martin wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:Now if we were giving Horford a max deal for 4 years - I would have NO ISSUES with that - NONE

I think a lot of teams will offer him a max contract and he'd have no reason to come here. Either Noah really wants to be here or he's expecting that we'll outbid everyone else.

No disagreement. I don't think we have a realistic shot at landing Horford right now. But that is not reason for us to go bid against ourselves on overrated players with injury history or attitude problems. And even if we are bidding against other teams we should only offer what's reasonable. In case of Noah a two year guaranteed contract is reasonable. Sorry for the typos, Swype on new Android phone hasn't settled to my style yet

So what happens when the team only offers what you think are reasonable contracts and then signs no one?

It's a sellers market out there

You keep the assets you have instead of trading for one year rentals that then puts you in the position to get into a bidding war for damaged goods. Or basically use common sense, This stuff is case by case.

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:Now if we were giving Horford a max deal for 4 years - I would have NO ISSUES with that - NONE

I think a lot of teams will offer him a max contract and he'd have no reason to come here. Either Noah really wants to be here or he's expecting that we'll outbid everyone else.

No disagreement. I don't think we have a realistic shot at landing Horford right now. But that is not reason for us to go bid against ourselves on overrated players with injury history or attitude problems. And even if we are bidding against other teams we should only offer what's reasonable. In case of Noah a two year guaranteed contract is reasonable. Sorry for the typos, Swype on new Android phone hasn't settled to my style yet

So what happens when the team only offers what you think are reasonable contracts and then signs no one?

It's a sellers market out there

ooohh I know! pick me! Then we get to hear about Phil's failure to lure anyone, how a rookie GM is obviously a failure, and how Phil cant build a team.

I don't know about others but the only thing I hold against Phil is giving Melo the contract he gave him and the NTC. That was pretty stupid IMO. If he signs Noah to a 4 year deal, I would hold that against him as well.

nixluva wrote:I still think adding Rose and Noah makes all kinds of sense. I don't believe Noah is as diminished as he looked before getting surgery on his shoulder. He was playing with a damaged shoulder for a while. I think the long layoff is going to help him. If you look at his game highlights from 2015 and 2016 he looks just as fast.

Rose has to have a great year in his contract year. He expressed that he was mainly just trying to get thru last season. This is the season he was trying to get to. For both Rose and Noah there is risk but also great upside for the Knicks. Media jokes are one thing but the Knicks could be WAY better than they think. It's worth the risk IMO.

DrAlphaeus wrote:Rose has gifts from the basketball gods that are greater than the mortal frame upon which he has been given. Great players can also adapt, maybe he can figure out how to use his driving capabilities in spots and buy in on a team defense scheme.

I'm a little weary and wary of the "All Star 2: DNP Boogaloo" thing though, for sure.

One possible upside is surrounding KP with NBA all-star killer scoring talent like Melo and Rose — even in their decline — will inspire KP to new heights. If KP is the franchise, he needs to get that consistent killer edge offensively both of those guys have shown.

I like this post and approved of it. Lol. Think operative word though is 'had'. Do agree that being around players with killer instincts is beneficial. Think Noah if signed helps KP in that regard

Knickoftime wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:Yes, I think you can build a team like that - just not in one or two years - I think you gather assets over time and at some point you need a bit of luck, but if we have the right pieces we can score a real big player on a trade that doesn't have health issues and attitude problems.

The clear direction was that we were staying away from starfukks for players with a bunch of baggage or question marks - we haven't changed that yet, but the premise of another thread is a 4 year deal for Noah at 18MM - That would be the change from that direction

Genuine, what's the difference between a "real big player" and a "starfukke" player.

Can you define them and give me examples?

Think I just did? When we get players with more baggage than productivity at max or near max contracts it's a starfukk - Melo with NTC, Noah at 70MM, Eddy Curry, Amare etc
Now if in some kind of scenario we had the assets to trade for tier one player and gave them the max - Horford in this market, CP3 our Durant it would be a good a trade.

Melo at the time of the ex. was the same age as Horford is now and arguably as if not more productive.

If you like Horford more than Melo, you're entitled to what's a valid personal opinion. You might even make a decent case.

But we don't know if Horford gets NTC or not.

So want to have a discussion that Horford is the better player than Melo was. By all means, have it. Just don't forgot cover the last 5 seasons Horford has played 11 games in one and 29 games in another.

But to label one a "starfukk" just an an expression of a personal opinion without establishing a basis for it just brings the discourse now a couple of notches.

Does Horford have injury history or history of getting coaches fired? We discuss our opinions in a forum, if this had some other higher purpose, I am not aware of it.

SupremeCommander wrote:after seeing the insane deals that teams are paying guys i think i like this deal more for the knicks now

And I dislike trading Rolo for Rise even more.

meloshouldgo wrote:

martin wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

martin wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:Now if we were giving Horford a max deal for 4 years - I would have NO ISSUES with that - NONE

I think a lot of teams will offer him a max contract and he'd have no reason to come here. Either Noah really wants to be here or he's expecting that we'll outbid everyone else.

No disagreement. I don't think we have a realistic shot at landing Horford right now. But that is not reason for us to go bid against ourselves on overrated players with injury history or attitude problems. And even if we are bidding against other teams we should only offer what's reasonable. In case of Noah a two year guaranteed contract is reasonable. Sorry for the typos, Swype on new Android phone hasn't settled to my style yet

So what happens when the team only offers what you think are reasonable contracts and then signs no one?

It's a sellers market out there

You keep the assets you have instead of trading for one year rentals that then puts you in the position to get into a bidding war for damaged goods. Or basically use common sense, This stuff is case by case.

your response does not make sense and is a big non-answer. We are not talking about Rose. We are talking about free agents.

