Phil can GTFO now (he's wiling to deal KP) part II

Red Vines · Post #841 » by **Red Vines** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:53 pm

Sark wrote:Jackson is doing what's right for the organization, and you guys are still saying he's the problem. Unreal.

He's stepping down?!

Jstock12 · Post #842 » by **Jstock12** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:53 pm

Sark wrote:Jackson is doing what's right for the organization, and you guys are still saying he's the problem. Unreal.

If he's going to get a massive haul for KP, then I agree it's good for the organization. But if he trades a franchise level talent away for 50 cents on the dollar, just because of the battle of 2 egos, would you still classify it as what's right for the organization?

Sark · Post #843 » by **Sark** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:53 pm

Rasho Brezec wrote:We're discussing trading a player who hates losing so much he stood up to an incompetent executive and that incompetent executive doesn't like being told that he's wrong. Think about that.

No. He's discussing trading a player for a massive haul of picks, to shape the franchise for the future. Any competent executive would field offers for any player. No one is untouchable.

waya · Post #844 » by **waya** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:53 pm

Jstock12 wrote:Will the Knicks fans start booing if KP gets traded during the draft? That would be pretty ironic.

As someone who will be in attendance, I'm gonna cheer for whoever we draft. But I also want to boo the trade (unless we net a crazy amount). Hmm..

Jstock12 · Post #845 » by **Jstock12** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:54 pm

Red Vines wrote:
Sark wrote:Jackson is doing what's right for the organization, and you guys are still saying he's the problem. Unreal.

He's stepping down?!

Sark · Post #846 » by **Sark** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:54 pm

Jstock12 wrote:
Sark wrote:Jackson is doing what's right for the organization, and you guys are still saying he's the problem. Unreal.

If he's going to get a massive haul for KP, then I agree it's good for the organization. But if he trades a franchise level talent away for 50 cents on the dollar, just because of the battle of 2 egos, would you still classify it as what's right for the organization?

But he has no plans to do that. He's asking for a kings ransom.

symbiotic · Post #847 » by **symbiotic** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:54 pm

Red Vines wrote:And let's be honest--Phil realizes the only way to add multiple talented pieces is trading KP... Because nobody is signing...sad but true.

The KnicksFix · Post #848 » by **The KnicksFix** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:56 pm

Sark wrote:
Rasho Brezec wrote:We're discussing trading a player who hates losing so much he stood up to an incompetent executive and that incompetent executive doesn't like being told that he's wrong. Think about that.

No. He's discussing trading a player for a massive haul of picks, to shape the franchise for the future. Any competent executive would field offers for any player. No one is untouchable.

No. He's trading that player because he is an INCOMPETENT executive who is alienating future prospects and players. What happens when that "haul" of players can't play in the triangle? Trade them too? That's what happens when u trade for unknowns

Jstock12 · Post #849 » by **Jstock12** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:57 pm

Sark wrote:
Jstock12 wrote:
Sark wrote:Jackson is doing what's right for the organization, and you guys are still saying he's the problem. Unreal.

If he's going to get a massive haul for KP, then I agree it's good for the organization. But if he trades a franchise level talent away for 50 cents on the dollar, just because of the battle of 2 egos, would you still classify it as what's right for the organization?

But he has no plans to do that. He's asking for a kings ransom.

It's negotiations man. A lot can happen. What if Phil overrates an asset/player (*ahem* Booker *ahem*) and thinks he's asking for "king's ransom" when in reality he's just seling low on KP?

NYKAL · Post #850 » by **NYKAL** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:58 pm

thebuzzardman wrote:
FirePjax wrote:

Read on Twitter

I don't know if posted but pjax should take this and run. Fast

Edit: if it's the nets pick

That's got to be 10 from Sacramento, no?

NM - I guess it could be something down around 14,15 too.

NOT without knowing where that 2nd draft pick will be. If its top 10, then yeah, but, if not.....

Knox · Post #851 » by **Knox** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:58 pm

ThefellowMelo wrote:
Sark wrote:
Rasho Brezec wrote:We're discussing trading a player who hates losing so much he stood up to an incompetent executive and that incompetent executive doesn't like being told that he's wrong. Think about that.

No. He's discussing trading a player for a massive haul of picks, to shape the franchise for the future. Any competent executive would field offers for any player. No one is untouchable.

No. He's trading that player because he is an INCOMPETENT executive who is alienating future prospects and players. What happens when that "haul" of players can't play in the triangle? Trade them too? That's what happens when u trade for unknowns

I rather have us stick to a plan then get a bunch of talented pieces that don't mesh in one system ..... I don't miss them isiah days.

