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

Knicks get two FIRST ROUND PICKS!!!! NY/HOU/SA
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 8 of 11 « First‹ Previous 6  7  8  9  10 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
joec32033
Posts: 30615
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
2/25/2005  10:10 AM
Posted by diderotn:

and your point is????????

My point is the moving on of information so people who don't have access to the Daily News can read it.....

I must say though, the point you made this with this post has to be one of the best that I have seen in a while...(of course if you didn't get the point of my post, I highly doubt you'll get the sarcasm behind that last statement)....
~You can't run from who you are.~
AUTOADVERT
joec32033
Posts: 30615
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
2/25/2005  10:14 AM
Posted by fishmike:

Bonn... you dont lump these trades together. One is good and one is terrible. What cracks me up is how your always harping about the super-duper value of expiring contracts. Well guess what, Isiah just trades two of those goldmine assets for Mo Taylor who got 3 more years left on his deal.

Do tell.. is Mo Taylor the kind of stud your looking to land with those great assets?

Fish, I think that money aside, Taylor is a better player than Moochie and Vin combined....I think that was the whole point of making the trade....he alone may be a more tradeable asset than Vin and Mooch..(Vin and Mooch are only valuable for their contracts ending, IMO....Taylor can at least be a minimal threat offensively). And even if he doesn't get moved, I personally would rather have him on the bench as opposed to Vin and Moochie....Zeke phrased it as a "talent upgrade"...what it is is trading the commodity of ending contracts, for the commodity of a player with some skill, IMO.
~You can't run from who you are.~
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
2/25/2005  10:50 AM
Posted by joec32033:
Posted by fishmike:

Bonn... you dont lump these trades together. One is good and one is terrible. What cracks me up is how your always harping about the super-duper value of expiring contracts. Well guess what, Isiah just trades two of those goldmine assets for Mo Taylor who got 3 more years left on his deal.

Do tell.. is Mo Taylor the kind of stud your looking to land with those great assets?

Fish, I think that money aside, Taylor is a better player than Moochie and Vin combined....I think that was the whole point of making the trade....he alone may be a more tradeable asset than Vin and Mooch..(Vin and Mooch are only valuable for their contracts ending, IMO....Taylor can at least be a minimal threat offensively). And even if he doesn't get moved, I personally would rather have him on the bench as opposed to Vin and Moochie....Zeke phrased it as a "talent upgrade"...what it is is trading the commodity of ending contracts, for the commodity of a player with some skill, IMO.

i disagree joec. i do not see a team clamoring for a $9 mil mo taylor for HIS TALENT (even as an expiring deal). he's only going to get traded b/c he's an expiring deal, that's it. this is a bad deal. i mean, why is mo taylor here? to take minutes away from sweetney? or to back him up? do we know the answer to this? then what about rose? where does he play?

when we just saw frank, cezary, deke, and othella get dealt for JAMAL CRAWFORD, a 24 year old with tons of potential it hurts me knowing that we traded vin and moochie for mo taylor, a soft PF with a bad knee.
s3231
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #544
USA
2/25/2005  11:01 AM
Posted by djsunyc:

i disagree joec. i do not see a team clamoring for a $9 mil mo taylor for HIS TALENT (even as an expiring deal). he's only going to get traded b/c he's an expiring deal, that's it.










If he gets traded just because he has an expiring deal is that necessarily a bad thing? Teams that want to get under the cap would love to have an expiring contract that large. Not saying that expiring contracts always work, but they can be very helpful sometimes... just ask the Golden State Warriors who used Dale Davis as a major piece to get Baron Davis.
"This is a very cautious situation that we're in. You have to be conservative in terms of using your assets and using them wisely. We're building for the future." - Zeke (I guess not protecting a first round pick is being conservative)
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
2/25/2005  11:04 AM
Posted by s3231:
Posted by djsunyc:

i disagree joec. i do not see a team clamoring for a $9 mil mo taylor for HIS TALENT (even as an expiring deal). he's only going to get traded b/c he's an expiring deal, that's it.










If he gets traded just because he has an expiring deal is that necessarily a bad thing? Teams that want to get under the cap would love to have an expiring contract that large. Not saying that expiring contracts always work, but they can be very helpful sometimes... just ask the Golden State Warriors who used Dale Davis as a major piece to get Baron Davis.

what you just said means that we shouldn't have traded for him since we had two expiring deals THIS summer as opposed to next. he does nothing for us in the interim. i would almost understand it if it was a backup PG, SG, or SF b/c we don't have a good one. but a PF makes no sense. imagine we made this deal for ruben patterson instead. that would've been AWESOME.

