Knicks · DRose signs with the Cavs (page 4)

Knickoftime wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

TheGame wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

TheGame wrote:This is great news. With Rose there the Cavs will feel more comfortable about trading Irving. A team of Rose, smith, Melo, Lebron, and Love would be pretty tough on offense.

Was exactly does a guy have to do to demonstrate he's not a good NBA shooter?

Being able to take a shot is a legitimate NBS skill.

Be able to score points efficiently in relation to how many shots you take is far more important.

He is Nba mediocre at that.

Rose is decent. His weakness is no defense and no 3pt shooting. He actually can shoot 3s but for some reason he just wants to drive. I think he just has the mindset that I can drive on anyone so why shoot 3s. Anyway, he probably a better defender than Irving, so in the Cavs mind; he probably gives them 75% of what Irving gave them. Then you add what they can get for Irving and the cave might be able to put together an even stronger team.

Agree, people think Rose was a bad defender, wait till they see Kyrie. LOL

Produce a metric that shows Irving was worse.

I don't believe any of the metrics provide a basis for comparison across teams because what your teammates are doing is absolutely worked into them.

So in other words your basis for comparison doesn't exist either way.

These comparisons are silly. When Rose was on a good defensive team in Chicago his metrics looked better as well.

Better, but still on the lower half of that team.

And he was a better, healthier player then.

My basis for comparison is from me watching them play. Kyrie is along the same lines as Rose in terms of defense. I also take into consideration the duration of our commitment to the player and salary when making comps. Rose was a one year experiment that cost is Rolo, Kyrie will come at a much higher price which makes him much less valuable to me.

No one could get all that from "Agree, people think Rose was a bad defender, wait till they see Kyrie. LOL"

Seems to imply Irving is a worse defender than Rose. Doesn't seem to suggest several qualifiers. That's all I responded to.

If that isn't exactly wha you mean, no big deal.

As far as I am concerned Kyrie is a worse defender AND/OR Kyrie costs more to be equally bad as Rose. Just because I don't agree on using metrics to compare players across teams doesn't mean I am changing my position.

I asked you to provide a metric, you have your opinion. If you don't have what I asked for no need to further this discussion.

I just looked up the player tracking numbers. He held his man to 49.9% FG shooting despite the average being 44.7%. That's actually pretty worrisome. In prior years it was less bad but not good.

I wasn't suggesting Irving is a good defender.

Lebron is naturally a point forward. He loves to pass. He likes to play like a point guard.

I think Rose/Lebron will mesh much better than Rose/Melo ever did. Melo needs a point guard that will pass the ball to him, play off him and shoot the outside shot. Billups. Kidd.

Lebron I think will mesh with Rose more.

nyknickzingis wrote:I think the way Rose plays (SG with point skills) the other star wing has to be like a PG.
To make it work, Melo needed to play like a point forward which isn't his natural game or who he has been in his career. He can sometimes do it, which he showed in portions of KP's rookie season, but it will never be his game.

Lebron is naturally a point forward. He loves to pass. He likes to play like a point guard.

I think Rose/Lebron will mesh much better than Rose/Melo ever did. Melo needs a point guard that will pass the ball to him, play off him and shoot the outside shot. Billups. Kidd.

Lebron I think will mesh with Rose more.

He'll probably mesh with James a lot better.

Doesn't make him a good player.

Bonn1997 wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

TheGame wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

TheGame wrote:This is great news. With Rose there the Cavs will feel more comfortable about trading Irving. A team of Rose, smith, Melo, Lebron, and Love would be pretty tough on offense.

Was exactly does a guy have to do to demonstrate he's not a good NBA shooter?

Being able to take a shot is a legitimate NBS skill.

Be able to score points efficiently in relation to how many shots you take is far more important.

He is Nba mediocre at that.

