FREE AGENT/Trade/Transaction Idea thread

[aq_ua]

Sure we have. The NY Knicks, unlike fans, are not guarantee-of-championship or bust. There is value to the Knicks of being a good team for the next several years.

The personal opinion that the Knicks should trade Melo and go full-on draft rebuild coinciding with $70+ in cap room opening up to the Knicks over the next 3 years is a perfectly valid one. But a personal opinion that has no chance of occurring, and I think in an honest moment you'd acknowledge that.

So what's left is the worst of both worlds. Carrying Melo on your roster for the remainder of this contract AND sitting out the FA market. Can't say I can make a valid argument for that approach.

Actually, that is the only option that has no chance of occurring. The rest is purely your own opinion based on...

Exactly right. So the Knicks ARE going to have to play the FA market, and if they want premium players they're going to hav to pay premium prices, which brings us right back to what I've been saying all along.

Actually, you've been saying we need to pay "market value", not premium prices, and how the heck are Carroll, Milsap, Matthews and Ellis "premium players"?

Again, my contention is that if your strategy is the alternative, I would much rather NOT carry Melo on our roster for the remainder of his contract.

[riter]

LMA/Porz
Melo
Carroll
Schved/Gallo

[And100]

Actually, that is the only option that has no chance of occurring. The rest is purely your own opinion based on...

Exactly right. So the Knicks ARE going to have to play the FA market, and if they want premium players they're going to hav to pay premium prices, which brings us right back to what I've been saying all along.

Actually, you've been saying we need to pay "market value", not premium prices, and how the heck are Carroll, Milsap, Matthews and Ellis "premium players"?

They're the same thing in a market that is about to explode with brand new money that HAS to be spent.

Again, my contention is that if your strategy is the alternative, I would much rather NOT carry Melo on our roster for the remainder of his contract.

And I'm being completely genuine when I say I don't begrudge you personally preferring a path we both know the NY Knicks aren't taking.

[aq_ua]

Exactly right. So the Knicks ARE going to have to play the FA market, and if they want premium players they're going to hav to pay premium prices, which brings us right back to what I've been saying all along.

Actually, you've been saying we need to pay "market value", not premium prices, and how the heck are Carroll, Milsap, Matthews and Ellis "premium players"?

They're the same thing in a market that is about to explode with brand new money that HAS to be spent.

What? No they're not. You're either paying market or you're paying above it, that is the very literal definition of those terms. What you're advocating is the overpaying for talent, which is exactly the opposite of any sensible strategy.

Again, my contention is that if your strategy is the alternative, I would much rather NOT carry Melo on our roster for the remainder of his contract.

And I'm being completely genuine when I say I don't begrudge you personally preferring a path we both know the NY Knicks aren't taking.

That's cool, I don't know why you would need to make it personal but whatever helps you cope.

[HarthorneWingo]

I know all the reasons the responses to this will hate this suggestion especially how bad the fit is, but...

Does Rondo on a one year contract (see the rumored mutual interest between Rondo and Sacramento on a one year deal) have any interest from us?

Jose Calderon and Tim Hardaway Jr. to Dallas in a sign and trade for Rajon Rondo on a 1 year deal that matches the salary ($8.5 Million)?

[riter]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/stevekylerNBA/status/613490715830681600[/tweet]

[And100]

What? No they're not. You're either paying market or you're paying above it, that is the very literal definition of those terms. What you're advocating is the overpaying for talent, which is exactly the opposite of any sensible strategy.

You and I have a disagreement over what the market will be like for the next 3 years. I think salaries are going to explode with the new money, and the choice will be to respond to those market conditions or not be in the market.

Again, my contention is that if your strategy is the alternative, I would much rather NOT carry Melo on our roster for the remainder of his contract.

And I'm being completely genuine when I say I don't begrudge you personally preferring a path we both know the NY Knicks aren't taking.

