Knicks · Tyson Chandler another 20-20 game (page 4)

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:I hate to say I told you so...but I told you all so.

No, I wasn't a fan of Tyson's body language but why should that matter? He's playing with grown men who should have the gumption to get beyond that. Besides, any player that can't handle bad "body language", isn't equipped to handle the stress and rigors of playing in New York anyway. I'm not saying that we should have kept Tyson but this notion that he needed to be traded immediately, because of his pouty-face was flat out dumb.

Now, all we have to show for moving Tyson is a 33 year old PG due $21 million over the next 3 years and some marginal 2nd rounders that people try to hype up as game changers. I hated that trade then and hate it the same today because it was a horrible waste of an asset. The silver lining is that we're so FUBAR that we've accidentally positioned ourselves well enough to be contenders for Emanual Mudiay, Karl Towns and Jahlil Okafor.

It was a lot more than a pouty face. He was going to the gm trying to get his coach fired. I really wanted Mills out in the Phil purge last year as we'll. whatever you think of Woodson he had no support from mills last year.

You're blaming him for encouraging what we all wanted to happen? Woodson was a horrible coach and Chandler had every right to voice that opinion, since Woodson's ineptitude hurt Chandler's career and future earning potential. You see the way that he's playing for Dallas now, right? That could've been us (assuming we could find a coach with the chops that Rick Carlisle has)!

I don't know. Maybe I'm just trying to be the devil's advocate but I don't see the wrong in it.

you think that the fact that dallas has a really good team surrounding him helps? Chandler and Melo/Stats game don't mesh.

Based on what? They had a 54 win season and over .500 record as teammates.

that 54 win season had guards and leaders.

Of course you have to have good teammates. I still asked, they don't mesh based on what?

based on tyson moping, not even trying anymore ...

Well, I could understand your point if you revised your statement to something like, "The Chandler we had in the last of his 3 years here didn't fit great, although we still were much better off than now."

Listen, I always hated chandler and hated how much we paid for him so in regards to him, I am definitely biased.

I hated the fact that he could only dunk or score within 2 feet. Yes, that looks good in the stat sheet, but when your defender can roam since he has no respect for you away from the basket, it clogs everything up. Its like when sammy gets the ball 15 feet from the basket and there is nobody near him and he is stuck.

I wanted him gone.

So ... your argument is that we could have gotten more for him, maybe we could have ... who knows.

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:I hate to say I told you so...but I told you all so.

No, I wasn't a fan of Tyson's body language but why should that matter? He's playing with grown men who should have the gumption to get beyond that. Besides, any player that can't handle bad "body language", isn't equipped to handle the stress and rigors of playing in New York anyway. I'm not saying that we should have kept Tyson but this notion that he needed to be traded immediately, because of his pouty-face was flat out dumb.

Now, all we have to show for moving Tyson is a 33 year old PG due $21 million over the next 3 years and some marginal 2nd rounders that people try to hype up as game changers. I hated that trade then and hate it the same today because it was a horrible waste of an asset. The silver lining is that we're so FUBAR that we've accidentally positioned ourselves well enough to be contenders for Emanual Mudiay, Karl Towns and Jahlil Okafor.

It was a lot more than a pouty face. He was going to the gm trying to get his coach fired. I really wanted Mills out in the Phil purge last year as we'll. whatever you think of Woodson he had no support from mills last year.

You're blaming him for encouraging what we all wanted to happen? Woodson was a horrible coach and Chandler had every right to voice that opinion, since Woodson's ineptitude hurt Chandler's career and future earning potential. You see the way that he's playing for Dallas now, right? That could've been us (assuming we could find a coach with the chops that Rick Carlisle has)!

I don't know. Maybe I'm just trying to be the devil's advocate but I don't see the wrong in it.

you think that the fact that dallas has a really good team surrounding him helps? Chandler and Melo/Stats game don't mesh.

Based on what? They had a 54 win season and over .500 record as teammates.

that 54 win season had guards and leaders.

Of course you have to have good teammates. I still asked, they don't mesh based on what?

based on tyson moping, not even trying anymore ...

Well, I could understand your point if you revised your statement to something like, "The Chandler we had in the last of his 3 years here didn't fit great, although we still were much better off than now."

Listen, I always hated chandler and hated how much we paid for him so in regards to him, I am definitely biased.

I hated the fact that he could only dunk or score within 2 feet. Yes, that looks good in the stat sheet, but when your defender can roam since he has no respect for you away from the basket, it clogs everything up. Its like when sammy gets the ball 15 feet from the basket and there is nobody near him and he is stuck.

I wanted him gone.

So ... your argument is that we could have gotten more for him, maybe we could have ... who knows.

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:I hate to say I told you so...but I told you all so.

No, I wasn't a fan of Tyson's body language but why should that matter? He's playing with grown men who should have the gumption to get beyond that. Besides, any player that can't handle bad "body language", isn't equipped to handle the stress and rigors of playing in New York anyway. I'm not saying that we should have kept Tyson but this notion that he needed to be traded immediately, because of his pouty-face was flat out dumb.

Now, all we have to show for moving Tyson is a 33 year old PG due $21 million over the next 3 years and some marginal 2nd rounders that people try to hype up as game changers. I hated that trade then and hate it the same today because it was a horrible waste of an asset. The silver lining is that we're so FUBAR that we've accidentally positioned ourselves well enough to be contenders for Emanual Mudiay, Karl Towns and Jahlil Okafor.