Rose is decent. His weakness is no defense and no 3pt shooting. He actually can shoot 3s but for some reason he just wants to drive. I think he just has the mindset that I can drive on anyone so why shoot 3s. Anyway, he probably a better defender than Irving, so in the Cavs mind; he probably gives them 75% of what Irving gave them. Then you add what they can get for Irving and the cave might be able to put together an even stronger team.

Agree, people think Rose was a bad defender, wait till they see Kyrie. LOL

Produce a metric that shows Irving was worse.

I don't believe any of the metrics provide a basis for comparison across teams because what your teammates are doing is absolutely worked into them.

So in other words your basis for comparison doesn't exist either way.

These comparisons are silly. When Rose was on a good defensive team in Chicago his metrics looked better as well.

Better, but still on the lower half of that team.

And he was a better, healthier player then.

My basis for comparison is from me watching them play. Kyrie is along the same lines as Rose in terms of defense. I also take into consideration the duration of our commitment to the player and salary when making comps. Rose was a one year experiment that cost is Rolo, Kyrie will come at a much higher price which makes him much less valuable to me.

No one could get all that from "Agree, people think Rose was a bad defender, wait till they see Kyrie. LOL"

Seems to imply Irving is a worse defender than Rose. Doesn't seem to suggest several qualifiers. That's all I responded to.

If that isn't exactly wha you mean, no big deal.

As far as I am concerned Kyrie is a worse defender AND/OR Kyrie costs more to be equally bad as Rose. Just because I don't agree on using metrics to compare players across teams doesn't mean I am changing my position.

So you use metrics to compare players on the same team and eyeball assessments to compare players on different teams?

I am not opposed to looking at metrics in both cases. I just don't think they are very reliable when comparing across teams. I think the difference becomes more stark and less reliable when you compare defensive metrics of a player who played on a good defensive team to that of a player who played on a bad one. But I don't use metrics in exclusion of everything else to decide anything.

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:D Rose is no slouch of a player--anyone you add with LBJ goes up a few notches on top of it.

I don't put anything past James, but this past year rose was the definition of a slouch.

Low assist rate, low efg%, no defense.

His penetration is only useful if it leads to converted scores.

It did not.

Are you really signing Rose because of his 3 pt. shooting? Defensive prowless? Court vision? The metrics are great... But mostly for guys sitting in front of a their computers trying to prove they know all aspects of playing basketball. Metrics do not tell the whole story or talk about filling a need on a team. As it is still a team game and not a individual statistical competition.

Did not like Rose's tunnel vision, lack of assists or 3pt shooting. However was one of our best penetrating guards, in a long time. and was great to have as an option in tight game? The guy can still create as well as anyone in the NBA. Now is that worth $20M? Of course not. Half of Ron Bakers salary? Absolutely. Also consider that he was not a good fit on the 2016 Knicks. Team that needed a passing/set up point guard. A team that needed additional 3pt. shooting.

Briggs is right. For $2,1 Million, Rose is a very good signing. A great signing if he stays healthy. Specialy on the Cavs. As Lebron is the facilitator and they have several 3pt shooters. A drivinng point guard will help their team.

I can't respond to what people meant, only what they write.

Rose is a slouch of a player, which helps explains why he could only find a min deal.

If his effectiveness has to be qualified by his minimum salary and/or playing with James, I think that speaks somewhat for itself in the bigger picture.

But I didn't respond to that qualification, just the basic idea he is not a poor player in general.

He is.

Cleveland can apparently sign anyone for the min and it becomes a great signing because Lebron will make them better.

If they get him to pass the ball, out of drives, 3 or 4 times more per game, he then turns into a great addition.

If anyone fundamentally changes their game, of course all bets are off the table.

If the Knicks get Hardaway to grab 3 or 4 more rebounds, he becomes a different player.

The rub is it actually occurring.

Some truth there. But your making something, so well known, a mere circumstance. That he is doing what so many have done in recent years. Sacrificing his market value for a chance at winning a Chip! Because I know your not going to try to argue that his market value is 2.1M.

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:D Rose is no slouch of a player--anyone you add with LBJ goes up a few notches on top of it.

