OT: It's not because of NYC, it's the NYK!

[Fez Hammersticks]

Don't like what I'm hearing today. "Knicks are in trouble with the top free agents," a source with direct knowledge of convos btwn FAs said.

- Alan Hahn Twitter

But cost of living in NYC, media scrutiny play into the concerns about Knicks. Plus lack of legit talent (all due respect, Gallo) on roster

- Alan Hahn Twitter

NYC is GREAT location. Location's not the problem. just not a lot to offer basketball wise

- Chris Broussard Twitter

NYC is a great bball city, but Knicks not great bball franchise. Can u honestly disagree?

- Chris Broussard Twitter

So you're telling me playing with Tony Douglas, Wilson Chandler, Eddy Curry, etc. are not appealing to these top free agents?

 

[Sug]

So you're telling me playing with Tony Douglas, Wilson Chandler, Eddy Curry, etc. are not appealing to these top free agents?

Heck go back the last five years and you would have a tough time finding anyone the top FAs would want to play with, the Knicks have been so bad for so long it is pathetic.

 

[Minstrel]

This is one big reason why the "burn it all down and rebuild with max free agents and top draft picks" strategy almost never works. Top free agents rarely switch teams in the first place and those who are willing to move rarely want to land up in disaster zones. New York perhaps thought that market size would make them an exception. We'll see.

 

[Denny Crane]

This is one big reason why the "burn it all down and rebuild with max free agents and top draft picks" strategy almost never works. Top free agents rarely switch teams in the first place and those who are willing to move rarely want to land up in disaster zones. New York perhaps thought that market size would make them an exception. We'll see.

Doesn't work for the Knicks anyhow.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Just another case of Imaginary Cap Space.

 

[Entity]

Knicks to court Johnson and Stoudemire

D'Antoni hoping his prior relationship with those players are enough?

 

[jlprk]

The Knick media is so hard up that they're enthusiastic about buying the #44 pick, Jamaican Jerome Jordan. The team bought #44 for $1M after Paul Allen's generosity overpaid $2M to buy #34 and unload #44 only 3 days earlier.

 

[jlprk]

As long as I gave you that teaser, I might as well spell out what happened...

I'm reading national praise for Pritchard's picks in trading for #16 and #34. Both trades were impossible without Paul Allen. Here's an example of how he makes Pritchard look better by overspending: Allen paid $2M (plus #34) for #44, and #44 was then immediately sold for only $1M.

"Many teams had been asking for a minimum of $1.5 million for a second-rounder, and on Monday Portland paid the astronomical sum (by historical standards) of $2 million just to EXCHANGE the 44th pick for the 34th. Walsh paid the Bucks $1 million for that very same 44th pick"

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/knicks/post/_/id/131/how-should-jim-dolan-spend-the-500000-he-saved

Details (all happened last week): We bought #34 from Golden State for $2M and #44. Golden State then traded #44 and Corey Maggette to Milwaukee for Charlie Bell and Dan Gadzuric. The Knicks wanted to buy #44 from Milwaukee, but couldn't because the former trade was contingent upon Maggette's passing a physical. So the Knicks had the Bucks draft Jerome Jordan at #44, and then when Maggette passed the physical, paid the Bucks $1M for #44 Jordan. The Knicks announced it the day after the draft, but it becomes official July 8.

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/news/story?id=5327247

 

[BalancedMan]

This is one big reason why the "burn it all down and rebuild with max free agents and top draft picks" strategy almost never works. Top free agents rarely switch teams in the first place and those who are willing to move rarely want to land up in disaster zones. New York perhaps thought that market size would make them an exception. We'll see.

To be honest, the real problem is that New York was so mismanaged under Isiah that they couldn't rebuild properly. If they had 'rebuilt' the way the Blazers or Thunder did, then they'd be in great shape. That means having a couple of horrible years and obtaining top draft picks (and not drafting busts), obtaining salary in exchange for more picks, but having the salary come off the books at the right time so that you have cap space along with a solid core of players all on cheap rookie scale contracts. Granted, having an active GM like Presti or Pritchard is useful as well.

This is essentially the whole plan. New York traded away all of it's good picks in previous years so they didn't have lots of young talent. They didn't take on horrible contracts and receive picks in the process (just signed people like Eddie Curry and Jared Jeffries to horrible contracts). So now they're left with scrubs and some cap space. Despite being in an attractive market/city, LeBron and other stars won't go to a place where other pieces aren't already there. Because once LeBron and Bosh use up all the cap space, who else of any caliber can they sign? Players with the MLE every year?

If your core is Rose, LeBron, Bosh, Noah then that's pretty darn good, and you can add a few nice pieces to compliment them with the MLE. People will come to play with them for cheap searching rings, like how Malone and Payton went to LA for smaller contracts than they could have received elsewhere.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

One prominent agent says tonight: "I think there's a very good chance the Knicks will get shutout (in free agency)...Even likely..."

- Woj Twitter

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

that's what you get for clearing cap space two years into the future!

 

[Nikolokolus]

that's what you get for clearing cap space two years into the future!

It's about to work out pretty well for the Heat and the Bulls. The only trouble with the Knicks is that they are still suffering under Isaiah's idiotic moves that shipped out high draft picks and they have no real quality players to form even the barest hint of a foundation.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

As long as I gave you that teaser, I might as well spell out what happened...

