1-Melo: All-Star scorer and shot creator on par with Irving. Almost identical scorers at this point. Irving better off the dribble, Melo off isolations in the post.
2-Lee: Top 30 three point shooter in the league. Great win now investment. Would add depth to their 2 guard rotation.
3-Future first round pick (top 10 protection followed by top 7 protections).
4-Second round pick

That's quite a bit for Irving. I don't think anyone will top that offer in terms of win now and also giving a future asset (our pick would be a good pick for them, not like we would be a contender anytime soon).

knicks1248 wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:Unless we significantly upgrade the talent level on the roster, I don't think KP stays.

It's not as cut and dry as "how does Kyrie make the team better." Getting him is a power play to keep our franchise player.

Make the move.

yup-

there's no other logical way of looking at this

Sure there is, playing for a one year $7.5m QO takes a LOT of discipline and guts when there is a 5 year/$140m guarantee on the table.

Almost no star(ish) players leave after their rookie scale deal.

Nalod wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Nalod wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Vmart wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Vmart wrote:

Welpee wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

Jrshoops wrote:This Get Kyrie Irving at all costs talk is ridiculous.

Youth - Check
Talented - Check
Defense - No

We finally have our first round picks again, and we need to rebuild through the draft and developing our own prospects first! Kyrie doesn't get us to a championship with KP and Hardaway! We need to see what we have with Ntilikina first, he has the ability with his desire and wingspan to be a GREAT defender and at 18, playing against professional players, had a well rounded offensive game.

We don't even know if KP can stay healthy for an entire season. We need more picks, not less! We have no ****in patience to ever do it the right way in ANY sport in New York, that's why we win way less than we should in all NY sports.

We had this great press conference with a great mantra of building and changing the culture. Kyrie will still only be 27 when his deal is up. If we show we are a player away then that is the time to get him and trade some picks.

Don't do it Knicks! Build from the bottom and finally change our culture. Long term success not a sugar rush!

As I said when Phil was relieved of his contract, "Welcome to hell."

Yeah, because it was heaven when Phil was here.

Philosophy is important when rebuilding following the path and sticking to it.

Yeah, stick to a philosophy that wasn't working and keep us sinking deeper into the hole we were
in.

What are you talking about. Cut the crap you know And I know it's important for any franchise to build up their youth. Trading away future assets for immediate gratification is absolutely the reason we are in the reason for where we are. We did it for a Melo trade and look what has been accomplished. You do the same for Kyrie and you just repeated the same mistake. Learn from mistakes.

Like I said I'll take Kyrie but only for Melo and O'Quin or Lee

Then why did Phil resign Melo, sign Lee and Noah and trade for Rose? That was his "youth movement?" How many "philosophies" did we have to endure from Phil before he got it right? He that was truly his plan he should've let Melo walk when he was a free agent. Phil's plan was he had no plan, at least not one that worked.

And can we cut the crap with these valuable "assets" we gave up for Melo. The two picks would've been nice but wouldn't have yielded a franchise player where we picked. And Gallo, W. Chandler, Mozgov and Felton have played in a grand total of zero all-star games collectively since being traded.

Two picks, Gallo, W. Chandler, Mozgov and Felton were assets.
No one knows what they will be converted to.
The point is that by getting to Knicks while stripping all assets out of the team Melo killed his and Knicks chances to ever play competitive ball during his contract.
And then he resigned doing same.
There was 0 chances he will ever win with Knicks and he did not. -60 regular season record and a couple of games win in playoffs in 7 years.
Talk about professional athlete live wasted by his own decisions.

Assets... assets...
Can you really continually spout this putrid line of sheehit, year after year?
Gallo - injured more than he plays
Mayor - Now starting for your Shanghai Dragons...
Mozgov - Hey! He's been traded 15 times, but he got a ring!
Felton - newsflash, we got him back for next to nothing, which, as it turned out, was about what he was worth.

Picks? We STILL talkin bout picks?
February 22, 2011: 2016 1st round draft pick (Jakob Poeltl was later selected) a 2015 2nd round draft pick (Richaun Holmes was later selected) a 2012 2nd round draft pick (Quincy Miller was later selected), a 2013 2nd round draft pick (Romero Osby was later selected), a 2014 1st round draft pick (Dario Saric was later selected) and a 2016 1st round draft pick (Jamal Murray was later selected)

Dario ended up turning into Willy for us while he's enjoying the Hinkie process's affect on his career; "How to live your NBA cellar life as trade bait for future picks".

All these other names are tearing up the league now, huh?

Names are one thing, but how did the franchise fair with Melo? Denver won 57 games the year we won 54.
Since then both teams have floundered.
So its not like you can really boost in either direction.
But you try.