It was a lot more than a pouty face. He was going to the gm trying to get his coach fired. I really wanted Mills out in the Phil purge last year as we'll. whatever you think of Woodson he had no support from mills last year.

You're blaming him for encouraging what we all wanted to happen? Woodson was a horrible coach and Chandler had every right to voice that opinion, since Woodson's ineptitude hurt Chandler's career and future earning potential. You see the way that he's playing for Dallas now, right? That could've been us (assuming we could find a coach with the chops that Rick Carlisle has)!

I don't know. Maybe I'm just trying to be the devil's advocate but I don't see the wrong in it.

you think that the fact that dallas has a really good team surrounding him helps? Chandler and Melo/Stats game don't mesh.

Based on what? They had a 54 win season and over .500 record as teammates.

that 54 win season had guards and leaders.

Of course you have to have good teammates. I still asked, they don't mesh based on what?

based on tyson moping, not even trying anymore ...

Well, I could understand your point if you revised your statement to something like, "The Chandler we had in the last of his 3 years here didn't fit great, although we still were much better off than now."

Listen, I always hated chandler and hated how much we paid for him so in regards to him, I am definitely biased.

I hated the fact that he could only dunk or score within 2 feet. Yes, that looks good in the stat sheet, but when your defender can roam since he has no respect for you away from the basket, it clogs everything up. Its like when sammy gets the ball 15 feet from the basket and there is nobody near him and he is stuck.

I wanted him gone.

So ... your argument is that we could have gotten more for him, maybe we could have ... who knows.

Well that's your theory. You can't place that above the actual fact that his teams always put up better offensive #s with him, though.

how much is "better" worth? Was it "worth" what we paid him? For 14 million (and our damn amnesty) him being "better" than without him just doesn't cut it.

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:I hate to say I told you so...but I told you all so.

No, I wasn't a fan of Tyson's body language but why should that matter? He's playing with grown men who should have the gumption to get beyond that. Besides, any player that can't handle bad "body language", isn't equipped to handle the stress and rigors of playing in New York anyway. I'm not saying that we should have kept Tyson but this notion that he needed to be traded immediately, because of his pouty-face was flat out dumb.

Now, all we have to show for moving Tyson is a 33 year old PG due $21 million over the next 3 years and some marginal 2nd rounders that people try to hype up as game changers. I hated that trade then and hate it the same today because it was a horrible waste of an asset. The silver lining is that we're so FUBAR that we've accidentally positioned ourselves well enough to be contenders for Emanual Mudiay, Karl Towns and Jahlil Okafor.

It was a lot more than a pouty face. He was going to the gm trying to get his coach fired. I really wanted Mills out in the Phil purge last year as we'll. whatever you think of Woodson he had no support from mills last year.

You're blaming him for encouraging what we all wanted to happen? Woodson was a horrible coach and Chandler had every right to voice that opinion, since Woodson's ineptitude hurt Chandler's career and future earning potential. You see the way that he's playing for Dallas now, right? That could've been us (assuming we could find a coach with the chops that Rick Carlisle has)!

I don't know. Maybe I'm just trying to be the devil's advocate but I don't see the wrong in it.

you think that the fact that dallas has a really good team surrounding him helps? Chandler and Melo/Stats game don't mesh.

Based on what? They had a 54 win season and over .500 record as teammates.

that 54 win season had guards and leaders.

Of course you have to have good teammates. I still asked, they don't mesh based on what?

based on tyson moping, not even trying anymore ...

Well, I could understand your point if you revised your statement to something like, "The Chandler we had in the last of his 3 years here didn't fit great, although we still were much better off than now."

Listen, I always hated chandler and hated how much we paid for him so in regards to him, I am definitely biased.

I hated the fact that he could only dunk or score within 2 feet. Yes, that looks good in the stat sheet, but when your defender can roam since he has no respect for you away from the basket, it clogs everything up. Its like when sammy gets the ball 15 feet from the basket and there is nobody near him and he is stuck.

I wanted him gone.

So ... your argument is that we could have gotten more for him, maybe we could have ... who knows.

Well that's your theory. You can't place that above the actual fact that his teams always put up better offensive #s with him, though.

how much is "better" worth? Was it "worth" what we paid him? For 14 million (and our damn amnesty) him being "better" than without him just doesn't cut it.

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:I hate to say I told you so...but I told you all so.

No, I wasn't a fan of Tyson's body language but why should that matter? He's playing with grown men who should have the gumption to get beyond that. Besides, any player that can't handle bad "body language", isn't equipped to handle the stress and rigors of playing in New York anyway. I'm not saying that we should have kept Tyson but this notion that he needed to be traded immediately, because of his pouty-face was flat out dumb.

Now, all we have to show for moving Tyson is a 33 year old PG due $21 million over the next 3 years and some marginal 2nd rounders that people try to hype up as game changers. I hated that trade then and hate it the same today because it was a horrible waste of an asset. The silver lining is that we're so FUBAR that we've accidentally positioned ourselves well enough to be contenders for Emanual Mudiay, Karl Towns and Jahlil Okafor.

It was a lot more than a pouty face. He was going to the gm trying to get his coach fired. I really wanted Mills out in the Phil purge last year as we'll. whatever you think of Woodson he had no support from mills last year.

You're blaming him for encouraging what we all wanted to happen? Woodson was a horrible coach and Chandler had every right to voice that opinion, since Woodson's ineptitude hurt Chandler's career and future earning potential. You see the way that he's playing for Dallas now, right? That could've been us (assuming we could find a coach with the chops that Rick Carlisle has)!

