Knicks · Much more so than any max contract--its the mid stuff that kills us (page 2)

fishmike wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:10mm spent on Camby Novak and Kidd--and that will hurt us next year--it will lock us out of the bigger MLE.

exactly the amount the Knicks couldnt spend on Jeremy Lin. More excellent Knick management

you get 3 for the price of one, thats a no brainer..with our injury luck Lin goes down, and like last season were left in chaos at the position.

You guys act like there so many options we by pass, like there were a host of FA guards and Centers..
Lin is great, but not all that proven, didn't show durabilty, and your severely weak at the position.

Kidd wasn't plan A or B he was C, see that we didn't have options or a bunch a trade chips then.

your honestly telling me a bunch of guys with no gas in the tank are worth your 24 year starting PG? Cmon son

Im not saying that, but your putting all your eggs in one basket, thats not just a saying ya know.

Give me some of the options we had that was remotely possible..kidd was going to be here even if lin signed and so was Camby and Novak..

Briggs is basing this thread on igonrant signings of a few role players who everyone was gushing about in dec and nov. The roster was depleted after last seaosn we had like 5 guys under contract and very few $ to fill the voids. But he has yet to explain some of our better options, neither have you.

Also remember crawford and nash was on the A list that blew us off, they made a few pitches to a few Fa's that may have been better then camby and kidd, everybody wanted novak back, so why the change of heart?

Bonn1997 wrote:Who gave us better value this year? Camby, Novak, and Kidd for $10 mil combined OR Amare for $20 mil?

Not to mention, $10 million for three players is not against $0. It's against the cap hold for each position, which is about $1.5 million for the three slots, right? So we're really talking $8.5 million.

I think the way the contracts have been done is clever. We're going to have a ton of cap room when we have a ton of players all coming off the books the same year.

knicks1248 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:10mm spent on Camby Novak and Kidd--and that will hurt us next year--it will lock us out of the bigger MLE.

exactly the amount the Knicks couldnt spend on Jeremy Lin. More excellent Knick management

you get 3 for the price of one, thats a no brainer..with our injury luck Lin goes down, and like last season were left in chaos at the position.

You guys act like there so many options we by pass, like there were a host of FA guards and Centers..
Lin is great, but not all that proven, didn't show durabilty, and your severely weak at the position.

Kidd wasn't plan A or B he was C, see that we didn't have options or a bunch a trade chips then.

I don't think this is a fair argument, 3 for the price of 1. Lin is improving, CLEARLY. Camby and Kidd are declining (though still very good players). Novak is just an incomplete player, serves a function and I like him but it is hard to believe he is here and not Lin. So, saying something is a no brainer is just a subjective way of trying to make a point with your 3 for 1 argument and attaching a phrase that removes debate to the argument.

Lin is not proven, but he did prove he could lead our team of nobodies. He did prove he belonged in the NBA. He proved he could score in the clutch, could pass, defend and see the floor better than any PG we've had here since Jackson. What kind of proof do you want from what is essentially a rookie? Look at Kylie Irving or other young players that had some injuries, are you going to judge them as not showing durability? Come on, we are talking about a Meniscus tear.

Look at how much Lin has improved. Can't go left - no longer a big problem and still improving. Too many TO's - doing quite well there though he is off the ball a lot and not really being utilized well. I'm not saying Lin was our everything, but that was the most exciting basketball I'd seen as a Knicks fan in YEARS and we let it walk. You reap what you sow.

And now, who is our #2 scorer? It is JR and he comes off the bench. How terrible is that? Lin could close and was clutch for us, we let that walk because...

What would we do right now to have a number 2 scorer who also can lead the team?

Dolan blew the Lin thing and many of us, including me, called it. He further compounded it by bringing in the Geriatric bunch, who I like, but not over Lin. The injuries many of us predicted have really destroyed any continuity that we've had and more. Talk about durability???

The league figured us out and the crazy rate the 3's were falling is behind us. I am pulling for us but talking about a championship now is laughable.

y2zipper wrote:The only Chandler deal that makes any sense is Chandler to LAC for Bledsoe and Jordan. Good deal for both teams if Bledsoe pans out.

