FREE AGENT/Trade/Transaction Idea thread

[aq_ua]

Spending cap room, sure. Entirely on free agents? Why not trades?

I'm down with good trades. Now you're starting to characterize my argument in exagerrated extremes. In context I first responded about the notion of free agents at their market value vs. preferred friendly value. I have in no way implied the KNicks cannot or should not consider trades. Why do I even have to say that?

Because you've implied it multiple times:

You wouldn't be spending for the sake of not being "shut out", you'd be spending for the sake of not being a 17 win team, or 30 win (or whatever) team if Melo is healthy for 75+ games.

So what's left is the worst of both worlds. Carrying Melo on your roster for the remainder of this contract AND sitting out the FA market. Can't say I can make a valid argument for that approach.

Exactly right. So the Knicks ARE going to have to play the FA market

You have painted a rather extreme picture of your position.

[aq_ua]

Does it make sense for MSG to want the NY Knicks to win 30 games forever because we only won 17 last year? Does it make sense for MSG to want the NY Knicks to win 40 games forever? Etc. etc. etc. Do you think Knicks management just looks at 2016 in a vacuum or as part of the overall package of what it needs to sell to fans in terms of future prospects. Why even sign a guy like Phil Jackson when there are much cheaper alternatives that could throw together just as credible a sham. Could maybe, just maybe, the team have championship aspirations and have genuine intentions to put together more than just a quick fix solution?

You've clearly stated multiple times that trying to put a team around Melo is a significant antithesis of the approach you favor.

Phil Jackson, one a five year deal (yes?) gave him a max extension and a no-trade clause one year ago.

Reconcile that please.

Sure, he had the choice of losing Melo for nothing or bringing him back and rolling the dice. The no-trade was the price to pay to roll the dice.

[aq_ua]

Not trying to be obtuse, but then what is the distinction between left and right of Ellis?

My opinion to as free agents who are ascending to their peak value vs. descending. Which you may agree or disagree with, which would be fair.

I just did...really?

Really, I told you I didn't understand the significance or context of the latter part of what you describe as a funny conflict. I still don't. Because I don't recognize it. Still don't.

Pray tell, who? I actually don't know who these free agents are that will make the Knicks better and NOT cap them out for years to come.

Don't understand the question. Knicks can ONLY go over the cap by the room exception this year. Raises can only be 4.5%. The Knicks will be under the cap by CBA rule going into the 2016-2017 season. That same process will repeat itself the following offseason.

This is a pure statement of fact. Why are you arguing the Knicks will be capped out? No one is arguing they'll have the cap room to acquire the player YOU identify as wanting or needing.

No, the statement is not pure fact when you assume said free agent signings "make the Knicks better". The only fact in there is there is a salary cap and the salary cap tends to change over time.

Again, let's say the salary cap goes up by $20mm. That means we can add one more player of a similar stature to whomever we add this off-season. However, that does not necessarily mean it opens up a full max contract slot because as salary caps go up, so do max contract caps. So how does this help us avoid salary cap purgatory? Please explain said facts.

Just did. I never said they'd have a max cap slot. i said they'd have cap room. Can we please distinguish putting facts into the discourse versus your subjective charactrization of them?

Ah, so you want go with technicalities. Sure, we will have practically speaking an infinite capacity of adding players when taking into consideration veteran's minimums. However, I thought your initial premise was that premium players, ones desirable for the Knicks, would require a max contract?

If you have accepted the fact that the 2016 pick is gone, then you should accept the fact that it doesn't matter whether or not we win more than 17 games next season and the only criteria by which you should judge next year is by whether we have advanced the team and its roster towards a championship caliber one.

And you and I both know we are not fans of an organization guided by the precept.

Nor do we know what players will become available in trade. What we do need is the ability to act opportunistically in order to acquire the as of yet unknown players/draft picks because that is the only way in which we can advance the agenda of building towards something winning and something sustainable. That requires assets and cap flexibility. Signing a bunch of role players with Melo just doesn't do that.

Again, the premise behind this is clearly your subjective view of available free agents. I realy have to inclination to argue, over, say the abilities of Demarre Carroll. It would be beneath both of us.

I will say desiring to add players in salary dumps and acquiring worthwhile draft picks is a desire (and a perfectly valid one) not a strategy.

The problem with your lack of inclination is that there is no getting around accepting the realities of DeMarr Carroll's abilities, because that is the reality of the pool of talent that exists for us to sign. If you so choose to keep the argument entirely in philosophy, then why bother with realities of salary cap increases, Melo's contract, and the Knicks' predisposition or lack thereof to long-term team building.

