Ill play Amare at starting C with Tyler at PF and backed up by Cole Aldrich. If there is a team that will take Tyson and will give us back reasonable assets--please shake this team up. Amare looks pretty good --Tyler and Aldrich can play the 48 minutes at C.
Portland is a team that seems like they could use him too.
I'd take back McCollum (does he even get min?), Lopez and a pick.
We have over a year to get something for Chandler. Melo's the one we're running out of time to trade
Bonn1997 wrote:We have over a year to get something for Chandler. Melo's the one we're running out of time to trade
Chandler doesn't deserve to be valued as he is around the league though. Sooner or later it'll catch up, as it did with Shumpert, and then we'll get nothing for him. We should trade Melo if he doesn't commit to staying, but Chandler should be the piece moved first. Especially to a Western team that's looking for a playoff run. I'd talk to OKC, Suns and Portland.
BRIGGS wrote:Ill play Amare at starting C with Tyler at PF and backed up by Cole Aldrich. If there is a team that will take Tyson and will give us back reasonable assets--please shake this team up. Amare looks pretty good --Tyler and Aldrich can play the 48 minutes at C.
I've been begging for this all year. He is one dimensional, extremely overpaid, and is injury prone. If we can get something reasonable, we should do it. Dating back to end of last Feb, he has essentially been a non-contributer. In addition to that, he gets credit for "being a leader" when he is the first to sling coaches and teammates under the bus. Last year he came out against Melo in the playoffs, which was comical given that Hibbert was lighting him up and he wasn't rebounding at all.
SwishAndDish13 wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Ill play Amare at starting C with Tyler at PF and backed up by Cole Aldrich. If there is a team that will take Tyson and will give us back reasonable assets--please shake this team up. Amare looks pretty good --Tyler and Aldrich can play the 48 minutes at C.
I've been begging for this all year. He is one dimensional, extremely overpaid, and is injury prone. If we can get something reasonable, we should do it. Dating back to end of last Feb, he has essentially been a non-contributer. In addition to that, he gets credit for "being a leader" when he is the first to sling coaches and teammates under the bus. Last year he came out against Melo in the playoffs, which was comical given that Hibbert was lighting him up and he wasn't rebounding at all.
+1
Your going to get back a longer contract and you guys we'll be screaming how were always over the cap and can't put no one around melo
Bonn1997 wrote:We have over a year to get something for Chandler. Melo's the one we're running out of time to trade
Chandler keeps playing so poorly and his value won't be too high by the time that year is coming to a close.
knicks1248 wrote:Your going to get back a longer contract
so?
and if its a better player, a player that complements Melo and gonna play some defense(like Tyler) and not just stnad put whenever PG going to the paint, or other PF/C is abusing him down low.
o-v-e-r-a-t-e-d primadona
Bonn1997 wrote:We have over a year to get something for Chandler. Melo's the one we're running out of time to trade
The knicks have over two years to get something from shump but they could've got a real player. Now his value is poo. Tyson needs to be traded before people recognize his skills are nearly gone.
I agree with this. He is an asset that should be moved while we still can. OKC seems like a good spot. They have cap space. Perkins and one of their 1st rounders for Tyson would be great.
knicks1248 wrote:Your going to get back a longer contract and you guys we'll be screaming how were always over the cap and can't put no one around melo
I doubt this - but maybe management has already survey other GMs for the value of our players, and Chandler has none - and would get back worse talent/contract?
here's my take.. Chandler is a specialist. If he's on a really well rounded team he can be a bigtime impact player. We have seen that on this team, and seen it on Dallas also.
The problem is the Knicks have sooooo many holes right now. We have a backcourt giving up 17ppg to their opponents every night and stringing together nights where we get nothing, literally nothing from Prigs, Felton and Shump and those guys will combine for 80-90 minutes easily.
The means you simply need others to fill out the stat sheet. Chandler isnt that guy. I would think he would immediatly go back to being an impact guy in the right situation. OKC scenarios have made sense. I think putting him next Duncan in SAS would also do that. MAybe we could get a nice young player like Leanard back. I could see Chandler being a piece the Spurs could use to get another ring. Even old starting Duncan/Chandler/Parker/Manu and anyone who can shoot or defend is pretty awesome.