I don't put anything past James, but this past year rose was the definition of a slouch.

Low assist rate, low efg%, no defense.

His penetration is only useful if it leads to converted scores.

It did not.

Are you really signing Rose because of his 3 pt. shooting? Defensive prowless? Court vision? The metrics are great... But mostly for guys sitting in front of a their computers trying to prove they know all aspects of playing basketball. Metrics do not tell the whole story or talk about filling a need on a team. As it is still a team game and not a individual statistical competition.

Did not like Rose's tunnel vision, lack of assists or 3pt shooting. However was one of our best penetrating guards, in a long time. and was great to have as an option in tight game? The guy can still create as well as anyone in the NBA. Now is that worth $20M? Of course not. Half of Ron Bakers salary? Absolutely. Also consider that he was not a good fit on the 2016 Knicks. Team that needed a passing/set up point guard. A team that needed additional 3pt. shooting.

Briggs is right. For $2,1 Million, Rose is a very good signing. A great signing if he stays healthy. Specialy on the Cavs. As Lebron is the facilitator and they have several 3pt shooters. A drivinng point guard will help their team.

I can't respond to what people meant, only what they write.

Rose is a slouch of a player, which helps explains why he could only find a min deal.

If his effectiveness has to be qualified by his minimum salary and/or playing with James, I think that speaks somewhat for itself in the bigger picture.

But I didn't respond to that qualification, just the basic idea he is not a poor player in general.

He is.

Cleveland can apparently sign anyone for the min and it becomes a great signing because Lebron will make them better.

If they get him to pass the ball, out of drives, 3 or 4 times more per game, he then turns into a great addition.

If anyone fundamentally changes their game, of course all bets are off the table.

If the Knicks get Hardaway to grab 3 or 4 more rebounds, he becomes a different player.

The rub is it actually occurring.

Some truth there. But your making something, so well known, a mere circumstance. That he is doing what so many have done in recent years. Sacrificing his market value for a chance at winning a Chip! Because I know your not going to try to argue that his market value is 2.1M.

Rose's camp expressed a willingness to return to NY on a discount. He met with the Bucks... twice. The Clippers and the Lakers. It is late in free agency when every spent their money. Cleveland could've had him for the min a month ago.

If you don't see it's perfectly clear he was looking for more money, even in places like Milwaukee and either LA, I can't say anything that will change this conversation.

doomed wrote:Favorite DRose NY Knicks moment? Today.

and there's no way he would have signed with NYC for the minimum

kNYks342 wrote:Has anyone thought about the fact that Former MVP D Rose is making less money than Ron Baker????!!!

What we need is a guy that can be a mentor and also play when one of them struggles or hits a wall or is injured. I don't know who that is, exactly.

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:D Rose is no slouch of a player--anyone you add with LBJ goes up a few notches on top of it.

I don't put anything past James, but this past year rose was the definition of a slouch.

Low assist rate, low efg%, no defense.

His penetration is only useful if it leads to converted scores.

It did not.

Are you really signing Rose because of his 3 pt. shooting? Defensive prowless? Court vision? The metrics are great... But mostly for guys sitting in front of a their computers trying to prove they know all aspects of playing basketball. Metrics do not tell the whole story or talk about filling a need on a team. As it is still a team game and not a individual statistical competition.

Did not like Rose's tunnel vision, lack of assists or 3pt shooting. However was one of our best penetrating guards, in a long time. and was great to have as an option in tight game? The guy can still create as well as anyone in the NBA. Now is that worth $20M? Of course not. Half of Ron Bakers salary? Absolutely. Also consider that he was not a good fit on the 2016 Knicks. Team that needed a passing/set up point guard. A team that needed additional 3pt. shooting.

Briggs is right. For $2,1 Million, Rose is a very good signing. A great signing if he stays healthy. Specialy on the Cavs. As Lebron is the facilitator and they have several 3pt shooters. A drivinng point guard will help their team.

I can't respond to what people meant, only what they write.

