So many of you talked like he was a total waste of time, money and roster space. I really didn't like they way he was treated, but I understood the development of Mitch.
What kills me is how Mills talks about having players on the roster that want to be here, and then waives these same players that want to be here.
Even if all kanter did was grab 12 rebounds a game with 12 to 14 points, that's production. Even if his defense was as suspect as RODMANS offense, there's role for him, especially next to a defense big like Mitch, and I should add that he was cool with durant..
I guess the knicks did him a favor
I mostly agree -- I liked Kanter. He has his weaknesses, but I liked his fire and personality, his offense and rebounding of course, and he is showing in Portland that he can be a solid contributer on a good team. I mean he really is saving the Blazers' bacon after Nurkic going down. The one thing I counter with is that the Knicks FO cut him loose for primarily one reason -- tanking.
And obviously they did him a favor.
KnickDanger wrote:I mostly agree -- I liked Kanter. He has his weaknesses, but I liked his fire and personality, his offense and rebounding of course, and he is showing in Portland that he can be a solid contributer on a good team. I mean he really is saving the Blazers' bacon after Nurkic going down. The one thing I counter with is that the Knicks FO cut him loose for primarily one reason -- tanking.
And obviously they did him a favor.
I recall him being in the rotation during the 18 game losing streak
knicks1248 wrote:So many of you talked like he was a total waste of time, money and roster space. I really didn't like they way he was treated, but I understood the development of Mitch.What kills me is how Mills talks about having players on the roster that want to be here, and then waives these same players that want to be here.
Even if all kanter did was grab 12 rebounds a game with 12 to 14 points, that's production. Even if his defense was as suspect as RODMANS offense, there's role for him, especially next to a defense big like Mitch, and I should add that he was cool with durant..
I guess the knicks did him a favor
So you'd rather we kept kanter and re-signed him and then could only get one top FA and so miss out on all of them because one of them want to be the sole FA? Nice plan!
Wouldn't it have been great if we kept Kanter and then weren't able to Mitch the minutes he got at the end of the season, just so we could allow Kanter to get his stats when we had no intention of re-signing him. That would have been cool!
he's crushing it in the play offs. Amazing how being on a good team seems to make everyone better!
The thing about Kanter - he wanted to be here and I thought he had some leadership qualities. I thought he helped during our better play earlier in the year.
We talk about having to sign Durant, but if we strike out, who do we have to perhaps give us some of what Kanter gave us?
I am very happy for him- and I realize how tough things were for the front office as far as making a decision.
Rainman has to put down the FO when ever he can.
A different perspective is WE DID HIM A FAVOR! Did we hold him for ransom that we'd release him if he took a buy out? No. He got paid, and paid again by Blazers.
His production in NY was good and we lost. Put him on a much much better team his production was good and his team wins.
What he brings to the Blazers is between him and his team. He was not part of our plan. Most everyone liked him but do you resign him and eat cap?
"But what about hardaway"........It don't work that way. One has nothing to do with the other. Every team has contracts they might want to rethink in hindsight and move forward. Back to Enes, we got him as cap fodder for Melo. He did well, wanted to be here (KP did not). Notice how about every free agent to be says they want to stay?
Its because they can sign a player and go over the cap. Get paid the most. Don't be naïve.
Enes was not the problem here, but he was not the solution. He was singed as a backup and proved to be a great move for Portland. I hope they resign him. Hope he does not get killed by Turkish assassin squad.
Knicks1248, we get your not just happy for kanter as much as you want to make a dig at Mills.
franco12 wrote:he's crushing it in the play offs. Amazing how being on a good team seems to make everyone better!The thing about Kanter - he wanted to be here and I thought he had some leadership qualities. I thought he helped during our better play earlier in the year.
We talk about having to sign Durant, but if we strike out, who do we have to perhaps give us some of what Kanter gave us?
I am very happy for him- and I realize how tough things were for the front office as far as making a decision.
Kanter has been happy about being on whatever team he is currently on. He stood up for his teammates very nicely but also sulked on the bench when he didn't have a starting role. That's not leadership in my book (check out the reactions of Lee and DJordan for better leaders). He is very good at a couple of things but also can get exposed very easily; he's a flawed player who can't make up for his deficiencies IMHO. Can bee a good player off the bench if he doesn't eat cap space.
knicks1248 wrote:So many of you talked like he was a total waste of time, money and roster space. I really didn't like they way he was treated, but I understood the development of Mitch.What kills me is how Mills talks about having players on the roster that want to be here, and then waives these same players that want to be here.
