crzymdups wrote:Do you really think Rondo could hold up for 100+ games?

probably not but I wouldnt compound it by adding salary to two more 31 year olds.

crzymdups wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Wouldnt this team be a better ball club with Grant and Lopez in place? Then we still have 15-18mm to spend on a SG and back ups?

If the rumors are true about Noah - it looks like we'll have Rose and Noah for the same price as your hypothetical Rondo, Rolo, Calderon, Grant. The latter group has more depth, but the former has way more upside. And the downside? We get a really good pick in a loaded 2017 draft. Not to mention we get Justin Holiday and the Bulls 2017 2nd rounder, which could be quite decent.

We still have $15-18m to spend on a SG and backups. And can go over the cap to re-sign Lance, Langston, and Dwill

It's a very similar scenario to the one you laid out, but I think the upside of Rose and Noah - who are clearly motivated to prove the Bulls management wrong - is much higher. To me it is worth the risk. It could be a special team if healthy.

A) We have $70 to 80 mil locked up in a center who is injured most of the time rather than having $40 mil remaining for a healthy, effective Rolo.
B) We gave up a first round draft pick (Grant) and one of our more effective players and better trade assets (Rolo) for a guy who is injured and/or ineffective.
C) We are bad but not bad enough to get a top lottery pick - maybe it ends up in the 10 to 15 range.

I'm not saying that the above will happen but you should give a fair description of the downside.

Bonn1997 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Wouldnt this team be a better ball club with Grant and Lopez in place? Then we still have 15-18mm to spend on a SG and back ups?

If the rumors are true about Noah - it looks like we'll have Rose and Noah for the same price as your hypothetical Rondo, Rolo, Calderon, Grant. The latter group has more depth, but the former has way more upside. And the downside? We get a really good pick in a loaded 2017 draft. Not to mention we get Justin Holiday and the Bulls 2017 2nd rounder, which could be quite decent.

We still have $15-18m to spend on a SG and backups. And can go over the cap to re-sign Lance, Langston, and Dwill

It's a very similar scenario to the one you laid out, but I think the upside of Rose and Noah - who are clearly motivated to prove the Bulls management wrong - is much higher. To me it is worth the risk. It could be a special team if healthy.

That's not really a fair description of the downside. The downside is:

A) We have $70 to 80 mil locked up in a center who is injured most of the time rather than having $40 mil remaining for a healthy, effective Rolo.
B) We gave up a first round draft pick (Grant) and one of our more effective players and better trade assets (Rolo) for a guy who is injured and/or ineffective.
C) We are bad but not bad enough to get a top lottery pick - maybe it ends up in the 10 to 15 range.

I'm not saying that the above will happen but you should give a fair description of the downside.

A) Didn't realize terms of the deal had been announced yet.
B) That remains to be seen - how effective Rose is. He himself has said he played at half speed last season just to get his legs back under him and make it through the season healthy. Not to mention he played in a mask with blurred vision for the first two months of the year.
C) Either way that would probably be true - KP and Melo and Rolo who was apparently very effective got the team the 9th worst record and thus the 9th pick. If DRose and Noah are really so much worse than Rolo and Calderon, then the team should have better than the 9th pick in a much better draft, right?

If you're worried the trade makes the team worse, I think it's fair to say that having a draft pick better than 9 in the coming draft is one aspect of the downside. We don't know how many years the Noah deal is for.

Also, I paid attention to Chicago last year. I think Noah was having his head messed with by Hoiberg even before his injury - he was told early in the season he'd be coming off the bench. It screwed with him. The arrival of Gasol in Chicago didn't do Noah many favors.

I happen to think Rose and Noah will be locked in with something to prove this season and it will be relatively successful.

I think I saw something on twitter say "Knicks going all in for the second round" which I think is probably fair.

I think this team can get to the second round - heck maybe with a favorable matchup they can get to the ECF if all goes well.

The thing I am most interested in is - I have been critical of Phil about his building process. People argued with me and told me that it was a slow build and Rolo and Grant were evidence of this. Are those people still on board with Phil? I'm curious.