Rose is a slouch of a player, which helps explains why he could only find a min deal.

If his effectiveness has to be qualified by his minimum salary and/or playing with James, I think that speaks somewhat for itself in the bigger picture.

But I didn't respond to that qualification, just the basic idea he is not a poor player in general.

He is.

Cleveland can apparently sign anyone for the min and it becomes a great signing because Lebron will make them better.

If they get him to pass the ball, out of drives, 3 or 4 times more per game, he then turns into a great addition.

If anyone fundamentally changes their game, of course all bets are off the table.

If the Knicks get Hardaway to grab 3 or 4 more rebounds, he becomes a different player.

The rub is it actually occurring.

Some truth there. But your making something, so well known, a mere circumstance. That he is doing what so many have done in recent years. Sacrificing his market value for a chance at winning a Chip! Because I know your not going to try to argue that his market value is 2.1M.

Rose's camp expressed a willingness to return to NY on a discount. He met with the Bucks... twice. The Clippers and the Lakers. It is late in free agency when every spent their money. Cleveland could've had him for the min a month ago.

If you don't see it's perfectly clear he was looking for more money, even in places like Milwaukee and either LA, I can't say anything that will change this conversation.

Lol. Rose's camp agreed that they would be open to getting overpaid by the Knicks.
Don't think many vets are rushing to the Clips, Bucks or Lakers, for vets min, in order to play in a guaranteed final. As they have not made the finals in quite some time and are long shots to do so any time soon. Also, don't think you know what kind of numbers were discussed. As Rose has said he would sacrifice some money to be in a better situation. In the finals, with LBJ, may qualify as one.

nyknickzingis wrote:We're at a stage where with having Ntilikina, and Baker showing promise as a floor general, that we wouldn't want a 30 minute a night player at point guard. It would eat up at the minutes for Baker and Frank.

What we need is a guy that can be a mentor and also play when one of them struggles or hits a wall or is injured. I don't know who that is, exactly.

No, what we need is to have these young guys in a winning culture. That's the problem with some of you, your so busy thinking this is the development league.

POPovich once said, when you develop young players in a losing atmosphere, it becomes a habit, they become immune to losing, doesn't hurt, doesn't bother them after while. You have to have quality vets when developing young guys.

knicks1248 wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:We're at a stage where with having Ntilikina, and Baker showing promise as a floor general, that we wouldn't want a 30 minute a night player at point guard. It would eat up at the minutes for Baker and Frank.

What we need is a guy that can be a mentor and also play when one of them struggles or hits a wall or is injured. I don't know who that is, exactly.

No, what we need is to have these young guys in a winning culture. That's the problem with some of you, your so busy thinking this is the development league.

POPovich once said, when you develop young players in a losing atmosphere, it becomes a habit, they become immune to losing, doesn't hurt, doesn't bother them after while. You have to have quality vets when developing young guys.

StarksEwing1 wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:We're at a stage where with having Ntilikina, and Baker showing promise as a floor general, that we wouldn't want a 30 minute a night player at point guard. It would eat up at the minutes for Baker and Frank.

What we need is a guy that can be a mentor and also play when one of them struggles or hits a wall or is injured. I don't know who that is, exactly.

No, what we need is to have these young guys in a winning culture. That's the problem with some of you, your so busy thinking this is the development league.

POPovich once said, when you develop young players in a losing atmosphere, it becomes a habit, they become immune to losing, doesn't hurt, doesn't bother them after while. You have to have quality vets when developing young guys.

Its not that simple. Its not like you just snap your fingers and it happens. The best course of action is to continue to develop our young players through the draft and also trying to land free agents along the way. I know you hate the idea of building through the draft but its the most realistic and best course of action for us now

building through the draft requires multiple top picks every season for 3 seasons minimum. We don't have that, nor do we have the assets to acquire any.

I would have resign rose over Baker without even blinking. I'm not even a rose fan at all, but he's 10x better than baker on his worse day.

knicks1248 wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:We're at a stage where with having Ntilikina, and Baker showing promise as a floor general, that we wouldn't want a 30 minute a night player at point guard. It would eat up at the minutes for Baker and Frank.