Even if all kanter did was grab 12 rebounds a game with 12 to 14 points, that's production. Even if his defense was as suspect as RODMANS offense, there's role for him, especially next to a defense big like Mitch, and I should add that he was cool with durant..
I guess the knicks did him a favor
A Mitch/Kanter wouldn't work because of spacing issues. The Blazers had three and D guys to cover for Enes. They also had a top 25 player go super Nova and an opponent whose star player is gaining the rep as a choke artist. Enes got to choose where to go and he chose a team that fit him perfectly. He wasn't a good fit here. We have a roster filled with guys who trouble recognizing their own man on defense. They couldn't be expected to cover up for Enes too. I'm happy for Enes, but it wasn't working out here.
martin wrote:franco12 wrote:he's crushing it in the play offs. Amazing how being on a good team seems to make everyone better!The thing about Kanter - he wanted to be here and I thought he had some leadership qualities. I thought he helped during our better play earlier in the year.
We talk about having to sign Durant, but if we strike out, who do we have to perhaps give us some of what Kanter gave us?
I am very happy for him- and I realize how tough things were for the front office as far as making a decision.
Kanter has been happy about being on whatever team he is currently on. He stood up for his teammates very nicely but also sulked on the bench when he didn't have a starting role. That's not leadership in my book (check out the reactions of Lee and DJordan for better leaders). He is very good at a couple of things but also can get exposed very easily; he's a flawed player who can't make up for his deficiencies IMHO. Can bee a good player off the bench if he doesn't eat cap space.
What a crappy post. You were wrong big time.
I'm happy for him too. But the big takeaway here is how replaceable these centers are today. When someone like Nurkic goes down, you can replace his 15 and 10 on a minimum salary with Kanter, Greg Monroe, etc. These are guys you would build an offense around 10 years ago, and they would put up 20 and 10 with ease. Kanter is playing well but is also very replaceable and won't get a significant free agent contract no matter how far they go. The league has just changed so much. I remember when Monroe was a hot commodity and the Knicks were after him. 4 years later he's the exact same player making the minimum.
Knixkik wrote:I'm happy for him too. But the big takeaway here is how replaceable these centers are today. When someone like Nurkic goes down, you can replace his 15 and 10 on a minimum salary with Kanter, Greg Monroe, etc. These are guys you would build an offense around 10 years ago, and they would put up 20 and 10 with ease. Kanter is playing well but is also very replaceable and won't get a significant free agent contract no matter how far they go. The league has just changed so much. I remember when Monroe was a hot commodity and the Knicks were after him. 4 years later he's the exact same player making the minimum.
Knicks never offered him a contract. They met with him. Either he was not interested in being here or visa versa.
Rainman, Rodman played for the Pistons, Bulls and SAS. All good teams who were able to absorb a head case too. Put Rodman on a last place young team like the knicks and its a whole different situation.
Kanter sulked and wanted to start. Rightfully so but he wanted to get paid. His benching was not from a lack of effort or production. It was not "bad habits" or "bad attitude". It was about giving reps to others.
Kanter got the David Lee treatment. His game was flawed and everyone beat on him for his flaws. But when you produce you produce and Kanter's numbers were good when he got his minutes. The Knicks want to built a different type of team. I'll tell you what though, Kanter's limitations aren't as exposed in Portland, where the guards are complete and utter dogshit
knicks1248 wrote:So many of you talked like he was a total waste of time, money and roster space. I really didn't like they way he was treated, but I understood the development of Mitch.What kills me is how Mills talks about having players on the roster that want to be here, and then waives these same players that want to be here.
Even if all kanter did was grab 12 rebounds a game with 12 to 14 points, that's production. Even if his defense was as suspect as RODMANS offense, there's role for him, especially next to a defense big like Mitch, and I should add that he was cool with durant..
I guess the knicks did him a favor
Kanter is supplementary piece which can be plugged in into well established system and handled appropriately.
There is nothing established in Knicks roster and may not be established for a couple of seasons to come.
We may need a piece like Kanter at some point but NBA has this available at any time.
Kanter was in good place with OKC and now is in good place with Portland.
Perfect setup for him and for the team.
This is how smart FO using the roster positions at maximum efficiency and low risk.
SupremeCommander wrote:Kanter got the David Lee treatment. His game was flawed and everyone beat on him for his flaws. But when you produce you produce and Kanter's numbers were good when he got his minutes. The Knicks want to built a different type of team. I'll tell you what though, Kanter's limitations aren't as exposed in Portland, where the guards are complete and utter dogshit
Disagree. Lee was a grade A stat padder in NY. He would drop off his man so he had a better chance at a rebound. Mr. Jazzhands. Kanter wasnt a first rate defender in NY, but the effort was there. Kanter stuck his chest out to check his man, Lee led with his jazzhands. Both got better at D post Knicks, Lee had more work to do. Lee was soft, Kanter wasnt.