[And100]

Does it make sense for MSG to want the NY Knicks to win 30 games forever because we only won 17 last year? Does it make sense for MSG to want the NY Knicks to win 40 games forever? Etc. etc. etc. Do you think Knicks management just looks at 2016 in a vacuum or as part of the overall package of what it needs to sell to fans in terms of future prospects. Why even sign a guy like Phil Jackson when there are much cheaper alternatives that could throw together just as credible a sham. Could maybe, just maybe, the team have championship aspirations and have genuine intentions to put together more than just a quick fix solution?

You've clearly stated multiple times that trying to put a team around Melo is a significant antithesis of the approach you favor.

Phil Jackson, one a five year deal (yes?) gave him a max extension and a no-trade clause one year ago.

Reconcile that please.

Sure, he had the choice of losing Melo for nothing or bringing him back and rolling the dice. The no-trade was the price to pay to roll the dice.

Okay, and either signing Melo reflected their intention to built a team around him during his contract and prime, or they were boxed into a corner and now have to shape their intentions toward this.

Either way, we both know the answer to your question. Knicks are going to try to build a contender over the next 3 years. Whether you believe that's possible and whether you're right or not are independent of what we both know is that fact.

Can't you just acknowledge that? Doesn't make your personal preference any less valid.

[And100]

Spending cap room, sure. Entirely on free agents? Why not trades?

I'm down with good trades. Now you're starting to characterize my argument in exagerrated extremes. In context I first responded about the notion of free agents at their market value vs. preferred friendly value. I have in no way implied the KNicks cannot or should not consider trades. Why do I even have to say that?

Because you've implied it multiple times:

You wouldn't be spending for the sake of not being "shut out", you'd be spending for the sake of not being a 17 win team, or 30 win (or whatever) team if Melo is healthy for 75+ games.

So what's left is the worst of both worlds. Carrying Melo on your roster for the remainder of this contract AND sitting out the FA market. Can't say I can make a valid argument for that approach.

Exactly right. So the Knicks ARE going to have to play the FA market

You have painted a rather extreme picture of your position.

|

Fine. That's cool. In theory, the knicks might not have to sign a single free agent at any dollar amount in order to significantly improve their roster for the 2015-16 season. Yes, that's possible.

If you'd rather have a discussion of the possible rather than the highly probable, I concede your point.

[aq_ua]

You've clearly stated multiple times that trying to put a team around Melo is a significant antithesis of the approach you favor.

Phil Jackson, one a five year deal (yes?) gave him a max extension and a no-trade clause one year ago.

Reconcile that please.

Sure, he had the choice of losing Melo for nothing or bringing him back and rolling the dice. The no-trade was the price to pay to roll the dice.

Okay, and either signing Melo reflected their intention to built a team around him during his contract and prime, or they were boxed into a corner and now have to shape their intentions toward this.

Either way, we both know the answer to your question. Knicks are going to try to build a contender over the next 3 years. Whether you believe that's possible and whether you're right or not are independent of what we both know is that fact.

Can't you just acknowledge that? Doesn't make your personal preference any less valid.

My contention is exactly that - the Knicks are going to try to build a contender. However, trying and doing are two completely different things and the manner in which they go about it completely unknown to us. What you and I both know, whether we admit it or not, is that there is a very real possibility that we are unable to sign any premium free agents. Where things go from there are again completely unknown to us. To bring things full circle, I don't think that means we will nor should we be forced to sign mediocre free agents to large contracts for the sake of doing so and that any other alternative is more attractive than that.

[aq_ua]

I'm down with good trades. Now you're starting to characterize my argument in exagerrated extremes. In context I first responded about the notion of free agents at their market value vs. preferred friendly value. I have in no way implied the KNicks cannot or should not consider trades. Why do I even have to say that?

Because you've implied it multiple times:

You wouldn't be spending for the sake of not being "shut out", you'd be spending for the sake of not being a 17 win team, or 30 win (or whatever) team if Melo is healthy for 75+ games.

So what's left is the worst of both worlds. Carrying Melo on your roster for the remainder of this contract AND sitting out the FA market. Can't say I can make a valid argument for that approach.

Exactly right. So the Knicks ARE going to have to play the FA market

You have painted a rather extreme picture of your position.

|

Fine. That's cool. In theory, the knicks might not have to sign a single free agent at any dollar amount in order to significantly improve their roster for the 2015-16 season. Yes, that's possible.

If you'd rather have a discussion of the possible rather than the highly probable, I concede your point.

Well, unless you are about to produce a super powered statistics machine (note: I avoid the term "computer"), the difference between "possible" and "highly probable" are entirely in your mind.

[And100]

No, the statement is not pure fact when you assume said free agent signings "make the Knicks better". The only fact in there is there is a salary cap and the salary cap tends to change over time.

Knicks will have no less than $15m in cap room a year from now. I'm happy to leave it at that.

Ah, so you want go with technicalities. Sure, we will have practically speaking an infinite capacity of adding players when taking into consideration veteran's minimums. However, I thought your initial premise was that premium players, ones desirable for the Knicks, would require a max contract?

