Knicks · Not Melo's fault, Not Amare's fault, Not Woodys fault, Not MDAs fault... (page 2)
mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:IrishKnickFan wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Wow!! We should have used the Amnesty on Amare!!!i agree but then we wouldn't have tyson so its one of those things that we took a gamble on. I never thought Amare would go from a MVP candidate to a waste of space in one yearI can't believe nobody thought of that
Why do people keep saying this? If we had amnestied Amar'e instead of Billups we could have signed Tyson plus at least another decent player. Billups would have expired after two more games and we would have clear of both contracts.
Thats a good take but daring. Don't think the knicks had the balls to do that last year. It probably was more of an argument for this year.
That being said, was Tyson worth it? Tough call since they are now stuck in a big way.
Also, Tyson came along with having TD be our starter so we were not really going anywhere with him. Lin was an unexpected gift.
If we had cut Amare we would have had space for another 7-8Mil player - We could have turned Amare into Tyson plus Scola/Battier type. Is Tyson worth it? is that a serious question - W/o Tyson anchoring the defensive we would be 30 win (max) team irrespective of who coached us. There were people on the board who said we should have amnestied Amar'e right away. But Dolan would have to pay 20 Mil over the cap for the next three years in oreder to do that and make use of the freed up cap space. I doubt even Dolan would be willing to cough up that type of money.
Well of course he is worth it but at what cost?
Lets forget about Amnestying amare last year (I would have loved that) and say that it could not be done for the sake of argument. If we could only do it this year, knowing what we know today, would we have signed Chandler and wasted our amnesty on Billups?
This year Billups would have expired anyway. And to me it is worth it to amnesty anybody on his team for Tyson except Melo. And I am not the greatest Melo fan, but his value definitely exceeds Tyson. Not sure that is what you are asking?
loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:IrishKnickFan wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Wow!! We should have used the Amnesty on Amare!!!i agree but then we wouldn't have tyson so its one of those things that we took a gamble on. I never thought Amare would go from a MVP candidate to a waste of space in one yearI can't believe nobody thought of that
Why do people keep saying this? If we had amnestied Amar'e instead of Billups we could have signed Tyson plus at least another decent player. Billups would have expired after two more games and we would have clear of both contracts.
Thats a good take but daring. Don't think the knicks had the balls to do that last year. It probably was more of an argument for this year.
That being said, was Tyson worth it? Tough call since they are now stuck in a big way.
Also, Tyson came along with having TD be our starter so we were not really going anywhere with him. Lin was an unexpected gift.
If we had cut Amare we would have had space for another 7-8Mil player - We could have turned Amare into Tyson plus Scola/Battier type. Is Tyson worth it? is that a serious question - W/o Tyson anchoring the defensive we would be 30 win (max) team irrespective of who coached us. There were people on the board who said we should have amnestied Amar'e right away. But Dolan would have to pay 20 Mil over the cap for the next three years in oreder to do that and make use of the freed up cap space. I doubt even Dolan would be willing to cough up that type of money.
Well of course he is worth it but at what cost?
Lets forget about Amnestying amare last year (I would have loved that) and say that it could not be done for the sake of argument. If we could only do it this year, knowing what we know today, would we have signed Chandler and wasted our amnesty on Billups?
This year Billups would have expired anyway. And to me it is worth it to amnesty anybody on his team for Tyson except Melo. And I am not the greatest Melo fan, but his value definitely exceeds Tyson. Not sure that is what you are asking?
If we did not Amnesty Amare and kept Billups, we could not have signed Tyson.
If we did not sign Tyson and kept Billups he would have expired this summer.
If we amnestied Amare this summer, we rid ourselves of Billups' contract and Amare's. 25 million against the cap? Something like that ...
Is Tyson worth that cap space?
mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:IrishKnickFan wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Wow!! We should have used the Amnesty on Amare!!!i agree but then we wouldn't have tyson so its one of those things that we took a gamble on. I never thought Amare would go from a MVP candidate to a waste of space in one yearI can't believe nobody thought of that
Why do people keep saying this? If we had amnestied Amar'e instead of Billups we could have signed Tyson plus at least another decent player. Billups would have expired after two more games and we would have clear of both contracts.
Thats a good take but daring. Don't think the knicks had the balls to do that last year. It probably was more of an argument for this year.
That being said, was Tyson worth it? Tough call since they are now stuck in a big way.
