[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Bondy: High number of players w/expiring contracts has negatively affected ball movement (Fiz quote in his tweet)
Author Thread
TripleThreat
Posts: 22228
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 2/24/2012
Member: #3997

1/10/2019  6:55 PM
Cartman718 wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:
You compare Mudiay to Steph Curry, and I have an agenda. Got it. Glad we cleared that up. Because you have provided facts!

Did not compare Mudiay to Steph Curry in entirety, but the idea that you were presenting...his assist numbers or his lack of D.
We obviously disagree on the eye test.

So present your case with numbers instead of rhetoric.
Otherwise pls change your screen name to TrollBoy. lol


https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/150/Red-Herring


Red Herring

Ignoratio elenchi

(also known as: beside the point, misdirection [form of], changing the subject, false emphasis, the Chewbacca defense, irrelevant conclusion, irrelevant thesis, clouding the issue, ignorance of refutation)

Description: Attempting to redirect the argument to another issue to which the person doing the redirecting can better respond. While it is similar to the avoiding the issue fallacy, the red herring is a deliberate diversion of attention with the intention of trying to abandon the original argument.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/61/Avoiding-the-Issue


Avoiding the Issue

(also known as: avoiding the question [form of], missing the point, straying off the subject, digressing, distraction [form of])

Description: When an arguer responds to an argument by not addressing the points of the argument. Unlike the strawman fallacy, avoiding the issue does not create an unrelated argument to divert attention, it simply avoids the argument.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/169/Strawman-Fallacy


Strawman Fallacy

Description: Substituting a person’s actual position or argument with a distorted, exaggerated, or misrepresented version of the position of the argument.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/1/Ad-Hominem-Abusive


Ad Hominem (Abusive)

argumentum ad hominem

(also known as: personal abuse, personal attacks, abusive fallacy, damning the source, name calling, refutation by caricature, against the person, against the man)

Description: Attacking the person making the argument, rather than the argument itself, when the attack on the person is completely irrelevant to the argument the person is making.


****

Baseline point is the same. Mudiay has had a decent month ( good for him, good for the team) However his career arc as a whole shows a player who is massive liability on defense, someone who cannot hit a consistent league average three point shot, is chronically out of elite physical condition and is a low BBIQ player. He had two years of heavy minutes in Denver to prove himself and nothing in his career arc shows that this decent month is a marked long term shift in his ability/production/projection of value.

When these issues are brought up, some, not all, decide the best strategy is to ignore the relevant factors ( his actual skill set compared to what the league and league trends actually value in players) , change the subject or attempt to divert the subject, usually within some form of logical fallacy.

You are trying to change the subject, but picked the worst example possible. Being willfully ignorant of basic resource management concepts is one thing, but trying to defend doing it is actually devaluing this community as a whole. This is no longer just you disagreeing with a basketball point, you and Big Daddy G are now willfully going after people for not agreeing with you.

"Should have paid Lin and rid ourselves of Melo. Lin makes every team better." - HofstraBBall 11/12/2018
AUTOADVERT
TripleThreat
Posts: 22228
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 2/24/2012
Member: #3997

1/10/2019  7:09 PM
franco12 wrote:who is our PG next year?

In Mudiay, I see a young player who MIGHT be getting it. And in the NBA, players get paid a lot on potential - I'm not saying that is a good thing.

But, we have to build some consistency. Mudiay is probably never going to be an all star. But can he play a role on our team next year and for the next 3-4? Yes.

Can he be upgraded? Absolutely.

Do you know who our PG is next year? Where exactly are we getting him from?

Because we have a ton of questions with this roster, and you can't just turn the roster over every year. You have to pick your battles, and we have to start building - which means keeping some players.


It's a fair question.

Could Mudiay pan out? In theory, he can. But what are the odds. This is why Denver gave up on him. Let's say Mudiay's chances to turn it around in Denver was 5 in 100. Was that 5 percent chance worth the value of those minutes plus the opportunity cost of the roster spot and the cap value of whatever Mudiay was getting paid?

Food from the trash can will taste like filet mignon if you are starving. Water from the toilet will taste like champagne if you are dying of thirst in the desert. Many want to see something in Mudiay because the past few years were so bleak. I get that.

The Knicks would be better off giving a UDFA or a 2nd round pick a chance ( someone who might develop) instead of giving Mudiay a long term extension ( what he wants) If all Mudiay can get is another one year prove it deal, odds are he'd go to another team because the Knicks will make every attempt to replace him this offseason. You can get limited to no defense and a substandard three point shot from nearly anyone. Mudiay is producing with VOLUME. What happens if he's only getting 10 minutes a game? Only taking 6 shots? You have to look at him as a question if he can fill an actual role, not just what he can produce with volume ( heavy minutes, calling his own shot often)

"Should have paid Lin and rid ourselves of Melo. Lin makes every team better." - HofstraBBall 11/12/2018
Cartman718
Posts: 28707
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/12/2007
Member: #1694

1/10/2019  11:41 PM
TripleThreat wrote:
Cartman718 wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:
You compare Mudiay to Steph Curry, and I have an agenda. Got it. Glad we cleared that up. Because you have provided facts!

Did not compare Mudiay to Steph Curry in entirety, but the idea that you were presenting...his assist numbers or his lack of D.
We obviously disagree on the eye test.

So present your case with numbers instead of rhetoric.
Otherwise pls change your screen name to TrollBoy. lol


https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/150/Red-Herring


Red Herring

Ignoratio elenchi

(also known as: beside the point, misdirection [form of], changing the subject, false emphasis, the Chewbacca defense, irrelevant conclusion, irrelevant thesis, clouding the issue, ignorance of refutation)

Description: Attempting to redirect the argument to another issue to which the person doing the redirecting can better respond. While it is similar to the avoiding the issue fallacy, the red herring is a deliberate diversion of attention with the intention of trying to abandon the original argument.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/61/Avoiding-the-Issue


Avoiding the Issue

(also known as: avoiding the question [form of], missing the point, straying off the subject, digressing, distraction [form of])

Description: When an arguer responds to an argument by not addressing the points of the argument. Unlike the strawman fallacy, avoiding the issue does not create an unrelated argument to divert attention, it simply avoids the argument.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/169/Strawman-Fallacy


Strawman Fallacy

Description: Substituting a person’s actual position or argument with a distorted, exaggerated, or misrepresented version of the position of the argument.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/1/Ad-Hominem-Abusive


Ad Hominem (Abusive)

argumentum ad hominem

(also known as: personal abuse, personal attacks, abusive fallacy, damning the source, name calling, refutation by caricature, against the person, against the man)

Description: Attacking the person making the argument, rather than the argument itself, when the attack on the person is completely irrelevant to the argument the person is making.


****

Baseline point is the same. Mudiay has had a decent month ( good for him, good for the team) However his career arc as a whole shows a player who is massive liability on defense, someone who cannot hit a consistent league average three point shot, is chronically out of elite physical condition and is a low BBIQ player. He had two years of heavy minutes in Denver to prove himself and nothing in his career arc shows that this decent month is a marked long term shift in his ability/production/projection of value.

When these issues are brought up, some, not all, decide the best strategy is to ignore the relevant factors ( his actual skill set compared to what the league and league trends actually value in players) , change the subject or attempt to divert the subject, usually within some form of logical fallacy.

You are trying to change the subject, but picked the worst example possible. Being willfully ignorant of basic resource management concepts is one thing, but trying to defend doing it is actually devaluing this community as a whole. This is no longer just you disagreeing with a basketball point, you and Big Daddy G are now willfully going after people for not agreeing with you.

You believe that Mudiay's growth in career is not possible at 22 considering he's been in the NBA since 19. That may be true, but then again it may not. We can agree to disagree. That's fine. I don't have to go after anyone and I am not. I am attacking the facts you are presenting. You respond with one fact, that he's been in the league for his 4th year now and ignore the fact that he's trending up. That's ok, to each their own. Obviously we won't see eye to eye. End of discussion.

Nixluva is posting triangle screen grabs, even when nobody asks - Fishmike. LOL So are we going to reference that thread like the bible now? "The thread of Wroten Page 14 post 9" - EnySpree
meloshouldgo
Posts: 26453
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/3/2014
Member: #5801

1/11/2019  12:11 PM
Cartman718 wrote:
Chandler wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
TPercy wrote:On this subject: We are dead last in the league in assists.

Yeah i think Rubio or Morant would help solve this problem. We need playmakers for sure.

it's not going to be fixed by a pg. that will add maybe 3 assists per game. We need a system of unselfish ball movement and cutting. The Bucks have a remarlably simple offense and a lot of guys are taking wide open shots as a result.

Exactly what I am getting at. But some people think I am comparing Mudiay to Steph Curry instead of comparing the concept they're presenting with...number of assists.

Your posts are reeking of hypocrisy. You want unselfish ball movement and you you also want Mudiay. The fact that you can't see the hypocrisy is what makes it funny.

I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only try to make them think - Socrates
meloshouldgo
Posts: 26453
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/3/2014
Member: #5801

1/11/2019  12:15 PM
Cartman718 wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:
You compare Mudiay to Steph Curry, and I have an agenda. Got it. Glad we cleared that up. Because you have provided facts!

Did not compare Mudiay to Steph Curry in entirety, but the idea that you were presenting...his assist numbers or his lack of D.
We obviously disagree on the eye test.

So present your case with numbers instead of rhetoric.
Otherwise pls change your screen name to TrollBoy. lol

So you compare number of assists between Curry and Mudiay and ignore who they are? You don't get that Curry can get away with low assists because he plays in a ball movement system where everyone plays unselfish basketball while Mudiay looks for his own shot everytime he touches the ball and passes only when it's impossible to shoot? You are comparing concepts? WTF??