[Edited by - djsunyc on 02/25/2005 11:04:50]
s3231
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #544
USA
2/25/2005  11:16 AM
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by s3231:
Posted by djsunyc:

i disagree joec. i do not see a team clamoring for a $9 mil mo taylor for HIS TALENT (even as an expiring deal). he's only going to get traded b/c he's an expiring deal, that's it.










If he gets traded just because he has an expiring deal is that necessarily a bad thing? Teams that want to get under the cap would love to have an expiring contract that large. Not saying that expiring contracts always work, but they can be very helpful sometimes... just ask the Golden State Warriors who used Dale Davis as a major piece to get Baron Davis.

what you just said means that we shouldn't have traded for him since we had two expiring deals THIS summer as opposed to next. he does nothing for us in the interim. i would almost understand it if it was a backup PG, SG, or SF b/c we don't have a good one. but a PF makes no sense. imagine we made this deal for ruben patterson instead. that would've been AWESOME.

[Edited by - djsunyc on 02/25/2005 11:04:50]










As I have said in the other thread, he does do something for us in the interim, he gives us more depth. Would a player like Ruben Patterson fit our needs more? Yes, I completely agree with you on that. But Taylor makes this team better now and again when he does have an expiring contract it will be worth more than Baker and Norris' expiring contracts combined because A. it will be for more money and B. because he is the best player out of the three.
"This is a very cautious situation that we're in. You have to be conservative in terms of using your assets and using them wisely. We're building for the future." - Zeke (I guess not protecting a first round pick is being conservative)
fishmike
Posts: 53867
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
2/25/2005  11:16 AM
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by s3231:
Posted by djsunyc:

i disagree joec. i do not see a team clamoring for a $9 mil mo taylor for HIS TALENT (even as an expiring deal). he's only going to get traded b/c he's an expiring deal, that's it.
great point... at least with JYD/Rose/Patterson/KT you would have a few guys that love to play D. Mo Tayler is the exact opposite. He just wants to shoot and he's a PF and only a PF. Did I mention he's got 2 more years? Its dumb









If he gets traded just because he has an expiring deal is that necessarily a bad thing? Teams that want to get under the cap would love to have an expiring contract that large. Not saying that expiring contracts always work, but they can be very helpful sometimes... just ask the Golden State Warriors who used Dale Davis as a major piece to get Baron Davis.

what you just said means that we shouldn't have traded for him since we had two expiring deals THIS summer as opposed to next. he does nothing for us in the interim. i would almost understand it if it was a backup PG, SG, or SF b/c we don't have a good one. but a PF makes no sense. imagine we made this deal for ruben patterson instead. that would've been AWESOME.

[Edited by - djsunyc on 02/25/2005 11:04:50]
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Nalod
Posts: 71379
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
2/25/2005  11:17 AM
I guess with this one we take a gulp of the kool aid and say " IN ISIAH WE TRUST!"
fishmike
Posts: 53867
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
2/25/2005  11:17 AM
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by s3231:
Posted by djsunyc:

i disagree joec. i do not see a team clamoring for a $9 mil mo taylor for HIS TALENT (even as an expiring deal). he's only going to get traded b/c he's an expiring deal, that's it.
If he gets traded just because he has an expiring deal is that necessarily a bad thing? Teams that want to get under the cap would love to have an expiring contract that large. Not saying that expiring contracts always work, but they can be very helpful sometimes... just ask the Golden State Warriors who used Dale Davis as a major piece to get Baron Davis.

what you just said means that we shouldn't have traded for him since we had two expiring deals THIS summer as opposed to next. he does nothing for us in the interim. i would almost understand it if it was a backup PG, SG, or SF b/c we don't have a good one. but a PF makes no sense. imagine we made this deal for ruben patterson instead. that would've been AWESOME.

[Edited by - djsunyc on 02/25/2005 11:04:50]
great point... at least with JYD/Rose/Patterson/KT you would have a few guys that love to play D. Mo Tayler is the exact opposite. He just wants to shoot and he's a PF and only a PF. Did I mention he's got 2 more years? Its dumb
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
s3231
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #544
USA
2/25/2005  11:32 AM
Hell, there are a bunch of other deals I would rather have done than the Taylor trade. I'm not a fan of the trade at all but I still understand that there are a couple of positive things about the deal (which I said before). A Patterson trade would have been perfect but financially it wouldn't even work out if we send Baker and Moochie in that deal. I would like to think about what other deals we could've done too, but there is no purpose because whats done is done. We have Taylor so we mind as well make the best out of it.
"This is a very cautious situation that we're in. You have to be conservative in terms of using your assets and using them wisely. We're building for the future." - Zeke (I guess not protecting a first round pick is being conservative)
Pharzeone
Posts: 32183
Alba Posts: 14
Joined: 2/11/2005
Member: #871
2/25/2005  11:51 AM
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by joec32033:
Posted by fishmike:

Bonn... you dont lump these trades together. One is good and one is terrible. What cracks me up is how your always harping about the super-duper value of expiring contracts. Well guess what, Isiah just trades two of those goldmine assets for Mo Taylor who got 3 more years left on his deal.

