Marv wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:I hate the rush, as you put it MS. Nothing that moves the needle. The Suns just gifted Memphis Josh Jackson because they ****ed up their cap management. Is Josh Jackson spectacular? NO. But he coudl very well prove to be part of the future moving forward. Jabari Parker just got signed to a 2 year $13 million deal. Yes, I would rather that than $31 million to Bobby Portis. I don't think we locked anyone up that is definitely going to be here for the long haul. The players we signed have to know that -- good ****ing luck getting them to play as a team instead of a bunch of mercenaries looking for their next paycheck

i don't know. 2 mercenaries battled for the title this year - one hurt - and then moved on to their respective greener pastures.

I wouldn't compare any of our guys to two of the top 5 players in the league

Marv wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:I hate the rush, as you put it MS. Nothing that moves the needle. The Suns just gifted Memphis Josh Jackson because they ****ed up their cap management. Is Josh Jackson spectacular? NO. But he coudl very well prove to be part of the future moving forward. Jabari Parker just got signed to a 2 year $13 million deal. Yes, I would rather that than $31 million to Bobby Portis. I don't think we locked anyone up that is definitely going to be here for the long haul. The players we signed have to know that -- good ****ing luck getting them to play as a team instead of a bunch of mercenaries looking for their next paycheck

i don't know. 2 mercenaries battled for the title this year - one hurt - and then moved on to their respective greener pastures.

SupremeCommander wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Marv wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:I hate the rush, as you put it MS. Nothing that moves the needle. The Suns just gifted Memphis Josh Jackson because they ****ed up their cap management. Is Josh Jackson spectacular? NO. But he coudl very well prove to be part of the future moving forward. Jabari Parker just got signed to a 2 year $13 million deal. Yes, I would rather that than $31 million to Bobby Portis. I don't think we locked anyone up that is definitely going to be here for the long haul. The players we signed have to know that -- good ****ing luck getting them to play as a team instead of a bunch of mercenaries looking for their next paycheck

i don't know. 2 mercenaries battled for the title this year - one hurt - and then moved on to their respective greener pastures.

Josh Jackson is a mess off the court. The Suns wanted him off their team. Doubt his option is picked up and he is owed 7 mil this year. I don't think you want him in nyc or near the young Knicks. Jabari has been a huge disappointment. There is no effort from him on d. That is different than being a bad defensive player. He just doesn't care. You don't even see the extra hustle if he makes a mistake and turns the ball over. I think the front office took character into account both on and off the court when they brought in players. One report I saw said the Knicks signed 4/5 guys they wanted for their plan b option.

when Bobby Portis was deemed to be a backup, he literally broke the other guy's face. He is also not known for defense. I don't like either of the guys I mentioned but they are way cheaper, and frankly are higher upside

franco12 wrote:I like what the FO did. All team options! How the F did they do that?

The only criticism I have is I wish they would have kept $10-20m open so they could have had the option to facilitate a trade.

It would have been nice to have gotten someone like Iggy from GS, and picked up a pick. But that isn't the end of the world.

I also would have liked to resign Vonleh & Mudiay, but I think their replacements offer up greater upside. We did after all win 17 games with these players.

Easy. No other team came close to offering them the annual money we did. And if that's the case, their contracts mean they offer no trade value, since we won't take back money that goes beyond 2021. So we're stuck with them for better or worse....and considering that these guys don't really move the needle....which is why they were available in the first place....it means we basically decided to set close to $80 million on fire.

NardDogNation wrote:This free agency feels exactly like 2015 when we burned several million as well on Robin Lopez, Aaron Afflalo, Derrick Williams and Kevin Seraphin for $30 million. And we were using the same nonsense talking points about doing it for "veteran leadership" and how we shouldn't worry because they were only "short-term deals". One season later, not a single one of those players were on our team. Had we only used a fraction of the money spent on those guys instead on taking Jason Thompson, Carl Landry and Nik Stauskaus into space (~$20 million), we would've had the 3rd pick in the 2017 draft and the 14th pick in the 2019 draft. I definitely would've preferred those picks.