I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only try to make them think - Socrates
fwk00
Posts: 21056
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/20/2015
Member: #6048

1/11/2019  1:00 PM
TripleThreat wrote:
franco12 wrote:who is our PG next year?

In Mudiay, I see a young player who MIGHT be getting it. And in the NBA, players get paid a lot on potential - I'm not saying that is a good thing.

But, we have to build some consistency. Mudiay is probably never going to be an all star. But can he play a role on our team next year and for the next 3-4? Yes.

Can he be upgraded? Absolutely.

Do you know who our PG is next year? Where exactly are we getting him from?

Because we have a ton of questions with this roster, and you can't just turn the roster over every year. You have to pick your battles, and we have to start building - which means keeping some players.


It's a fair question.

Could Mudiay pan out? In theory, he can. But what are the odds. This is why Denver gave up on him. -snip-

Many want to see something in Mudiay because the past few years were so bleak. I get that.

The Knicks would be better off giving a UDFA or a 2nd round pick a chance ( someone who might develop) instead of giving Mudiay a long term extension ( what he wants) If all Mudiay can get is another one year prove it deal, odds are he'd go to another team because the Knicks will make every attempt to replace him this offseason. You can get limited to no defense and a substandard three point shot from nearly anyone. Mudiay is producing with VOLUME. What happens if he's only getting 10 minutes a game? Only taking 6 shots? You have to look at him as a question if he can fill an actual role, not just what he can produce with volume ( heavy minutes, calling his own shot often)

There's nothing unusual about young adolescents requiring a few years to get themselves together. Once they do they "turn a corner" and suddenly get it. This happens in the mid-twenties for all kinds of people, not just basketball players.

I don't think Denver "gave up" on Mudiay at all. Players are assets and are exchanged as such in sports. Denver had better options that made Mudiay expendable.

Right now the Knicks are built to lose by virtue of their youth and inexperience with one another. You can argue that because they lose they all need to be replaced - the losing statistics prove it. But what makes teams winners is not constant churn but stability and consistent familiarity.

It's not about individual chances, its about chemistry and automatic recognition of what your teammate will do next. That's what this year is the beginning of. We don't want to rinse and repeat this same thing year over year.

The idea that second round picks just show up and are better than players finally turning the corner is laughable. PG competency takes years to develop. Mudiay has a ways to go but this criticism is over-the-top. This is a young team - let them grow.

TripleThreat
Posts: 22228
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 2/24/2012
Member: #3997

1/11/2019  1:03 PM
Cartman718 wrote:You believe that Mudiay's growth in career is not possible at 22 considering he's been in the NBA since 19. That may be true, but then again it may not. We can agree to disagree. That's fine. I don't have to go after anyone and I am not. I am attacking the facts you are presenting. You respond with one fact, that he's been in the league for his 4th year now and ignore the fact that he's trending up. That's ok, to each their own. Obviously we won't see eye to eye. End of discussion.


You aren't actually listening to what is being said to you.

No one is saying it's "not possible"

What I am saying, and how actual NBA front offices are applying the concept is that the odds of Mudiay panning out is NOT WORTH THE OPPORTUNITY COST OF THE A) MINUTES PLAYED IMPLIED B) VALUE OF THE ROSTER SPOT AND C) VALUE OF THE CAP SPACE IMPLIED

Let's say the odds are 10 in 100 ( that's unreasonably high) but I'll highball it to illustrate the point. Denver made the assessment that the 10 percent chance that they regret giving up on Mudiay is NOT WORTH the 90 out of 100 other times he will show failure to their expectations/needs.

He is NOT trending up. Trending up would be each year, his three point shooting percentage would go up. Trending up would be his 3 point shooting range would go up ( be able to hit it from farther away) incrementally each year. Trending up would mean he would his conditioning would go up and get stronger each year ( versus just getting into shape in the first place) Trending up would be getting to league average against the pick and roll on defense, then doing a better job of locking down the passing lanes in Year 2, then doing something else in Year 3.

He's shooting well from midrange ( inefficient shot in general to league trends but at least he's doing it) Is this a progression over time? No, it's a good month. What's more likely? He's going to regress to the rest of his career arc trends? Or he would dramatically uptick without signs of actual growth?

Growth is doing 10 pushups and struggling to do them. Then two months later you can do 20 pushups. End of the year, you can do 50 pushups. Morbidly obese people, some of them lose weight dramatically. What are the odds they will keep it off? Odds are they will gain it back. Smokers who quit. People who are incarcerated. People with drug addiction. You are arguing against a life concept - People don't really change, not often, and when things are on the line like winning, you often take the safe bet.

Look at the rest of the Knicks roster

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hardati02.html

Knicks gave up on THJr after his 2nd year.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/burketr01.html

Utah gave up on Trey Burke after his third year, and Washington did too

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hezonma01.html

Orlando gave up on Hezonja after his third year

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/v/vonleno01.html

Portland gave up on Vonleh in his 4th year. Now Vonleh might pan out, but can you blame the Trail Blazers for moving on?

You do not understand the concept of 'trending up', this is the real problem.

Nothing he's doing is showing a PROGRESSION OVER TIME. This is how people actually improve.

The above examples is just from the Knicks, the league is FULL of players that have moved on and been dumped or traded because after a couple of years, their drafting team did not feel the opportunity cost question could justify the player staying on the roster. The players were then treated as a SUNK COST.

This is how NBA teams actually operate. If they didn't, then Burke, Vonleh, Hezonja and yes Mudiay and the like would not even be Knicks in the first place. That is the end of the discussion. This is how they do things. This is not an "agree to disagree" moment, it's just how the system works.

You can take this opportunity to learn something about resource management in professional sports. Or you can keep telling everyone else that this is not how the system works when hundreds of the top minds in sports who have given their entire lives to the game are applying these concepts every single day. Your choice.

"Should have paid Lin and rid ourselves of Melo. Lin makes every team better." - HofstraBBall 11/12/2018
fwk00
Posts: 21056
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/20/2015
Member: #6048

1/11/2019  1:48 PM
TripleThreat wrote:
Cartman718 wrote:You believe that Mudiay's growth in career is not possible at 22 considering he's been in the NBA since 19. That may be true, but then again it may not. We can agree to disagree. That's fine. I don't have to go after anyone and I am not. I am attacking the facts you are presenting. You respond with one fact, that he's been in the league for his 4th year now and ignore the fact that he's trending up. That's ok, to each their own. Obviously we won't see eye to eye. End of discussion.


You aren't actually listening to what is being said to you.

No one is saying it's "not possible"

What I am saying, and how actual NBA front offices are applying the concept is that the odds of Mudiay panning out is NOT WORTH THE OPPORTUNITY COST OF THE A) MINUTES PLAYED IMPLIED B) VALUE OF THE ROSTER SPOT AND C) VALUE OF THE CAP SPACE IMPLIED

Let's say the odds are 10 in 100 ( that's unreasonably high) but I'll highball it to illustrate the point. Denver made the assessment that the 10 percent chance that they regret giving up on Mudiay is NOT WORTH the 90 out of 100 other times he will show failure to their expectations/needs.

He is NOT trending up. Trending up would be each year, his three point shooting percentage would go up. Trending up would be his 3 point shooting range would go up ( be able to hit it from farther away) incrementally each year. Trending up would mean he would his conditioning would go up and get stronger each year ( versus just getting into shape in the first place) Trending up would be getting to league average against the pick and roll on defense, then doing a better job of locking down the passing lanes in Year 2, then doing something else in Year 3.

He's shooting well from midrange ( inefficient shot in general to league trends but at least he's doing it) Is this a progression over time? No, it's a good month. What's more likely? He's going to regress to the rest of his career arc trends? Or he would dramatically uptick without signs of actual growth?

Growth is doing 10 pushups and struggling to do them. Then two months later you can do 20 pushups. End of the year, you can do 50 pushups. Morbidly obese people, some of them lose weight dramatically. What are the odds they will keep it off? Odds are they will gain it back. Smokers who quit. People who are incarcerated. People with drug addiction. You are arguing against a life concept - People don't really change, not often, and when things are on the line like winning, you often take the safe bet.

Look at the rest of the Knicks roster

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hardati02.html

Knicks gave up on THJr after his 2nd year.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/burketr01.html

Utah gave up on Trey Burke after his third year, and Washington did too

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hezonma01.html

Orlando gave up on Hezonja after his third year

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/v/vonleno01.html

Portland gave up on Vonleh in his 4th year. Now Vonleh might pan out, but can you blame the Trail Blazers for moving on?

You do not understand the concept of 'trending up', this is the real problem.

Nothing he's doing is showing a PROGRESSION OVER TIME. This is how people actually improve.

The above examples is just from the Knicks, the league is FULL of players that have moved on and been dumped or traded because after a couple of years, their drafting team did not feel the opportunity cost question could justify the player staying on the roster. The players were then treated as a SUNK COST.

This is how NBA teams actually operate. If they didn't, then Burke, Vonleh, Hezonja and yes Mudiay and the like would not even be Knicks in the first place. That is the end of the discussion. This is how they do things. This is not an "agree to disagree" moment, it's just how the system works.

You can take this opportunity to learn something about resource management in professional sports. Or you can keep telling everyone else that this is not how the system works when hundreds of the top minds in sports who have given their entire lives to the game are applying these concepts every single day. Your choice.

Trip, you get a lot of things right but you miss the point on all counts.

Some other factoids to consider. Most winning teams have a high percentage of former first round picks on their roster.

Furthermore, we know from watching years upon years of draft classes that it is very hard for middling NBA teams to transcend recursive mediocrity. In other words, the same teams dominate the standings and the playoffs year after year.

