New York Knicks ($1,304,071; 28th); Los Angeles Lakers ($1,428,173; 29th)

Finally, we have two of the league's flagship franchises, who threaten to become cautionary tales for NBA executives. These teams suggest that while the road of excess might lead to the palace of wisdom, it doesn't necessarily lead to the playoffs. However, there are big differences between the Knicks and Lakers. L.A. gambled with aging, Hall of Fame talent and was undercut by the injury pitfalls that come with that strategy. The Knicks, on the other hand, tried to spend their way to a roster worthy of Carmelo Anthony's talents, and the resulting mess is what Phil Jackson is currently trying to mop up. In the process, New York might lose the one player it was trying to please.

EnySpree wrote:lock.....no need to make a buzz kill thread when we are currently crawling out from under this bull****....lock this

Could say the same about your Josh Smith trade idea

Knicks22 wrote:lifelong Knicks fan, but how anyone could equate the lakers and NYK "two flagship franchises" is amazing. Laker's appearances in Finals over 50 years makes them arguably the most successful franchise in team sports - well beyond Yanks.

Let's hope Phil gets this on track. Max-ing out a 30 year old isn't the way to go, hopefully we start afresh.

Might be talking more about the Knicks being one of the first franchises and the most valuable according to Forbes. Unfortunately its been a long time since they have been known for anything else but futility.

GustavBahler wrote:

EnySpree wrote:lock.....no need to make a buzz kill thread when we are currently crawling out from under this bull****....lock this

Could say the same about your Josh Smith trade idea

Blah lol...

We're not overspending anymore. Even that Josh Smith idea isn't overspending. Am are still comes off the books so they'll be money to pay with still

newyorknewyork wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11155438/san-antonio-spurs-lead-league-spending-efficiency-nba

New York Knicks ($1,304,071; 28th); Los Angeles Lakers ($1,428,173; 29th)

Finally, we have two of the league's flagship franchises, who threaten to become cautionary tales for NBA executives. These teams suggest that while the road of excess might lead to the palace of wisdom, it doesn't necessarily lead to the playoffs. However, there are big differences between the Knicks and Lakers. L.A. gambled with aging, Hall of Fame talent and was undercut by the injury pitfalls that come with that strategy. The Knicks, on the other hand, tried to spend their way to a roster worthy of Carmelo Anthony's talents, and the resulting mess is what Phil Jackson is currently trying to mop up. In the process, New York might lose the one player it was trying to please.

How? They already gave Amare 100mil and instead of spending money on a PG they spent it on a Center even though Carmelo isn't a creator?

The so called need at the time was for a consistent second scorer and for whatever reason the Knicks thought Andrea Bargnani was it. You don't need a PG for a Mike Woodson offense. You need someone to walk the ball up the court and hand it to Melo. The team try to get what the"need" was. Did a terrible of it.

meloshouldgo wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11155438/san-antonio-spurs-lead-league-spending-efficiency-nba

New York Knicks ($1,304,071; 28th); Los Angeles Lakers ($1,428,173; 29th)

Finally, we have two of the league's flagship franchises, who threaten to become cautionary tales for NBA executives. These teams suggest that while the road of excess might lead to the palace of wisdom, it doesn't necessarily lead to the playoffs. However, there are big differences between the Knicks and Lakers. L.A. gambled with aging, Hall of Fame talent and was undercut by the injury pitfalls that come with that strategy. The Knicks, on the other hand, tried to spend their way to a roster worthy of Carmelo Anthony's talents, and the resulting mess is what Phil Jackson is currently trying to mop up. In the process, New York might lose the one player it was trying to please.

How? They already gave Amare 100mil and instead of spending money on a PG they spent it on a Center even though Carmelo isn't a creator?

The so called need at the time was for a consistent second scorer and for whatever reason the Knicks thought Andrea Bargnani was it. You don't need a PG for a Mike Woodson offense. You need someone to walk the ball up the court and hand it to Melo. The team try to get what the"need" was. Did a terrible of it.

That wasn't spending, they traded 3 contracts on the books already for Bargs. Spending is Amnestying Billups expiring contract to sign Tyson Chandler.