We ****ed ourselves in the same manner this offseason. We could've had the Warriors 2024 first round pick OUTRIGHT when Stephen Curry will be 36 years old, Klay Thompson will be 34 years old and Draymond Green might not even be on the team. The cost? Taking on Andre Iguodala who provides every bit the "veteran leadership" a Taj Gibson could and likely could be flipped for assets at the deadline.

We could've also had the Heat 2023 first round pick (top 5 protected; unprotected by 2026) when Jimmy Butler won't be in the NBA and Pat Riley might not even be on this plane of existence. The cost? The $10.5 million attached to Mo Harkless, who is a useful player in his own right and might even be able to get you a good 2nd round pick at the deadline.

If it came down to it, we could've still signed the bulk of these horse**** contracts, if that's what we wanted to do. But you can't fix stupid I'm told and the Knicks are exactly that. I just don't understand how the fans aren't picking up on how we're screwing ourselves the same way every year.

Lopez was a good move, trading him for Rose, wasnt. Was a stat padding ball stopper. Lopez was one of the best interior defenders, rebounders, in the league at the time. Not sure how you view him as a waste of cap space. Made KP's job a lot easier his rookie year.

GustavBahler wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:This free agency feels exactly like 2015 when we burned several million as well on Robin Lopez, Aaron Afflalo, Derrick Williams and Kevin Seraphin for $30 million. And we were using the same nonsense talking points about doing it for "veteran leadership" and how we shouldn't worry because they were only "short-term deals". One season later, not a single one of those players were on our team. Had we only used a fraction of the money spent on those guys instead on taking Jason Thompson, Carl Landry and Nik Stauskaus into space (~$20 million), we would've had the 3rd pick in the 2017 draft and the 14th pick in the 2019 draft. I definitely would've preferred those picks.

We ****ed ourselves in the same manner this offseason. We could've had the Warriors 2024 first round pick OUTRIGHT when Stephen Curry will be 36 years old, Klay Thompson will be 34 years old and Draymond Green might not even be on the team. The cost? Taking on Andre Iguodala who provides every bit the "veteran leadership" a Taj Gibson could and likely could be flipped for assets at the deadline.

We could've also had the Heat 2023 first round pick (top 5 protected; unprotected by 2026) when Jimmy Butler won't be in the NBA and Pat Riley might not even be on this plane of existence. The cost? The $10.5 million attached to Mo Harkless, who is a useful player in his own right and might even be able to get you a good 2nd round pick at the deadline.

If it came down to it, we could've still signed the bulk of these horse**** contracts, if that's what we wanted to do. But you can't fix stupid I'm told and the Knicks are exactly that. I just don't understand how the fans aren't picking up on how we're screwing ourselves the same way every year.

Lopez was a good move, trading him for Rose, wasnt. Was a stat padding ball stopper. Lopez was one of the best interior defenders, rebounders, in the league at the time. Not sure how you view him as a waste of cap space. Made KP's job a lot easier his rookie year.

He didn't come close to the justifying the opportunity costs of gift-wrapped lottery picks from the Kings. I knew that then. I see no reason to change that position today.

GustavBahler wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:This free agency feels exactly like 2015 when we burned several million as well on Robin Lopez, Aaron Afflalo, Derrick Williams and Kevin Seraphin for $30 million. And we were using the same nonsense talking points about doing it for "veteran leadership" and how we shouldn't worry because they were only "short-term deals". One season later, not a single one of those players were on our team. Had we only used a fraction of the money spent on those guys instead on taking Jason Thompson, Carl Landry and Nik Stauskaus into space (~$20 million), we would've had the 3rd pick in the 2017 draft and the 14th pick in the 2019 draft. I definitely would've preferred those picks.

We ****ed ourselves in the same manner this offseason. We could've had the Warriors 2024 first round pick OUTRIGHT when Stephen Curry will be 36 years old, Klay Thompson will be 34 years old and Draymond Green might not even be on the team. The cost? Taking on Andre Iguodala who provides every bit the "veteran leadership" a Taj Gibson could and likely could be flipped for assets at the deadline.

