Why Would FAs Go To Knicks over Nets?

Post #61 » by **dakomish23** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:49 am

Tor_Raps wrote:
jokeboy86 wrote:
Chanel Bomber wrote:Tyson Chandler after the Mavs title too.

You could basically say Melo too. And though he was done you could add Noah to the list.

You can easily argue that the Knicks only acquired Chandler, Amare and Noah because their original teams didn't want to pay them due to their age/injury history. And we all know how those contracts ended up turning out.

The chandler contract was always good. You might be thinking of the phx deal

Post #62 » by **Trader_Joe** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:53 am

dakomish23 wrote:
Trader_Joe wrote:
dakomish23 wrote:
Even then he’s still the best draw as a teammate on either team

Not sure I agree at all with that..what relationship does he have with stars? I know LeVert is adored by Durant.

Durant has been praising KP since his rookie year

Durant trains with LeVert.

https://www.netsdaily.com/2017/9/25/16363846/kevin-durant-tells-caris-levert-be-ready-for-that-moment

Post #63 » by **bondom34** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:54 am

Trader_Joe wrote:
dakomish23 wrote:
Trader_Joe wrote:Not sure I agree at all with that..what relationship does he have with stars? I know LeVert is adored by Durant.

Durant has been praising KP since his rookie year

Durant trains with LeVert.

https://www.netsdaily.com/2017/9/25/16363846/kevin-durant-tells-caris-levert-be-ready-for-that-moment

Durant likes everyone.

Until he gets to his burner accounts.

Source: I lived it as a fan.

Tor_Raps · Post #64 » by **Tor_Raps** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:55 am

dakomish23 wrote:
Tor_Raps wrote:
jokeboy86 wrote:
You could basically say Melo too. And though he was done you could add Noah to the list.

You can easily argue that the Knicks only acquired Chandler, Amare and Noah because their original teams didn't want to pay them due to their age/injury history. And we all know how those contracts ended up turning out.

The chandler contract was always good. You might be thinking of the phx deal

I just remember the Mavs not willing to match the Knicks offer, which says something after he was a big piece in their championship run.

Suns were scared away because of amares knees and we all know about Noah.

Knicks have just been in a brutal stretch but if they even start sniffing some winning, players will flock there. Still remember those sprewell/houston/camby teams.

Post #65 » by **Capn'O** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:59 am

This is a "Go Fish" thread.

It's posed as a question but none of the answers count. Go Fish. The Knicks have some distinct relative advantages that have been mentioned, as do the Nets. At the end of the day, nobody knows what's going on in these Free Agents' heads. What they value over the others. They may choose neither destination. That is not an unlikely outcome.

Post #66 » by **dakomish23** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:02 am

Tor_Raps wrote:
dakomish23 wrote:
Tor_Raps wrote:
You can easily argue that the Knicks only acquired Chandler, Amare and Noah because their original teams didn't want to pay them due to their age/injury history. And we all know how those contracts ended up turning out.

The chandler contract was always good. You might be thinking of the phx deal

I just remember the Mavs not willing to match the Knicks offer, which says something after he was a big piece in their championship run.

Suns were scared away because of amares knees and we all know about Noah.

Knicks have just been in a brutal stretch but if they even start sniffing some winning, players will flock there. Still remember those sprewell/houston/camby teams.

Mavs didn’t match b/c they wanted Dwight and DWill.

Only reason Knicks got Chandler is b/c the made the playoffs the year before.

They could have made another deal in 2013 but they wasted their amnesty on Amare b/c they didn’t opt out of Billups.

Knicks missed the playoffs by one game in 13-14 (big reason was Tyson being out) & the rest is history.

Knicks had a chance to really build a strong core and have a ton of space in 19/20. Instead, they signed THJ.

Yep.

JayMKE · Post #67 » by **JayMKE** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:15 am

Knicks are more popular and play in MSG, pretty simple really

pretty low bar for success for the Knicks too

Karate Diop · Post #68 » by **Karate Diop** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:28 am

LAL wrote:Prestige.

But neither franchise is getting anything, so it’s a moot point.

What prestige though? Look at the Knicks "accomplishments", there virtually are none. MSG from a basketball standpoint is famous for opposing players coming to town and taking a Jurrasic sized dump on the home team... Not for anything the Knicks have done there.

