PDA

View Full Version : Official: Melo to the Knicks



Pages : [1] 2

IU_sears
02-21-2011, 10:21 PM
Link

http://www.denverpost.com/nuggets/ci_17443219

Hopefully more trades can go down now...

BringJackBack
02-21-2011, 10:23 PM
Like I said, watch us all wake up in the morning to see that there are ten other deals done.. Finally the Denver FO has quit holding everyone hostage.

CT Pacer
02-21-2011, 10:23 PM
Finally.

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 10:27 PM
SpearsNBAYahoo Marc J. Spears
Y! Sports: NY: Melo, CB, Balkman, Williams, Carter; DEN: Gallo, Mosgov, Felton, Chandler, '14 NY 1st & 2 2nds; Minn: Randolph and Curry.
1 minute ago Favorite Retweet Reply

So Min is invloved AR going to the Twoves

BringJackBack
02-21-2011, 10:29 PM
Woah.. NY loses a lot of players.

DemonHunter1105
02-21-2011, 10:30 PM
Maybe I am the only one, maybe not...but I would take that package over Melo all day. One player is not worth that much. No one man can take your team to the finals unless your name is Lebron.

cdash
02-21-2011, 10:32 PM
So the Knicks went from being a 42 win team to a 47 win team. Congrats.

ndcoltsnpacers
02-21-2011, 10:34 PM
Only NY would make a deal like this. And I'm sure their fan base is thrilled right now. I'm thrilled too because I think this increases our odds of getting the 6th spot.

Trophy
02-21-2011, 10:36 PM
The Knicks are giving up too much.

Sookie
02-21-2011, 10:36 PM
aww, Chauncey's involved, he didn't want to go..

smj887
02-21-2011, 10:37 PM
Wow, awful deal for NY in my opinion. The good part is that their big 2 can't get a huge lead on us like Miami's big 3, but our depth will dominate them just like it does Miami.

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 10:37 PM
The Knicks are giving up too much.

they get two all-stars back in Billups and Melo.

it is really just Galio and Moz and a pick for Melo

because with Melo in NY Chandler wasnt gonna be retained he will want a lot of money via FA.

Felton and Billups cancel each other out. ( but in a few years they will need another pg. CP3 wll be a FA in a few years Dwill also.)

focused444
02-21-2011, 10:38 PM
So whats NY's starting 5 now?

cdash
02-21-2011, 10:38 PM
they get two all-stars back in Billups and Melo.

Yeah but I don't think Billups is at that All-Star level anymore. He'll be handy in the playoffs, but he is nearing the end of his career.

Trophy
02-21-2011, 10:38 PM
they get two all-stars back in Billups and Melo.

They gave up Felton, a young player who's rising for Billups, an aging PG and in no way an All-Star anymore.

They need reserves.

Psyren
02-21-2011, 10:39 PM
they get two all-stars back in Billups and Melo.

I think Chauncey bolts the first chance he gets.

As Cdash said, congrats. 42 to 47 or 48 wins. Your 2 stars aren't great defenders.

Not to mention, you gave up far too much.

Whoop, thanks for the months of stupid drama NY. Thanks for wasting everyone's time, and holding everyone up.

Now, on to the rest of the NBA.

BringJackBack
02-21-2011, 10:40 PM
So whats NY's starting 5 now?

Billups
Fields
Melo
Amare
Turiaf

I'd guess.. They've lost a lot of depth, but obviously picking up Melo was worth it.

MrPreGame
02-21-2011, 10:40 PM
So the Knicks have a decent 4 starters and a lotta scrubs, Cant wait to play that team

ndcoltsnpacers
02-21-2011, 10:41 PM
Wow, awful deal for NY in my opinion. The good part is that their big 2 can't get a huge lead on us like Miami's big 3, but our depth will dominate them just like it does Miami.

Not to mentions their big 2 play 0 defense unlike 2/3 of Miami's big 3.

Trophy
02-21-2011, 10:42 PM
They got Renaldo Balkman back after Mike D'Antoni didn't want him.

He wasn't terrible player for them.

rexnom
02-21-2011, 10:42 PM
Is it a steep price to pay for Melo? How many times have seen quantity lose out vis-a-vis quality? Real quality. Not Jermaine O'Neal quality. How's Houston doing with all those great trade assets they've accumulated?

Pacerized
02-21-2011, 10:43 PM
I hate the Knicks and I hope it takes years and they're never able to put together a supporting cast that works.
The new CBA needs to prevent a team from having 2 max contract players. I'd probably be in favor of any rule that would discourage superstars from trying to put together their own teams.

idioteque
02-21-2011, 10:44 PM
The Knicks are giving up too much.

There is hardly a definition of too much if you're a large market with the opportunity to get Melo. They will grab enough reserves in the next couple of off seasons to be a contender.

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 10:44 PM
Billups
Fields
Melo
Amare
Turiaf

I'd guess.. They've lost a lot of depth, but obviously picking up Melo was worth it.

Shawne Williams for 6 man of the year :dance::dance:

Heisenberg
02-21-2011, 10:46 PM
http://twitter.com/#!/WojYahooNBA/status/39891219362492416 (http://twitter.com/#%21/WojYahooNBA/status/39891219362492416)


Donnie Walsh ally says of steep price paid for Melo: "This is all Dolan. All Isiah. All (Worldwide) Wes and Leon Rose..."

If true, Donnie needs to go Col. Frank Slade on em. FLAMETHROWA TO THIS PLACE!

HeliumFear
02-21-2011, 10:46 PM
They should have just waited for free agency...lol.

Psyren
02-21-2011, 10:47 PM
So the Knicks have a decent 4 starters and a lotta scrubs, Cant wait to play that team

Agreed.

With all the depth they've lost, I look at that team and think "meh".

Good? Yea. Worse than Miami? Definitely.

If we can play with Miami and their scrubs, I REALLY can't wait to dominate these 2 and their supporting cast of even worse scrubs.

idioteque
02-21-2011, 10:47 PM
Is it a steep price to pay for Melo? How many times have seen quantity lose out vis-a-vis quality? Real quality. Not Jermaine O'Neal quality. How's Houston doing with all those great trade assets they've accumulated?

Exactly. Heck, I remember reading that Boston gave up too much for Garnett, that Boston would have no depth and be old and brittle. Truth is, you give another team as many prospects and fringe starters as they want for a proven superstar. The team that gets the superstar always wins the trade.

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 10:48 PM
They should have just waited for free agency...lol.


WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
Donnie Walsh always believed the Knicks could be patient, preserve roster, and keep financial flexibility. He didn't suddenly change mind.

sounds like thats what Donnie Walsh wanted to do. Dolan and Zeke wanted him now.

vnzla81
02-21-2011, 10:49 PM
Billups to me still have some value and NY is pretty much getting him for free, good deal for both teams.

The starting team would be Billups,Fields, Melo, whoever and Amare.

Pacerfan
02-21-2011, 10:49 PM
http://twitter.com/#!/WojYahooNBA/status/39891219362492416 (http://twitter.com/#%21/WojYahooNBA/status/39891219362492416)



If true, Donnie needs to go Col. Frank Slade on em. FLAMETHROWA TO THIS PLACE!

I've been saying Donnie really needs to quit..... after convincing the Knicks to take TJ Ford at back-up pg. :D Come back to Indy and be a consultant and live out his life peacefully.

BringJackBack
02-21-2011, 10:51 PM
Exactly. Heck, I remember reading that Boston gave up too much for Garnett, that Boston would have no depth and be old and brittle. Truth is, you give another team as many prospects and fringe starters as they want for a proven superstar. The team that gets the superstar always wins the trade.

This is definitely true.. BUT they could have just waited and signed him in free agency while keeping Felton, Chandler, and Gallo altogether.

Pacerfan
02-21-2011, 10:51 PM
WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski

Walsh believed the Knicks could adhere to those principles, and still get 'Melo. All that went out the window, with Isiah/CAA pushing Dolan.

27 seconds ago Favorite Retweet Reply

PacerPride33
02-21-2011, 10:52 PM
so is felton going to be traded? i think i read that from chris broussard. and is randolph being traded yet?

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 10:52 PM
This is definitely true.. BUT they could have just waited and signed him in free agency while keeping Felton, Chandler, and Gallo altogether.

They couldnt afford to resign Chandler and Melo. Plus still have cap room going into 2012 to get an elite payer.

Trophy
02-21-2011, 10:52 PM
Melo and Amare are probably gonna work well together simply because they both play different positions and do different things with the ball in their hands.

DemonHunter1105
02-21-2011, 10:53 PM
I would just be happy if I am Denver because they got back SO much considering that everyone knew Carmelo did not want to be there. In the long run, NY is going to be good. The fact that Denver got some pretty good talent and assets in the process makes it a great deal for them right now.

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 10:53 PM
so is felton going to be traded? i think i read that from chris broussard. and is randolph being traded yet?

read the article it answers you ?

vnzla81
02-21-2011, 10:56 PM
To me the Melo/Amare duo is better than the Lebron/Bosh duo, they need one more piece and would be better.

Heisenberg
02-21-2011, 10:57 PM
If Dolan really sidestepped Walsh, for ZEKE of all people, my hatred for the Knicks is right back up there like it was in my pre-teen years.

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 10:59 PM
If Dolan really sidestepped Walsh, for ZEKE of all people, my hatred for the Knicks is right back up there like it was in my pre-teen years.

From what I've read Dolan belives that if Zeke was with the Knicks last year. LBJ would be a Knick. Both Dolan and Zeke are confusing people.

Pacerfan
02-21-2011, 10:59 PM
You really have to feel for Donnie though.... Donnie gave Isiah his chance and Isiah is now trying to get rid of Donnie and undermining him. What an incredibly unthankful douchebag.

sheppie33
02-21-2011, 11:01 PM
as for anthony randolph....... link shows a tweet from spears. Stein confirmed on sportscenter.

Y! Sports: NY: Melo, CB, Balkman, Williams, Carter; DEN: Gallo, Mosgov, Felton, Chandler, '14 NY 1st & 2 2nds; Minn: Randolph and Curry.less than a minute ago via TweetDeckMarc J. Spears
SpearsNBAYahoo

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2011/2/21/2007162/carmelo-anthony-trade-eddy-curry-anthony-randolph-minnesota-timberwolves

PacersPride
02-21-2011, 11:01 PM
i read elsewhere the nets would be interested in granger. what would they have to offer to make that happen?

im guessing a very similar to the melo package?

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 11:01 PM
You really have to feel for Donnie though.... Donnie gave Isiah his chance and Isiah is now trying to get rid of Donnie and undermining him. What an incredibly unthankful douchebag.

Zeke doesnt even work for th Knicks. He is a D1 collge basketball coach :laugh:. If I was the AD at that school I wuld fire him.

BornReady
02-21-2011, 11:02 PM
Anyone else feel like the Knicks aren't done making trades?

Heisenberg
02-21-2011, 11:03 PM
i read elsewhere the nets would be interested in granger. what would they have to offer to make that happen?

im guessing a very similar to the melo package?
Favors + Vujajic + 1st. Anything less and no thanks.

vnzla81
02-21-2011, 11:04 PM
Anyone else feel like the Knicks aren't done making trades?

They don't have anything else to offer, I think they are done.

idioteque
02-21-2011, 11:04 PM
i read elsewhere the nets would be interested in granger. what would they have to offer to make that happen?

im guessing a very similar to the melo package?

There is no offer they could possibly make. They don't have an elite SG and Favors has done nothing this year. Lopez is not a big need since we have Hibbert, and Harris is not a team first PG so I'd rather have Collison.

Trophy
02-21-2011, 11:06 PM
Anyone else feel like the Knicks aren't done making trades?

They have a few decent unused players that they probably want to look to get rid of for pick(s).

Andy Rautins, Kelenna Azubuike (good player before injury), Roger Mason, Bill Walker.

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 11:06 PM
Favors + Vujajic + 1st. Anything less and no thanks.

How bout 1 or 2 more first's also. I dont think Larry will do it unless the deal is really good. Trading Danny would pretty much take us out of the playoffs. But Im not opposed to us doing a deal like this and rebuliding the right way.

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 11:08 PM
MrMichaelLee Michael Lee
by MikeWellsNBA
Not hating on Melo. I know he's happy & didn't leave DEN high & dry. Concerned about NBA's overall health/competitive balance. Becoming MLB

I agree getting tierd of players pushing there way out

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 11:10 PM
http://nba.fanhouse.com/2011/02/21/report-carmelo-anthony-finally-traded-to-the-knicks/

Sounds like the AR trade wll be a seprate trade

PacersPride
02-21-2011, 11:10 PM
I agree getting tierd of players pushing there way out

good thing the new cba is around the corner. something needs to be done to keep some level of parity.

Trophy
02-21-2011, 11:11 PM
Maybe George Karl is gonna step down in a few days.

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 11:12 PM
good thing the new cba is around the corner. something needs to be done to keep some level of parity.

I dont know if Stern really wants it to change. He seems to like the superteams. Hopefully the owners of small market teams get thier vocies and ideas heard, and changes will be made.

d_c
02-21-2011, 11:13 PM
NY probably doesn't have the depth right now to be serious contenders, but in a year they're going to have the room to add Chris Paul or Deron Williams.

They'll have the cap space along with the desirability of already having two all-star for Paul/Williams to pass to.

PacersPride
02-21-2011, 11:15 PM
I dont know if Stern really wants it to change. He seems to like the superteams. Hopefully the owners of small market teams get thier vocies and ideas heard, and changes will be made.

stern seems like a douchebag. your probably right, the nba is loving the idea of ny, miami, la, boston finals ratings.

its gonna suck being a small market team if something isnt done.

HickeyS2000
02-21-2011, 11:16 PM
good thing the new cba is around the corner. something needs to be done to keep some level of parity.

I'm not sure a new CBA can undo the damage that teams like MIA and NYK have already done. And honestly, it's not in the best interest of the league to do so. This buzz in New York will increase interest in the league and is probably just going to make things worse for the future. At this point the only thing that can fix the league is getting rid of Stern, which won't happen before the new CBA. The league is on the edge of losing millions of fans from small markets, but does not care because of the growing interest from the larger markets. What a shame.

Peck
02-21-2011, 11:18 PM
Congrats to Anthony for being able to impose his will and force the team to trade him to the only team he wanted to be traded to. (sarcasm btw)

My only hope is that Paul George breaks open like Kevin Durrant and Lance becomes Dway Wade, even then though we now all have to worry about them forcing their way onto teams they want as well.

I feel just absolutely sorry for fans of the Denver Nuggets, they do NOT deserve this.

vnzla81
02-21-2011, 11:18 PM
So the starting team for Denver is going to look like this: Lawson,JR,Gallo,KM and Nene, no that bad.

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 11:20 PM
stern seems like a douchebag. your probably right, the nba is loving the idea of ny, miami, la, boston finals ratings.

its gonna suck being a small market team if something isnt done.

It isnt he is a D bag but that is what makes the league the most money. Look back at the 90s and 80s. There were about 6 good teams and the rest had no chance to win. But they were making tons of money beacuse of thoes super teams. Like The 90s bulls 80s Celtics and 2000s Lakers.

vnzla81
02-21-2011, 11:21 PM
Melo could have been a dick and pull a Lebron in the off season, he did Denver a favor by letting them know what he wanted to do.

Dr. house
02-21-2011, 11:22 PM
my question is how in the world was this whole thing not tampering at all?

Sookie
02-21-2011, 11:22 PM
I've got no problem with what Melo did.

He was going to be a free agent, and could have gone where ever he wanted. He gave his team a heads up, and allowed them to try and make a trade for him. It must suck to be Denver fans, but Melo didn't leave his team high and dry.

Heisenberg
02-21-2011, 11:23 PM
All things considered, Denver did pretty damn well for themselves. They actually have young pieces to show for their superstar leaving. I know it's an entirely different situation (read: Melo let them know) but Cleveland's gotta be jealous.

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 11:23 PM
Corey Brewer going to the Knicks, I dont think the Twolves gave up a 1st rd pick ethier.

xBulletproof
02-21-2011, 11:23 PM
NY probably doesn't have the depth right now to be serious contenders, but in a year they're going to have the room to add Chris Paul or Deron Williams.

They'll have the cap space along with the desirability of already having two all-star for Paul/Williams to pass to.

I doubt have the cap space at all. In that year, Amare and Carmelo alone will total 40 million if I am correct on Carmelo's salary that year, it may be more. If I recall correctly the number for him in that year will be 21 million. Amare will be 20 million. Also in two years I'm sure they'll have more on the books than the 43 million they only have now between Carmelo, Amare and Toney Douglas.

LA_Confidential
02-21-2011, 11:24 PM
Corey Brewer goes to the Knicks per Chris Broussard on Sportscenter right now.

Edit: pacer4ever posted first.