GustavBahler wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:he's crushing it in the play offs. Amazing how being on a good team seems to make everyone better!The thing about Kanter - he wanted to be here and I thought he had some leadership qualities. I thought he helped during our better play earlier in the year.
We talk about having to sign Durant, but if we strike out, who do we have to perhaps give us some of what Kanter gave us?
I am very happy for him- and I realize how tough things were for the front office as far as making a decision.
Kanter has been happy about being on whatever team he is currently on. He stood up for his teammates very nicely but also sulked on the bench when he didn't have a starting role. That's not leadership in my book (check out the reactions of Lee and DJordan for better leaders). He is very good at a couple of things but also can get exposed very easily; he's a flawed player who can't make up for his deficiencies IMHO. Can bee a good player off the bench if he doesn't eat cap space.
What a crappy post. You were wrong big time.
Feel free to add anything of relavence
martin wrote:GustavBahler wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:he's crushing it in the play offs. Amazing how being on a good team seems to make everyone better!The thing about Kanter - he wanted to be here and I thought he had some leadership qualities. I thought he helped during our better play earlier in the year.
We talk about having to sign Durant, but if we strike out, who do we have to perhaps give us some of what Kanter gave us?
I am very happy for him- and I realize how tough things were for the front office as far as making a decision.
Kanter has been happy about being on whatever team he is currently on. He stood up for his teammates very nicely but also sulked on the bench when he didn't have a starting role. That's not leadership in my book (check out the reactions of Lee and DJordan for better leaders). He is very good at a couple of things but also can get exposed very easily; he's a flawed player who can't make up for his deficiencies IMHO. Can bee a good player off the bench if he doesn't eat cap space.
What a crappy post. You were wrong big time.
Feel free to add anything of relavence
Believe Kanter already did that. 
martin wrote:franco12 wrote:he's crushing it in the play offs. Amazing how being on a good team seems to make everyone better!The thing about Kanter - he wanted to be here and I thought he had some leadership qualities. I thought he helped during our better play earlier in the year.
We talk about having to sign Durant, but if we strike out, who do we have to perhaps give us some of what Kanter gave us?
I am very happy for him- and I realize how tough things were for the front office as far as making a decision.
Kanter has been happy about being on whatever team he is currently on. He stood up for his teammates very nicely but also sulked on the bench when he didn't have a starting role. That's not leadership in my book (check out the reactions of Lee and DJordan for better leaders). He is very good at a couple of things but also can get exposed very easily; he's a flawed player who can't make up for his deficiencies IMHO. Can bee a good player off the bench if he doesn't eat cap space.
You have to take into consideration the type of personality he has, the fact that he was in a contract yr, the fact that he never played on a really bad team that played to lose..
This was a yr where having the worst record didn't have the same impact as it did before. Jordan was bench towards the very end of the season, and lee was hurt for most of the beginning of the season.
Kanter came to play a game on crutches and left on crutches after playing 30+ minutes, that's the passion he has for the game and for winning..I don't believe he was sulking, he just wanted to play
Adams has routinely given Kanter all he could handle. Happy to see him get over that hump. Adams had a relatively quiet playoffs was he hurt or did Kanter's neutralize him?
Kanter signed with Portland for 500K as an add on to a team that was already top 5 in the West. He is house money for anyone at that price regardless of flaws.
newyorknewyork wrote:Adams has routinely given Kanter all he could handle. Happy to see him get over that hump. Adams had a relatively quiet playoffs was he hurt or did Kanter's neutralize him? Kanter signed with Portland for 500K as an add on to a team that was already top 5 in the West. He is house money for anyone at that price regardless of flaws.
Of Course, a lot of teams would sign Kanter for the League Min. It comes down to price will Portland give him 15 million a year? I doubt it. I don't think he will get the Midlevel
Jmpasq wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:Adams has routinely given Kanter all he could handle. Happy to see him get over that hump. Adams had a relatively quiet playoffs was he hurt or did Kanter's neutralize him? Kanter signed with Portland for 500K as an add on to a team that was already top 5 in the West. He is house money for anyone at that price regardless of flaws.
Of Course, a lot of teams would sign Kanter for the League Min. It comes down to price will Portland give him 15 million a year? I doubt it. I don't think he will get the Midlevel
The emotions are important... for the fans.
But for clubs it is all business. Dollars and cents.
Market will decide Kanters paycheck not his personality.
So we are going to see.
There is no doubt that both sides did the right thing and Knicks went very professional about it.
