ImageImageImageImageImage

Grunwald depreciation day

Moderators: j4remi, HerSports85, NoLayupRule, GONYK, Jeff Van Gully, dakomish23, Deeeez Knicks, mpharris36

User avatar
GONYK
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 66,999
And1: 45,769
Joined: Jun 27, 2003
Location: Brunson Gang
   

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#41 » by GONYK » Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:55 pm

Knicks_Fan2 wrote:
GONYK wrote:
MaseInYourFace wrote:Yup Novak was a bad signing. But it's not too much of a killer either. If you want to kill Grunwald for anything it's that he didn't leave himself a lot of space for flexibility for the next few years. He basically locked himself in for the next couple of years.


The only clear mistake I think Grunwald pulled was picking up Chauncey's contracts, then amnestying him like a week later.

That was our get out of jail free card, and we used it on a player who we didn't have to pay in the first place.

I know why he did it. We would have need Billups' contract in any potential CP3 deal. But to commit to the longshot, and then waste the amnesty after it was a bit ridiculous.


Couldn't have gotten Chandler without this, though. Calculated--maybe reckless--risk.


Couldn't we have gotten Chandler if we never picked up Chauncey's option in the first place?
seren
RealGM
Posts: 24,720
And1: 4,949
Joined: Jul 21, 2002

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#42 » by seren » Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:55 pm

Knicks_Fan2 wrote:
GettinitDone wrote:Lin would have done wonders for us. I'm his fan for a reason, he has this knack for influencing his teammates to run and move the ball. The Rockets team without him playing iso-Harden are a sorry ass team, but when Lin plays and starts moving the ball, and sacrificing, the whole team also moves the ball.

I remember vividly when Woody took helm last year, when Melo got back from injuries, we were blowing out teams because we set the tempo offensively in the beginning of games and jumped on teams in the first quarters. In the middle of it all was Lin quarterbacking everything. Everyone had the ball. Those that didn't have the ball kept moving and kept finding ways to be open. Shump got 1-2 alley oops a game from Lin, Fields got 1-2 backdoor cut alley oops a game from Lin. Everyone had easy baskets and because the offense was so easy, they made commitment to play D. Now in contrast, the iso stuff made it hard for everyone to contribute offensively and when the offense is hard, players naturally worry about it more than defense.

I am a fan of Lin not because of Linsanity, or hoping he would average 30ppg and 15apg... but rather, again, he has uncanny knack for making his teammates move the ball, sacrifice, and focus on one thing they have in common: winning.

But apparently, Felton is "a much better fit" for this team. You can never win in multi-billion dollar industry worrying about money. Being money smart is appreciated, but should never get in the way of good judgment/ analysis of talent. And out of all teams, we are the most valuable, richest, capital city of the world and the owner of this team is worried about several millions of dollars? Damn.


ahh, you were so happy to write this post. Is this all you do with your day? Troll around realgm for posts where you can potentially talk about Lin?



Fair to talk about Lin.

Who is our guard rotation right now? Felton/White/Kidd/JR. Are you telling me Lin wouldn't be an upgrade over any of these guys?

What did we gain with letting Lin go? Did we get a second rounder? Did we get cash to spend somewhere else? Did we get some kind of an exception?

No. We lost him for nothing. NOTHING!!!
seren
RealGM
Posts: 24,720
And1: 4,949
Joined: Jul 21, 2002

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#43 » by seren » Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:58 pm

GONYK wrote:
I get the opposite impression

I think, with the exception of possibly a few players, this is a roster Woodson wanted.

Dude loves vets he can trust


Copeland
White
Pablo

That is 20 percent of the roster for you. I am pretty sure Woodson never even heard about these guys.

KT was a throw in in the Felton deal. That is four dead spots for you.

He apparently thought so well about Camby that he went hard after Rashweed. Now that dude is injured, that is five dead spots on the roster.
User avatar
hubertdavis44
Sophomore
Posts: 187
And1: 4
Joined: Mar 04, 2011
Location: Washington, DC via Long Island, NY
       

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#44 » by hubertdavis44 » Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:59 pm

GONYK wrote:
MaseInYourFace wrote:Yup Novak was a bad signing. But it's not too much of a killer either. If you want to kill Grunwald for anything it's that he didn't leave himself a lot of space for flexibility for the next few years. He basically locked himself in for the next couple of years.


