RealGM

Ive never liked Melo as a player and never wanted him on our team. but now that he might be available ive been considering it. What do u guys think? Nene, ariza, and otto porter for Melo and the Knicks 1st?

wall, beal, webster, melo, gortat. this summer if we make a couple good signings and draft someone half way decent that could be the core of a contender. no? although id rather we try to get okafur back over the summer rather than gortat with that lineup.

Melo doesnt produce championships, like George Karl said. At the end of the day, if its not going to help us at the ultimate goal, building a team that can win the title, then I'm not interested.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

melo alone doesnt. but with wall, beal, and a high lottery pick pf?

i mean what we've been missing is that finisher. i dont like the guy either. but he is a clutch guy.

ozthegandp wrote:melo alone doesnt. but with wall, beal, and a high lottery pick pf?

Of course Melo alone isnt enough. I mean that he isnt a team player. Beal is one of the best characters in the NBA, so they say, and same goes for Wall. I dont want to risk the future for a SF who will begin to decline in 2 years.

And the Knicks dealt their pick to Denver to get Melo, so there wont be a 'high lottery pick pf'


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Melo would be the filler in your trade proposal.

ok i stand corrected on the pick. but man how long are u going to wait for this wizards future. hasnt it been long enough yet?

ozthegandp wrote:ok i stand corrected on the pick. but man how long are u going to wait for this wizards future. hasnt it been long enough yet?

Melo isn't as good as his reputation, way not nearly. He won't help that "Wizards' future" you mention, because names don't win games: take a look at Brooklyn (or Melo's Knicks for that matter).

It's a terrible idea.

GeeWiz wrote:Melo doesnt produce championships, like George Karl said. At the end of the day, if its not going to help us at the ultimate goal, building a team that can win the title, then I'm not interested.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Going all in for a 40+ win season doesn't produce championships either but that isn't stopping Ernie/Ted from pursuing this playoffs or bust mantra.

Acquiring Melo would seem to fit right into that line of thinking.

GeeWiz wrote:Melo doesnt produce championships, like George Karl said. At the end of the day, if its not going to help us at the ultimate goal, building a team that can win the title, then I'm not interested.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I might consider it(as a rental), definitely not to pay Melo a max deal into his mid-30s, but to get out of Nene's contract. If the Knicks are dealing Melo they are probably trying to trim their luxury tax bill. So they might take less talent in exchange for less salary when dealing Anthony.

I would take Porter and the 1st out of the deal and try to keep Ariza. I would only be interested in Melo as PF.

No times athousandymillion

I don't quite understand the angst. People here loved the selling off of a draft pick for the one year rental of a solid, but replaceable C but are totally taken aback by the suggestion of Melo?

Dat2U wrote:I don't quite understand the angst. People here loved the selling off of a draft pick for the one year rental of a solid, but replaceable C but are totally taken aback by the suggestion of Melo?

Dat, I'm not sure how many people "loved selling off of a draft pick for a one-year rental of a solid, but replaceable C".

Back on topic: Melo = no.

Dat2U wrote:I don't quite understand the angst. People here loved the selling off of a draft pick for the one year rental of a solid, but replaceable C but are totally taken aback by the suggestion of Melo?

because we can at least retain Gortat (Or at least have a legitimate shot at resigning him). Melo would walk. He has no desire to be here so why waste the time or resources.

pineappleheadindc wrote:

Dat2U wrote:I don't quite understand the angst. People here loved the selling off of a draft pick for the one year rental of a solid, but replaceable C but are totally taken aback by the suggestion of Melo?

Dat, I'm not sure how many people "loved selling off of a draft pick for a one-year rental of a solid, but replaceable C".

Back on topic: Melo = no.

The Gortat poll was at 56% in favor of the trade when I checked with only 29% saying they didn't like it.

nuposse04 wrote:

Dat2U wrote:I don't quite understand the angst. People here loved the selling off of a draft pick for the one year rental of a solid, but replaceable C but are totally taken aback by the suggestion of Melo?

because we can at least retain Gortat (Or at least have a legitimate shot at resigning him). Melo would walk. He has no desire to be here so why waste the time or resources.

Yeah, I was on the fence on the Gortat trade, but I think it's clear that the trade for him makes it likely that he will be a Zard next season - far more likely than if they hadn't traded for him. So, I disagree with calling him a rental. As far as him being replacable - everyone on the Wiz is replacable. He is not easily replacable.

Getting Anthony would serve no positive purpose - short-term or long-term.

Ruzious wrote:

nuposse04 wrote:

Dat2U wrote:I don't quite understand the angst. People here loved the selling off of a draft pick for the one year rental of a solid, but replaceable C but are totally taken aback by the suggestion of Melo?

because we can at least retain Gortat (Or at least have a legitimate shot at resigning him). Melo would walk. He has no desire to be here so why waste the time or resources.

Yeah, I was on the fence on the Gortat trade, but I think it's clear that the trade for him makes it likely that he will be a Zard next season - far more likely than if they hadn't traded for him. So, I disagree with calling him a rental. As far as him being replacable - everyone on the Wiz is replacable. He is not easily replacable.

Getting Anthony would serve no positive purpose - short-term or long-term.

Last time I checked, Gortat was an unrestricted free agent after this season. He can sign with anyone. We might have the inside track but there's no denying there's a significant amount of risk involved... with the upside being well short of contender status.

Much like with Melo, there would be significant risk involved... with the upside being well... probably the same thing.

So what's really the difference?

I was thinking that Melo is going to opt out and the Wizards would have an opportunity to sign him straight up in free agency. I wouldn't do it, but that could be the way things unfold.

Dat2U wrote:

Ruzious wrote:

nuposse04 wrote:
because we can at least retain Gortat (Or at least have a legitimate shot at resigning him). Melo would walk. He has no desire to be here so why waste the time or resources.

Yeah, I was on the fence on the Gortat trade, but I think it's clear that the trade for him makes it likely that he will be a Zard next season - far more likely than if they hadn't traded for him. So, I disagree with calling him a rental. As far as him being replacable - everyone on the Wiz is replacable. He is not easily replacable.

Getting Anthony would serve no positive purpose - short-term or long-term.

Last time I checked, Gortat was an unrestricted free agent after this season. He can sign with anyone. We might have the inside track but there's no denying there's a significant amount of risk involved... with the upside being well short of contender status.

Much like with Melo, there would be significant risk involved... with the upside being well... probably the same thing.

So what's really the difference?

I would be surprised if Gortat gets offered a max contract.

A deal that dumps Nene's salary and brings back Melo would be something I would consider. Even if it meant including Porter.