We could've also had the Heat 2023 first round pick (top 5 protected; unprotected by 2026) when Jimmy Butler won't be in the NBA and Pat Riley might not even be on this plane of existence. The cost? The $10.5 million attached to Mo Harkless, who is a useful player in his own right and might even be able to get you a good 2nd round pick at the deadline.

If it came down to it, we could've still signed the bulk of these horse**** contracts, if that's what we wanted to do. But you can't fix stupid I'm told and the Knicks are exactly that. I just don't understand how the fans aren't picking up on how we're screwing ourselves the same way every year.

Lopez was a good move, trading him for Rose, wasnt. Was a stat padding ball stopper. Lopez was one of the best interior defenders, rebounders, in the league at the time. Not sure how you view him as a waste of cap space. Made KP's job a lot easier his rookie year.

He didn't come close to the justifying the opportunity costs of gift-wrapped lottery picks from the Kings. I knew that then. I see no reason to change that position today.

Lopez was a bust because your trade fantasy didnt happen?

Is it a fantasy if the deal happened with Philly and Sac?

Lopez is alright. But he is expendable and is why he's been on 5 teams in his career; 6 if you consider the Bucks. You don't pick that over an opportunity to get multiple/improved lottery picks. It's why the Sixers are title contenders and we have to delude ourselves into thinking Julius Randle and company can be cornerstones for this franchise.

NardDogNation wrote:This free agency feels exactly like 2015 when we burned several million as well on Robin Lopez, Aaron Afflalo, Derrick Williams and Kevin Seraphin for $30 million. And we were using the same nonsense talking points about doing it for "veteran leadership" and how we shouldn't worry because they were only "short-term deals". One season later, not a single one of those players were on our team. Had we only used a fraction of the money spent on those guys instead on taking Jason Thompson, Carl Landry and Nik Stauskaus into space (~$20 million), we would've had the 3rd pick in the 2017 draft and the 14th pick in the 2019 draft. I definitely would've preferred those picks.

We ****ed ourselves in the same manner this offseason. We could've had the Warriors 2024 first round pick OUTRIGHT when Stephen Curry will be 36 years old, Klay Thompson will be 34 years old and Draymond Green might not even be on the team. The cost? Taking on Andre Iguodala who provides every bit the "veteran leadership" a Taj Gibson could and likely could be flipped for assets at the deadline.

We could've also had the Heat 2023 first round pick (top 5 protected; unprotected by 2026) when Jimmy Butler won't be in the NBA and Pat Riley might not even be on this plane of existence. The cost? The $10.5 million attached to Mo Harkless, who is a useful player in his own right and might even be able to get you a good 2nd round pick at the deadline.

If it came down to it, we could've still signed the bulk of these horse**** contracts, if that's what we wanted to do. But you can't fix stupid I'm told and the Knicks are exactly that. I just don't understand how the fans aren't picking up on how we're screwing ourselves the same way every year.

GustavBahler wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:This free agency feels exactly like 2015 when we burned several million as well on Robin Lopez, Aaron Afflalo, Derrick Williams and Kevin Seraphin for $30 million. And we were using the same nonsense talking points about doing it for "veteran leadership" and how we shouldn't worry because they were only "short-term deals". One season later, not a single one of those players were on our team. Had we only used a fraction of the money spent on those guys instead on taking Jason Thompson, Carl Landry and Nik Stauskaus into space (~$20 million), we would've had the 3rd pick in the 2017 draft and the 14th pick in the 2019 draft. I definitely would've preferred those picks.

We ****ed ourselves in the same manner this offseason. We could've had the Warriors 2024 first round pick OUTRIGHT when Stephen Curry will be 36 years old, Klay Thompson will be 34 years old and Draymond Green might not even be on the team. The cost? Taking on Andre Iguodala who provides every bit the "veteran leadership" a Taj Gibson could and likely could be flipped for assets at the deadline.

