ramtour420 wrote:Briggs, this is not a good idea. How can I tell ? Tkf is having too much fun with this. Also, because Tyson is our second most important player and also Smith would not be our 2nd most important player. Downgrade imho with the pick not being high enough to make up for it. There has to be a better way to get picks.
I woulodnt care about the picks:) Josh Smith and Melo on the same team would be hard to guard. I wouldnt do it without getting Oneal but again Oneal and Amare at C is no slouch.
BRIGGS wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:BRIGGS wrote:helloharv wrote:not very good at allwe would be outrebounded 40-20 every game
Wed likely be a better rebounding team. With Smith Melo and a center----wed become young versatile explosive. Remember this is a guy who avg 19-10-4 last year. Tyson avg 11-11. Where is Miamis center?
Let's look at that a bit more closely. The difference this year between Smith and Tyson is that Smith scores 5.0 more points per game on 8.9 more shots a game. This trade makes us much worse on both ends of the floor.
This would make the team faster, more versatile and more explosive. Certainly we would need a center and I would not do something like this without potentially acquiring a center like Oneal
But for one second lets look at this
I would not do it unless we had the ability to add a C but I would believe we can--in fact I think we can add Webster from Wash and Oneal from Phoi in a 3 way
what better our present team? or
Oneal C
Smith F
Melo F
Webster G
Felton--G
Amare
JR Smith
J Kidd
Novak
Wallace
The team can run faster and jump higher. Brilliant! I don't mean this as an insult to you because many others use the same reasoning but athletic abilities in the absence of results are irrelevant. Why should I prefer someone who gets 17 points off 16 shots by running quickly and jumping high over someone who doesn't jump as high but gets 12 points on 7 shots. The high vertical leap itself is something I'm supposed to value?
I mean, do you realize how big a downgrade on offense it is if the guy gets 5 more points on 9 more shots and also gives 3 fewer offensive rebounds a game? My guess is the team averages about seven fewer points per game if you replace Tyson with Smith and keep everything else the same.
BRIGGS wrote:ramtour420 wrote:Briggs, this is not a good idea. How can I tell ? Tkf is having too much fun with this. Also, because Tyson is our second most important player and also Smith would not be our 2nd most important player. Downgrade imho with the pick not being high enough to make up for it. There has to be a better way to get picks.
I woulodnt care about the picks:) Josh Smith and Melo on the same team would be hard to guard. I wouldnt do it without getting Oneal but again Oneal and Amare at C is no slouch.
Oneal is as inconsistent as they come, both his health and his game. Tyson is quite the opposite. Tyson in PnR is even harder to guard we just don't run it nearly enough for him or maybe its that Felton is not that good at passing it when PnR
Knicks couldn't get Josh Smith for Tyson.
I would rather ask Houston if they are interested in Tyson. Tyson for Asik, Patterson and Aldrich.
Knicks would get a rebounding machine in Asik that plays good defense. Backup young PF in Patterson and a backup center. Fixes a lot of problems.
Houston would get a center that actually knows how to play PnR with Lin and Harden.
This is a win win for both teams.
Bonn1997 wrote:I mean, do you realize how big a downgrade on offense it is if the guy gets 5 more points on 9 more shots and also gives 3 fewer offensive rebounds a game? My guess is the team averages about seven fewer points per game if you replace Tyson with Smith and keep everything else the same.
You keep focusing on offense and fg attempts. What about D?
I would not do the trade though. Even though Smith is one of the best wing defenders in the league.
Atlanta would do thus cuz they want to move hortford to power fwd. ....Chandler has a leader reputation as a knock i feel he has done nothing of the sort.
The knicks would have a devestating front line with A'mare in the mix. I still like A'mare of the bench but we have Camby on the roster still...josh, melo and Camby with A'mare of the bench is championship ready. Stick Shump where he belongs next to Felton with kid and smith?
Let's do it!!!! Briggs is a genius!!!
NYKBocker wrote:I would rather ask Houston if they are interested in Tyson. Tyson for Asik, Patterson and Aldrich. Knicks would get a rebounding machine in Asik that plays good defense. Backup young PF in Patterson and a backup center. Fixes a lot of problems.
Houston would get a center that actually knows how to play PnR with Lin and Harden.
This is a win win for both teams.
Tyson is not worth those 3 players. No way Houston makes this deal. They would be interested in Amare if not for his contract
I don't think its crazy to think that Tyson gets dealt. I'm sure the Knicks aren't happy with his up and down play an zero offensive game. But not for Josh Smith. Him & Melo on the same team would rival Isiah levels of ineptitude
Everyone's been up and down. I'd be surprised if the Knicks are not happy with their all-star center
yellowboy90 wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:I mean, do you realize how big a downgrade on offense it is if the guy gets 5 more points on 9 more shots and also gives 3 fewer offensive rebounds a game? My guess is the team averages about seven fewer points per game if you replace Tyson with Smith and keep everything else the same.