That's cool, I don't know why you would need to make it personal but whatever helps you cope.[/quote]

How is that personal? I'm being genuine. I respect your right to have an opinion, but I also contend you and I both know the Knicks aren't dealing Melo (even if they could) and they aren't keeping Melo and sitting out the FA market, so they'll pay what they hav to land players.

I'm just not sure why anyone would conclude premium free agents are going to choose a 17 win team at anything less than their maxes.

[aq_ua]

What? No they're not. You're either paying market or you're paying above it, that is the very literal definition of those terms. What you're advocating is the overpaying for talent, which is exactly the opposite of any sensible strategy.

You and I have a disagreement over what the market will be like for the next 3 years. I think salaries are going to explode with the new money, and the choice will be to respond to those market conditions or not be in the market.

Not really. We have a disagreement over whether players like Carroll, Milsap, Matthews and Ellis are worth giving max level contracts, all in the name of not being shut out of free agency. I suppose you are taking the view that what we consider max level contracts today will not be after next season because of the rising cap. I still wouldn't want to tie our cap space up with those guys at today's max level contracts, I think that would be suicidal.

Again, my contention is that if your strategy is the alternative, I would much rather NOT carry Melo on our roster for the remainder of his contract.

And I'm being completely genuine when I say I don't begrudge you personally preferring a path we both know the NY Knicks aren't taking.

That's cool, I don't know why you would need to make it personal but whatever helps you cope.

How is that personal? I'm being genuine. I respect your right to have an opinion, but I also contend you and I both know the Knicks aren't dealing Melo (even if they could) and they aren't keeping Melo and sitting out the FA market, so they'll pay what they hav to land players.

I'm just not sure why anyone would conclude premium free agents are going to choose a 17 win team at anything less than their maxes.

Well, simply because neither Carroll nor Milsap nor Matthews nor Ellis are premium free agents, and that's the reality of what's available this summer according to your own statement. So, to summarize, your strategy of overpaying non-premium free agents in order to avoid being shut out of free agency does not make any sense and I'm at a loss why you would think the Knicks would do so.

[And100]

What? No they're not. You're either paying market or you're paying above it, that is the very literal definition of those terms. What you're advocating is the overpaying for talent, which is exactly the opposite of any sensible strategy.

You and I have a disagreement over what the market will be like for the next 3 years. I think salaries are going to explode with the new money, and the choice will be to respond to those market conditions or not be in the market.

Not really. We have a disagreement over whether players like Carroll, Milsap, Matthews and Ellis are worth giving max level contracts, all in the name of not being shut out of free agency. I suppose you are taking the view that what we consider max level contracts today will not be after next season because of the rising cap. I still wouldn't want to tie our cap space up with those guys at today's max level contracts, I think that would be suicidal.

Then what is the alternative? Being a lottery team for 2015-16 without a lottery pick? Isn't that the literal definition of suicidal?

And I understand the argument in a vacuum is trade Melo, but that argument isn't practical and in the sense it isn't happening?

So, conditional scenario? IF the Knicks find the market to be higher for quality players than you anticipate, are you suggesting the Knicks knowingly sit out the market, coming off a 17 win season?

Again, my contention is that if your strategy is the alternative, I would much rather NOT carry Melo on our roster for the remainder of his contract.

And I'm being completely genuine when I say I don't begrudge you personally preferring a path we both know the NY Knicks aren't taking.

That's cool, I don't know why you would need to make it personal but whatever helps you cope.

How is that personal? I'm being genuine. I respect your right to have an opinion, but I also contend you and I both know the Knicks aren't dealing Melo (even if they could) and they aren't keeping Melo and sitting out the FA market, so they'll pay what they hav to land players.

I'm just not sure why anyone would conclude premium free agents are going to choose a 17 win team at anything less than their maxes.