What we need is a guy that can be a mentor and also play when one of them struggles or hits a wall or is injured. I don't know who that is, exactly.

No, what we need is to have these young guys in a winning culture. That's the problem with some of you, your so busy thinking this is the development league.

POPovich once said, when you develop young players in a losing atmosphere, it becomes a habit, they become immune to losing, doesn't hurt, doesn't bother them after while. You have to have quality vets when developing young guys.

Its not that simple. Its not like you just snap your fingers and it happens. The best course of action is to continue to develop our young players through the draft and also trying to land free agents along the way. I know you hate the idea of building through the draft but its the most realistic and best course of action for us now

building through the draft requires multiple top picks every season for 3 seasons minimum. We don't have that, nor do we have the assets to acquire any.

I would have resign rose over Baker without even blinking. I'm not even a rose fan at all, but he's 10x better than baker on his worse day.

Why do you always box yourself in to a position that is both easily disputed and doesn't even make sense?

Wolves have drafted at the top forever and haven't gone anywhere.

GS drafted #7, #11 and #35 and hit gold.

Knicks just drafted #4, #35, #8 and KP, Willy, Frank need time to show what they got.

Gonna take time.

martin wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:We're at a stage where with having Ntilikina, and Baker showing promise as a floor general, that we wouldn't want a 30 minute a night player at point guard. It would eat up at the minutes for Baker and Frank.

What we need is a guy that can be a mentor and also play when one of them struggles or hits a wall or is injured. I don't know who that is, exactly.

No, what we need is to have these young guys in a winning culture. That's the problem with some of you, your so busy thinking this is the development league.

POPovich once said, when you develop young players in a losing atmosphere, it becomes a habit, they become immune to losing, doesn't hurt, doesn't bother them after while. You have to have quality vets when developing young guys.

Its not that simple. Its not like you just snap your fingers and it happens. The best course of action is to continue to develop our young players through the draft and also trying to land free agents along the way. I know you hate the idea of building through the draft but its the most realistic and best course of action for us now

building through the draft requires multiple top picks every season for 3 seasons minimum. We don't have that, nor do we have the assets to acquire any.

I would have resign rose over Baker without even blinking. I'm not even a rose fan at all, but he's 10x better than baker on his worse day.

Why do you always box yourself in to a position that is both easily disputed and doesn't even make sense?

Wolves have drafted at the top forever and haven't gone anywhere.

GS drafted #7, #11 and #35 and hit gold.

Knicks just drafted #4, #35, #8 and KP, Willy, Frank need time to show what they got.

Gonna take time.

martin wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:We're at a stage where with having Ntilikina, and Baker showing promise as a floor general, that we wouldn't want a 30 minute a night player at point guard. It would eat up at the minutes for Baker and Frank.

What we need is a guy that can be a mentor and also play when one of them struggles or hits a wall or is injured. I don't know who that is, exactly.

No, what we need is to have these young guys in a winning culture. That's the problem with some of you, your so busy thinking this is the development league.

POPovich once said, when you develop young players in a losing atmosphere, it becomes a habit, they become immune to losing, doesn't hurt, doesn't bother them after while. You have to have quality vets when developing young guys.

Its not that simple. Its not like you just snap your fingers and it happens. The best course of action is to continue to develop our young players through the draft and also trying to land free agents along the way. I know you hate the idea of building through the draft but its the most realistic and best course of action for us now

building through the draft requires multiple top picks every season for 3 seasons minimum. We don't have that, nor do we have the assets to acquire any.

I would have resign rose over Baker without even blinking. I'm not even a rose fan at all, but he's 10x better than baker on his worse day.

Why do you always box yourself in to a position that is both easily disputed and doesn't even make sense?

Wolves have drafted at the top forever and haven't gone anywhere.

GS drafted #7, #11 and #35 and hit gold.

