fishmike wrote:lol.. we should have pulled the trigger and had DM instead of Fournier in the starting line up? I love the bench but based on the FO's ability to grab role players and make trades for guy who are good at filling roles you have to wonder how we look.I believe the deal was essentially Obi/IQ/Grimes/Fournier with 3-4 FRPs and some additional pick swaps. So basically our whole bench and 4 years of draft choices
No thanks. Glad Rose/Perry took a pass
Nalod wrote:Marv wrote:i didn't want a 6-1 6-1 backcourt either, but it's funny using that picture to illustrate the point, isn't it ^^ i mean mitchell's kind of kneeling on the court there 
A paragraph without mention of DM's 7 foot wingspan?
Think Tyrian Lannister with giant arms!
DM looks like a little person in that photo.
If we go that wingspan DM is really a Center
With or without Mitchell, I don’t see us winning a title.
And overall with depth, I like our chances better to be a solid winning team in the near and medium term.
Maybe Mitchell get’s you into the 50 win level sooner, but my hope still is RJ manages to improve as he is much younger and the potential is still there.
franco12 wrote:With or without Mitchell, I don’t see us winning a title.And overall with depth, I like our chances better to be a solid winning team in the near and medium term.
Maybe Mitchell get’s you into the 50 win level sooner, but my hope still is RJ manages to improve as he is much younger and the potential is still there.
The space and pace style of today’s nba makes it much more if a team sport than it was in the 90’s and 2000’s. Yea, it’s always good to have superstars but the way to really win now is having constantly 5 athletic guys on the court at the same time who can all(or at least 4) can shoot the 3
We tried the starphuc 10 years ago and we ended up with Melo and a patchwork supporting cast of veterans past their prime
Cavs were able to keep their 2 all-stars and add a third. They are in win now mode and maybe an Eastern Conference contender. So there is that. We would be in a way different position after the trade.
Still looks like a deal the FO was smart to pass on. Who knows what doctors will say if DM has another concussion? How it would affect his career. Nevermind the asking price.
How many years would it take for the FO to build a contender around whats left? We watched what happened when a large part the cap is invested in one or two talented, but expensive players. Like Melo and Amar'e.
Stoudemire played like an MVP for half a season, then injuries set in and he was pretty much washed as a consistent contributor. Melo was pretty much the offense for the bulk of his time in NY, because he ate so much of the cap. By the time he left he needed a season away from the game to get some of his game back.
The less talent on the roster, the more of the load the stars have to carry. That can lead to injuries, wear and tear. Then by the time a contender is assembled, the stars might be more injury prone.
We've tried the "gut the team and rebuild" strategy. Want to see a big trade that isnt in effect one step forward, and two steps back.
BigDaddyG wrote:wargames wrote:The Jazz got a lot for Donovan… the value of the Knicks own picks would have made giving those picks up a lot worsr
Man... That Sexton contract isn't looking good so far. Agbani hasn't gotten off the bench, so he knows where he ends up. But Lauri... He's been Dirk very 1.5 so far. If he keeps it up I'd say the Jazz did good from a player standpoint. The picks... You never know, but I'm not sure how great they'll turn out.
The players the Jazz got from the Cavs were a lot better
ramtour420 wrote:Cavs were able to keep their 2 all-stars and add a third. They are in win now mode and maybe an Eastern Conference contender. So there is that. We would be in a way different position after the trade.
If we had the Cavs roster I would have made the trade. The Cavs have a much better roster than the Knicks.
Jmpasq wrote:ramtour420 wrote:Cavs were able to keep their 2 all-stars and add a third. They are in win now mode and maybe an Eastern Conference contender. So there is that. We would be in a way different position after the trade.
If we had the Cavs roster I would have made the trade. The Cavs have a much better roster than the Knicks.
+1 I definitely agree. We can afford to develop our guys, obtain more assets. Cavs are in a much more urgent situation
