RealGM

He laughed at that, but the smile wasn't there when we talked about people such as Charles Barkley and Mark Cuban, who both have said the Nuggets got the better of the trade with the Knicks.

Carmelo called the talk "nonsense" and of Cuban's remark he shot back, "I'm pretty sure if I'd have came here [to Dallas], he'd have got the better end of the deal."

Deeeez Knicks wrote:Cuban and Barkley not liking the trade for us just means that we will win a championship in the next 3 years.

GnarlesOakley wrote:Melo needs to get thicker skin if he's going to survive in New York, he should have known as soon as he put on a Knicks jersey he'd have a giant target on his back.

Deeeez Knicks wrote:Cuban and Barkley not liking the trade for us just means that we will win a championship in the next 3 years.

KnicksGod wrote:I hated giving up Mozgov but until Gallo or Felton can fix their jumpers and become consistent shooters, the Knicks didn't really pay this huge price that someone like Cuban (who really doesn't understand the game of basketball) thinks we did.

Chandler is a good player 1) who is not on an All-Star trajectory and 2) whose trade/commodity value are low because he's about to be restricted.

Felton is a good player who I like a lot but who shoots a low percentage and who is just not the player that Billups is -- not as a shooter or playmaker. And by the way Cuban, Jason Kidd is not the player that Billups is.

Unless you like Mozgov as much as I do, then 70% of the trade probably comes down to Gallinari, who has some strides to make before you can say he's on an All-Star trajectory.

I don't want to obsess too much on All-Stars -- the Mavericks prove that you can build a good (maybe not title team, but a good one) through depth and one All-Star. But if you're making a trade in which you get back a young All-Star in his prime, plus a veteran great player, and don't give up any certain All-Stars ... then you didn't get killed in that trade.

I still maintain that the best upside player the Knicks dealt was Mozgov, not Gallo -- but then you have people like SVG saying that we were crazy to care about giving up Mozgov. But that's me.

If Gallo or Chandler do not materialize as top players, then the bottom line is that they are replaceable pieces. If Mozgov becomes a 15/10/2 type center, well 7-1 guys at that level are not easy to come by. That's why I think Mozgov is the only asset we gave up that I'm really worried about.

Could Gallo become really, really good? Yes. Do I think he showed solid signs that he will become that kind of player? No. Do I think he'll be more than a one-time All-Star in his career? I don't know but if I had to guess, I'd say no.

Melo is far from perfect but 25 PPG scorers speak for themselves. That's an elite player no matter how you cut it. And we may not have given up a single elite player to get him.

KnicksGod wrote:I hated giving up Mozgov but until Gallo or Felton can fix their jumpers and become consistent shooters, the Knicks didn't really pay this huge price that someone like Cuban (who really doesn't understand the game of basketball) thinks we did.

Chandler is a good player 1) who is not on an All-Star trajectory and 2) whose trade/commodity value are low because he's about to be restricted.

Felton is a good player who I like a lot but who shoots a low percentage and who is just not the player that Billups is -- not as a shooter or playmaker. And by the way Cuban, Jason Kidd is not the player that Billups is.

Unless you like Mozgov as much as I do, then 70% of the trade probably comes down to Gallinari, who has some strides to make before you can say he's on an All-Star trajectory.

I don't want to obsess too much on All-Stars -- the Mavericks prove that you can build a good (maybe not title team, but a good one) through depth and one All-Star. But if you're making a trade in which you get back a young All-Star in his prime, plus a veteran great player, and don't give up any certain All-Stars ... then you didn't get killed in that trade.

I still maintain that the best upside player the Knicks dealt was Mozgov, not Gallo -- but then you have people like SVG saying that we were crazy to care about giving up Mozgov. But that's me.

If Gallo or Chandler do not materialize as top players, then the bottom line is that they are replaceable pieces. If Mozgov becomes a 15/10/2 type center, well 7-1 guys at that level are not easy to come by. That's why I think Mozgov is the only asset we gave up that I'm really worried about.

Could Gallo become really, really good? Yes. Do I think he showed solid signs that he will become that kind of player? No. Do I think he'll be more than a one-time All-Star in his career? I don't know but if I had to guess, I'd say no.

Melo is far from perfect but 25 PPG scorers speak for themselves. That's an elite player no matter how you cut it. And we may not have given up a single elite player to get him.