Knicks =/= Lakers.

There are some arguments for players choosing the Knicks over Nets (KP is by far the best player on either roster, dedicated fanbase), but historical success and prestige aren't two of them.

Metta World WAR · Post #69 » by **Metta World WAR** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:41 am

Karate Diop wrote:
LAL wrote:Prestige.

But neither franchise is getting anything, so it’s a moot point.

What prestige though? Look at the Knicks "accomplishments", there virtually are none. MSG from a basketball standpoint is famous for opposing players coming to down and taking a Jurrasic sized dump on the home team... Not for anything the Knicks have done there.

Knicks =/= Lakers.

The Knicks have 2 NBA Championships and multiple NBA Finals appearances. The Nets have 2 ABA (offbrand) Championships and multiple NBA Finals defeats. And Billy King gifting the Celtics another possible/probable dynasty. And delusional fans that truly believe they are anything beyond an offbrand afterthought in New York. You can cry, you can rationalize, you can protest, but that's how it is, and how it will always be. AND YOU'LL LIKE IT.

Lalouie · Post #70 » by **Lalouie** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:55 am

jokeboy86 wrote:With the Irving/Butler/KD talk you always hear about the Knicks but why not the Nets? I get the Knicks have Porzingis but outside of that wouldn't the Nets be the better option especially with the foundation they've built from a coaching and roster standpoint. I think more than any other team so far the Nets have been the surprise of the year. Also even with the whole Billy King debacle you could make an argument that the Nets have been the (slightly)better of the two franchises for the past 20 years.

even though the knicks have a better longer "tradition, their tradition encompasses 8 yrs out of 50, so it's not as if the knicks have been stellar,,,,and it doesn't help that nyk.org is to be avoided like leprosy. what nyk has has over the nets is dominance of the news that flows out of new york city. nyc loves their giants and yankees and knicks - they are the big3. the jets had namath, and the nets are really the jersey/brooklyn nets and are treated that way. it's very much like the lakers versus clips. the knicks are a cultural thing, as are the dodgers and lakers

Hello Brooklyn · Post #71 » by **Hello Brooklyn** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:56 am

The Knicks are way more popular in NY than the Nets, I will admit that.

But its not a Lakers/Clippers type situation. The Knicks haven't won a title in like 40 years.

If the Nets were ever good, then NY would flip over. And Brooklyn would become entrenched as a Nets town.

People in New York are starving for good basketball. They're not going to stick with James Dolan if they have another option.

GYK · Post #72 » by **GYK** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:11 am

IDK. Nets have the better coaching and GM.
Knicks are just the Knicks. terrible team but somehow worth the most. if you win here it's going to be kind of a big deal.

bronxknicksfan1 · Post #73 » by **bronxknicksfan1** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:20 am

Hello Brooklyn wrote:The Knicks are way more popular in NY than the Nets, I will admit that.

But its not a Lakers/Clippers type situation. The Knicks haven't won a title in like 40 years.

If the Nets were ever good, then NY would flip over. And Brooklyn would become entrenched as a Nets town.

People in New York are starving for good basketball. They're not going to stick with James Dolan if they have another option.

Only way NY would flip over to the Nets is if there were a dynasty being built.

Knicks, even through all their mediocrity, have always be NY's team. When they were halfway decent, MSG was probably the hottest ticket in all of NY sports.

Hello Brooklyn · Post #74 » by **Hello Brooklyn** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:32 am

bronxknicksfan1 wrote:
Hello Brooklyn wrote:The Knicks are way more popular in NY than the Nets, I will admit that.

But its not a Lakers/Clippers type situation. The Knicks haven't won a title in like 40 years.

If the Nets were ever good, then NY would flip over. And Brooklyn would become entrenched as a Nets town.

People in New York are starving for good basketball. They're not going to stick with James Dolan if they have another option.

Only way NY would flip over to the Nets is if there were a dynasty being built.

Knicks, even through all their mediocrity, have always be NY's team. When they were halfway decent, MSG was probably the hottest ticket in all of NY sports.

Yeah not true. If the Nets just win 1 Championship they will become the team in New York. Especially in Brooklyn.

Loyalty to the Knicks doesn't run that deep in NY. People are tired of Dolan.

