Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 88

Thread: Trading Gallo or Randolph for Carmelo will fail us.

  1. #46
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    122
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    stat and melo would be about 50 a game on their own... throw in the rest and that's the playoff baby. i wouldn't like to see gallo go but he will waste away on the bench at this stage of his career. he can always come back as a FA. i think with melo we could match up even with miami . go bockers

  2. #47
    Fundamentally Sound ronoranina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,758
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by AlboKnickFan
    nobody is saying that Carmelo is the best player in the league or anything like that...

    Carmelo is a ALL - STAR, an MVP contender, a great scorer, and made the Olympic team. And you need more than 1 of these type of players in order to contend for a championship...

    As far as Gallo, yes he does have potential, and hes looking good, but he has not proved anything yet...

    The same thing goes for AR, he has not proved anything yet...

    And if we can trade for Anthony without having to include both Gallo and AR than go for it in a heart beat.

    Because then you would have 2 superstar players in Stoudemire and Anthony. A solid PG in Felton who has the potential to be even better in New York. And a supporting cast of either Gallo or AR, Turiaf, Azubuike, Mason, Mozgov, Walker, Douglas. ( I am pretending that either Gallo or AR along with Chandler and Curry are traded to Denver).

    And this team looks like it can contend for a championship as soon as this season (if the trade goes down).

    However, if it doesnt work out and we dont get Anthony, then I believe that we still have a good team that if players like Gallo, AR, Chandler, Mason, Mozgov, Douglas play solid basketball, Im supposing that Amare, Felton, Turiaf, and Azubuike will play well and stay out of injuries, then we will make maybe even the 5th seed in the Eastern Conference.
    I agree w the last paragraph, but I have to ask..

    How much have you seen of Gallo?? How much have you seen of Randolph??

    Who have you seen more of?? Who do you know more about??

    The answer to me is sort of easy.. I've seen alot more of G. I've seen a much smaller sample of AR. That doesn't mean I didn't put together a quick report in my mind of what he can't and can do. I'm just much more sure of what I've seen from G and what he will be based on this viewing disparity, if you will.

    What are you basing this statement on that G is an equal unknown to AR w regards to what they can be?

    As someone who watched Gallo in every game last season and the season before, they damn sure ARE NOT EQUALLY UNKNOWN and less proven to me. Combine this w the fact that G-state basically shipped AR out of town for nothing, like someone else astutely pointed out and as I said also in the --If The Knicks Don't Get Melo-- thread, and something smells fishy. Something is amiss here w AR.

    To me he has WAY more to prove than Gallo.

    Who knows man, maybe G can average 23 ppg along w Amare's 24-25. We don't know...! The difference between Melo's and Gallo's scoring could be negligible.

    But the disparity between Gallo and Melo in the area of intangibles is something that would be missed. Melo is not the personality that Gallo is. Gallo is really affable and has other traits that lend to leadership. These skills, and they are skills, are often undervalued and overlooked.

    I will be really disappointed if G is included in a trade for Melo. My 2 cents...
    Last edited by ronoranina; Sep 22, 2010 at 19:24.

  3. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    157
    Rep Power
    5

    Default

    Originally Posted by ronoranina
    I agree w the last paragraph, but I have to ask..

    How much have you seen of Gallo?? How much have you seen of Randolph??

    Who have you seen more of?? Who do you know more about??

    The answer to me is sort of easy.. I've seen alot more of G. I've seen a much smaller sample of AR. That doesn't mean I didn't put together a quick report in my mind of what he can't and can do. I'm just much more sure of what I've seen from G and what he will be based on this viewing disparity, if you will.

    What are you basing this statement on that G is an equal unknown to AR w regards to what they can be?

    As someone who watched Gallo in every game last season and the season before, they damn sure ARE NOT EQUALLY UNKNOWN and less proven to me. Combine this w the fact that G-state basically shipped AR out of town for nothing, like someone else astutely pointed out and as I said also in the --If The Knicks Don't Get Melo-- thread, and something smells fishy. Something is amiss here w AR.