Post #852 » by **K_ick_God** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:59 pm

Rasho Brezec wrote:We're discussing trading a player who hates losing so much he stood up to an incompetent executive and that incompetent executive doesn't like being told that he's wrong. Think about that.

Rasho Brezec · Post #853 » by **Rasho Brezec** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:59 pm

Sark wrote:
Rasho Brezec wrote:We're discussing trading a player who hates losing so much he stood up to an incompetent executive and that incompetent executive doesn't like being told that he's wrong. Think about that.

No. He's discussing trading a player for a massive haul of picks, to shape the franchise for the future. Any competent executive would field offers for any player. No one is untouchable.

You'd think teams lining up at the first hint of a player not being untouchable would ring a bell, but some heads are just thicker than others.

NOOB77 · Post #854 » by **NOOB77** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:59 pm

ThefellowMelo wrote:
NYKfan77 wrote:If Boston makes a deal for 7 then trade is a go. They aren't doing that just because

All joking aside if we get the 3 and 7 and keep the 8. Who's available at 7? We get Jackson at 3, monk at 7 and frank at 8?????? That's a trash team wth no bigs

We have Willy

BBALLER4FR · Post #855 » by **BBALLER4FR** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:59 pm

MP4LIFE wrote:
BBALLER4FR wrote:
MP4LIFE wrote:
You can't help yourself when it comes to defending James Dolan. Quite a sight to behold. As Trump would say, Very Sad!

LOL, you are in the minority of fans when it comes to trusting in Phil but you have the audacity to say I can't help, or that I'm defending Dolan and smugly use a stupid Trumpism as your cherry topper? Wack!

See, your Dolan support is so strong that it makes you say ridiculous things. I don't support Phil. I started a Fire Phil thread last April before it was cool to hate Phil and that long thread was eventually locked because it was 'insane'. I've continued my anti-Phil rhetoric since. It's too bad you just choose to see what fits your narrative, which is a classic Dolan move.

So sir, why on earth would you make a statement placing no blame on Phil if you felt this way. I didn't even say I supported Dolan. Ooooh... you just want to fight on the internet. Gotcha! Here is the relatively benign question I asked that got you worked up:

BBALLER4FR wrote:
MP4LIFE wrote:If we trade Porzingis with Bledsoe as the centerpiece back then Adam Silver needs to pull a Stern and veto the trade, then ban Dolan for life from MSG.

Dolan? He's not doing this. Phil is.

F N 11 · Post #856 » by **F N 11** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:00 pm

Read on Twitter

god shammgod · Post #857 » by **god shammgod** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:01 pm

NYKAL wrote:
thebuzzardman wrote:
FirePjax wrote:

Read on Twitter

I don't know if posted but pjax should take this and run. Fast

Edit: if it's the nets pick

That's got to be 10 from Sacramento, no?

NM - I guess it could be something down around 14,15 too.

NOT without knowing where that 2nd draft pick will be. If its top 10, then yeah, but, if not.....

a post earlier said they were trying to get 7 from minny

symbiotic · Post #858 » by **symbiotic** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:02 pm

ThefellowMelo wrote:
NYKfan77 wrote:If Boston makes a deal for 7 then trade is a go. They aren't doing that just because

All joking aside if we get the 3 and 7 and keep the 8. Who's available at 7? We get Jackson at 3, monk at 7 and frank at 8?????? That's a trash team wth no bigs

What's so bad about being a trash team when we have ALL OF OUR DRAFT PICKS?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!

The Philadelphia 76ers were a trash team for a long time too.

Bet you'd rather have their position.

Jstock12 · Post #859 » by **Jstock12** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:02 pm

KP is a known variable. A guy whose ceiling is a franchise level player and floor of a perennial All-Star. I don't like trading him for unknown variables that have All-Star ceilings and Bust floors. These types of trades are always a gamble. They're only fair value if you're lucky and those picks do not become busts.

The KnicksFix · Post #860 » by **The KnicksFix** » Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:03 pm

Knox wrote:
ThefellowMelo wrote:
Sark wrote:

No. He's discussing trading a player for a massive haul of picks, to shape the franchise for the future. Any competent executive would field offers for any player. No one is untouchable.

No. He's trading that player because he is an INCOMPETENT executive who is alienating future prospects and players. What happens when that "haul" of players can't play in the triangle? Trade them too? That's what happens when u trade for unknowns

I rather have us stick to a plan then get a bunch of talented pieces that don't mesh in one system ..... I don't miss them isiah days.

U ever stop to think that maybe the system is outdated and antiquated? We stink man and the system of the triangle was great... in the 90's and early 2000's