Moderators: dakomish23, mpharris36, j4remi, NoLayupRule, GONYK, Jeff Van Gully, HerSports85, Deeeez Knicks
swisscheeseD wrote:KnicksGod wrote:This works with my plan of giving them Randolph and our 2014 pick. Put Walker and Gallo in there and call it a day.
Your plan isn't even feasible seeing as how we can't trade our 2014 pick. This has been gone over numerous times and continues to be neglected. Our first available 1st Round pick to deal as of right now is in the year 2017.
KnicksGod wrote:swisscheeseD wrote:KnicksGod wrote:This works with my plan of giving them Randolph and our 2014 pick. Put Walker and Gallo in there and call it a day.
Your plan isn't even feasible seeing as how we can't trade our 2014 pick. This has been gone over numerous times and continues to be neglected. Our first available 1st Round pick to deal as of right now is in the year 2017.
That's false. We have our 2013 pick and can deal our 2014 pick right now.
Jay10 wrote:alan hahn is reporting that the nuggets might actually want anthony randolph
moocow007 wrote:Jay10 wrote:alan hahn is reporting that the nuggets might actually want anthony randolph
I never honestly got why they wouldn't. Just because he looked bad early on and ended up in D'Antoni's doghouse doesn't mean that Randolph doesn't have talent, upside and value. In Denver, in a rebuild, he'd basically get to flex his wings and play while learning. Randolph has every bit the chance to explode in that type of environment. He IS the Knick player with the highest upside and in a rebuild, you want guys that have the highest upside). Also, of the 3 main guys (Chandler, Gallinar and Randolph) the cheapest.
In court papers, Baylor said that Jim Brewer, then an assistant with the Clippers, wanted the chance to interview for the head coaching job after Bill Fitch was dismissed following the 1997-98 season. ‘I believe he [Sterling] was a little reluctant at first but I said, ‘We owe him that courtesy.’ So we go there and we sit down and Brewer starts talking about his qualifications, that he believed he could do the job of being the head coach,’ Baylor said in court papers. ‘And when he finished, Donald said something that was very shocking to me. He said, ‘Personally, I would like to have a white Southern coach coaching poor black players. And I was shocked. And he looked at me and said, ‘Do you think that’s a racist statement?’ I said, ‘Absolutely. That’s plantation mentality.’”
According to depositions given by one of Sterling's property supervisors and obtained by ESPN The Magazine's Peter Keating, Sterling didn't like renting to black people ("they smell"), Mexican-Americans ("just sit around and smoke and drink all day") and people with children ("brats"), though he did like Koreans because "they will take whatever conditions I give them and still pay the rent." (The property supervisor, Sumner Davenport, sued Sterling for sexual harassment. She lost.)
• Sterling once welshed on a $1,000 prize for a free-throw shooting contest, forcing the winner, a lawyer and season ticketholder named Michael Spilger, to sue. More than a year later, according to Lidz, Spilger got his money.
• During his first season as owner, according to Sports Illustrated, Sterling reportedly wanted to save money by jettisoning the team trainer. He asked coach Paul Silas if he would mind taping up players before games.
In his time as the Clippers' owner, he has behaved far more repulsively than any wayward player ever suspended by David Stern; if Sterling were a small forward, he'd be looking for a run in Minsk right about now. But he's an owner and a wealthy real-estate magnate, and for those reasons and no other, a league so concerned about its public image that it tells its players how to dress will happily overlook the fact that Donald T. Sterling is a cheap, whoring bigot.
swisscheeseD wrote:
I'll post the link again...
http://www.theknicksblog.com/2011/01/19 ... pien-rule/
KnicksGod wrote:swisscheeseD wrote:
I'll post the link again...
http://www.theknicksblog.com/2011/01/19 ... pien-rule/
I stand corrected. That's a legit mistake by Walsh because it cuts off a 1st to trade for Melo.
KnicksGod wrote:swisscheeseD wrote:
I'll post the link again...
http://www.theknicksblog.com/2011/01/19 ... pien-rule/
I stand corrected. That's a legit mistake by Walsh because it cuts off a 1st to trade for Melo.
Here's the full answer: The "Ted Stepien Rule" prevents teams from trading their future first round picks in consecutive years. So if a team (like the Knicks) has traded its 2012 first round pick, it can't trade its 2011 or 2013 picks. Note that the Stepien rule looks only at the future -- it doesn't matter that the team also traded its 2010 pick. That pick is in the past, and the Stepien rule ignores it.