We can anticipate the roster and its needs and cap situation now, but history tells us we can't anticipate those things a year from now.

But I'm happy to concede as of this moment the Knicks will more likely than not be looking to add role/bench players this time next year, as opposed to the no less than 3 and perhaps 4 new starters they are clearly seeking this year.

I don't believe I suggested otherwise.

The problem with your lack of inclination is that there is no getting around accepting the realities of DeMarr Carroll's abilities, because that is the reality of the pool of talent that exists for us to sign. If you so choose to keep the argument entirely in philosophy, then why bother with realities of salary cap increases, Melo's contract, and the Knicks' predisposition or lack thereof to long-term team building.

There is no "reality" about a player's ability to help a team, or how to construct a team worthy of the postseason in the East, just opinion.

[And100]

What you and I both know, whether we admit it or not, is that there is a very real possibility that we are unable to sign any premium free agents.

No argument here.

Where things go from there are again completely unknown to us. To bring things full circle, I don't think that means we will nor should we be forced to sign mediocre free agents to large contracts for the sake of doing so and that any other alternative is more attractive than that.

I never argued that HAD to sign free agents, which is not under their control, obviously. I argued they cannot legitimately not try and realistically play the market.

And no one is advocating signing free agents for the sake of signing free agents. What is being advocated is acquiring players better than a 17 win team has for the sake of being better than a 17 win team.

[And100]

Because you've implied it multiple times:






You have painted a rather extreme picture of your position.

|

Fine. That's cool. In theory, the knicks might not have to sign a single free agent at any dollar amount in order to significantly improve their roster for the 2015-16 season. Yes, that's possible.

If you'd rather have a discussion of the possible rather than the highly probable, I concede your point.

Well, unless you are about to produce a super powered statistics machine (note: I avoid the term "computer"), the difference between "possible" and "highly probable" are entirely in your mind.

Fair enough.

Do you think the NY KNicks are going to spend a majority of their 2015 cap space on free agents, yes or no?

[aq_ua]

|

Fine. That's cool. In theory, the knicks might not have to sign a single free agent at any dollar amount in order to significantly improve their roster for the 2015-16 season. Yes, that's possible.

If you'd rather have a discussion of the possible rather than the highly probable, I concede your point.

Well, unless you are about to produce a super powered statistics machine (note: I avoid the term "computer"), the difference between "possible" and "highly probable" are entirely in your mind.

Fair enough.

Do you think the NY KNicks are going to spend a majority of their 2015 cap space on free agents, yes or no?

A majority? Sure.

Now, do you think the Knicks would never seek to trade Melo nor would Melo ever request a trade?

[And100]

Well, unless you are about to produce a super powered statistics machine (note: I avoid the term "computer"), the difference between "possible" and "highly probable" are entirely in your mind.

Fair enough.

Do you think the NY KNicks are going to spend a majority of their 2015 cap space on free agents, yes or no?

A majority? Sure.

Now, do you think the Knicks would never seek to trade Melo nor would Melo ever request a trade?

Hard no.

[aq_ua]

No, the statement is not pure fact when you assume said free agent signings "make the Knicks better". The only fact in there is there is a salary cap and the salary cap tends to change over time.

Knicks will have no less than $15m in cap room a year from now. I'm happy to leave it at that.

Got it.

Ah, so you want go with technicalities. Sure, we will have practically speaking an infinite capacity of adding players when taking into consideration veteran's minimums. However, I thought your initial premise was that premium players, ones desirable for the Knicks, would require a max contract?

We can anticipate the roster and its needs and cap situation now, but history tells us we can't anticipate those things a year from now.

But I'm happy to concede as of this moment the Knicks will more likely than not be looking to add role/bench players this time next year, as opposed to the no less than 3 and perhaps 4 new starters they are clearly seeking this year.

I don't believe I suggested otherwise.

And following from the point above, given we are not talking about giving out max contracts to premium players, we are in fact talking about surrounding Melo with a bunch of role players over the next couple of seasons. If we're talking about probabilities, I find it highly unlikely that is the end game.

