Rose is explainable as a 1 year option.
Melo is already under contract.

Gordon and Noah are hard to explain.

Consider the premise that this is Melo's last "full price" contract, that whether here or elsewhere he will join the bananaboat 4 somewhere. Or if he returns, it will have to be on a Tim Duncan type deal.

The Knicks main competitive advantage is a large amount cash. They make bank.

They cannot leverage cash due to salary cap limits.

Can we make sense of targeting oft injured players?

1) Guaranteed Money? Any guaranteed years on present contracts need to be co-terminous with Melo. I can give a non-guaranteed 4th year to any player and no fan should care. For injured players, it motivates them to earn that year. These kinds of players may be more willing to accept non guaranteed money.

2) Homerun or Strike Out. Nothing in between. The NBA is becoming a superfriend league. You need 4 all stars or no all stars to advance year to year. Assume you are indifferent to winning or losing this year. Play your guys hard and hope you win a chip or lost 70 games due to injury. Draft pick next year. Basically, close your eyes and swing as hard as you can and hope you connect.

3) Surround KP with Character. Want to be an all star, learn from other all stars. Even injured, these guys can impart wisdom.

I'm not sure I buy this model, but I find it hard to rationalie so many injured players unless the Knicks are hiding the fountain of youth under MSG.

Its a very risky set of bets. On short terms deals, I am fine. Even on Melo timed deals, I will live.
But you touch a 4 year with risky players and my eyes go crazy. Nothing guaranteed past 18/19.

The only hedge is draft picks. No trading draft picks from hereon. Too risky.

So, what happens.

Neither of Gordon nor Noah will have no trade clauses. If things go bad for one or two pulling us out of cntention, you can likely trade the healthy players to competitive teams over the next three. They all have risk adjusted value. You just cannot overpay.

I'd guess a healthy lineup is top 4 in the east. Still need a bench though... 4 out of 5 still a playoff team. 3 out of 5 is probably back in the lottery. 2 out of 5 last year's hell. 1 out of 5 is the Sixers :)

Rose
Gordon
Melo
KP
Noah

Eh, I'll watch but I am not excited. Unless they really have that fountain of youth.

EwingsGlass wrote:

SwishAndDish13 wrote:Some would simply call this low risk, high reward. As many posted on the trade reaction threads, worst case scenario, this blows up and we get a pick. We are offering less money than anybody for FAs, so it's not a great sell. We had to gamble a bit but we have our pick and have to assume the system will be rectified in 2017. We should be in an advantageous position either way.

If it was low risk, high reward, why doesnt everybody sign lots of injured players? Its high risk high reward. Only hedge is the lotto pick.

I guess the real question is how many players have to remain healthy for them to be competitive and how many have to be injured for them to get a good lotto pick?

The cap has us a bit tied because we can't legitimately compete for top tier FAs under the current system because we offer less dollars. This is a chance to make us competitive but if it fails, we should have a decent pick. I don't get super excited about it but I accept the reality and I don't just blame the organization, it is what the system forces. I don't even think Noah would have had interest here if he wasn't from here. As absurd as it is, one can argue he may have taken a slight discount to come here.

Regarding what would result in a complete explosion, I think it depends more on Rose and Melo. If both miss extended time we are a lottery team. I can live with that going into the lockout. At least there is some intrigue around the team and we have a couple NBA-caliber guards on the roster.

EwingsGlass wrote:

SwishAndDish13 wrote:Some would simply call this low risk, high reward. As many posted on the trade reaction threads, worst case scenario, this blows up and we get a pick. We are offering less money than anybody for FAs, so it's not a great sell. We had to gamble a bit but we have our pick and have to assume the system will be rectified in 2017. We should be in an advantageous position either way.

If it was low risk, high reward, why doesnt everybody sign lots of injured players? Its high risk high reward. Only hedge is the lotto pick.

I guess the real question is how many players have to remain healthy for them to be competitive and how many have to be injured for them to get a good lotto pick?

Every signing carries risk, but teams would rather have to manage injured talent than fail to attract it at all.

fishmike wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

SwishAndDish13 wrote:Some would simply call this low risk, high reward. As many posted on the trade reaction threads, worst case scenario, this blows up and we get a pick. We are offering less money than anybody for FAs, so it's not a great sell. We had to gamble a bit but we have our pick and have to assume the system will be rectified in 2017. We should be in an advantageous position either way.

If it was low risk, high reward, why doesnt everybody sign lots of injured players? Its high risk high reward. Only hedge is the lotto pick.

I guess the real question is how many players have to remain healthy for them to be competitive and how many have to be injured for them to get a good lotto pick?

They do. Mosgov had tons of injuries... big money. Beal is a ticking timebomb, huge contract. Chandler Parsons had the Houston/STAT surgery... just got offered a massive deal. We could go on an on with this... teams 100% do sign tons of injured players and the reason is simple, impact talent is the hardest thing to acquire and keep. If Noah only plays 50 games but is reasonably healthy come playoff time (assuming the KNicks are in) he is a huge player for us.

Every signing carries risk, but teams would rather have to manage injured talent than fail to attract it at all.