PacersPride
02-21-2011, 11:26 PM
It isnt he is a D bag but that is what makes the league the most money. Look back at the 90s and 80s. There were about 6 good teams and the rest had no chance to win. But they were making tons of money beacuse of thoes super teams. Like The 90s bulls 80s Celtics and 2000s Lakers.

well i think the guy is a straight douche for suspending artest for an entire season.. so ya stern can get bent.

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 11:27 PM
SpearsNBAYahoo Marc J. Spears
Quietly, new NYK G Chauncey Billups got paid as he is expected to get $14 million salary '11-'12 and won't be bought out, source tells Y!.

pacergod2
02-21-2011, 11:27 PM
The Knicks kept Fields, which I find interesting. I agree with Denver that I would have chosen Gallo over Fields, but I think Fields fits next to Melo and Amare well. He is a facilitator and plays good defense. He is very much a glue guy.

They will need a backup PG. Walsh, c'mon buddy. Give up anything for Ford and/or Dunleavy.

New York
PG - Billups, Douglas, Routins, Carter
SG - Fields, Brewer, Azuibuke, Mason
SF - Carmelo, Balkman, Walker
PF - Amare, Shawne Williams
C - Turiaf, Sheldon Williams

Denver
PG - Lawson, Felton
SG - Afflalo, Smith
SF - Chandler, Gallinari, Forbes
PF - Martin, Harrington, Ely
C - Nene, Anderson, Mozgov

This is a great trade foir Denver. I don't think they will end up as good of a team, but consiudering the circumstances, they really got some pieces they can build around. I doubt they resign JR Smith and it fills the wing rotation with some very good young players. Gallo, Chandler and Afflalo is a nice rotation. Harrington can score. Nene and Anderson are very good front court players. I think if they do keep Mozgov, they could move Nene to PF and start Anderson if they don't resign Martin. They get three good picks, but not great, which is about what the Nets were giving up since three of their picks were from other teams. I think Denver ought to take a big and backup PG in this year's draft. They also did a good job of clearing salary, which will save them millions going into next year. They are seven games above .500 and have an opportunity to be a low seed, which gives them an opportunity who they want to keep long-term. I really like what the Nuggets have done to set themselves up going forward. Talk about making the most of a bad situation. I give Ujiri two thumbs up. Not because they got better, but because it could have been SOOOOO much worse for the Nuggets and it wasn't.

pacer4ever
02-21-2011, 11:29 PM
well i think the guy is a straight douche for suspending artest for an entire season.. so ya stern can get bent.

Ya Ben Wallace barley got jack and all the Pacers got a ton of games.

PacersPride
02-21-2011, 11:29 PM
I've got no problem with what Melo did.

He was going to be a free agent, and could have gone where ever he wanted. He gave his team a heads up, and allowed them to try and make a trade for him. It must suck to be Denver fans, but Melo didn't leave his team high and dry.

melo was only out for himself, prob cared less what happened to denver.. he simply rejected a 3 year 65million dollar contract.. and his intentions were known then.

Trophy
02-21-2011, 11:30 PM
The Knicks kept Fields, which I find interesting. I agree with Denver that I would have chosen Gallo over Fields, but I think Fields fits next to Melo and Amare well. He is a facilitator and plays good defense. He is very much a glue guy.

They will need a backup PG. Walsh, c'mon buddy. Give up anything for Ford and/or Dunleavy.

New York
PG - Billups, Douglas, Routins, Carter
SG - Fields, Azuibuke, Mason
SF - Carmelo, Balkman, Walker
PF - Amare, Shawne Williams
C - Turiaf, Sheldon Williams

Denver
PG - Lawson, Felton
SG - Afflalo, Smith
SF - Chandler, Gallinari, Forbes
PF - Martin, Harrington, Ely
C - Nene, Anderson, Mozgov

This is a great trade foir Denver. I don't think they will end up as good of a team, but consiudering the circumstances, they really got some pieces they can build around. I doubt they resign JR Smith and it fills the wing rotation with some very good young players. Gallo, Chandler and Afflalo is a nice rotation. Harrington can score. Nene and Anderson are very good front court players. I think if they do keep Mozgov, they could move Nene to PF and start Anderson if they don't resign Martin. They get three good picks, but not great, which is about what the Nets were giving up since three of their picks were from other teams. I think Denver ought to take a big and backup PG in this year's draft. They also did a good job of clearing salary, which will save them millions going into next year. They are seven games above .500 and have an opportunity to be a low seed, which gives them an opportunity who they want to keep long-term. I really like what the Nuggets have done to set themselves up going forward. Talk about making the most of a bad situation. I give Ujiri two thumbs up. Not because they got better, but because it could have been SOOOOO much worse for the Nuggets and it wasn't.

I like some of the unused pieces they have.

They can probably use some more depth at SG if they still don't want to use Andy Rautins, Roger Mason, or Bill Walker.

cdash
02-21-2011, 11:33 PM
Knicks are going to end up doing what Miami and Boston did: Getting their pick of the veterans who get bought out by their teams in time for a playoff run or a title run. If TJ Ford gets bought out, the bet here is that he winds up in either New York or Miami.

beast23
02-21-2011, 11:33 PM
Truth is, you give another team as many prospects and fringe starters as they want for a proven superstar. The team that gets the superstar always wins the trade.Not always true at all. And in this case, totally wrong.

Without a trade, Denver was going to lose Anthony this summer anyway. A superstar would walk away without getting ANYTHING in return.

Due to the idiocy of Dolan and Thomas, NY just stripped their team of young talent and provided Denver with a lot of assets that they wouldn't have had if NY had waited to sign Anthony as a FA. And, Denver was also able to shed almost 19M in salary while picking up an additional 1st round pick.

You can say that NY won all you want. But NY didn't get as good a deal as they could have if they had only been patient. And Denver, they hardly lost; they got a hell of a lot more than they would have if NY had waited.

The good thing about all of this to me is that NY now has one of the weakest benches in the league... and more importantly, it appears they have Thomas.

Good luck with all of that, NY. Personally, I think you're effed.

PacersPride
02-21-2011, 11:34 PM
now the nba can move on and start generating some trades..

posey is on the block!!

Heisenberg
02-21-2011, 11:35 PM
I think people are really blowing NY's lack of depth out of proportion. It's clearly a problem right now, but does anyone think if they don't win a title this season then the whole deal's a failure? They're going to have their pick of the litter of solid veteran roleplayers willing to ring chase on below market salaries.

Sandman21
02-21-2011, 11:36 PM
If I were Walsh, I'd tell Dolan to stick it and walk.


Zeke doesnt even work for th Knicks. He is a D1 collge basketball coach :laugh:. If I was the AD at that school I wuld fire him.
Wasn't a there a rule issue about him taking the consultant gig to begin with? How what he's doing to Walsh even allowable?

beast23
02-21-2011, 11:41 PM
NY probably doesn't have the depth right now to be serious contenders, but in a year they're going to have the room to add Chris Paul or Deron Williams.

They'll have the cap space along with the desirability of already having two all-star for Paul/Williams to pass to.Under a new CBA, the cap limit is almost certain to be decreased.... by a pretty big amount. And, if they adopt a hard cap limit or a franchise tag (enabling Paul to be retained by his present team), NY is pretty much screwed.

Peck
02-21-2011, 11:42 PM
Not always true at all. And in this case, totally wrong.

Without a trade, Denver was going to lose Anthony this summer anyway. A superstar would walk away without getting ANYTHING in return.

Due to the idiocy of Dolan and Thomas, NY just stripped their team of young talent and provided Denver with a lot of assets that they wouldn't have had if NY had waited to sign Anthony as a FA. And, Denver was also able to shed almost 19M in salary while picking up an additional 1st round pick.

You can say that NY won all you want. But NY didn't get as good a deal as they could have if they had only been patient. And Denver, they hardly lost; they got a hell of a lot more than they would have if NY had waited.

The good thing about all of this to me is that NY now has one of the weakest benches in the league... and more importantly, it appears they have Thomas.

Good luck with all of that, NY. Personally, I think you're effed.

At the end of the day Denver only got by, period. There is no winning here.

Through no fault of their own or choice of their own they are now on a path of rebuilding and hoping and praying to find a superstar only to hope and pray more that the star doesn't decide to up and leave.

I'm not faulting Mello either as I understand the free agent game and all but as the kids say "don't hate the player, hate the game", well I hate the game.

PacersPride
02-21-2011, 11:45 PM
I'm not faulting Mello either as I understand the free agent game and all but as the kids say "don't hate the player, hate the game", well I hate the game.

true.. if ever that adage applied it is now.

idioteque
02-21-2011, 11:51 PM
At the end of the day Denver only got by, period. There is no winning here.

Through no fault of their own or choice of their own they are now on a path of rebuilding and hoping and praying to find a superstar only to hope and pray more that the star doesn't decide to up and leave.

I'm not faulting Mello either as I understand the free agent game and all but as the kids say "don't hate the player, hate the game", well I hate the game.

This. Denver is at best a fringe playoff team now. In two or three years the Knicks will be title contenders. Denver will never ever sign a superstar and will have to to hope for luck in the draft just like 26 other teams, and even then they've probably only got that star for 7 or so years and the most so they better get assets quickly, but even then, they key reserves aren't going to want to go to your city even if you have a superstar since they can play with a superstar on one of the super teams.

CableKC
02-21-2011, 11:53 PM
Only a NY Knicks Team influenced and advised by Zeke would make a deal like this. And I'm sure their fan base is thrilled right now. I'm thrilled too because I think this increases our odds of getting the 6th spot.
Fixed.

beast23
02-21-2011, 11:54 PM
I've got no problem with what Melo did.

He was going to be a free agent, and could have gone where ever he wanted. He gave his team a heads up, and allowed them to try and make a trade for him. It must suck to be Denver fans, but Melo didn't leave his team high and dry.Well... there is more to this than just what you say.

Anthony would have been looking at being acquired by NY under a new CBA. They were scheduled to have about 42M or so in salaries already, with only about 10 players under contract. Considering that the new CBA will almost certainly have a much lower salary cap, Anthony would have been signing with NY as a FA under a pretty small contract. If the new CBA has a 50M cap, then Anthony would have been making around 8M, unless NY could have shed a few of its current players without taking any salary back.

So, let's call it like it is. Anthony didn't give a xxxx about Denver, he was merely looking out for #1.

I imagine that NY somehow would have gotten him, but I would have found it pretty interesting to see NY jump through hoops to accommodate Anthony's salary desires.

I personally think Denver played it pretty smart. Made NY sweat and other than maybe an additonal draft pick, probably got the best they could.

pacergod2
02-21-2011, 11:55 PM
If I am in the East, I am building a team around great front court and PG play. Wings can be had, but if there is a weakness to these new big teams, it is their front court. I like Boston and Orlando a lot still (Van Gundy needs to figure out how to utilize Arenas though).

CableKC
02-21-2011, 11:57 PM
Anyone else feel like the Knicks aren't done making trades?
What assets do they have left that they can trade?

vnzla81
02-21-2011, 11:59 PM
If I am in the East, I am building a team around great front court and PG play. Wings can be had, but if there is a weakness to these new big teams, it is their front court. I like Boston and Orlando a lot still (Van Gundy needs to figure out how to utilize Arenas though).

This is the reason why I keep hoping that the Pacers get Nene, we could have a huge front court with him and Hibbert.

idioteque
02-22-2011, 12:00 AM
If I am in the East, I am building a team around great front court and PG play. Wings can be had, but if there is a weakness to these new big teams, it is their front court. I like Boston and Orlando a lot still (Van Gundy needs to figure out how to utilize Arenas though).

Good points here. Our front court has basically manhandled Miami and its really a slightly better than average front court at best. I like the talent we have right now, especially considering George and Collison will likely continue to improve.

Boston has a really good front court and Pierce is an elite enough wing in the playoffs and they've got a great point guard in Rondo, which is why they will again win the title this year.

CircleCity3318
02-22-2011, 12:02 AM
They gave up Felton, a young player who's rising for Billups, an aging PG and in no way an All-Star anymore.

They need reserves.

Billups is just a stop gap at pg until they get deron Williams or cp3. And a pretty darn good stop gap at that.

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 12:03 AM
Does anybody here think that the Pacers could go for Felton? He was close to be an all star this year.

CableKC
02-22-2011, 12:05 AM
I think people are really blowing NY's lack of depth out of proportion. It's clearly a problem right now, but does anyone think if they don't win a title this season then the whole deal's a failure? They're going to have their pick of the litter of solid veteran roleplayers willing to ring chase on below market salaries.
Yeah....but remember that they will also have the choice to go to the Celtics, Heat and even the Lakers.

croz24
02-22-2011, 12:08 AM
well, hopefully this means the nets overpay for granger

Larry Staverman
02-22-2011, 12:14 AM
WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski

Walsh believed the Knicks could adhere to those principles, and still get 'Melo. All that went out the window, with Isiah/CAA pushing Dolan.

Zeke 1 D. Walsh 0

This could get interesting in a way not so good for the Knickles

Got my popcorn and drinks and am going to sit back and enjoy the spectacle

Hey Donnie remember what Bobby Knight says " if rape is inevitable it's best to try and and enjoy it"

graphic-er
02-22-2011, 12:15 AM
well, hopefully this means the nets overpay for granger

Dude we are not trading Danny Granger, who on that Nets team do the Pacers even want? Nobody!

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 12:15 AM
If I was the Pacers I would try to get Nene and Felton, I don't care if we have to trade DC and anybody else but Danny,Roy and PG.

Felton,PG,Danny,Nene and Hibbert? :drool:

croz24
02-22-2011, 12:19 AM
Dude we are not trading Danny Granger, who on that Nets team do the Pacers even want? Nobody!

the nets have favors and 1st round picks...and as you just saw with this knicks trade and as you've seen before with the celtics acquiring garnett, rondo, and allen, or the lakers acquiring gasol, young talent and draft picks is how you win championships. not vets who struggle to dribble without turning the ball over.

Sookie
02-22-2011, 12:21 AM
If I was the Pacers I would try to get Nene and Felton, I don't care if we have to trade DC and anybody else but Danny,Roy and PG.

Felton,PG,Danny,Nene and Hibbert? :drool:

Be careful about Felton. If Obie is PG hell, Dantonie is PG heaven.

Yes, he looked like an All star PG in Dantonie's system..but name the last PG that didn't. (Okay, Duhon didn't, but Duhon looked a lot better than he actually is.)

Felton averaged 12 points, 5.6 assists, and 2.1 turnovers last year. Darren's averaging 13 points, 5.1 assists, and 2.5 turnovers this year, in his second season.

LA_Confidential
02-22-2011, 12:23 AM
Im happy for the Knicks. They got their man. Their lack of depth is over blown. They didnt have depth before the trade. If the Knicks had Melo, Billups, Corey Brewer etc at the beginning of the year they would have a better record.

Melo/Brewer>>>>Chandler/Gallo
Billups>> Felton
Mozgov/Randolph werent even in the rotation.
They keep Fields too.

The only thing the Knicks lose is continuity. Huge win for the Knicks.

Now Lets make sure we kick their A$$e$!

Sookie
02-22-2011, 12:25 AM
Obviously not real, but for anyone who hasn't seen this, it's hilarious

http://twitter.com/Coach_D_Antoni

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 12:28 AM
Be careful about Felton. If Obie is PG hell, Dantonie is PG heaven.

Yes, he looked like an All star PG in Dantonie's system..but name the last PG that didn't. (Okay, Duhon didn't, but Duhon looked a lot better than he actually is.)

Felton averaged 12 points, 5.6 assists, and 2.1 turnovers last year. Darren's averaging 13 points, 5.1 assists, and 2.5 turnovers this year, in his second season.

Felton is a great defender also. Collison's is rather poor. just my :twocents:

graphic-er
02-22-2011, 12:30 AM
the nets have favors and 1st round picks...and as you just saw with this knicks trade and as you've seen before with the celtics acquiring garnett, rondo, and allen, or the lakers acquiring gasol, young talent and draft picks is how you win championships. not vets who struggle to dribble without turning the ball over.
Some would say we already have young talent at every position on the floor. Why do we need to trade away our best player for some scrubs and a draft pick from one of the worst teams in the league, and they've been one of the worst teams for like 3-4 years now. You don't get much better swapping talent with the worst team in the league. We need to add a couple of solid veterans who are not over the hill.

cdash
02-22-2011, 12:30 AM
Felton is a great defender also. Collison's is rather poor.

Good defender, perhaps, but not great. He's above average and better than DC for sure.

I'd rather have DC than Felton. Just my preference.

PacersPride
02-22-2011, 12:32 AM
Felton is a great defender also. Collison's is rather poor.

when he wants to be.. i dont remember anyone saying felton was an excellent defender for the bobcats, or he woulda got paid more.

DC is below average not poor, but much younger as well.