You keep focusing on offense and fg attempts. What about D?
I would not do the trade though. Even though Smith is one of the best wing defenders in the league.
I suspect Tyson will turn it up on D when it matters. Even if he doesn't, it's hard to overstate his impact on offense. He's getting us tons of more points than the average center would. He's also depended on to get every rebound because all our other front-court players are below average rebounders. People expect him to shoot 70%, grab 15 boards, and go all out on defense.
Regardless, Smith better be a DPOY level player if he's gonna make up for 7 a point loss on the offensive end.
gunsnewing wrote:NYKBocker wrote:I would rather ask Houston if they are interested in Tyson. Tyson for Asik, Patterson and Aldrich. Knicks would get a rebounding machine in Asik that plays good defense. Backup young PF in Patterson and a backup center. Fixes a lot of problems.
Houston would get a center that actually knows how to play PnR with Lin and Harden.
This is a win win for both teams.
Tyson is not worth those 3 players. No way Houston makes this deal. They would be interested in Amare if not for his contract
Aldrich is filler. Tyson for Asik and Patterson would be overpaying a little for Houston but they would get the perfect PnR center for Lin and Harden. Someone who can actually set a screen and catch the ball.
Bonn1997 wrote:Everyone's been up and down. I'd be surprised if the Knicks are not happy with their all-star center
Pat ewing is an all star. Tyson Chandler is a role player all star who couldnt walk in Patricks shoes.
BRIGGS wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Everyone's been up and down. I'd be surprised if the Knicks are not happy with their all-star center
Pat ewing is an all star. Tyson Chandler is a role player all star who couldnt walk in Patricks shoes.
Patrick Ewing was a superstar. Chandler is an allstar who's presence goes beyond his stats and he is finally getting recognized for it. He has become the heart and soul of this team so i doubt he gets traded unless it's in a Dwight-type trade.
Pat was complete player. All around.
Defense, offense, leadership, heart, tuffness.
Tyson represent what left out of all this in today’s NBA - finesse, arrogance, one-sided skills.
Players like Patrick are hard to come by. Bbal Dinosaurs.
arkrud wrote:Pat was complete player. All around.
Defense, offense, leadership, heart, tuffness.
Tyson represent what left out of all this in today’s NBA - finesse, arrogance, one-sided skills.
Players like Patrick are hard to come by. Bbal Dinosaurs.
Ewing was a terrible passer (or just hated to do it)
mrKnickShot wrote:arkrud wrote:Pat was complete player. All around.
Defense, offense, leadership, heart, tuffness.
Tyson represent what left out of all this in today’s NBA - finesse, arrogance, one-sided skills.
Players like Patrick are hard to come by. Bbal Dinosaurs.
Ewing was a terrible passer (or just hated to do it)
Who was he passing it to? Knicks didn't have players like Amare and Melo.
Checketts admitted his biggest regret in 94 was not getting Ewing that Robin
Bonn, TyChan has one of the highest shooting percentages in the game because he basically only dunks. I dont think it's fair to evalluate the trade based on shooting percentage. But I don't want to see Amare playing Center as a starter, it means we would not have a last line of defense. That is why I wouldn't do it.
loweyecue wrote:Bonn, TyChan has one of the highest shooting percentages in the game because he basically only dunks. I dont think it's fair to evalluate the trade based on shooting percentage. But I don't want to see Amare playing Center as a starter, it means we would not have a last line of defense. That is why I wouldn't do it.
I think that his point is that players should shoot the highest percentage shots, therefore, they should only dunk
Well ... not really
I don't think that Bonn is willing to entertain the idea of diminishing marginal returns when it comes to Chandler and WS's
gunsnewing wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:arkrud wrote:Pat was complete player. All around.
Defense, offense, leadership, heart, tuffness.
Tyson represent what left out of all this in today’s NBA - finesse, arrogance, one-sided skills.
Players like Patrick are hard to come by. Bbal Dinosaurs.
Ewing was a terrible passer (or just hated to do it)
Who was he passing it to? Knicks didn't have players like Amare and Melo.
Checketts admitted his biggest regret in 94 was not getting Ewing that Robin
You can make the same case for Melo in many ways. Its a bad argument (most of the time).
They both should have been better passers but have the mind set that not many shots are better than theirs.