I see the logic of this path. If we actually want to sign a star player next summer, making the playoffs and winning a series or two is of paramount importance. I think Rose and Noah help us do that. I want to see how many years the Noah deal may wind up being before passing judgment on the financial aspect.

Bonn1997 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Wouldnt this team be a better ball club with Grant and Lopez in place? Then we still have 15-18mm to spend on a SG and back ups?

If the rumors are true about Noah - it looks like we'll have Rose and Noah for the same price as your hypothetical Rondo, Rolo, Calderon, Grant. The latter group has more depth, but the former has way more upside. And the downside? We get a really good pick in a loaded 2017 draft. Not to mention we get Justin Holiday and the Bulls 2017 2nd rounder, which could be quite decent.

We still have $15-18m to spend on a SG and backups. And can go over the cap to re-sign Lance, Langston, and Dwill

It's a very similar scenario to the one you laid out, but I think the upside of Rose and Noah - who are clearly motivated to prove the Bulls management wrong - is much higher. To me it is worth the risk. It could be a special team if healthy.

That's not really a fair description of the downside. The downside is:

A) We have $70 to 80 mil locked up in a center who is injured most of the time rather than having $40 mil remaining for a healthy, effective Rolo.
B) We gave up a first round draft pick (Grant) and one of our more effective players and better trade assets (Rolo) for a guy who is injured and/or ineffective.
C) We are bad but not bad enough to get a top lottery pick - maybe it ends up in the 10 to 15 range.

I'm not saying that the above will happen but you should give a fair description of the downside.

There's a downside to every scenario you can come up with that's realistic and also an upside to each one but Phil has chosen which way he'd like to go and if we just get a little luck with health we'll be a really good team if we end up with J.Noah and one of C.Lee/E.Gordon who are the two SG's i'm hearing we're planning on going after. All we'll need to do is get a good backup PG and we're good to go and lets remember that it's still not the finished product cause that will come in the following off season.

We all will miss Rolo but once we see Noah out there with his high energy and doing everything Rolo can do and then some we'll quickly forget about Rolo. Noah is a different type of player on the floor and in the locker room and just what he brings vocally on and off the court will be a huge help.

crzymdups wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Wouldnt this team be a better ball club with Grant and Lopez in place? Then we still have 15-18mm to spend on a SG and back ups?

If the rumors are true about Noah - it looks like we'll have Rose and Noah for the same price as your hypothetical Rondo, Rolo, Calderon, Grant. The latter group has more depth, but the former has way more upside. And the downside? We get a really good pick in a loaded 2017 draft. Not to mention we get Justin Holiday and the Bulls 2017 2nd rounder, which could be quite decent.

We still have $15-18m to spend on a SG and backups. And can go over the cap to re-sign Lance, Langston, and Dwill

It's a very similar scenario to the one you laid out, but I think the upside of Rose and Noah - who are clearly motivated to prove the Bulls management wrong - is much higher. To me it is worth the risk. It could be a special team if healthy.

That's not really a fair description of the downside. The downside is:

A) We have $70 to 80 mil locked up in a center who is injured most of the time rather than having $40 mil remaining for a healthy, effective Rolo.
B) We gave up a first round draft pick (Grant) and one of our more effective players and better trade assets (Rolo) for a guy who is injured and/or ineffective.
C) We are bad but not bad enough to get a top lottery pick - maybe it ends up in the 10 to 15 range.

I'm not saying that the above will happen but you should give a fair description of the downside.

A) Didn't realize terms of the deal had been announced yet.
B) That remains to be seen - how effective Rose is. He himself has said he played at half speed last season just to get his legs back under him and make it through the season healthy. Not to mention he played in a mask with blurred vision for the first two months of the year.
C) Either way that would probably be true - KP and Melo and Rolo who was apparently very effective got the team the 9th worst record and thus the 9th pick. If DRose and Noah are really so much worse than Rolo and Calderon, then the team should have better than the 9th pick in a much better draft, right?

If you're worried the trade makes the team worse, I think it's fair to say that having a draft pick better than 9 in the coming draft is one aspect of the downside. We don't know how many years the Noah deal is for.