Tyson needs a P&R PG and some other guys to cover the holes in his game. Its not so much Chandler that has been exposed here, rather the futility of the rest of the roster. God they are bad!
fishmike wrote:here's my take.. Chandler is a specialist. If he's on a really well rounded team he can be a bigtime impact player. We have seen that on this team, and seen it on Dallas also.The problem is the Knicks have sooooo many holes right now. We have a backcourt giving up 17ppg to their opponents every night and stringing together nights where we get nothing, literally nothing from Prigs, Felton and Shump and those guys will combine for 80-90 minutes easily.
The means you simply need others to fill out the stat sheet. Chandler isnt that guy. I would think he would immediatly go back to being an impact guy in the right situation. OKC scenarios have made sense. I think putting him next Duncan in SAS would also do that. MAybe we could get a nice young player like Leanard back. I could see Chandler being a piece the Spurs could use to get another ring. Even old starting Duncan/Chandler/Parker/Manu and anyone who can shoot or defend is pretty awesome.
Tyson needs a P&R PG and some other guys to cover the holes in his game. Its not so much Chandler that has been exposed here, rather the futility of the rest of the roster. God they are bad!
a WELL Rounded team makes sense.. so how do we get that? we don't have picks or cap space?
ahhh.. maybe you trade the player with the most value..
then you can get possibly a PG, a small forward who defends and maybe, just maybe a pick...
then you can start building a well rounded team, and maximize on chandler and the big impact you said he can have on a well rounded team... Trying to trade chandler for young talented guys like Leonard is not realistic...
just a thought....
Mills was getting a bunch of calls for him when he was out w1th the leg injury
fishmike wrote:here's my take.. Chandler is a specialist. If he's on a really well rounded team he can be a bigtime impact player. We have seen that on this team, and seen it on Dallas also.The problem is the Knicks have sooooo many holes right now. We have a backcourt giving up 17ppg to their opponents every night and stringing together nights where we get nothing, literally nothing from Prigs, Felton and Shump and those guys will combine for 80-90 minutes easily.
The means you simply need others to fill out the stat sheet. Chandler isnt that guy. I would think he would immediatly go back to being an impact guy in the right situation. OKC scenarios have made sense. I think putting him next Duncan in SAS would also do that. MAybe we could get a nice young player like Leanard back. I could see Chandler being a piece the Spurs could use to get another ring. Even old starting Duncan/Chandler/Parker/Manu and anyone who can shoot or defend is pretty awesome.
Tyson needs a P&R PG and some other guys to cover the holes in his game. Its not so much Chandler that has been exposed here, rather the futility of the rest of the roster. God they are bad!
100% agree with you.. he would also benefit if he didn't have a coach that advocates switching every damn minute..
Mda does that because he goes small, and usually has a 6 10" guy playing center. Not a 7 footer
knicks1248 wrote:fishmike wrote:here's my take.. Chandler is a specialist. If he's on a really well rounded team he can be a bigtime impact player. We have seen that on this team, and seen it on Dallas also.The problem is the Knicks have sooooo many holes right now. We have a backcourt giving up 17ppg to their opponents every night and stringing together nights where we get nothing, literally nothing from Prigs, Felton and Shump and those guys will combine for 80-90 minutes easily.
The means you simply need others to fill out the stat sheet. Chandler isnt that guy. I would think he would immediatly go back to being an impact guy in the right situation. OKC scenarios have made sense. I think putting him next Duncan in SAS would also do that. MAybe we could get a nice young player like Leanard back. I could see Chandler being a piece the Spurs could use to get another ring. Even old starting Duncan/Chandler/Parker/Manu and anyone who can shoot or defend is pretty awesome.
Tyson needs a P&R PG and some other guys to cover the holes in his game. Its not so much Chandler that has been exposed here, rather the futility of the rest of the roster. God they are bad!
100% agree with you.. he would also benefit if he didn't have a coach that advocates switching every damn minute..
Mda does that because he goes small, and usually has a 6 10" guy playing center. Not a 7 footer
D'antoni has his teams switch everything? I honestly don't remember our teams switching until Woodson got here.
