Posted by TrueBlue:

Best websites I've found to reference NBA Team and player Salaries



#1 My favorite for Team Salary History it's also good for Player salary but doesn't quite have in glossary linked format like the next site
http://www.eskimo.com/~pbender/index.html

Yeah, this is the Patricia Bender info. It's not the prettiest site, but her salary info is considered the gold standard.

Posted by Nalod:

"If Isiah asks for Jerry West, Dolan will get him him Jerry west."

"If Isiah asks for a chicken, he'll get a chicken!"



Isiah is a chicken Phucher!

This is how Marburies and Curries are made...

Herb does have a charisma, it's called hard work, integrity, and a connection to a time when the knicks left their blood, sweat and tears on the court instead of half-time's KFC crumbs.

This is PURE speculation - Herb Williams has no record of being a good coach or player. However- he is singularly distinuguished by his ability to hang on with that organization better than the most tenacious parasite. I am not going to spend too much time on this except to use it as contrast- in the sense that if anyone believes that 'regaling' Dolan with stories of NBA lore and charisma are the primary reason's for Isiah being there- then this premise is deeply flawed and needs re-examination with the lens of objectivity.

Now as for Magic Johnson- I would agree that there are published stories that he was the 'first' choice for Dolan. However- that does not mean - (and this is what I said) that the richest NBA franchise in the NBA wouldn't have looked at or for other candidates. I would agree that there is no supportive evidence -but we are talking about somethingthat occured over 4 years ago.

As has been openly acknowledged by many sources (including USA today-http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/oconnor/2003-12-23-thomas_x.htm) -we are talking about what has been acknowledged as a bad roster and a bad salary cap situation.

Your contention is that cutting payroll is the obvious road to team rebuilding. I am not disputing that - however it has been pointed out that the Knicks with their various trades did do better in terms of talent -with the expense of taking on salary. Although this approach is counter intuitive - it does have some basis in fact.

http://www.stopmikelupica.com/2007/12/nba_salary_cap_analysis_part_1.php

As for another GM ascertaining the status of Houston's or McDyess's health - the NBA is a small community and their health problems were known for quite sometime by most NBA personnel - so I am not sure why -anyone would have to take an additional week to ascertain that the two best players were injured and unable to play ?! McDyess has been hurt since 01/02 and there was no way Houston was going to get moved!!

Again- one can use hindsight - and say -"Well I KNEW that MCDyess was going to become healthy and be a great player" -but it wouldn't be truthful. McDyess- is still a bench/role player- on a talent laden team like Detroit - he is very useful but I doubt -anyone would rebuild around him. So I am not sure what the error was in moving him.

You are confusing the desire to remain competitive, like Walsh/Indiana did, with the poorly executed fallen-starphuck that Isiah conducted. Isiah promised the Walsh/Carslile Indiana success, but delivered the Isiah/Isiah Knicks disaster

Going back briefly to the prosports daily thread- as you said you don't need 5 pages to tell you things you already know. The main points I thought were relevant were:
1. Many fans were excitied by a lot of these moves and it did generate excitement for the Knicks- hence bringing back or manitaining interest.
2. As many posters have pointed out - in most of these trades - at the time - the perception was that we took on salary for talent.
3. That crticisms of these moves -that are occuring and perpetuating 'after' the fact has the benefit of hindsight. As I stated earlier - no one gets credit for hindsight - that is simply folly.
4. He established the main purpose of turning over the roster where most of the key players were around 30 and exchanging them for younger experienced players (average age for these players is like 25).

When Scott took over in a GM role our cap situation was at $69.5mil. I'm not sure who was already on the books then but is it fair to say that we should afford Layden the same allowances as you're trying to give I SAY UGH with existing contracts on board? Yet his team was closer to a championship by far, than when I SAY UGH took over his crew.

Please go herehttp://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/NYK/

This would put your assertion that the Knicks were closer to a championship at doubt. The Knicks won 30 & 37 games in 2001/2002 and were 16-24 before Isiah came on board with Lenny Wilkens- hardly a 'closer to a championship team'- particularly with an aging roster that had over 38M dollars committed to players that were either injured or not starting till 2006/07. I would agree that the team got swept by the Nets- but hardly surprisng for a tweam that won an average of 32.5 games in a very weak division for two years prior to that.








[Edited by - iyamwutiam on 02-18-2008 12:05 PM]

So basically you are sticking to the "Laydens sucks and anything is better than that" frozen in time theory.

Ok, thats your opinion.

4 years later the question is while Isiah was trying to starphuch and rebuild a young core at the same time and in the even the starphuch did not work we had a young core to rebuild (yes this is a run on sentance)and expirings so in a sense the rebuild on the fly thing should have yielded a playoff team and SOME excitement while the creative Isiah would draft a young core and be patient with them.

It can work, but plan A is a train wreck.

I have little confidence in Isiah as the architect of any plan.