    To me he has WAY more to prove than Gallo.

    Who knows man, maybe G can average 23 ppg along w Amare's 24-25. We don't know...! The difference between Melo's and Gallo's scoring could be negligible.

    But the disparity between Gallo and Melo in the area of intangibles is something that would be missed. Melo is not the personality that Gallo is. Gallo is really affable and has other traits that lend to leadership. These skills, and they are skills, are often undervalued and overlooked.

    I will be really disappointed if G is included in a trade for Melo. My 2 cents...
    I dont think you are a bigger Gallo and AR fan that I am. And actually those are the only players along with Amare that I think can help us get somewhere. However, Im talking about a superstar that has been in All-star games, has averaged 28 ppg per season, was and will be a MVP candidate, has playoff experience, etc etc...

    The other thing is that if we can somehow get Melo and retain either Gallo or Randolph ( I prefer Gallo), then we hit the jack pot...

  4. #49
    Knicks Guru hometheaterguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,017
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by Toons
    lol checkmate
    OK, I got my question answered and it turns out that I am right but not for the reason I explained. I knew there was some weird reason why the Knicks did not have the ability to offer a pick for Melo; here's what Larry Coons said:

    Question: Can the Knicks offer their 2014, 15 or 16 pick to Denver in a trade for Melo before or during the 2010, 11 season?

    Answer: No. A team cannot be without a first round pick in two consecutive future years. For example, if their 2014 pick is owed, then they cannot trade their 2013 or 2015 picks. They can't even make a trade that leaves them with the POSSIBILITY of being without consecutive future picks.

    The Knicks owe a first round pick somewhere in the 2012 - 2015 range to Houston (top-5 protected each year), so the only pick they can trade is their 2017 pick. They can't go out farther than 2017 -- seven years is the max.

    But if they end up with the #6 pick next year and it's conveyed to Houston, then their 2013-2015 picks become tradeable.

    Walsh also has the ability to acquire another team's first round pick, either to send to Denver, or to have on hand so his own picks are freed up to trade.

  5. #50
    Knicks Guru hometheaterguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,017
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by KBlack25
    Not trying to make any statement about what Denver does and does not want...I'm just fairly certain we could trade our future draft picks starting with the 2014 pick...But I don't think a 2014 pick gets the trade done anyway.
    So like I explained, the Knicks CAN NOT offer a pick UNLESS it is the 2017 pick and there is NO WAY Denver will do it. So, I was correct and it is because of the way Walsh structured the pick to Houston. Houston literally has a 4 year span to choose from when they want to cash in the pick. Walsh has tied up the Knicks ability to trade a pick for up to 6 years from now.

  6. #51
    Hannibal Lecter TR1LL10N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Dark side of the Moon
    Posts
    2,743
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Originally Posted by hometheaterguy
    You can only go 7 years into the future so a 2018 or 20 is not allowed.

    Again from Larry Coons site:
    The "Seven Year Rule" allows teams to trade draft picks up to seven years into the future (for example, if this is the 2008-09 season, then a 2015 pick can be traded, but a 2016 pick cannot).
    That's fine, I wasn't aware of the 7 year rule but it doesn't change the fact that you are wrong about how you are interpreting the 2 consecutive year 1st rnd. draft pick rule.

  7. #52
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    county of the kings
    Posts
    1,120
    Rep Power
    8

    Nyk Logo

    Originally Posted by KBlack25
    I'm not giving up AR AND Gallo AND a 1st round pick just for Melo...sounds like an Isiah trade to me.

    i would.. this sounds like the channing frye rule....

    after mr. frye showed promise for the knicks.. the minnesota timbs wanted frye for garnet.. isaih said no becuz channing might be the next garnet...