Sookie
02-22-2011, 12:33 AM
when he wants to be.. i dont remember anyone saying felton was an excellent defender, or he woulda got paid more.

DC is below average not poor, but much younger as well.

No, DC's poor.

But DC tries all the time, that's got to count for something. :laugh:

I'd rather have DC too.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 12:34 AM
Dude we are not trading Danny Granger, who on that Nets team do the Pacers even want? Nobody!

see BBJ and cdash I am not the only one who talks like they know what they are talking about or a gm . It is part of a message board to talk this way. Have an take and tell why you view the siuation that way.

PacersPride
02-22-2011, 12:36 AM
anyone think the knicks go after some vets now with their cap space? would like to move ford/poseys contracts if possible.

i know its not likely but if the knicks are gonna make a run at it i can see them taking any talent that can acqure and ford would fit

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 12:37 AM
I think Felton is a better floor genral. I would take ethier one if I had the chocie I would proably take DC.

croz24
02-22-2011, 12:37 AM
Some would say we already have young talent at every position on the floor. Why do we need to trade away our best player for some scrubs and a draft pick from one of the worst teams in the league, and they've been one of the worst teams for like 3-4 years now. You don't get much better swapping talent with the worst team in the league. We need to add a couple of solid veterans who are not over the hill.

you're right. i'd never want to trade for players like love, griffin, gordon, wall, or even a seattle supersonics durant. must be crap talents since they were on bad teams. granger is not that valuable of an asset to our team. even during our win streak, with exception to the bucks game, granger hardly contributed to our wins. he plays zero defense, cannot create for himself or others, and lacks the leadership skills necessary to take turn this team into a contender. i think it's already clear a 20 year old possesses more skill and passion than he does. we held on to jo 3 years too long and i'd hate to see us do the same with granger. we need to deal him before his value diminishes even further.

cdash
02-22-2011, 12:39 AM
see BBJ and cdash I am not the only one who talks like they know what they are talking about or a gm . It is part of a message board to talk this way. Have an take and tell why you view the siuation that way.

Let it go man. I'm not even the one who originally said it, I just agreed with it, as did a few others.

PR07
02-22-2011, 12:46 AM
I'm just glad it's over.

PacersPride
02-22-2011, 12:51 AM
No, DC's poor.

But DC tries all the time, that's got to count for something. :laugh:

I'd rather have DC too.

i guess if were speaking currently.. maybe he could be considered poor, but with DC's quickness he will become a better defender.

as better talent is assembled around him, maybe just adding Rush or George to the starting lineup that would help.

not gonna label DC as a poor defender or possessing low bball iq until the kid has a chance to get into a consistent setting, comfortable with players and fully integrated into a sound defensive & offensive philosophy.

as you eluded to.. DC has a work ethic and loves the game of basketball, he may never be john stockton but i think he has a chance to be one of the best point gaurds to ever play for the pacers. DC pretty darn good on the offensive end and will improve with additional experience.

QuickRelease
02-22-2011, 01:08 AM
you're right. i'd never want to trade for players like love, griffin, gordon, wall, or even a seattle supersonics durant. must be crap talents since they were on bad teams. granger is not that valuable of an asset to our team. even during our win streak, with exception to the bucks game, granger hardly contributed to our wins. he plays zero defense, cannot create for himself or others, and lacks the leadership skills necessary to take turn this team into a contender. i think it's already clear a 20 year old possesses more skill and passion than he does. we held on to jo 3 years too long and i'd hate to see us do the same with granger. we need to deal him before his value diminishes even further.:blahblah::rollout: C'mon Croz...you back on the anti-Danny campaign again?

gummy
02-22-2011, 01:23 AM
If this article is to be believed, it was now or never for the Knicks because Melo's first priority was securing his $$ before the new CBA:

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/columns/story?columnist=oconnor_ian&id=6146150

"As much as the Brooklyn-born forward burned to play for the hometown team, he wasn't about to risk his $65 million payday to do it. Anthony wanted his money, even if he had to take it from the Nuggets or the New Jersey Nets (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=njn)."

"The Knicks knew if they didn't get Carmelo at the trade deadline," said one source close to the negotiations, "they were never going to get him."

xBulletproof
02-22-2011, 01:39 AM
If this article is to be believed, it was now or never for the Knicks because Melo's first priority was securing his $$ before the new CBA:

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/columns/story?columnist=oconnor_ian&id=6146150

"As much as the Brooklyn-born forward burned to play for the hometown team, he wasn't about to risk his $65 million payday to do it. Anthony wanted his money, even if he had to take it from the Nuggets or the New Jersey Nets (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=njn)."

"The Knicks knew if they didn't get Carmelo at the trade deadline," said one source close to the negotiations, "they were never going to get him."

It's the same reason Carmelo didn't hold all the cards. Some people acted like I was crazy when I said Denver had plenty of leverage in this situation, but I was right. I believe if Carmelo didn't get traded he was still going to sign the extension with Denver. Nobody wants to risk giving away $50,000,000 with nothing to gain from doing so. However if you're Denver you're still risking keeping a malcontent around, which isn't good in the long run, but it would be better than losing Carmelo for nothing.

imbtyler
02-22-2011, 02:08 AM
aww, Chauncey's involved, he didn't want to go..

You and I might be the only two who care...

michealwilliams4
02-22-2011, 02:10 AM
you're right. i'd never want to trade for players like love, griffin, gordon, wall, or even a seattle supersonics durant. must be crap talents since they were on bad teams. granger is not that valuable of an asset to our team. even during our win streak, with exception to the bucks game, granger hardly contributed to our wins. he plays zero defense, cannot create for himself or others, and lacks the leadership skills necessary to take turn this team into a contender. i think it's already clear a 20 year old possesses more skill and passion than he does. we held on to jo 3 years too long and i'd hate to see us do the same with granger. we need to deal him before his value diminishes even further.

Come on...I can tell you're more anti-Danny than most people (if not all people here), but no one on the Nets is anywhere near those players you mentioned. The Nets can't possibly overpay for Danny without getting a third team involved because no one on that team is worth trading for, not even Favors. They're all awful. Even their best players don't have a place here. It only makes the Pacers worse making a deal with them. Granger's trade value can't diminish that much. Not even O'Neal's did.

Merz
02-22-2011, 02:24 AM
the nets have favors and 1st round picks...and as you just saw with this knicks trade and as you've seen before with the celtics acquiring garnett, rondo, and allen, or the lakers acquiring gasol, young talent and draft picks is how you win championships. not vets who struggle to dribble without turning the ball over.

I'm sorry but not much you said here makes any sense. We have NOT seen the Knicks winning a championship with this trade and the Celtics acquired Garnett and Allen WITH the 1st rounder and young talent and the Lakers acquired Gasol with what at the time was pretty much nothing (and still is -M. Gasol).

So your idea is backwards of what your examples did.

Cactus Jax
02-22-2011, 02:36 AM
The Pacers should try and trade any expiring cept Foster to try and get Nene from the Nuggets, might have to give up McRoberts or Hans though to do so.

cdash
02-22-2011, 02:41 AM
The Pacers should try and trade any expiring cept Foster to try and get Nene from the Nuggets, might have to give up McRoberts or Hans though to do so.

Bet they'd want an expiring, a first round pick, and a young player (probably ask for George, get rebuffed, and settle for Hansbrough, Rush, or Price).

daschysta
02-22-2011, 02:41 AM
the nets have favors and 1st round picks...and as you just saw with this knicks trade and as you've seen before with the celtics acquiring garnett, rondo, and allen, or the lakers acquiring gasol, young talent and draft picks is how you win championships. not vets who struggle to dribble without turning the ball over.

Young talent and draft picks is how you win championships?

The celtics benifited from former players that still were sympathetic to the boston team. They milked their alma meter for less value than they typically would have gotten.

Memphis is one of the most mismanaged franchises in sports, and were robbed of gasol.

Not to mention both of the teams you mentioned are major markets that players attempt to find their way into... Indianapolis? Not so much.

Danny would be one of the best second options in the entire league, most of the NBA and this board feel like we got what should have been a top 5 pick in paul george. Roy hibbert is essentially also playing like a top 5 or ten draft pick. Darren collison was all-rookie first team last year...

we HAVE young talent, the way to win isn't trading away every solid vet you have just to get younger and younger in a crapshoot.

You simply have some intense personal dislike of granger. I would estimate that almost half of your entire posting history is nothing but granger criticism, regardless of how well he's playing.

He is our first option out of neccesity, and isn't payed like a superstar, he's stuck with us through the hard times, and now we finally have a few players that could supplant him as the number one.

Does that mean we have to trade him? NO!!

It just means that we'll be much better in the end.

ZepZach
02-22-2011, 03:06 AM
Ugh, we have to play NY three more times.

Psyren
02-22-2011, 03:08 AM
Ugh, we have to play NY three more times.

Bring it.

2 Stars that play no defense, an old point guard who doesn't want to even be there (so it seems), and a bunch of scrubs who are even worse than those in Miami.

Let's do it :devil:

Heisenberg
02-22-2011, 03:10 AM
The NBA's got until the next CBA to either give a fan of a team that isn't from a city of a billion+ or a vacation spot reason to watch or starting ringing their death knell.

I really think the next CBA is that important, the survival of the small market NBA depends on it. The only other way to fix it is to somehow change the priorities and values of a lot of the "superstars" and make them value loyalty and responsibility over flat out attention and good luck with that.

I'm just becoming really, really, disillusioned.

And if anyone wants to say it, spare me the "but it's fun to watch a handful of superteams battle to the death!" No it's not, at all.

daschysta
02-22-2011, 03:15 AM
The NBA has always been like this though. Teams in the 80's were more stacked than the most stacked teams in the league today...

The pacers have competed without having trascendent superstars before too.

Not to mention the fact that Melo got pretty decent return, and melo played ball in Syracuse and is from new york, it isn't a suprise that he'd want to play there.

Psyren
02-22-2011, 03:15 AM
The NBA's got until the next CBA to either give a fan of a team that isn't from a city of a billion+ or a vacation spot reason to watch or starting ringing their death knell.

I really think the next CBA is that important, the survival of the small market NBA depends on it. The only other way to fix it is to somehow change the priorities and values of a lot of the "superstars" and make them value loyalty and responsibility over flat out attention and good luck with that.

I'm just becoming really, really, disillusioned.

And if anyone wants to say it, spare me the "but it's fun to watch a handful of superteams battle to the death!" No it's not, at all.

Could not possibly agree more with that statement.

The NBA has to give small market fans a reason to watch again. I understand it's a player's choice, but it's getting to the point that it's just not fun anymore.

Especially under the assumption NY ends up with D-Will or CP3. That's just not fun for everyone besides the Heat/Celtics/Knicks, at least in the East.

The only team I respect that is a great team, IMO, is the Bulls. Yes, they got Boozer but Rose was their pick. They're doing it the right way, and they're a really good team.

Bulls :angel:

Heat/Knicks/Celtics :devil:

Heisenberg
02-22-2011, 03:19 AM
The NBA has always been like this though. Teams in the 80's were more stacked than the most stacked teams in the league today...

The pacers have competed without having trascendent superstars before too.

Not to mention the fact that Melo got pretty decent return, and melo played ball in Syracuse and is from new york, it isn't a suprise that he'd want to play there.
The stacked 80s teams didn't get stacked by players leaving their previous team in the middle of their prime because they couldn't get them a ring before they turned 26 friggin years old.

croz24
02-22-2011, 03:21 AM
I'm sorry but not much you said here makes any sense. We have NOT seen the Knicks winning a championship with this trade and the Celtics acquired Garnett and Allen WITH the 1st rounder and young talent and the Lakers acquired Gasol with what at the time was pretty much nothing (and still is -M. Gasol).

So your idea is backwards of what your examples did.

no, what was said makes perfect sense. without the young talent and 1st round picks, those teams would not have been able to trade for stated players. by acquiring 1sts and last year's #3 overall pick to go with the youth currently on the roster, the pacers are in a position to make their own trade for an all-nba level talent.

Merz
02-22-2011, 03:37 AM
no, what was said makes perfect sense. without the young talent and 1st round picks, those teams would not have been able to trade for stated players. by acquiring 1sts and last year's #3 overall pick to go with the youth currently on the roster, the pacers are in a position to make their own trade for an all-nba level talent.

So...the Pacers can just go in circles? Trade the player, that can get some young talent, away for young talent then trade said young talent for the NBA's version of Granger in 2014. Good luck with that.

You seem to forget that Boston actually held on to their "Granger" (though a better one). Pierce wasn't this big winner before Garnett and Allen came along. Just like Pierce, Granger's game would become much more efficient with two number one options along with him.

They could always sign your favorite player from the '08 draft...Joe Alexander ;)

Taterhead
02-22-2011, 03:49 AM
People are missing the big picture. Carmelo brings star power to the franchise, and tons of exposure. He will energize that huge fan base and more players will flock to NY. They will find plenty of players to play defense. And when either Deron Williams or Chris Paul joins them after next year they will be pretty darn tough, and for years to come. Plus now they are gonna be a pretty scary team in the playoffs.

This is the kind of trade we need to be making to get somebody that can energize this fan base, and we have the pieces to do it. We could of bettered that offer easily if Melo wanted to play here, IMO. I can't believe so many people just want to sit back and wait, especially when we actually have the pieces to make a move. Most of the time sitting on your hands will backfire. You can spend years waiting on pieces to develop and they never do. Then what? You are right back where you started. And you wasted years.

Our beloved team is stuck in a state of irrelevance. And it's sad to see that happen. I remember how great the city seemed back in the Pacers stretch of success in the mid 90's. I think people in this town just miss Reggie Miller. They need a new great player to capture the attention of the fans. Danny just isn't quite that type of guy. And we can't just sit around and wait on other people to live up to expectations either.

I think we need to try and pick 2-3 of these young guys that we think are cornerstones and put the rest out there and see what kind of deals are available. And with our expiring deals to add to the mix we should be in a position to have our choice of anybody who's out there on the market. And if nothing comes up, I wouldn't mind seeing an aggressive move in the draft.


So...the Pacers can just go in circles? Trade the player, that can get some young talent, away for young talent then trade said young talent for the NBA's version of Granger in 2014. Good luck with that.

You seem to forget that Boston actually held on to their "Granger" (though a better one). Pierce wasn't this big winner before Garnett and Allen came along. Just like Pierce, Granger's game would become much more efficient with two number one options along with him.

They could always sign your favorite player from the '08 draft...Joe Alexander ;)

Are you serious? Paul Pierce was always a big time player. You don't remember him killing the Pacers in the playoffs? Sure he's more successful with better players around him, that's not hard to figure out.

Granger is not anywhere near as good an offensive player as Pierce.

daschysta
02-22-2011, 03:52 AM
Key point is melo wanted to play nowhere but NY...

Those type of players where do you think they come from? Either the draft, free agency, or demanding a trade.

Two of those 3 leave us out of the picture, and the draft is a crapshoot.

Maybe paul becomes that player, but if you actually expect us to do what NY did... Well then you are just being unreasonable, because it isn't going to happen, even if we wanted to do such a thing.

Plus it's essentially impossible for Dwill or CP3 to join up with them, even if the cap remains untouched, if it's lowered in the next cba then it's literally impossible unless they take MAJOR paycuts to play on a gutted team, which isn't going to happen.

People don't miss reggie alone, they miss winning, which you don't need some egotistical glamorous superstar to do.

croz24
02-22-2011, 03:53 AM
Young talent and draft picks is how you win championships?

The celtics benifited from former players that still were sympathetic to the boston team. They milked their alma meter for less value than they typically would have gotten.

Memphis is one of the most mismanaged franchises in sports, and were robbed of gasol.

Not to mention both of the teams you mentioned are major markets that players attempt to find their way into... Indianapolis? Not so much.

Danny would be one of the best second options in the entire league, most of the NBA and this board feel like we got what should have been a top 5 pick in paul george. Roy hibbert is essentially also playing like a top 5 or ten draft pick. Darren collison was all-rookie first team last year...

we HAVE young talent, the way to win isn't trading away every solid vet you have just to get younger and younger in a crapshoot.

You simply have some intense personal dislike of granger. I would estimate that almost half of your entire posting history is nothing but granger criticism, regardless of how well he's playing.

He is our first option out of neccesity, and isn't payed like a superstar, he's stuck with us through the hard times, and now we finally have a few players that could supplant him as the number one.

Does that mean we have to trade him? NO!!