Well, simply because neither Carroll nor Milsap nor Matthews nor Ellis are premium free agents, and that's the reality of what's available this summer according to your own statement. So, to summarize, your strategy of overpaying non-premium free agents in order to avoid being shut out of free agency does not make any sense and I'm at a loss why you would think the Knicks would do so.[/quote]

Premium, quality, good, whatever terms you prefer. Not the point.

They'd do so because the alternative is qualifying for the lottery and not having a lottery pick, the worst-case scenario.

What makes sense about the a 17 win team standing pat with no lottery pick coming to help in 2016?

[aq_ua]

You and I have a disagreement over what the market will be like for the next 3 years. I think salaries are going to explode with the new money, and the choice will be to respond to those market conditions or not be in the market.

Not really. We have a disagreement over whether players like Carroll, Milsap, Matthews and Ellis are worth giving max level contracts, all in the name of not being shut out of free agency. I suppose you are taking the view that what we consider max level contracts today will not be after next season because of the rising cap. I still wouldn't want to tie our cap space up with those guys at today's max level contracts, I think that would be suicidal.

Then what is the alternative? Being a lottery team for 2015-16 without a lottery pick? Isn't that the literal definition of suicidal?

And I understand the argument in a vacuum is trade Melo, but that argument isn't practical and in the sense it isn't happening?

So, conditional scenario? IF the Knicks find the market to be higher for quality players than you anticipate, are you suggesting the Knicks knowingly sit out the market, coming off a 17 win season?

That's cool, I don't know why you would need to make it personal but whatever helps you cope.

How is that personal? I'm being genuine. I respect your right to have an opinion, but I also contend you and I both know the Knicks aren't dealing Melo (even if they could) and they aren't keeping Melo and sitting out the FA market, so they'll pay what they hav to land players.

I'm just not sure why anyone would conclude premium free agents are going to choose a 17 win team at anything less than their maxes.

Well, simply because neither Carroll nor Milsap nor Matthews nor Ellis are premium free agents, and that's the reality of what's available this summer according to your own statement. So, to summarize, your strategy of overpaying non-premium free agents in order to avoid being shut out of free agency does not make any sense and I'm at a loss why you would think the Knicks would do so.

Premium, quality, good, whatever terms you prefer. Not the point.

They'd do so because the alternative is qualifying for the lottery and not having a lottery pick, the worst-case scenario.

What makes sense about the a 17 win team standing pat with no lottery pick coming to help in 2016?

Just applying your own terminology, fella.
Here is the huge falsehood in your argument. Not overpaying for mediocre non-premium free agents does not equate to standing pat. In fact, there are many other options available including taking on one year contract dumps for picks and rookie contracts.

Do you truly believe we're ending this summer by adding a rookie and let's say Carroll and Ellis as our free agent haul, after the 17 win season and without having our own pick in 2016 as you elude to multiple times? Do you think those signings move the needle sufficiently to set us up for the future? Or do you think Melo takes a look around, realizes he isn't winning anything by sticking around and makes the "argument in a vacuum" not so remote?

[And100]

Here is the huge falsehood in your argument. Not overpaying for mediocre non-premium free agents does not equate to standing pat. In fact, there are many other options available including taking on one year contract dumps for picks and rookie contracts.

i know the answer to the question who from recent other conversation is "who knows", but I have a hard time imagining a quality pick of the kind a talentless Knicks team needs coming via a salary dump.

The poster boy for this idea David Lee would come with the 30th pick, literally the worst pick you can have.

Do you truly believe we're ending this summer by adding a rookie and let's say Carroll and Ellis as our free agent haul, after the 17 win season and without having our own pick in 2016 as you elude to multiple times?

I think that is much, much more likely than the Knicks ending the offseason with the 4th pick and nothing else, yes, very much so.

Do you think those signings move the needle sufficiently to set us up for the future? Or do you think Melo takes a look around, realizes he isn't winning anything by sticking around and makes the "argument in a vacuum" not so remote?

I think the Melo gets traded argument is about as remote as you get. He signed here coming off a non-postseason season despite being courted by other, better teams.

