Zooropa wrote:Besart19 wrote:Zooropa wrote:
RoLo was beyond solid last year. He's a starting-caliber center on an insanely team-friendly deal with the cap spiking. If Marco Belinelli got SAC #22 this year, RoLo could've gotten us something. Ditto for Grant, although in my mind getting rid of him was even crazier.
Calm down... don't you see you're the only one to oppose the trade here?!
if it wont work out you'd have a high lottery pick and 70M to spend in 2017... Get over it... It's a win-win situation
I'm the only one out of the five people who seem to be awake right now to oppose the trade. Flip through the thread––I'm not alone. But even if I were, my opinions are mine alone and that's what makes debate possible.
I don't know why you're telling me to calm down, when I've been completely calm throughout this discussion. As I said in my last post, I'm at the agree-to-disagree part of the evening because the tone is getting hostile. I don't like the trade, and that's okay.
u know. you are right for the most part.
where you are wrong is this, you overvalue RoLo's contract and didnt compare holiday/grant (dif. player types, but somewhat same talent level).
The knicks didnt loose anything, except for RoLo's cool hair and personality, which is important no doubt. But the gamble on Rose is worth the trade off.
1. We dont loose any cap flexibillity
2. We finally have a Leadguard, which the FO so desperately wanted
3. We have "Starpower" to attract FA's (multiple reports say the same)
4. We exchanged young talent (grant-holiday)
Other than the really really good contract RoLo was on i dont think we lost anything. and i trade an average center for derrick rose any day of the week, especially as 1 year rental


