The phenomenon you cite - "trending" - has more to do with middling and perpetual losing teams looking for immediate gratification. They want to catch lightning in a bottle with a draft pick - the sooner the better. If not, bring in the next shiny object for fans to pin their hopes on. *THAT* is how the system works.

The by-product of teams discarding former high draft picks to take their fan's minds off of their history of inevitable losses is that some (not all) of these discarded draft picks have the three or four years of NBA exposure required to finally realize their potential.

So what does this mean?

Well, for one thing it means that the Knicks front-office is doing precisely the right thing. Collect as many seasoned former high lottery picks as they can and let them play their way in or out of MSG. Some will fail, others will be keepers.

The second thing, the FO is doing right is not disposing of high draft picks for second-rounders. The silliness of fans proposing dumping Frankie or Mudiay for a second-rounder is absurd.

In concert with accumulating tarnished potential the Knicks need to trade wisely AND use caution in signing free agents. Despite the losing record, the Knicks are very close to turning that difficult corner of transcending the NBA status quo of keeping second-tier teams down in perpetuity.

A healthy KP or strategic trade of KP could suddenly harden the starting unit and reinforce the secondary so that all the close losses suddenly turn into wins and a dramatically different standing in the coming season. This isn't empty hope. Broadcasters from opposing teams can see it as well. The Knicks are taking some beat-down losses that will come around and the smart people on these teams can sense it.

Fans advocating young player churn should be cooling their jets for a season. The Knicks are losing for a cause that may (or may not) bear fruit over the summer.

arkrud
Posts: 31517
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/31/2005
Member: #995
USA
1/11/2019  2:35 PM
I do not see how you points are conflicting with Trip points.
Knicks and those teams who dumped the players who failed to produce in required time frame are in very different situation.
Knicks are in perfect position to explore reclamation projects and on top had no other ways to improve due to damaged cap space.
Depending on FA and draft we may have another year to do same or use some of both (most likely).
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Hamlet
TripleThreat
Posts: 22228
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 2/24/2012
Member: #3997

1/11/2019  9:14 PM
fwk00 wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
franco12 wrote:who is our PG next year?

In Mudiay, I see a young player who MIGHT be getting it. And in the NBA, players get paid a lot on potential - I'm not saying that is a good thing.

But, we have to build some consistency. Mudiay is probably never going to be an all star. But can he play a role on our team next year and for the next 3-4? Yes.

Can he be upgraded? Absolutely.

Do you know who our PG is next year? Where exactly are we getting him from?

Because we have a ton of questions with this roster, and you can't just turn the roster over every year. You have to pick your battles, and we have to start building - which means keeping some players.


It's a fair question.

Could Mudiay pan out? In theory, he can. But what are the odds. This is why Denver gave up on him. -snip-

Many want to see something in Mudiay because the past few years were so bleak. I get that.

The Knicks would be better off giving a UDFA or a 2nd round pick a chance ( someone who might develop) instead of giving Mudiay a long term extension ( what he wants) If all Mudiay can get is another one year prove it deal, odds are he'd go to another team because the Knicks will make every attempt to replace him this offseason. You can get limited to no defense and a substandard three point shot from nearly anyone. Mudiay is producing with VOLUME. What happens if he's only getting 10 minutes a game? Only taking 6 shots? You have to look at him as a question if he can fill an actual role, not just what he can produce with volume ( heavy minutes, calling his own shot often)

There's nothing unusual about young adolescents requiring a few years to get themselves together. Once they do they "turn a corner" and suddenly get it. This happens in the mid-twenties for all kinds of people, not just basketball players.

I don't think Denver "gave up" on Mudiay at all. Players are assets and are exchanged as such in sports. Denver had better options that made Mudiay expendable.

Right now the Knicks are built to lose by virtue of their youth and inexperience with one another. You can argue that because they lose they all need to be replaced - the losing statistics prove it. But what makes teams winners is not constant churn but stability and consistent familiarity.

It's not about individual chances, its about chemistry and automatic recognition of what your teammate will do next. That's what this year is the beginning of. We don't want to rinse and repeat this same thing year over year.

The idea that second round picks just show up and are better than players finally turning the corner is laughable. PG competency takes years to develop. Mudiay has a ways to go but this criticism is over-the-top. This is a young team - let them grow.

1) Professional athletes, esp NBA players, are NOT the typical mid 20s situation where young people are in transition. Not even close. If Mudiay was an accountant or just out of law school, great. But that's not the case is it?

You have a short window after you are drafted to prove yourself ( MLB and the NHL have some push/pull because they have more extensive minor league systems) If you don't produce, given the sports nominal timetable to assess skill set outside of rookie development, they will find someone will produce.

2) If Mudiay was "expendable", then the Nuggets gave up on him. Maybe politely, but still gave up on him.

3) Stability is important. You are right in concept. But it ONLY MATTERS WHEN THERE IS A SPECIFIC BASELINE OF TALENT. You are dead wrong in application. What makes teams win is talent. Period. Without the right talent, the rest does not matter.

Mudiay is in this 4th season, no major injuries, and had lots of playing time in his first two seasons, including starts. He's still a **** defender, he's still a failure to produce a league average three point shot, he's still a heavy risk in terms of his fitness. He's still a low BBIQ player. More stability does not make Mudiay a better player. If he had more talent and HE FUCKING WORKED HARDER then he'd be a better player. ( NO FUCKING EXCUSE TO BE OUT OF SHAPE AT THIS LEVEL)

4) You don't "churn" guys in their prime developmental window. Guys like Zinger, Knox, MRob, Frank N, Trier. You give those times to grow because they are not yet within their midpoint to their third season ( Zinger is injured, this is different) Guys like Mudiay are journeymen at this point.

5) A 2nd round pick is promised ZERO GUARANTEED MONEY. Their cost factor would be dramatically less than resigning Mudiay to an extension. A 2nd round pick who doesn't pan out can be dumped easily since he's not making much. Dumping Mudiay would be much harder. A 2nd round pick has room to grow, Mudiay will still be an out of shape **** defender who makes poor decisions and can't hit the three ball. How much better does a 2nd round pick have to be to be better than Mudiay IF YOU GAVE THEM MUDIAY'S VOLUME. Give a guy 30 minutes a night plus and 20 shots a night and let him be ball dominant and call his own number at will, and crazy idea, he'll put up some counting stats. If a 2nd round pick can give you 55 percent of Mudiays production at 20 percent of the cost, that's massive value. A second round pick does not need to be better to offer more value, he just needs to offer relative production WHILE FACTORING IN CAP COST. How hard will it be to find a 2nd round pick who can't hit a three point shot, is a **** defender and doesn't know what he's doing on the court? BUT GUESS WHAT? HE'D BE CHEAPER IN TERMS OF CAP COST. Which is why the CBA has the Veteran's Minimum Exception, which means the league pays for veteran's minimum contracts for the express reason I stated that younger cheaper players are more desirable unless there is a mechanism for market correction. You are now arguing against the marketplace systems in place that naturally lean towards younger cheaper players. Good luck with that.

What competency is being developed?

He's still a **** defender.

He can't hit the three ball at a league average rate.

He's chronically out of shape.

He's a poor decision maker and a low BBIQ player.

Three of those can be improved with just raw effort. Mudiay isn't even competent enough to pick up a kettlebell in the offseason and put down the fries.

This team needs more talent. Mudiay is not the long term answer. Even if he did pan out ( odds are stacked against this) what are the odds against the opportunity cost of that roster spot, minutes and cap hit? It's a bad bet. Vonleh might pan out, but can no one see how Portland moved on because of the bad bet principle? Vonleh being what he is now was not worth the 95 percent chance he'd just sink a roster spot and cap space. Mudiay is not here because of some grand sweeping front office strategy. Phil Jackson ****ed up the cap sheet. Badly. The Knicks gave out bad deals and made bad trades and had no money left. Cap locked, they took what warm bodies they could. Guys like Mudiay. That's it. This is not development for Mudiay, it's triage for a ****ty cap situation.

You are expendable but no one gave up on you? What in the entire world does that even mean?

Someone give Mudiay an opportunity! You mean like two years of heavy minutes and starting after he was drafted?

You want this team to win, it needs more talent. It needs players with more talent that Mudiay.

"Should have paid Lin and rid ourselves of Melo. Lin makes every team better." - HofstraBBall 11/12/2018
CrushAlot
Posts: 58058
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/25/2003
Member: #452
USA
1/11/2019  10:11 PM
TripleThreat wrote:
fwk00 wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
franco12 wrote:who is our PG next year?

In Mudiay, I see a young player who MIGHT be getting it. And in the NBA, players get paid a lot on potential - I'm not saying that is a good thing.

But, we have to build some consistency. Mudiay is probably never going to be an all star. But can he play a role on our team next year and for the next 3-4? Yes.

Can he be upgraded? Absolutely.

Do you know who our PG is next year? Where exactly are we getting him from?

Because we have a ton of questions with this roster, and you can't just turn the roster over every year. You have to pick your battles, and we have to start building - which means keeping some players.


It's a fair question.

Could Mudiay pan out? In theory, he can. But what are the odds. This is why Denver gave up on him. -snip-

Many want to see something in Mudiay because the past few years were so bleak. I get that.

The Knicks would be better off giving a UDFA or a 2nd round pick a chance ( someone who might develop) instead of giving Mudiay a long term extension ( what he wants) If all Mudiay can get is another one year prove it deal, odds are he'd go to another team because the Knicks will make every attempt to replace him this offseason. You can get limited to no defense and a substandard three point shot from nearly anyone. Mudiay is producing with VOLUME. What happens if he's only getting 10 minutes a game? Only taking 6 shots? You have to look at him as a question if he can fill an actual role, not just what he can produce with volume ( heavy minutes, calling his own shot often)

There's nothing unusual about young adolescents requiring a few years to get themselves together. Once they do they "turn a corner" and suddenly get it. This happens in the mid-twenties for all kinds of people, not just basketball players.