If someone says IU want Curry and Randolph as my core long term--their credibility is junk right there. Also--let's remember we had Tim Duncan Lite and all of this great youth[can Mardy Collins hit the side of a billboard?] the *yoots8 as they say are OK. Give me one Monta Ellis Or Bynum etc..[we could ve had both in same draft right?? Ultimately the people responsible for bringing in weak-minded players who lack character and heart who have flaws galore almost to a man--I mean that's a mix bag of sht. That's what this team is--sht--and like Stone Cold says that IS the bottom line any way you want to spin it anyway you want to blame anyone and NO NO NO this team is NOT better than with what Laydumb left--there was great opportunity--it just wasn't executed on correctly. Like I said this is a failed project that has to stop and Dolan is the only guy that matters--the rest are sleeping with the fish in my book. No name calling--just the facts

Posted by iyamwutiam:

Actually - I am only saying that comparatively from whn he came in 2003/04 and now 2007/08 - he is percentage wise better on the cap the Knicks will be dramatically under the cap (the first time in over 20 years!!) and our roster is better than when he came in.

This is despite every conceiveable thing going wrong - in terms of LB, Marbury, Crawford, Q Rich. I won't put Curry in that category - as he did actually have one very good year last year.

yo, when the fukc are we going to be dramatically be under the cap? Cause I don't see it.

And we are not in a better position record wise now then before Isiah came in, and that's the end-all mark of a team. LAC was youthier for 10 straight years, does that mean they were better than a better-performing team record-wise?

Posted by BRIGGS:

If someone says IU want Curry and Randolph as my core long term--their credibility is junk right there.

You wanted 50% of those two players as your long-term core.

iyamwutiam is not Isiah but his way of thinking the situation is similar to what Isiah himself should think.
No loser will ever admit that he is a loser. Course he will stop being loser at the very moment.
We can speculate all day long but Knicks have -22 record and won 16 games before All star break,
they are losing team for 4 years, they have no players desireble by any team, no prospects, no cap space, no winning culture, etc.
The man is dead. Just put him to rest and move on.

yo, when the fukc are we going to be dramatically be under the cap? Cause I don't see it.

And we are not in a better position record wise now then before Isiah came in, and that's the end-all mark of a team. LAC was youthier for 10 straight years, does that mean they were better than a better-performing team record-wise?

http://hoopshype.com/salaries/new_york.htm
Martin, the projection is 2009/10 and onwards. This is when Le Bron is coming out as well as Wade. It may be sooner - if someone wishes the expiring contracts of both Marbury and Maike Rose- this year or next year- or if the Knicks either do a buy out or let them play out the next year.

then you have the audacity to say "this is despite every conceivable thing going wrong - in terms of LB, marbury, crawford, Q rich" -- WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? ISIAH'S JOB is to make sure that things don't go wrong. its ISIAHS FAULT that marbury failed, that LB failed, that Q rich failed, that CURRY failed (you aren't gonna jump the gun b/c he had "one very good year" last year where we were a lottery team and he still didnt rebound or defend.

Big Smooth- Curry's attribute was scoring in the post- that was it. He was a 22 year old center at the time with a long term contract that averaged 10M a year over the length of his contract. He was never known to be a tenacious rebounder or defender (a la Ben Wallace) but he was and still does provide scoring in the post. The one year where he was fed in the post - he responded with an AVERAGE of 20 points and 9 rebounds-. At this point of the year - he is 25 years old and has career averages of 13.5 pts and 5.4 rebounds in 25 minutes a game and with the Knicks he has averaged 16 pts and 6.5 rebounds for the last two years. Comparing him to say Q Rich - I would not say he is a bad signing- in addition - his ability to lay a plethora of fouls on opposing bigs is under-rated - but you could see it very clearly in the game against Philadelphia - where he personally was responsible for atleast 10 fouls on Dalembert, Jason Smith, Reggie Evans and Calvin Booth. There is upside here- as we saw - I am not disputing the fact that fans find it exasperating that he isn't the dominant center all fans dream. Also both Dalembert and Curry were drafted at the same time - and are getting paid essentially the same amount - Dalembert has career averages of 8 pts, 8 rebounds and 2 blocks in about the same time- but he was not available . All in all I would say that Dalembert is the better center but Curry is one of the few centers who is not a legitimate superstar (Stoudemire, etc) that has scored 6000 points already - compare him to Dampier and many others-even Dalembert!!

I would have believed it maybe last April if you told me the Knicks were in OK salary position, considering that we would have francis and marbury and rose and a bunch of other mofos coming off after next season. In fact, there was even talk coming from the organization that they were trying to shed some salary. However, that notion went straight to hell when they traded Francis and Frye for Zach Randolf, whom maybe 5 teams at most, would want to trade for him, if they even had pieces.

Allanfan- that is impossible. Jalen Rose and Steve Francis came with contracts that were never going to expire the followng year. Rose was also going through till 2007/08 when he had 16M due to him. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2317958 and http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/sports/basketball/31knicks.html.