Team is KP, Melo, Rose and parts right now. If you wanna add low level dudes to that, that's fine, say it. If you want to build a team, the market this year dictates you overpay by the standards you are setting.

My response was trading Rolo means we now need to bid for starting center and our choice is Noah who is damaged goods. What part of this did not make sense?

I was responding in regards to signing free agents. Rolo is gone. Free agency is now here.

So we keep Rolo, Calderon and Grant. Now what? We can't get top tier free agents with Rose/Noah, but we were going to sign players because we kept Lopez?

People don't want Rose so what was the alternative? Apparently Conley wasn't coming here so what's plan B? Rondo? Jennings? What about their injury history? What point guard better than Rose were we getting in exchange for a Lopez package? Did some Knicks fans want us to return next season with the same lottery roster? Did you just want to tank this season and carry over the cap space to next year and sign big time free agents? The same level of top tier big time free agents who are flocking to join us this season?

This is a serious question to the naysayers, give us some examples of moves you think were available to us that would've made us better?

meloshouldgo wrote:

martin wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

martin wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:Now if we were giving Horford a max deal for 4 years - I would have NO ISSUES with that - NONE

I think a lot of teams will offer him a max contract and he'd have no reason to come here. Either Noah really wants to be here or he's expecting that we'll outbid everyone else.

No disagreement. I don't think we have a realistic shot at landing Horford right now. But that is not reason for us to go bid against ourselves on overrated players with injury history or attitude problems. And even if we are bidding against other teams we should only offer what's reasonable. In case of Noah a two year guaranteed contract is reasonable. Sorry for the typos, Swype on new Android phone hasn't settled to my style yet

So what happens when the team only offers what you think are reasonable contracts and then signs no one?

It's a sellers market out there

You keep the assets you have instead of trading for one year rentals that then puts you in the position to get into a bidding war for damaged goods. Or basically use common sense, This stuff is case by case.

your response does not make sense and is a big non-answer. We are not talking about Rose. We are talking about free agents.

Team is KP, Melo, Rose and parts right now. If you wanna add low level dudes to that, that's fine, say it. If you want to build a team, the market this year dictates you overpay by the standards you are setting.

My response was trading Rolo means we now need to bid for starting center and our choice is Noah who is damaged goods. What part of this did not make sense?

Okay, fair enough.

Knicks keep Lopez.

Knicks were a 32 win team with Lopez.

How do the Knicks get better?

Knickoftime wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

martin wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

martin wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:Now if we were giving Horford a max deal for 4 years - I would have NO ISSUES with that - NONE

I think a lot of teams will offer him a max contract and he'd have no reason to come here. Either Noah really wants to be here or he's expecting that we'll outbid everyone else.

No disagreement. I don't think we have a realistic shot at landing Horford right now. But that is not reason for us to go bid against ourselves on overrated players with injury history or attitude problems. And even if we are bidding against other teams we should only offer what's reasonable. In case of Noah a two year guaranteed contract is reasonable. Sorry for the typos, Swype on new Android phone hasn't settled to my style yet

So what happens when the team only offers what you think are reasonable contracts and then signs no one?

It's a sellers market out there

You keep the assets you have instead of trading for one year rentals that then puts you in the position to get into a bidding war for damaged goods. Or basically use common sense, This stuff is case by case.

your response does not make sense and is a big non-answer. We are not talking about Rose. We are talking about free agents.

Team is KP, Melo, Rose and parts right now. If you wanna add low level dudes to that, that's fine, say it. If you want to build a team, the market this year dictates you overpay by the standards you are setting.

My response was trading Rolo means we now need to bid for starting center and our choice is Noah who is damaged goods. What part of this did not make sense?

Okay, fair enough.

Knicks keep Lopez.

Knicks were a 32 win team with Lopez.

How do the Knicks get better?

I have already answered this many times. Keep acquiring assets like Rolo. They are valuable to other teams. And sooner or later opportunity will present itself to trade for a legit star or move them to create enough cap space to sign one outright. In the meantime draft the best talent you can. It's slow process but I would like to see us try it.

meloshouldgo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

martin wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

martin wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:Now if we were giving Horford a max deal for 4 years - I would have NO ISSUES with that - NONE

I think a lot of teams will offer him a max contract and he'd have no reason to come here. Either Noah really wants to be here or he's expecting that we'll outbid everyone else.

No disagreement. I don't think we have a realistic shot at landing Horford right now. But that is not reason for us to go bid against ourselves on overrated players with injury history or attitude problems. And even if we are bidding against other teams we should only offer what's reasonable. In case of Noah a two year guaranteed contract is reasonable. Sorry for the typos, Swype on new Android phone hasn't settled to my style yet

So what happens when the team only offers what you think are reasonable contracts and then signs no one?

It's a sellers market out there

You keep the assets you have instead of trading for one year rentals that then puts you in the position to get into a bidding war for damaged goods. Or basically use common sense, This stuff is case by case.

your response does not make sense and is a big non-answer. We are not talking about Rose. We are talking about free agents.

Team is KP, Melo, Rose and parts right now. If you wanna add low level dudes to that, that's fine, say it. If you want to build a team, the market this year dictates you overpay by the standards you are setting.

My response was trading Rolo means we now need to bid for starting center and our choice is Noah who is damaged goods. What part of this did not make sense?

Okay, fair enough.

Knicks keep Lopez.

Knicks were a 32 win team with Lopez.

How do the Knicks get better?

I have already answered this many times. Keep acquiring assets like Rolo.

Okay, fair enough.

They signed Lopez to $13m per last year.

The cap went up 35%.

Bearing in mind Mosgov just got $16m per, who is this season's Lopez-like asset the Knicks can acquire?