Not all players are championship or bust. His perhaps only other logical destination happens to be a team in the almost exaxt same situation as the Knicks.

if this discussion is predicated on me thinking the Knicks are going to try to trade Melo AND Melo would approve, then it's a pointless exercise because I think there is as you say a remote chance of that occuring.

Even more remote than that is a off-season of inactivity in a sort of backdoor dare by the Knicks for Melo to want out, which I kind of get the sense is behind your position.

[aq_ua]

Here is the huge falsehood in your argument. Not overpaying for mediocre non-premium free agents does not equate to standing pat. In fact, there are many other options available including taking on one year contract dumps for picks and rookie contracts.

i know the answer to the question who from recent other conversation is "who knows", but I have a hard time imagining a quality pick of the kind a talentless Knicks team needs coming via a salary dump.

The poster boy for this idea David Lee would come with the 30th pick, literally the worst pick you can have.

Do you truly believe we're ending this summer by adding a rookie and let's say Carroll and Ellis as our free agent haul, after the 17 win season and without having our own pick in 2016 as you elude to multiple times?

I think that is much, much more likely than the Knicks ending the offseason with the 4th pick and nothing else, yes, very much so.

Do you think those signings move the needle sufficiently to set us up for the future? Or do you think Melo takes a look around, realizes he isn't winning anything by sticking around and makes the "argument in a vacuum" not so remote?

I think the Melo gets traded argument is about as remote as you get. He signed here coming off a non-postseason season despite being courted by other, better teams.

Not all players are championship or bust. His perhaps only other logical destination happens to be a team in the almost exaxt same situation as the Knicks.

if this discussion is predicated on me thinking the Knicks are going to try to trade Melo AND Melo would approve, then it's a pointless exercise because I think there is as you say a remote chance of that occuring.

Even more remote than that is a off-season of inactivity in a sort of backdoor dare by the Knicks for Melo to want out, which I kind of get the sense is behind your position.

No, I think you're missing the point again that this is a question of how the Knicks will get set up for a viable and sustainable future.

We can of course debate whether Melo chose the Knicks because we offered a better future, or he simply chose the most money (intellectual honesty making the answer pretty clear in retrospect) and whether now that he has his contract, he can now choose to have his cake and eat it too. However, let me explain to you how rudimentary this argument is.

On one hand, we have your world view that overpaying for mediocre free agents and sacrificing salary cap flexibility is the best way forward.

On the other hand, we have my world view where literally every other course of action is better.

Really, not much else here of substance.

[And100]

We can of course debate whether Melo chose the Knicks because we offered a better future, or he simply chose the most money (intellectual honesty making the answer pretty clear in retrospect) and whether now that he has his contract, he can now choose to have his cake and eat it too.

I think it was about the money AND the lifestyle. Is it really that foreign a concept he wants to say in NYC?

On one hand, we have your world view that overpaying for mediocre free agents and sacrificing salary cap flexibility is the best way forward.

"Overpaying" is a subjective term. Even if you believe it intellectual honesty dictates you acknowledge that. You can't predicate a definitive argument on a opinion of your choosing.

And I never said it was the "best" way forward. I've been pretty clear what sort of "way forward" I've characterized it.

On the other hand, we have my world view where literally every other course of action is better.

You haven't expressed one that I know of:

1.) Dare Melo to leave (along with non-militant fans) to a small handful of GOOD teams he'd maybe consider by doing nothing, with him holding all the leverage.

Best case scenario fall out still very unlikely to net you a 2016 lottery pick.

2.) Try to improve by seeking out one or two unidentified good players from unidentified teams on unidentified contracts to gets back unidentified draft picks. Best case scenario fall out still very unlikely to net you a 2016 lottery pick.

[aq_ua]

We can of course debate whether Melo chose the Knicks because we offered a better future, or he simply chose the most money (intellectual honesty making the answer pretty clear in retrospect) and whether now that he has his contract, he can now choose to have his cake and eat it too.