The point is - which I have stated earlier - you either pay Francis and Rose 40M + 30M to sit on the bench and hope they don't further harm what fragile team chemistry there may have been. Or you buy out Rose and trade Francis for Randolph. Francis has yet to play in Houston and is out for the season with injury - he would cost the Knicks 40M over 2 years - while Randolph had a 60M contract. So in essence -60-40M = 20M -which is what we paid for a 26 y/o guy who has basically been a double/double machine versus not spending that money on a disgruntled, injured PG who would not be playing. There would have been no trade for Zbo if nt for Steve francis's humongous contract- this is why we got 3 layers (Dickau/Jones/(two expiring contracts)and Randolph - for Francis and Frye. Also Frye's leaving allowed more time for David Lee. IMO- Randolph is a good player - there is plenty to like - he rebounds, has increased his assists, has a consistent mid-range jumper and can take it to the hole- plus -he is young and we can see that several teams are nterested in a 26 y/o PF who is consistently getting a double/double in the NBA for the last 5 years.

You can talk percentage wise all you want, but our cap situation isn't any better than it was 5 years ago when we had Howard Eisley as our starting PG. We still have guys that are close to impossible to trade. They just happen to be in different shapes and forms than the Shanvis Eisleyspoons and Allan Houstons and Keith Van Horns of the world. Yet with last Summers Zach trade, Isiah proved that he has no intention of making a serious attempt at getting under the cap.

So how are we in better position?

Here is the 2003 roster before isiah arrived.
http://www.nysportsday.com/nyk/roster.html
ages in 2004
Mutombo was 38 !!
McDyess-30 coming off of injury and sitting on the bench for clse to 3 years.
K. Thomas 32- and has averaged 6.5 pts/7 rbs since leaving the Knicks

I wish I could go on - but the rest of the roster is not in the NBA!!! So I can confidently say that this Knicks team would beat the last one - since only 3 of the players if they were playing today.

As for the premise that Van Horn, Mutombo,Houston, McDyess, Ward as a starting line-up would have a better record and do better - I am not sure anyone can answer such a hypothetical question. However- what I can say i that the roster I have linked can not in anyway be construed to be full of trade prospects -as you suggest - which is why the Knicks basically tok on salary with every trade- because you literally had to pay people to take them!

As for being in a better position:
The roster is younger - we do have low salaried draft picks that people are interested in:
Balkman, Lee, Robinson - which is more than the 2003 roster
Crawford and Randolph - have had teams interested in them - which is more than you can say about anyone on the Knicks roster of 2003 including McDyess. Also other than McDyess-or even him i you include his age (there is no PF or big man on the roster that compares to Randolph and Curry).
Definitely in terms of Expiring contracts - Marbury -20M and Rose 7M.

But I do understand that people can and may wish to refute this. It is only my opinion - but 'going forward' this team is young and has more tradable assets than the team of 2003 - where most of the players were 30 or over or injured with question marks regarding future viability of performance- and lastly -sone of the players on the roster (Sweetney/Harrington/Ward/ Lampe/Vranes/Weatherspoon etc etc ) should still be in the league - since Sam Cassel, Brevin Knight etc are still playing. Even Mutombo at 42 has a spot - even if he is a cheerleader for 99 percent of the games. To have this many players out of the league in so short a time (with in two years) does say something about the quality of the roster - and so in that regard - I would say these Knicks are better.



[Edited by - iyamwutiam on 02-18-2008 6:29 PM]

Posted by Bonn1997:

People have been making these predictions about getting under the cap for about 8 years now. The only thing that's constant in NY is that we're ALWAYS three years away from being under the cap.

Yup. It's funny when you fully understand that to have a shot, in our situation, it would logically take 3+ years of absolute patience, from any point. However, with our management, regardless of GM, when they're dormant for 6 months, you start to hope... then they fck it up with a trade for Mr. Overpaid. Sigh.

i sware to god i am what i am is isiah thomas posting. you are giving the same excuses as isiah dude, "frustrated fans who want to win now". that couldn't be further from the truth. we are frustrated fans who want to see some semblance of a plan -- something isiah has not provided. we have been directionless for the past 4 years under isiah, with panic trades being made every year, terrible FA signings, draft picks being given away, etc.

"He was never known to be a tenacious rebounder or defender (a la Ben Wallace) but he was and still does provide scoring in the post." -- yeah, he was never know to play ANY defense or get ANY rebounds. he scores in the post, he can't even pass out of a freaking double team.

"Comparing him to say Q Rich - I would not say he is a bad signing- in addition - his ability to lay a plethora of fouls on opposing bigs is under-rated" - what the hell are you talking about? are you saying he can draw fouls? maybe thats the case, fact of the matter curry is turnover prone, plays NO defense, and is not an efficient rebounder for a 6'11" player who is immovable. you say when he was fed the ball he had AVERAGES of 20 and 8. the team was also one of the worst teams in the league, whats that say about its best player? then you go on to compare him to dalembert and come to the conclusion that dalembert is better. dalembert is a terrible center, so the fact that 2 lotto picks were given up to get a C who is worse than sam freaking dalembert and only has one basketball skill is pathetic.

isiah is a terrible GM, there are no ifs ands or buts, isiah sucks. deal with it.