TripleThreat wrote:

F500ONE wrote:A 2018 1st is of no relevance to our future success

Zero whatsoever, keep telling yourself it would be

The current rookie slotting system and contract setup is vested until 2020.

There will be almost certainly be a labor war in 2016-2017.

There is a current strong push in the ownership group to shift the current lottery from 3 teams to SIX TEAMS. This is part of the measures proposed to reduce tanking and give more teams a chance not to end up on the league "treadmill of slow death"

No one is quite sure what the new labor war will bring. 2018 in sports time is FOREVER from now. To say, what could be the first overall pick in that 2018 draft for the Knicks given lottery reform and the fallout of the next labor war, and just say it has no value now is crazy.

The reason teams are hoarding first round picks right now, and even 2nds in some cases, is because that vested 2020 window gives franchises COST CERTAINTY over those players. They aren't just cheap cost controlled labor, but they are grandfathered in to prevent the impact of a new labor deal from having an inflationary impact on their value. It's the same reason why folks who think the Knicks can get a 1st rounder out of Shumpert or STAT or Bargs are smoking crack.

FIRST ROUND PICKS IN THE MODERN NBA ARE WORTH GOLD. They don't always pan out, and they have limited value to contenders edging near the cap consistently, but THEY ARE WORTH SOLID GOLD TO A TEAM LIKE THE KNICKS.

It wasn't that long ago that the NFC West in the NFL was THE WORST division in all of pro football. Until it became a powerhouse. And now teams there are struggling again. To try to be predictive of draft value FOUR YEARS from now in pro sports is insane.

However look at the tea leaves. The owners WON THE LAST LABOR WAR. The players had to give back a good chunk of money and eat shorter contracts overall. Teams didn't get hard capped bu the luxury tax and repeater system essentially created an invisible hard cap for the league. Superstars will always get paid, that's simply a reality of pro sports, however draft picks mean cheap labor, and the NBA is moving towards the NFL model of using cheap labor.

The trick to a good organization is seeking out MARKET INEFFICIENCIES. Seeking value where the rest of the league OVERLOOKS IT. When Don Nelson was scouting internationally, even long long before even the Spurs were doing it, he was looking for hidden value. Same when he mined the CBA for guys like Mario Elie. Or got Manute Bol to stretch the floor as a three point shooter.

The consistent trend of bad organizations is to buck market trends of the entire league in the current marketplace. If the rest of the league covets and values 1st rounders, there is a REASON FOR IT. When the Knicks behave in a manner that devalues them, it works to the detriment of the franchise. It's like the Knicks trying to sell ice cream in the winter time. When the rest of the league is selling heavy jackets and space heaters.

What is "cutting bait" on Bargs?

He has ZERO CURRENT TRADE VALUE. You want to pay him so he can go play for another team? Where he might help a team win or lose (more likely lose), and if he does, what if it impacts the Knicks draft slot?

With Smith and STATs injury history and the general trend for big men in the NBA to be more injury prone than other positions, why tempt fate and cut him now when you might need the warm body later?

Also Bargs, until his rights are renounced, even as a free agent, IIRC, still offers the Knicks his BIRD RIGHTS. Which may offer a low chance , even a really low chance, to be useful in the offseason in some other move.

F500ONE, dude, actually read the current CBA sometime.

Great post. I learned a lot. Puts things in perspective.

TripleThreat wrote:

F500ONE wrote:A 2018 1st is of no relevance to our future success

Zero whatsoever, keep telling yourself it would be

The current rookie slotting system and contract setup is vested until 2020.

There will be almost certainly be a labor war in 2016-2017.

There is a current strong push in the ownership group to shift the current lottery from 3 teams to SIX TEAMS. This is part of the measures proposed to reduce tanking and give more teams a chance not to end up on the league "treadmill of slow death"

No one is quite sure what the new labor war will bring. 2018 in sports time is FOREVER from now. To say, what could be the first overall pick in that 2018 draft for the Knicks given lottery reform and the fallout of the next labor war, and just say it has no value now is crazy.