I think it was about the money AND the lifestyle. Is it really that foreign a concept he wants to say in NYC?

On one hand, we have your world view that overpaying for mediocre free agents and sacrificing salary cap flexibility is the best way forward.

"Overpaying" is a subjective term. Even if you believe it intellectual honesty dictates you acknowledge that. You can't predicate a definitive argument on a opinion of your choosing.

And I never said it was the "best" way forward. I've been pretty clear what sort of "way forward" I've characterized it.

On the other hand, we have my world view where literally every other course of action is better.

You haven't expressed one that I know of:

1.) Dare Melo to leave (along with non-militant fans) to a small handful of GOOD teams he'd maybe consider by doing nothing, with him holding all the leverage.

Best case scenario fall out still very unlikely to net you a 2016 lottery pick.

2.) Try to improve by seeking out one or two unidentified good players from unidentified teams on unidentified contracts to gets back unidentified draft picks. Best case scenario fall out still very unlikely to net you a 2016 lottery pick.

No, overpaying would not be subjective if the proposition is to put forth max level contracts to players that would not otherwise receive them. This is actually your paradigm if you care to go back and review.

As to any other specific course of action that would be superior to yours, again it would be literally any. Daring Melo to leave would be a quite childish way of putting it, my point being he would likely choose to leave if we were not showing progress in a successful team build. If you need a "for example", then let's go with your David Lee and the 30th and perhaps add a Chris Anderson and a future second round pick for fun. I would still take that strategy over Melo, Carroll and Monta signed to max contracts. In fact, I could see both scenarios ending with similarly awful seasons, but at least we would have flexibility and draft picks under my path.

[fuzzy1]

Hawks fan who enjoys fantasy trades.

Teague for Calderon, #4 pick. Takers?

Edit: OR, with rumors we might trade up to the #9 pick...

Schroeder, #9, rights to Walter Tavares for the #4 pick.

[And100]

No, overpaying would not be subjective if the proposition is to put forth max level contracts to players that would not otherwise receive them.

I said about 4 messages previous that this is what our disagreement is really about, what the market will be like. You seem to reject that notion if memory serves.

Daring Melo to leave would be a quite childish way of putting it, my point being he would likely choose to leave if we were not showing progress in a successful team build.

Daring, challenging. I think I understand the premise clearly. Knicks would have to choose inactivity, which is how this scenario is triggered. If you're choosing to do something with the intent (even if its not the only) of getting him to reconsider the clause in his contract he asked for, i think I characterized it accurately.

If you need a "for example", then let's go with your David Lee and the 30th and perhaps add a Chris Anderson and a future second round pick for fun. I would still take that strategy over Melo, Carroll and Monta signed to max contracts. In fact, I could see both scenarios ending with similarly awful seasons, but at least we would have flexibility and draft picks under my path.

And once again, i don't begrudge you your opinion at all, because what you characterize as being "similarly awful" would be subjective as well.

In my few months here I've become versed enough to understand some fans don't distinguish between winning 50 games and losing in the second round and not qualifying for the postseason at all. I just doubt the NY Knicks see it that way.

i think the Knicks can transform into a "good" team this year with $40m more in cap room coming over 2 years to supplement. The extra "flexibility" you mentioned is simply deferring spending this year's portion of total of $70m or so in cap room over 3 seasons to other years - other crops of free agents, who will be relatively more expensive in a year than the 2016 class, because their market will be dictated by $88m ans $108m caps.

Of course you could be referring to the notion of having cap room to absorb good players on good contracts other teams no longer want, but there is an inherent conflict in that very premise.

And "draft" picks is too volatile a terms to qualify.

And btw, I specifically did not suggest Ellis was getting a max, if you reread my only mention of Ellis.

[And100]

Hawks fan who enjoys fantasy trades.

Teague for Calderon, #4 pick. Takers?

Edit: OR, with rumors we might trade up to the #9 pick...

