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

When do we admit it wasn't worth it?
Author Thread
Knixkik
Posts: 35449
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #11
USA
1/23/2012  8:45 AM
MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:I don't like this "it's a star league, you HAD to make the trade" crap.

Who was the star on the Piston's most recent championship?

And, in any case, we already had a star in Amar'e and very good pieces around him, pieces that fit.


We also probably had the right pieces to pull off a trade Dwight Howard and get a real star before the Melo deal but no longer do.

True. We were in a good position and could afford to be patient. The team before the Melo trade was a lock for the playoffs.

Clippers got Chris Paul for Gordon, Kaman, and Aminu?

Fans here overrate our prospects so much. We were not getting any other NBA star, including Howard, for a package built around Gallo. We got Melo because Denver was stuck in a corner only being able to trade with NY. Yes we bailed them out, but they never wanted our package in the first place. They wanted Nicolas Batum or OJ Mayo over Gallo, think of that for a second? Clippers had to trade Gordon (a future star), a lotto pick in Aminu, an unprotected pick from Minn that will be very high in a strong draft, and Kaman who is valuable as a center alone. That is 3 times the package we gave up.

AUTOADVERT
Knixkik
Posts: 35449
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #11
USA
1/23/2012  8:52 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:Gallo 12 million per
Stat 18 million per
Wilson Chandler 8 million per
Felton 10 million per
Moz 3 million per

If we didn't make that trade, here is what your team is getting paid in 2 years


That's if you kept those players rather than trading them for picks and/or players with more years of rookie contracts. Or you could include those players in a trade for a real star.

So trading for more rookies was the answer? What's the point of signing Stoudemire in the first place then, if there is no interest in contending, just recycling our young players for younger players as soon as we have to pay them. And i'm sure teams are really going to value non-stars that are due for large salary increases in a short period of time. This is what i'm talking about. Complaining about the Melo trade with no real sensible alternative option. If this is what some people prefer to do, you should be equally mad the Knicks signed Stoudemire and just go into full-blown rebuilding mode. If that's the case let's quit on this team for 3 or 4 years and when we wake up, see if there are in any better position.

And as for the other option of trading for a "real star", very few ever come up, and when they do, no one is taking a package built around Gallo and co. who are due for a pay day. The package for Paul was 3 times are good as what we gave up for Melo. My point is these alternative options anti-Melo advacates are suggesting are either unrealistic, or just plain dumb.

Knixkik
Posts: 35449
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #11
USA
1/23/2012  8:53 AM
crzymdups wrote:
islesfan wrote:When are you people going to understand that Carmelo Anthony is not the problem. The Melo Trade had to be made, plain and simple. The NBA is a star league and Melo is a star.

The Knicks aren't winning because of 3 things and none of them have to do with Melo:

1) The head coach
2) The Point Guard
3) Amare is already breaking down

The way some of you talk, the Golden Age of Knicks basketball was just prior to the Melo trade. Get it into your skulls, the Knicks sucked before the Melo trade and they weren't going anywhere. This pathetic need to constantly criticize the Melo trade stems from a pathological need to overvalue every scrub on the Knicks. The Knicks got the best player in that deal by far. The type of player you build around. Get over it. There isn't another star player that could win with the aforementioned Knicks problems.


+1000000000000000001
MS
Posts: 27060
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
1/23/2012  10:21 AM
Here is the issue. We broke down a team that would be:

Lee-Gallo-Zach-Chandler-Crawford-Douglas-Fields-Shump etc for a team now that doesn't fit and needs to be rebuilt. I'm willing to bet that team hands this one our ass.

Everyone is quick to point out the raises people were in for, but Chandler isn't a top 10 player and he is paid 14MM a year, Amare is slowing down already and Melo is proving that Denver is the reason for his success year in and year out.

MarburyAnd1Crossover
Posts: 23120
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 10/24/2011
Member: #3650

1/23/2012  10:27 AM    LAST EDITED: 1/23/2012  10:28 AM
MS wrote:Here is the issue...

...for a team now that doesn't fit and needs to be rebuilt. I'm willing to bet that team hands this one our ass.

That's the thing. Regardless of what anyone imagines this team would be without the Melo trade, the cold, hard, bloody and ugly truth is that it was a Team coming together, and a Team not too many steps away from winning 50 games for the next five years.