Also, I paid attention to Chicago last year. I think Noah was having his head messed with by Hoiberg even before his injury - he was told early in the season he'd be coming off the bench. It screwed with him. The arrival of Gasol in Chicago didn't do Noah many favors.

I happen to think Rose and Noah will be locked in with something to prove this season and it will be relatively successful.

I think I saw something on twitter say "Knicks going all in for the second round" which I think is probably fair.

I think this team can get to the second round - heck maybe with a favorable matchup they can get to the ECF if all goes well.

The thing I am most interested in is - I have been critical of Phil about his building process. People argued with me and told me that it was a slow build and Rolo and Grant were evidence of this. Are those people still on board with Phil? I'm curious.

I see the logic of this path. If we actually want to sign a star player next summer, making the playoffs and winning a series or two is of paramount importance. I think Rose and Noah help us do that. I want to see how many years the Noah deal may wind up being before passing judgment on the financial aspect.

crzymdups wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Wouldnt this team be a better ball club with Grant and Lopez in place? Then we still have 15-18mm to spend on a SG and back ups?

If the rumors are true about Noah - it looks like we'll have Rose and Noah for the same price as your hypothetical Rondo, Rolo, Calderon, Grant. The latter group has more depth, but the former has way more upside. And the downside? We get a really good pick in a loaded 2017 draft. Not to mention we get Justin Holiday and the Bulls 2017 2nd rounder, which could be quite decent.

We still have $15-18m to spend on a SG and backups. And can go over the cap to re-sign Lance, Langston, and Dwill

It's a very similar scenario to the one you laid out, but I think the upside of Rose and Noah - who are clearly motivated to prove the Bulls management wrong - is much higher. To me it is worth the risk. It could be a special team if healthy.

That's not really a fair description of the downside. The downside is:

A) We have $70 to 80 mil locked up in a center who is injured most of the time rather than having $40 mil remaining for a healthy, effective Rolo.
B) We gave up a first round draft pick (Grant) and one of our more effective players and better trade assets (Rolo) for a guy who is injured and/or ineffective.
C) We are bad but not bad enough to get a top lottery pick - maybe it ends up in the 10 to 15 range.

I'm not saying that the above will happen but you should give a fair description of the downside.

A) Didn't realize terms of the deal had been announced yet.
B) That remains to be seen - how effective Rose is. He himself has said he played at half speed last season just to get his legs back under him and make it through the season healthy. Not to mention he played in a mask with blurred vision for the first two months of the year.
C) Either way that would probably be true - KP and Melo and Rolo who was apparently very effective got the team the 9th worst record and thus the 9th pick. If DRose and Noah are really so much worse than Rolo and Calderon, then the team should have better than the 9th pick in a much better draft, right?

If you're worried the trade makes the team worse, I think it's fair to say that having a draft pick better than 9 in the coming draft is one aspect of the downside. We don't know how many years the Noah deal is for.

Also, I paid attention to Chicago last year. I think Noah was having his head messed with by Hoiberg even before his injury - he was told early in the season he'd be coming off the bench. It screwed with him. The arrival of Gasol in Chicago didn't do Noah many favors.

I happen to think Rose and Noah will be locked in with something to prove this season and it will be relatively successful.

I think I saw something on twitter say "Knicks going all in for the second round" which I think is probably fair.

I think this team can get to the second round - heck maybe with a favorable matchup they can get to the ECF if all goes well.

The thing I am most interested in is - I have been critical of Phil about his building process. People argued with me and told me that it was a slow build and Rolo and Grant were evidence of this. Are those people still on board with Phil? I'm curious.

I see the logic of this path. If we actually want to sign a star player next summer, making the playoffs and winning a series or two is of paramount importance. I think Rose and Noah help us do that. I want to see how many years the Noah deal may wind up being before passing judgment on the financial aspect.

Yeah but you brought up the topic of the worst case scenario. You can't say it remains to be seen or hasn't been announced. By definition, worse case scenario is in the future and remains to be seen.