Schroeder, #9, rights to Walter Tavares for the #4 pick.

I'll be kind and inform you that you won't find any takers for that here.

[aq_ua]

No, overpaying would not be subjective if the proposition is to put forth max level contracts to players that would not otherwise receive them.

I said about 4 messages previous that this is what our disagreement is really about, what the market will be like. You seem to reject that notion if memory serves.

Daring Melo to leave would be a quite childish way of putting it, my point being he would likely choose to leave if we were not showing progress in a successful team build.

Daring, challenging. I think I understand the premise clearly. Knicks would have to choose inactivity, which is how this scenario is triggered. If you're choosing to do something with the intent (even if its not the only) of getting him to reconsider the clause in his contract he asked for, i think I characterized it accurately.

If you need a "for example", then let's go with your David Lee and the 30th and perhaps add a Chris Anderson and a future second round pick for fun. I would still take that strategy over Melo, Carroll and Monta signed to max contracts. In fact, I could see both scenarios ending with similarly awful seasons, but at least we would have flexibility and draft picks under my path.

And once again, i don't begrudge you your opinion at all, because what you characterize as being "similarly awful" would be subjective as well.

In my few months here I've become versed enough to understand some fans don't distinguish between winning 50 games and losing in the second round and not qualifying for the postseason at all. I just doubt the NY Knicks see it that way.

i think the Knicks can transform into a "good" team this year with $40m more in cap room coming over 2 years to supplement. The extra "flexibility" you mentioned is simply deferring spending this year's portion of total of $70m or so in cap room over 3 seasons to other years - other crops of free agents, who will be relatively more expensive in a year than the 2016 class, because their market will be dictated by $88m ans $108m caps.

Of course you could be referring to the notion of having cap room to absorb good players on good contracts other teams no longer want, but there is an inherent conflict in that very premise.

And "draft" picks is too volatile a terms to qualify.

And btw, I specifically did not suggest Ellis was getting a max, if you reread my only mention of Ellis.

If you care to go back, you provided a list of players including Carroll, Milsap, Ellis and Matthews for whom you would more than willingly outbid the market for including extending max contracts in order to sign this summer. If you would like to retract that statement, then go right ahead, but that did read as the entirety of your strategy.

If I further understand your position, you don't mind signing these players to what are considered max contracts today, because as the cap increases, those max contracts would increase in proportion.

I think what is fundamentally missing here is an understanding of the exact players you are talking about. The players you are talking about, these are role players. They're not as good as you seem to think they are. Subjective opinion? Sure, but then why do you single out those players as free agent targets in the first place? The premise starts with a subjective opinion of those players' talents, but objectively, no team has ever chosen to build around them.

Now - I will point out an interesting flaw in your analysis. You make the point of stating a good player on a good contract that the team no longer wants as having an inherent conflict. However, that is the sole reason why Melo is on this team. In fact, that trade and drafts are the only way this team has ever acquired a bonfide star. Furthermore, to your point on outbidding for free agents, the nature of free agency is such that you must outbid the market for any player, hence the inherent conflict of signing a good player to a good contract is exactly there. I found that humorous.

[NoLayupRule]

looks like lots of good options for us are on the block

Plumlee, Olynek, Lamb, Novak

[knickstape4ever]

• Knicks, Nuggets talking trade? According to Sam Smith of Bulls.com, a potential move sees the Knicks swapping their No. 4 selection for Denver's No. 7 and center Jusuf Nurkic, who impressed as a rookie last season. Denver would theoretically take one of point guards D'Angelo Russell and Emmanuel Mudiay with the fourth pick, which would allow them to deal incumbent star Ty Lawson. The Knicks are rumored to like big men Trey Lyles (Kentucky) and Frank Kaminsky (Wisconsin), both likely to be around at the seventh selection. And of course, Lawson's name has been continually linked to Sacramento, George Karl and DeMarcus Cousins.