problem is the fact that he's playing and having an extremely negative effect on the games!

Sorry, this is just wrong. Mo's +/- as of 3/19 for NY is +9.9, second on the team only to Marbury. That's not extremely negative, it's extremely positive. There is no arguing with the numbers.

Now, this stat isn't the end all... Taylor still hasn't played a lot of games for us, and with time, his +/- may come down to Earth (it has already slipped a bit from where it was). But if we want to get our facts straight, the plain fact is that overall, Taylor has had a very good impact on the court thus far. Maybe there is reason to believe that he won't be much of a contributor in the long run, but to claim that he hasn't been a positive contributor thus far is just incorrect.
help treat disease with your spare computing power : http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
3/20/2005  2:01 PM
fine but I'll wait and see what he does with the contracts of TT/Penny/H20/Taylor before I fire him.
simrud
Posts: 23392
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/13/2003
Member: #474
USA
3/20/2005  2:56 PM
The +/- stat for bench players is meaningless, any stat expert will tell you that, go read Hollinger and you'll find a direct quoat somwehere in there, or whoever like him.

Mo Taylor is a 5th worst PF on the team, does not play defense or rebound, and is out of shape to top it all of. He has very long, lucrutive deal, and we gave up a 2nd round pick to get him.

The end result is that we got a bum and gave up a pick and expiring deals for him, that is Layden at his best.
A glimmer of hope maybe?!?
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
3/20/2005  2:58 PM
Posted by tomverve:
Posted by gunsnewing:

My problem is the fact that he's playing and having an extremely negative effect on the games!

Sorry, this is just wrong. Mo's +/- as of 3/19 for NY is +9.9, second on the team only to Marbury. That's not extremely negative, it's extremely positive. There is no arguing with the numbers.

Now, this stat isn't the end all... Taylor still hasn't played a lot of games for us, and with time, his +/- may come down to Earth (it has already slipped a bit from where it was). But if we want to get our facts straight, the plain fact is that overall, Taylor has had a very good impact on the court thus far. Maybe there is reason to believe that he won't be much of a contributor in the long run, but to claim that he hasn't been a positive contributor thus far is just incorrect.

then Mo Taylor is evidence that you should stop looking into +/- so much
TheloniusMonk
Posts: 21470
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2004
Member: #705
USA
3/20/2005  3:09 PM
Posted by simrud:

Taking on bad deals that have to stay on your roster is bad no matter when they end, even if they just expire, what is the reasoning for picking up garbage players who don't play any defense and pay them a lot of money meanwhile giving up draft picks for them?

My main problem with the Mo Taylor trade is that we gave up a draft pick to get him. If there was no draft pick invovled, then I would not care that much.

But the fact that we gave up a roster spot and a potential young chip high upside low risk player from the high 2nd round, really really sucks.

You are determined to make one trade by Isiah the "tell all" of who he is huh? lol More power to you. We've got years of Layden under our belt to compare things to. One for Isiah. Anybody with an ounce of intelligence would know that there is no logic in this. But hey, knock yourself out lil dude.
'You can catch me in Hollis at the hero shop!' -Tony Yayo
tomverve
Posts: 21407
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/4/2005
Member: #878
3/20/2005  3:41 PM
Posted by gunsnewing:

then Mo Taylor is evidence that you should stop looking into +/- so much

That's just an ignorant attitude to hold. Apparently, for you, all stats that don't jive with your opinions are misleading numbers that are better left for roto leagues. Here's what this exchange looks like:

tomverve: Kurt Thomas is a terrible rebounder.
gunsewing: But he averages 10.3 rebounds per game!
tomverve: Then maybe you should stop looking at rebounding stats so much.

Look, your claim was that Mo T has had a bad impact on the court. But the numbers plainly show that the team has been 9.9 points per 48 minutes better with Mo T on the floor so far. And what is a better measure of a player's impact on the court than how much his team outscores the opposition when he plays? If you still want to stick to your claim, you'll have to believe that not only has Mo T been bad, but for some exceedinly mysterious, unexplained reason, the rest of the team has just happened to pick up the slack in unheard of proportions, just in those situations where Taylor happens to be on the court.