The reason teams are hoarding first round picks right now, and even 2nds in some cases, is because that vested 2020 window gives franchises COST CERTAINTY over those players. They aren't just cheap cost controlled labor, but they are grandfathered in to prevent the impact of a new labor deal from having an inflationary impact on their value. It's the same reason why folks who think the Knicks can get a 1st rounder out of Shumpert or STAT or Bargs are smoking crack.

FIRST ROUND PICKS IN THE MODERN NBA ARE WORTH GOLD. They don't always pan out, and they have limited value to contenders edging near the cap consistently, but THEY ARE WORTH SOLID GOLD TO A TEAM LIKE THE KNICKS.

It wasn't that long ago that the NFC West in the NFL was THE WORST division in all of pro football. Until it became a powerhouse. And now teams there are struggling again. To try to be predictive of draft value FOUR YEARS from now in pro sports is insane.

However look at the tea leaves. The owners WON THE LAST LABOR WAR. The players had to give back a good chunk of money and eat shorter contracts overall. Teams didn't get hard capped bu the luxury tax and repeater system essentially created an invisible hard cap for the league. Superstars will always get paid, that's simply a reality of pro sports, however draft picks mean cheap labor, and the NBA is moving towards the NFL model of using cheap labor.

The trick to a good organization is seeking out MARKET INEFFICIENCIES. Seeking value where the rest of the league OVERLOOKS IT. When Don Nelson was scouting internationally, even long long before even the Spurs were doing it, he was looking for hidden value. Same when he mined the CBA for guys like Mario Elie. Or got Manute Bol to stretch the floor as a three point shooter.

The consistent trend of bad organizations is to buck market trends of the entire league in the current marketplace. If the rest of the league covets and values 1st rounders, there is a REASON FOR IT. When the Knicks behave in a manner that devalues them, it works to the detriment of the franchise. It's like the Knicks trying to sell ice cream in the winter time. When the rest of the league is selling heavy jackets and space heaters.

What is "cutting bait" on Bargs?

He has ZERO CURRENT TRADE VALUE. You want to pay him so he can go play for another team? Where he might help a team win or lose (more likely lose), and if he does, what if it impacts the Knicks draft slot?

With Smith and STATs injury history and the general trend for big men in the NBA to be more injury prone than other positions, why tempt fate and cut him now when you might need the warm body later?

Also Bargs, until his rights are renounced, even as a free agent, IIRC, still offers the Knicks his BIRD RIGHTS. Which may offer a low chance , even a really low chance, to be useful in the offseason in some other move.

F500ONE, dude, actually read the current CBA sometime.

TT I understand the value of picks

Hence we never should have traded

Novak-Camby-2 2nd rounders-1st

For Bargnani in the first place

What you don't understand is the value I outlined

In previous posts by trading him

If we are going to be good come 2017, 2018

The pick will not enhance our ability to win

It could possibly stretch the window so-to-speak

But it's a reach to say so

The only way the pick has GOLD value is if we suck

I don't think Phil is planning on fielding a bad team come 2018

The lost value in the pick can be made up

By acquiring 2nd rounders along the way until then

Bargnani is an anchor that has weighed this

Team down since day 1 of acquisition, end of story

And if Picks are GOLD as you say Phil should

Have dumped Shumpert for a 1st on multiple occasions

As Shumpert has almost no shot to be part

Of a long term rebuild here

The sad thing Shumpert could have been traded

For a 1st yielded next yr of the yr after

F500ONE wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

F500ONE wrote:A 2018 1st is of no relevance to our future success

Zero whatsoever, keep telling yourself it would be

The current rookie slotting system and contract setup is vested until 2020.

There will be almost certainly be a labor war in 2016-2017.

There is a current strong push in the ownership group to shift the current lottery from 3 teams to SIX TEAMS. This is part of the measures proposed to reduce tanking and give more teams a chance not to end up on the league "treadmill of slow death"

No one is quite sure what the new labor war will bring. 2018 in sports time is FOREVER from now. To say, what could be the first overall pick in that 2018 draft for the Knicks given lottery reform and the fallout of the next labor war, and just say it has no value now is crazy.