I'm reading national praise for Pritchard's picks in trading for #16 and #34. Both trades were impossible without Paul Allen. Here's an example of how he makes Pritchard look better by overspending: Allen paid $2M (plus #34) for #44, and #44 was then immediately sold for only $1M.

"Many teams had been asking for a minimum of $1.5 million for a second-rounder, and on Monday Portland paid the astronomical sum (by historical standards) of $2 million just to EXCHANGE the 44th pick for the 34th. Walsh paid the Bucks $1 million for that very same 44th pick"

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/knicks/post/_/id/131/how-should-jim-dolan-spend-the-500000-he-saved

Details (all happened last week): We bought #34 from Golden State for $2M and #44. Golden State then traded #44 and Corey Maggette to Milwaukee for Charlie Bell and Dan Gadzuric. The Knicks wanted to buy #44 from Milwaukee, but couldn't because the former trade was contingent upon Maggette's passing a physical. So the Knicks had the Bucks draft Jerome Jordan at #44, and then when Maggette passed the physical, paid the Bucks $1M for #44 Jordan. The Knicks announced it the day after the draft, but it becomes official July 8.

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/news/story?id=5327247

That's interesting.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

It's about to work out pretty well for the Heat and the Bulls. The only trouble with the Knicks is that they are still suffering under Isaiah's idiotic moves that shipped out high draft picks and they have no real quality players to form even the barest hint of a foundation.

difference is they kept their teams competitive, not relying solely on pipe dreams of imaginary cap space.

 

[jlprk]

You know, Sly, you are a smart fellow. Sometimes I write technically and only the most astute will appreciate it, such as yourself. What a great guy.

To make it simple for the masses--To get pick #34, we paid $2M plus a $1M pick (#44 sold 3 days later for $1M). So we paid $3M for only a 2nd round pick. The article says that the price of 2nd round picks has increased to $1.5M (probably because our high payments are driving up everyone's asking price).

Paying $3M for something worth $1.5M makes it incredibly easy for Pritchard to be on the winning side of a trade.

This is bigger bucks to owners than we think. Most owners are worth about $400-500M. Let's say you own a home and you're worth $400-500,000. Then $3M to an owner is like $3K to you. Are you more likely to accept a trade when someone throws $3000 into a deal that is normally worth $1500? We think $3M is peanuts to owners, but it isn't.

 

[jlprk]

If I were ever generous enough to give anyone a rec, you'd be getting one right now. So you can feel pretty good about that. Just think, "Cool. Scrooge almost gave me a rec."

 

[barfo]

If I were ever generous enough to give anyone a rec, you'd be getting one right now. So you can feel pretty good about that. Just think, "Cool. Scrooge almost gave me a rec."

Except that you'd want to call it a "rep", like all the cool kids do.

barfo

 

[barfo]

You know, Sly, you are a smart fellow. Sometimes I write technically and only the most astute will appreciate it, such as yourself. What a great guy.

To make it simple for the masses--To get pick #34, we paid $2M plus a $1M pick (#44 sold 3 days later for $1M). So we paid $3M for only a 2nd round pick. The article says that the price of 2nd round picks has increased to $1.5M (probably because our high payments are driving up everyone's asking price).

Paying $3M for something worth $1.5M makes it incredibly easy for Pritchard to be on the winning side of a trade.

This is bigger bucks to owners than we think. Most owners are worth about $400-500M. Let's say you own a home and you're worth $400-500,000. Then $3M to an owner is like $3K to you. Are you more likely to accept a trade when someone throws $3000 into a deal that is normally worth $1500? We think $3M is peanuts to owners, but it isn't.

Which is of course why Paul is a great owner to have. He's got the bucks and he's willing to spend them. The more he can drive the price of things up, the better. (As long as you don't want to buy tickets to the games, that is.)

barfo

 

[Natebishop3]

You know, Sly, you are a smart fellow. Sometimes I write technically and only the most astute will appreciate it, such as yourself. What a great guy.

To make it simple for the masses--To get pick #34, we paid $2M plus a $1M pick (#44 sold 3 days later for $1M). So we paid $3M for only a 2nd round pick. The article says that the price of 2nd round picks has increased to $1.5M (probably because our high payments are driving up everyone's asking price).

Paying $3M for something worth $1.5M makes it incredibly easy for Pritchard to be on the winning side of a trade.

This is bigger bucks to owners than we think. Most owners are worth about $400-500M. Let's say you own a home and you're worth $400-500,000. Then $3M to an owner is like $3K to you. Are you more likely to accept a trade when someone throws $3000 into a deal that is normally worth $1500? We think $3M is peanuts to owners, but it isn't.

Why do I get the feeling that you're Warkentein?

 

[Jayps15]

It's about to work out pretty well for the Heat and the Bulls. The only trouble with the Knicks is that they are still suffering under Isaiah's idiotic moves that shipped out high draft picks and they have no real quality players to form even the barest hint of a foundation.

It wasn't just Isiah's stupid moves though, Donny Walsh traded their most recent lotto pick (Jordan Hill), the right to swap picks in 2011, and the Knicks 1st rounder in 2012. Combine that with not getting much talent in some pretty rich drafts the last two years and I'd say Walsh is right up there with Isiah.