Knicks just drafted #4, #35, #8 and KP, Willy, Frank need time to show what they got.

Gonna take time.

we have a dread full history of developing talent, part of the reason for that is because of the CITY and distractions/media capital/and constant losing, the other part is the coaching staff that we have had, and the loser veterans we acquire

Aside from DAVID LEE and nate robinson, every draft pick we have had in the last 10+ yrs has taking a serious step back during their sophomore season. from danilo, tony douglas, THJ, chandler, fields, ect.

You know why Ward, Starks, Mason and those guys would get better every season, they had big time, hard working, high character VETS leading the way.

Let Cleveland deal with franks development, 3 yrs later we can bring him back like THJ and he will be ready to contribute.

I think it's more important to having a winning culture when dealing with developing youths.

HofstraBBall wrote:

martin wrote:ugh

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/JoshEberley/status/889880124509667328

Click here to view the Tweet

At least they have Cameron for that. Lol

Agree, frustrating to watch. Always thought he could have at least 6 assists per game. But again, don't think they need him to be a facilitator. That's what Lebron does. If Rose can penetrate when Love and Korver are sitting on the 3pt. line and Lebron can convince him to kick out the ball once in a while, he is a better fit than anyone still out there. Specially for 2.1M. And don't think anyone can argue that he is a great talent. IF he stays healthy.

The amazing thing is that from his first time on the floor with the Knicks, Rose played that way. He decided at the end of the season to start sharing the rock because he wanted to get paid.

To think he was almost brought back. Hats off to Mills for that call. Was his best move yet on the player side. Now lets see Perry do his thing...

knicks1248 wrote:

martin wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:We're at a stage where with having Ntilikina, and Baker showing promise as a floor general, that we wouldn't want a 30 minute a night player at point guard. It would eat up at the minutes for Baker and Frank.

What we need is a guy that can be a mentor and also play when one of them struggles or hits a wall or is injured. I don't know who that is, exactly.

No, what we need is to have these young guys in a winning culture. That's the problem with some of you, your so busy thinking this is the development league.

POPovich once said, when you develop young players in a losing atmosphere, it becomes a habit, they become immune to losing, doesn't hurt, doesn't bother them after while. You have to have quality vets when developing young guys.

Its not that simple. Its not like you just snap your fingers and it happens. The best course of action is to continue to develop our young players through the draft and also trying to land free agents along the way. I know you hate the idea of building through the draft but its the most realistic and best course of action for us now

building through the draft requires multiple top picks every season for 3 seasons minimum. We don't have that, nor do we have the assets to acquire any.

I would have resign rose over Baker without even blinking. I'm not even a rose fan at all, but he's 10x better than baker on his worse day.

Why do you always box yourself in to a position that is both easily disputed and doesn't even make sense?

Wolves have drafted at the top forever and haven't gone anywhere.

GS drafted #7, #11 and #35 and hit gold.

Knicks just drafted #4, #35, #8 and KP, Willy, Frank need time to show what they got.

Gonna take time.

we have a dread full history of developing talent, part of the reason for that is because of the CITY and distractions/media capital/and constant losing, the other part is the coaching staff that we have had, and the loser veterans we acquire

Aside from DAVID LEE and nate robinson, every draft pick we have had in the last 10+ yrs has taking a serious step back during their sophomore season. from danilo, tony douglas, THJ, chandler, fields, ect.

You know why Ward, Starks, Mason and those guys would get better every season, they had big time, hard working, high character VETS leading the way.

Let Cleveland deal with franks development, 3 yrs later we can bring him back like THJ and he will be ready to contribute.

I think it's more important to having a winning culture when dealing with developing youths.

We don't have a winning culture either. What do you give up for Kyrie? Two picks, or one pick and Frank along with Melo?

can't stand the NYC sports media that makes shit up to bash the knicks. anyone with a brain knows rose would never sign with the knicks for that price, and stop bashing ron the guy gave more effort then melo and rose combine on both ends of the floor. Baker makes a team better i don't think the same can be said for rose or melo.

thats why whatever we get for melo is gravy the guy is a chemistry killer if you think melo will actually make the rockets better hahaha thats just laughable if you still think guys like melo and rose make your team better you need a reality check.