I don't think Denver "gave up" on Mudiay at all. Players are assets and are exchanged as such in sports. Denver had better options that made Mudiay expendable.

Right now the Knicks are built to lose by virtue of their youth and inexperience with one another. You can argue that because they lose they all need to be replaced - the losing statistics prove it. But what makes teams winners is not constant churn but stability and consistent familiarity.

It's not about individual chances, its about chemistry and automatic recognition of what your teammate will do next. That's what this year is the beginning of. We don't want to rinse and repeat this same thing year over year.

The idea that second round picks just show up and are better than players finally turning the corner is laughable. PG competency takes years to develop. Mudiay has a ways to go but this criticism is over-the-top. This is a young team - let them grow.

1) Professional athletes, esp NBA players, are NOT the typical mid 20s situation where young people are in transition. Not even close. If Mudiay was an accountant or just out of law school, great. But that's not the case is it?

You have a short window after you are drafted to prove yourself ( MLB and the NHL have some push/pull because they have more extensive minor league systems) If you don't produce, given the sports nominal timetable to assess skill set outside of rookie development, they will find someone will produce.

2) If Mudiay was "expendable", then the Nuggets gave up on him. Maybe politely, but still gave up on him.

3) Stability is important. You are right in concept. But it ONLY MATTERS WHEN THERE IS A SPECIFIC BASELINE OF TALENT. You are dead wrong in application. What makes teams win is talent. Period. Without the right talent, the rest does not matter.

Mudiay is in this 4th season, no major injuries, and had lots of playing time in his first two seasons, including starts. He's still a **** defender, he's still a failure to produce a league average three point shot, he's still a heavy risk in terms of his fitness. He's still a low BBIQ player. More stability does not make Mudiay a better player. If he had more talent and HE FUCKING WORKED HARDER then he'd be a better player. ( NO FUCKING EXCUSE TO BE OUT OF SHAPE AT THIS LEVEL)

4) You don't "churn" guys in their prime developmental window. Guys like Zinger, Knox, MRob, Frank N, Trier. You give those times to grow because they are not yet within their midpoint to their third season ( Zinger is injured, this is different) Guys like Mudiay are journeymen at this point.

5) A 2nd round pick is promised ZERO GUARANTEED MONEY. Their cost factor would be dramatically less than resigning Mudiay to an extension. A 2nd round pick who doesn't pan out can be dumped easily since he's not making much. Dumping Mudiay would be much harder. A 2nd round pick has room to grow, Mudiay will still be an out of shape **** defender who makes poor decisions and can't hit the three ball. How much better does a 2nd round pick have to be to be better than Mudiay IF YOU GAVE THEM MUDIAY'S VOLUME. Give a guy 30 minutes a night plus and 20 shots a night and let him be ball dominant and call his own number at will, and crazy idea, he'll put up some counting stats. If a 2nd round pick can give you 55 percent of Mudiays production at 20 percent of the cost, that's massive value. A second round pick does not need to be better to offer more value, he just needs to offer relative production WHILE FACTORING IN CAP COST. How hard will it be to find a 2nd round pick who can't hit a three point shot, is a **** defender and doesn't know what he's doing on the court? BUT GUESS WHAT? HE'D BE CHEAPER IN TERMS OF CAP COST. Which is why the CBA has the Veteran's Minimum Exception, which means the league pays for veteran's minimum contracts for the express reason I stated that younger cheaper players are more desirable unless there is a mechanism for market correction. You are now arguing against the marketplace systems in place that naturally lean towards younger cheaper players. Good luck with that.

What competency is being developed?

He's still a **** defender.

He can't hit the three ball at a league average rate.

He's chronically out of shape.

He's a poor decision maker and a low BBIQ player.

Three of those can be improved with just raw effort. Mudiay isn't even competent enough to pick up a kettlebell in the offseason and put down the fries.

This team needs more talent. Mudiay is not the long term answer. Even if he did pan out ( odds are stacked against this) what are the odds against the opportunity cost of that roster spot, minutes and cap hit? It's a bad bet. Vonleh might pan out, but can no one see how Portland moved on because of the bad bet principle? Vonleh being what he is now was not worth the 95 percent chance he'd just sink a roster spot and cap space. Mudiay is not here because of some grand sweeping front office strategy. Phil Jackson ****ed up the cap sheet. Badly. The Knicks gave out bad deals and made bad trades and had no money left. Cap locked, they took what warm bodies they could. Guys like Mudiay. That's it. This is not development for Mudiay, it's triage for a ****ty cap situation.

You are expendable but no one gave up on you? What in the entire world does that even mean?

Someone give Mudiay an opportunity! You mean like two years of heavy minutes and starting after he was drafted?

You want this team to win, it needs more talent. It needs players with more talent that Mudiay.


Dying to hear a game reference from you. All posts sound the same.
I'm tired,I'm tired, I'm so tired right now......Kristaps Porzingis 1/3/18
arkrud
Posts: 31517
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/31/2005
Member: #995
USA
1/11/2019  11:26 PM
CrushAlot wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
fwk00 wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
franco12 wrote:who is our PG next year?

In Mudiay, I see a young player who MIGHT be getting it. And in the NBA, players get paid a lot on potential - I'm not saying that is a good thing.

But, we have to build some consistency. Mudiay is probably never going to be an all star. But can he play a role on our team next year and for the next 3-4? Yes.

Can he be upgraded? Absolutely.

Do you know who our PG is next year? Where exactly are we getting him from?

Because we have a ton of questions with this roster, and you can't just turn the roster over every year. You have to pick your battles, and we have to start building - which means keeping some players.


It's a fair question.

Could Mudiay pan out? In theory, he can. But what are the odds. This is why Denver gave up on him. -snip-

Many want to see something in Mudiay because the past few years were so bleak. I get that.

The Knicks would be better off giving a UDFA or a 2nd round pick a chance ( someone who might develop) instead of giving Mudiay a long term extension ( what he wants) If all Mudiay can get is another one year prove it deal, odds are he'd go to another team because the Knicks will make every attempt to replace him this offseason. You can get limited to no defense and a substandard three point shot from nearly anyone. Mudiay is producing with VOLUME. What happens if he's only getting 10 minutes a game? Only taking 6 shots? You have to look at him as a question if he can fill an actual role, not just what he can produce with volume ( heavy minutes, calling his own shot often)

There's nothing unusual about young adolescents requiring a few years to get themselves together. Once they do they "turn a corner" and suddenly get it. This happens in the mid-twenties for all kinds of people, not just basketball players.

I don't think Denver "gave up" on Mudiay at all. Players are assets and are exchanged as such in sports. Denver had better options that made Mudiay expendable.

Right now the Knicks are built to lose by virtue of their youth and inexperience with one another. You can argue that because they lose they all need to be replaced - the losing statistics prove it. But what makes teams winners is not constant churn but stability and consistent familiarity.

It's not about individual chances, its about chemistry and automatic recognition of what your teammate will do next. That's what this year is the beginning of. We don't want to rinse and repeat this same thing year over year.

The idea that second round picks just show up and are better than players finally turning the corner is laughable. PG competency takes years to develop. Mudiay has a ways to go but this criticism is over-the-top. This is a young team - let them grow.

1) Professional athletes, esp NBA players, are NOT the typical mid 20s situation where young people are in transition. Not even close. If Mudiay was an accountant or just out of law school, great. But that's not the case is it?

You have a short window after you are drafted to prove yourself ( MLB and the NHL have some push/pull because they have more extensive minor league systems) If you don't produce, given the sports nominal timetable to assess skill set outside of rookie development, they will find someone will produce.

2) If Mudiay was "expendable", then the Nuggets gave up on him. Maybe politely, but still gave up on him.

3) Stability is important. You are right in concept. But it ONLY MATTERS WHEN THERE IS A SPECIFIC BASELINE OF TALENT. You are dead wrong in application. What makes teams win is talent. Period. Without the right talent, the rest does not matter.

Mudiay is in this 4th season, no major injuries, and had lots of playing time in his first two seasons, including starts. He's still a **** defender, he's still a failure to produce a league average three point shot, he's still a heavy risk in terms of his fitness. He's still a low BBIQ player. More stability does not make Mudiay a better player. If he had more talent and HE FUCKING WORKED HARDER then he'd be a better player. ( NO FUCKING EXCUSE TO BE OUT OF SHAPE AT THIS LEVEL)

4) You don't "churn" guys in their prime developmental window. Guys like Zinger, Knox, MRob, Frank N, Trier. You give those times to grow because they are not yet within their midpoint to their third season ( Zinger is injured, this is different) Guys like Mudiay are journeymen at this point.

5) A 2nd round pick is promised ZERO GUARANTEED MONEY. Their cost factor would be dramatically less than resigning Mudiay to an extension. A 2nd round pick who doesn't pan out can be dumped easily since he's not making much. Dumping Mudiay would be much harder. A 2nd round pick has room to grow, Mudiay will still be an out of shape **** defender who makes poor decisions and can't hit the three ball. How much better does a 2nd round pick have to be to be better than Mudiay IF YOU GAVE THEM MUDIAY'S VOLUME. Give a guy 30 minutes a night plus and 20 shots a night and let him be ball dominant and call his own number at will, and crazy idea, he'll put up some counting stats. If a 2nd round pick can give you 55 percent of Mudiays production at 20 percent of the cost, that's massive value. A second round pick does not need to be better to offer more value, he just needs to offer relative production WHILE FACTORING IN CAP COST. How hard will it be to find a 2nd round pick who can't hit a three point shot, is a **** defender and doesn't know what he's doing on the court? BUT GUESS WHAT? HE'D BE CHEAPER IN TERMS OF CAP COST. Which is why the CBA has the Veteran's Minimum Exception, which means the league pays for veteran's minimum contracts for the express reason I stated that younger cheaper players are more desirable unless there is a mechanism for market correction. You are now arguing against the marketplace systems in place that naturally lean towards younger cheaper players. Good luck with that.