I don't know. Maybe I'm just trying to be the devil's advocate but I don't see the wrong in it.

you think that the fact that dallas has a really good team surrounding him helps? Chandler and Melo/Stats game don't mesh.

Based on what? They had a 54 win season and over .500 record as teammates.

that 54 win season had guards and leaders.

Of course you have to have good teammates. I still asked, they don't mesh based on what?

based on tyson moping, not even trying anymore ...

Well, I could understand your point if you revised your statement to something like, "The Chandler we had in the last of his 3 years here didn't fit great, although we still were much better off than now."

Listen, I always hated chandler and hated how much we paid for him so in regards to him, I am definitely biased.

I hated the fact that he could only dunk or score within 2 feet. Yes, that looks good in the stat sheet, but when your defender can roam since he has no respect for you away from the basket, it clogs everything up. Its like when sammy gets the ball 15 feet from the basket and there is nobody near him and he is stuck.

I wanted him gone.

So ... your argument is that we could have gotten more for him, maybe we could have ... who knows.

Well that's your theory. You can't place that above the actual fact that his teams always put up better offensive #s with him, though.

how much is "better" worth? Was it "worth" what we paid him? For 14 million (and our damn amnesty) him being "better" than without him just doesn't cut it.

How much better than .200 is .550 or whatever our record was during his time period here? You tell me.
Nowhere did I say we had to keep him long-term anyway though.

ah ... so you are comparing to a 20 game sample size ... I see

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:I hate to say I told you so...but I told you all so.

No, I wasn't a fan of Tyson's body language but why should that matter? He's playing with grown men who should have the gumption to get beyond that. Besides, any player that can't handle bad "body language", isn't equipped to handle the stress and rigors of playing in New York anyway. I'm not saying that we should have kept Tyson but this notion that he needed to be traded immediately, because of his pouty-face was flat out dumb.

Now, all we have to show for moving Tyson is a 33 year old PG due $21 million over the next 3 years and some marginal 2nd rounders that people try to hype up as game changers. I hated that trade then and hate it the same today because it was a horrible waste of an asset. The silver lining is that we're so FUBAR that we've accidentally positioned ourselves well enough to be contenders for Emanual Mudiay, Karl Towns and Jahlil Okafor.

It was a lot more than a pouty face. He was going to the gm trying to get his coach fired. I really wanted Mills out in the Phil purge last year as we'll. whatever you think of Woodson he had no support from mills last year.

You're blaming him for encouraging what we all wanted to happen? Woodson was a horrible coach and Chandler had every right to voice that opinion, since Woodson's ineptitude hurt Chandler's career and future earning potential. You see the way that he's playing for Dallas now, right? That could've been us (assuming we could find a coach with the chops that Rick Carlisle has)!

I don't know. Maybe I'm just trying to be the devil's advocate but I don't see the wrong in it.

you think that the fact that dallas has a really good team surrounding him helps? Chandler and Melo/Stats game don't mesh.

Based on what? They had a 54 win season and over .500 record as teammates.

that 54 win season had guards and leaders.

Of course you have to have good teammates. I still asked, they don't mesh based on what?

based on tyson moping, not even trying anymore ...

Well, I could understand your point if you revised your statement to something like, "The Chandler we had in the last of his 3 years here didn't fit great, although we still were much better off than now."

Listen, I always hated chandler and hated how much we paid for him so in regards to him, I am definitely biased.

I hated the fact that he could only dunk or score within 2 feet. Yes, that looks good in the stat sheet, but when your defender can roam since he has no respect for you away from the basket, it clogs everything up. Its like when sammy gets the ball 15 feet from the basket and there is nobody near him and he is stuck.

I wanted him gone.

So ... your argument is that we could have gotten more for him, maybe we could have ... who knows.

Well that's your theory. You can't place that above the actual fact that his teams always put up better offensive #s with him, though.

how much is "better" worth? Was it "worth" what we paid him? For 14 million (and our damn amnesty) him being "better" than without him just doesn't cut it.

How much better than .200 is .550 or whatever our record was during his time period here? You tell me.
Nowhere did I say we had to keep him long-term anyway though.

ah ... so you are comparing to a 20 game sample size ... I see

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:I hate to say I told you so...but I told you all so.

No, I wasn't a fan of Tyson's body language but why should that matter? He's playing with grown men who should have the gumption to get beyond that. Besides, any player that can't handle bad "body language", isn't equipped to handle the stress and rigors of playing in New York anyway. I'm not saying that we should have kept Tyson but this notion that he needed to be traded immediately, because of his pouty-face was flat out dumb.

Now, all we have to show for moving Tyson is a 33 year old PG due $21 million over the next 3 years and some marginal 2nd rounders that people try to hype up as game changers. I hated that trade then and hate it the same today because it was a horrible waste of an asset. The silver lining is that we're so FUBAR that we've accidentally positioned ourselves well enough to be contenders for Emanual Mudiay, Karl Towns and Jahlil Okafor.

It was a lot more than a pouty face. He was going to the gm trying to get his coach fired. I really wanted Mills out in the Phil purge last year as we'll. whatever you think of Woodson he had no support from mills last year.

You're blaming him for encouraging what we all wanted to happen? Woodson was a horrible coach and Chandler had every right to voice that opinion, since Woodson's ineptitude hurt Chandler's career and future earning potential. You see the way that he's playing for Dallas now, right? That could've been us (assuming we could find a coach with the chops that Rick Carlisle has)!

I don't know. Maybe I'm just trying to be the devil's advocate but I don't see the wrong in it.

you think that the fact that dallas has a really good team surrounding him helps? Chandler and Melo/Stats game don't mesh.