It just means that we'll be much better in the end.

you only remember me because of an opinion that differs from the norm. but who's to say you're right and i'm wrong? i have been attending pacers games since the 80s and have seen more than enough basketball to form an idea of what it takes to win a championship in this league. i do not personally dislike granger, and he is a decent player. but he is not a necessity to winning a title. guys like granger are the easiest to come by in the nba. the leauge has been littered small forwards of granger's caliber for many many years.

i'm sorry that i don't value a small forward shooting 42% from the floor who rarely plays d, can't dribble nor pass, must have the ball in his hands to even be seen moving on the offensive end, and shies away from any leadership responsibilities as much as the majority on here. but again, this is about winning titles. does getting younger guarantee a title? no. but acquiring youth and draft picks does put you in a better position for future success if you're a team mired in mediocrity for the last 7 years. it also puts the average age of the pacers core below 25yo.

as for the small market large market and draft picks not winning titles...chicago bulls drafted michael jordan #3 overall and used a draft day trade on pippen to win 6 titles. the rockets drafted hakeem #1 overall enabling them to win 2 titles. the spurs drafted duncan #1 overall, drafted parker and ginobili i believe in late 1st and 2nd round on their way to 4 titles. the lakers traded for kobe in a draft day trade, then used picks and youth to acquire pau. only the shaq signing here factored in to the large vs small market debate. the heat drafted wade #4. the 80s pistons drafted thomas #2 and dumars to win their 2 titles. bird #6. magic #1. non-title winners but leaders on contenders...howard #1. lebron #1. durant #2. yao pre injury #1. paul #3. melo #3. rose #1. so yea, young talent and draft picks is how you win championships, and rarely does big market vs small market ever play a factor. good management is the ultimate factor.

and you're right, we do have a lot of young talent. but danny granger is replaceable and does not provide the leadership this team needs. will a new leader emerge? maybe, but it does not help that the management has already designated danny our leader much like they did jo. neither are/were capable of fulfilling that label.

Merz
02-22-2011, 03:56 AM
People are missing the big picture. Carmelo brings star power to the franchise, and tons of exposure. He will energize that huge fan base and more players will flock to NY. They will find plenty of players to play defense. And when either Deron Williams or Chris Paul joins them after next year they will be pretty darn tough, and for years to come. Plus now they are gonna be a pretty scary team in the playoffs.

This is the kind of trade we need to be making to get somebody that can energize this fan base, and we have the pieces to do it. We could of bettered that offer easily if Melo wanted to play here, IMO. I can't believe so many people just want to sit back and wait, especially when we actually have the pieces to make a move. Most of the time sitting on your hands will backfire. You can spend years waiting on pieces to develop and they never do. Then what? You are right back where you started. And you wasted years.

Our beloved team is stuck in a state of irrelevance. And it's sad to see that happen. I remember how great the city seemed back in the Pacers stretch of success in the mid 90's. I think people in this town just miss Reggie Miller. They need a new great player to capture the attention of the fans. Danny just isn't quite that type of guy. And we can't just sit around and wait on other people to live up to expectations either.

I think we need to try and pick 2-3 of these young guys that we think are cornerstones and put the rest out there and see what kind of deals are available. And with our expiring deals to add to the mix we should be in a position to have our choice of anybody who's out there on the market. And if nothing comes up, I wouldn't mind seeing an aggressive move in the draft.

It's not that I don't necessarily agree with the thought I just don't think there is any of those players that the Pacers can get with what they have. Even if the Pacers could throw all their pieces at a team to get a star how would they get the second one? This isn't the type of market to pull in someone else.

All the Pacers can really do is try to build a solid TEAM that relies on excellent role players and depth. Hopefully one of their young players can develop into that star, but in the past they were able to compete without any true stars so hopefully it can happen again.

Indiana is just not the place that can build a team like New York or Miami.

dgranger17
02-22-2011, 03:57 AM
I've got no problem with what Melo did.

He was going to be a free agent, and could have gone where ever he wanted. He gave his team a heads up, and allowed them to try and make a trade for him. It must suck to be Denver fans, but Melo didn't leave his team high and dry.

Yea he gave Denver a heads up, but he said he'd only sign with one team and that's New York. So Denver only had one real option, they just got lucky Dolan got involved. I've been a critic of Walsh these last few years because he's fallen off the map, but even a washed up decision maker knows to let Melo's contract expire and sign him to whatever the max deal is under the new CBA as opposed to giving up however many players to get him. Everybody knew if he wasn't traded to the Knicks, Carmelo would've signed in New York. Horrible trade if you ask me. Denver just didn't want to be like Toronto and Cleveland. Until an owner and/or GM steps up and tells a player like Carmelo that he's not getting traded (potentially costing himself millions and millions of dollars) then this will continue to happen. It's too bad. Carmelo used the Bosh and James situations as leverage and had the Denver franchise by the balls.

Luckily for Pacers fans, Larry knows better than to draft a$$ clowns like Melo, LeBron, and Bosh who will leave at the first sign/sight/or sniff of money.

C.R.E.A.M.

Coincidence that a New York based group would release that song?

Merz
02-22-2011, 03:59 AM
Are you serious? Paul Pierce was always a big time player. You don't remember him killing the Pacers in the playoffs? Sure he's more successful with better players around him, that's not hard to figure out.

Granger is not anywhere near as good an offensive player as Pierce.

That wasn't my point. My point was the Celtics did what they did without having to deal their best player away for young assets. In that way (being their best player) he was their "Granger".

Behold the power of quotation marks.

daschysta
02-22-2011, 03:59 AM
you only remember me because of an opinion that differs from the norm. but who's to say you're right and i'm wrong? i have been attending pacers games since the 80s and have seen more than enough basketball to form an idea of what it takes to win a championship in this league. i do not personally dislike granger, and he is a decent player. but he is not a necessity to winning a title. guys like granger are the easiest to come by in the nba. the leauge has been littered small forwards of granger's caliber for many many years.

i'm sorry that i don't value a small forward shooting 42% from the floor who rarely plays d, can't dribble nor pass, must have the ball in his hands to even be seen moving on the offensive end, and shies away from any leadership responsibilities as much as the majority on here. but again, this is about winning titles. does getting younger guarantee a title? no. but acquiring youth and draft picks does put you in a better position for future success if you're a team mired in mediocrity for the last 7 years. it also puts the average age of the pacers core below 25yo.

as for the small market large market and draft picks not winning titles...chicago bulls drafted michael jordan #3 overall and used a draft day trade on pippen to win 6 titles. the rockets drafted hakeem #1 overall enabling them to win 2 titles. the spurs drafted duncan #1 overall, drafted parker and ginobili i believe in late 1st and 2nd round on their way to 4 titles. the lakers traded for kobe in a draft day trade, then used picks and youth to acquire pau. only the shaq signing here factored in to the large vs small market debate. the heat drafted wade #4. the 80s pistons drafted thomas #2 and dumars to win their 2 titles. bird #6. magic #1. non-title winners but leaders on contenders...howard #1. lebron #1. durant #2. yao pre injury #1. paul #3. melo #3. rose #1. so yea, young talent and draft picks is how you win championships, and rarely does big market vs small market ever play a factor. good management is the ultimate factor.

and you're right, we do have a lot of young talent. but danny granger is replaceable and does not provide the leadership this team needs. will a new leader emerge? maybe, but it does not help that the management has already designated danny our leader much like they did jo. neither are/were capable of fulfilling that label.

I'm not against trading danny if the deal is clearly in our favor, such a stance would be foolish. However, you cannot deny that danny would make a very good 2nd optionish kind of guy, and if some of our youth are able to make him not the focal point of the team he can still be a valuable part of a winner.

Larry is a guy that values loyalty, look how long he stuck with JOB... Danny was given the same assurances, stick with use while we struggle and reap the rewards when we are on the way up, and danny hasn't taken a blatant and inexplicable dump on our franchise the way JOB occasionally did with his public statements and roster decisions.

Danny is unselfish and has an excellent contract.

If Granger is as bad and flawed as you say than noone is going to give up a superstar- potential playerw, and due to his contract being of such good value we would likely have to add players to a deal just to match salaries with a player of equal talent to danny...

We're better off having granger as a steal of a contract on an ensemble cast than trading him for an unknown that will set us back a few years just when the fanbase can finally taste us making the playoffs and possibly turning a corner.

If we were going to trade granger the time was the year before last or last year.

Trading Danny now however? It makes little sense.

Fact is that we aren't bad enough to procure the top draft picks, and danny IS good enough that if he is traded for peanuts will likely make the draft pick from the team we gave him to not be high enough to be worth it. We're better off building like detroit did, or better yet, our teams from the 90's or even the early 00's. Those weren't such bad times were they?

You admit we have lots of young talent, why not make a strong ensemble cast including danny? It's whats most reasonable, and realistic given the reality of our current situation.

Danny at his level right now is better than many top five picks end up being anyhow. Danny was considered a top 5 pick without knee issues in his draft class anyhow.

Would your eally feel better about ourselves if we end up trading danny for a top 5 pick that busts or never ends up being as good as he is?

We can't afford that risk.

There are more ways than one to compete for a championship.

croz24
02-22-2011, 04:02 AM
So...the Pacers can just go in circles? Trade the player, that can get some young talent, away for young talent then trade said young talent for the NBA's version of Granger in 2014. Good luck with that.

You seem to forget that Boston actually held on to their "Granger" (though a better one). Pierce wasn't this big winner before Garnett and Allen came along. Just like Pierce, Granger's game would become much more efficient with two number one options along with him.

They could always sign your favorite player from the '08 draft...Joe Alexander ;)

paul pierce at least led the celtics to an ecf appearance. granger as the leader of a team has yet to even make the postseason. pierce has always been a far superior player to granger in every aspect and deny such is just ignorant. pierce is also much more of a #1 option than either garnett or allen.

Merz
02-22-2011, 04:07 AM
paul pierce at least led the celtics to an ecf appearance. granger as the leader of a team has yet to even make the postseason. pierce has always been a far superior player to granger in every aspect and deny such is just ignorant. pierce is also much more of a #1 option than either garnett or allen.

As I said to the other guy


That wasn't my point. My point was the Celtics did what they did without having to deal their best player away for young assets. In that way (being their best player) he was their "Granger".

Behold the power of quotation marks.

daschysta
02-22-2011, 04:07 AM
paul pierce at least led the celtics to an ecf appearance. granger as the leader of a team has yet to even make the postseason. pierce has always been a far superior player to granger in every aspect and deny such is just ignorant. pierce is also much more of a #1 option than either garnett or allen.

Pierce is a bit better than granger, but he isn't really worlds better than danny was the last two years. Pierce took advantage of better supporting casts (built to JOB's system) and a far weaker eastern conference. The class of the east at that point the sixers would be lucky to have homecourt advantage in the current eastern conference.

You forget that at the time antoine walker was also an all star caliber player? And their role players were far superior as well.

Taterhead
02-22-2011, 04:07 AM
Could not possibly agree more with that statement.

The NBA has to give small market fans a reason to watch again. I understand it's a player's choice, but it's getting to the point that it's just not fun anymore.

Especially under the assumption NY ends up with D-Will or CP3. That's just not fun for everyone besides the Heat/Celtics/Knicks, at least in the East.

The only team I respect that is a great team, IMO, is the Bulls. Yes, they got Boozer but Rose was their pick. They're doing it the right way, and they're a really good team.

Bulls :angel:

Heat/Knicks/Celtics :devil:

Seriously? Are we gonna be the whiny people screaming about how unfair it is?

NY is not unbeatable by any stretch. And Miami is beatable as well. Neither of those teams will be as good as the Bulls of the mid 90's, IMO. And we almost beat them with a fairly talented team of over achievers. It should make you want to beat them more. Not cry about it.

I personally like it on a certain level. NBA basketball is so watered down it's ridiculous. The top teams in the NBA's glory days were absolutely stacked and had much more talent than NY and Miami both will ever have.

We are not a tiny market incapable of winning. That is ridiculous. We have a great owner who have always spent enough money. Our payroll now is more than Miami's. The top players in the league have always had this mentality anyways. This is nothing new. The way they are going about it might be the only difference.

croz24
02-22-2011, 04:12 AM
I'm not against trading danny if the deal is clearly in our favor, such a stance would be foolish. However, you cannot deny that danny would make a very good 2nd optionish kind of guy, and if some of our youth are able to make him not the focal point of the team he can still be a valuable part of a winner.

Larry is a guy that values loyalty, look how long he stuck with JOB... Danny was given the same assurances, stick with use while we struggle and reap the rewards when we are on the way up.

Danny is unselfish and has an excellent contract.

If Granger is as bad and flawed as you say than noone is going to give up a superstar- potential playerw, and due to his contract being of such good value we would likely have to add players to a deal just to match salaries with a player of equal talent to danny...

We're better off having granger as a steal of a contract on an ensemble cast than trading him for an unknown that will set us back a few years just when the fanbase can finally taste us making the playoffs and possibly turning a corner.

If we were going to trade granger the time was the year before last or last year.

Trading Danny now however? It makes little sense.

Fact is that we aren't bad enough to procure the top draft picks, and danny IS good enough that if he is traded for peanuts will likely make the draft pick from the team we gave him to not be high enough to be worth it. We're better off building like detroit did, or better yet, our teams from the 90's or even the early 00's. Those weren't such bad times were they?

You admit we have lots of young talent, why not make a strong ensemble cast including danny? It's whats most reasonable, and realistic given the reality of our current situation.

Danny at his level right now is better than many top five picks end up being anyhow. Danny was considered a top 5 pick without knee issues in his draft class anyhow.

Would your eally feel better about ourselves if we end up trading danny for a top 5 pick that busts or never ends up being as good as he is?

We can't afford that risk.

There are more ways than one to compete for a championship.

i think hibbert's emergence in correlation to our record in the 1st month of the season and then in the last 10 games is proof that our most valuable piece is not granger. do i think granger could be a great #2? no. a great #3? yes. would i want to keep granger if i knew he could become our #3 sometime in the next 2 years? yes. but do i think that'll happen? no. because of how we have designated granger our guy, i just don't see any way we acquire the pieces necessary for granger to become the #3 option he needs to be for this team to win a championship. and therefore, imo he's better served to be dealt.....if he somehow finds it within himself to give a damn defensively on a nightly basis and dedicates himself to improving his playmaking abilities and moving without the ball, i highly doubt i'd be making these posts. i thought he had turned a corner early in the year, but i was wrong.

Taterhead
02-22-2011, 04:13 AM
That wasn't my point. My point was the Celtics did what they did without having to deal their best player away for young assets. In that way (being their best player) he was their "Granger".

Behold the power of quotation marks.

He might have been their "Granger", but we don't have a "Pierce". If we have to trade Granger to get one, that's what we need to do.

Merz
02-22-2011, 04:18 AM
He might have been their "Granger", but we don't have a "Pierce". If we have to trade Granger to get one, that's what we need to do.

But that wouldn't do much but make the Pacers slightly better...or maybe not as the team would have to give up more than just Granger.

It is not quite as easy to get a star as you guys seem to think. Maybe if Eric Gordon demands a trade to the Pacers or someone else demands a trade to any team and the Pacers have the pieces, but it is not going to happen that way.

You also seem to forget that Garnett only accepted the trade because both Peirce and Allen were there. Do you think some star (because stars have a say now-a-days) would accept a trade to Indiana with out anyone here to support him?

Taterhead
02-22-2011, 04:19 AM
Danny is unselfish and has an excellent contract.


I disagree. Danny is overpaid from a business standpoint because he isn't successful at the role he is given. He's the face of the franchise and his role is to lead and I don't feel he has done a great job by any means. He definitely hasn't improved nearly as much the last few years as he should have. I don't see any growth from him. He is still a 3 point shooter with poor ball handling and under achieving on defense. This town is way too accepting of mediocrity, IMO.

Taterhead
02-22-2011, 04:21 AM
But that wouldn't do much but make the Pacers slightly better...or maybe not as the team would have to give up more than just Granger.

It is not quite as easy to get a star as you guys seem to think. Maybe if Eric Gordon demands a trade to the Pacers or someone else demands a trade to any team and the Pacers have the pieces, it is not going to happen that way.

You also seem to forget that Garnett only excepted the trade because both Peirce and Allen were there. Do you think some star (because stars have a say now-a-days) would except a trade to Indiana with out anyone here to support him?

I disagree. Players like Pierce are rare. The guy is a ferocious competitor and it is infectious to the team. The guy is a winner. The game is about a lot more than just PPG my friend.

And it's not hard to get a star when you have the pieces to do it, and we do right now. We need to at least make an attempt.

Merz
02-22-2011, 04:24 AM
I disagree. Players like Pierce are rare. The guy is a ferocious competitor and it is infectious to the team. The guy is a winner. The game is about a lot more than just PPG my friend.

So this team is a contender in your eyes with Pierce in place of Granger and OTHER (Granger alone is not getting a star) assets?

Again what stars are out there to be had with what the Pacers have?

I know the Pacers could possibly get one with Granger + Hibbert/George + filler. But who will play with that star? What star could attract free agents to Indiana?

edit: said in better words by michaelwilliams4 two post below

wintermute
02-22-2011, 04:28 AM
Maybe I'm the only one, but I actually like the deal for NY. Melo and Billups are upgrades over Chandler and Felton respectively. Loss of Gallo and Mozgov hurts their depth in the short term, but both players project as role players anyway so it shouldn't take much to replace them next season. None of the assets that NY gives up is that great, really.