What competency is being developed?

He's still a **** defender.

He can't hit the three ball at a league average rate.

He's chronically out of shape.

He's a poor decision maker and a low BBIQ player.

Three of those can be improved with just raw effort. Mudiay isn't even competent enough to pick up a kettlebell in the offseason and put down the fries.

This team needs more talent. Mudiay is not the long term answer. Even if he did pan out ( odds are stacked against this) what are the odds against the opportunity cost of that roster spot, minutes and cap hit? It's a bad bet. Vonleh might pan out, but can no one see how Portland moved on because of the bad bet principle? Vonleh being what he is now was not worth the 95 percent chance he'd just sink a roster spot and cap space. Mudiay is not here because of some grand sweeping front office strategy. Phil Jackson ****ed up the cap sheet. Badly. The Knicks gave out bad deals and made bad trades and had no money left. Cap locked, they took what warm bodies they could. Guys like Mudiay. That's it. This is not development for Mudiay, it's triage for a ****ty cap situation.

You are expendable but no one gave up on you? What in the entire world does that even mean?

Someone give Mudiay an opportunity! You mean like two years of heavy minutes and starting after he was drafted?

You want this team to win, it needs more talent. It needs players with more talent that Mudiay.


Dying to hear a game reference from you. All posts sound the same.

He is sadly correct. Life is hard but for the most part fair.
Mud needs a contract and he will get it but very likely not from the Knicks.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Hamlet
fwk00
Posts: 21056
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/20/2015
Member: #6048

1/11/2019  11:52 PM
TripleThreat wrote:
fwk00 wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
franco12 wrote:who is our PG next year?

In Mudiay, I see a young player who MIGHT be getting it. And in the NBA, players get paid a lot on potential - I'm not saying that is a good thing.

But, we have to build some consistency. Mudiay is probably never going to be an all star. But can he play a role on our team next year and for the next 3-4? Yes.

Can he be upgraded? Absolutely.

Do you know who our PG is next year? Where exactly are we getting him from?

Because we have a ton of questions with this roster, and you can't just turn the roster over every year. You have to pick your battles, and we have to start building - which means keeping some players.


It's a fair question.

Could Mudiay pan out? In theory, he can. But what are the odds. This is why Denver gave up on him. -snip-

Many want to see something in Mudiay because the past few years were so bleak. I get that.

The Knicks would be better off giving a UDFA or a 2nd round pick a chance ( someone who might develop) instead of giving Mudiay a long term extension ( what he wants) If all Mudiay can get is another one year prove it deal, odds are he'd go to another team because the Knicks will make every attempt to replace him this offseason. You can get limited to no defense and a substandard three point shot from nearly anyone. Mudiay is producing with VOLUME. What happens if he's only getting 10 minutes a game? Only taking 6 shots? You have to look at him as a question if he can fill an actual role, not just what he can produce with volume ( heavy minutes, calling his own shot often)

There's nothing unusual about young adolescents requiring a few years to get themselves together. Once they do they "turn a corner" and suddenly get it. This happens in the mid-twenties for all kinds of people, not just basketball players.

I don't think Denver "gave up" on Mudiay at all. Players are assets and are exchanged as such in sports. Denver had better options that made Mudiay expendable.

Right now the Knicks are built to lose by virtue of their youth and inexperience with one another. You can argue that because they lose they all need to be replaced - the losing statistics prove it. But what makes teams winners is not constant churn but stability and consistent familiarity.

It's not about individual chances, its about chemistry and automatic recognition of what your teammate will do next. That's what this year is the beginning of. We don't want to rinse and repeat this same thing year over year.

The idea that second round picks just show up and are better than players finally turning the corner is laughable. PG competency takes years to develop. Mudiay has a ways to go but this criticism is over-the-top. This is a young team - let them grow.

1) Professional athletes, esp NBA players, are NOT the typical mid 20s situation where young people are in transition. Not even close. If Mudiay was an accountant or just out of law school, great. But that's not the case is it?

You have a short window after you are drafted to prove yourself ( MLB and the NHL have some push/pull because they have more extensive minor league systems) If you don't produce, given the sports nominal timetable to assess skill set outside of rookie development, they will find someone will produce.

2) If Mudiay was "expendable", then the Nuggets gave up on him. Maybe politely, but still gave up on him.

3) Stability is important. You are right in concept. But it ONLY MATTERS WHEN THERE IS A SPECIFIC BASELINE OF TALENT. You are dead wrong in application. What makes teams win is talent. Period. Without the right talent, the rest does not matter.

Mudiay is in this 4th season, no major injuries, and had lots of playing time in his first two seasons, including starts. He's still a **** defender, he's still a failure to produce a league average three point shot, he's still a heavy risk in terms of his fitness. He's still a low BBIQ player. More stability does not make Mudiay a better player. If he had more talent and HE FUCKING WORKED HARDER then he'd be a better player. ( NO FUCKING EXCUSE TO BE OUT OF SHAPE AT THIS LEVEL)

4) You don't "churn" guys in their prime developmental window. Guys like Zinger, Knox, MRob, Frank N, Trier. You give those times to grow because they are not yet within their midpoint to their third season ( Zinger is injured, this is different) Guys like Mudiay are journeymen at this point.

5) A 2nd round pick is promised ZERO GUARANTEED MONEY. Their cost factor would be dramatically less than resigning Mudiay to an extension. A 2nd round pick who doesn't pan out can be dumped easily since he's not making much. Dumping Mudiay would be much harder. A 2nd round pick has room to grow, Mudiay will still be an out of shape **** defender who makes poor decisions and can't hit the three ball. How much better does a 2nd round pick have to be to be better than Mudiay IF YOU GAVE THEM MUDIAY'S VOLUME. Give a guy 30 minutes a night plus and 20 shots a night and let him be ball dominant and call his own number at will, and crazy idea, he'll put up some counting stats. If a 2nd round pick can give you 55 percent of Mudiays production at 20 percent of the cost, that's massive value. A second round pick does not need to be better to offer more value, he just needs to offer relative production WHILE FACTORING IN CAP COST. How hard will it be to find a 2nd round pick who can't hit a three point shot, is a **** defender and doesn't know what he's doing on the court? BUT GUESS WHAT? HE'D BE CHEAPER IN TERMS OF CAP COST. Which is why the CBA has the Veteran's Minimum Exception, which means the league pays for veteran's minimum contracts for the express reason I stated that younger cheaper players are more desirable unless there is a mechanism for market correction. You are now arguing against the marketplace systems in place that naturally lean towards younger cheaper players. Good luck with that.

What competency is being developed?

He's still a **** defender.

He can't hit the three ball at a league average rate.

He's chronically out of shape.

He's a poor decision maker and a low BBIQ player.

Three of those can be improved with just raw effort. Mudiay isn't even competent enough to pick up a kettlebell in the offseason and put down the fries.

This team needs more talent. Mudiay is not the long term answer. Even if he did pan out ( odds are stacked against this) what are the odds against the opportunity cost of that roster spot, minutes and cap hit? It's a bad bet. Vonleh might pan out, but can no one see how Portland moved on because of the bad bet principle? Vonleh being what he is now was not worth the 95 percent chance he'd just sink a roster spot and cap space. Mudiay is not here because of some grand sweeping front office strategy. Phil Jackson ****ed up the cap sheet. Badly. The Knicks gave out bad deals and made bad trades and had no money left. Cap locked, they took what warm bodies they could. Guys like Mudiay. That's it. This is not development for Mudiay, it's triage for a ****ty cap situation.

You are expendable but no one gave up on you? What in the entire world does that even mean?

Someone give Mudiay an opportunity! You mean like two years of heavy minutes and starting after he was drafted?

You want this team to win, it needs more talent. It needs players with more talent that Mudiay.

Trip, I think where we disagree is in the metrics that every once in a while get published about the turning point for an NBA point guard (other positions vary). And the magic number of NBA years is 5 for point guards. There are obviously notable exceptions on either side of that number.

I think, based on what you imply, you see three-ish years as a general threshold for cutting bait on a young player. And you may be correct that many NBA teams do cut loose players that quickly. My observation on this is that it may be more of an indication of front office stability than anything the player can control. The Knicks fit that profile. Knicks media driven fans have the attention span of gerbils. Fizdale is already being dissected.

Where you are correct is that the NBA (and most major sports) are sausage machines. There is a steady flow of yearly talent available with a set number of roster spaces to occupy. Teams stuck in the perpetual mediocrity cycle have a profile. It consists of having at least one highly paid and publicized "star" player. Usually, these are statistics whores who make no one else better. And they are surrounded by by one or one-and-a-half dimensional, veteran rotation players. These players based on unwritten NBA conventions entitle themselves to minutes.

The patience threshold these teams have for development are short as their coach's tenure. Add to the mix, the difference in fiscal obligation between a younger player and a player with a few years under their belt and there's an incentive to bring in the cheaper version. Note that these reasons for moving players is only co-incidental to talent, potential, or even player improvement.

My point is that the Knicks by dedicating themselves to an implicitly painful rebuild process are taking advantage of the by-product of this talent turnstile. That is, quite specifically, that other teams have already paid the front-loaded cost of these lottery picks. The picks come inexpensively, they are fighting for their NBA career, and are no less talented than they were in the first place [and this is always a crap-shoot]. When better to exercise an oversized dose of taking chances than in a rebuilding year intended to absorb losses for lottery position?