Also, Tyson came along with having TD be our starter so we were not really going anywhere with him. Lin was an unexpected gift.
If we had cut Amare we would have had space for another 7-8Mil player - We could have turned Amare into Tyson plus Scola/Battier type. Is Tyson worth it? is that a serious question - W/o Tyson anchoring the defensive we would be 30 win (max) team irrespective of who coached us. There were people on the board who said we should have amnestied Amar'e right away. But Dolan would have to pay 20 Mil over the cap for the next three years in oreder to do that and make use of the freed up cap space. I doubt even Dolan would be willing to cough up that type of money.
Well of course he is worth it but at what cost?
Lets forget about Amnestying amare last year (I would have loved that) and say that it could not be done for the sake of argument. If we could only do it this year, knowing what we know today, would we have signed Chandler and wasted our amnesty on Billups?
This year Billups would have expired anyway. And to me it is worth it to amnesty anybody on his team for Tyson except Melo. And I am not the greatest Melo fan, but his value definitely exceeds Tyson. Not sure that is what you are asking?
If we did not Amnesty Amare and kept Billups, we could not have signed Tyson.
If we did not sign Tyson and kept Billups he would have expired this summer.
If we amnestied Amare this summer, we rid ourselves of Billups' contract and Amare's. 25 million against the cap? Something like that ...
Is Tyson worth that cap space?
You are using the Amnesty Clause to tie the two together and making a case for opportunity cost of not signing Tyson - I hadn't thought about it that way. Your argument depends on the fact hat he amnesty can be used on one player only and ties Billups/Amare contracts together as the cost for Tyson, because teh amnesty was used on Billups to get Tyson. I get your logic, but I am not sure I am comfortable of thinking about it that way - I mean if you assume you could not use Amnesty last year then we would not have been in the situation of being able to waste it on Billups. Not sure your assumption holds.
loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:IrishKnickFan wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Wow!! We should have used the Amnesty on Amare!!!i agree but then we wouldn't have tyson so its one of those things that we took a gamble on. I never thought Amare would go from a MVP candidate to a waste of space in one yearI can't believe nobody thought of that
Why do people keep saying this? If we had amnestied Amar'e instead of Billups we could have signed Tyson plus at least another decent player. Billups would have expired after two more games and we would have clear of both contracts.
Thats a good take but daring. Don't think the knicks had the balls to do that last year. It probably was more of an argument for this year.
That being said, was Tyson worth it? Tough call since they are now stuck in a big way.
Also, Tyson came along with having TD be our starter so we were not really going anywhere with him. Lin was an unexpected gift.
If we had cut Amare we would have had space for another 7-8Mil player - We could have turned Amare into Tyson plus Scola/Battier type. Is Tyson worth it? is that a serious question - W/o Tyson anchoring the defensive we would be 30 win (max) team irrespective of who coached us. There were people on the board who said we should have amnestied Amar'e right away. But Dolan would have to pay 20 Mil over the cap for the next three years in oreder to do that and make use of the freed up cap space. I doubt even Dolan would be willing to cough up that type of money.
Well of course he is worth it but at what cost?
Lets forget about Amnestying amare last year (I would have loved that) and say that it could not be done for the sake of argument. If we could only do it this year, knowing what we know today, would we have signed Chandler and wasted our amnesty on Billups?
This year Billups would have expired anyway. And to me it is worth it to amnesty anybody on his team for Tyson except Melo. And I am not the greatest Melo fan, but his value definitely exceeds Tyson. Not sure that is what you are asking?
If we did not Amnesty Amare and kept Billups, we could not have signed Tyson.
If we did not sign Tyson and kept Billups he would have expired this summer.
If we amnestied Amare this summer, we rid ourselves of Billups' contract and Amare's. 25 million against the cap? Something like that ...
Is Tyson worth that cap space?
You are using the Amnesty Clause to tie the two together and making a case for opportunity cost of not signing Tyson - I hadn't thought about it that way. Your argument depends on the fact hat he amnesty can be used on one player only and ties Billups/Amare contracts together as the cost for Tyson, because teh amnesty was used on Billups to get Tyson. I get your logic, but I am not sure I am comfortable of thinking about it that way - I mean if you assume you could not use Amnesty last year then we would not have been in the situation of being able to waste it on Billups. Not sure your assumption holds.