That's about as plausible as believing that a flipped coin has landed on heads 80 times out of 100 just out of coincedence, instead of concluding that the coin is biased. Hey, it's possible that that coin is fair, and it's also possible that NY has done much better with Mo T on the court just by coincidence. But if you believe either of those things, I've got a bridge you might be interested in purchasing.
help treat disease with your spare computing power : http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/
joec32033
Posts: 30613
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
3/20/2005  3:45 PM
Posted by fishmike:

what does Houston have to do with anything? Who even mentioned him?

So your logic is if the Rockets had one bad contract already on their roster then it would make sense to add more or keep more bad contracts? How does this make sense?

As for sweating it I'm sweating it because its a LAyden type move and its the same win now take on bad players philosophy that got us where we are.

Exactly how many Layden type moves are there? Not every trad rthat isn't an overwhelming homerun is a Layden trade....A Layden trade was trading Nene and Camby for an injured McDyess..so far every trade has been a Layden tradewe traded hardly anything...why is that so hard to understand? We traded two over the hill players for one player just entering his prime. We traded a 6-10 over the hill PF/C and a PG that noone wanted on the team anyway for a young 6-9 post presence at the very least! With the expiring contracts of Penny, TT, Moochie, and Baker..that is a total of $37 million in expiring contract (Mooch and Vin add up to $8 mil)...Who the hell are we gonna trade for that makes $37 mil in a season? Does this 8 million actually make a difference to a team that can already get 30 mil in cap relief if we traded JUS the contracts we got now?

I don't get it...the player that makes the MOST in the NBA right now is SHaq......Is he going somewhere?
Next is Dikembe...we already got rid of him once...
Allan is number 3...we don't have to trade for him....
Webber may be available at 4, but do you really want him now? Is that the type of player you want to exchange the contracts for?
KG is number 5 and he may be the only realistic option based on the far out fantasy world we are living in now.
Kidd makes the sixth most......enough said, he isn't coming here if Marbury is here...
Our Own Penny Hardaway is #7
Are Walker and Rahim the type of players you trade these contracts for? Wait, they are BOTH FA's so they can be signed and traded here for $20 million and 17 mil in cap filler...
Next is Steph, he is already here....should we trade with ourselves for him?
How about Big Z, an injury prone center who is slow and also a FA...I am sure Cleveland will sign him for 20 mil just to send him to us for contracts....maybe they can package Z and Gooden and McInnis and get back our trash and start over...
Ray Allen makes 14.625 mil (just like the last 7 guys starting at Penny)..he is on the wrong side of 30 and wants a BIG raise.
Is Philly moving Iverson for garbage and starting over?
Maybe Mike Finley.....he is exactly what we need, a 2 gurd/SF, aging with 3 years left on his tract....
Hill, KVH, Rose and Spree and TMAC all make the same $14.5 roughly...Besides McGrady, should we get rid of the "prized possessions for these guys? I am sure their teams have an extra 20 mil in dead weight like we do.
I guess we can always hope SA wants to trade Duncan and another 5 or 6 guys to us so they can have some cap space to TOTALLY start over...
Maybe the Lakers after this season are ready to trade Kobe....? Maybe?
Eddie Jones and Brina Grant can come here to play....that would be nice...but they are already close to expiring...so we are just trading names now...
We already have TT, so he is out....
Jamison and Carter and the rest of these guys make less that 13 mil...so now we are talking about 25 mil in cap filler...
Maybe Nowitzki, Finley and Stack for TT and Penny would work...I mean Dallas is always almost there but never quite there anyway...I'm sure they'd see that as equal value in rebuilding.
The TOP 30 contracts are rounded out by Paul Pierce, Damon Stoudemire and Baron Davis. Pierce and Davis are on teams with lower pay rolls already, and Damon is a FA...feel like paying him 20 mi?