Based on what? They had a 54 win season and over .500 record as teammates.

that 54 win season had guards and leaders.

Of course you have to have good teammates. I still asked, they don't mesh based on what?

based on tyson moping, not even trying anymore ...

Well, I could understand your point if you revised your statement to something like, "The Chandler we had in the last of his 3 years here didn't fit great, although we still were much better off than now."

Listen, I always hated chandler and hated how much we paid for him so in regards to him, I am definitely biased.

I hated the fact that he could only dunk or score within 2 feet. Yes, that looks good in the stat sheet, but when your defender can roam since he has no respect for you away from the basket, it clogs everything up. Its like when sammy gets the ball 15 feet from the basket and there is nobody near him and he is stuck.

I wanted him gone.

So ... your argument is that we could have gotten more for him, maybe we could have ... who knows.

Well that's your theory. You can't place that above the actual fact that his teams always put up better offensive #s with him, though.

how much is "better" worth? Was it "worth" what we paid him? For 14 million (and our damn amnesty) him being "better" than without him just doesn't cut it.

How much better than .200 is .550 or whatever our record was during his time period here? You tell me.
Nowhere did I say we had to keep him long-term anyway though.

ah ... so you are comparing to a 20 game sample size ... I see

That's all we have now. Are you expecting it to get better soon?

Yes. I do.

But its irrelevant. Tyson does not do much for us. Making us better is not good enough, and he was a massive dik.

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:I hate to say I told you so...but I told you all so.

No, I wasn't a fan of Tyson's body language but why should that matter? He's playing with grown men who should have the gumption to get beyond that. Besides, any player that can't handle bad "body language", isn't equipped to handle the stress and rigors of playing in New York anyway. I'm not saying that we should have kept Tyson but this notion that he needed to be traded immediately, because of his pouty-face was flat out dumb.

Now, all we have to show for moving Tyson is a 33 year old PG due $21 million over the next 3 years and some marginal 2nd rounders that people try to hype up as game changers. I hated that trade then and hate it the same today because it was a horrible waste of an asset. The silver lining is that we're so FUBAR that we've accidentally positioned ourselves well enough to be contenders for Emanual Mudiay, Karl Towns and Jahlil Okafor.

It was a lot more than a pouty face. He was going to the gm trying to get his coach fired. I really wanted Mills out in the Phil purge last year as we'll. whatever you think of Woodson he had no support from mills last year.

You're blaming him for encouraging what we all wanted to happen? Woodson was a horrible coach and Chandler had every right to voice that opinion, since Woodson's ineptitude hurt Chandler's career and future earning potential. You see the way that he's playing for Dallas now, right? That could've been us (assuming we could find a coach with the chops that Rick Carlisle has)!

I don't know. Maybe I'm just trying to be the devil's advocate but I don't see the wrong in it.

you think that the fact that dallas has a really good team surrounding him helps? Chandler and Melo/Stats game don't mesh.

Based on what? They had a 54 win season and over .500 record as teammates.

that 54 win season had guards and leaders.

Of course you have to have good teammates. I still asked, they don't mesh based on what?

based on tyson moping, not even trying anymore ...

Well, I could understand your point if you revised your statement to something like, "The Chandler we had in the last of his 3 years here didn't fit great, although we still were much better off than now."

Listen, I always hated chandler and hated how much we paid for him so in regards to him, I am definitely biased.

I hated the fact that he could only dunk or score within 2 feet. Yes, that looks good in the stat sheet, but when your defender can roam since he has no respect for you away from the basket, it clogs everything up. Its like when sammy gets the ball 15 feet from the basket and there is nobody near him and he is stuck.

I wanted him gone.

So ... your argument is that we could have gotten more for him, maybe we could have ... who knows.

Well that's your theory. You can't place that above the actual fact that his teams always put up better offensive #s with him, though.

how much is "better" worth? Was it "worth" what we paid him? For 14 million (and our damn amnesty) him being "better" than without him just doesn't cut it.

How much better than .200 is .550 or whatever our record was during his time period here? You tell me.
Nowhere did I say we had to keep him long-term anyway though.

ah ... so you are comparing to a 20 game sample size ... I see

That's all we have now. Are you expecting it to get better soon?

Yes. I do.

But its irrelevant. Tyson does not do much for us. Making us better is not good enough, and he was a massive dik.

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:I hate to say I told you so...but I told you all so.

No, I wasn't a fan of Tyson's body language but why should that matter? He's playing with grown men who should have the gumption to get beyond that. Besides, any player that can't handle bad "body language", isn't equipped to handle the stress and rigors of playing in New York anyway. I'm not saying that we should have kept Tyson but this notion that he needed to be traded immediately, because of his pouty-face was flat out dumb.

Now, all we have to show for moving Tyson is a 33 year old PG due $21 million over the next 3 years and some marginal 2nd rounders that people try to hype up as game changers. I hated that trade then and hate it the same today because it was a horrible waste of an asset. The silver lining is that we're so FUBAR that we've accidentally positioned ourselves well enough to be contenders for Emanual Mudiay, Karl Towns and Jahlil Okafor.

It was a lot more than a pouty face. He was going to the gm trying to get his coach fired. I really wanted Mills out in the Phil purge last year as we'll. whatever you think of Woodson he had no support from mills last year.

You're blaming him for encouraging what we all wanted to happen? Woodson was a horrible coach and Chandler had every right to voice that opinion, since Woodson's ineptitude hurt Chandler's career and future earning potential. You see the way that he's playing for Dallas now, right? That could've been us (assuming we could find a coach with the chops that Rick Carlisle has)!

