[Camelo Thread Part 7]

Future Soldier · Post #781 » by **Future Soldier** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:33 pm

yeah, where is Sheridan in all of this? He put up a front page story on ESPN about Melo only signing with NY, he wouldn't have done that unless his source was stone cold concrete, like LaLa or Melo himself. Anyone here that uses Twitter should ask him.

knicks9784 · Post #782 » by **knicks9784** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:35 pm

RHODEY wrote:
Justdatdude wrote:Like I said before, trade everyone on this team for Carmelo not named Felton or Amare if that's what it takes. Role players are replaceable. I love Fields, but he's replaceable. Get the stars, get the supporting cast later. Our coach is Mike D'Antoni. An offensive coach. You give an offensive coach two of the best offensive players in the league and you're in a special position. Find a shooting guard that can shoot and defend. Find a tall defensive center that can block and rebound. Now you're on your way to a championship. Get Carmelo at all cost. There is no benefit in saying 'we're better than the Nets' when the goal is to win the championship. Without Carmelo, we'll be good, but we're not on Miami's level nor will we ever be unless Dwight Howard come here.

Based on your logic when the Lakers traded for Gasol, they should have tossed in Odom and Ariza. Yet they didn't and look where they are now.

Some of the best trades are the ones you dont make.

thats a bad example cause it was west giving gasol to the lakers, that trade was never intended to be fair and i doubt their was much bargaining. everyone was on the same side of the table in that deal

Knicks_Fan2 · Post #783 » by **Knicks_Fan2** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:35 pm

Future Soldier wrote:yeah, where is Sheridan in all of this? He put up a front page story on ESPN about Melo only signing with NY, he wouldn't have done that unless his source was stone cold concrete, like LaLa or Melo himself. Anyone here that uses Twitter should ask him.

He had an article last night and has a chat at 2 pm. we'll see what he says.

Pharmcat · Post #784 » by **Pharmcat** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:38 pm

getting harrington isnt really a negative, as it helps replenish the depth lost in melo deal

azu + mason for harrington works in the checker and saves them boatload of money

FieldsMedal · Post #785 » by **FieldsMedal** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:38 pm

duetta wrote:Just get this over with. We lost to the world champions last night due to a lack of size. We need to solve that problem more than any other.

Who do you propose the Knicks get to succeed where Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Yao Ming, Dwight Howard and others have failed?

Future Soldier · Post #786 » by **Future Soldier** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:40 pm

just saw this

Nets officials have remained quietly confident for months, and received further assurances Sunday, a source told ESPN.com's Chris Sheridan, that Anthony ultimately would agree to the extension -- no matter how much he'd prefer to play with the Knicks -- to ensure that he locks in his contract before labor negotiations this summer that are expected to establish a much more restrictive financial landscape in the league.

hmmm....further assurances from his agent? Or from Melo himself? There is a big difference there. The agent may want one thing, and is just telling the Nets what they want to hear. Melo may be thinking something else entirely. But would this deal have gotten this far if Melo didn't give SOME indication that he'd be willing to sign the deal? Whatever. These CAA guys sure know how to turn everything under their umbrella into a circus. What a bunch of unprofessional dicks.

Jay10 · Post #787 » by **Jay10** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:40 pm

AllanHoustonFan wrote:Chris_Broussard Chris Broussard
Den swinging for fences: sources say in addition to Harrington, they're pushing NJ to take Renaldo Balkman & maybe give up 1st rounder too

this is what the nuggets are doing to the nets

Future Soldier · Post #788 » by **Future Soldier** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:41 pm

FieldsMedal wrote:
duetta wrote:Just get this over with. We lost to the world champions last night due to a lack of size. We need to solve that problem more than any other.

Who do you propose the Knicks get to succeed where Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Yao Ming, Dwight Howard and others have failed?

they're getting older, and will fall off by next year. I don't care how good you are, you aren't making the Finals 5 years in a row, it just doesn't happen.

captain subtext · Post #789 » by **captain subtext** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:43 pm

Here's a suggestion for the Nets GM: For every bad contract they wanna dump, you take away a first rounder. If you have pride and aren't completely desperate and insane, that is. Wait..you...oh... nevermind.

Falstaffxx · Post #790 » by **Falstaffxx** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:43 pm

Future Soldier wrote:just saw this

Nets officials have remained quietly confident for months, and received further assurances Sunday, a source told ESPN.com's Chris Sheridan, that Anthony ultimately would agree to the extension -- no matter how much he'd prefer to play with the Knicks -- to ensure that he locks in his contract before labor negotiations this summer that are expected to establish a much more restrictive financial landscape in the league.

hmmm....further assurances from his agent? Or from Melo himself? There is a big difference there. The agent may want one thing, and is just telling the Nets what they want to hear. Melo may be thinking something else entirely. But would this deal have gotten this far if Melo didn't give SOME indication that he'd be willing to sign the deal? Whatever. These CAA guys sure know how to turn everything under their umbrella into a circus. What a bunch of unprofessional dicks.

Hmm, that's not encouraging, but I still don't believe it.

god shammgod · Post #791 » by **god shammgod** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:46 pm

Pharmcat wrote:getting harrington isnt really a negative, as it helps replenish the depth lost in melo deal

azu + mason for harrington works in the checker and saves them boatload of money

if that's what it takes i don't really see the problem. take balkman too, who cares.

Post #792 » by **knicks742** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:48 pm

god shammgod wrote:
Pharmcat wrote:getting harrington isnt really a negative, as it helps replenish the depth lost in melo deal

azu + mason for harrington works in the checker and saves them boatload of money

if that's what it takes i don't really see the problem. take balkman too, who cares.

Agreed but the problem is that they apparently want Favors, the picks and to dump the contracts. So for us, they would probably want Gallo, Fields, picks and to dump Harrington. No way I do do this trade. Gallo, Eddy, pick, Azubuike and Mason for Melo and Harrington is my final offer.

ctorres · Post #793 » by **ctorres** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:48 pm

Ugh, I was hoping to wake up and find out the deal was done.

Future Soldier · Post #794 » by **Future Soldier** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:50 pm

I wouldn't mind taking Harrington. If there's one thing we've learned, it's that ANYONE can be traded. We could always do a salary dump and move Al for a couple of expirings and a low pick in the offseason. There's always a stupid ass GM out there ripe for the plucking.

Pharmcat · Post #795 » by **Pharmcat** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:50 pm

Falstaffxx wrote:
Knicker23 wrote:Comon now KG, championships are surely won with players like Fields, but championships are arrived at with players like Melo. . . I love Fields as well, and see him behind Amare/Felton as who I'd want to hold onto the most, but I'm not sure i'd let Melo walk for him.

I like Fields a lot, but I'd include him in a Melo deal, depending on what the whole package was. I'm on the fence about Gallo/Fields/Curry/1st. I'd probably do it though, to be honest.

i know its alot to do, but if thats what it takes you do it, and take on harrington to replenish depth

donnies plan was 2 max players, melo is the last on the list till 1.5 more years when paul and williams come on market

FieldsMedal · Post #796 » by **FieldsMedal** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:53 pm

Knicker23 wrote:I'm not sure i'd say these guys are making things up, but a lot of them may have their own agendas or want to make a name for themselves by being the first to report something.

No argument.

if Melo does in fact come to NY Sheridan will look like the smart one, but as of right now, he's looking pretty stupid.

You just clearly identified the catch-22 of all this.

People criticize the immediacy of social media. People criticize journalists wanting to be the first report something.

But its ALL the people (and a lot of the very SAME people) that are criticizing the info that are fueling it's availability. People aren't satisfied with knowing what's accurate, they want to know something "RIGHT NOW".

THIS is why we have a 55-page thread (since late last night) with people feverishly trying to update with the VERY LATEST ... ANY LATEST ... info from social media.

It doesn't MATTER if Chris Sheridan looks dumb "right now". It matter what happens in the END.

And let me also say Sheridan could've been right once. If 'Melo outright told him that he wouldn't sign the extension to anyone but the KNicks, and Sheridan reported that (justifiably), then Sheridan was right and will also be right. He accurately reported what a relevant source told him directly.

'Melo changing his mind will never make Sheridan wrong.

People can't criticize the state of sports journalists when they're the same people creating the conditions in which it exists.

Let me be clear.

If you are following Twitter accounts by the hour/minute/second, linking to any and all new updates, and trying to interpret how each and every new nugget of info fits into the big picture, you give you your right by default to criticize the current state of the media, because YOU're the one making it that way.

The media is competing for YOUR attention.

YOU are the cause.

We've already seen Berger be called out by Cuban about what he wrote the other week as 'completely false and based upon nothing'

Because people close to teams and players make things up.

Think about being a White House reporter. Doesn't matter how accurate what the President, or his Chief of Staff or his Press Secretary say, the second they utter is it is legitimately newsworthy, and any journalist is well within their bounds to report it publicly.

god shammgod · Post #797 » by **god shammgod** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:53 pm

knicks742 wrote:
god shammgod wrote:
Pharmcat wrote:getting harrington isnt really a negative, as it helps replenish the depth lost in melo deal

azu + mason for harrington works in the checker and saves them boatload of money

if that's what it takes i don't really see the problem. take balkman too, who cares.

Agreed but the problem is that they apparently want Favors, the picks and to dump the contracts. So for us, they would probably want Gallo, Fields, picks and to dump Harrington. No way I do do this trade. Gallo, Eddy, pick, Azubuike and Mason for Melo and Harrington is my final offer.

i think in the end they'll realize that getting rid of harrington will be worth more to them then getting an extra non lottery pick. in the nets deal they're stuck with harris too who's not greatly wanted around the league.

FieldsMedal · Post #798 » by **FieldsMedal** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:55 pm

Future Soldier wrote:they're getting older, and will fall off by next year. I don't care how good you are, you aren't making the Finals 5 years in a row, it just doesn't happen.

Fair enough.

The WHO question still stands, however.

??

Future Soldier · Post #799 » by **Future Soldier** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:58 pm

hell you never know....we could get lucky and pick up a nice young big man in the draft. They seem to be plentiful nowadays. Teams are getting good value in the mid/low part of the 1st round. Plus with the cap space we have....Kendrick Perkins would be fantastic. Reminds me of an old school Knick player. Would fit the culture here very well. Hard nosed guy that takes no shyt.

Knickplaya · Post #800 » by **Knickplaya** » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:59 pm

From Chris Sherridan http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/knicks ... -questions

Question No. 4: Why would Rose and Wesley push for a trade to the Nets when the Knicks are their client's preferred destination?

Good question, and there is no clear answer. But here is something to consider: Anthony signed his current contract when he was represented by BDA Sports, which continues to collect a commission on Anthony's salary, meaning CAA (Rose and Wesley's agency) has not made a dime off Anthony's salary since wooing him to join their megastar client list, which includes LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh and Chris Paul. If Anthony agrees to the New Jersey trade and signs his extension, he becomes a revenue producer for CAA (the industry standard is for agents to collect 4 percent of their client's salary).

Question No. 2: What is the key factor holding up the trade?

The Nets need to get a commitment from Anthony that he'll sign the extension, and they received word Sunday (not the first time they've been told this) that Anthony was amenable to the deal. But did they hear that from Anthony himself? Or from his representatives, Leon Rose and William Wesley? Because at the end of the day, no matter how many people in Anthony's camp are telling him and/or pressuring him to sign off on the deal, it still comes down to whether Anthony himself says "Yes" or "No."