The only clear mistake I think Grunwald pulled was picking up Chauncey's contracts, then amnestying him like a week later.

That was our get out of jail free card, and we used it on a player who we didn't have to pay in the first place.

I know why he did it. We would have need Billups' contract in any potential CP3 deal. But to commit to the longshot, and then waste the amnesty after it was a bit ridiculous.


This is my main gripe with Grunwald. That's 20 mil per year that had one outstanding year for us.
Falstaffxx
Banned User
Posts: 9,153
And1: 165
Joined: Sep 27, 2010

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#45 » by Falstaffxx » Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:59 pm

seren wrote:Fair to talk about Lin.

Who is our guard rotation right now? Felton/White/Kidd/JR. Are you telling me Lin wouldn't be an upgrade over any of these guys?

What did we gain with letting Lin go? Did we get a second rounder? Did we get cash to spend somewhere else? Did we get some kind of an exception?

No. We lost him for nothing. NOTHING!!!


It kills me. We had a good young player just drop into our laps, and let him walk for nothing because the owner is stubborn.
kane2021
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 17,005
And1: 6,067
Joined: Oct 03, 2008
Location: It's OK to feel that way. Just sick of hearing about it all the time.

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#46 » by kane2021 » Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:59 pm

I think we promised billups his option as part of the trade. Remember he refused to go to nj. Or that was the rumor. Knicks saw a chance to get a good pivot and the rest his history.
Image

Never underestimate the strength of knowledge.

Bring back the physical game and send the softies home.
User avatar
GONYK
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 66,999
And1: 45,769
Joined: Jun 27, 2003
Location: Brunson Gang
   

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#47 » by GONYK » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:01 pm

seren wrote:
GONYK wrote:
I get the opposite impression

I think, with the exception of possibly a few players, this is a roster Woodson wanted.

Dude loves vets he can trust


Copeland
White
Pablo

That is 20 percent of the roster for you. I am pretty sure Woodson never even heard about these guys.

KT was a throw in in the Felton deal. That is four dead spots for you.

He apparently thought so well about Camby that he went hard after Rashweed. Now that dude is injured, that is five dead spots on the roster.


Well, Cope, White and Pablo are the people I was referring to, but they are end of the bench.

Rasheed should never have been signed over KMart. He definitely should not be taking up a spot in a addition to Kurt.
User avatar
MaseInYourFace
RealGM
Posts: 26,393
And1: 11,272
Joined: Jul 14, 2010
Location: North Jersey
     

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#48 » by MaseInYourFace » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:01 pm

seren wrote:
GONYK wrote:
I get the opposite impression

I think, with the exception of possibly a few players, this is a roster Woodson wanted.

Dude loves vets he can trust


Copeland
White
Pablo

That is 20 percent of the roster for you. I am pretty sure Woodson never even heard about these guys.

KT was a throw in in the Felton deal. That is four dead spots for you.

He apparently thought so well about Camby that he went hard after Rashweed. Now that dude is injured, that is five dead spots on the roster.


I think that's a bit of a straw man. Those three guys were signed to be roster fillers or role players in Pablo's case not major bench pieces.
MIAMI HEAT BAF
G- James Harden
G- Malcolm Brogdon
F- Robert Covington
F- Paul Millsap
C- Dwight Howard
Bench: S. Milton, F. Korkmaz, K. Bazemore, D. Oturu, J. McDaniels, A. Caruso, T. Mann
IR: X. Tillman Sr., J. Nwora, E. Hughes,
seren
RealGM
Posts: 24,720
And1: 4,949
Joined: Jul 21, 2002

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#49 » by seren » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:02 pm

Falstaffxx wrote:
seren wrote:Fair to talk about Lin.

Who is our guard rotation right now? Felton/White/Kidd/JR. Are you telling me Lin wouldn't be an upgrade over any of these guys?

What did we gain with letting Lin go? Did we get a second rounder? Did we get cash to spend somewhere else? Did we get some kind of an exception?