TeamBall wrote:knicks1248 wrote:fishmike wrote:here's my take.. Chandler is a specialist. If he's on a really well rounded team he can be a bigtime impact player. We have seen that on this team, and seen it on Dallas also.The problem is the Knicks have sooooo many holes right now. We have a backcourt giving up 17ppg to their opponents every night and stringing together nights where we get nothing, literally nothing from Prigs, Felton and Shump and those guys will combine for 80-90 minutes easily.
The means you simply need others to fill out the stat sheet. Chandler isnt that guy. I would think he would immediatly go back to being an impact guy in the right situation. OKC scenarios have made sense. I think putting him next Duncan in SAS would also do that. MAybe we could get a nice young player like Leanard back. I could see Chandler being a piece the Spurs could use to get another ring. Even old starting Duncan/Chandler/Parker/Manu and anyone who can shoot or defend is pretty awesome.
Tyson needs a P&R PG and some other guys to cover the holes in his game. Its not so much Chandler that has been exposed here, rather the futility of the rest of the roster. God they are bad!
100% agree with you.. he would also benefit if he didn't have a coach that advocates switching every damn minute..
Mda does that because he goes small, and usually has a 6 10" guy playing center. Not a 7 footer
D'antoni has his teams switch everything? I honestly don't remember our teams switching until Woodson got here.
oh really, I thought woodson pick that up from MDA
knicks1248 wrote:TeamBall wrote:knicks1248 wrote:fishmike wrote:here's my take.. Chandler is a specialist. If he's on a really well rounded team he can be a bigtime impact player. We have seen that on this team, and seen it on Dallas also.The problem is the Knicks have sooooo many holes right now. We have a backcourt giving up 17ppg to their opponents every night and stringing together nights where we get nothing, literally nothing from Prigs, Felton and Shump and those guys will combine for 80-90 minutes easily.
The means you simply need others to fill out the stat sheet. Chandler isnt that guy. I would think he would immediatly go back to being an impact guy in the right situation. OKC scenarios have made sense. I think putting him next Duncan in SAS would also do that. MAybe we could get a nice young player like Leanard back. I could see Chandler being a piece the Spurs could use to get another ring. Even old starting Duncan/Chandler/Parker/Manu and anyone who can shoot or defend is pretty awesome.
Tyson needs a P&R PG and some other guys to cover the holes in his game. Its not so much Chandler that has been exposed here, rather the futility of the rest of the roster. God they are bad!
100% agree with you.. he would also benefit if he didn't have a coach that advocates switching every damn minute..
Mda does that because he goes small, and usually has a 6 10" guy playing center. Not a 7 footer
D'antoni has his teams switch everything? I honestly don't remember our teams switching until Woodson got here.
oh really, I thought woodson pick that up from MDA
that would be perfect in Knick land. The guy we hired because MDA cant coach defense is using MDAs defense.
TeamBall wrote:knicks1248 wrote:fishmike wrote:here's my take.. Chandler is a specialist. If he's on a really well rounded team he can be a bigtime impact player. We have seen that on this team, and seen it on Dallas also.The problem is the Knicks have sooooo many holes right now. We have a backcourt giving up 17ppg to their opponents every night and stringing together nights where we get nothing, literally nothing from Prigs, Felton and Shump and those guys will combine for 80-90 minutes easily.
The means you simply need others to fill out the stat sheet. Chandler isnt that guy. I would think he would immediatly go back to being an impact guy in the right situation. OKC scenarios have made sense. I think putting him next Duncan in SAS would also do that. MAybe we could get a nice young player like Leanard back. I could see Chandler being a piece the Spurs could use to get another ring. Even old starting Duncan/Chandler/Parker/Manu and anyone who can shoot or defend is pretty awesome.
Tyson needs a P&R PG and some other guys to cover the holes in his game. Its not so much Chandler that has been exposed here, rather the futility of the rest of the roster. God they are bad!
100% agree with you.. he would also benefit if he didn't have a coach that advocates switching every damn minute..
Mda does that because he goes small, and usually has a 6 10" guy playing center. Not a 7 footer
D'antoni has his teams switch everything? I honestly don't remember our teams switching until Woodson got here.
We've only been doing it for 5 years now haha
At this point we should try and stockpile 1 st round pciks for the next 2 years. let face it next year most likely will be another down year. So i would try and get some young talent AND get rid of these contacts so we can get some FA in 2015