Do tell.. is Mo Taylor the kind of stud your looking to land with those great assets?

Fish, I think that money aside, Taylor is a better player than Moochie and Vin combined....I think that was the whole point of making the trade....he alone may be a more tradeable asset than Vin and Mooch..(Vin and Mooch are only valuable for their contracts ending, IMO....Taylor can at least be a minimal threat offensively). And even if he doesn't get moved, I personally would rather have him on the bench as opposed to Vin and Moochie....Zeke phrased it as a "talent upgrade"...what it is is trading the commodity of ending contracts, for the commodity of a player with some skill, IMO.

i disagree joec. i do not see a team clamoring for a $9 mil mo taylor for HIS TALENT (even as an expiring deal). he's only going to get traded b/c he's an expiring deal, that's it. this is a bad deal. i mean, why is mo taylor here? to take minutes away from sweetney? or to back him up? do we know the answer to this? then what about rose? where does he play?

when we just saw frank, cezary, deke, and othella get dealt for JAMAL CRAWFORD, a 24 year old with tons of potential it hurts me knowing that we traded vin and moochie for mo taylor, a soft PF with a bad knee.

Rose, generally guards centers in the west to keep Duncan out of foul trouble much like Oakley and Mason did with Ewing. And he is damn pretty effective too. Big body that he can move. I like him backing up KT. Sweets will be starting. I am not going nuts about losing Baker (who sadly lost whatever skills he onced had) and Moochie (who I like but in spurts). Taylor doesn't rebound or defend well but He is a post nightmare. He has nice moves, seem to give the Knick trouble in the past. Besides, I think Zeke has a plan that involves around H20 contract coming off the books. I sure he communicated that to Dolan before he made these trades. I think if Houston doesn't come back at "100%" or near anything he was, Dolan and Thomas will continue to push him to retire under medical reasons.
I don't like to play bad rookies , I like to play good rookies - Mike D'Antoni
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
2/25/2005  12:42 PM
I just read this and found it to be DEAD ON:
Mohammed ... at age 28, he was never going to emerge an All-Star. Mohammed lacked toughness, shotblocking ability and had no post game.

if he didn't go to the all star game this year, he isn't going ever.

This was one of the more non zeke bashing takes on the trade.

http://www.nypost.com/sports/knicks/22182.htm

[Edited by - rvhoss on 02/25/2005 12:42:45]

I see Rose bounding off the bench to spell Kurt or Sweets (whichever is in foul trouble/ineffective defensively).

I like the new knick mentality that fouls are there to be used.

Rose can cover shaq (has in the past) and is more than capable of boxing out ilgauskus...webber, he more than held his own against.

Are there any other centers in the east?

[Edited by - rvhoss on 02/25/2005 12:45:22]
all kool aid all the time.
Allanfan20
Posts: 35947
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542
USA
2/25/2005  12:48 PM
Again, the Rose deal was a nice trade. I just have absolutely no clue why Zeke did the taylor move. Like Fish said, you can't say "Ohh, we gave up Moochie, Vin and Nazr for a couple of first rounders and 2 front court players." b/c it wasn't a 3 way deal. We got all the good stuff by only trading Nazr. We got crap in the Moochie deal. What was the point? We have Sweetney to post up and KT to shoot, and we have Rose and JYD who can defend and get garbage points. Isiah doesn't deserve to be fired for this one, but if he doesn't excecute properly this Summer, then maybe the chants should begin.

BTW, what's more mind boggling about the Mo T trade is the fact that even Isiah doesn't sound optimistic about him. I saw him on Sportsdesk, and he admitted he doesn't bring the right championship mentality (Tim Thomas anyone?) and that he was HOPING to get that our of him (Again, I say Tim Thomas?) We can't continue bringing in these players who come in with a half arsed mentality. At least Moochie worked like a dog and was a good presence in the locker room.

Neither of these 2 trades cross eachother out. They had absolutely nothing to do with eachother. We had no damn right making the Taylor trade.
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
2/25/2005  12:54 PM
After sleeping on this trade for a night (lol) I still think of it like this. Isiah traded 3 players who werent doing anything for us and a starting center who was never going to pan out in return for 1 guy who plays a JYD style of basketball but better and for another guy who we have questions about but still is a post player something the Knicks lack.... and oh yeah he got 2 first round draft picks out of it too.