I don't know. Maybe I'm just trying to be the devil's advocate but I don't see the wrong in it.

you think that the fact that dallas has a really good team surrounding him helps? Chandler and Melo/Stats game don't mesh.

Based on what? They had a 54 win season and over .500 record as teammates.

that 54 win season had guards and leaders.

Of course you have to have good teammates. I still asked, they don't mesh based on what?

based on tyson moping, not even trying anymore ...

Well, I could understand your point if you revised your statement to something like, "The Chandler we had in the last of his 3 years here didn't fit great, although we still were much better off than now."

Listen, I always hated chandler and hated how much we paid for him so in regards to him, I am definitely biased.

I hated the fact that he could only dunk or score within 2 feet. Yes, that looks good in the stat sheet, but when your defender can roam since he has no respect for you away from the basket, it clogs everything up. Its like when sammy gets the ball 15 feet from the basket and there is nobody near him and he is stuck.

I wanted him gone.

So ... your argument is that we could have gotten more for him, maybe we could have ... who knows.

Well that's your theory. You can't place that above the actual fact that his teams always put up better offensive #s with him, though.

how much is "better" worth? Was it "worth" what we paid him? For 14 million (and our damn amnesty) him being "better" than without him just doesn't cut it.

How much better than .200 is .550 or whatever our record was during his time period here? You tell me.
Nowhere did I say we had to keep him long-term anyway though.

ah ... so you are comparing to a 20 game sample size ... I see

That's all we have now. Are you expecting it to get better soon?

Yes. I do.

But its irrelevant. Tyson does not do much for us. Making us better is not good enough, and he was a massive dik.

I think it might get better in the sense that we improve to around .300 or .350 but then other people are just going to have to abandon the idea that it's a planned tanking right now.

its a planned tanking with an attempt to win games.

BRIGGS wrote:The guy has been great and getting even better. Whatever anyone wants to say--whatever happened last year--I cant say why we didnt get along or whatever--but if we used the 3mm lower level exepctiosn to help the G positions--the Knicks would be 12-5 right now with that type of play.

Everybody can't handle....
NY FANS
NY MEDIA
NY EXPECTATIONS
NY FANS

did I forget

NY FANS

It takes a special person to suceed in NYC. And these guys don't grow on trees. Chandler was always a decent player. But he's also a country boy. Plus, there's a reason why everybody plays better when they leave NY. The problem is not what we gave up....I think we needed to trade him. The problem is what we got in return!

Bonn1997 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

VCoug wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

VCoug wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Tyson probably would have helped us be an 8th seed with a first round exit and he probably walks as a free agent. The question isn't if we should have kept Tyson, no mater how he performs with Dallas. The question is should we have gotten a better package. Only real problem I have with the trade was I would have rather had a future first rounder then Larkin. And I didn't like that Calderon's contract ran into 2015 cap space.

Tyson & Felton to NO for Rivers and 2015 first rounder lotto protected or 2016 first rounder. Would have made me happy.

If Omer "I can't catch an entry pass or shoot free throws better than 50% to save my life" Asik could get a first from them....we could've gotten a protected pick and possibly better. Had we not been so quick to move Chandler, that opportunity would've presented itself.

The key is also being able to dump Felton as well.

Why is that the key? I don't even like Felton certainly didn't want him back when we S&T for him but I don't see why Felton is the key in anyandanyson trade. It's not even as if we opened up cap space since Calderon will be making more over more years. You're just trying to justify a shitty trade.

Exactly. We didn't open up cap space. We could have kept Tyson, waived Felton, and probably been a lot better than .250 right now.

Tyson probably would have helped us be an 8th seed with a first round exit and he probably walks as a free agent.

The question isn't if we should have kept Tyson, no mater how he performs with Dallas. The question is should we have gotten a better package.

Only real problem I have with the trade was I would have rather had a future first rounder then Larkin. And I didn't like that Calderon's contract ran into 2015 cap space.

Tyson & Felton to NO for Rivers and 2015 first rounder lotto protected or 2016 first rounder. Would have made me happy.

If you guys actually read what was written you would have known when I said "dumping Felton was the key", I was discussing with NardDog the possibility of moving Tyson to the Pelicans not the Dallas trade.

You still haven't explained why that's the key.

Clearly because Felton may have been untradable yet ate into the 2015 cap space. Being able to use Tyson to dump Felton would have saved 4.5mil in 2015 cap space as well as maybe landed us a future draft pick. Not only that but if that NO deal really happen we would have a 16mil trade exception which we maybe could have used to take on an unwanted expiring contract(Lin in hindsight) for another future draft pick.

The only issue we'd have for dumping Chandler for picks is a pretty big one. I don't think Melo re-signs here if something like that happens, which would leave us in a worse predicament than we are already in. We would've had to fill the void, left behind by Tyson and then some to give him false hope that we'd be competitive this season. Maybe we could've gotten Asik and Lin in a bundle package without having to give up a pick. We'd be no better than we are but those guys would help to hold our attention.

I'd much rather be .150 with the extra $25 mil in cap space actually.

To each his own. Remember, we don't even have a 2016 pick for that to be a silverlining. Add to the fact that cap space has only built winners twice in NBA history (LeBron's Heat; Shaq's Lakers). That makes me very skeptical of our rebuild plan. At least with Melo under contract, we have a major asset that can possibly be traded. Without him we'd be the David Kahn Wolves....minus the picks.