As far as I can tell, rolling the dice on former top ten picks is just as inexpensive and effective as running second-rounders on the floor. The challenge is for the Knicks to resist being a sausage factory with their own youth. Frankie, Dotson, and Kornet should be sheltered from churn. Newbies like Vonleh, Robinson, Trier, and Knox must also be untouchable to the degree they can be. That's a damned fine haul of talent needing another season together. I don't think the Knicks are as bereft of talent as you think. They are loaded.

But most of your argument is about Mudiay. I'm relatively ambivalent on him myself. *I think* he may be a keeper and a late bloomer. His size and aggressive offense is not easy to duplicate (say with just any second-rounder). And let's face it - nobody on this team is playing defense so holding EM to that seems dubious under the circumstances.

You seem to think he's a bum. What can I say? He's a kid.

BigRedDog
Posts: 21994
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 1/23/2004
Member: #569
1/12/2019  12:12 AM
arkrud wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
fwk00 wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
franco12 wrote:who is our PG next year?

In Mudiay, I see a young player who MIGHT be getting it. And in the NBA, players get paid a lot on potential - I'm not saying that is a good thing.

But, we have to build some consistency. Mudiay is probably never going to be an all star. But can he play a role on our team next year and for the next 3-4? Yes.

Can he be upgraded? Absolutely.

Do you know who our PG is next year? Where exactly are we getting him from?

Because we have a ton of questions with this roster, and you can't just turn the roster over every year. You have to pick your battles, and we have to start building - which means keeping some players.


It's a fair question.

Could Mudiay pan out? In theory, he can. But what are the odds. This is why Denver gave up on him. -snip-

Many want to see something in Mudiay because the past few years were so bleak. I get that.

The Knicks would be better off giving a UDFA or a 2nd round pick a chance ( someone who might develop) instead of giving Mudiay a long term extension ( what he wants) If all Mudiay can get is another one year prove it deal, odds are he'd go to another team because the Knicks will make every attempt to replace him this offseason. You can get limited to no defense and a substandard three point shot from nearly anyone. Mudiay is producing with VOLUME. What happens if he's only getting 10 minutes a game? Only taking 6 shots? You have to look at him as a question if he can fill an actual role, not just what he can produce with volume ( heavy minutes, calling his own shot often)

There's nothing unusual about young adolescents requiring a few years to get themselves together. Once they do they "turn a corner" and suddenly get it. This happens in the mid-twenties for all kinds of people, not just basketball players.

I don't think Denver "gave up" on Mudiay at all. Players are assets and are exchanged as such in sports. Denver had better options that made Mudiay expendable.

Right now the Knicks are built to lose by virtue of their youth and inexperience with one another. You can argue that because they lose they all need to be replaced - the losing statistics prove it. But what makes teams winners is not constant churn but stability and consistent familiarity.

It's not about individual chances, its about chemistry and automatic recognition of what your teammate will do next. That's what this year is the beginning of. We don't want to rinse and repeat this same thing year over year.

The idea that second round picks just show up and are better than players finally turning the corner is laughable. PG competency takes years to develop. Mudiay has a ways to go but this criticism is over-the-top. This is a young team - let them grow.

1) Professional athletes, esp NBA players, are NOT the typical mid 20s situation where young people are in transition. Not even close. If Mudiay was an accountant or just out of law school, great. But that's not the case is it?

You have a short window after you are drafted to prove yourself ( MLB and the NHL have some push/pull because they have more extensive minor league systems) If you don't produce, given the sports nominal timetable to assess skill set outside of rookie development, they will find someone will produce.

2) If Mudiay was "expendable", then the Nuggets gave up on him. Maybe politely, but still gave up on him.

3) Stability is important. You are right in concept. But it ONLY MATTERS WHEN THERE IS A SPECIFIC BASELINE OF TALENT. You are dead wrong in application. What makes teams win is talent. Period. Without the right talent, the rest does not matter.

Mudiay is in this 4th season, no major injuries, and had lots of playing time in his first two seasons, including starts. He's still a **** defender, he's still a failure to produce a league average three point shot, he's still a heavy risk in terms of his fitness. He's still a low BBIQ player. More stability does not make Mudiay a better player. If he had more talent and HE FUCKING WORKED HARDER then he'd be a better player. ( NO FUCKING EXCUSE TO BE OUT OF SHAPE AT THIS LEVEL)

4) You don't "churn" guys in their prime developmental window. Guys like Zinger, Knox, MRob, Frank N, Trier. You give those times to grow because they are not yet within their midpoint to their third season ( Zinger is injured, this is different) Guys like Mudiay are journeymen at this point.

5) A 2nd round pick is promised ZERO GUARANTEED MONEY. Their cost factor would be dramatically less than resigning Mudiay to an extension. A 2nd round pick who doesn't pan out can be dumped easily since he's not making much. Dumping Mudiay would be much harder. A 2nd round pick has room to grow, Mudiay will still be an out of shape **** defender who makes poor decisions and can't hit the three ball. How much better does a 2nd round pick have to be to be better than Mudiay IF YOU GAVE THEM MUDIAY'S VOLUME. Give a guy 30 minutes a night plus and 20 shots a night and let him be ball dominant and call his own number at will, and crazy idea, he'll put up some counting stats. If a 2nd round pick can give you 55 percent of Mudiays production at 20 percent of the cost, that's massive value. A second round pick does not need to be better to offer more value, he just needs to offer relative production WHILE FACTORING IN CAP COST. How hard will it be to find a 2nd round pick who can't hit a three point shot, is a **** defender and doesn't know what he's doing on the court? BUT GUESS WHAT? HE'D BE CHEAPER IN TERMS OF CAP COST. Which is why the CBA has the Veteran's Minimum Exception, which means the league pays for veteran's minimum contracts for the express reason I stated that younger cheaper players are more desirable unless there is a mechanism for market correction. You are now arguing against the marketplace systems in place that naturally lean towards younger cheaper players. Good luck with that.

What competency is being developed?

He's still a **** defender.

He can't hit the three ball at a league average rate.

He's chronically out of shape.

He's a poor decision maker and a low BBIQ player.

Three of those can be improved with just raw effort. Mudiay isn't even competent enough to pick up a kettlebell in the offseason and put down the fries.

This team needs more talent. Mudiay is not the long term answer. Even if he did pan out ( odds are stacked against this) what are the odds against the opportunity cost of that roster spot, minutes and cap hit? It's a bad bet. Vonleh might pan out, but can no one see how Portland moved on because of the bad bet principle? Vonleh being what he is now was not worth the 95 percent chance he'd just sink a roster spot and cap space. Mudiay is not here because of some grand sweeping front office strategy. Phil Jackson ****ed up the cap sheet. Badly. The Knicks gave out bad deals and made bad trades and had no money left. Cap locked, they took what warm bodies they could. Guys like Mudiay. That's it. This is not development for Mudiay, it's triage for a ****ty cap situation.

You are expendable but no one gave up on you? What in the entire world does that even mean?

Someone give Mudiay an opportunity! You mean like two years of heavy minutes and starting after he was drafted?

You want this team to win, it needs more talent. It needs players with more talent that Mudiay.


Dying to hear a game reference from you. All posts sound the same.

He is sadly correct. Life is hard but for the most part fair.
Mud needs a contract and he will get it but very likely not from the Knicks.

Sadly he isn't correct. Triplefraud just spews the same **** over and over and never actually responds to what people write against his agenda. I don't feel like reading his whole manifesto but the fact he writes Mudiay is CHRONICALLy out of shape is crap. Fiz told his players to come into this year in their top shape. Mudiay worked his ass off in the offseason and you can see he is in great shape. No , I don't believe its about a contract, rather maturity and having a coach who believes in him. I think Cartman said it very well when he wrote

"You believe that Mudiay's growth in career is not possible at 22 considering he's been in the NBA since 19. That may be true, but then again it may not. We can agree to disagree. That's fine. . I am attacking the facts you are presenting. You respond with one fact, that he's been in the league for his 4th year now and ignore the fact that he's trending up. That's ok, to each their own. Obviously we won't see eye to eye. End of discussion."

No one will change Triplefrauds mind and we see something else happening. Time will tell. I don't think the past 3 yrs will define Mudiays career, rather the next 2 yrs. I think especially never going to college and a wasted yr in China, I kind of think its almost Mudiays 1st or 2nd yr

Briggs-- Frank is 2 yrs away from being 2 years away
CrushAlot
Posts: 58058
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/25/2003
Member: #452
USA
1/12/2019  12:47 AM
arkrud wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
fwk00 wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
franco12 wrote:who is our PG next year?

In Mudiay, I see a young player who MIGHT be getting it. And in the NBA, players get paid a lot on potential - I'm not saying that is a good thing.

But, we have to build some consistency. Mudiay is probably never going to be an all star. But can he play a role on our team next year and for the next 3-4? Yes.

Can he be upgraded? Absolutely.

Do you know who our PG is next year? Where exactly are we getting him from?

Because we have a ton of questions with this roster, and you can't just turn the roster over every year. You have to pick your battles, and we have to start building - which means keeping some players.


It's a fair question.

Could Mudiay pan out? In theory, he can. But what are the odds. This is why Denver gave up on him. -snip-

Many want to see something in Mudiay because the past few years were so bleak. I get that.

