Bonn1997 wrote:

franco12 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:That said, if I ran LAC the goal would be to have Paul, Griffin, and Melo together. I'd have no interest in replacing Griffin with Melo. That's not going to produce a team that makes it out of the west.

I'd love to perhaps trade them melo for Jordan, filler and a bunch of draft picks.

Yeah, I mentioned Jordan, Reddick, Collison, and a pick. I doubt Dolan wants to do that though.

franco12 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

franco12 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:That said, if I ran LAC the goal would be to have Paul, Griffin, and Melo together. I'd have no interest in replacing Griffin with Melo. That's not going to produce a team that makes it out of the west.

I'd love to perhaps trade them melo for Jordan, filler and a bunch of draft picks.

Yeah, I mentioned Jordan, Reddick, Collison, and a pick. I doubt Dolan wants to do that though.

I don't like the length on Reddick's contract. And I would seriously want at least three first rounders and maybe some second rounders as well. I'm not sure Jordan is anything to build with.

Reddick has some great advanced stats. Collison's #s are pretty good. 3 1st rounders isn't realistic IMO. You could substitute a pick for Collison but I'd rather get a known player.

Bonn1997 wrote:That said, if I ran LAC the goal would be to have Paul, Griffin, and Melo together. I'd have no interest in replacing Griffin with Melo. That's not going to produce a team that makes it out of the west.

I think that would be the Clips ultimate goal and the way Melo has commented on how the Miami three did it right is interesting. Throw in that Melo seemed to take Griffin under his wing during Olympic practices add in the trip the three had promoting the Jordan brand to china and all over and you have the makings of a fan conspiracy sponsored by CAA. But I disagree with you about the second part. The space it would create for everyone would be huge in my opinion. Also I feel Doc would probably restrict Melo's liberties and would not be as obtuse as Woodson is.

franco12 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

franco12 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:That said, if I ran LAC the goal would be to have Paul, Griffin, and Melo together. I'd have no interest in replacing Griffin with Melo. That's not going to produce a team that makes it out of the west.

I'd love to perhaps trade them melo for Jordan, filler and a bunch of draft picks.

That's almost the same as making no deal at all. What is the point of that?

How is it the same as making no deal? What could happen is we lose melo for nothing. I'd rather get something for him- and Jordan and 2-3 first rounders is much more than the Cavs got for LeBron.

franco12 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

franco12 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:That said, if I ran LAC the goal would be to have Paul, Griffin, and Melo together. I'd have no interest in replacing Griffin with Melo. That's not going to produce a team that makes it out of the west.

I'd love to perhaps trade them melo for Jordan, filler and a bunch of draft picks.

That's almost the same as making no deal at all. What is the point of that?

How is it the same as making no deal? What could happen is we lose melo for nothing. I'd rather get something for him- and Jordan and 2-3 first rounders is much more than the Cavs got for LeBron.

Cleveland lost LeBron because they had no leverage: LeBron was an unrestricted free agent and Miami had cap space. The Knicks, on the other hand, have leverage. For one, Melo is cash-hunger, which makes it difficult to turn down the extra $30 million he could get. Second, none of the teams that interest Melo have cap space or can acquire it easily (LAC and CHI). That puts him in a bind and makes it unlikely he'd leave us without needing a sign and trade. The trade you proposed is the bargain basement, last ditch effort trade we can make in that situation because they'd need to move Jordan and another players contract. So what would be the point in making that deal now if we can make that deal later?

And know if he really wants to win, he won't sign with the knicks this auper max contract and leave the team with only minimum contract players.

Bonn1997 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

franco12 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

franco12 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:That said, if I ran LAC the goal would be to have Paul, Griffin, and Melo together. I'd have no interest in replacing Griffin with Melo. That's not going to produce a team that makes it out of the west.

I'd love to perhaps trade them melo for Jordan, filler and a bunch of draft picks.

That's almost the same as making no deal at all. What is the point of that?

How is it the same as making no deal? What could happen is we lose melo for nothing. I'd rather get something for him- and Jordan and 2-3 first rounders is much more than the Cavs got for LeBron.

Cleveland lost LeBron because they had no leverage: LeBron was an unrestricted free agent and Miami had cap space. The Knicks, on the other hand, have leverage. For one, Melo is cash-hunger, which makes it difficult to turn down the extra $30 million he could get. Second, none of the teams that interest Melo have cap space or can acquire it easily (LAC and CHI). That puts him in a bind and makes it unlikely he'd leave us without needing a sign and trade. The trade you proposed is the bargain basement, last ditch effort trade we can make in that situation because they'd need to move Jordan and another players contract. So what would be the point in making that deal now if we can make that deal later?

As far as I understand the S & T rules are really bad now and doing an S & T to a team over the cap is extremely unlikely.

Gotcha. It's a major reason why I hate this ****ing CBA. Too many rules and most of the time, they don't really serve a meaningful purpose.

holfresh wrote:This deal won't happen without Melo's endorsement...Like him or not, he was always been an upfront guy..If he wanted to be traded to the Clippers, he would have told the Knicks already...There is zero chance that Melo walks away from a 5 year deal on the back end of his career for a shorter term deal with less money...Won't happen...My thinking is that Melo thinks a Chip in NY is worth more than a Chip in LA right now...

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:This deal won't happen without Melo's endorsement...Like him or not, he was always been an upfront guy..If he wanted to be traded to the Clippers, he would have told the Knicks already...There is zero chance that Melo walks away from a 5 year deal on the back end of his career for a shorter term deal with less money...Won't happen...My thinking is that Melo thinks a Chip in NY is worth more than a Chip in LA right now...

You know what he has and hasn't told the Knicks?

No, but when I know these things, I'll be sure to let u know...

NardDogNation wrote:

franco12 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

franco12 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:That said, if I ran LAC the goal would be to have Paul, Griffin, and Melo together. I'd have no interest in replacing Griffin with Melo. That's not going to produce a team that makes it out of the west.

I'd love to perhaps trade them melo for Jordan, filler and a bunch of draft picks.

That's almost the same as making no deal at all. What is the point of that?

How is it the same as making no deal? What could happen is we lose melo for nothing. I'd rather get something for him- and Jordan and 2-3 first rounders is much more than the Cavs got for LeBron.

Cleveland lost LeBron because they had no leverage: LeBron was an unrestricted free agent and Miami had cap space. The Knicks, on the other hand, have leverage. For one, Melo is cash-hunger, which makes it difficult to turn down the extra $30 million he could get. Second, none of the teams that interest Melo have cap space or can acquire it easily (LAC and CHI). That puts him in a bind and makes it unlikely he'd leave us without needing a sign and trade. The trade you proposed is the bargain basement, last ditch effort trade we can make in that situation because they'd need to move Jordan and another players contract. So what would be the point in making that deal now if we can make that deal later?

You make the deal now because it gives them a chance with melo to win a chip. Maybe you get their first round pick this year. You start the rebuilding now.

Look, I'd rather lose melo for nothing than have him lock up so much of our cap space. Melo is a great player. But he is not good enough to get us to get us to a championship. Heck, he isn't good enough to get us to the play offs this year. He will soon be on the wrong side of 30 with a ton of minutes on his body. His play is going to decline, and we don't have the assets to build a winner now.