Okay / well I agree: worst case scenario is they give Noah 4yr/$80m and he gets injured in year one and becomes a cap dead weight. That's the big danger. I'm hoping it's not a four year deal. He will almost certainly not be worth the money in years 3 and 4.

crzymdups wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Wouldnt this team be a better ball club with Grant and Lopez in place? Then we still have 15-18mm to spend on a SG and back ups?

If the rumors are true about Noah - it looks like we'll have Rose and Noah for the same price as your hypothetical Rondo, Rolo, Calderon, Grant. The latter group has more depth, but the former has way more upside. And the downside? We get a really good pick in a loaded 2017 draft. Not to mention we get Justin Holiday and the Bulls 2017 2nd rounder, which could be quite decent.

We still have $15-18m to spend on a SG and backups. And can go over the cap to re-sign Lance, Langston, and Dwill

It's a very similar scenario to the one you laid out, but I think the upside of Rose and Noah - who are clearly motivated to prove the Bulls management wrong - is much higher. To me it is worth the risk. It could be a special team if healthy.

That's not really a fair description of the downside. The downside is:

A) We have $70 to 80 mil locked up in a center who is injured most of the time rather than having $40 mil remaining for a healthy, effective Rolo.
B) We gave up a first round draft pick (Grant) and one of our more effective players and better trade assets (Rolo) for a guy who is injured and/or ineffective.
C) We are bad but not bad enough to get a top lottery pick - maybe it ends up in the 10 to 15 range.

I'm not saying that the above will happen but you should give a fair description of the downside.

A) Didn't realize terms of the deal had been announced yet.
B) That remains to be seen - how effective Rose is. He himself has said he played at half speed last season just to get his legs back under him and make it through the season healthy. Not to mention he played in a mask with blurred vision for the first two months of the year.
C) Either way that would probably be true - KP and Melo and Rolo who was apparently very effective got the team the 9th worst record and thus the 9th pick. If DRose and Noah are really so much worse than Rolo and Calderon, then the team should have better than the 9th pick in a much better draft, right?

If you're worried the trade makes the team worse, I think it's fair to say that having a draft pick better than 9 in the coming draft is one aspect of the downside. We don't know how many years the Noah deal is for.

Also, I paid attention to Chicago last year. I think Noah was having his head messed with by Hoiberg even before his injury - he was told early in the season he'd be coming off the bench. It screwed with him. The arrival of Gasol in Chicago didn't do Noah many favors.

I happen to think Rose and Noah will be locked in with something to prove this season and it will be relatively successful.

I think I saw something on twitter say "Knicks going all in for the second round" which I think is probably fair.

I think this team can get to the second round - heck maybe with a favorable matchup they can get to the ECF if all goes well.

The thing I am most interested in is - I have been critical of Phil about his building process. People argued with me and told me that it was a slow build and Rolo and Grant were evidence of this. Are those people still on board with Phil? I'm curious.

I see the logic of this path. If we actually want to sign a star player next summer, making the playoffs and winning a series or two is of paramount importance. I think Rose and Noah help us do that. I want to see how many years the Noah deal may wind up being before passing judgment on the financial aspect.

Yeah but you brought up the topic of the worst case scenario. You can't say it remains to be seen or hasn't been announced. By definition, worse case scenario is in the future and remains to be seen.

Okay / well I agree: worst case scenario is they give Noah 4yr/$80m and he gets injured in year one and becomes a cap dead weight. That's the big danger. I'm hoping it's not a four year deal. He will almost certainly not be worth the money in years 3 and 4.

OK fair enough. I don't think all of A through C would happen but it is the downside. Point C would require KP developing and Melo staying healthy. Or maybe Rose and Noah are healthy for part of the season. And those factors collectively could give us like 39 wins. The point is it's not a given that we end up with a great lottery pick if the trades don't work out.

Sure. There's a middle ground. Though I honestly think that for this one season it puts the Knicks in far better position to have a good year. I'm hoping the Noah deal is a one and one deal like Afflalo. That would allow maximum flexibility and allow the Knicks to make a run this year. I firmly believe to attract the big free agents, the Knicks need to at least make the second round. I think this trade and potential Noah signing gives them a fair chance to do that.