knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Talking back about Melo and winning.

Well when other people contribute positively--it seems like Melo is one nice piece? He single handidly kept us in that game last night 1st half--without him were down 20+ Thats what team is---5-8 guys contributing. It's much easier to work with pieces already here than trying to acquire new one's. Shane Larkin also showed that he can be a nice back up--really he has all season. Not every player is going to be a star but role players collective contribution+star play.

You seem to confound positivity with keeping Melo. There's no logical necessity to confounding the two though. It also seems highly unlikely that "it's much easier to work with the pieces already here" when the current pieces are a .160 team and you're trying to build a contender than it is to "acquire new ones"

Right now the Knicks need to find a way to a way to limit Melo to 30 minutes an thats it. He should be given tonight's game off. We have made mistakes trading Tyson Chandler David Lee Zach Randdolph --we dont make good trades. melo is a guy we can work with. His NCAA team won a NC team with him as the main guy as a freshmen and he had 10 consecutive winning seasons with a % close to .600. The problem with the current Knicks was a storm of bad coaching poor contributions mainly from almost every guard we have--poor play from Dalembart who could not replacce Chandler Bargnani injury ---we just didnt click--not Melos fault. Someone made a good point comparing this season to when we had Bernard King and he got hurt--when we ended up with ewing. Now Melo is not BK but hes reasonably close. Its imperative now to accept that we are 22 agmes under .500 and we need to rest Melo for the good of the future.

This has nothing to do with the Knicks

And what teams currently have to contend with under the new CBA

If the climate was the same as 10yrs ago maybe you'd have a point here but you don't

It's mentally exhausting seeing posters reach abck to Carmelo's Denver days and project them

Forward as Knick as Melo heads towards the downside of his career

For the record the Bargnani trade didn't necessarily affect the now

Nor the past but it more than likely affects the future

Had we held on to Novak and Camby we weren't going to win with them either

Those aren't the players you surround Melo with either

I disagree. The Knicks only have two other top 10 drafted players on their roster. The team is made up of mid to late first rounders, second rounders, and undrafted guys. There just isn't a lot of talent. If the talent improves the results will improve. Having a guy on your team that has always won when the roster he was on was reasonable is not a bad place to start.

Then we should have traded Melo for picks

If you're going to go the team full of high top draft picks angle

It's very difficult to acquire said players

Via free agency as teams either hold on to such players

Or they are busts, or they age out, or you have to be really bad

But we did have at one point in time

Felton[high pick], Gallo[high pick], Chandler[1st round], Anthony Randolph[high pick], Douglas[1st round]

With a winning record surrounding Amar'e for half a yr and that wasn't good enough

For some of you

so what trades do you know of that was on the table for Melo that we turned down?

I think he's saying thats the route Phil should have gone, if folks are crying over draft pick position.

I think that was certainly the route that would have been best, I just don't know that we ever had anything on the table.

I don't think that teams were ready to give up valuable picks for him and have to pay him.

All the Butler, Gibson + Mirotic and a number one type talks were so blatantly ridiculous.

Agreed. it was always gonna be max or nothing. Phil wouldnt have traded with Chicago anyway because of his ego. the same reason why in 2014 he's defending his triangle offense and former rings on twitter to folks who havent won any.

maybe he would not have but I just don't think that chicago was dumb enough to overpay.

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Talking back about Melo and winning.

Well when other people contribute positively--it seems like Melo is one nice piece? He single handidly kept us in that game last night 1st half--without him were down 20+ Thats what team is---5-8 guys contributing. It's much easier to work with pieces already here than trying to acquire new one's. Shane Larkin also showed that he can be a nice back up--really he has all season. Not every player is going to be a star but role players collective contribution+star play.