Well I just don't think that Dolan was ready to use it on Amare last year because he still had confidence in him and owed him 80 million dollars. Now, he has no confidence in him and only owes him 60.
So it was up to him to either use it on Billups last year or save it for Amare this year. Of course, the latter would have meant no Tyson but far less of a gamble.
Its not a slam dunk but something to think about I think.
Found this yesterday.
http://www.hoopsworld.com/the-pros-and-c...
"Another possible unfortunate byproduct from adding Chandler is potentially losing the amnesty clause, if, in fact, Billups needs to be cut in order to clear cap space forChandler. Given Amar’e knee issues and a debilitating back injury which sidelined him in the playoffs last April, many analysts assumed the Knicks would keep the amnesty provision in their back pocket in case they needed to get out from under the weight of a catastrophic injury to Stoudemire."
mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:IrishKnickFan wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Wow!! We should have used the Amnesty on Amare!!!i agree but then we wouldn't have tyson so its one of those things that we took a gamble on. I never thought Amare would go from a MVP candidate to a waste of space in one yearI can't believe nobody thought of that
Why do people keep saying this? If we had amnestied Amar'e instead of Billups we could have signed Tyson plus at least another decent player. Billups would have expired after two more games and we would have clear of both contracts.
Thats a good take but daring. Don't think the knicks had the balls to do that last year. It probably was more of an argument for this year.
That being said, was Tyson worth it? Tough call since they are now stuck in a big way.
Also, Tyson came along with having TD be our starter so we were not really going anywhere with him. Lin was an unexpected gift.
If we had cut Amare we would have had space for another 7-8Mil player - We could have turned Amare into Tyson plus Scola/Battier type. Is Tyson worth it? is that a serious question - W/o Tyson anchoring the defensive we would be 30 win (max) team irrespective of who coached us. There were people on the board who said we should have amnestied Amar'e right away. But Dolan would have to pay 20 Mil over the cap for the next three years in oreder to do that and make use of the freed up cap space. I doubt even Dolan would be willing to cough up that type of money.
Well of course he is worth it but at what cost?
Lets forget about Amnestying amare last year (I would have loved that) and say that it could not be done for the sake of argument. If we could only do it this year, knowing what we know today, would we have signed Chandler and wasted our amnesty on Billups?
This year Billups would have expired anyway. And to me it is worth it to amnesty anybody on his team for Tyson except Melo. And I am not the greatest Melo fan, but his value definitely exceeds Tyson. Not sure that is what you are asking?
If we did not Amnesty Amare and kept Billups, we could not have signed Tyson.
If we did not sign Tyson and kept Billups he would have expired this summer.
If we amnestied Amare this summer, we rid ourselves of Billups' contract and Amare's. 25 million against the cap? Something like that ...
Is Tyson worth that cap space?
You are using the Amnesty Clause to tie the two together and making a case for opportunity cost of not signing Tyson - I hadn't thought about it that way. Your argument depends on the fact hat he amnesty can be used on one player only and ties Billups/Amare contracts together as the cost for Tyson, because teh amnesty was used on Billups to get Tyson. I get your logic, but I am not sure I am comfortable of thinking about it that way - I mean if you assume you could not use Amnesty last year then we would not have been in the situation of being able to waste it on Billups. Not sure your assumption holds.Well I just don't think that Dolan was ready to use it on Amare last year because he still had confidence in him and owed him 80 million dollars. Now, he has no confidence in him and only owes him 60.
So it was up to him to either use it on Billups last year or save it for Amare this year. Of course, the latter would have meant no Tyson but far less of a gamble.
Its not a slam dunk but something to think about I think.
Found this yesterday.
http://www.hoopsworld.com/the-pros-and-c...
"Another possible unfortunate byproduct from adding Chandler is potentially losing the amnesty clause, if, in fact, Billups needs to be cut in order to clear cap space forChandler. Given Amar’e knee issues and a debilitating back injury which sidelined him in the playoffs last April, many analysts assumed the Knicks would keep the amnesty provision in their back pocket in case they needed to get out from under the weight of a catastrophic injury to Stoudemire."
