Knixkik wrote:

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.

Knixkik wrote:

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.

loweyecue wrote:

JCrusher wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

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.

You can't blame people for that. look i would understand if we were losing close games to good teams because we would just make a few adjustment. But we have gotten killed by weak teams. The Denver game ws a lot better even in a loss but when you come in with high expectations and you start 6-10 playing terribly against a soft schedule people have every right to be pissed

Cry me a river. People have he right to be pissed? But the players and the coach dont have the right to have a decent shot at practice with all the key cogs healthy and participating? People want to "keep building the right way" but you can't ask them when and where it ends. Then they get pissed because it means we are nolonger building the right way.

Post Melo trade team record and Post Tyson trade record should be two different things methinks.

What choice do we have as fans other than to remain optimistic

Bonn1997 wrote:

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.

Knicks are 79-153 since Mike Antoni took over.

Knicks were 53-79 with Danilo Gallinari.

islesfan wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

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.

Knicks are 79-103 since Mike Antoni took over.

Knicks were 53-79 with Danilo Gallinari.

Bonn1997 wrote:

BasketballJones wrote:

islesfan wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

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.

Knicks are 79-103 since Mike Antoni took over.

Knicks were 53-79 with Danilo Gallinari.

What's the record post-Marbury?

About the same as with and pre-Marbury (and as with and pre-Isiah).

Then, going by historical precedent, none of this should surprise anyone.

Panos wrote:

islesfan wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

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.

Knicks are 79-153 since Mike Antoni took over.

Knicks were 53-79 with Danilo Gallinari.

Knicks are 220-556 since islesfan started posting.

Without question there's a direct correlation.

Bonn1997 wrote:

islesfan wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

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.

Knicks are 79-103 since Mike Antoni took over.

Knicks were 53-79 with Danilo Gallinari.

Correct. The Post-Melo-trade period has been a continuation of the trajectory of pre-Melo-trade period.

The defense will continue to get better.

Baron Davis creates a cascading effect and Shump takes TD's minutes as 6th man till TD gets healthy and more confident in doing what TD do instead of trying to be a floor general and getting booed.

Jerome Jordan will develop like his distant cousin DeAndre.

Landry Fields will find his stroke from the corner.

Amare and Melo will figure it out because they both want to win.

MDA will get this offense humming.

Next season will be wayyyyy better than this season once the Yoots (and everyone else) have experience/a consistent system and we can sign a healthy rejuvenated Baron to retire as a Knick. Or Steve Nash. Or Ray Felton.

Extra E will decline his player option and come back to the Knicks and take a paycut to do it.

Nowhere to go from here but up baby!

FeltonandAmare wrote:

Panos wrote:

islesfan wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

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.

Knicks are 79-153 since Mike Antoni took over.

Knicks were 53-79 with Danilo Gallinari.

Knicks are 220-556 since islesfan started posting.

Interesting how that idiot islesfan posts only when things are not going smoothly. We'll
never see this idiot once we win a championship. By the way all those idiots that are
saying the Nuggets won the trade will be completely silent when the Nuggets are one and done
every year, and thus out of the lottery and also never able to attract another superstar like Melo.
They will be stuck in medicority for ever, while we're perennial contenders.

Homosaidwhat?

I've been posting here since 2004. Since then, when exactly have things gone smoothly for the Knicks? Idiot.

islesfan wrote:

FeltonandAmare wrote:

Panos wrote:

islesfan wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

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.

Knicks are 79-153 since Mike Antoni took over.

Knicks were 53-79 with Danilo Gallinari.

Knicks are 220-556 since islesfan started posting.

Interesting how that idiot islesfan posts only when things are not going smoothly. We'll
never see this idiot once we win a championship. By the way all those idiots that are
saying the Nuggets won the trade will be completely silent when the Nuggets are one and done
every year, and thus out of the lottery and also never able to attract another superstar like Melo.
They will be stuck in medicority for ever, while we're perennial contenders.

Homosaidwhat?

I've been posting here since 2004. Since then, when exactly have things gone smoothly for the Knicks? Idiot.