What does hurt them is that they're practically stripped of assets now. With the monster extension to Melo, they won't have the cap space to go after that 3rd player (Chris Paul or Deron) in 2012. Instead, they'll have to hope that either player would force their way off their teams (and believe me, the rumors have started already), and that NO or Utah would accept Billups + Fields + whatever leftover picks/young players that NY can dredge up. Should be interesting.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I think Isiah and Dolan were right and Walsh was wrong. There's a time to be patient, but when the superstar you want is on the market you have to go after him with all you have. That's assuming Melo is indeed the player you want to build around. In fairness to Walsh, perhaps he was thinking to save the assets to go after another player, like Paul or Williams.

michealwilliams4
02-22-2011, 04:35 AM
He might have been their "Granger", but we don't have a "Pierce". If we have to trade Granger to get one, that's what we need to do.

I don't want to take away from Pierce, because individually, he's a player that excels at a high level when he's surrounded by a good team. I don't know if Granger can, largely because he hasn't had one.

But let's not pretend like Pierce is the type of player that's going to lift an average/below average team to the postseason. To be fair, Pierce's early success came in the worst stretch of Eastern Conference basketball ever, six of his first nine seasons were losing ones, one of his four playoffs appearances came with a 36-46 team. Granger has led teams to 36-46, just so happened the postseason wasn't possible at that record.

Pierce was a heavy minutes high volume shooter at 42% on a 45-win team with players that fit an Obie system. He is a better player than Granger, but I think it's weird we'd suggest that the two aren't comparable, and that we need to trade our "Granger" for a "Pierce" to get us somewhere.

A "Pierce" doesn't improve this current team all that much. A "Pierce" needs a team to work with. With this team, he gets us about where we'll end up: first round playoffs, maybe with a couple less games. I don't know. We've not really seen a "Granger" in the playoffs (a "Pierce" likely isn't changing that). Trading a "Granger" for a "Pierce" doesn't make us great. In fact, each additional piece have to give up in order to get a "Pierce" helps in cancelling out the overall progress we would gain in getting one. I think the gap is a lot closer than people seem to think it is, even though a "Pierce" is better.

I don't think anyone is arguing against improving this team, and if the time comes when Granger needs to be involved in that trade, we can't keep it from happening. But trading Granger for a high draft pick because he was a high draft pick is not the way to do it. Someone like Favors doesn't actually get better just because he was taken #3. We can't look at young guys like that. It's irresponsible to take Granger's abilities that lightly.

Taterhead
02-22-2011, 04:38 AM
So this team is a contender in your eyes with Pierce in place of Granger and OTHER (Granger alone is not getting a star) assets? Again you are completely failing to see points.

Again what stars are out there to be had with what the Pacers have?

I understand your point, just disagree.

Yes, I think a 27 year old Paul Pierce instantly makes the Pacers a much better team than a 27 year old Danny Granger. Paul Pierce is a great leader. Danny Granger is not. Great leaders make a pretty big difference.

As far as stars that are available, IDK. My top NBA source ran out of cell phone minutes and doesn't get paid until Friday, so I'll get back to you on that. But I'm sure there has got to be somebody out there. The Pacers FO might have to show some vision and get a youngster who has the mental makeup to become one. IDK. But it's not my job. I'm just telling you what I think we need, not what we can necessarily do. I just feel that there is a move out there involving Granger that can move this franchise forward.

Maybe call the Kings about Tyreke Evans. Apparently he and Cousins are not meshing well and Grangers 3 point ability could be a big asset to go with Cousins inside game. I could see the Kings being willing to deal and I could see Tyreke becoming a big star in a few years also.

King Tuts Tomb
02-22-2011, 04:38 AM
The stacked 80s teams didn't get stacked by players leaving their previous team in the middle of their prime because they couldn't get them a ring before they turned 26 friggin years old.

They got stacked by taking advantage of stupid teams back when draft picks weren't properly valued. And Kareem went to the Lakers when he was 27.


C.R.E.A.M.

Coincidence that a New York based group would release that song?

That song is about being trapped in a culture of greed and trying not to fall victim to it. Cash rules everything around me.

croz24
02-22-2011, 04:41 AM
don't want to quote the entire post but yes, even with the similar "statistics" under job, paul pierce was the vastly superior player because of his defensive intensity, playmaking ability, leadership, passion, and ability to make his teammates better. hard to measure those in a box score.

Taterhead
02-22-2011, 04:41 AM
I don't want to take away from Pierce, because individually, he's a player that excels at a high level when he's surrounded by a good team. I don't know if Granger can, largely because he hasn't had one.

But let's not pretend like Pierce is the type of player that's going to lift an average/below average team to the postseason. To be fair, Pierce's early success came in the worst stretch of Eastern Conference basketball ever, six of his first nine seasons were losing ones, one of his four playoffs appearances came with a 36-46 team. Granger has led teams to 36-46, just so happened the postseason wasn't possible at that record.

Pierce was a heavy minutes high volume shooter at 42% on a 45-win team with players that fit an Obie system. He is a better player than Granger, but I think it's weird we'd suggest that the two aren't comparable, and that we need to trade our "Granger" for a "Pierce" to get us somewhere.

A "Pierce" doesn't improve this current team all that much. A "Pierce" needs a team to work with. With this team, he gets us about where we'll end up: first round playoffs, maybe with a couple less games. I don't know. We've not really seen a "Granger" in the playoffs (a "Pierce" likely isn't changing that). Trading a "Granger" for a "Pierce" doesn't make us great. In fact, each additional piece have to give up in order to get a "Pierce" helps in cancelling out the overall progress we would gain in getting one. I think the gap is a lot closer than people seem to think it is, even though a "Pierce" is better.

I don't think anyone is arguing against improving this team, and if the time comes when Granger needs to be involved in that trade, we can't keep it from happening. But trading Granger for a high draft pick because he was a high draft pick is not the way to do it. Someone like Favors doesn't actually get better just because he was taken #3. We can't look at young guys like that. It's irresponsible to take Granger's abilities that lightly.

There is a reason you haven't seen Granger in the playoffs. Stop giving him a pass.

Pierce carried the Celtics to the playoffs several years with a mediocre supporting cast. And he won in the playoffs as well. Pierce still carries the Celtics in big games on a regular basis.

croz24
02-22-2011, 04:44 AM
as for the trade, this doesn't change things at all in the eastern conference imo. neither miami nor new york have the lost post presence to defeat the magic or celtics or bulls in a playoff series. new york shouldn't be looking to add cp3 in the future, but rather a couple of bangers down low. they need themselves a modern day charles oakley or anthony mason before they should think about pg.

Merz
02-22-2011, 04:46 AM
How many times does it have to be said? It is not Pierce for Granger. It is Pierce (or type player) for Granger and other assets ie Hibbert, George, draft picks and the like (of course not all together) to get said star. As you know, Granger alone is not getting that star, just like Pierce alone (back in the day) was not getting that star, even though he is better than Granger.

Merz
02-22-2011, 04:48 AM
as for the trade, this doesn't change things at all in the eastern conference imo. neither miami nor new york have the lost post presence to defeat the magic or celtics or bulls in a playoff series.

Now that I can agree with.

And I agree to an extent with getting the bangers...but I think if you can add Chris Paul to your team...you add Chris Paul.

daschysta
02-22-2011, 04:49 AM
There is a reason you haven't seen Granger in the playoffs. Stop giving him a pass.

Pierce carried the Celtics to the playoffs several years with a mediocre supporting cast. And he won in the playoffs as well. Pierce still carries the Celtics in big games on a regular basis.


Two of the years pierce made the playoffs his teams were 36-46.

Danny has led this team to that record, in a harder eastern conference to boot.

Pierces best year with boston, the ECF year, his team won 45 games. I'd bet money on us winning that much next year, pierce also had AT LEAST as much support as danny has had the past couple of years.

Our second and 3rd best players have been mike dunleavey and troy murphy.

Heck if we make the playoffs this year then danny is well on his way (teamwise) to matching what pierce did with his teams in his pre big-3 days.

You can hardly use the playoff argument when the east was in such a sorry state at that point, and it looks even more silly when danny in fact has led the pacers to the same record pierce did in multiple years... the difference? The east was so bad then that it actually qualified.

CooperManning
02-22-2011, 05:00 AM
I disagree. Danny is overpaid from a business standpoint because he isn't successful at the role he is given.

He's given that role because he's the best player on the team, but he isn't paid like it. Every playoff team has at least one player that's paid significantly more than Danny:

Miami (all 3)
Boston (KG, Pierce)
Chicago (Boozer)
Orlando (Arenas, Dwight, JRich)
Atlanta (JJ)
New York (Amare, 'Melo)
Philly (Brand)

San Antonio (Duncan)
Dallas (Dirk)
LA (Kobe, Gasol, Bynum)
OKC (Durant starting next year)
Blazers (Roy)
Hornets (CP3)
Nuggets (Kmart)
Utah (AK, Deron)

http://hoopshype.com/salaries.htm

Every player mentioned above makes at least three mil more than Danny, most a lot more, some double. Danny is our first option because he has to be, but he's not paid like it. We're still in the process of putting pieces around him. He plays like a "2nd or 3rd option on a contender" because he is one, which is why he gets paid like one. I'm as bummed that we don't have a 1st option as everyone else, but I'm not going to blame Danny for it.

CooperManning
02-22-2011, 05:35 AM
Two of the years pierce made the playoffs his teams were 36-46.

Danny has led this team to that record, in a harder eastern conference to boot.

Pierces best year with boston, the ECF year, his team won 45 games. I'd bet money on us winning that much next year, pierce also had AT LEAST as much support as danny has had the past couple of years.

Our second and 3rd best players have been mike dunleavey and troy murphy.

Heck if we make the playoffs this year then danny is well on his way (teamwise) to matching what pierce did with his teams in his pre big-3 days.

You can hardly use the playoff argument when the east was in such a sorry state at that point, and it looks even more silly when danny in fact has led the pacers to the same record pierce did in multiple years... the difference? The east was so bad then that it actually qualified.

Good point on Pierce's 36-46 playoff teams. I've always thought he was an interesting player to compare with Granger, since they play the same position, are similarly sized, and played three years of college. Interesting to look at the per-36 numbers of their first six years. I'm not trying to make any kind of point here.

Pierce:

http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8660/screenshot20110222at228.png


Danny:

http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/5205/screenshot20110222at227.png

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/piercpa01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/grangda01.html

HeliumFear
02-22-2011, 05:47 AM
So basically they have Carmello,who's gonna' take a lot of shots and score in bunches while also...well,I guess that's really all he does well. Unlike Amar'e who not only scores but also...um...


Well,this could be interesting.

daschysta
02-22-2011, 06:08 AM
Good point on Pierce's 36-46 playoff teams. I've always thought he was an interesting player to compare with Granger, since they play the same position, are similarly sized, and played three years of college. Interesting to look at the per-36 numbers of their first six years. I'm not trying to make any kind of point here.

Pierce:

http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/8660/screenshot20110222at228.png


Danny:

http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/5205/screenshot20110222at227.png

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/piercpa01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/grangda01.html



Exactly...

Pierce is clearly a shade superior, but really for all of his "unquantifiable tenacity and leadership" that he possesses and danny lacks he didn't perform much better, or lead his team to many more wins until he received much, much more help.

If anything Dannies attitude and contract means that he will be more accepting of a secondary role, if paul george develops into an number one kind of guy. Roy Hibbert is really our first offensive option under vogel, and Danny couldn't be happier for him.

King Tuts Tomb
02-22-2011, 06:20 AM
Exactly...

Pierce is clearly a shade superior, but really for all of his "unquantifiable tenacity and leadership" that he possesses and danny lacks he didn't perform much better, or lead his team to many more wins until he received much, much more help.

Yeah, it's funny how now that Pierce has won a title the first half of his career has been revised. Before KG and Ray came Pierce was seen as an selfish guy and a someone who didn't get the team game. He played a prominent role on one of the worst teams ever (the 06 Celtics). Now that he got some better players around him he was always a leader and an unselfish guy. Pierce never changed, but the perception of him has.

Unclebuck
02-22-2011, 08:14 AM
Maybe I am the only one, maybe not...but I would take that package over Melo all day. One player is not worth that much. No one man can take your team to the finals unless your name is Lebron.

Never take quantity over quality (unless you already have your two star players) The Nuggets will spend the next ten years dreaming of getting another player as good as Melo. Can anyone name a team that traded away their best player and then became good anytime soon. The Nuggets were in the WCF two years ago - they probably won't see anythign like that for quite awhile.

change of topic

I was just listening to Jeff Van Gundy on Mike and Mike and he thinks all the constant trade talks during the season takes away from the actual games. He suggested that no trades can take place during the season.
I might be in favor of that. How would you like to be a season ticket holder in Denver right now

Rogco
02-22-2011, 08:22 AM
Ya Ben Wallace barley got jack and all the Pacers got a ton of games.

I've said this before, but I think Stern is a Pacers hater. In any country in any sport in any league around the globe, teams that can't control their fans get stomped on by the league governing bodies. What did Stern do to Detriot for letting their fans damn near riot, throw things and attack the players? Nothing. Cause he's a Douche. But he had no qualms about dismembering the Pacers team.

Maybe it's a lingering anti ABA bias, maybe he's allergic to corn, maybe he's from Kentucky, but I think he's an @ss (though generally an intelligent @ss who knows how to make money for his league.)

The Jackson shimmy
02-22-2011, 08:25 AM
I'll skip getting into the pros and cons of Granger as a player.

But I will say this. Trading for a totally unproven commodity like
Derrick Favors would potentially be the same kind of egregious,
franchise-destroying move as trading for the similarly unproven
(11.5mins, 4pts and 3rbs per game over 4 yrs in POR) Jermaine
O'Neal was 11 years ago.

Sarcasm intended !

Jared Sullinger
02-22-2011, 08:36 AM
http://nba.fanhouse.com/2011/02/21/report-carmelo-anthony-finally-traded-to-the-knicks/

Sounds like the AR trade wll be a seprate trade

I'm disappointed. I wanted Randolph here, and to see that Minnesota was given him for atrocious Corey Brewer and for taking Curry's almost paid-off contract leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

wintermute
02-22-2011, 09:06 AM
I'm disappointed. I wanted Randolph here, and to see that Minnesota was given him for atrocious Corey Brewer and for taking Curry's almost paid-off contract leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

The Twolves had cap space, we didn't. Next year we'll have cap space, so we'll be in a position to do this kind of deal.

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 09:12 AM
I'm not too worry about this new NY team, for those that keep complaining that the Pacers are going to be screwed, what would you say if we get another good player and have our own "small 3?(Iguadola,Nene,Dwest,Wallace)

The Pacers are going to have the money to make something happen next year, not only they'll be able to get an star but if PG becomes the player we think he is going to be we are going to be better than either NY or Miami.

graphic-er
02-22-2011, 09:14 AM
I'm not too worry about this new NY team, for those that keep complaining that the Pacers are going to be screwed, what would you say if we get another good player and have our own "small 3?(Iguadola,Nene,Dwest,Wallace)

The Pacers are going to have the money to make something happen next year, not only they'll be able to get an star but if PG becomes the player we think he is going to be we are going to be better than either NY or Miami.

The truth right here. one of those 4 players is most likely gonna be a Pacer next year. And while they all would prefer to be traded or signed to a contender. None of the called contenders have the cap space to do it. Infact I think only Dallas could pull off a trade with Butler's expiring deal.

bulldog
02-22-2011, 09:23 AM
Never take quantity over quality (unless you already have your two star players) The Nuggets will spend the next ten years dreaming of getting another player as good as Melo. Can anyone name a team that traded away their best player and then became good anytime soon. The Nuggets were in the WCF two years ago - they probably won't see anythign like that for quite awhile.


I don't know about trading a star player, but teams frequently perform better after an overrated, one dimensional player moves on in free agency or retirement. For example, look at the Knicks after Ewing.

The Nuggets made out like bandits with this trade. That team was clearly on the decline, ever since they traded Camby they just haven't been the same (perhaps the advanced statistics that rate Camby very highly and rate Melo's efficiency poorly were right). With this trade they're able to retool on the fly - essentially, I think Melo forced them into doing something that is good for their franchise anyway.

Tom White
02-22-2011, 09:32 AM
Ya Ben Wallace barley got jack and all the Pacers got a ton of games.

The suspensions were not based on the confrontation between Artest and Wallace. They were based on what happened in the stands and on the sidelines. One may have inadvertently led to the other, but the action on the floor was minimal compared to the aftermath.

naptownmenace
02-22-2011, 09:33 AM
Yeah, it's funny how now that Pierce has won a title the first half of his career has been revised. Before KG and Ray came Pierce was seen as an selfish guy and a someone who didn't get the team game. He played a prominent role on one of the worst teams ever (the 06 Celtics). Now that he got some better players around him he was always a leader and an unselfish guy. Pierce never changed, but the perception of him has.