What do you mean cap space has only built winners twice? Every team starts with zero dollars on its roster and then has to use the available cap room as intelligently as possible.

Yeah, in 1942 or whenever the league was created. But since then, what franchise talent has changed teams via cap space? If the draft route is shot (no 2016 pick), I don't see how we benefit from Melo simply walking.

blkexec wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:The guy has been great and getting even better. Whatever anyone wants to say--whatever happened last year--I cant say why we didnt get along or whatever--but if we used the 3mm lower level exepctiosn to help the G positions--the Knicks would be 12-5 right now with that type of play.

Everybody can't handle....
NY FANS
NY MEDIA
NY EXPECTATIONS
NY FANS

did I forget

NY FANS

It takes a special person to suceed in NYC. And these guys don't grow on trees. Chandler was always a decent player. But he's also a country boy. Plus, there's a reason why everybody plays better when they leave NY. The problem is not what we gave up....I think we needed to trade him. The problem is what we got in return!

Tyson Chandler was born in California and raised in Compton. Not sure how much of a country boy he'd be, lol.

NardDogNation wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

VCoug wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

VCoug wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Tyson probably would have helped us be an 8th seed with a first round exit and he probably walks as a free agent. The question isn't if we should have kept Tyson, no mater how he performs with Dallas. The question is should we have gotten a better package. Only real problem I have with the trade was I would have rather had a future first rounder then Larkin. And I didn't like that Calderon's contract ran into 2015 cap space.

Tyson & Felton to NO for Rivers and 2015 first rounder lotto protected or 2016 first rounder. Would have made me happy.

If Omer "I can't catch an entry pass or shoot free throws better than 50% to save my life" Asik could get a first from them....we could've gotten a protected pick and possibly better. Had we not been so quick to move Chandler, that opportunity would've presented itself.

The key is also being able to dump Felton as well.

Why is that the key? I don't even like Felton certainly didn't want him back when we S&T for him but I don't see why Felton is the key in anyandanyson trade. It's not even as if we opened up cap space since Calderon will be making more over more years. You're just trying to justify a shitty trade.

Exactly. We didn't open up cap space. We could have kept Tyson, waived Felton, and probably been a lot better than .250 right now.

Tyson probably would have helped us be an 8th seed with a first round exit and he probably walks as a free agent.

The question isn't if we should have kept Tyson, no mater how he performs with Dallas. The question is should we have gotten a better package.

Only real problem I have with the trade was I would have rather had a future first rounder then Larkin. And I didn't like that Calderon's contract ran into 2015 cap space.

Tyson & Felton to NO for Rivers and 2015 first rounder lotto protected or 2016 first rounder. Would have made me happy.

If you guys actually read what was written you would have known when I said "dumping Felton was the key", I was discussing with NardDog the possibility of moving Tyson to the Pelicans not the Dallas trade.

You still haven't explained why that's the key.

Clearly because Felton may have been untradable yet ate into the 2015 cap space. Being able to use Tyson to dump Felton would have saved 4.5mil in 2015 cap space as well as maybe landed us a future draft pick. Not only that but if that NO deal really happen we would have a 16mil trade exception which we maybe could have used to take on an unwanted expiring contract(Lin in hindsight) for another future draft pick.

The only issue we'd have for dumping Chandler for picks is a pretty big one. I don't think Melo re-signs here if something like that happens, which would leave us in a worse predicament than we are already in. We would've had to fill the void, left behind by Tyson and then some to give him false hope that we'd be competitive this season. Maybe we could've gotten Asik and Lin in a bundle package without having to give up a pick. We'd be no better than we are but those guys would help to hold our attention.

I'd much rather be .150 with the extra $25 mil in cap space actually.

To each his own. Remember, we don't even have a 2016 pick for that to be a silverlining. Add to the fact that cap space has only built winners twice in NBA history (LeBron's Heat; Shaq's Lakers). That makes me very skeptical of our rebuild plan. At least with Melo under contract, we have a major asset that can possibly be traded. Without him we'd be the David Kahn Wolves....minus the picks.

What do you mean cap space has only built winners twice? Every team starts with zero dollars on its roster and then has to use the available cap room as intelligently as possible.

Yeah, in 1942 or whenever the league was created. But since then, what franchise talent has changed teams via cap space? If the draft route is shot (no 2016 pick), I don't see how we benefit from Melo simply walking.

NardDogNation wrote:

blkexec wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:The guy has been great and getting even better. Whatever anyone wants to say--whatever happened last year--I cant say why we didnt get along or whatever--but if we used the 3mm lower level exepctiosn to help the G positions--the Knicks would be 12-5 right now with that type of play.

Everybody can't handle....
NY FANS
NY MEDIA
NY EXPECTATIONS
NY FANS

did I forget

NY FANS

It takes a special person to suceed in NYC. And these guys don't grow on trees. Chandler was always a decent player. But he's also a country boy. Plus, there's a reason why everybody plays better when they leave NY. The problem is not what we gave up....I think we needed to trade him. The problem is what we got in return!

Tyson Chandler was born in California and raised in Compton. Not sure how much of a country boy he'd be, lol.

Bonn1997 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

blkexec wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:The guy has been great and getting even better. Whatever anyone wants to say--whatever happened last year--I cant say why we didnt get along or whatever--but if we used the 3mm lower level exepctiosn to help the G positions--the Knicks would be 12-5 right now with that type of play.