You seem to confound positivity with keeping Melo. There's no logical necessity to confounding the two though. It also seems highly unlikely that "it's much easier to work with the pieces already here" when the current pieces are a .160 team and you're trying to build a contender than it is to "acquire new ones"

Right now the Knicks need to find a way to a way to limit Melo to 30 minutes an thats it. He should be given tonight's game off. We have made mistakes trading Tyson Chandler David Lee Zach Randdolph --we dont make good trades. melo is a guy we can work with. His NCAA team won a NC team with him as the main guy as a freshmen and he had 10 consecutive winning seasons with a % close to .600. The problem with the current Knicks was a storm of bad coaching poor contributions mainly from almost every guard we have--poor play from Dalembart who could not replacce Chandler Bargnani injury ---we just didnt click--not Melos fault. Someone made a good point comparing this season to when we had Bernard King and he got hurt--when we ended up with ewing. Now Melo is not BK but hes reasonably close. Its imperative now to accept that we are 22 agmes under .500 and we need to rest Melo for the good of the future.

This has nothing to do with the Knicks

And what teams currently have to contend with under the new CBA

If the climate was the same as 10yrs ago maybe you'd have a point here but you don't

It's mentally exhausting seeing posters reach abck to Carmelo's Denver days and project them

Forward as Knick as Melo heads towards the downside of his career

For the record the Bargnani trade didn't necessarily affect the now

Nor the past but it more than likely affects the future

Had we held on to Novak and Camby we weren't going to win with them either

Those aren't the players you surround Melo with either

I disagree. The Knicks only have two other top 10 drafted players on their roster. The team is made up of mid to late first rounders, second rounders, and undrafted guys. There just isn't a lot of talent. If the talent improves the results will improve. Having a guy on your team that has always won when the roster he was on was reasonable is not a bad place to start.

Then we should have traded Melo for picks

If you're going to go the team full of high top draft picks angle

It's very difficult to acquire said players

Via free agency as teams either hold on to such players

Or they are busts, or they age out, or you have to be really bad

But we did have at one point in time

Felton[high pick], Gallo[high pick], Chandler[1st round], Anthony Randolph[high pick], Douglas[1st round]

With a winning record surrounding Amar'e for half a yr and that wasn't good enough

For some of you

so what trades do you know of that was on the table for Melo that we turned down?

I think he's saying thats the route Phil should have gone, if folks are crying over draft pick position.

I think that was certainly the route that would have been best, I just don't know that we ever had anything on the table.

I don't think that teams were ready to give up valuable picks for him and have to pay him.

All the Butler, Gibson + Mirotic and a number one type talks were so blatantly ridiculous.

Agreed. it was always gonna be max or nothing. Phil wouldnt have traded with Chicago anyway because of his ego. the same reason why in 2014 he's defending his triangle offense and former rings on twitter to folks who havent won any.

maybe he would not have but I just don't think that chicago was dumb enough to overpay.

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Talking back about Melo and winning.

Well when other people contribute positively--it seems like Melo is one nice piece? He single handidly kept us in that game last night 1st half--without him were down 20+ Thats what team is---5-8 guys contributing. It's much easier to work with pieces already here than trying to acquire new one's. Shane Larkin also showed that he can be a nice back up--really he has all season. Not every player is going to be a star but role players collective contribution+star play.

You seem to confound positivity with keeping Melo. There's no logical necessity to confounding the two though. It also seems highly unlikely that "it's much easier to work with the pieces already here" when the current pieces are a .160 team and you're trying to build a contender than it is to "acquire new ones"

Right now the Knicks need to find a way to a way to limit Melo to 30 minutes an thats it. He should be given tonight's game off. We have made mistakes trading Tyson Chandler David Lee Zach Randdolph --we dont make good trades. melo is a guy we can work with. His NCAA team won a NC team with him as the main guy as a freshmen and he had 10 consecutive winning seasons with a % close to .600. The problem with the current Knicks was a storm of bad coaching poor contributions mainly from almost every guard we have--poor play from Dalembart who could not replacce Chandler Bargnani injury ---we just didnt click--not Melos fault. Someone made a good point comparing this season to when we had Bernard King and he got hurt--when we ended up with ewing. Now Melo is not BK but hes reasonably close. Its imperative now to accept that we are 22 agmes under .500 and we need to rest Melo for the good of the future.