I agree with this but I must admit that I've always been a Paul Pierce fan. I started pulling for him because I couldn't believe that 9 teams passed on drafting him in the draft. Most of those teams could've really used a player like Pierce too. I was hopeful that he would play as well as he has and prove the naysayers wrong.

Those Boston teams in his early years were pretty terrible but he wasn't selfish though. How can you be selfish when your on a team with Antoine Walker? When they added a few more veteran role players like Kenny Anderson, Walter McCarty, and Tony Delk, he began to improve and start taking more of a leadership role. Even with that, Pierce's name kept coming up in trade rumors. Ultimately, not trading him was the right decision.

We don't need to trade Granger. We need to wait until we can surround him with more talent and see how he plays. I think he'll improve as the current young talent around him improves. It won't hurt anything for the Pacers to be patient. Also, I'm not going to hold anything against him because he's played the past couple of seasons with a coach that was in way over his head.

vapacersfan
02-22-2011, 09:38 AM
The suspensions were not based on the confrontation between Artest and Wallace. They were based on what happened in the stands and on the sidelines. One may have inadvertently led to the other, but the action on the floor was minimal compared to the aftermath.

Even if you use that logic, Ben Wallace should have gotten more games and the organization should have been fined.

But whatever, it is in the past.

_______________________________________

As for this trade, huge risk. We will see if they can add any supporting pieces

Slick Pinkham
02-22-2011, 09:40 AM
The Knicks are on their way toward recreating the Phoenix Suns, with Amare being Amare, Carmelo being Shawn Marion with less D, and a future free agent to-be-determined being Steve Nash. If that future free agent is Chris Paul, they may exceed those Suns.

Can they win with that?

Perhaps not, but it is at least entertaining. Some people have to decide to guard somebody. It could happen. Lebron didn't use to care about guarding people and now he does.

They have some advantages in gaining depth in future years: D'Antoni's style, his international experience, the NYC spotlight, etc. so as a charter member of the he-man Knick haters Club this is not something I like.

Unclebuck
02-22-2011, 09:54 AM
I don't know about trading a star player, but teams frequently perform better after an overrated, one dimensional player moves on in free agency or retirement. For example, look at the Knicks after Ewing.



Ewing was 80 years old. Melo is in his prime

bulldog
02-22-2011, 10:06 AM
Ewing was 80 years old. Melo is in his prime

And yet in the Anthony era they've lost in the first round every year but one, and they were clearly on the downswing. It may or may not be Melo's prime, but it certainly wasn't the Nugget's prime. Trading Camby sealed their fate, trading Melo was the right move and was inevitable.

We'll see how well they play over the next few weeks, I bet they'll actually be pretty good. Losing Billups hurts a lot in the near term, but Felton is very solid and should mitigate that.



I'm disappointed. I wanted Randolph here, and to see that Minnesota was given him for atrocious Corey Brewer and for taking Curry's almost paid-off contract leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

I've said it once and I'll say it again: some of Kahn's moves have been indefensibly atrocious, but overall, that roster actually has quite a bit of talent and a bright future. I don't think Rambis is the right coach for them, but a young core of Love, Beasley, Rubio, and Randolph surrounded by role players like Milicic actually ain't half bad. Of course, Love seems pretty unhappy with the situation and might force his way out (and obviously ditto to Rubio), but if they can get everyone on the court together Kahn will have assembled a good nucleus.

xIndyFan
02-22-2011, 10:13 AM
as with all these trade, so much depends on the CBA negotiations. found this from fanhouse via hoops hype. (http://www.storytellerscontracts.com/) anything like this would leave the knicks with 2 guys and nobody else. i thought the owners would look for something in the neighborhood of $60M. so even if the owners gave another $10M or so, there are lots of teams that will have to 'alan houston' guys to make the cap. houston, indiana, memphis, milwaukee, new jersey, OKC and sacramento are the only teams under $45M for next year.


The NBA's current CBA expires on June 30, and the owners are pushing for the sort of structure -- i.e. a hard salary cap at approximately $45 million -- that would put the Kings in prime position to improve their team via free agency quickly because of their league-low payroll. The Ducks officials have reportedly offered a $100 million loan that could make it feasible to make the move now, with approximately $70 million being used to pay the city of Sacramento back for the Arco Arena loan and the remaining $30 million expected to be used for relocation fees. A Kings official, however, said on Monday that the report was "not accurate." Such a move would have to be approved by the league's Board of Governor's by a majority vote, but it is believed that the Maloofs have previously inquired with their fellow owners about such a possibility and are confident the move would be approved

Unclebuck
02-22-2011, 10:21 AM
as with all these trade, so much depends on the CBA negotiations. found this from fanhouse via hoops hype. (http://www.storytellerscontracts.com/) anything like this would leave the knicks with 2 guys and nobody else. i thought the owners would look for something in the neighborhood of $60M. so even if the owners gave another $10M or so, there are lots of teams that will have to 'alan houston' guys to make the cap. houston, indiana, memphis, milwaukee, new jersey, OKC and sacramento are the only teams under $45M for next year.

If the owners are dead set on having a $45M hard cap. If that is what they are going for, then we can write off the season next year because there will not be one. The owners would have to lock them out for the whole season before the players agree to something like that.

The small market teams might want a hard $45M cap, but the large market teams won't and I don't know how many owners are needed to agree.

Overall I'd be shocked if we get a hard cap at all, let alone one near $45M or even $60M.

Mackey_Rose
02-22-2011, 10:38 AM
The Knicks "lack of depth" isn't going to look nearly as bad after they get Chris Paul or Deron Williams to accompany Melo and Amar'e in 2012.

BillS
02-22-2011, 10:38 AM
If the owners are dead set on having a $45M hard cap. If that is what they are going for, then we can write off the season next year because there will not be one. The owners would have to lock them out for the whole season before the players agree to something like that.

The small market teams might want a hard $45M cap, but the large market teams won't and I don't know how many owners are needed to agree.

Overall I'd be shocked if we get a hard cap at all, let alone one near $45M or even $60M.

Even if it DID happen, what would end up being done is that the teams over the hard cap will be grandfathered in with a certain number of seasons to reduce their payroll. Therefore, the teams at or just under $45M basically get screwed because they can't use the cap space to catch up to the teams already waaaaay over it.

Talk about doing the right thing and getting punished for it...

Brad8888
02-22-2011, 10:45 AM
Even if it DID happen, what would end up being done is that the teams over the hard cap will be grandfathered in with a certain number of seasons to reduce their payroll. Therefore, the teams at or just under $45M basically get screwed because they can't use the cap space to catch up to the teams already waaaaay over it.

Talk about doing the right thing and getting punished for it...

I think so, too.

And, this line of thinking explains why Dolan went ahead and pulled the trigger on the Melo deal. Dolan must believe that the teams with higher salaries and stars will be grandfathered in, and wants the Knicks to be a "have" instead of a "have not" under this scenario, and I am sure that Stern would prefer to see it that way, too.

Unclebuck
02-22-2011, 10:47 AM
Even if it DID happen, what would end up being done is that the teams over the hard cap will be grandfathered in with a certain number of seasons to reduce their payroll. Therefore, the teams at or just under $45M basically get screwed because they can't use the cap space to catch up to the teams already waaaaay over it.

Talk about doing the right thing and getting punished for it...

Yes, and that is why, after I think about it, I doubt the small market teams want a hard cap like that. I mean 4 or 5 years down the road it helps the small market teams, but for the first 3 years or so it locks in the really good teams to be really good and leaves the bad teams really bad as they won't be able to sign any players anyway.

How did the NFL do it when they went to a hard cap. But the NFL with the number of players is so different from the NBA.

Basketball Fan
02-22-2011, 10:48 AM
I'm just glad this is over I don't know if it makes the Knicks better but I don't care I'm just glad its over.

xBulletproof
02-22-2011, 10:54 AM
Wow, everyone keeps pounding on the Chris Paul to New York drum. I guess my post went ignored so I'll say it again.

Between Amare, and Carmelo the Knicks will have $40 million dollars in contracts for the offseason that those guys are free agents. In just two players. Even today that only leaves 18 million in cap space. After the CBA who knows? Unless they sign every player between now and then for 1 year deals, they'll have far more than that tied up and be unable to sign either of them.

Jared Sullinger
02-22-2011, 11:03 AM
On the speculation of us trading Danny to the Nets for Derrick Favors, here are Favors' per-36 numbers vs. the per-36 rookie year numbers of fellow 19-year-olds Dwight Howard and Kwame Brown:

http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/8563/sfjhcxjsd.gif (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=favorde01&y1=2011&p2=howardw01&y2=2005&p3=brownkw01&y3=2002)

Favors is somewhere in between the two in scoring, rebounding and shot blocking. Kwame has surprisingly nice assists numbers, but his FG% is horrific. Also, notice that Favors is actually pulling down more offensive rebounds per-36 than Dwight did, an excellent 4.2 per-36.

If New Jersey offered up Favors for Granger I'd have to give it some serious consideration. If they sweetened the deal with either another prospect/solid player, a first or an expiring contract, I'd probably lean towards pulling the trigger.

PacerGuy
02-22-2011, 11:10 AM
Yes, and that is why, after I think about it, I doubt the small market teams want a hard cap like that. I mean 4 or 5 years down the road it helps the small market teams, but for the first 3 years or so it locks in the really good teams to be really good and leaves the bad teams really bad as they won't be able to sign any players anyway.

How did the NFL do it when they went to a hard cap. But the NFL with the number of players is so different from the NBA.

My suggestions in next CBA:
-Hard cap, its the only way to level the field.
-Shared TV revenue like in NFL, again, levels the field.
-"Allen Houston" rule available to ALL, over or not before n/y.
-Teams over can not add to current overage.
-3 year plan for ALL teams to get under, extreme penelties if not under.
-"Franchise tag" limited to 1 player/team, limited to team it is signed with.
(No signing w/ 'home team" so you get the extra, then ask to be moved!)
-3 year contracts, 4 for "home team", limits to guarenteed money.
-Loosen trade restrictions (currently 125% + 100k) to make it easier to trade.
-Rookie straight out of high school, or must stay 2 yrs in college.
(I would love for rookie contracts tied to yrs of college experience - more experience, more you can sign for - but will never happen).

Unclebuck
02-22-2011, 11:18 AM
I have read from several different sources that Donnie Walsh was essentially benched and that the owner took over and made the decision with maybe Isiah's prodding.

Also read that league executives across the NBA are upset. Donnie is extremely well liked around the NBA.

Here is some good stuff in Vecsey's column

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/dolan_feared_losing_turf_war_to_G18WeI4BDpuu5RQKog hgqJ

Young
02-22-2011, 11:23 AM
I laugh at this deal.

This is what it would have been like to have Don Nelson coach Glenn Robinson and Shawn Kemp in the 90s.

You know what has gotten lost with all of this Knicks and Heat big 3 crap? How important other players are.

Think about the Lakers in the early 2000s. Yeah Shaq and Kobe carried the load but they had to have some key performances/shots from Robert Horry and Derek Fisher. Horry was also big for the Spurs.

When the Celtics won in 2008 their top 6 players were probably KG, Pierce Rondo, Allen, Perkins, and James Posey. Plus they had other key reserves like Sam Cassell, PJ Brown, and Eddie House.

Is the Heat or Knicks 4th best player as good as the Celtic's 6th was that year? These are the guys who make the difference. This is what gets lost in all of this. Sure your stars will play 40 MPG and have a huge impact on defense and offense. However if you don't have great role players you won't win.

This gets looked over in basketball over and over again. Yeah individuals can have a huge impact in basketball (like baseball) but to win championships you need to have good players who know/fit their role 1-12.

PacerGuy
02-22-2011, 11:23 AM
I have read from several different sources that Donnie Walsh was essentially benched and that the owner took over and made the decision with maybe Isiah's prodding.

Also read that league executives across the NBA are upset. Donnie is extremely well liked around the NBA.

I just wish he would walk.
His health has not been the best, & I can't imagine that working enviroment & related stress is helping in that capasity. Is staying to spite Isiah (that has to be the only reason he is staying, just to not let Isiah win) really worth working w/ Dolan for the remainder of the year?

Mackey_Rose
02-22-2011, 11:29 AM
Wow, everyone keeps pounding on the Chris Paul to New York drum. I guess my post went ignored so I'll say it again.

Between Amare, and Carmelo the Knicks will have $40 million dollars in contracts for the offseason that those guys are free agents. In just two players. Even today that only leaves 18 million in cap space. After the CBA who knows? Unless they sign every player between now and then for 1 year deals, they'll have far more than that tied up and be unable to sign either of them.

Many people made the ludicrous claim that Miami would be screwed after spending all their cap space on 3 players also.

xBulletproof
02-22-2011, 11:38 AM
Many people made the ludicrous claim that Miami would be screwed after spending all their cap space on 3 players also.

Depends on what you mean by screwed. They certainly can't make any trades right now, so in that sense, yes they're screwed. On the court, of course not. However Miami's situation has no real bearing on what I was saying.

The point is Paul/Deron will be in a situation where they have to take less money to go to NY, or a sign and trade. Problem with the sign and trade would be, Utah/New Orleans would know absolutely that NY can't sign them outright. Which is what would give NY leverage in a sign and trade. Since that's not likely to happen ..... what does NY have to make Utah or New Orleans willing to sign and trade them?

Toronto and Cleveland were in completely different positions. Lebron and Bosh could sign there for nearly the same amount even without their original teams help. In that case, something is better than nothing.

Unclebuck
02-22-2011, 11:41 AM
Many people made the ludicrous claim that Miami would be screwed after spending all their cap space on 3 players also.

Yeah, that was wishful thinking. Good role players will take less money to play with two superstars and 1 star player.

back to the trade for a second. The Knicks better get some really good defenders at the shooting guard and center spot, because Amare and melo are no where near the defenders that Bosh, Lebron and Wade are. That is what IMo people don't realize how good those three are as defenders. Amare and Melo are no where nearly as good

k_lewis93
02-22-2011, 11:51 AM
Look at the group of guys we have rightnow. Granger, George, Hans, Collison, Hibbert, McBob, Price, Rush, Lance, DJones. I think all these guys are in our future and the others should be let to walk after their contract is up or be traded. How can you say this isn't a good group? Granger is Granger and yes he has his off days but is still a very good player. If George ends up being who we all think he will be then he could be our #1 guy we are looking for. Hans is a beast downlow who I hope he we for a very long time unless we can get someone better through a trade. Collison is a good pg who will get better; he is only a 2nd year player. Hibbert is playing awesome rightnow and will be a top 5 C in the league soon IMO. McBob gets rebounds for you and can hit the open jump shot and of course...DUNK VERY WELL. Price is a decend backup pg who I personally really like and think he has a bright future. I don't know if Rush has a place here or not. I'm more on the side of trading him for a veteren package deal. IMO Lance will be a good player some day. We haven't seen him yet but we all know he has amazing offensive skills. And DJones is a great player IMHO. I really hope we keep him because he is sort of a leader on our team and is always keeping spirits high and can occasionally get those 17 point quarters for you; he is also very good defensively. I think, unless you can get a deal you just can't walk away from before the deadline, you keep the roster the same and make the playoffs then in the offseason sign a player. Money talks. Yes we are in Indiana but you throw enough money towards a star player he will go there. I think our future is very bright and unless you can get that package deal with Granger in it for a #1 option guy I think you keep the current roster.

Young
02-22-2011, 11:54 AM
It's a little off track of the trade but this was talked on Mike & Mike this morning. Assume that Dwight Howard signs with the Lakers and one of Deron Williams or Chris Paul sign with the Knicks. Where does Williams or Paul sign then? I think it's safe to say that they won't be back with their current teams. Do the Lakers find a way to sign one of them or do they go elsewhere and where would that be?

Hicks
02-22-2011, 12:08 PM
The Knicks "lack of depth" isn't going to look nearly as bad after they get Chris Paul or Deron Williams to accompany Melo and Amar'e in 2012.

How can they afford one of them? I read somewhere last night they don't have that kind of cap room left.

Hicks
02-22-2011, 12:12 PM
Many people made the ludicrous claim that Miami would be screwed after spending all their cap space on 3 players also.

They got some help, but not enough. They won't beat Boston. Their lack of depth is the same reason we can give them some trouble; our bench can beat their bench, and our PG and C and beat their PG and C.

wintermute
02-22-2011, 12:39 PM
Miami's situation is not really comparable to NY's. They got their 3 stars signed on the same offseason - it's easier to fit in 3 contracts at their lowest value (~$14m which would rise to ~$17m by 2012). In contrast, both Amare and Melo would be making close to $20m by 2012. Miami's 3 stars also agreed to each take a paycut so that Miami could sign some non-minimum players, like Mike Miller and Udonis Haslem. That option won't be available for Amare and Melo (contracts can't be renegotiated), so the only hope for NY of getting Paul or Williams in FA is that one of the two is willing to sign a significantly below market contract.