And now, we have a team that needs a lot of work, again.

Say what you want about "never win a championship" and I will tell you "FORK a championship, give me a team that balls hard and wins 50 games a year and makes concentrated pushes every year in the post-season and I will be a happy man".

We have the best memories of the 90s Knicks and they never won it all.

Carmelo Anthony is ANTI-BASKETBALL
MS
Posts: 27060
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
1/23/2012  10:40 AM
Unfortunately we don't have a qualified owner in place.

You have to understand that you have two teams that are going to be good for the next five years; The Heat and the Bulls. Your other competion is the Pacers and the Sixers.

So you build a team that is going to be able to compete against those teams. Miami has 2 of the top 5 players in the NBA. Amare and Melo are outside the top 10. So right there you're at a disadvantage. They play defense and took less money. Then Bosh is light years better than Tyson Chandler who essential is being paid max money for a nice impact on defense, but it's not game changing.

The Bulls have depth at every position and have trouble scoring. We as a rule always played them well with the previous team prior to the melo trade.

So you understand that the Knicks were offensively on par with every team in the entire league. They needed a little defense and some bench scoring that was basically it. We were in games, but would run out of gas towards the end without an elite scorer. But, Gallo was getting better, Chandler was getting better, Moz got better and Felton was strong. So with the addition of Shumpert adding more depth in our backcourt on a rookie deal the plan was still working. I am willing to bet with one good free agent signing or just waiting this team would have been a 3 seed for years to come.

islesfan
Posts: 9999
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 7/19/2004
Member: #712
1/23/2012  10:50 AM
1970
1973
2011 Pre Melo Trade

Best Knicks Teams Ever

If it didn’t work in Phoenix with Nash and Stoutamire... it’s just not a winning formula. It’s an entertaining formula, but not a winning one. - Derek Harper talking about D'Antoni's System
markvmc
Posts: 21996
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/6/2008
Member: #1797

1/23/2012  10:53 AM
islesfan wrote:1970
1973
2011 Pre Melo Trade

Best Knicks Teams Ever

Finally someone gets it.

smackeddog
Posts: 38389
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/30/2005
Member: #883
1/23/2012  11:22 AM
ha ha, worst timing ever:

Melo nominated for player of the month!

http://knicksnow.com/videos/340

I think he's getting too much criticism around here, but still, surely this is a joke by the nba?!

Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
1/23/2012  2:14 PM
Knixkik wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:Gallo 12 million per
Stat 18 million per
Wilson Chandler 8 million per
Felton 10 million per
Moz 3 million per

If we didn't make that trade, here is what your team is getting paid in 2 years


That's if you kept those players rather than trading them for picks and/or players with more years of rookie contracts. Or you could include those players in a trade for a real star.

So trading for more rookies was the answer? What's the point of signing Stoudemire in the first place then, if there is no interest in contending, just recycling our young players for younger players as soon as we have to pay them.

In some cases, you'll be recycling them. In other cases, keeping them. In other cases, losing them for nothing (which I'd still prefer to our current situation). I was just objecting to the assumption that we'd have to keep and extend all of them.
GodSaveTheKnicks
Posts: 23952
Alba Posts: 21
Joined: 11/21/2006
Member: #1207
USA
1/23/2012  4:08 PM
just for posterity's sake my .02: It looks absolutely TERRIBLE right now..but it's still early in the season.

I am holding out on the hope that we will find a way to make this work.

Let's try to elevate the level of discourse in this byeetch. Please
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
1/23/2012  4:17 PM
GodSaveTheKnicks wrote:just for posterity's sake my .02: It looks absolutely TERRIBLE right now..but it's still early in the season.

I am holding out on the hope that we will find a way to make this work.


It's early but it's not just this season, though. We're 20-28 post-trade now.
loweyecue
Posts: 27468
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 11/20/2005
Member: #1037

1/23/2012  4:17 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:Gallo 12 million per
Stat 18 million per
Wilson Chandler 8 million per
Felton 10 million per
Moz 3 million per

If we didn't make that trade, here is what your team is getting paid in 2 years


That's if you kept those players rather than trading them for picks and/or players with more years of rookie contracts. Or you could include those players in a trade for a real star.

So trading for more rookies was the answer? What's the point of signing Stoudemire in the first place then, if there is no interest in contending, just recycling our young players for younger players as soon as we have to pay them.

