Knickoftime wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:jrodmc wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:Knickoftime wrote: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?
Its not really specifically about having or keeping Gallo, Chandler etc... But the pre Melo deals if managed better would have left the Knicks with leftover assets after the Melo trade. Which they could have used to add more talent. Say they are able to keep Moz and Chandler and offer Hill and one of the draft picks acquired in a previous Jamal Crawford trade which Walsh got a future pick back for Crawford. Or vise versa and we kept Hill and draft pick. Those assets can now be used to build around Melo. In a perfect scenario Amare wouldn't have been signed for 100mil contract either with 80 yr old man knees as doctors proclaimed. And we would also have some cap space due to not blowing our load. W.Chandler and another assets (which we would have plenty) could have been used to acquire a SG. Instead of depending on JR Smith going to china during the lockout year and signing him for pennies due to luck. Or maybe we get that as well on top of quality starter would be an option. Moz or Hill would plug in at center or be moved for another Center. Flexibility to improve and balance out the rosters. There would be tons of different variables. But the key theme is tons of options to try and improve.
Wow, and I thought quantum physics was complicated...
Its not really that complicated. We made bad move after bad move giving away assets chasing stars until we were grid locked. Dating back to when Walsh came in to tear down everything hoping to sign Lebron & co as FA in 2008. We have one good season to show for it.
Now we risk going down the same road because for some reason ppl believe this time its gonna be different. Melo wasn't Marbury but the end results were still the same. Irving isn't Marbury or Melo, but the results would still be the same.
The point is your premise is based on a cascading butterfly effect series of events being different. And I'm not sure all that accurate, though I'll reserve judgment. How do you figure a lottery pick for Jefferies in addition to Hill?
You have a bigger problem, though. You specifically critical of the specific moves the Knicks made, but are generally critical of trading players or picks in general.
Which is it?
Building trough the lottery is by no means some certain path to success, despite popular theory.
There is a common theme between all of them which makes them all similar and is the same issue with adding Kyrie today. That depending on the deal we won't have the pieces to improve going forward. That is the main issue. And we already have Perry saying Cavs can have anything they want except KP.
I have no problem trading picks depending on the deal. Already stated I would give up Melo & 2 future first round picks 1 protected and 1 unprotected for Irving. As well as other side moves like swapping Lee for Shumpert, Adding KOQ & Kuz to the deals so Cavs can get other smaller upgrades. If that's not good enough then so be it. Have no problem going after a Marbury or Melo. Everything depends on situation. I don't beleive Knicks are in the situation where giving up a boat load of assets for Irving will serve their best interest. Part of the reason is I don't view Irving as that caliber of player. And there are many pit falls that goes into the possible trade.
Trading for Irving and we would have 2 seasons to turn this team into a contender or there is a possibility that he could bolt for a better situation. With less assets and no real cap space to work with after the deal it could lead to desperation moves of giving up even more future picks packaged with the Lee's or Noah's for players that could give immediate help. The move also depends a lot on KP becoming a superstar player which isn't a guarantee. There is no guarantee that Irving-Hardaway-KP trio is a better team then the Wizards Wall-Beal-Porter trio or the Raps Lowry-Derozan-Ibaka-Jonas or Bucks Freak-Middleton-Parker-Brogden. Yet they will have their picks and other movable pieces or better supporting cast to continually improve as well as young players from past drafts that are getting better. And this isn't even getting into Celtics or the West coast. Irving also isn't a seamless fit. Neither Irving, Hardaway, or KP are known for their passing. So would the team also need to reshuffle players to balance the team out to get maximum contributions out of everyone.
Wolves were in the ideal situation for the moves they made. They traded their previous lotto picks as well as the one they held at the draft for Butler while being able to fall back on Towns, Wiggins, Rubio, Deing and major cap space. As well as nabbing the #16 pick in the draft. Then moved Rubio for another future draft pick. Then signed Teague & Gibson with the space. Don't owe any future picks yet added one. All made possible by loading up on enough assets to play with house money.
If a draft pick is a bust we would still have draft picks and pieces to improve the team afterwards. If Irving is a bust(not because he is producing stats but in terms of generating wins) then there isn't much room for improvement afterwards given our situation not for a couple years unless we give up valuable pieces our self or more future assets. Now what if Willy and Frank actually turn out to be good players? To go along with the picks coming in that wasn't traded away. To go along with better cap situation. All i'm saying is its to early imo for a move like this for Irving. I would prefer to collect more assets and then go after a star while still being able to fall back on healthy situation to continually improve.
https://vote.nba.com/en Vote for your Knicks.