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:D Rose is no slouch of a player--anyone you add with LBJ goes up a few notches on top of it.

I don't put anything past James, but this past year rose was the definition of a slouch.

Low assist rate, low efg%, no defense.

His penetration is only useful if it leads to converted scores.

It did not.

Are you really signing Rose because of his 3 pt. shooting? Defensive prowless? Court vision? The metrics are great... But mostly for guys sitting in front of a their computers trying to prove they know all aspects of playing basketball. Metrics do not tell the whole story or talk about filling a need on a team. As it is still a team game and not a individual statistical competition.

Did not like Rose's tunnel vision, lack of assists or 3pt shooting. However was one of our best penetrating guards, in a long time. and was great to have as an option in tight game? The guy can still create as well as anyone in the NBA. Now is that worth $20M? Of course not. Half of Ron Bakers salary? Absolutely. Also consider that he was not a good fit on the 2016 Knicks. Team that needed a passing/set up point guard. A team that needed additional 3pt. shooting.

Briggs is right. For $2,1 Million, Rose is a very good signing. A great signing if he stays healthy. Specialy on the Cavs. As Lebron is the facilitator and they have several 3pt shooters. A drivinng point guard will help their team.

I can't respond to what people meant, only what they write.

Rose is a slouch of a player, which helps explains why he could only find a min deal.

If his effectiveness has to be qualified by his minimum salary and/or playing with James, I think that speaks somewhat for itself in the bigger picture.

But I didn't respond to that qualification, just the basic idea he is not a poor player in general.

He is.

Cleveland can apparently sign anyone for the min and it becomes a great signing because Lebron will make them better.

If they get him to pass the ball, out of drives, 3 or 4 times more per game, he then turns into a great addition.

If anyone fundamentally changes their game, of course all bets are off the table.

If the Knicks get Hardaway to grab 3 or 4 more rebounds, he becomes a different player.

The rub is it actually occurring.

Some truth there. But your making something, so well known, a mere circumstance. That he is doing what so many have done in recent years. Sacrificing his market value for a chance at winning a Chip! Because I know your not going to try to argue that his market value is 2.1M.

Rose's camp expressed a willingness to return to NY on a discount. He met with the Bucks... twice. The Clippers and the Lakers. It is late in free agency when every spent their money. Cleveland could've had him for the min a month ago.

If you don't see it's perfectly clear he was looking for more money, even in places like Milwaukee and either LA, I can't say anything that will change this conversation.

Lol. Rose's camp agreed that they would be open to getting overpaid by the Knicks.
Don't think many vets are rushing to the Clips, Bucks or Lakers, for vets min, in order to play in a guaranteed final. As they have not made the finals in quite some time and are long shots to do so any time soon. Also, don't think you know what kind of numbers were discussed. As Rose has said he would sacrifice some money to be in a better situation. In the finals, with LBJ, may qualify as one.

Just a year ago, Rose still believed he could earn a $20 million a year long-term deal, but he accepted a one-year, $2.1 million veterans minimum deal. To regain his footing in the NBA, Rose wanted a real team with real games.

"A one-year deal on a bad team to try and put up numbers -- we did not want to entertain that way of thinking," agent B.J. Armstrong, a three-time NBA champion with the Chicago Bulls, told ESPN on Tuesday. "Getting up every day to go to the gym to just try and put up numbers -- that's not who he is. He didn't want to chase anything this summer other than, 'Hey, let's get around a group of guys who are like-minded, who are pursuing winning and be a part of that.'"

This is Rose's agent acknowledging his options were one year 'show me' deals.

If he had multi-year offers, his agent would have said so to better make his point.

Nobody believed in Rose enough to offer him more than one year.

If you regard it all together, clear he wasn't offered much in terms of $$ either.