This has nothing to do with the Knicks

And what teams currently have to contend with under the new CBA

If the climate was the same as 10yrs ago maybe you'd have a point here but you don't

It's mentally exhausting seeing posters reach abck to Carmelo's Denver days and project them

Forward as Knick as Melo heads towards the downside of his career

For the record the Bargnani trade didn't necessarily affect the now

Nor the past but it more than likely affects the future

Had we held on to Novak and Camby we weren't going to win with them either

Those aren't the players you surround Melo with either

I disagree. The Knicks only have two other top 10 drafted players on their roster. The team is made up of mid to late first rounders, second rounders, and undrafted guys. There just isn't a lot of talent. If the talent improves the results will improve. Having a guy on your team that has always won when the roster he was on was reasonable is not a bad place to start.

Then we should have traded Melo for picks

If you're going to go the team full of high top draft picks angle

It's very difficult to acquire said players

Via free agency as teams either hold on to such players

Or they are busts, or they age out, or you have to be really bad

But we did have at one point in time

Felton[high pick], Gallo[high pick], Chandler[1st round], Anthony Randolph[high pick], Douglas[1st round]

With a winning record surrounding Amar'e for half a yr and that wasn't good enough

For some of you

so what trades do you know of that was on the table for Melo that we turned down?

I think he's saying thats the route Phil should have gone, if folks are crying over draft pick position.

I think that was certainly the route that would have been best, I just don't know that we ever had anything on the table.

I don't think that teams were ready to give up valuable picks for him and have to pay him.

All the Butler, Gibson + Mirotic and a number one type talks were so blatantly ridiculous.

Agreed. it was always gonna be max or nothing. Phil wouldnt have traded with Chicago anyway because of his ego. the same reason why in 2014 he's defending his triangle offense and former rings on twitter to folks who havent won any.

maybe he would not have but I just don't think that chicago was dumb enough to overpay.

Melo certainly would not have made 22 mil on the Bulls roster, thats for sure. But they did want him, just at a rate of which his value really is....16 mil.

16 million was all they could spend, right? Not sure if they could have given him more.

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

knickscity wrote:

mreinman wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Talking back about Melo and winning.

Well when other people contribute positively--it seems like Melo is one nice piece? He single handidly kept us in that game last night 1st half--without him were down 20+ Thats what team is---5-8 guys contributing. It's much easier to work with pieces already here than trying to acquire new one's. Shane Larkin also showed that he can be a nice back up--really he has all season. Not every player is going to be a star but role players collective contribution+star play.

You seem to confound positivity with keeping Melo. There's no logical necessity to confounding the two though. It also seems highly unlikely that "it's much easier to work with the pieces already here" when the current pieces are a .160 team and you're trying to build a contender than it is to "acquire new ones"

Right now the Knicks need to find a way to a way to limit Melo to 30 minutes an thats it. He should be given tonight's game off. We have made mistakes trading Tyson Chandler David Lee Zach Randdolph --we dont make good trades. melo is a guy we can work with. His NCAA team won a NC team with him as the main guy as a freshmen and he had 10 consecutive winning seasons with a % close to .600. The problem with the current Knicks was a storm of bad coaching poor contributions mainly from almost every guard we have--poor play from Dalembart who could not replacce Chandler Bargnani injury ---we just didnt click--not Melos fault. Someone made a good point comparing this season to when we had Bernard King and he got hurt--when we ended up with ewing. Now Melo is not BK but hes reasonably close. Its imperative now to accept that we are 22 agmes under .500 and we need to rest Melo for the good of the future.