Everybody can't handle....
NY FANS
NY MEDIA
NY EXPECTATIONS
NY FANS

did I forget

NY FANS

It takes a special person to suceed in NYC. And these guys don't grow on trees. Chandler was always a decent player. But he's also a country boy. Plus, there's a reason why everybody plays better when they leave NY. The problem is not what we gave up....I think we needed to trade him. The problem is what we got in return!

Tyson Chandler was born in California and raised in Compton. Not sure how much of a country boy he'd be, lol.

And Dallas is one of the ten most populated US cities. He's not living deep out in the country!

+1.

Bonn1997 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

VCoug wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

VCoug wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Tyson probably would have helped us be an 8th seed with a first round exit and he probably walks as a free agent. The question isn't if we should have kept Tyson, no mater how he performs with Dallas. The question is should we have gotten a better package. Only real problem I have with the trade was I would have rather had a future first rounder then Larkin. And I didn't like that Calderon's contract ran into 2015 cap space.

Tyson & Felton to NO for Rivers and 2015 first rounder lotto protected or 2016 first rounder. Would have made me happy.

If Omer "I can't catch an entry pass or shoot free throws better than 50% to save my life" Asik could get a first from them....we could've gotten a protected pick and possibly better. Had we not been so quick to move Chandler, that opportunity would've presented itself.

The key is also being able to dump Felton as well.

Why is that the key? I don't even like Felton certainly didn't want him back when we S&T for him but I don't see why Felton is the key in anyandanyson trade. It's not even as if we opened up cap space since Calderon will be making more over more years. You're just trying to justify a shitty trade.

Exactly. We didn't open up cap space. We could have kept Tyson, waived Felton, and probably been a lot better than .250 right now.

Tyson probably would have helped us be an 8th seed with a first round exit and he probably walks as a free agent.

The question isn't if we should have kept Tyson, no mater how he performs with Dallas. The question is should we have gotten a better package.

Only real problem I have with the trade was I would have rather had a future first rounder then Larkin. And I didn't like that Calderon's contract ran into 2015 cap space.

Tyson & Felton to NO for Rivers and 2015 first rounder lotto protected or 2016 first rounder. Would have made me happy.

If you guys actually read what was written you would have known when I said "dumping Felton was the key", I was discussing with NardDog the possibility of moving Tyson to the Pelicans not the Dallas trade.

You still haven't explained why that's the key.

Clearly because Felton may have been untradable yet ate into the 2015 cap space. Being able to use Tyson to dump Felton would have saved 4.5mil in 2015 cap space as well as maybe landed us a future draft pick. Not only that but if that NO deal really happen we would have a 16mil trade exception which we maybe could have used to take on an unwanted expiring contract(Lin in hindsight) for another future draft pick.

The only issue we'd have for dumping Chandler for picks is a pretty big one. I don't think Melo re-signs here if something like that happens, which would leave us in a worse predicament than we are already in. We would've had to fill the void, left behind by Tyson and then some to give him false hope that we'd be competitive this season. Maybe we could've gotten Asik and Lin in a bundle package without having to give up a pick. We'd be no better than we are but those guys would help to hold our attention.

I'd much rather be .150 with the extra $25 mil in cap space actually.

To each his own. Remember, we don't even have a 2016 pick for that to be a silverlining. Add to the fact that cap space has only built winners twice in NBA history (LeBron's Heat; Shaq's Lakers). That makes me very skeptical of our rebuild plan. At least with Melo under contract, we have a major asset that can possibly be traded. Without him we'd be the David Kahn Wolves....minus the picks.

What do you mean cap space has only built winners twice? Every team starts with zero dollars on its roster and then has to use the available cap room as intelligently as possible.

Yeah, in 1942 or whenever the league was created. But since then, what franchise talent has changed teams via cap space? If the draft route is shot (no 2016 pick), I don't see how we benefit from Melo simply walking.

It's obviously an oversimplification when I say zero but you want use of your payroll to be effective and efficient. Making Melo the highest paid player on the planet is neither. There are better ways to spend the money (if the goal is winning rather than seat and jersey sales).

Fair. I just don't know how effective and efficient we can be. Why would anyone of value want to come here (without a "star") unless it is to be grossly overpaid? And wouldn't that, in effect, take us back to the Scott Layden era (without the pick acquisition)? We could take on bad contracts for picks though; I wouldn't be opposed to that.

Started off in Hanford, California. Starts at 1:20 or so. I remember watching this feature...

City mouse/country mouse... east coast/west coast... it's interesting to speculate... could also just be a combo of these mysterious "personal problems" of his and an incompatibility with last year's club culture.

blkexec wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:The guy has been great and getting even better. Whatever anyone wants to say--whatever happened last year--I cant say why we didnt get along or whatever--but if we used the 3mm lower level exepctiosn to help the G positions--the Knicks would be 12-5 right now with that type of play.

Everybody can't handle....
NY FANS
NY MEDIA
NY EXPECTATIONS
NY FANS

did I forget

NY FANS

It takes a special person to suceed in NYC. And these guys don't grow on trees. Chandler was always a decent player. But he's also a country boy. Plus, there's a reason why everybody plays better when they leave NY. The problem is not what we gave up....I think we needed to trade him. The problem is what we got in return!

he was just fine in new york. he isn't a country boy. besides, willis reed was pure country and he did just fine in new york. chandler didn't like the culture at msg and really who could blame him? and then there's the fact that he isn't a triangle player. it was a GREAT boon for him to be traded where (a) he didn't want to be anymore and (b) he wasn't wanted. and if he is going to be accused of dogging it then there was a precedent for dogging it set a couple of years earlier when d'antoni was here.

warning: i think chandler's situation is a premonition for any future free agents-- don't go to the knicks: you'll have a hard time fitting in, you will be under-appreciated, and you are not really in the running for a title for a few years.