We could've also had the Heat 2023 first round pick (top 5 protected; unprotected by 2026) when Jimmy Butler won't be in the NBA and Pat Riley might not even be on this plane of existence. The cost? The $10.5 million attached to Mo Harkless, who is a useful player in his own right and might even be able to get you a good 2nd round pick at the deadline.

If it came down to it, we could've still signed the bulk of these horse**** contracts, if that's what we wanted to do. But you can't fix stupid I'm told and the Knicks are exactly that. I just don't understand how the fans aren't picking up on how we're screwing ourselves the same way every year.

Lopez was a good move, trading him for Rose, wasnt. Was a stat padding ball stopper. Lopez was one of the best interior defenders, rebounders, in the league at the time. Not sure how you view him as a waste of cap space. Made KP's job a lot easier his rookie year.

He didn't come close to the justifying the opportunity costs of gift-wrapped lottery picks from the Kings. I knew that then. I see no reason to change that position today.

Lopez was a bust because your trade fantasy didnt happen?

Is it a fantasy if the deal happened with Philly and Sac?

Lopez is alright. But he is expendable and is why he's been on 5 teams in his career; 6 if you consider the Bucks. You don't pick that over an opportunity to get multiple/improved lottery picks. It's why the Sixers are title contenders and we have to delude ourselves into thinking Julius Randle and company can be cornerstones for this franchise.

It is a fantasy if you believe the Knicks could have pulled off precisely the same deal because you say so. Dont care how many teams Lopez has been on, was playing at a high level in NY. He took tbe toughest defensive assignments, boxed out so KP could grab a board. By the end of the season he developed a hook shot, became more of a two way player. Surprised anyone is trying to say otherwise.

When did I even speak about Lopez's game? If it means anything, I think he's useful. But by no stretch of the imagination is integral. And you don't pass up the opportunity to get lottery picks for something that is not integral. If you read ANY of the headlines surrounding that deal between the Kings and Sixers, it was regarded as a coup for the Sixers because it was a foregone conclusion that those picks were going to be extremely valuable. I would've been fine with making due with Kyle O'Quinn and Kevin Seraphin if that type of deal was floating around. And we would've been no worse or better during a lost season for it.

But explain to me why the Sixers could get that deal, while we couldn't? I could understand how the Kings would gain leverage if we showed interest as well. But not to the extent where we couldn't get back real draft assets for taking on players that offerred no on-court value.

NardDogNation wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:This free agency feels exactly like 2015 when we burned several million as well on Robin Lopez, Aaron Afflalo, Derrick Williams and Kevin Seraphin for $30 million. And we were using the same nonsense talking points about doing it for "veteran leadership" and how we shouldn't worry because they were only "short-term deals". One season later, not a single one of those players were on our team. Had we only used a fraction of the money spent on those guys instead on taking Jason Thompson, Carl Landry and Nik Stauskaus into space (~$20 million), we would've had the 3rd pick in the 2017 draft and the 14th pick in the 2019 draft. I definitely would've preferred those picks.

We ****ed ourselves in the same manner this offseason. We could've had the Warriors 2024 first round pick OUTRIGHT when Stephen Curry will be 36 years old, Klay Thompson will be 34 years old and Draymond Green might not even be on the team. The cost? Taking on Andre Iguodala who provides every bit the "veteran leadership" a Taj Gibson could and likely could be flipped for assets at the deadline.

We could've also had the Heat 2023 first round pick (top 5 protected; unprotected by 2026) when Jimmy Butler won't be in the NBA and Pat Riley might not even be on this plane of existence. The cost? The $10.5 million attached to Mo Harkless, who is a useful player in his own right and might even be able to get you a good 2nd round pick at the deadline.

If it came down to it, we could've still signed the bulk of these horse**** contracts, if that's what we wanted to do. But you can't fix stupid I'm told and the Knicks are exactly that. I just don't understand how the fans aren't picking up on how we're screwing ourselves the same way every year.