In some cases, you'll be recycling them. In other cases, keeping them. In other cases, losing them for nothing (which I'd still prefer to our current situation). I was just objecting to the assumption that we'd have to keep and extend all of them.

And you would keep doing that till you get lucky? In like 20 years? That's the right way to build is it?

TKF on Melo ::....he is a punk, a jerk, a self absorbed out of shape, self aggrandizing, unprofessional, volume chucking coach killing playoff loser!!
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
1/23/2012  4:24 PM    LAST EDITED: 1/23/2012  5:11 PM
loweyecue wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:Gallo 12 million per
Stat 18 million per
Wilson Chandler 8 million per
Felton 10 million per
Moz 3 million per

If we didn't make that trade, here is what your team is getting paid in 2 years


That's if you kept those players rather than trading them for picks and/or players with more years of rookie contracts. Or you could include those players in a trade for a real star.

So trading for more rookies was the answer? What's the point of signing Stoudemire in the first place then, if there is no interest in contending, just recycling our young players for younger players as soon as we have to pay them.

In some cases, you'll be recycling them. In other cases, keeping them. In other cases, losing them for nothing (which I'd still prefer to our current situation). I was just objecting to the assumption that we'd have to keep and extend all of them.

And you would keep doing that till you get lucky? In like 20 years? That's the right way to build is it?


No, see here. http://ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=40602&page=#900634
And don't forget we've already spent about 10 years starphucking and gotten nowhere!
ATrain
Posts: 21487
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2010
Member: #3192

1/23/2012  4:27 PM
I will never give up on a CLOSER. NEVER.
The only thing about that trade I would take back if I could would be Raymond Felton.
tj23
Posts: 21851
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/20/2010
Member: #3119

1/23/2012  4:30 PM
Bad trade? Maybe. I actually think the amare signing is looking pretty bad even though we needed a star to attract the other players. Melo has proven he can't carry a team without some help. There's no penetrators on this team. Nobody moves the ball. Fields is the only guy who moves without the ball. Melo is a good passer but he's very selective when he wants to. Nobody else can run a pick n roll or drive n kick at all. I thought Melo and stat would have a 2 man game going. Instead they both are iso jumpshooters who make bad decisions and don't play off one another at all. I think the pre trade team was a .500 team but at least it was better than this mess. Its not set in stone yet, but I look like an idiot for pushing the melo trade.
MS
Posts: 27060
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
1/23/2012  4:32 PM
The Knicks have had the 2nd easiest schedule in the entire league and are 6-9. We aren't losing to good teams. Lottery teams are handing us their ass.

The Clippers got a player that actually makes people better and can play with anyone. Eric Gordon is a great player, but he is injured every season (78, 62, 56 and 2 this season), Amiu hasn't shown much promise to date and the lottery pick won't be as good as you think. So right now our package for Melo is stronger.

Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
1/23/2012  4:32 PM
tj23 wrote:Bad trade? Maybe. I actually think the amare signing is looking pretty bad even though we needed a star to attract the other players. Melo has proven he can't carry a team without some help. There's no penetrators on this team. Nobody moves the ball. Fields is the only guy who moves without the ball. Melo is a good passer but he's very selective when he wants to. Nobody else can run a pick n roll or drive n kick at all. I thought Melo and stat would have a 2 man game going. Instead they both are iso jumpshooters who make bad decisions and don't play off one another at all. I think the pre trade team was a .500 team but at least it was better than this mess. Its not set in stone yet, but I look like an idiot for pushing the melo trade.

Melo makes a lot of nice passes, which I think is why many say he's a good passer. But he also makes many bad passes, which is part of the reason he commits so many turnovers.
RonRon
Posts: 25531
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/22/2002
Member: #246
1/23/2012  4:43 PM
We had chemistry, a system, players that fed of each other and fit, complimented each other, players with multi skills and moved the ball, while taking good shots.
We were not done, with those players, yes, they would be getting a raise, but we had the ability to keep those players, and have a bench.
The current team DOES NOT FIT, we are not capable of adding quality talent, without room, and we cannot blame Tyson Chandler's contract.
He is a top defender at his position, with many centers earning 10m plus.