NardDogNation wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

VCoug wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

VCoug wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Tyson probably would have helped us be an 8th seed with a first round exit and he probably walks as a free agent. The question isn't if we should have kept Tyson, no mater how he performs with Dallas. The question is should we have gotten a better package. Only real problem I have with the trade was I would have rather had a future first rounder then Larkin. And I didn't like that Calderon's contract ran into 2015 cap space.

Tyson & Felton to NO for Rivers and 2015 first rounder lotto protected or 2016 first rounder. Would have made me happy.

If Omer "I can't catch an entry pass or shoot free throws better than 50% to save my life" Asik could get a first from them....we could've gotten a protected pick and possibly better. Had we not been so quick to move Chandler, that opportunity would've presented itself.

The key is also being able to dump Felton as well.

Why is that the key? I don't even like Felton certainly didn't want him back when we S&T for him but I don't see why Felton is the key in anyandanyson trade. It's not even as if we opened up cap space since Calderon will be making more over more years. You're just trying to justify a shitty trade.

Exactly. We didn't open up cap space. We could have kept Tyson, waived Felton, and probably been a lot better than .250 right now.

Tyson probably would have helped us be an 8th seed with a first round exit and he probably walks as a free agent.

The question isn't if we should have kept Tyson, no mater how he performs with Dallas. The question is should we have gotten a better package.

Only real problem I have with the trade was I would have rather had a future first rounder then Larkin. And I didn't like that Calderon's contract ran into 2015 cap space.

Tyson & Felton to NO for Rivers and 2015 first rounder lotto protected or 2016 first rounder. Would have made me happy.

If you guys actually read what was written you would have known when I said "dumping Felton was the key", I was discussing with NardDog the possibility of moving Tyson to the Pelicans not the Dallas trade.

You still haven't explained why that's the key.

Clearly because Felton may have been untradable yet ate into the 2015 cap space. Being able to use Tyson to dump Felton would have saved 4.5mil in 2015 cap space as well as maybe landed us a future draft pick. Not only that but if that NO deal really happen we would have a 16mil trade exception which we maybe could have used to take on an unwanted expiring contract(Lin in hindsight) for another future draft pick.

The only issue we'd have for dumping Chandler for picks is a pretty big one. I don't think Melo re-signs here if something like that happens, which would leave us in a worse predicament than we are already in. We would've had to fill the void, left behind by Tyson and then some to give him false hope that we'd be competitive this season. Maybe we could've gotten Asik and Lin in a bundle package without having to give up a pick. We'd be no better than we are but those guys would help to hold our attention.

I'd much rather be .150 with the extra $25 mil in cap space actually.

To each his own. Remember, we don't even have a 2016 pick for that to be a silverlining. Add to the fact that cap space has only built winners twice in NBA history (LeBron's Heat; Shaq's Lakers). That makes me very skeptical of our rebuild plan. At least with Melo under contract, we have a major asset that can possibly be traded. Without him we'd be the David Kahn Wolves....minus the picks.

What do you mean cap space has only built winners twice? Every team starts with zero dollars on its roster and then has to use the available cap room as intelligently as possible.

Yeah, in 1942 or whenever the league was created. But since then, what franchise talent has changed teams via cap space? If the draft route is shot (no 2016 pick), I don't see how we benefit from Melo simply walking.

It's obviously an oversimplification when I say zero but you want use of your payroll to be effective and efficient. Making Melo the highest paid player on the planet is neither. There are better ways to spend the money (if the goal is winning rather than seat and jersey sales).

Fair. I just don't know how effective and efficient we can be. Why would anyone of value want to come here (without a "star") unless it is to be grossly overpaid? And wouldn't that, in effect, take us back to the Scott Layden era (without the pick acquisition)? We could take on bad contracts for picks though; I wouldn't be opposed to that.

20-20. 30-30. Who cares?

dk7th wrote:

blkexec wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:The guy has been great and getting even better. Whatever anyone wants to say--whatever happened last year--I cant say why we didnt get along or whatever--but if we used the 3mm lower level exepctiosn to help the G positions--the Knicks would be 12-5 right now with that type of play.

Everybody can't handle....
NY FANS
NY MEDIA
NY EXPECTATIONS
NY FANS

did I forget

NY FANS

It takes a special person to suceed in NYC. And these guys don't grow on trees. Chandler was always a decent player. But he's also a country boy. Plus, there's a reason why everybody plays better when they leave NY. The problem is not what we gave up....I think we needed to trade him. The problem is what we got in return!

he was just fine in new york. he isn't a country boy. besides, willis reed was pure country and he did just fine in new york. chandler didn't like the culture at msg and really who could blame him? and then there's the fact that he isn't a triangle player. it was a GREAT boon for him to be traded where (a) he didn't want to be anymore and (b) he wasn't wanted. and if he is going to be accused of dogging it then there was a precedent for dogging it set a couple of years earlier when d'antoni was here.

warning: i think chandler's situation is a premonition for any future free agents-- don't go to the knicks: you'll have a hard time fitting in, you will be under-appreciated, and you are not really in the running for a title for a few years.

You dont have to be born in the south to be a country boy. And you can never compare dallas basketball where college football rules....to nyc mecca of basketball.

And i went to school down south....i know some southerners that would run circles around yall....and nyers that so country you would think they was from the south.

The good thing is phil traded chandler to his preferred team...that speaks volumes for feature FAs.