Now to all the people who cry about the cap and how this just makes it worse well your right but it doesnt matter. When Isiah resigns Sweetney and Ariza in addition to having the huge contracts of Steph and Jamal on the team, we werent going to be under the cap anyway, so might as well take on more salary. With the acquisitions of Rose and Taylor Isiah can now package them or Kurt Thomas or Sweetney with a expiring contract in the summer or next years deadline JUST LIKE Golden State did to get Baron Davis (it took an expiring contract in Dale Davis and a decent player but not a starter in Speedy Claxton)

Guys, Isiah knows what he's doing, he knows having 5 pf's who are all in the 6'8 range without a starting center is not the way to build a team but to build a team you NEED trade assets and now he has them and first round picks to go along with it, one of them being in the lottery. Pretty darn good job yesterday if you ask me.

Edited: For Spelling

[Edited by - nyk4ever on 02/25/2005 12:56:28]
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
2/25/2005  1:01 PM
Kurt Thomas will look a lot better now at center since he wont have to guard the Kmarts and Amares of the league
MaTT4281
Posts: 34916
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #538
USA
2/25/2005  1:22 PM
It's amazing how much the oppinion of Malik Rose has changed here.
Anyone remember last year when Zeke was close to trading Kurt for Rose and everyone was talking about how bad he was? I know that the picks are the sole reason for trading for him, but now we're hearing about how good of a worker he is, or how good he is on defense. I think before the most positive thing said (okay, not positive, the least negative) was that he was an undersized PF.
Anyway, with that said, I really do like the SA deal and can't wait to see how Malik plays (Still hoping Sweetney starts over him).
franco12
Posts: 34069
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/19/2004
Member: #599
USA
2/25/2005  1:24 PM
could he not have trade KT to Houston for Taylor and a first round pick?

I would have liked that deal better.
fishmike
Posts: 53867
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
2/25/2005  1:32 PM
Posted by franco12:

could he not have trade KT to Houston for Taylor and a first round pick?

I would have liked that deal better.
the $$$ doesnt match, so it wouldnt work. In some ways I'm glad we kept Kurt. I'm always talking about moving him but he's a good player and shouldnt be dumped. Anyone notice he's actually started putting the ball on the floor? Rather than always taking that baseline jumper he's been using a pump fake then dribble and move to the basket. When I was at the Mia game he actually made an up and under move.

If this is a transition period guys like JYD/Rose/KT are good players to have.

If we can land a big talent at either the 3 or 5 in this draft we could have an interesting team with some nice firepower and those 3 guys to bang and hustle and play some D. Marvin Williams or Bogut would look very nice... I would be nice for once to rely on good planning from management rather then praying for an 8.9% chance to win the #1 pick
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Pharzeone
Posts: 32183
Alba Posts: 14
Joined: 2/11/2005
Member: #871
2/25/2005  1:39 PM
Posted by Allanfan20:

Again, the Rose deal was a nice trade. I just have absolutely no clue why Zeke did the taylor move. Like Fish said, you can't say "Ohh, we gave up Moochie, Vin and Nazr for a couple of first rounders and 2 front court players." b/c it wasn't a 3 way deal. We got all the good stuff by only trading Nazr. We got crap in the Moochie deal. What was the point? We have Sweetney to post up and KT to shoot, and we have Rose and JYD who can defend and get garbage points. Isiah doesn't deserve to be fired for this one, but if he doesn't excecute properly this Summer, then maybe the chants should begin.

BTW, what's more mind boggling about the Mo T trade is the fact that even Isiah doesn't sound optimistic about him. I saw him on Sportsdesk, and he admitted he doesn't bring the right championship mentality (Tim Thomas anyone?) and that he was HOPING to get that our of him (Again, I say Tim Thomas?) We can't continue bringing in these players who come in with a half arsed mentality. At least Moochie worked like a dog and was a good presence in the locker room.

Neither of these 2 trades cross eachother out. They had absolutely nothing to do with eachother. We had no damn right making the Taylor trade.

He wants roster space. That is more clear now then before. I am not worry about Dolan spending money and the Knicks are over the cap not because of Taylor but contracts like Houston, Marbury, Penny and TT. If you look at the deal short term it makes no sense but in 2006-2007, Houston and Taylor will be big time assets with trade value. For 2 years the Knicks will have approximately 30 million in expiring contracts which are now more valuable to some teams (depending on the new CBA)than players.
I don't like to play bad rookies , I like to play good rookies - Mike D'Antoni
fishmike
Posts: 53867
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
2/25/2005  1:56 PM
if you want roster space then just waive Moochie and Baker this summer. Now your paying an additional $9mm to a player you dont need and aparantly dont really want.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Page 8 of 11 « First‹ Previous 6  7  8  9  10 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
Knicks get two FIRST ROUND PICKS!!!! NY/HOU/SA
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©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