No. We lost him for nothing. NOTHING!!!


It kills me. We had a good young player just drop into our laps, and let him walk for nothing because the owner is stubborn.


The ownership is cheap. That comes down to that.

Lakers are spending 100 million dollars on their roster plus luxury tax.

Their ticket prices are only second to the NY Knicks.
Knicks_Fan2
RealGM
Posts: 20,348
And1: 4,675
Joined: May 14, 2010

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#50 » by Knicks_Fan2 » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:02 pm

kane2021 wrote:I think we promised billups his option as part of the trade. Remember he refused to go to nj. Or that was the rumor. Knicks saw a chance to get a good pivot and the rest his history.


If we didn't pick up his option, it would've $4-6mm (forget if it was 4 or 6) of dead money and we couldn't have gotten chandler and we wouldn't have had a pg that season.
User avatar
K_ick_God
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 80,879
And1: 43,336
Joined: Oct 10, 2003
   

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#51 » by K_ick_God » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:02 pm

GONYK wrote:I get the opposite impression

I think, with the exception of possibly a few players, this is a roster Woodson wanted.

Dude loves vets he can trust



I agree with GONYK and not seren. Woodson never really was enamored with Lin. Talked him up because he felt he had to embrace Linsanity to get his paycheck locked in. But he might have well gone away from Lin anyway.

Definitely feel Woodson likes vets with track records.
User avatar
GONYK
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 66,999
And1: 45,769
Joined: Jun 27, 2003
Location: Brunson Gang
   

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#52 » by GONYK » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:02 pm

kane2021 wrote:I think we promised billups his option as part of the trade. Remember he refused to go to nj. Or that was the rumor. Knicks saw a chance to get a good pivot and the rest his history.


I'm aware of this, and I agree that that was the motivation.

But it was always a dumb move.

Too much loyalty, not enough savvy from this group. That would be my main criticism.

Riley would have shown Billups the door.
User avatar
GONYK
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 66,999
And1: 45,769
Joined: Jun 27, 2003
Location: Brunson Gang
   

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#53 » by GONYK » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:03 pm

Knicks_Fan2 wrote:
kane2021 wrote:I think we promised billups his option as part of the trade. Remember he refused to go to nj. Or that was the rumor. Knicks saw a chance to get a good pivot and the rest his history.


If we didn't pick up his option, it would've $4-6mm (forget if it was 4 or 6) of dead money and we couldn't have gotten chandler and we wouldn't have had a pg that season.


We didn't have a PG that season anyway, but I do see the point on the financials
User avatar
Rasho Brezec
RealGM
Posts: 61,959
And1: 18,587
Joined: Mar 12, 2008
Contact:
   

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#54 » by Rasho Brezec » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:03 pm

GONYK wrote:
seren wrote:He put the most unathletic roster imaginable out there. Not that I am happy with Melo, but the role players as a group on this team can only play a low speed game. We can't get easy buckets because nobody can run. We can't keep up with athletes like last night. We are dead last in the league in assists per game because nobody moves without the ball.

You can put some of it on the coach and his brand of basketball, but the fact is we simply don't have many guys who can keep up with the young legs in this league.

So bravo Grunwald for creating a down the hill supporting cast with zero athleticism.

Edit: I officially miss Lin, Fields, and Jeffries. That says a lot...


What was the alternative though?

I know he could have stocked up on a lot of athletic misfits that have been cut around the league, but that comes at its own cost.

I don't understand why Sheed was chosen over Kmart and Birdman, but other than that I'm not sure how he could have gotten more value out of the nothing we had available to offer after we let Lin go.

Here's a crazy thought, how about not letting Lin go and build from there?

Yeah, I said it. The Cocoon experiment failed.
Image
seren
RealGM
Posts: 24,720
And1: 4,949
Joined: Jul 21, 2002

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#55 » by seren » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:03 pm

MaseInYourFace wrote:
seren wrote:Copeland
White
Pablo

That is 20 percent of the roster for you. I am pretty sure Woodson never even heard about these guys.

KT was a throw in in the Felton deal. That is four dead spots for you.