Of course, this is all based on current CBA rules. Who knows what changes are coming. If existing player salaries are rolled back, if the maximum salary for a player is reduced, if the salary cap somehow increases - all these factors could increase NY's chances.

Marlin
02-22-2011, 12:44 PM
Bet they'd want an expiring, a first round pick, and a young player (probably ask for George, get rebuffed, and settle for Hansbrough, Rush, or Price).

TJ/Rush/1st: would you do it?

Marlin
02-22-2011, 12:48 PM
The Clippers are "dangling a first-round" pick in an effort to land Danilo Gallinari, sources tell ESPN's Chris Broussard.

Would be excellent for the Clips, and the Nuggets seem somewhat open to the idea of flipping Gallinari...wonder if the price is right?

Peck
02-22-2011, 12:53 PM
On the speculation of us trading Danny to the Nets for Derrick Favors, here are Favors' per-36 numbers vs. the per-36 rookie year numbers of fellow 19-year-olds Dwight Howard and Kwame Brown:

http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/8563/sfjhcxjsd.gif (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=favorde01&y1=2011&p2=howardw01&y2=2005&p3=brownkw01&y3=2002)

Favors is somewhere in between the two in scoring, rebounding and shot blocking. Kwame has surprisingly nice assists numbers, but his FG% is horrific. Also, notice that Favors is actually pulling down more offensive rebounds per-36 than Dwight did, an excellent 4.2 per-36.

If New Jersey offered up Favors for Granger I'd have to give it some serious consideration. If they sweetened the deal with either another prospect/solid player, a first or an expiring contract, I'd probably lean towards pulling the trigger.

Wait... did you just suggest trading Danny Granger for Derrik Favors? I've been skimming the thread this a.m. and this popped up. Surely I'm reading this wrong.

crazylikeafox
02-22-2011, 12:53 PM
I just wish he would walk.
His health has not been the best, & I can't imagine that working enviroment & related stress is helping in that capasity. Is staying to spite Isiah (that has to be the only reason he is staying, just to not let Isiah win) really worth working w/ Dolan for the remainder of the year?

Here is what I don't understand: didn't Donnie bring in Isaiah to coach the Pacers before Carlisle? Has their relationship deteriorated to where they don't like each other?

Anthem
02-22-2011, 12:57 PM
TJ/Rush/1st: would you do it?
For Nene? Heck yeah.

Anthem
02-22-2011, 12:58 PM
Here is some good stuff in Vecsey's column

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/dolan_feared_losing_turf_war_to_G18WeI4BDpuu5RQKog hgqJ
Typo in the first sentence? What a rag.

Slick Pinkham
02-22-2011, 01:01 PM
How can they afford one of them? I read somewhere last night they don't have that kind of cap room left.

It would require the two already under contract to re-negiotiate their deals to a less-than-max contract and the third to take a less-than max contract.

Recall that he Heat could not field a team with three max contract guys-- Lebron and Bosh had to take less in base salary, and perhaps Wade took some off too, though as a rule the players union doesn't want any player under contract to give back one penny. If the player wants it, I think he'd eventually get his way.

Botton line, Lebron and Bosh sacrificed some base salary to form a trio, and the 3rd guy on the Knicks would have to sacrifice a lot, or they would all have to sacrifice a little, to make it work there too.

Marlin
02-22-2011, 01:03 PM
For Nene? Heck yeah.

That's what I thought, too. It's within the lines set with the post I quoted, but I don't think it'd look that good on the Nuggets side.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 01:06 PM
The Clippers are "dangling a first-round" pick in an effort to land Danilo Gallinari, sources tell ESPN's Chris Broussard.

Would be excellent for the Clips, and the Nuggets seem somewhat open to the idea of flipping Gallinari...wonder if the price is right?

He would be a great fit with Eric. Galio would be a nice addition.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 01:07 PM
TJ/Rush/1st: would you do it?

they would proably ask for more. Nene is having an All-star type year.

Slick Pinkham
02-22-2011, 01:30 PM
They got some help, but not enough. They won't beat Boston. Their lack of depth is the same reason we can give them some trouble; our bench can beat their bench, and our PG and C and beat their PG and C.

I think that Miami realized the first year would be tough, but adding players each year using available exceptions would put them over the top.

As to beating their PG, they have dealt with that in the game against us by playing Lebron at PG every minute of the 4th quarter, which they also did against the Celtics.

Also the gap between the Heat and Celtics is a little exaggerated. It was large early when the Heat had barely been introduced to one another, but recall their in their last game Lebron had a free throw to tie the game with under 10 seconds left. He missed it. Then Mike Miller had a wide open 3 to also tie it at the buzzer. If Lebron makes the FT (about a 75% chance) or if Mike Miller makes the open 3 (about 35% chance, maybe more considering he was truly completely open) then the game goes into overtime. The difference between then is a ball bouncing one way, or not.

Also we have seen many instances where regular season series results get turned around dramatically in the playoffs.

Mackey_Rose
02-22-2011, 01:38 PM
Agreed Slick. I think it's way too early to write up the death certificate for Miami's championship chances this season.

They are definitely going to get better each year.

bulldog
02-22-2011, 02:37 PM
Wow, everyone keeps pounding on the Chris Paul to New York drum. I guess my post went ignored so I'll say it again.

Between Amare, and Carmelo the Knicks will have $40 million dollars in contracts for the offseason that those guys are free agents. In just two players. Even today that only leaves 18 million in cap space. After the CBA who knows? Unless they sign every player between now and then for 1 year deals, they'll have far more than that tied up and be unable to sign either of them.

Exactly. Never underestimate the power of New York media to tease their fans with unrealistic expectations.

The players union should be thrilled this trade went through. The Knicks should be firmly against a $45 million hard cap and may rally some of the other big market teams around them.

Miami, meanwhile, makes out like bandits, securing 2.5 superstars long-term in a way that might not be possible in the future.

rock747
02-22-2011, 03:01 PM
The NBA is becoming a Joke!! It's becoming unrealistic to be a small market team fan and think that they will ever have a chance. They can't keep their players! The sad thing is the NBA wants it this way.

King Tuts Tomb
02-22-2011, 04:30 PM
Agreed Slick. I think it's way too early to write up the death certificate for Miami's championship chances this season.

They are definitely going to get better each year.

Agreed. No one seems to remember last year when Boston was getting beat over the head by a bunch of teams and no one gave them a chance in the playoffs. If a team has championship talent, the regular season doesn't especially matter.

Pacerfan
02-22-2011, 04:47 PM
Walsh's future with Knicks uncertain
FOX Sports New York Post






Updated Feb 22, 2011 2:59 PM ET
The Carmelo Anthony blockbuster trade ó spearheaded by Knicks owner James Dolan with former team president and coach Isiah Thomas in his ear ó does not bode well for current Knicks president Donnie Walsh.


'MELO JOINS KNICKS
Nuggets trade 'Melo to Knicks
Kriegel: Did Knicks mortgage future?
Rosen: 'Melo won't mean more wins
Two sources told The Post on Tuesday that, as negotiations for Anthony heated up in Los Angeles with Dolan, Walsh bolted for Indiana to see his family during All-Star Weekend.

One source said Walsh packed up and left because he was irritated and felt it was a waste of time being in New York since trade negotiations were taking place in Los Angeles without him, and with Thomas advising Dolan.

Another league source said Thomas wanted to make the deal more than Walsh did.

Walsh underwent hip replacement surgery in November and since then had been unable to travel on a plane.

The soon-to-be 70-year-old returned to New York Tuesday to finalize the trade, which reportedly came to fruition after Dolan made the call to include Russian seven-footer Timofey Mozgov.

A Yahoo Sports report on Sunday, citing league sources, stated that Thomas, the coach of the Florida International University men's basketball team, was acting as the Knicks' top basketball executive in the Anthony talks.

That prompted a rare joint statement to be hustled out by Dolan, Walsh and coach Mike D'Antoni, claiming that they were on the "same page" and denying any "outside" influence on the team's operations.

But none were in the same place, as Dolan was in Los Angeles for a meeting with Anthony, Walsh was in Indiana, and D'Antoni was home in New York.


WAG-TASTIC!
Check out the lovely ladies of the NBA's all-WAGs team here.
D'Antoni admitted he was out of the loop over the weekend, and one source says the Knicks coach feels they gave up too much to obtain Anthony.

"I was not in contact for the last [few days] ó hanging out at the house and enjoying my weekend and [seeing] what happens," D'Antoni said. "I'm a spectator like everybody else."

Dolan and Thomas have remained close friends since Thomas' unsuccessful and highly unpopular four-year run ended with his firing in 2008.

Dolan tried to rehire the Hall of Fame point guard as a consultant last year, but the NBA overruled him, saying that Thomas could not work for the Knicks and continue to coach college players.

According to reports last summer, Thomas was involved in the Knicks' signing of power forward Amar'e Stoudemire and their failed bid to sign LeBron James.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/New-York-Knicks-president-Donnie-Walshs-future-uncertain-after-Carmelo-Anthony-trade-022211

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 05:41 PM
http://nba.fanhouse.com/2011/02/22/george-karl-ty-lawson-will-start-over-raymond-felton-for-now/

Raymon Felton coming off the bench.

O'Braindead
02-22-2011, 06:49 PM
Here are a couple of worthy tweets of quotes from Danny Granger:

MikeWellsNBA Mike Wells
Granger on Melo to NY and possibility of CP3 or Deron going there, 2: "I donít think itís good for the league. Teaming up, itís not good."
23 minutes ago

MikeWellsNBA Mike Wells
More Granger: "If the trend is to go to the better city, you got teams like us, Milwaukee, Minnesota, who donít have a shot."
22 minutes ago

Are you getting this David Stern? Are you getting this? Hello?

Pacerfan
02-22-2011, 06:52 PM
Here are a couple of worthy tweets of quotes from Danny Granger:

MikeWellsNBA Mike Wells
Granger on Melo to NY and possibility of CP3 or Deron going there, 2: "I donít think itís good for the league. Teaming up, itís not good."
23 minutes ago

MikeWellsNBA Mike Wells
More Granger: "If the trend is to go to the better city, you got teams like us, Milwaukee, Minnesota, who donít have a shot."
22 minutes ago

Are you getting this David Stern? Are you getting this? Hello?



And this is why you have to love the Reggie Miller's, Danny Granger's...etc of the league. They could have left but didn't...

Trophy
02-22-2011, 06:58 PM
The league is becoming way too commercial.

Mackey_Rose
02-22-2011, 08:07 PM
And this is why you have to love the Reggie Miller's, Danny Granger's...etc of the league. They could have left but didn't...

Dude Granger signed one extension for huge dollars. He isn't exactly a hero, and he definitely isn't even comparable to Reggie Miller and his tenure with the Pacers.

Pacerfan
02-22-2011, 08:26 PM
Dude Granger signed one extension for huge dollars. He isn't exactly a hero, and he definitely isn't even comparable to Reggie Miller and his tenure with the Pacers.

He's been with the Pacers the last few years when they weren't that good. He stayed even with JOB being here. He could have asked for a trade instead of wasting precious years in his prime. He's not in the top tier of players for sure, but I'm sure there are many teams that would love to have him if he wanted to be traded.

CableKC
02-22-2011, 08:31 PM
Dude Granger signed one extension for huge dollars. He isn't exactly a hero, and he definitely isn't even comparable to Reggie Miller and his tenure with the Pacers.
I don't get the sense that PacerFan was suggesting that the "Legend of Danny" is anywhere close to the "Legend of Reggie" when it comes to how he is viewed in PacerLand....my impression is that PacerFan was referring to Danny's willingness to stay with the Team that drafted him for the duration of his career ( yes, for now...just through 1 extension ).

The main point is that Danny hasn't asked to be traded despite the last 3 crap-tastic years that we have gone through.

shags
02-22-2011, 08:41 PM
My radical idea to stop these superteams (who I don't necessarily think are bad for the NBA):

INCREASE the maximum player salary to half the salary cap.

For example, let's say the maximum years you can re-sign with your own team is 5 years, while signing with another team is 4 years. And let's say the maximum salary to re-sign with your own team is 50% of the salary cap, while the maximum salary to sign with another team is 35% of the salary cap. And no raises unless the cap goes up.

So let's use $58 million as an example cap number, and say LeBron is a free agent with Cleveland. The Cavs could have offered him a 5 year, $145 million contract. The Heat (or any other team) could offer him a 4 year, $80 million contract.

What about a sign and trade? It's treated like signing with another team (35% of the cap, 4 years), with the caveat that the salary can go up in future years to no more than a max raise (let's say 10%) and no more than 50% of the cap in any one year. So LeBron's salary sign and trade goes to 4 years, $92 million ($20, $22, $24, $26 million).

I think this might work. LeBron (or any other player) don't really have a problem sacrificing $15 million over 6 years to be in a better situation. But sacrificing $53 million over 5 years? That's some serious cash. Which is why, if Denver called Melo's bluff, he may have stayed. He got his cake and ate it too.

I haven't worked out the bugs, and there's probably some questions I don't have a good answer for, but I think an idea like this helps teams keep "superstars" for the duration of their career.

Hicks
02-22-2011, 08:50 PM
Shags, I like your idea, but I'd take it in the other direction. Keep the % the same if it's their current team, but lower the % if it's another team.

King Tuts Tomb
02-22-2011, 08:51 PM
My radical idea to stop these superteams (who I don't necessarily think are bad for the NBA):


I like the idea of using the cap in creative ways to push teams and players to do things the right way. But I'm not sure you want such a massive difference in pay between players on the same team. That's sure to breed resentment.

King Tuts Tomb
02-22-2011, 08:57 PM
I've been thinking about this idea for a while and wonder what you all make of it.

What if, instead of signing players to a dollar amount, you sign them to a % of the salary cap. So the best player on your team can sign up to 25%. If the cap is $60 million, your best player makes $15 mil. This way if the league makes more money the cap goes up and your players make more money. If the league makes less money then the players take a hit too. Share the risk, share the reward.

croz24
02-22-2011, 09:16 PM
Here are a couple of worthy tweets of quotes from Danny Granger:

MikeWellsNBA Mike Wells
Granger on Melo to NY and possibility of CP3 or Deron going there, 2: "I don’t think it’s good for the league. Teaming up, it’s not good."
23 minutes ago

MikeWellsNBA Mike Wells
More Granger: "If the trend is to go to the better city, you got teams like us, Milwaukee, Minnesota, who don’t have a shot."
22 minutes ago

Are you getting this David Stern? Are you getting this? Hello?

i kinda take offense to the "If the trend is to go to the better city, you got teams like us, Milwaukee, Minnesota, who don’t have a shot" statement. maybe in an nba player's mind who wants the night life but in terms of raising a family, i'd much rather live in a city like indy or minneapolis or milwaukee than miami or los angeles. i know what granger means by it but still, give me indy's hospitality any day over the trash that new york has to offer.

shags
02-22-2011, 09:30 PM
I've been thinking about this idea for a while and wonder what you all make of it.

What if, instead of signing players to a dollar amount, you sign them to a % of the salary cap. So the best player on your team can sign up to 25%. If the cap is $60 million, your best player makes $15 mil. This way if the league makes more money the cap goes up and your players make more money. If the league makes less money then the players take a hit too. Share the risk, share the reward.

I agree with the principle, but the problem is that it doesn't discourage "superteams".

Under that proposal, if I'm understanding it correctly, the Heat could still sign LeBron, Wade, and Bosh. But if you put the max to 50%, then the Heat can't. They can sign Wade and Bosh, but not Wade and LeBron, and certainly not Wade, LeBron, and Bosh. I don't think Wade gives up $45 million to create a superteam.

And if players like Wade and LeBron are willing to sacrifice $45 to $55 million to do that, then more power to them. IMO, there's not a fair system to stop that.

But they've proven they're willing to give up around $15 million. Not to trumpet my proposal too much, but I think it helps small markets keep their superstars, and also is palatable to the players because of the potential to make more money.

Taterhead
02-22-2011, 10:02 PM
Yeah, it's funny how now that Pierce has won a title the first half of his career has been revised. Before KG and Ray came Pierce was seen as an selfish guy and a someone who didn't get the team game. He played a prominent role on one of the worst teams ever (the 06 Celtics). Now that he got some better players around him he was always a leader and an unselfish guy. Pierce never changed, but the perception of him has.

That's not true at all. Paul Pierce had a reputation as one of the biggest clutch players in the game long before Garnett and Allen ever joined him. Pierce stayed with the Celtics through a rebuilding process that's all. He was on some bad teams. But he has always been a great competitor and true franchise player.