The Knicks would be better off giving a UDFA or a 2nd round pick a chance ( someone who might develop) instead of giving Mudiay a long term extension ( what he wants) If all Mudiay can get is another one year prove it deal, odds are he'd go to another team because the Knicks will make every attempt to replace him this offseason. You can get limited to no defense and a substandard three point shot from nearly anyone. Mudiay is producing with VOLUME. What happens if he's only getting 10 minutes a game? Only taking 6 shots? You have to look at him as a question if he can fill an actual role, not just what he can produce with volume ( heavy minutes, calling his own shot often)

There's nothing unusual about young adolescents requiring a few years to get themselves together. Once they do they "turn a corner" and suddenly get it. This happens in the mid-twenties for all kinds of people, not just basketball players.

I don't think Denver "gave up" on Mudiay at all. Players are assets and are exchanged as such in sports. Denver had better options that made Mudiay expendable.

Right now the Knicks are built to lose by virtue of their youth and inexperience with one another. You can argue that because they lose they all need to be replaced - the losing statistics prove it. But what makes teams winners is not constant churn but stability and consistent familiarity.

It's not about individual chances, its about chemistry and automatic recognition of what your teammate will do next. That's what this year is the beginning of. We don't want to rinse and repeat this same thing year over year.

The idea that second round picks just show up and are better than players finally turning the corner is laughable. PG competency takes years to develop. Mudiay has a ways to go but this criticism is over-the-top. This is a young team - let them grow.

1) Professional athletes, esp NBA players, are NOT the typical mid 20s situation where young people are in transition. Not even close. If Mudiay was an accountant or just out of law school, great. But that's not the case is it?

You have a short window after you are drafted to prove yourself ( MLB and the NHL have some push/pull because they have more extensive minor league systems) If you don't produce, given the sports nominal timetable to assess skill set outside of rookie development, they will find someone will produce.

2) If Mudiay was "expendable", then the Nuggets gave up on him. Maybe politely, but still gave up on him.

3) Stability is important. You are right in concept. But it ONLY MATTERS WHEN THERE IS A SPECIFIC BASELINE OF TALENT. You are dead wrong in application. What makes teams win is talent. Period. Without the right talent, the rest does not matter.

Mudiay is in this 4th season, no major injuries, and had lots of playing time in his first two seasons, including starts. He's still a **** defender, he's still a failure to produce a league average three point shot, he's still a heavy risk in terms of his fitness. He's still a low BBIQ player. More stability does not make Mudiay a better player. If he had more talent and HE FUCKING WORKED HARDER then he'd be a better player. ( NO FUCKING EXCUSE TO BE OUT OF SHAPE AT THIS LEVEL)

4) You don't "churn" guys in their prime developmental window. Guys like Zinger, Knox, MRob, Frank N, Trier. You give those times to grow because they are not yet within their midpoint to their third season ( Zinger is injured, this is different) Guys like Mudiay are journeymen at this point.

5) A 2nd round pick is promised ZERO GUARANTEED MONEY. Their cost factor would be dramatically less than resigning Mudiay to an extension. A 2nd round pick who doesn't pan out can be dumped easily since he's not making much. Dumping Mudiay would be much harder. A 2nd round pick has room to grow, Mudiay will still be an out of shape **** defender who makes poor decisions and can't hit the three ball. How much better does a 2nd round pick have to be to be better than Mudiay IF YOU GAVE THEM MUDIAY'S VOLUME. Give a guy 30 minutes a night plus and 20 shots a night and let him be ball dominant and call his own number at will, and crazy idea, he'll put up some counting stats. If a 2nd round pick can give you 55 percent of Mudiays production at 20 percent of the cost, that's massive value. A second round pick does not need to be better to offer more value, he just needs to offer relative production WHILE FACTORING IN CAP COST. How hard will it be to find a 2nd round pick who can't hit a three point shot, is a **** defender and doesn't know what he's doing on the court? BUT GUESS WHAT? HE'D BE CHEAPER IN TERMS OF CAP COST. Which is why the CBA has the Veteran's Minimum Exception, which means the league pays for veteran's minimum contracts for the express reason I stated that younger cheaper players are more desirable unless there is a mechanism for market correction. You are now arguing against the marketplace systems in place that naturally lean towards younger cheaper players. Good luck with that.

What competency is being developed?

He's still a **** defender.

He can't hit the three ball at a league average rate.

He's chronically out of shape.

He's a poor decision maker and a low BBIQ player.

Three of those can be improved with just raw effort. Mudiay isn't even competent enough to pick up a kettlebell in the offseason and put down the fries.

This team needs more talent. Mudiay is not the long term answer. Even if he did pan out ( odds are stacked against this) what are the odds against the opportunity cost of that roster spot, minutes and cap hit? It's a bad bet. Vonleh might pan out, but can no one see how Portland moved on because of the bad bet principle? Vonleh being what he is now was not worth the 95 percent chance he'd just sink a roster spot and cap space. Mudiay is not here because of some grand sweeping front office strategy. Phil Jackson ****ed up the cap sheet. Badly. The Knicks gave out bad deals and made bad trades and had no money left. Cap locked, they took what warm bodies they could. Guys like Mudiay. That's it. This is not development for Mudiay, it's triage for a ****ty cap situation.

You are expendable but no one gave up on you? What in the entire world does that even mean?

Someone give Mudiay an opportunity! You mean like two years of heavy minutes and starting after he was drafted?

You want this team to win, it needs more talent. It needs players with more talent that Mudiay.


Dying to hear a game reference from you. All posts sound the same.

He is sadly correct. Life is hard but for the most part fair.
Mud needs a contract and he will get it but very likely not from the Knicks.

You could have posted what he said in September. Nothing Triple says ever references what actually happens n the court

I'm tired,I'm tired, I'm so tired right now......Kristaps Porzingis 1/3/18
Cartman718
Posts: 28707
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/12/2007
Member: #1694

1/12/2019  11:56 AM
Thanks to those posters who are pointing out TripleThreat's agenda against Mudiay. I am done arguing with him, because you can throw words out like low bball IQ all you want without any specific examples to back that up, doesn't make it right. How exactly is low bball IQ measured, can we get examples of plays where this is on display, otherwise it's just rhetoric.
Nixluva is posting triangle screen grabs, even when nobody asks - Fishmike. LOL So are we going to reference that thread like the bible now? "The thread of Wroten Page 14 post 9" - EnySpree
CrushAlot
Posts: 58058
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/25/2003
Member: #452
USA
1/12/2019  12:33 PM
meloshouldgo wrote:
Cartman718 wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:You seem to have gone off the deep end on Mudiay. You are starting to sound like the trolls. Kanter is averaging 2.0 Assists a game, Mudiay is averaging 4. One is a backup center the other is a starting POINT guard, You do the math.

Kanter has excellent chemistry with Hezonja, Mudiay couldn't spell "chemistry" if his life depended on it. You keep going from thread to thread making excuses for this scrub and you accuse other people of agenda when they disagree. I really thought you were a better poster. But you are definitely entitled to your opinion.

Kanter has 2 assists a game sure, but he goes one on one a lot even when he is like triple teamed. Thats what I mean when I say doesn't know how to pass, why try to go one on 3 or one on 2.

As far as Mudiay's 4 assists a game, how many times has he passed the ball to an open teammate and they just bricked it. Lets look at GSW the champs...do you think Curry is the only one on the team finding open teammates? Steph Curry is 3rd on his own team in assists per game behind Draymond and Durant. Why don't you question why THAT is happening. As a starter, he's averaging 4.5 assists per game this season in 7 more mins per game than Mudiay.

So let's all start talking **** about Steph now? SMH

The problem isn't that Mudiay is not a passer or not a ball mover. The problem is that the majority of the players on the floor with him are not.

So Mudiay could average more assists per game, sure. Why isn't anyone else coming even close to 4? Because of 2 reasons:
a. We don't really shoot the 3 ball much.
b. We don't really shoot the ball well at all consistently as a team.
c. We don't really look for open teammates...ss a team.

Steph makes 5 threes a game at 45% and his 2 point shooting is a shade over 48%, which is amazing.
Klay 2.7 a game. KD 1.8 a game
Do you know our stats at all??
Timmmy is the leader at 2.6 a game. Think about that...he averages less than 3 threes per game!! How many have you seen him take? Our team leader in 3s made shoots it at around 35%
Kornet at 1.6 3s a game and Vonleh at 1.5 3s a game.

So where are our shooters? The people who shoot 3s the best Kornet and Vonleh dont attempt as many as they should. How many times have you seen them hesitate or pass the ball from the arc even though they were open?

Dont blame the passing woes on Mudiay...it's a team sport. Other than Frank and WholeTeamDot, I dont see anyone supporting Mudiay in the ball movement from the guards. If Mudiay finds you open and you brick it, that's now Mudiay's fault for not getting an assist??? Yep great logic.

Your statement "Kanter has excellent chemistry with Hezonja, Mudiay couldn't spell "chemistry" if his life depended on it" ....Now THAT is classic trolling. Great chemistry with Hezonja means what exactly. Outside of those couple of passes that Hezonja catches from Kanter, what exactly is he doing on the court? I would say last 2-3 games, he's shown a bit more, but what before that?

You do have an agenda, because you keep pointing out a problem with Mudiay that isn't there. Back your statements up with facts and stats not just vague opinions.

I have an agenda. Glad we cleared that up.

I'm tired,I'm tired, I'm so tired right now......Kristaps Porzingis 1/3/18
meloshouldgo
Posts: 26453
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/3/2014
Member: #5801

1/12/2019  4:43 PM
CrushAlot wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:
Cartman718 wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:You seem to have gone off the deep end on Mudiay. You are starting to sound like the trolls. Kanter is averaging 2.0 Assists a game, Mudiay is averaging 4. One is a backup center the other is a starting POINT guard, You do the math.

Kanter has excellent chemistry with Hezonja, Mudiay couldn't spell "chemistry" if his life depended on it. You keep going from thread to thread making excuses for this scrub and you accuse other people of agenda when they disagree. I really thought you were a better poster. But you are definitely entitled to your opinion.