The reason teams are hoarding first round picks right now, and even 2nds in some cases, is because that vested 2020 window gives franchises COST CERTAINTY over those players. They aren't just cheap cost controlled labor, but they are grandfathered in to prevent the impact of a new labor deal from having an inflationary impact on their value. It's the same reason why folks who think the Knicks can get a 1st rounder out of Shumpert or STAT or Bargs are smoking crack.

FIRST ROUND PICKS IN THE MODERN NBA ARE WORTH GOLD. They don't always pan out, and they have limited value to contenders edging near the cap consistently, but THEY ARE WORTH SOLID GOLD TO A TEAM LIKE THE KNICKS.

It wasn't that long ago that the NFC West in the NFL was THE WORST division in all of pro football. Until it became a powerhouse. And now teams there are struggling again. To try to be predictive of draft value FOUR YEARS from now in pro sports is insane.

However look at the tea leaves. The owners WON THE LAST LABOR WAR. The players had to give back a good chunk of money and eat shorter contracts overall. Teams didn't get hard capped bu the luxury tax and repeater system essentially created an invisible hard cap for the league. Superstars will always get paid, that's simply a reality of pro sports, however draft picks mean cheap labor, and the NBA is moving towards the NFL model of using cheap labor.

The trick to a good organization is seeking out MARKET INEFFICIENCIES. Seeking value where the rest of the league OVERLOOKS IT. When Don Nelson was scouting internationally, even long long before even the Spurs were doing it, he was looking for hidden value. Same when he mined the CBA for guys like Mario Elie. Or got Manute Bol to stretch the floor as a three point shooter.

The consistent trend of bad organizations is to buck market trends of the entire league in the current marketplace. If the rest of the league covets and values 1st rounders, there is a REASON FOR IT. When the Knicks behave in a manner that devalues them, it works to the detriment of the franchise. It's like the Knicks trying to sell ice cream in the winter time. When the rest of the league is selling heavy jackets and space heaters.

What is "cutting bait" on Bargs?

He has ZERO CURRENT TRADE VALUE. You want to pay him so he can go play for another team? Where he might help a team win or lose (more likely lose), and if he does, what if it impacts the Knicks draft slot?

With Smith and STATs injury history and the general trend for big men in the NBA to be more injury prone than other positions, why tempt fate and cut him now when you might need the warm body later?

Also Bargs, until his rights are renounced, even as a free agent, IIRC, still offers the Knicks his BIRD RIGHTS. Which may offer a low chance , even a really low chance, to be useful in the offseason in some other move.

F500ONE, dude, actually read the current CBA sometime.

TT I understand the value of picks

Hence we never should have traded

Novak-Camby-2 2nd rounders-1st

For Bargnani in the first place

What you don't understand is the value I outlined

In previous posts by trading him

If we are going to be good come 2017, 2018

The pick will not enhance our ability to win

It could possibly stretch the window so-to-speak

But it's a reach to say so

The only way the pick has GOLD value is if we suck

I don't think Phil is planning on fielding a bad team come 2018

The lost value in the pick can be made up

By acquiring 2nd rounders along the way until then

Bargnani is an anchor that has weighed this

Team down since day 1 of acquisition, end of story

And if Picks are GOLD as you say Phil should

Have dumped Shumpert for a 1st on multiple occasions

As Shumpert has almost no shot to be part

Of a long term rebuild here

The sad thing Shumpert could have been traded

For a 1st yielded next yr of the yr after

There's only one issue....the Knicks thought they'd be good in 2014 which is why they included it in the deal for Melo.

Mistake numero uno, we were a lotto team in 2014 WITH melo. Mistake numero dos is trade the 2016 pick whether a swap or not for a player who hasnt contributed and wont even be on the team in 2016....stupid, very stupid move. There is no guarantee the Knicks will be good in 2018 either, sure they have cap space, but no sure thing any major pieces will come here, also....4 years from now melo will be 34....he already gassed in preseason and hasnt played much as a 30 year old. At some point the team needs to stop the bleeding of trading draft picks. They cant control how a player plays per se, but they can control their picks.

Bargs does not get a free pass. He gets an opportunity with a new coach and a new system.
If he succeeds, then deal with it. He is not a Marbury type bench cancer so there is no reason to waive and still pay his salary.