    NEVER HAPPENED....

    potential gets coaches and gms fired.....

    melo is proven

    sorry just the facts

    also dont expect gallo to start if we were to get melo.. so he might as well go.... and we have a bunch of SFs

    meo will be the starting 3
    amare will be the starting 4
    felton will be the starting 1
    turiaf/tmo will be the starting 5
    gallo aint playin the 2

  8. #53
    Veteran KBlack25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,668
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Originally Posted by hometheaterguy
    OK, I got my question answered and it turns out that I am right but not for the reason I explained. I knew there was some weird reason why the Knicks did not have the ability to offer a pick for Melo; here's what Larry Coons said:

    Question: Can the Knicks offer their 2014, 15 or 16 pick to Denver in a trade for Melo before or during the 2010, 11 season?

    Answer: No. A team cannot be without a first round pick in two consecutive future years. For example, if their 2014 pick is owed, then they cannot trade their 2013 or 2015 picks. They can't even make a trade that leaves them with the POSSIBILITY of being without consecutive future picks.

    The Knicks owe a first round pick somewhere in the 2012 - 2015 range to Houston (top-5 protected each year), so the only pick they can trade is their 2017 pick. They can't go out farther than 2017 -- seven years is the max.

    But if they end up with the #6 pick next year and it's conveyed to Houston, then their 2013-2015 picks become tradeable.

    Walsh also has the ability to acquire another team's first round pick, either to send to Denver, or to have on hand so his own picks are freed up to trade.
    Again you are wrong...

    The Knicks traded the right to swap in 2011 (they could not outright trade their 2011 pick because they lost 2010) and a Top-1 protected 2012 pick. They have full rights to their 2013, 2014, 2015...

    You misunderstand the trade, and misunderstood the rule, which leads to gross misstatements of the situation.

    I am pretty sure that the trade does not say anything about 2013-2017...[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

    Nothing in the initial report mentions it.

    That said, I wouldn't want to make the trade anyway.

  9. #54
    Knicks Guru hometheaterguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,017
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by TR1LL10N
    That's fine, I wasn't aware of the 7 year rule but it doesn't change the fact that you are wrong about how you are interpreting the 2 consecutive year 1st rnd. draft pick rule.
    I stated that 7 year rule in one of my posts
    Originally Posted by hometheaterguy
    You can only go 7 years into the future so a 2018 or 20 is not allowed.

    Again from Larry Coons site:
    The "Seven Year Rule" allows teams to trade draft picks up to seven years into the future (for example, if this is the 2008-09 season, then a 2015 pick can be traded, but a 2016 pick cannot).
    I also stated that I was listening to some shows talk about the Knicks not being able to offer a draft pick to Denver as part of the deal. The CBA can be confusing, like I stated that a team can get around the 2 year rule by signing and trading the pick.... But, you are correct that I did mis-understand the 2 year rule in that a team could trade a future pick as long as it was 2 years away from the last pick they traded.

    Originally Posted by hometheaterguy
    No, I am saying that under the current CBA a team can not trade future draft picks 2 years in a row. They would have to wait until the end of this season before they could offer a future pick.... That is how I understand it and how it has been explained on the shows that I have listened too and watched about this.
    So, I did take the information that was being conveyed and interpreted wrong.
    Doesn't matter if I took point B instead of Point A to get to Point C, as long as I got there and you guys were insistent that they could trade their 2014 pick and I originally stated that because of their deal with Houston, they were ham-stringed this year! So factually I was correct!

    Originally Posted by KBlack25
    Right so we could offer 2014 but not 2013...isn't that what he is saying? I'm not sure why you think trading 2014 and retaining 2013 is against the rules?

  10. #55
    Knicks Guru hometheaterguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,017
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by KBlack25
    Again you are wrong...

    The Knicks traded the right to swap in 2011 (they could not outright trade their 2011 pick because they lost 2010) and a Top-1 protected 2012 pick. They have full rights to their 2013, 2014, 2015...

    You misunderstand the trade, and misunderstood the rule, which leads to gross misstatements of the situation.
    How am I wrong? Larry Coons in recognized as the premier NBA cap guy and I just pasted in his response to me... He knows the Knicks situation as well as Walsh! Walsh structured the trade in a way that prevents them from trading a future pick this season unless it is the 2017 pick. Here is what he wrote me again:

    The Knicks owe a first round pick somewhere in the 2012 - 2015 range to Houston (top-5 protected each year), so the only pick they can trade is their 2017 pick. They can't go out farther than 2017 -- seven years is the max.