Seriously....some times too much is too much and it gets ridiculous.we are talking about trading the 11 and 12 guys on our bench for the 10th guy off our bench now.
~You can't run from who you are.~
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
3/20/2005  3:46 PM
nothing is more telling then watching the games. I specially played close attention to when Taylor came in the game for Sweetney last night snd each time the Heat went on a huge run because Taylor shot the ball every time he touched it and bricked and shaq or haslem came back and scored on him. EACH TIME!! that is how we went down by 18 in the 1st half when we had the lead and in the 2nd half when the game was within reach.
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
3/20/2005  3:47 PM
Where were you Mo T haters when he was scoring points in the 4th quarter and leading us to a few victories? Get over it, he was added to the team to be a future trade piece or he will be bought out and won't be on the team past next year. He was brought in a as INSURANCE POLICY in case we don't get anyone in the draft or aren't able to make a trade. Vin Baker and Moochie Norris suck and Mo T's contract is NOTHING TO THE KNICKS. Get over it, geez. Yeah I know I'll get flamed for this but I've had this SAME opinion since the day we got him.

[Edited by - nyk4ever on 03/20/2005 15:49:20]

Woops... thats not the quote button. lol. damn edit button!

[Edited by - nyk4ever on 01-13-2006 11:42 AM]
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
tomverve
Posts: 21407
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/4/2005
Member: #878
3/20/2005  3:53 PM
Posted by gunsnewing:

nothing is more telling then watching the games.

Watching the games is invaluable, yes. But so are statistics. In some ways, stats are even more valuable, because they allow objective analysis.

Take a look at this page: http://www.yorku.ca/eye/m-lillu.htm . Decide which line is longer just by looking at them. Then objectively measure them with a ruler. When you find that your perception is contradicted by your measurement, what are you going to do? Say that maybe we shouldn't bother measuring things with rulers?
I specially played close attention to when Taylor came in the game for Sweetney last night...

Taylor had a bad game last night, no doubt; I can tell that just by looking at the boxscore. That doesn't support the claim that he has been terrible for the Knicks so far. All it says is he had one bad game. If you objectively look at what Taylor has done since he's been here, you find that he's had a positive overall impact. If you deny this, you might as well throw out all your rulers as well.

[Edited by - tomverve on 03/20/2005 15:53:48]
help treat disease with your spare computing power : http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
3/20/2005  3:55 PM
he was also in the game when we blew big leads to Seattle and Miami in the 4th quarter at home when the playoffs was still a possibility. Taylor's value on the court is that he helps us get closer to a high draft pick.
tomverve
Posts: 21407
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/4/2005
Member: #878
3/20/2005  4:26 PM
Alright, just for you, I went through the play-by-plays for those games.

In the Seattle game, Seattle outscored NY 15 - 8 when Taylor was on the court. Knicks got outscored by 7 with Taylor, and lost by 10.

In the Miami game, NY outscored Miami 31 - 29 with Taylor on the court. They lost that game by 2.

So, Taylor didn't have a great impact against Seattle, but the team actually slightly outplayed Miami with Taylor, though it's mostly a wash. Not quite the sob story you want to believe in. Also, ask yourself this question: would the playoffs still have been a possibility by the Seattle and Miami games if NY didn't have Taylor posting fabulous +/- numbers in the previous few games and helping NY to go on a little winning surge?
help treat disease with your spare computing power : http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
3/20/2005  4:31 PM
I'm not saying Taylor is the only reason we blow games. that has more to do with no perimeter defense and do center and marbury and crawford hoisting 3's but Taylor sure doesn't help the situation. 1 decent game out of 3 atrocious games is not good!
tomverve
Posts: 21407
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/4/2005
Member: #878
3/20/2005  4:59 PM
It takes more than one good game out of every three to build a +9.9, hombre. Taylor certainly has helped NY win a bunch of games-- maybe we would have won those without him, but either way, he helped a lot. Yeah, he's had bad games, but since when is it unacceptable for a 7th or 8th man to have some bad games? Overall, he's done more good than bad-- he's helped the team-- since he's been here, even if he's had a couple of subpar games.
help treat disease with your spare computing power : http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/
fishmike
Posts: 53863
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
3/20/2005  5:44 PM
Posted by nyk4ever:

Where were you Mo T haters when he was scoring points in the 4th quarter and leading us to a few victories? Get over it, he was added to the team to be a future trade piece or he will be bought out and won't be on the team past next year. He was brought in a as INSURANCE POLICY in case we don't get anyone in the draft or aren't able to make a trade. Vin Baker and Moochie Norris suck and Mo T's contract is NOTHING TO THE KNICKS. Get over it, geez. Yeah I know I'll get flamed for this but I've had this SAME opinion since the day we got him.

[Edited by - nyk4ever on 03/20/2005 15:49:20]

Seriously....some times too much is too much and it gets ridiculous.we are talking about trading the 11 and 12 guys on our bench for the 10th guy off our bench now.

these are all good points if they had anything to do with my whole arguement all along. They dont. Looking at +/- numbers dont mean much either. He's played in 9 games for the Knicks and is averaging 11 minutes a game. I dont see how thats more telling then the -3.7 in 38 games with the Rockets.

Heres the thing with Isiah and Layden. Layden brought in overpaid guys with no upside and traded picks in deals to aquire them. Bad philosophy. Until the Mo Taylor trade Isiah had done a reasonable job of NOT doing just that. Penny and JYD had younger better players coming back so no biggie.
What I'm talking about is philosophy. Are we building something here? Or are we collecting other team's castoffs and bad contracts? Wouldnt we just be better served to let Mike Sweetney have the extra minutes? Wouldnt we be better served to use the pick on some gamble and maybe get another Ariza?
Instead we clog a roster spot with an overpaid player thats redundant on our roster. Bad philosophy.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
3/20/2005  5:55 PM
Posted by fishmike:
Posted by nyk4ever:

Where were you Mo T haters when he was scoring points in the 4th quarter and leading us to a few victories? Get over it, he was added to the team to be a future trade piece or he will be bought out and won't be on the team past next year. He was brought in a as INSURANCE POLICY in case we don't get anyone in the draft or aren't able to make a trade. Vin Baker and Moochie Norris suck and Mo T's contract is NOTHING TO THE KNICKS. Get over it, geez. Yeah I know I'll get flamed for this but I've had this SAME opinion since the day we got him.

[Edited by - nyk4ever on 03/20/2005 15:49:20]

Seriously....some times too much is too much and it gets ridiculous.we are talking about trading the 11 and 12 guys on our bench for the 10th guy off our bench now.

these are all good points if they had anything to do with my whole arguement all along. They dont. Looking at +/- numbers dont mean much either. He's played in 9 games for the Knicks and is averaging 11 minutes a game. I dont see how thats more telling then the -3.7 in 38 games with the Rockets.

Heres the thing with Isiah and Layden. Layden brought in overpaid guys with no upside and traded picks in deals to aquire them. Bad philosophy. Until the Mo Taylor trade Isiah had done a reasonable job of NOT doing just that. Penny and JYD had younger better players coming back so no biggie.
What I'm talking about is philosophy. Are we building something here? Or are we collecting other team's castoffs and bad contracts? Wouldnt we just be better served to let Mike Sweetney have the extra minutes? Wouldnt we be better served to use the pick on some gamble and maybe get another Ariza?
Instead we clog a roster spot with an overpaid player thats redundant on our roster. Bad philosophy.

wait and see what he does with the contracts of TT/Penny/H20 & Taylor before you talked about acquiring castoffs. Jamal Crawford is the biggest castoff and Isiah got him by using your brilliant strategy of trading minimal contracts. I'll take an Elton Brand, Maggette, Francis, Vince, Carter, type "castoff" over Jamal Crawford anyday!
fishmike
Posts: 53863
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
3/20/2005  6:18 PM
my brilliant stategy?? When did I say this? Crawford is reasonably priced at $5-$6mm and has good upside. He's gotten better every year he's been in the league.

Guns I have no idea what your talking about. I say Mo Taylor you say Houston. I say philosophy you make stuff up. Honestly forget it. I'm sure whatever future bad deals Isiah makes wont matter to you.

Here's your logic. The McDyess trade and Eisley signing were actually VERY GOOD moves by Layden, because those contracts assets were used to get Marbury. And when Mo Taylor is traded in 2 years for Kevin Garnett we can all thank LAyden again because if he never signed Spoon we could never have aquired Moochie, then Mo Taylor. Why do we need ISiah at all? Oh yea... so we dont trade draft picks for overpriced over the hill players.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
joec32033
Posts: 30613
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
3/20/2005  6:27 PM
Posted by fishmike:
Posted by nyk4ever:

Where were you Mo T haters when he was scoring points in the 4th quarter and leading us to a few victories? Get over it, he was added to the team to be a future trade piece or he will be bought out and won't be on the team past next year. He was brought in a as INSURANCE POLICY in case we don't get anyone in the draft or aren't able to make a trade. Vin Baker and Moochie Norris suck and Mo T's contract is NOTHING TO THE KNICKS. Get over it, geez. Yeah I know I'll get flamed for this but I've had this SAME opinion since the day we got him.

[Edited by - nyk4ever on 03/20/2005 15:49:20]

Seriously....some times too much is too much and it gets ridiculous.we are talking about trading the 11 and 12 guys on our bench for the 10th guy off our bench now.

these are all good points if they had anything to do with my whole arguement all along. They dont. Looking at +/- numbers dont mean much either. He's played in 9 games for the Knicks and is averaging 11 minutes a game. I dont see how thats more telling then the -3.7 in 38 games with the Rockets.

Heres the thing with Isiah and Layden. Layden brought in overpaid guys with no upside and traded picks in deals to aquire them. Bad philosophy. Until the Mo Taylor trade Isiah had done a reasonable job of NOT doing just that. Penny and JYD had younger better players coming back so no biggie.
What I'm talking about is philosophy. Are we building something here? Or are we collecting other team's castoffs and bad contracts? Wouldnt we just be better served to let Mike Sweetney have the extra minutes? Wouldnt we be better served to use the pick on some gamble and maybe get another Ariza?
Instead we clog a roster spot with an overpaid player thats redundant on our roster. Bad philosophy.

If your problem with Bringing in Taylor is a philosophy issue, I can agree, but as I said before...Brining in Taylor is not that much of a deviation of what he said he was gonna do...bring in younger players with talent. That is what he did. The Mo Taylor trade was the trade that opened up spots to Sign Jermaine Jackson, Jackie Butler, It cleared the center spot for KT so Sweets can get more time, "supposedly". The fact that Sweet's numbers have not markedly gone up seems like a direct effect of him not performing any different in his limited 20 minutes as when he gets 30 minutes.

When it comes to the whole area of contracts and what we gave up with that, I see it as a laterel move...not a move towards the better or a move towards the worse...It's like trading your 90 Tempo GL in for a 91 Pontiac 9000...they both suck, maybe the newer car wil help you limp along a little better...I think the problem is expectations...I have no expectations for Mo here...anything he does is icing. I had less than those expectations for Vin and the Mooch.

As for the second round pick, this goes against philosophy, but I tell you this....If Isiah didn't pick Ariza, do you think he would've been drafted at all? There is no difference to me in bringing in a rookie FA and drafting a guy in the second round.

[Edited by - joec32033 on 03/20/2005 18:32:44]
~You can't run from who you are.~
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
3/20/2005  6:32 PM
no cos when he does get 30mins he puts up big numbers
Page 5 of 19 « First‹ Previous 3  4  5  6  7 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
Idiots who liked the Mo Taylor trade manup!
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy