[Camelo Thread] - Update: He's Pushing for NYK! Part 5

[GONYK]

if melo REALLY wants to come here :

all he needs to do is have one of his handlers leak to sheridan or broussard that he is not worried bout the next cba as he knows the endorsements, citing the study knicks used on lebron, in a big market can make up the difference in the contract

that would corner DEN and force their hand

Melo himself already said he is not worried about the CBA

[Pharmcat]

if melo REALLY wants to come here :

all he needs to do is have one of his handlers leak to sheridan or broussard that he is not worried bout the next cba as he knows the endorsements, citing the study knicks used on lebron, in a big market can make up the difference in the contract

that would corner DEN and force their hand

If that is the case, why give up Gallo?

he'd be riding the pine with amre, melo, chandler in front of him

+ you have to give to get

[Fury]

if melo REALLY wants to come here :

all he needs to do is have one of his handlers leak to sheridan or broussard that he is not worried bout the next cba as he knows the endorsements, citing the study knicks used on lebron, in a big market can make up the difference in the contract

that would corner DEN and force their hand

If that is the case, why give up Gallo?

he'd be riding the pine with amre, melo, chandler in front of him

Last I checked, D'Antoni uses a 7-8 man rotation. You start Felton, Fields, Gallo, Melo, Amare and have Chandler come off the bench.

[FieldsMedal]

Chandler is not untradeable. I like him a lot but I'd be happy to move him if I thought he'd bring back a major upgrade to a relatively weak area of the team. I don't want to trade for a player just for the sake of trading for a player or just because a player may have a big name. I want a guy whose game will actually fill weak areas on the team and complement and accentuate the other players already on the roster.

Generally speaking, even aside from Carmelo, I think some people fail to get the idea that not every player (even the so-called superstars) is a great fit for every team. Player A might help Team X a lot. That same Player A might help Team Y only a little. And that same Player A might actually hurt Team Z. It's not enough to just throw in another big name. You have to consider how he will fit in.

If you're making a plea for intelligent discourse, it's probably not a good idea to accuse everyone who disagrees with you about "Melo of being a starf***er.

I don't see any compelling argument that suggests Carmelo Anthony won't "fit" on a team that has been playing well for all of 3 weeks. I think Mike D'Antoni had an adjustment after the first Denver game, and he can do so again to get the best out of the TALENT available to him, and 'Melo represents an upgrade in talent.

'Melo can't be left alone on the floor, anywhere. No, he's not a great threat from behind the arc, but play off of him, he can catch it there adn get a running start to the basket, where he is as deadly as anyone in the game.

The idea that the Knicks spacing will suffer with him is frankly ludicrous.

I don't know of anything close to a comparable upgrade in talent that one can reasonably anticipate to be available to the Knicks at the 5 in the next 14 months.

i don't think the Knicks are a "need" away from legit contention. I think they're still a fair amount of 36 minutes a night talent away.

[Pharmcat]

Amare at the 5 long term is a bad basketball decision

it wont happen

for short spurts, maybe

[god shammgod]

Amare at the 5 long term is a bad basketball decision

it wont happen

for short spurts, maybe

as long as the team keeps winning this way i don't expect mike to stop it.

[Fury]

I don't know. Amare, Melo at the 4 and 5 is tough to stop defensively. Of course they'll give it back up but that doesn't mean you can't play Amare at the 4 either.

[dk7th]

walsh's foot is on the nugget front office's neck. he has all the leverage and they have zero leverage. the nuggets are not going to have any takers-- at all!

some of you guys really kill me. why are you indulging trade scenarios where the knicks give up so much value for a player who is going to be a free agent in less than 60 games and has no intention of signing elsewhere? we don't owe denver anything.

no to chandler-- he's just taken a quantum leap in shooting and recognizing what the defense is giving him
no to gallo-- he spaces the floor and doesn't need touches to have a huge positive effect on the team
no to fields-- no way no how
no to mozgov-- he needs time and will come into his own
no to turiaf-- heart, maturity and leadership and humor, clutch fouler, and every locker room needs a guy like him

curry, mason, and randolph and let them find a fricking pick for randolph.

[Pharmcat]

Amare at the 5 long term is a bad basketball decision

it wont happen

for short spurts, maybe

as long as the team keeps winning this way i don't expect mike to stop it.

thats b/c he doesnt have any other option,

i mean we have turiaf, mozgov, AR...slim pickings

a guy like varejo would be perfect at the 5 and should be a prime target for us if we trade for melo

[cgf]

Amare at the 5 long term is a bad basketball decision

it wont happen

for short spurts, maybe

as long as the team keeps winning this way i don't expect mike to stop it.

thats b/c he doesnt have any other option,

i mean we have turiaf, mozgov, AR...slim pickings

a guy like varejo would be perfect at the 5 and should be a prime target for us if we trade for melo

Turiaf > Sideshow Bob...

[TrueWarrior]

IDK why people think Gallo or Chandler could start alongside Melo and Amare long term.

Best case is whoever is left of the two becomes 6th man.

Thing is Chandler is gonna get paid this season while Gallo will next season. Is it worth tying up good money in these guys?

Also who does Denver actually want? Karl and Ujiri dont seem to like Gallo that much. Meanwhile Chandler is going to be a RFA. Now I know we have leverage and best case is to not give up any of the 2, but in all likelihood one of them is probably going sooner or later.

In any case I dont like this small ball crap so that eliminates Chandler or Gallo from starting unless we play Melo at SG which, like Amare at C, doesnt seem like a good long term thing.

My plan would be to trade Chandler, Randolph or pick, Bookie, and Curry. We keep Gallo for another year to see how he pans out, in addition to Fields. I think Gallo and Fields would be great compliments with their ability to play their role within the team concept. Gallo becomes 6th man for the time being. Chandler and Randolph might have more individual talent, but Im not sure where they fit with Melo and Amare. Im also not ready to give Chandler big money just yet, and feel his game will get hurt the most by Melo arriving. Gallo scores 2 less ppg on 4 less shots, so I think he would be able to defer a little better in addition to his more willing passing.

Obviously my preference would be to not trade Chandler or Gallo at all. We could always use them to parlay for a defensive center down the line.

[BigUgly]

Just be patient guys. It is all coming together . We have built something here that is clear no matter what happens this week and as they say...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHTsQ9qePrQ[/youtube]

[johnnywishbone]

would you rather have Melo getting Chandler's shots and touches or have Chandler keep them?

Who said anything about Chandler? btw. he is a four Melo is a three.

So your question should really be:

would you rather have Melo getting Gallo's shots and touches or have Gallo keep them?

[god shammgod]

Amare at the 5 long term is a bad basketball decision

it wont happen

for short spurts, maybe

as long as the team keeps winning this way i don't expect mike to stop it.

thats b/c he doesnt have any other option,

i mean we have turiaf, mozgov, AR...slim pickings

a guy like varejo would be perfect at the 5 and should be a prime target for us if we trade for melo

what mike likes about these lineups is that everyone besides amare is a threat from 3. ideally mike would like a center who can shoot from there so he can keep that same spacing. otherwise he'll never be happy with whoever it is.

[towelie]

walsh's foot is on the nugget front office's neck. he has all the leverage and they have zero leverage. the nuggets are not going to have any takers-- at all!

some of you guys really kill me. why are you indulging trade scenarios where the knicks give up so much value for a player who is going to be a free agent in less than 60 games and has no intention of signing elsewhere? we don't owe denver anything.

no to chandler-- he's just taken a quantum leap in shooting and recognizing what the defense is giving him
no to gallo-- he spaces the floor and doesn't need touches to have a huge positive effect on the team
no to fields-- no way no how
no to mozgov-- he needs time and will come into his own
no to turiaf-- heart, maturity and leadership and humor, clutch fouler, and every locker room needs a guy like him

curry, mason, and randolph and let them find a fricking pick for randolph.

The Knicks still have to offer a package that:

a) ...beats out teams' rental offer -- Beaubois + 1st round picks; Orton/Gortat + 1st round picks. These aren't good packages, but they're still better than your proposed Randolph/Mason garbage.

b) ...is "better than nothing." It has to be enough so that by the deadline, Denver decides accepting our package is better than waiting till the summer and getting nothing but future 1sts. Does Randolph/Mason accomplish that? Hardly. If I were Denver GM, I'd hang up the phone and not listen to any other offers.

[towelie]

Thing is Chandler is gonna get paid this season while Gallo will next season. Is it worth tying up good money in these guys?

How does Chandler getting his pay day this summer matter if we acquire Melo in a trade? We'd be at the cap as soon as we get Melo and having a resigned Chandler at $8-9M would affect us no differently than having Gallo still on his rookie contract. In fact, by having Chandler at a higher price, it'd be easier to pull off further deals that require us to match contracts...e.g. Chandler for Marcus Camby.

[TrueWarrior]

what mike likes about these lineups is that everyone besides amare is a threat from 3. ideally mike would like a center who can shoot from there so he can keep that same spacing. otherwise he'll never be happy with whoever it is.

Pretty much. Its true what BnO said in that Dantoni would love a guy like Okur. A big who can check the opposing center on defense but also space the floor on offense for STAT. The problem obviously is that these guys are very rare so until further notice we're going to continue seeing bigs put up career highs on us. In a perfect world Amare would be a center, but hes obviously not. There arent many great centers in the league anymore period, especially ones you can run your offense through like we do with Amare and did with Lee.

Dantoni's system isnt traditional, and thats something most people forget. If Melo comes here he will definitely continues with the small ball until further notice. We all saw it coming.

Thing is Chandler is gonna get paid this season while Gallo will next season. Is it worth tying up good money in these guys?

How does Chandler getting his pay day this summer matter if we acquire Melo in a trade? We'd be at the cap as soon as we get Melo and having a resigned Chandler at $8-9M would affect us no differently than having Gallo still on his rookie contract. In fact, by having Chandler at a higher price, it'd be easier to pull off further deals that require us to match contracts...e.g. Chandler for Marcus Camby.

Well for one maybe Chandler's game suffers from Melo arriving. I really dont think they can co-exist offensively. Theres also the risk of injury since Chandler has ended the season hurt the last 2 years with messed up ankles.

You can look at this from both perspectives though. If we keep Chandler and sign him to a good deal then we can def swing him in a trade for a center. Wed be over the cap anyway and most likely the Paul/Deron thing is dead with the way Felton is playing. Thing is we could also do it with Gallo. Gallo, especially if he improves, could net us a young big man still on a rookie deal. It wont be a veteran like Chandler could net but perhaps a guy like Cousins or somebody of the sort who has fallen out of favor with their team. If Gallo shows improvement he will have alot of value around the league, if he doesnt already.

Theres also the chance that Gallo becomes our Toni Kukoc and flourishes as a 6th man. While Chandler is more versatile again Im not sure how his game will mesh with Melo. Its the same thing most of us said about Chandler with LeBron.

Do we have the MLE if we trade for Melo and go over the cap? In that case why not just sign a center with that this offseason? Might not be a world beater and Im not sure who would be available, but we should be able to get somebody who can fill the void if Mozgov doesnt improve.

[DishAndSwish]

would you rather have Melo getting Chandler's shots and touches or have Chandler keep them?

Who said anything about Chandler? btw. he is a four Melo is a three.

So your question should really be:

would you rather have Melo getting Gallo's shots and touches or have Gallo keep them?

In Dantoni's system, Melo can play the 4.

[j4remi]

would you rather have Melo getting Chandler's shots and touches or have Chandler keep them?

Who said anything about Chandler? btw. he is a four Melo is a three.

So your question should really be:

would you rather have Melo getting Gallo's shots and touches or have Gallo keep them?

There's no way in hell that Melo takes on the decoy role and doesn't have plays run through him. He'd likely become the focal point of that elbow play they run with Amare on and off, and he'd likely get touches in a similar position to where Chandler sees the ball.

[j4remi]

Also, to the people saying that acquiring Melo would help relieve the minutes on the Knicks' starters, I'm not really clear on how you add depth by trading some combination of Gallo/Chandler/Fields to get him.

Are you opposed to dealing for him if we only have to give up one of the above? Say one of those three, AR (or a first rounder), Billy walker and second round pick...would you still be opposed to adding Melo? As far as I'm concerned, that's an upgrade to the line-up if you move either of the F's...the only issue if you move Fields is that you don't have a legit 2, though we didn't think Fields could be one at first either.