From a fans perspective there is nothing but upside to his existence this year either on the court or as an expiring. If some one wants him, then he is trade fodder. Same for Amare. They are not the future unless they are paid as role players, not cornerstones.

TripleThreat wrote:

F500ONE wrote:
TT I understand the value of picks

If we are going to be good come 2017, 2018

The pick will not enhance our ability to win

It could possibly stretch the window so-to-speak

But it's a reach to say so

In less than a year's time, the Pacer went from a team on the rise and possible contender to a team losing Lance Stephenson and Paul George in about a week, to watching Hibbert self destruct and are now relying on Rodney Stuckey to carry heavy water for them on offense.

That's less than a year. The fortunes of a team can change on a dime. A year ago, the Cleveland Cavaliers were seen as in a free fall. They fired their GM. They made rash deals for Deng and Hawes. And now they have LeBron James and Kevin Love. The Heat went from consistent Finals participants to hoping Josh McRoberts pans out for them. And you want to project what the Knicks will be in 2018?

No, clearly you do not understand the value of 1st round picks. I doubt, from seeing some of your Captain Haiku posts, that you even really understand the current CBA, where actual market inefficiencies in the NBA 'system' exist and how teams actually work to get better.

You are the worst kind of fan. Ignorance compounded with arrogance. You don't have the ability to accept that there are things you clearly don't know about the NBA and how it operates and then seek to learn them.

I completely understand the CBA

You can try and go the personal route all you want

You're trying to project value on picks

4yrs from now as GOLD which in of itself

Is just as asinine in your opinion of me projecting if

Our team will be contending or not then by then

And all your examples above which were poor

For the subject matter at hand, had nothing to do with

Picks being sacrificed but let's delve a little here

Pacers traded Kawhai for Hill but the Pacers weren't

Quite contenders when they did and they had this

Guy by the name of Paul George on the rise

It didn't stop the Pacers from being contenders did it

On the other hand to help your chitty examples out

Continuing in this vein it did breathe more life into

The Spurs as the picks of Splitter and Leonard paid huge dividends

But it wasn't like the Spurs weren't contenders without them

I can conversely say with the ballooning of cap space

Teams won't rely so much on rebuilding through the draft

As they won't be restrained by dubious cap restrictions

Their attention could very well go towards signing free agents

I'm very informed on the Collective Bargaining Agreement

Care to explain why Phil didn't trade Shumpert for a 1st

knickscity wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

F500ONE wrote:A 2018 1st is of no relevance to our future success

Zero whatsoever, keep telling yourself it would be

The current rookie slotting system and contract setup is vested until 2020.

There will be almost certainly be a labor war in 2016-2017.

There is a current strong push in the ownership group to shift the current lottery from 3 teams to SIX TEAMS. This is part of the measures proposed to reduce tanking and give more teams a chance not to end up on the league "treadmill of slow death"

No one is quite sure what the new labor war will bring. 2018 in sports time is FOREVER from now. To say, what could be the first overall pick in that 2018 draft for the Knicks given lottery reform and the fallout of the next labor war, and just say it has no value now is crazy.

The reason teams are hoarding first round picks right now, and even 2nds in some cases, is because that vested 2020 window gives franchises COST CERTAINTY over those players. They aren't just cheap cost controlled labor, but they are grandfathered in to prevent the impact of a new labor deal from having an inflationary impact on their value. It's the same reason why folks who think the Knicks can get a 1st rounder out of Shumpert or STAT or Bargs are smoking crack.

FIRST ROUND PICKS IN THE MODERN NBA ARE WORTH GOLD. They don't always pan out, and they have limited value to contenders edging near the cap consistently, but THEY ARE WORTH SOLID GOLD TO A TEAM LIKE THE KNICKS.

It wasn't that long ago that the NFC West in the NFL was THE WORST division in all of pro football. Until it became a powerhouse. And now teams there are struggling again. To try to be predictive of draft value FOUR YEARS from now in pro sports is insane.