But why do we have to take a risk this year? Wouldn't you want that risk on Curry, Westbrook, CP3, Lowry, Greek Freak, Gordon Hayward? This year's free agent class is absolute dog shyt. Spend the 90% of the cap on bargain basement roster filler, then go for broke next year.

STUPID PHUCKING KNICKS!

DrAlphaeus wrote:Are there gonna be ads on the jerseys this year? Maybe the sponsor should be the Hospital for Special Surgery.

Seriously. They're going to need these guys on speed dial.

ChuckBuck wrote:

SwishAndDish13 wrote:Chuck, I had a laugh at the pics, but do you at least acknowledge that we are at a competitive disadvantage in the current CBA? Rose is expiring let's try to relax a bit and see who is actually on the roster before losing our minds.

We are at a disadvantage if we let ourselves be at one. We don't have to commit big guaranteed money on all glass team of Noah and Gordon/Lee/Insert Sucky ass 2 guard. We can stretch it out to 4 or 5 flexible vet contracts instead. Let everybody blow their load, then get the table scraps later.

Stupid stupid stupid Knicks...

I disagree here bc the system encourages that. Please provide some tangible ways you would have spent the money that would be plausible and where players would have realistically accepted an offer and I am happy to acknowledge it as an alternative. Rose is expiring so he'should not a big deal.

ChuckBuck wrote:

fishmike wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

SwishAndDish13 wrote:Some would simply call this low risk, high reward. As many posted on the trade reaction threads, worst case scenario, this blows up and we get a pick. We are offering less money than anybody for FAs, so it's not a great sell. We had to gamble a bit but we have our pick and have to assume the system will be rectified in 2017. We should be in an advantageous position either way.

If it was low risk, high reward, why doesnt everybody sign lots of injured players? Its high risk high reward. Only hedge is the lotto pick.

I guess the real question is how many players have to remain healthy for them to be competitive and how many have to be injured for them to get a good lotto pick?

They do. Mosgov had tons of injuries... big money. Beal is a ticking timebomb, huge contract. Chandler Parsons had the Houston/STAT surgery... just got offered a massive deal. We could go on an on with this... teams 100% do sign tons of injured players and the reason is simple, impact talent is the hardest thing to acquire and keep. If Noah only plays 50 games but is reasonably healthy come playoff time (assuming the KNicks are in) he is a huge player for us.

Every signing carries risk, but teams would rather have to manage injured talent than fail to attract it at all.

But why do we have to take a risk this year? Wouldn't you want that risk on Curry, Westbrook, CP3, Lowry, Greek Freak, Gordon Hayward? This year's free agent class is absolute dog shyt. Spend the 90% of the cap on bargain basement roster filler, then go for broke next year.

STUPID PHUCKING KNICKS!

Rose is expiring and you have no clue what the salary structure will look like as well as the cap out of the inevitable lockout. If you think the league is going to allow the Knicks, Lakers, and Celtics to continue to not be allowed to sign FAs unless players want to take a financial hit you are kidding yourself.

ChuckBuck wrote:

SwishAndDish13 wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

fishmike wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

SwishAndDish13 wrote:Some would simply call this low risk, high reward. As many posted on the trade reaction threads, worst case scenario, this blows up and we get a pick. We are offering less money than anybody for FAs, so it's not a great sell. We had to gamble a bit but we have our pick and have to assume the system will be rectified in 2017. We should be in an advantageous position either way.

If it was low risk, high reward, why doesnt everybody sign lots of injured players? Its high risk high reward. Only hedge is the lotto pick.

I guess the real question is how many players have to remain healthy for them to be competitive and how many have to be injured for them to get a good lotto pick?

They do. Mosgov had tons of injuries... big money. Beal is a ticking timebomb, huge contract. Chandler Parsons had the Houston/STAT surgery... just got offered a massive deal. We could go on an on with this... teams 100% do sign tons of injured players and the reason is simple, impact talent is the hardest thing to acquire and keep. If Noah only plays 50 games but is reasonably healthy come playoff time (assuming the KNicks are in) he is a huge player for us.

Every signing carries risk, but teams would rather have to manage injured talent than fail to attract it at all.

But why do we have to take a risk this year? Wouldn't you want that risk on Curry, Westbrook, CP3, Lowry, Greek Freak, Gordon Hayward? This year's free agent class is absolute dog shyt. Spend the 90% of the cap on bargain basement roster filler, then go for broke next year.

STUPID PHUCKING KNICKS!

Rose is expiring and you have no clue what the salary structure will look like as well as the cap out of the inevitable lockout. If you think the league is going to allow the Knicks, Lakers, and Celtics to continue to not be allowed to sign FAs unless players want to take a financial hit you are kidding yourself.

You can sign FAs, but doesn't mean it has to be ones everyone else is chasing. Sign roster filler this year to flexible/moveable contracts and pounce next year when they're real players to be had.

Unfortunately, no deals have been signed that are in line with that thinking yet. I will reiterate that Rose as an expiring deal meets the criteria you seek so hopefully you are at least ok with him for 1 year.