Lalouie · Post #75 » by **Lalouie** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:36 am

Hello Brooklyn wrote:The Knicks are way more popular in NY than the Nets, I will admit that.

But its not a Lakers/Clippers type situation. The Knicks haven't won a title in like 40 years.

If the Nets were ever good, then NY would flip over. And Brooklyn would become entrenched as a Nets town.

People in New York are starving for good basketball. They're not going to stick with James Dolan if they have another option.

i think the nets have to be more than just good, just as the clips have to be more than just good. all that time with blake and cp3 ultimately got the clips nowhere in la because they just couldn't establish anything. as it CURRENTLY stands in nyc, the nets aren't good enough. they're better than nyk but it's not enough to just be better

PhilBlackson · Post #76 » by **PhilBlackson** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:48 am

1. It's actual NYC aka the Mecca
2. The nostalgia of MSG
3. They already have a potential superstar in place, the Nets have a bunch of varying quality role players

bronxknicksfan1 · Post #77 » by **bronxknicksfan1** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:49 am

Hello Brooklyn wrote:
bronxknicksfan1 wrote:
Hello Brooklyn wrote:The Knicks are way more popular in NY than the Nets, I will admit that.

But its not a Lakers/Clippers type situation. The Knicks haven't won a title in like 40 years.

If the Nets were ever good, then NY would flip over. And Brooklyn would become entrenched as a Nets town.

People in New York are starving for good basketball. They're not going to stick with James Dolan if they have another option.

Only way NY would flip over to the Nets is if there were a dynasty being built.

Knicks, even through all their mediocrity, have always be NY's team. When they were halfway decent, MSG was probably the hottest ticket in all of NY sports.

Yeah not true. If the Nets just win 1 Championship they will become the team in New York. Especially in Brooklyn.

Loyalty to the Knicks doesn't run that deep in NY. People are tired of Dolan.

In a year that the Knicks are tanking and the Nets are clearly the better team, the Knicks are top 10 in attendance while the Nets are dead last. Even during the Nets best days they weren't in the top half of the league in attendance while the Knicks have always been in the top 5-10 range.

The Nets just became an NY team 6 years ago. Even if the Knicks have been mediocre for the past 20 years, they're going to stay NY's team for a while.

Metallikid · Post #78 » by **Metallikid** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 8:35 am

They wouldn't. Why would you pick Dolan over Jay-Z?

Metallikid · Post #79 » by **Metallikid** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 8:38 am

Karate Diop wrote:
LAL wrote:Prestige.

But neither franchise is getting anything, so it’s a moot point.

What prestige though? Look at the Knicks "accomplishments", there virtually are none. MSG from a basketball standpoint is famous for opposing players coming to town and taking a Jurrasic sized dump on the home team... Not for anything the Knicks have done there.

Knicks =/= Lakers.

There are some arguments for players choosing the Knicks over Nets (KP is by far the best player on either roster, dedicated fanbase), but historical success and prestige aren't two of them.

I don't think I would call a fanbase that is well-known for turning on their own team and booing their own players, "dedicated."

Karate Diop · Post #80 » by **Karate Diop** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 10:24 am

Metta World WAR wrote:
Karate Diop wrote:
LAL wrote:Prestige.

But neither franchise is getting anything, so it’s a moot point.

What prestige though? Look at the Knicks "accomplishments", there virtually are none. MSG from a basketball standpoint is famous for opposing players coming to down and taking a Jurrasic sized dump on the home team... Not for anything the Knicks have done there.

Knicks =/= Lakers.

The Knicks have 2 NBA Championships and multiple NBA Finals appearances. The Nets have 2 ABA (offbrand) Championships and multiple NBA Finals defeats. And Billy King gifting the Celtics another possible/probable dynasty. And delusional fans that truly believe they are anything beyond an offbrand afterthought in New York. You can cry, you can rationalize, you can protest, but that's how it is, and how it will always be. AND YOU'LL LIKE IT.

The Knicks won their championships in the '69-'70 and '72-'73 seasons.

The Nets won their two ABA championships in '73-'74 and '75-'76.

All 4 of these championships occurred before the NBA-ABA merger.

To insinuate that the Knicks' championships are worth more than the Nets'championships is being disengenous... Especially when you can make an argument that the ABA had better top tier talent than the NBA at the time.