This has nothing to do with the Knicks

And what teams currently have to contend with under the new CBA

If the climate was the same as 10yrs ago maybe you'd have a point here but you don't

It's mentally exhausting seeing posters reach abck to Carmelo's Denver days and project them

Forward as Knick as Melo heads towards the downside of his career

For the record the Bargnani trade didn't necessarily affect the now

Nor the past but it more than likely affects the future

Had we held on to Novak and Camby we weren't going to win with them either

Those aren't the players you surround Melo with either

I disagree. The Knicks only have two other top 10 drafted players on their roster. The team is made up of mid to late first rounders, second rounders, and undrafted guys. There just isn't a lot of talent. If the talent improves the results will improve. Having a guy on your team that has always won when the roster he was on was reasonable is not a bad place to start.

Then we should have traded Melo for picks

If you're going to go the team full of high top draft picks angle

It's very difficult to acquire said players

Via free agency as teams either hold on to such players

Or they are busts, or they age out, or you have to be really bad

But we did have at one point in time

Felton[high pick], Gallo[high pick], Chandler[1st round], Anthony Randolph[high pick], Douglas[1st round]

With a winning record surrounding Amar'e for half a yr and that wasn't good enough

For some of you

so what trades do you know of that was on the table for Melo that we turned down?

I think he's saying thats the route Phil should have gone, if folks are crying over draft pick position.

I think that was certainly the route that would have been best, I just don't know that we ever had anything on the table.

I don't think that teams were ready to give up valuable picks for him and have to pay him.

All the Butler, Gibson + Mirotic and a number one type talks were so blatantly ridiculous.

Agreed. it was always gonna be max or nothing. Phil wouldnt have traded with Chicago anyway because of his ego. the same reason why in 2014 he's defending his triangle offense and former rings on twitter to folks who havent won any.

maybe he would not have but I just don't think that chicago was dumb enough to overpay.

Melo certainly would not have made 22 mil on the Bulls roster, thats for sure. But they did want him, just at a rate of which his value really is....16 mil.

16 million was all they could spend, right? Not sure if they could have given him more.

they could have made a move or so to get a few more mils tacked on, but they obviously wanted the team they had plus Melo. Depleting their roster for Melo made no sense. They knew that watching what happened to us.

Yup ... I think that they would have had to trade Taj and they were not gonna do that.

I gotta go find and bump some of those ridiculous Melo proposals

F500ONE wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Talking back about Melo and winning.

Well when other people contribute positively--it seems like Melo is one nice piece? He single handidly kept us in that game last night 1st half--without him were down 20+ Thats what team is---5-8 guys contributing. It's much easier to work with pieces already here than trying to acquire new one's. Shane Larkin also showed that he can be a nice back up--really he has all season. Not every player is going to be a star but role players collective contribution+star play.

You seem to confound positivity with keeping Melo. There's no logical necessity to confounding the two though. It also seems highly unlikely that "it's much easier to work with the pieces already here" when the current pieces are a .160 team and you're trying to build a contender than it is to "acquire new ones"

Right now the Knicks need to find a way to a way to limit Melo to 30 minutes an thats it. He should be given tonight's game off. We have made mistakes trading Tyson Chandler David Lee Zach Randdolph --we dont make good trades. melo is a guy we can work with. His NCAA team won a NC team with him as the main guy as a freshmen and he had 10 consecutive winning seasons with a % close to .600. The problem with the current Knicks was a storm of bad coaching poor contributions mainly from almost every guard we have--poor play from Dalembart who could not replacce Chandler Bargnani injury ---we just didnt click--not Melos fault. Someone made a good point comparing this season to when we had Bernard King and he got hurt--when we ended up with ewing. Now Melo is not BK but hes reasonably close. Its imperative now to accept that we are 22 agmes under .500 and we need to rest Melo for the good of the future.

This has nothing to do with the Knicks

And what teams currently have to contend with under the new CBA

If the climate was the same as 10yrs ago maybe you'd have a point here but you don't

It's mentally exhausting seeing posters reach back to Carmelo's Denver days and project them

Forward as a Knick as Melo heads towards the downside of his career

For the record the Bargnani trade didn't necessarily affect the now

Nor the past but it more than likely affects the future

Had we held on to Novak and Camby we weren't going to win with them either

Those aren't the players you surround Melo with either