Yes, I think I posted the same thing back then, my take was we should have tried to trade Billups expiring for cap psace because he still had value. The way the clause is designed you can either hold it and play the waiting game or you can use it as best as you can in your current situation. But you can't do BOTH. We used it last year but we used it on the wrong guy. Now that's easy to say in hindsight and wasn't a sure thing when the decision was made becasue Amar'e had shown last season that he was still an effective player who could potentially be dominant. Everything comes at a price and there were other factors to consider. People on this board were screaming about loyalty and image issues where the no other player would sign here because they would be sure to be traded or dumped. And I can't say those are not valid concerns.
loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:loweyecue wrote:IrishKnickFan wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Wow!! We should have used the Amnesty on Amare!!!i agree but then we wouldn't have tyson so its one of those things that we took a gamble on. I never thought Amare would go from a MVP candidate to a waste of space in one yearI can't believe nobody thought of that
Why do people keep saying this? If we had amnestied Amar'e instead of Billups we could have signed Tyson plus at least another decent player. Billups would have expired after two more games and we would have clear of both contracts.
Thats a good take but daring. Don't think the knicks had the balls to do that last year. It probably was more of an argument for this year.
That being said, was Tyson worth it? Tough call since they are now stuck in a big way.
Also, Tyson came along with having TD be our starter so we were not really going anywhere with him. Lin was an unexpected gift.
If we had cut Amare we would have had space for another 7-8Mil player - We could have turned Amare into Tyson plus Scola/Battier type. Is Tyson worth it? is that a serious question - W/o Tyson anchoring the defensive we would be 30 win (max) team irrespective of who coached us. There were people on the board who said we should have amnestied Amar'e right away. But Dolan would have to pay 20 Mil over the cap for the next three years in oreder to do that and make use of the freed up cap space. I doubt even Dolan would be willing to cough up that type of money.
Well of course he is worth it but at what cost?
Lets forget about Amnestying amare last year (I would have loved that) and say that it could not be done for the sake of argument. If we could only do it this year, knowing what we know today, would we have signed Chandler and wasted our amnesty on Billups?
This year Billups would have expired anyway. And to me it is worth it to amnesty anybody on his team for Tyson except Melo. And I am not the greatest Melo fan, but his value definitely exceeds Tyson. Not sure that is what you are asking?
If we did not Amnesty Amare and kept Billups, we could not have signed Tyson.
If we did not sign Tyson and kept Billups he would have expired this summer.
If we amnestied Amare this summer, we rid ourselves of Billups' contract and Amare's. 25 million against the cap? Something like that ...
Is Tyson worth that cap space?
You are using the Amnesty Clause to tie the two together and making a case for opportunity cost of not signing Tyson - I hadn't thought about it that way. Your argument depends on the fact hat he amnesty can be used on one player only and ties Billups/Amare contracts together as the cost for Tyson, because teh amnesty was used on Billups to get Tyson. I get your logic, but I am not sure I am comfortable of thinking about it that way - I mean if you assume you could not use Amnesty last year then we would not have been in the situation of being able to waste it on Billups. Not sure your assumption holds.Well I just don't think that Dolan was ready to use it on Amare last year because he still had confidence in him and owed him 80 million dollars. Now, he has no confidence in him and only owes him 60.
So it was up to him to either use it on Billups last year or save it for Amare this year. Of course, the latter would have meant no Tyson but far less of a gamble.
Its not a slam dunk but something to think about I think.
Found this yesterday.
http://www.hoopsworld.com/the-pros-and-c...
"Another possible unfortunate byproduct from adding Chandler is potentially losing the amnesty clause, if, in fact, Billups needs to be cut in order to clear cap space forChandler. Given Amar’e knee issues and a debilitating back injury which sidelined him in the playoffs last April, many analysts assumed the Knicks would keep the amnesty provision in their back pocket in case they needed to get out from under the weight of a catastrophic injury to Stoudemire."
Yes, I think I posted the same thing back then, my take was we should have tried to trade Billups expiring for cap psace because he still had value. The way the clause is designed you can either hold it and play the waiting game or you can use it as best as you can in your current situation. But you can't do BOTH. We used it last year but we used it on the wrong guy. Now that's easy to say in hindsight and wasn't a sure thing when the decision was made becasue Amar'e had shown last season that he was still an effective player who could potentially be dominant. Everything comes at a price and there were other factors to consider. People on this board were screaming about loyalty and image issues where the no other player would sign here because they would be sure to be traded or dumped. And I can't say those are not valid concerns.
I think they would have loved to trade Billups instead of wasting the sacred amnesty but they would have had to take back salary.
This amnesty just created many interesting scenarios that we have never seen before.