However look at the tea leaves. The owners WON THE LAST LABOR WAR. The players had to give back a good chunk of money and eat shorter contracts overall. Teams didn't get hard capped bu the luxury tax and repeater system essentially created an invisible hard cap for the league. Superstars will always get paid, that's simply a reality of pro sports, however draft picks mean cheap labor, and the NBA is moving towards the NFL model of using cheap labor.

The trick to a good organization is seeking out MARKET INEFFICIENCIES. Seeking value where the rest of the league OVERLOOKS IT. When Don Nelson was scouting internationally, even long long before even the Spurs were doing it, he was looking for hidden value. Same when he mined the CBA for guys like Mario Elie. Or got Manute Bol to stretch the floor as a three point shooter.

The consistent trend of bad organizations is to buck market trends of the entire league in the current marketplace. If the rest of the league covets and values 1st rounders, there is a REASON FOR IT. When the Knicks behave in a manner that devalues them, it works to the detriment of the franchise. It's like the Knicks trying to sell ice cream in the winter time. When the rest of the league is selling heavy jackets and space heaters.

What is "cutting bait" on Bargs?

He has ZERO CURRENT TRADE VALUE. You want to pay him so he can go play for another team? Where he might help a team win or lose (more likely lose), and if he does, what if it impacts the Knicks draft slot?

With Smith and STATs injury history and the general trend for big men in the NBA to be more injury prone than other positions, why tempt fate and cut him now when you might need the warm body later?

Also Bargs, until his rights are renounced, even as a free agent, IIRC, still offers the Knicks his BIRD RIGHTS. Which may offer a low chance , even a really low chance, to be useful in the offseason in some other move.

F500ONE, dude, actually read the current CBA sometime.

TT I understand the value of picks

Hence we never should have traded

Novak-Camby-2 2nd rounders-1st

For Bargnani in the first place

What you don't understand is the value I outlined

In previous posts by trading him

If we are going to be good come 2017, 2018

The pick will not enhance our ability to win

It could possibly stretch the window so-to-speak

But it's a reach to say so

The only way the pick has GOLD value is if we suck

I don't think Phil is planning on fielding a bad team come 2018

The lost value in the pick can be made up

By acquiring 2nd rounders along the way until then

Bargnani is an anchor that has weighed this

Team down since day 1 of acquisition, end of story

And if Picks are GOLD as you say Phil should

Have dumped Shumpert for a 1st on multiple occasions

As Shumpert has almost no shot to be part

Of a long term rebuild here

The sad thing Shumpert could have been traded

For a 1st yielded next yr of the yr after

There's only one issue....the Knicks thought they'd be good in 2014 which is why they included it in the deal for Melo.

Mistake numero uno, we were a lotto team in 2014 WITH melo. Mistake numero dos is trade the 2016 pick whether a swap or not for a player who hasnt contributed and wont even be on the team in 2016....stupid, very stupid move. There is no guarantee the Knicks will be good in 2018 either, sure they have cap space, but no sure thing any major pieces will come here, also....4 years from now melo will be 34....he already gassed in preseason and hasnt played much as a 30 year old. At some point the team needs to stop the bleeding of trading draft picks. They cant control how a player plays per se, but they can control their picks.

So you're pigeon holing Phil

As not really accomplishing much in 5yrs

Look I understand what you're getting at

But we have picks 2015 and 2017

That should be enough with making deals

Along the way for supplementary picks[2nds] and signing free agents

The landscape will drastically be different

From 2010-2011 to 2017-2018

But in all reality Phil should have bottomed

The team out day 1 on the job and started from scratch

Acquiring as many picks as possible from deals

I know I know I know

guys

are

killing

me

Dare

YOU

/

/

/

fishmike wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

fishmike wrote:a few things...

first NO to cutting Bargs. There is zero zilch reason to do it now.

There isnt some talent out there that we have to have on the roster by cutting Bargs. Wear? Galloway? These guys arent NBA talent.

Amare is looking very good and bouncy in preseason and I expect for Fisher to lean on him early. We also know that he will break at some point and having another big who can do some things will help. Smith has gotten hurt alot. Dalembert is best when his minutes are in the mid 20s.

We also all talk about cap space, but Barg's has a nice sized expiring Knicks may use at the deadline.