Young
02-22-2011, 10:21 PM
That's not true at all. Paul Pierce had a reputation as one of the biggest clutch players in the game long before Garnett and Allen ever joined him. Pierce stayed with the Celtics through a rebuilding process that's all. He was on some bad teams. But he has always been a great competitor and true franchise player.

I could be wrong but didn't the Celtics try to trade Pierce to Portland for a draft pick a few years ago but Pierce exercised his no trade clause? Then he changed his attitude? (not that he wasn't clutch before)

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 10:26 PM
The Nuggets also got 15 mil in trade exceptions.

King Tuts Tomb
02-22-2011, 10:33 PM
That's not true at all. Paul Pierce had a reputation as one of the biggest clutch players in the game long before Garnett and Allen ever joined him. Pierce stayed with the Celtics through a rebuilding process that's all. He was on some bad teams. But he has always been a great competitor and true franchise player.

Not true at all? I seem to remember a lot of criticism of Pierce in the mid-00's after the Eastern Conf Finals trip with Toine and JOB. The Celtics were a 35-45 win team for about five years and Pierce took a lot of the flack for that, highlighted by his ejection in the Indy-Boston first round series.

rock747
02-22-2011, 11:11 PM
The current system has to be changed, or it really does look bleak for us Pacer fans and every other small market in the NBA. The East just got better. We really are lucky to have a player like Granger that has so far shown to be pretty loyal to the Pacers.

DTheKing23
02-22-2011, 11:34 PM
MELOs reaction to being traded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CibFcqiCYAg&feature=player_embedded#at=42

Kegboy
02-23-2011, 12:00 AM
Even though I like Memphis, have to like seeing Denver win so short-handed. Lawson had 21 points, 7 assists, 6 steals and 5 rebounds against a good defender.

Taterhead
02-23-2011, 12:39 AM
Not true at all? I seem to remember a lot of criticism of Pierce in the mid-00's after the Eastern Conf Finals trip with Toine and JOB. The Celtics were a 35-45 win team for about five years and Pierce took a lot of the flack for that, highlighted by his ejection in the Indy-Boston first round series.

Who said that? Some guy on ESPN? Some journalist?

I guarantee you not many in the NBA thought that.


I could be wrong but didn't the Celtics try to trade Pierce to Portland for a draft pick a few years ago but Pierce exercised his no trade clause? Then he changed his attitude? (not that he wasn't clutch before)

A rumor is a rumor. Doesn't mean it's true. He has been the center piece of their franchise for a long time, that says more to me.

King Tuts Tomb
02-23-2011, 12:55 AM
Who said that? Some guy on ESPN? Some journalist?

I guarantee you not many in the NBA thought that.

A rumor is a rumor. Doesn't mean it's true. He has been the center piece of their franchise for a long time, that says more to me.

I think you're missing what I said. That was the perception of Pierce at that time, from a lot of fans and the media (I don't know what people in the NBA said about it, I don't talk to any players or GMs). I thought it was unfair then because he didn't have a lot of help at that time. Just like I don't think it's fair to peg Danny as a perpetual loser now because he's been on some lackluster teams too.

Taterhead
02-23-2011, 01:47 AM
I think you're missing what I said. That was the perception of Pierce at that time, from a lot of fans and the media (I don't know what people in the NBA said about it, I don't talk to any players or GMs). I thought it was unfair then because he didn't have a lot of help at that time. Just like I don't think it's fair to peg Danny as a perpetual loser now because he's been on some lackluster teams too.

Idk man, I didn't hear much of that I guess. I knew Pierce was an animal when he was nailing clutch three's against us and a young Ron Artest in the playoffs on the road.

When I see Pierce play I see a competitive fire that Granger just doesn't have. And that is something that I've always seen in Paul. It's not just how many points you score, it's when you score them.

Those teams Pierce were on were horrible. Yet they still were competitive, even if they weren't pleasing the fans in Boston. Those who were criticizing Paul probably did so because they expect to win championships. All fans expect here is the playoffs, and they hope for championships. Big difference.

He got to the ECF with JOB, nuff said, IMO.

ilive4sports
02-23-2011, 03:04 AM
Idk man, I didn't hear much of that I guess. I knew Pierce was an animal when he was nailing clutch three's against us and a young Ron Artest in the playoffs on the road.

When I see Pierce play I see a competitive fire that Granger just doesn't have. And that is something that I've always seen in Paul. It's not just how many points you score, it's when you score them.

Those teams Pierce were on were horrible. Yet they still were competitive, even if they weren't pleasing the fans in Boston. Those who were criticizing Paul probably did so because they expect to win championships. All fans expect here is the playoffs, and they hope for championships. Big difference.

He got to the ECF with JOB, nuff said, IMO.

I think you are putting too much emphasis on scoring at the end of the game when we need buckets. Granger has come through time and time again this season alone scoring when the team gets into a drought. He will score 8+ points in a row for us, keeping us in the game or putting us over the top. Hell tonight in the third quarter he is why we really pulled ahead.

A clutch bucket doesn't just come at the end of the game. It comes at when your team needs a basket. Danny may not have a ton of 4th quarter baskets that people like to talk about (not just his fault, our offense and lack of plays to properly give Danny a decent shot really killed us), but there are points in games where he just takes over. He will come down the court and hit a three at the right time, then do it again, then drive and get to the line.

Taterhead
02-23-2011, 03:10 AM
I think you are putting too much emphasis on scoring at the end of the game when we need buckets. Granger has come through time and time again this season alone scoring when the team gets into a drought. He will score 8+ points in a row for us, keeping us in the game or putting us over the top. Hell tonight in the third quarter he is why we really pulled ahead.

A clutch bucket doesn't just come at the end of the game. It comes at when your team needs a basket. Danny may not have a ton of 4th quarter baskets that people like to talk about (not just his fault, our offense and lack of plays to properly give Danny a decent shot really killed us), but there are points in games where he just takes over. He will come down the court and hit a three at the right time, then do it again, then drive and get to the line.

I disagree. I think it's because of his limited offensive game. And he doesn't do it nearly enough. Paul Pierce does that, and does it at the end of games too.

King Tuts Tomb
02-23-2011, 03:15 AM
And if Danny gets some help and wins a championship in a couple years we'll all remember the beginning of his career as a prelude to greatness, just like Pierce!

Jared Sullinger
02-23-2011, 03:25 AM
For the record: Paul Pierce won an average of 37-games-per-season prior to K.G. and Allen's arrival (this includes extrapolating Boston's .380 winning percentage in 98-99 to 31-wins). He peaked at 49-wins and an Eastern Conference Finals appearance in the horrible 01-02 East, and plummeted to 24-wins the season prior to the aforementioned K.G. and Allen arrival.

Danny's current wins-per-season? 36.

Let's bring in two future Hall of Famers who can still go and see how much that changes in three years.

Taterhead
02-23-2011, 03:51 AM
And if Danny gets some help and wins a championship in a couple years we'll all remember the beginning of his career as a prelude to greatness, just like Pierce!

Do you think the odds of that happening are very good?

Didn't the Celtics trade Al Jefferson and Jeff Green to get those two guys?

So who is gonna be our Jeff Green and Al Jefferson? Cause I ain't trading Roy or PG.


For the record: Paul Pierce won an average of 37-games-per-season prior to K.G. and Allen's arrival (this includes extrapolating Boston's .380 winning percentage in 98-99 to 31-wins). He peaked at 49-wins and an Eastern Conference Finals appearance in the horrible 01-02 East, and plummeted to 24-wins the season prior to the aforementioned K.G. and Allen arrival.

Danny's current wins-per-season? 36.

Let's bring in two future Hall of Famers who can still go and see how much that changes in three years.

Same question. How? Without trading Granger, Roy or PG.

ilive4sports
02-23-2011, 03:56 AM
I disagree. I think it's because of his limited offensive game. And he doesn't do it nearly enough. Paul Pierce does that, and does it at the end of games too.

He does it nearly every game. Often it comes in the third quarter.

And why are you comparing him to Paul Pierce, a man who has been in the league for 13 years and didn't win a thing until two HOF players were brought to Boston? The year two years that the Celtics went deep in the playoffs before the big three formed, Pierce played with a legit 20 ppg scorer, something Danny has yet to experience. He also played on a team where O'Brien's offense made sense, where here it was a mess. And the East was absolutely terrible those years no less.

Danny is in his sixth season. Here are his numbers:
21.1ppg, 5.5 rpg, 2.7 apg, 43%FG, 39% from three, 2.72TOs

Here are Pierce's in his sixth season:
23ppg, 6.5rpg, 5.1apg, 40%FG, 30% from three, 3.79TOs

They aren't that different. Pierce has higher averages, but Danny seems to be more efficient. The record of the celtics that year. 36-46, lost in the first round of the playoffs to the Pacers 4-0.

Now Danny is about to do the same thing with the Pacers. We will probably have a similar record to that of the Celtics in 03-04, get into the playoffs and most likely not make too much noise. So whats the big difference? Did Pierce's "clutch" shots make his team so much better than what the Pacers are this year? Nope.

Not every player shows his emotion the same way. Danny will always be an even keeled type of guy because thats how he was raised. He doesn't get too high or too low. That does not mean he doesn't have that fire or doesn't want to win as badly as someone like Paul Pierce.

And how is Danny's offense exactly limited? He can shoot, he can drive, he can get to the lane, he can create for others. He's a rather skilled offensive player. At the sixth year in PP's career he was better at attacking the rim, but Danny can do it and he does. The thought that Danny doesn't drive or can't drive is one of the biggest fallacies on this board. He always can and often would. And now that we run a real offense he does it even more often. And Danny is a better shooter. Pierce has become a much better shooter than he was (and yes I know he shot 40% from three in 01-02) as he has gotten older and playing in the big 3.

You know what the biggest difference in Granger's career and Pierce's early career success? Pierce had a better team and played when the conference was much weaker.

Your idea of clutch shots at the end of the game are also one of the most overrated ideas in basketball as well. Yeah I said it. They provide great memories, no doubt. But if player X just hits his shots throughout that game, there is no need for a clutch shot at the end of the game. If Paul Pierce is shooting 3-15 and hits a shot at the buzzer to win the game, does that mean he played well? Hell no. If he would have just hit his shots throughout the game the team would have never been in that position. Danny taking over games in the third quarter is just as important as Pierce hitting a buzzer beater because at the end of the game 2 points is 2 points.

Jared Sullinger
02-23-2011, 03:57 AM
I like Roy, but if he can be the centerpiece in acquiring a 2007 K.G.-level talent, I'd probably have to wave goodbye to him. I'd be a little more hesitant to move P.G. for a 2007 Ray Allen, though.

ilive4sports
02-23-2011, 04:02 AM
Do you think the odds of that happening are very good?

Didn't the Celtics trade Al Jefferson and Jeff Green to get those two guys?

So who is gonna be our Jeff Green and Al Jefferson? Cause I ain't trading Roy or PG.



Same question. How? Without trading Granger, Roy or PG.

The idea is to let our young guys develop. There isn't a star at the level above Granger that we can just trade for right now. Even if its trading Granger. Maybe we could have traded for Melo, but I don't think we ever could have without giving up too much.

We have Roy, DC, PG, Hans, Stephenson, McBob, Rush and Price who are all extremely young. That's what is holding this team back right now. It's not that Danny isn't a good enough player. Its that this team is incredibly young. Right now we are thinking PG is going to take over this franchise. Guess what, Danny Granger would be great to have along side him. Ask Kobe how much he would like a guy that is deadly from the outside and can attack the rim. He would love it. Add a center that Roy can develop into and a point guard that Darren can become and you have a damn good team.

King Tuts Tomb
02-23-2011, 04:23 AM
The idea is to let our young guys develop. There isn't a star at the level above Granger that we can just trade for right now. Even if its trading Granger. Maybe we could have traded for Melo, but I don't think we ever could have without giving up too much.

We have Roy, DC, PG, Hans, Stephenson, McBob, Rush and Price who are all extremely young. That's what is holding this team back right now. It's not that Danny isn't a good enough player. Its that this team is incredibly young. Right now we are thinking PG is going to take over this franchise. Guess what, Danny Granger would be great to have along side him. Ask Kobe how much he would like a guy that is deadly from the outside and can attack the rim. He would love it. Add a center that Roy can develop into and a point guard that Darren can become and you have a damn good team.

My thoughts exactly. I see a lot of people on here complaining that because of the current CBA we can't attract good free agents. Well if we build a strong core then quality free agents will want to come here and play for a contender, regardless of the size of the market. I don't see players complaining when they get traded to San Antonio.

King Tuts Tomb
02-23-2011, 04:26 AM
Do you think the odds of that happening are very good?


Who knows? The NBA landscape changes pretty quickly. Four years ago LA was a on the way to being a 30 win team with Kobe Bryant demanding a trade. Now they're defending champs. Last year Cleveland had the best record in the league, now they're one of the worst teams ever.

A lot can happen in the NBA in a short period of time.

Taterhead
02-23-2011, 10:48 AM
He does it nearly every game. Often it comes in the third quarter.

And why are you comparing him to Paul Pierce, a man who has been in the league for 13 years and didn't win a thing until two HOF players were brought to Boston? The year two years that the Celtics went deep in the playoffs before the big three formed, Pierce played with a legit 20 ppg scorer, something Danny has yet to experience. He also played on a team where O'Brien's offense made sense, where here it was a mess. And the East was absolutely terrible those years no less.

Danny is in his sixth season. Here are his numbers:
21.1ppg, 5.5 rpg, 2.7 apg, 43%FG, 39% from three, 2.72TOs

Here are Pierce's in his sixth season:
23ppg, 6.5rpg, 5.1apg, 40%FG, 30% from three, 3.79TOs

They aren't that different. Pierce has higher averages, but Danny seems to be more efficient. The record of the celtics that year. 36-46, lost in the first round of the playoffs to the Pacers 4-0.

Now Danny is about to do the same thing with the Pacers. We will probably have a similar record to that of the Celtics in 03-04, get into the playoffs and most likely not make too much noise. So whats the big difference? Did Pierce's "clutch" shots make his team so much better than what the Pacers are this year? Nope.

Not every player shows his emotion the same way. Danny will always be an even keeled type of guy because thats how he was raised. He doesn't get too high or too low. That does not mean he doesn't have that fire or doesn't want to win as badly as someone like Paul Pierce.

And how is Danny's offense exactly limited? He can shoot, he can drive, he can get to the lane, he can create for others. He's a rather skilled offensive player. At the sixth year in PP's career he was better at attacking the rim, but Danny can do it and he does. The thought that Danny doesn't drive or can't drive is one of the biggest fallacies on this board. He always can and often would. And now that we run a real offense he does it even more often. And Danny is a better shooter. Pierce has become a much better shooter than he was (and yes I know he shot 40% from three in 01-02) as he has gotten older and playing in the big 3.

You know what the biggest difference in Granger's career and Pierce's early career success? Pierce had a better team and played when the conference was much weaker.

Your idea of clutch shots at the end of the game are also one of the most overrated ideas in basketball as well. Yeah I said it. They provide great memories, no doubt. But if player X just hits his shots throughout that game, there is no need for a clutch shot at the end of the game. If Paul Pierce is shooting 3-15 and hits a shot at the buzzer to win the game, does that mean he played well? Hell no. If he would have just hit his shots throughout the game the team would have never been in that position. Danny taking over games in the third quarter is just as important as Pierce hitting a buzzer beater because at the end of the game 2 points is 2 points.

He's limited because he has no post game, and he can't dribble the ball with his left hand what so ever.

I only compared him to Pierce because someone else did.


Who knows? The NBA landscape changes pretty quickly. Four years ago LA was a on the way to being a 30 win team with Kobe Bryant demanding a trade. Now they're defending champs. Last year Cleveland had the best record in the league, now they're one of the worst teams ever.

A lot can happen in the NBA in a short period of time.

We are more of a Cleveland than a Los Angeles my friend. Sorry but it's true. LA was never on their way to 30 wins.

spreedom
02-23-2011, 08:13 PM
Melo is wearing #7 tonight for the Knicks, which was the number Kelenna Azubuike was originally assigned. Buke has #17 now. Can anyone explain why the league allowed this change? Just curious.

King Tuts Tomb
02-23-2011, 08:29 PM
We are more of a Cleveland than a Los Angeles my friend. Sorry but it's true. LA was never on their way to 30 wins.

If Kobe wouldn't have vetoed his trade for Deng they absolutely would have won 30 or less games. Instead they schemed Pau for Kwame. It's a razor thin line between success and failure in the NBA.

Unclebuck
02-24-2011, 08:55 AM
I watched parts of the press conference annuncing the trade of Melo to the Knicks and it was sad to see Donnie Walsh like that. He doesn't look well. I don't believe he spoke at all during the presser and at the end they very discretely got hm off the stage and he had to use a walker.