Little difference you always manage to overlook, Mr. Centrist.

What was Denver's record with Melo?
What was our record before Melo?
Answer me those and get back to me about boosts. And please spare me the pathetic "Amare, Pringles and the yoots were taking us to the promised land all by their lonesomes!"

It's okay. I've always understood that unrequited MoobyHate can be a very mellow thing.

Yes, label me, what ever.
Your questions really cannot be answered with any accuracy because the simple fact is there are no two scenarios that one can compare. Denver had a different roster than Knicks before and after the trade.
So why go there.
There is no hate, its just a simple fact that his tenure here mostly failed and for the 100th time, I don't blame him. The dynamics of the knick teams in his tenure did not add up. The 54 win team was an old unsustainable roster. He was great BTW!!! Denver won 57 games that year. They were great!!!

IN the end both teams failed. Key word here is "TEAMS". Statiscially Melo did just fine. Statistically he lived up to his contract and was mostly healthy.
I have no fault with him.
Is it possible if we never Signed AMare and never did that trade the history of the knicks would replicate Denvers? I doubt it. We might have made other deals and not commited to Danillo and the Mayor.
There is so many other possibilities we could have gone it. But we didn't.

Thus, Melo was Melo (all star diva before and after trade), but the real question is not how did the others in the trade do, its how did the knicks do?
That's all that matters.

So you speak of not mentioning boosts, but then say that all that matters is how did the knicks do? Melo was a boost, the facts bear this out.
If Denver's 57 wins don't matter, why mention them, if it's not an answer to the real question?

All I will continue to mention is our record immediately pre-Mooby and immediately post-Mooby. Simple, probably painful fact for some; it's almost always pretty easy to just count (Unless Bonn gets involved). And the factoid is just about the knicks.

So the continual, never-dying narrative about Trade Rape and the "assets" we sacrificed to the Moobygod will continue unabated, anyway. Like the LinsaneLove and Pringles for POTUS movements. The NBA: an inferno of saviors!

And back in the day of Sombers and Homers, you gladly accepted the Centrist label.
I will try to refrain from labeling again though.

knicks1248 wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:Unless we significantly upgrade the talent level on the roster, I don't think KP stays.

It's not as cut and dry as "how does Kyrie make the team better." Getting him is a power play to keep our franchise player.

Make the move.

yup-

there's no other logical way of looking at this

Hmmmm. We have people arguing KP won't want to stay if we get Kyrie and people arguing we must get Kyrie to keep KP. Probably both groups are wrong. We just need a team that's improving and has a good future and we have to offer KP more than any other team does. The latter part alone might be all that matters. I'm not obsessed with keeping KP at all costs anyway. He needs to improve a lot before I start to think that way. No, that doesn't mean I've given up on him or don't want to keep him but I'm not going to make a deal that I consider bad just out of being terrified of losing KP.

knicks1248 wrote:Oh I agree, but I already see that KP is a 2nd or 3rd option. He is not a alpha type player, and he's ok with being that 2nd guy. His personality (IMO)indicates, he wouldn't mind more touches, but to be the go to guy every time down court.. That's not him, and it will never be.

But was he held enough as a child?

knickstorrents wrote:Trading for Kyrie is a lateral move at best. He doesn't play defense, he doesn't make others better. Why do we want him? I want defense on all 5 positions.

yes but he is alot better than Melo. ALso he fits the team right now.

Irving
Hardaway
Lee
KP
Willy

Irving is 25. He can still adapt and maybe, just maybe he can play with KP and Hardaway. If not, he is a FA in 2 years...no big deal.

Bonn1997 wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:Unless we significantly upgrade the talent level on the roster, I don't think KP stays.

It's not as cut and dry as "how does Kyrie make the team better." Getting him is a power play to keep our franchise player.

Make the move.

yup-

there's no other logical way of looking at this

Hmmmm. We have people arguing KP won't want to stay if we get Kyrie and people arguing we must get Kyrie to keep KP. Probably both groups are wrong. We just need a team that's improving and has a good future and we have to offer KP more than any other team does. The latter part alone might be all that matters. I'm not obsessed with keeping KP at all costs anyway. He needs to improve a lot before I start to think that way. No, that doesn't mean I've given up on him or don't want to keep him but I'm not going to make a deal that I consider bad just out of being terrified of losing KP.