Kanter has 2 assists a game sure, but he goes one on one a lot even when he is like triple teamed. Thats what I mean when I say doesn't know how to pass, why try to go one on 3 or one on 2.

As far as Mudiay's 4 assists a game, how many times has he passed the ball to an open teammate and they just bricked it. Lets look at GSW the champs...do you think Curry is the only one on the team finding open teammates? Steph Curry is 3rd on his own team in assists per game behind Draymond and Durant. Why don't you question why THAT is happening. As a starter, he's averaging 4.5 assists per game this season in 7 more mins per game than Mudiay.

So let's all start talking **** about Steph now? SMH

The problem isn't that Mudiay is not a passer or not a ball mover. The problem is that the majority of the players on the floor with him are not.

So Mudiay could average more assists per game, sure. Why isn't anyone else coming even close to 4? Because of 2 reasons:
a. We don't really shoot the 3 ball much.
b. We don't really shoot the ball well at all consistently as a team.
c. We don't really look for open teammates...ss a team.

Steph makes 5 threes a game at 45% and his 2 point shooting is a shade over 48%, which is amazing.
Klay 2.7 a game. KD 1.8 a game
Do you know our stats at all??
Timmmy is the leader at 2.6 a game. Think about that...he averages less than 3 threes per game!! How many have you seen him take? Our team leader in 3s made shoots it at around 35%
Kornet at 1.6 3s a game and Vonleh at 1.5 3s a game.

So where are our shooters? The people who shoot 3s the best Kornet and Vonleh dont attempt as many as they should. How many times have you seen them hesitate or pass the ball from the arc even though they were open?

Dont blame the passing woes on Mudiay...it's a team sport. Other than Frank and WholeTeamDot, I dont see anyone supporting Mudiay in the ball movement from the guards. If Mudiay finds you open and you brick it, that's now Mudiay's fault for not getting an assist??? Yep great logic.

Your statement "Kanter has excellent chemistry with Hezonja, Mudiay couldn't spell "chemistry" if his life depended on it" ....Now THAT is classic trolling. Great chemistry with Hezonja means what exactly. Outside of those couple of passes that Hezonja catches from Kanter, what exactly is he doing on the court? I would say last 2-3 games, he's shown a bit more, but what before that?

You do have an agenda, because you keep pointing out a problem with Mudiay that isn't there. Back your statements up with facts and stats not just vague opinions.

I have an agenda. Glad we cleared that up.

Just the kind of low class slimeball **** I expect from you. At least Cartman talks about basketball.

I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only try to make them think - Socrates
martin
Posts: 48143
Alba Posts: 106
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
1/12/2019  5:07 PM
Cartman718 wrote:Thanks to those posters who are pointing out TripleThreat's agenda against Mudiay. I am done arguing with him, because you can throw words out like low bball IQ all you want without any specific examples to back that up, doesn't make it right. How exactly is low bball IQ measured, can we get examples of plays where this is on display, otherwise it's just rhetoric.

Every time I watch the Knicks play is another example of Mudiay’s low bbiq

Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
TripleThreat
Posts: 22228
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 2/24/2012
Member: #3997

1/12/2019  9:51 PM
fwk00 wrote:Trip, I think where we disagree is in the metrics that every once in a while get published about the turning point for an NBA point guard (other positions vary). And the magic number of NBA years is 5 for point guards. There are obviously notable exceptions on either side of that number.

My observation on this is that it may be more of an indication of front office stability than anything the player can control.


Teams stuck in the perpetual mediocrity cycle have a profile.

My point is that the Knicks by dedicating themselves to an implicitly painful rebuild process are taking advantage of the by-product of this talent turnstile. That is, quite specifically, that other teams have already paid the front-loaded cost of these lottery picks.

As far as I can tell, rolling the dice on former top ten picks is just as inexpensive and effective as running second-rounders on the floor.

I don't think the Knicks are as bereft of talent as you think. They are loaded.

I see your point. You are making good points.

Something to consider is these other point guards who needed five years to realize their full skill set, I'd still argue many offered at least a passable floor of production to stay in the rotation and give indication that the then current floor still held value. Billups was used as an example ( I don't think he's a good cross example though) Billups was always a good defender. That was at least a bedrock to build upon. Mudiay offers zero 3 And D value.

If team gives up on a player during the timeline of his rookie contract ( by either low value trade or simply not picking up the 3rd/4th year option, that player is just not very good. ( Or to point, he was not very good with that team) We can mince the outer circumstances of the overall franchise, but the player was just not productive. This is where the question of major injury or limited minutes come into play. ( Both these things applied to Billups)

Here is where we are going to diverge.

This is the current Rookie Wage Scale

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2018/07/rookie-scale-salaries-for-2018-first-round-picks.html

Mudiay was the 7th pick in his draft. I recognize his draft was a while ago and the scale has gone up. ( Mudiay's rookie deal was a 4/14, with this last year as a 4.3 million salary)

Wendell Carter was this years 7th. His deal was a 4/22, ranging from 4.4 to 6.9.

I'll use the Suns as an example because they have a lot of young players. They picked Okobo in the 2nd round with the top pick in that round.

He was signed to a 4 year/5.7 million dollar contract. ( 1.2 / 1.4 / 1.6 / 1.8 ) The 3rd/4th years are team options. The Suns can walk away totally for 2.6 million.

They traded for DeAnthony Melton ( quite like him) the 46th player in his draft. So we have an example of a mid 2nd round guy. He was signed to a guaranteed 2 year/2.4 million contract. His first year is less than a million dollars.

You could pay the entire guaranteed portions of Melton and Okobo's deals ( four years of cost control) for just a little less than Carter's first year's salary alone. For just a little more than Carter's 4th year option alone, you could get six years of cost control from both players.

Now Mudiay's deal is scaled back to a different CBA and timeline.

But even at 4.3 for this last year, you could get , with a little more, FOUR YEARS of the top pick in the 2nd round on your squad. Someone who is still in their prime developmental window.

Here's the other problem, when the Knicks get a guy in his 4th year, they must make a contract assessment on him quickly. He could flame out ( most) but in the rare case he does well, it's a question of betting against one solid season against the previous three where the lack of production is why he was available in the first place. You are NOT getting the full benefit of the cost control aka COST CERTAINTY with the rookie deal. '

The Knicks are NOT taking advantage of anything. They are getting a player outside of his prime developmental window, who has flamed out somewhere else before, at a greater cost and risk question than a 2nd round pick. The reason the Knicks didn't give the roster spot to a 2nd round pick was because PHIL JACKSON KEPT TRADING THEM OFF. LIKE AN IDIOT. Yes, they got MRob with a 2nd, but they could have had way more 2nds available over time if they did not trade them off.

Would you rather have Okobo for a little more in salary overall, but for four years? Compared to Mudiay in his 4th? ( And remember, I'm scaling it to Mudiay's slotting, if I used Carter's, it would be even more of a contrast for that 4th year i.e. 6.9)

Would you rather have Melton ( assuming the Knicks aren't getting a top 2nd round pick) for LESS than Mudiay's 4th year for a grand sum of 2.4 million for two years?

Even if Melton and Okobo were busts ( but they are both better players than Mudiay right now, that's just sad), and just gave you what Mudiay gave you on the average ( not this outlier month but the reality of his averages across his career), they'd STILL BE CHEAPER.

The Knicks are not loaded, they have one very elite prospect ( Zinger) in his prime developmental window. They have a bunch of other guys in their prime developmental window. They are not loaded with talent. They are in a better direction than before. But how hard is that?

Let's go to the 10th pick in the Rookie Wage Scale to find a baseline, since you said former 10 ten picks. 3.5 to 5.5.

Now if Mudiay was a better player, I'd see the argument working more in line with what you are saying. He's doing more, he's giving more, so he's making more. What is he giving? Not even league average defense. A league average three point shot? No. Elite conditioning all across his career? ( working out when your back is to the wall doesn't count) Even show average BBIQ? ( Does he cut well? Move off the ball well? Operate in close contact well? Switch and rotate well? Close out well? Anticipate movement on the floor? Run the defense? Make defensive calls or adjustments? Show situational awareness? Does he know how to feed teammates to exploit mismatches? Excel in transition? Does he use his size well, when he's not falling down...Is he a good decision maker with less than five seconds on the shot clock? Does he know how to pace a game, help get a cold hand going, work the refs, exploit what the defense is giving him? Can he lock down the passing lanes? )

A 2nd round pick might, and likely would bust. But is he gonna give you less than Mudiay if you gave said rookie 30 plus minutes a night and 20 plus shots a night plus allowed to be ball dominant and call his own number at will?

But will that 2nd round pick give you possibly more in a ROLE, like only playing 10 minutes a night or only getting five shots in a game?

A 2nd round pick does not need to equalize Mudiay. If he gave 50 percent of Mudiays RELATIVE production at a fraction of the cost, he's a massive value over Mudiay.

It is NOT AN EFFECTIVE STRATEGY. You know what is an effective strategy? DUMPING SUNK COSTS.

Orlando saw Hezonja as a sunk cost and dumped him. Not worth the 5 percent chance of being something else to risk the 95 percent chance he'd still suck for them. Give the minutes, roster spot and cap space to someone else who might develop.

Phil Jackson took a bad situation and made it horrible. He ****ed up the cap sheet. And he dumped out 2nd round picks that were insanely valuable. That's it. This is why Mudiay is on the roster.

"Should have paid Lin and rid ourselves of Melo. Lin makes every team better." - HofstraBBall 11/12/2018
Bondy: High number of players w/expiring contracts has negatively affected ball movement (Fiz quote in his tweet)

©2001-2012 ultimateknicks.com All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.