He apparently thought so well about Camby that he went hard after Rashweed. Now that dude is injured, that is five dead spots on the roster.


I think that's a bit of a straw man. Those three guys were signed to be roster fillers or role players in Pablo's case not major bench pieces.


That is not how you build a championship roster. Your 15th guy has to be good enough to get minutes when necessary. Heck, I'd understand putting some rookie there for future, but if that is not where you are going, at least put a dam good veteran. Not a 30 year old rookie who doesn't know where to stand.
User avatar
GONYK
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 66,999
And1: 45,769
Joined: Jun 27, 2003
Location: Brunson Gang
   

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#56 » by GONYK » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:04 pm

KnicksGod wrote:
GONYK wrote:I get the opposite impression

I think, with the exception of possibly a few players, this is a roster Woodson wanted.

Dude loves vets he can trust



I agree with GONYK and not seren. Woodson never really was enamored with Lin. Talked him up because he felt he had to embrace Linsanity to get his paycheck locked in. But he might have well gone away from Lin anyway.

Definitely feel Woodson likes vets with track records.


Woodson and Grunnie are college buddies. There is no way Woodson was left out of the loop this season.
User avatar
hubertdavis44
Sophomore
Posts: 187
And1: 4
Joined: Mar 04, 2011
Location: Washington, DC via Long Island, NY
       

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#57 » by hubertdavis44 » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:04 pm

Couldn't we have gotten Chandler if we never picked up Chauncey's option in the first place?


Well Chauncey's option was picked up by Donnie, so basically Grunwald was left in a tough position. Obviously hindsight is 20/20 but damn, I still wish we had that Amnesty.
OhMyBosh
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,744
And1: 1,206
Joined: Jan 17, 2005

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#58 » by OhMyBosh » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:05 pm

Grunwald's strategy has always been to acquire a superstar, and then fill it with veterans that are almost on their last legs since older teams always manage to find ways to win.

It's a decent strategy to get into the playoffs rather easily since veterans can grind through 82 games much better than a young squad, but there comes a time when athletic teams can pounce on mismatches.
Knicks_Fan2
RealGM
Posts: 20,348
And1: 4,675
Joined: May 14, 2010

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#59 » by Knicks_Fan2 » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:05 pm

GONYK wrote:
Knicks_Fan2 wrote:
kane2021 wrote:I think we promised billups his option as part of the trade. Remember he refused to go to nj. Or that was the rumor. Knicks saw a chance to get a good pivot and the rest his history.


If we didn't pick up his option, it would've $4-6mm (forget if it was 4 or 6) of dead money and we couldn't have gotten chandler and we wouldn't have had a pg that season.


We didn't have a PG that season anyway, but I do see the point on the financials


Right, point was, where we had an alternative (either pg or center) in picking up his option, we would have neither if we didn't pick up the option.
User avatar
GONYK
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 66,999
And1: 45,769
Joined: Jun 27, 2003
Location: Brunson Gang
   

Re: Grunwald depreciation day 

Post#60 » by GONYK » Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:05 pm

Rasho Brezec wrote:
GONYK wrote:
seren wrote:He put the most unathletic roster imaginable out there. Not that I am happy with Melo, but the role players as a group on this team can only play a low speed game. We can't get easy buckets because nobody can run. We can't keep up with athletes like last night. We are dead last in the league in assists per game because nobody moves without the ball.

You can put some of it on the coach and his brand of basketball, but the fact is we simply don't have many guys who can keep up with the young legs in this league.

So bravo Grunwald for creating a down the hill supporting cast with zero athleticism.

Edit: I officially miss Lin, Fields, and Jeffries. That says a lot...


What was the alternative though?

I know he could have stocked up on a lot of athletic misfits that have been cut around the league, but that comes at its own cost.

I don't understand why Sheed was chosen over Kmart and Birdman, but other than that I'm not sure how he could have gotten more value out of the nothing we had available to offer after we let Lin go.

Here's a crazy thought, how about not letting Lin go and build from there?

Yeah, I said it. The Cocoon experiment failed.


Once again, not Grunnie's call. At least not one he made by himself.

Return to New York Knicks