[FrazierVocab]

Assuming we draft Mudiay, I wouldn't mind seeing these 12 players on our roster:

PG:Mudiay/Galloway
SG:Green/Hardaway
SF:Melo/Early/Thanasis
PF:West/Bass
C:Lopez/Pachulia/Aldrich

The real gripe that I have is that there's no real shot blocker at center. But hopefully AD and Whiteside/Ezeli become free agents in 2016 (assuming Whiteside's season was no fluke). Imagine a starting lineup of:

PG:Mudiay
SG:Green
SF:Melo
PF:Davis
C:Whiteside

[digitaldropoff]

Assuming we draft Mudiay, I wouldn't mind seeing these 12 players on our roster:

PG:Mudiay/Galloway
SG:Green/Hardaway
SF:Melo/Early/Thanasis
PF:West/Bass
C:Lopez/Pachulia/Aldrich

The real gripe that I have is that there's no real shot blocker at center. But hopefully AD and Whiteside/Ezeli become free agents in 2016 (assuming Whiteside's season was no fluke). Imagine a starting lineup of:

PG:Mudiay
SG:Green
SF:Melo
PF:Davis
C:Whiteside

[FrazierVocab]

Assuming we draft Mudiay, I wouldn't mind seeing these 12 players on our roster:

PG:Mudiay/Galloway
SG:Green/Hardaway
SF:Melo/Early/Thanasis
PF:West/Bass
C:Lopez/Pachulia/Aldrich

The real gripe that I have is that there's no real shot blocker at center. But hopefully AD and Whiteside/Ezeli become free agents in 2016 (assuming Whiteside's season was no fluke). Imagine a starting lineup of:

PG:Mudiay
SG:Green
SF:Melo
PF:Davis
C:Whiteside

Why must you live in reality?

[digitaldropoff]

Haha....I'm sorry. You will def have that lineup, and you'll get LBJ as your 6th man.

[Boarder Patrol]

Draft whoever the Nuggets want, but do not sign him or trade him yet to save cap room (kind of like the Cavs held Wiggins in limbo last year)

Sign Monroe 4 years starting at 15 million.
Sign West 2 years + 1 year team option starting at 11 million
Sign back our minimum guys that we want

Trade the pick + Calderon for Lawson + a smaller asset

Then sign some veterans and bench pieces for the minimum.

Lawson
Galloway
Melo
West
Monroe

Then add Aldrich, Acy, Hardaway, etc to the bench.

[kej718]

Sorry if posted already
http://www.inquisitr.com/2198928/new-york-knicks-trade-rumors-draft-pick-trade-with-denver-nuggets-closer/
New York Knicks Trade Rumors: Draft Pick Trade With Denver Nuggets Closer?

New York Knicks trade rumors again involve 2015 NBA Draft picks. A Knicks trade with the Denver Nuggets has been discussed, possibly shifting how the early part of the first round plays out Thursday night (June 24). A report from NBA.com states that the trade would have the Knicks dealing the No. 4 overall selection to the Nuggets in exchange for the No. 7 overall pick and Jusuf Nurkic.

It’s no secret that New York Knicks team president Phil Jackson is interested in players that will likely be selected in the top three picks, or in the second half of the 2015 NBA Draft. If Karl-Anthony Towns and Jahlil Okafor are already off the board, the Knicks don’t have a lot of incentive to take one of the players available at No. 4. This is why there are so many Knicks trade rumors floating around, and this move with the Nuggets might actually make a lot of sense.

As the Knicks try to rebuild a talented roster around All-Star Carmelo Anthony, it is important to have a few good role players. Jusuf Nurkic might just be a perfect fit. He is going to be just 21 years old during the 2015-16 NBA season, and had a mildly successful rookie campaign with the Denver Nuggets. Nurkic averaged 6.9 points, 6.2 rebounds, and 1.1 blocks while playing just 17.8 minutes a night in Denver. Nurkic was capable of being in the starting lineup (he started 27 games) and stands at 6’11”, 280 pounds.

As previously reported on the Inquisitr, Phil Jackson is busy trying to make a big trade for the Knicks. Previous rumors indicate that Jackson is very interested in Trey Lyles, but the No. 4 selection seems far to early to take him in the 2015 NBA Draft. This almost guarantees that the team trades down on draft day, but which team it ends up making that deal with is the biggest unknown at this point.

With barely anyone left on the active roster for Jackson, he has to find a lot of players during this NBA offseason to team up with Carmelo Anthony. The team is certainly in a rebuilding mode at the moment, especially after missing the playoffs again during the past NBA season. Theses New York Knicks trade rumors make the most sense so far, because the team would get a good big man in Jusuf Nurkic and wouldn’t have to move down too far in the draft order. The reason the Denver Nuggets would want this deal is to move up and take one of the top point guards available.

=============================================================================================================
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=pqfgcck

He looks solid. It would be great if we could swap the picks and trade Calderon to Denver for Nurkic and Chandler (Would like to see him back).

C-Jusuf Nurkic
PF-Greg Monroe
SF-Carmelo Anthony / Wilson Chandler
SG-Free agent
PG-Emmanuel Mudiay (will he still be there at #7)

or

C-Jusuf Nurkic
PF-Greg Monroe
SF-Carmelo Anthony / Wilson Chandler
SG-Justise Winslow (will he still be there at #7)
PG-Langston Galloway

Danny Green is expected to make between $10-$12 mil maybe we can add him too?

[Meat]

would the suns trade bledsoe for the 7th?