Even if a team might not have a pick (because it's lottery-protected, for example) it's still subject to the Stepien rule. If a team might not be without a future first round pick, then they can't trade the pick in the year before or the year after.
The Knicks have traded the right to swap 2011 #1's to Houston, so New York will end up with the lesser of its pick and Houston's pick. But they will have a pick, so their 2011 pick is not considered to be traded as far as the Stepeien rule is concerned. A team doesn't need to have its own first round pick in a given year -- any first round pick will do.
So here's the Knicks' situation: They will have a 2011 first round pick (either their own or Houston's). They have traded away their 2012 pick (again to Houston), but it's top-5 protected all the way to 2015. If the 2012 pick is in the top-5 then Houston gets their 2013 pick instead. If the 2013 pick is top-5, then they get the 2014 pick. If the 2014 pick is in the top-5 then they get their 2015 pick. If the 2015 pick is top-5, then they stop trying to send a first round pick, and give them two second round picks instead.
So New York may be without its 2012, 2013, 2014 or 2015 first round pick -- and we don't know for sure which one it'll be. This means that right now New York can't trade its picks in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 or 2016 -- because if they do so they might be without a first round pick two consecutive years in the future -- and that's enough for the Stepien rule to put the kibosh on it.
But let's look at what happens if the Knicks acquire another team's 2012 pick:
* If their own 2012 pick ends up going to Houston, then they will still have a pick in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014, so their 2011 and 2013 picks can be traded.
* If their own 2013 pick ends up going to Houston, then they will have one pick in 2011, two picks in 2012, none in 2013, one in 2014, and one in 2015. They can trade their 2011 pick and one of the 2012 picks.
* If their own 2014 or 2015 pick ends up going to Houston, then they are in the same situation as 2013 -- they can still trade their 2011 pick and one of their 2012 picks.
So final answer -- If Donnie Walsh acquires a 2012 pick from another team, he can then trade two future first round picks (presumably to Denver). One will definitelty be their 2011 pick (the lesser of theirs and Houston's). The other will be either a 2012 pick or their 2013 pick, depending on whether their 2012 pick is in the top five.
Any trade agreement to move two picks would have to spell this out -- it would specify that they are trading whichever 2011 pick they end up with after Houston has their say; and it would specify that it will be their 2013 pick if their 2012 pick is conveyed to Houston, or one of the specific 2012 picks if their 2012 pick is not conveyed to Houston.
KnicksGod wrote:swisscheeseD wrote:
I'll post the link again...
http://www.theknicksblog.com/2011/01/19 ... pien-rule/
I stand corrected. That's a legit mistake by Walsh because it cuts off a 1st to trade for Melo.
Whoa. That was awesome.
god shammgod wrote:KnicksGod wrote:swisscheeseD wrote:
I'll post the link again...
http://www.theknicksblog.com/2011/01/19 ... pien-rule/
I stand corrected. That's a legit mistake by Walsh because it cuts off a 1st to trade for Melo.
we can trade our 2014 pick. we just have to include the stipulations that say it might not be theirs till 2017 depending on where we pick. since the pick in 2012 has to be top 5 for houston not to get it denver won't really worry about the 2014 pick being moved back.
Anders wrote:The sweetest revenge is living well! Darius Rucker said it, so you know its real!
towelie wrote:This is like the 4th time I'm posting this. We can still trade our 2014 pick. We just include stipulations that state, "If NYK receives a top 5 2012 pick and does not satisfy their obligation to Houston, Denver receives NYK's 2015 or next eligible 1st."
swisscheeseD wrote:Ok...I see what you guys are saying. I mean, I highly doubt we're going to be Top 5 next year regardless of wether or not we add Melo, that was never my issue. I just wonder how or why the league would allow us to circumvent the rule by adding our own stipulation to the pick?
towelie wrote:This is like the 4th time I'm posting this. We can still trade our 2014 pick. We just include stipulations that state, "If NYK receives a top 5 2012 pick and does not satisfy their obligation to Houston, Denver receives NYK's 2015 or next eligible 1st."
magnumt wrote:swisscheeseD wrote:Ok...I see what you guys are saying. I mean, I highly doubt we're going to be Top 5 next year regardless of wether or not we add Melo, that was never my issue. I just wonder how or why the league would allow us to circumvent the rule by adding our own stipulation to the pick?
Top 5 Protection = Top 5 WORST Team, not best.