We had Amare to begin with, so unless, we never signed Amare, and traded for Melo, then we can still have plenty of salary to sign FAs.
But we do not have that luxury after the trade for Melo, with Amare making max money already.
Yes Gallo, Wilson Chandler, Felton, MozGoV, Jorts, and Iman will eventually be getting a pay raise but we have the ability to keep them.
But that is the price you have to pay, with a nice young core, allowing us to compete at a high level, and their continued development, playing the "right" way.
We had a bunch of players that were versatile, roles that were clear for players, and roles as team.

Wilson Chandler and Gallo are 2 players that can play the SG to PF, with the SF being their real positions. While they play the SG and PF, they create a mismatch, with size, penetration, ability to stretch the floor, and the ability to post up. With those mismatches and our ability to move the ball, mixed with our ability to play hit the 3, and play unselfishly, it created GOOD SHOTS.

While I don't know if we would have targeted Tyson Chandler if we never traded for Melo, we would still have the ability to sign him or another legit center.
The Center position, to go with a SG with speed/penetration to help the PG out and have the ability to create for himself and others, and a backup PG.

Tyson Chandler
Iman
Jorts

would be developing together, playing the right way, with an identity, set role for players, a system, and leadership of Tyson Chandler *defense* and Amare *offense*

With

Felton
Wilson Chandler
Gallo
Iman

being the 2nd "stars" that complimented each other and are solid players on BOTH ENDS, our 2nd leaders, 2nd unit leaders/scorers/defenders.
With

Jorts
JJ
Shawne Williams
TD
MosGoV

being the role players.

And yes, we would have been able to sign Tyson Chandler and Wilson Chandler to contracts, as long as we moved Turiaf *for Tyson Chandler alone, with $ left over*,
and we can offer Wilson Chandler a slightly more than 1 year deal like David Lee got for the Qualifying Offer or be able to sign him long term
if we moved AR for a 2nd pick *salaries don't have to match because we are under the cap. It is not even arguable which would be the better team.
While I don't know if we would target Tyson Chandler, with all the centers available this summer, we clearly needed an anchor, and it would have been addressed.

Felton /Iman / TD
Fields/ Wilson Chandler/ Iman
Gallo/ Wilson Chandler/ Shawne Williams
Amare/ Wilson Chandler/ JJ / Shawne WIlliams
Tyson/ CHandler/ MozGov/ Jorts/ Jordan

Felton
Fields
Gallo
Amare
Tyson Chandler

Iman
Wilson Chandler
Shawne Williams
Jorts
MosGoV

TD
JJ
Jordan
Walker
Baron Davis???? he might not come to New York in this situation, but any player at this situation is just super DEPTH, it can be Anthony Carter

This was the difference of signing a player vs trading the trade for Melo, look at this depth, this was Donnie Walsh's plan.
Why do we need a player of Melo's caliber, we instantly become a better team for this year alone, and many years after.
We will eventually be 80-90m+ in salary, but we with 2 GS picks, 1 of our own first rounders, and possibly a swap of 1st rounders.

We took steps behind, we are no where near what we could have been, yet so many people here still can't come to terms that they are IDIOTS and can't see through it.
How can you possibly argue, you come up with stupid excuses, to justify your lack of vision, and brain cells, because you can't admit your wrong in supporting
the deal for Melo.....

Knixkik
Posts: 35449
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #11
USA
1/23/2012  4:43 PM
loweyecue wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knixkik wrote:Gallo 12 million per
Stat 18 million per
Wilson Chandler 8 million per
Felton 10 million per
Moz 3 million per

If we didn't make that trade, here is what your team is getting paid in 2 years


That's if you kept those players rather than trading them for picks and/or players with more years of rookie contracts. Or you could include those players in a trade for a real star.

So trading for more rookies was the answer? What's the point of signing Stoudemire in the first place then, if there is no interest in contending, just recycling our young players for younger players as soon as we have to pay them.

In some cases, you'll be recycling them. In other cases, keeping them. In other cases, losing them for nothing (which I'd still prefer to our current situation). I was just objecting to the assumption that we'd have to keep and extend all of them.

And you would keep doing that till you get lucky? In like 20 years? That's the right way to build is it?

Surprisingly this is how some people here want to build. The uncertainty is better than the commitment. Commitment means seeing something thru and people here will never be content doing that.

When do we admit it wasn't worth it?

©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