I agree 100000%. Well run orgs don't make bad trades to appease star players and KP isn't even a star player yet. We have teams loaded up like Warriors, OKC, Minny, Celtics, Bucks. Depending on what is given up in the deal for Irving we wouldn't beat out Toronto in the playoffs over the next 3 yrs let alone those other teams. Yet we wouldn't have the pieces to add to improve on that. We would have to package Lee & Thomas with more future draft picks to try and upgrade due to not having the cap space to our right sign players. Only to not come close to these teams with a plethora of young talent and all their future draft picks. And all the flexibility in the world to improve. Knicks need to add as much young talent as possible so that they can make Irving type of deals with house money like Wolves did for Butler who is a better player then Irving.

newyorknewyork wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Vmart wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Vmart wrote:

Welpee wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

Jrshoops wrote:This Get Kyrie Irving at all costs talk is ridiculous.

Youth - Check
Talented - Check
Defense - No

We finally have our first round picks again, and we need to rebuild through the draft and developing our own prospects first! Kyrie doesn't get us to a championship with KP and Hardaway! We need to see what we have with Ntilikina first, he has the ability with his desire and wingspan to be a GREAT defender and at 18, playing against professional players, had a well rounded offensive game.

We don't even know if KP can stay healthy for an entire season. We need more picks, not less! We have no ****in patience to ever do it the right way in ANY sport in New York, that's why we win way less than we should in all NY sports.

We had this great press conference with a great mantra of building and changing the culture. Kyrie will still only be 27 when his deal is up. If we show we are a player away then that is the time to get him and trade some picks.

Don't do it Knicks! Build from the bottom and finally change our culture. Long term success not a sugar rush!

As I said when Phil was relieved of his contract, "Welcome to hell."

Yeah, because it was heaven when Phil was here.

Philosophy is important when rebuilding following the path and sticking to it.

Yeah, stick to a philosophy that wasn't working and keep us sinking deeper into the hole we were
in.

What are you talking about. Cut the crap you know And I know it's important for any franchise to build up their youth. Trading away future assets for immediate gratification is absolutely the reason we are in the reason for where we are. We did it for a Melo trade and look what has been accomplished. You do the same for Kyrie and you just repeated the same mistake. Learn from mistakes.

Like I said I'll take Kyrie but only for Melo and O'Quin or Lee

Then why did Phil resign Melo, sign Lee and Noah and trade for Rose? That was his "youth movement?" How many "philosophies" did we have to endure from Phil before he got it right? He that was truly his plan he should've let Melo walk when he was a free agent. Phil's plan was he had no plan, at least not one that worked.

And can we cut the crap with these valuable "assets" we gave up for Melo. The two picks would've been nice but wouldn't have yielded a franchise player where we picked. And Gallo, W. Chandler, Mozgov and Felton have played in a grand total of zero all-star games collectively since being traded.

And what good did the franchise player do? Sent the franchise back another 6 years, what else? Counting "all star" games is how you measure player value? Enuff said, I suppose.

The problem goes deeper then the Melo trade. Its giving up Hill and another lotto pick to dump Jeffries contract which turned into Felton. So Felton cost 2 lotto picks. Its not getting any future picks for Crawford or Randloph which could have been offered in the Melo trade and still left us with assets build with after the deal. David Lee putting up 18pts 12rebs 4ast and us not getting *anything* back for him when all was said and done when he should have gotten us a lotto pick. Refusing to add Fields to the Melo deal and giving up a future pick instead only to get nothing in return for Fields one year later. This would be on top of having Gallo, Chandler, Moz, still possibly Felton.

Exactly what's the virtue of still having gallo, chandler, mozgiv and Felton?

90sKnicks wrote:I'm surprised everyone is overlooking the fact that Kyrie doesn't want to play on a Cleveland team that probably wins the East and competes for a title so that he can go to a worse team and be the man. I guess I could've maybe understood it if Lebron was locked in to Cleveland for several years, but he's a free agent after next year and likely leaving and then Kyrie could have been the man and savior to Cleveland and if Lebron did stay then he could ask for a trade next summer. I guess I question how important winning is to Kyrie. Sounds like another Melo to me.

franco12 wrote:I was in the boat to get him at the right price, now not so much:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2017/07/25/the-one-red-flag-a-team-trading-for-kyrie-irving-needs-to-know/?utm_term=.5e487cf616b9

Before James’s return in 2014, the Cavaliers were outscored by at least 5.1 net points per 100 possessions with Irving on the court, roughly the same production we expect from a team that wins 25 to 27 games a season. In 2014-15 Cleveland had a net rating of plus-0.9 with Irving on the court and James on the bench. The next season that declined to minus-0.5 and then again to minus-8 in 2016-17, a mark lower than the 26-win Los Angeles Lakers (minus-7.2 net rating) last season. When Irving was without the services of James and Kevin Love, the team’s net rating dropped even further to minus-12.8.