Interesting, if Bledsoe pans out that trade is heavily in our favor. Lucky for us he's on the Clippers,a team that cannot maximize his talents so long as he's backing up Chris Paul. I like this trade a lot.

But again why in the world would the clips give up bledoe for tyson when they have jordan who is younger and arguably better or will be better?

Solace wrote:I think the way the contracts have been done is clever. We're going to have a ton of cap room when we have a ton of players all coming off the books the same year.

It's not clever when it's the yr we have swap on 1st with Denver and when Felton and Novak are still on the books. Not to mention Melo and probably Chandler are going to want extensions prior to.

There has been nothing clever about our situation...

BRIGGS wrote:10mm spent on Camby Novak and Kidd--and that will hurt us next year--it will lock us out of the bigger MLE.

your premise is faulty.

amare is max player and has underperformed, even when healthy. he makes nobody better, especially melo.
melo is a max player and has underperformed. he makes nobody better, especially stat.
chandler got a ton of money-- and has underperformed.

all 3 played a total of 1 year of college ball collectively and the pro game makes you age more quickly physically because you are going up against bigger and stronger players.

Dagger wrote:

y2zipper wrote:The only Chandler deal that makes any sense is Chandler to LAC for Bledsoe and Jordan. Good deal for both teams if Bledsoe pans out.

Interesting, if Bledsoe pans out that trade is heavily in our favor. Lucky for us he's on the Clippers,a team that cannot maximize his talents so long as he's backing up Chris Paul. I like this trade a lot.

Tyson is exactly what the Clippers need: a defensive big next to Blake that can shoot FT's reliably. Jordan helps the Knicks fill the void at center and can play D, and the Knicks get value in Bledsoe once CP3 is locked up.

Bonn1997 wrote:I don't know if Amare will ever play an NBA game again. If he does, he probably won't last more than a month or two. I'd much rather get out of his contract than out of Camby's, Kidd's, and Novak's.

I don't know if I agree. If Amar'e can give the team 10-15 minutes of highly effective play, there's value there. I understand you usually pay the guy who does that a tenth of what Amar'e gives, but the cost will be too high to get another team to take his contract. It's unfortunate that it played out this way but it is what it is. Maybe he walks away like H20 did

I know I'd in the minority, but I'd like to see the Knicks keep it together and add to it until certain contracts expire. I'd like to see what they do in the playoffs before I start screaming about blowing it up

Solace wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Who gave us better value this year? Camby, Novak, and Kidd for $10 mil combined OR Amare for $20 mil?

Not to mention, $10 million for three players is not against $0. It's against the cap hold for each position, which is about $1.5 million for the three slots, right? So we're really talking $8.5 million.

And Camby's deal was a minimum commitment for the third year. The third year had to be included because he was a sign and trade.

fishmike wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:10mm spent on Camby Novak and Kidd--and that will hurt us next year--it will lock us out of the bigger MLE.

exactly the amount the Knicks couldnt spend on Jeremy Lin. More excellent Knick management

Lin's deal is 5 mil for the first 2 years and 15 mil for year three. The Knicks will not have 10 mil committed to those three when the poison pill goes into in effect in year three. Camby will be done as his deal had a minimal third year commitment so a sign and trade could be done.

CrushAlot wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:10mm spent on Camby Novak and Kidd--and that will hurt us next year--it will lock us out of the bigger MLE.

exactly the amount the Knicks couldnt spend on Jeremy Lin. More excellent Knick management

Lin's deal is 5 mil for the first 2 years and 15 mil for year three. The Knicks will not have 10 mil committed to those three when the poison pill goes into in effect in year three. Camby will be done as his deal had a minimal third year commitment so a sign and trade could be done.

Im still trying to figure out what does kidd, camby, and novak have to do with lin..kidd was suppose to be lins mentor, camby was tysons back up, and novak got his bird rights..those 3 guys was not why we didn't sign lin..