Lopez was a good move, trading him for Rose, wasnt. Was a stat padding ball stopper. Lopez was one of the best interior defenders, rebounders, in the league at the time. Not sure how you view him as a waste of cap space. Made KP's job a lot easier his rookie year.

He didn't come close to the justifying the opportunity costs of gift-wrapped lottery picks from the Kings. I knew that then. I see no reason to change that position today.

Lopez was a bust because your trade fantasy didnt happen?

Is it a fantasy if the deal happened with Philly and Sac?

Lopez is alright. But he is expendable and is why he's been on 5 teams in his career; 6 if you consider the Bucks. You don't pick that over an opportunity to get multiple/improved lottery picks. It's why the Sixers are title contenders and we have to delude ourselves into thinking Julius Randle and company can be cornerstones for this franchise.

It is a fantasy if you believe the Knicks could have pulled off precisely the same deal because you say so. Dont care how many teams Lopez has been on, was playing at a high level in NY. He took tbe toughest defensive assignments, boxed out so KP could grab a board. By the end of the season he developed a hook shot, became more of a two way player. Surprised anyone is trying to say otherwise.

When did I even speak about Lopez's game? If it means anything, I think he's useful. But by no stretch of the imagination is integral. And you don't pass up the opportunity to get lottery picks for something that is not integral. If you read ANY of the headlines surrounding that deal between the Kings and Sixers, it was regarded as a coup for the Sixers because it was a foregone conclusion that those picks were going to be extremely valuable. I would've been fine with making due with Kyle O'Quinn and Kevin Seraphin if that type of deal was floating around. And we would've been no worse or better during a lost season for it.

But explain to me why the Sixers could get that deal, while we couldn't? I could understand how the Kings would gain leverage if we showed interest as well. But not to the extent where we couldn't get back real draft assets for taking on players that offerred no on-court value.

Lopez could have been an integral part of the team, was his only season in NY. Check out how many games he has missed in his career At the time he was one of the ironmen in tbe league in that dept. Lopez was signed as an FA.

Every team has a different roster, you are suggesting that trading for one player is no different than trading for another. The deals these teams completed were specific to those rosters.You're assuming they would look at our roster at the time in exactly the same way. Doesnt work like that.

Another thing to factor in is relationships between rival execs. Phil didnt really have any. Good relationships with other execs can get you better deals than you might get normally. Perry seems to be on good terms with other execs, probably easier to reach than Phil.

SupremeCommander wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:This free agency feels exactly like 2015 when we burned several million as well on Robin Lopez, Aaron Afflalo, Derrick Williams and Kevin Seraphin for $30 million. And we were using the same nonsense talking points about doing it for "veteran leadership" and how we shouldn't worry because they were only "short-term deals". One season later, not a single one of those players were on our team. Had we only used a fraction of the money spent on those guys instead on taking Jason Thompson, Carl Landry and Nik Stauskaus into space (~$20 million), we would've had the 3rd pick in the 2017 draft and the 14th pick in the 2019 draft. I definitely would've preferred those picks.

We ****ed ourselves in the same manner this offseason. We could've had the Warriors 2024 first round pick OUTRIGHT when Stephen Curry will be 36 years old, Klay Thompson will be 34 years old and Draymond Green might not even be on the team. The cost? Taking on Andre Iguodala who provides every bit the "veteran leadership" a Taj Gibson could and likely could be flipped for assets at the deadline.

We could've also had the Heat 2023 first round pick (top 5 protected; unprotected by 2026) when Jimmy Butler won't be in the NBA and Pat Riley might not even be on this plane of existence. The cost? The $10.5 million attached to Mo Harkless, who is a useful player in his own right and might even be able to get you a good 2nd round pick at the deadline.

If it came down to it, we could've still signed the bulk of these horse**** contracts, if that's what we wanted to do. But you can't fix stupid I'm told and the Knicks are exactly that. I just don't understand how the fans aren't picking up on how we're screwing ourselves the same way every year.

PREACH

Welcome to Fantasy Island, all we need is Tattoo...