The only reason to cut Bargs is Knick fans want something shiny and new. Yes he sucks. No I dont want him to be part of the rotation, but its important to get any value you can for him. Right now that value is zero. That can change quickly. Patience.

Expirings aren't what they used to be

It would more than likely require taking back salary

If it resulted in acquiring immediate pick(s) of use

For such an expense, okay

But ask yourself when is the last time an

Expiring contract was traded, where a team got good value for it

Since all teams are going to have cap flexibility soon

It hurts the value even more in an expiring

Our only hope is a team like Philly or maybe Orlando

Brooklyn probably needs some help financially

But like us they don't have much to offer

you

have

no

crystal

ball

point

is

Knicks

in

NO way

benefit

from

trading

him

now....

and

there

many

potential

reasons

keeping

him

could

prove

to

be

the

smart

thing

to

do

I actually outlined many number of reasons of benefits

1 - we could get back a serviceable player who fits better

2 - generate a TPE

3 - put us about $9mil[a J.R. Smith + Shump trade] away getting below the cap[in the event a player is waived we can put in a bid]

4 - puts us near the tax thresh hold possibly avoiding tax payment with 1 more small trade

5 - allows proper development and roles to be filled in the system

6 - open a roster spot for someone like Thanasis or surprise NBDL talent to sign

But hey according to TT you only

Have a grasp for the NBA CBA if you

Place GOLD value on future picks 4yrs from now

fishmike wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

fishmike wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

fishmike wrote:a few things...

first NO to cutting Bargs. There is zero zilch reason to do it now.

There isnt some talent out there that we have to have on the roster by cutting Bargs. Wear? Galloway? These guys arent NBA talent.

Amare is looking very good and bouncy in preseason and I expect for Fisher to lean on him early. We also know that he will break at some point and having another big who can do some things will help. Smith has gotten hurt alot. Dalembert is best when his minutes are in the mid 20s.

We also all talk about cap space, but Barg's has a nice sized expiring Knicks may use at the deadline.

The only reason to cut Bargs is Knick fans want something shiny and new. Yes he sucks. No I dont want him to be part of the rotation, but its important to get any value you can for him. Right now that value is zero. That can change quickly. Patience.

Expirings aren't what they used to be

It would more than likely require taking back salary

If it resulted in acquiring immediate pick(s) of use

For such an expense, okay

But ask yourself when is the last time an

Expiring contract was traded, where a team got good value for it

Since all teams are going to have cap flexibility soon

It hurts the value even more in an expiring

Our only hope is a team like Philly or maybe Orlando

Brooklyn probably needs some help financially

But like us they don't have much to offer

you

have

no

crystal

ball

point

is

Knicks

in

NO way

benefit

from

trading

him

now....

and

there

many

potential

reasons

keeping

him

could

prove

to

be

the

smart

thing

to

do

I actually outlined many number of reasons of benefits

1 - we could get back a serviceable player who fits better

2 - generate a TPE

3 - put us about $9mil[a J.R. Smith + Shump trade] away getting below the cap[in the event a player is waived we can put in a bid]

4 - puts us near the tax thresh hold possibly avoiding tax payment with 1 more small trade

5 - allows proper development and roles to be filled in the system

6 - open a roster spot for someone like Thanasis or surprise NBDL talent to sign

But hey according to TT you only

Have a grasp for the NBA CBA if you

Place GOLD value on future picks 4yrs from now

well to be fair his points were spot on, and you need only look at the Knicks. But hey... who needs a guy like Lamarcus Aldridge on your team when you can have Eddie Curry?

Considering our history I get it

The Curry trade involved much more than 1 pick &

Those picks given up were closer to when we acquired him too

[2006 and 2007 respectively] not 4yrs away

But that's what Phil is for right

I'm pretty sure Phil isn't looking at 2018

And banking on the pick becoming LaMarcus Aldridge[lottery bound]

If so that means everything in between

Has been a come up shortance, yes I said shortance

Could the pick be used better possibly so

At the same time it's been discussed a pick

Would more than likely have to be included to move Amar'e

More than likely no different for Bargs

Other than salary which makes Amar'e deal more difficult

To get done doesn't mean there shouldn't be urgency to move them