    But if they end up with the #6 pick next year and it's conveyed to Houston, then their 2013-2015 picks become tradeable.

    Walsh also has the ability to acquire another team's first round pick, either to send to Denver, or to have on hand so his own picks are freed up to trade.

    So what he is saying is Houston has the ability to sit and wait to cash in that pick any time from 2012 to 2015; Walsh gave them that option. The Knicks have those years top 5 protected and if they get a decent pick next season and Houston chooses to cash their future #1 consideration then the Knicks are freed up and can offer a team their 2013 through to 2015 pick to a team starting at the 2011/2012 season.

  11. #56
    Veteran KBlack25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,668
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Where in the trade does it say that? I'm not saying Coon is not a recognized capologist, and usually I trust his opinion, but he is not infallible. The way I understand the trade, still, is that there is a right to swap in 2011, and our pick in 2012. Find me an article, a document, something about the JEfferies trade that says otherwise.

  12. #57
    Knicks Guru hometheaterguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,017
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by moneyg
    i would.. this sounds like the channing frye rule....

    after mr. frye showed promise for the knicks.. the minnesota timbs wanted frye for garnet.. isaih said no becuz channing might be the next garnet...

    NEVER HAPPENED....

    potential gets coaches and gms fired.....

    melo is proven

    sorry just the facts

    also dont expect gallo to start if we were to get melo.. so he might as well go.... and we have a bunch of SFs

    meo will be the starting 3
    amare will be the starting 4
    felton will be the starting 1
    turiaf/tmo will be the starting 5
    gallo aint playin the 2
    Did not know that he refused to give Frye for Garnett.... If that is true, there is no one that can defend this man as a GM!! I was told that McHale didn't want to help the Knicks out and had an allegiance to Boston...

  13. #58
    Knicks Guru hometheaterguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,017
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by KBlack25
    Where in the trade does it say that? I'm not saying Coon is not a recognized capologist, and usually I trust his opinion, but he is not infallible. The way I understand the trade, still, is that there is a right to swap in 2011, and our pick in 2012. Find me an article, a document, something about the JEfferies trade that says otherwise.
    I also heard Mike Francessa explain the same thing a few weeks back when discussing the possibility of a Melo trade to NY so maybe your info is wrong.... Just saying.... I also asked Tommy Dee and he said no as well but did not go into as much explanation as Coons did but still said no.

  14. #59
    Knicks Guru hometheaterguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,017
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by TR1LL10N
    That's fine, I wasn't aware of the 7 year rule but it doesn't change the fact that you are wrong about how you are interpreting the 2 consecutive year 1st rnd. draft pick rule.
    By the way, that picture of the 2 NY city dancers is just way hot!!! Man, makes realize the FIRST thing(s) I would buy if I won the lottery!!!!!

  15. #60
    Veteran KBlack25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,668
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Originally Posted by hometheaterguy
    Did not know that he refused to give Frye for Garnett.... If that is true, there is no one that can defend this man as a GM!! I was told that McHale didn't want to help the Knicks out and had an allegiance to Boston...
    We traded Frye a month before KG got traded...I'm not sure if it is true (and haven't seen any evidence that it is), and Isiah was horrible with or without this fact...but I'm not sure how true it is.

Similar Threads

  1. Chandler V Gallanari
    By Crazy⑧s in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: Nov 01, 2010, 10:51
  2. Replies: 29
    Last Post: Sep 17, 2010, 09:46
  3. Replies: 20
    Last Post: Jul 24, 2010, 16:55
  4. Randolph for Lee...article from GSW writer
    By metrocard in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: Jul 13, 2010, 01:15
  5. Zach Randolph putback dunk vs Heat
    By MSGKnickz33 in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: Jan 25, 2008, 12:22

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •