If Carroll picks Carmelo, Monroe, and #4 over Kobe, Clarkson, Randle, and #2 then he's not the guy we want. He's a loser.
I feel so positive heading into this free agency period. I really haven't felt this way in awhile. I think we're going to make a splash this summer; I really do.
So says the die hard Laker fan. Like I said, If I'm Carroll at age 28, I'd consider the Knicks because they will be making deeper playoff runs faster than we will due to us being so young AND we're in the West. If I was 25 or 26, I'd choose the Lakers. These players are aware of their own basketball mortality. As excited as I am for this Laker team, they are 2-3 years away, short of us signing Durant AND Conely next offseason.
I'm not saying everyone has to pick the Lakers or they're losers like @shoe mistakenly assumed. I'm saying anyone who picks the deathly toxic KNICKS over the Lakers is a loser. That franchise stinks of incompetence from the top down. Not even Phil Jackson could turn that around. It's a gross situation to be in and there's a reason everyone rushes to leave except for Carmelo Anthony who gets to collect massive paychecks in a huge market.
I think Monroe and Carroll going there, along with a high quality character guy in the draft (Winslow might be a good fit) could turn that culture around a little bit. To be honest, around the league, the Lakers culture isn't viewed as that much better. I know it's unfair, but on the national radio, insiders keep saying the Lakers front office is looked at like a bit of a mess. Do I agree with that narrative? Not really, but it's still the reality around the country.
Exactly. Of course we as lakers fans think we're in a much better situation than the Knicks, but they can turn it around pretty quick since they're in the east + have cap space, #4 pick and Melo.
IF Thibodeau is hired to replace Fisher...New York will have a feather in their cap to lure free agents. Of course, Jackson probably won't be there to talk to potential signees. He's been in the news a lot during this season...candid as usual about how messy the place is...the less than stellar job he's done...the hurdles they have to deal with...not to mention ridding of the likes of Smith, Stoudemire, Chandler and Felton. Dolan is likely irked and impatient about Jackson's laissez faire approach and jealous of relinquishing the spotlight. Egos all over...
There's a few problems with this logic. 1. Even the most hardcore fan would be more surprised by a season where Kobe looks like Kobe than losing Kove to a season ending injury. 2. Not only do you know you can't count on Kobe anymore, you've never seen #2 or Randle play a full NBA game. What we have to offer is really Clarkson & blind faith. 3. These FA's watched us try & fail to throw 20M a year at Melo. When you try to paint him as a loser, you paint us as an Org. that might go out & throw the max at a loser.
I wouldn't fault a FA for taking NY over LA right now. I think I'd choose la based on track record and the fact that when kobe retires, they have a good shot at luring a big-time talent via FA then. but if someone takes the bird in the hand that is a more-likely-to-return-to-health melo and weak a** competition in the east, I could buy that.
Good point, can never rule out the appeal of the weak East. Boston & Brooklyn both looked like they were tanking for the #1 pick this season & ended up flipping the switch & making the playoffs. Toronto is falling apart, ATL looks like their Cinderella run might end after 1 season due to free agency, Rose & Noah are always hurt, Indiana is full of question marks, Miami was unable to recover from losing Lebron & now might lose Wade. It's really a 2 team conference with Cleveland & Washington as the only consistent threats.
Reports say that LA is an option for Wade. But LA is ALWAYS an option for any player so I guess that doesn't mean much. Lol. I think Wade can still be an excellent contributor...for a Ginobili type of role. He would never accept that though.
Wade could be a good option depending on the contract he's looking for. I think he still has a couple 21-5-5 seasons left playing 60-70 games per year. I know the reports say he wants a 3 year deal & Miami doesn't want to give it to him, but if it was 15-16M like his current deal & not the max, I'd strongly consider it. Of course we should chase Butler & Middleton first but if that doesn't pan out, I don't think Wade is a bigger injury risk than Love, & Love will want the max. He would take a lot of pressure off of Kobe & possibly extend his career. We're probably looking at atleast 2-3 years before Okafor/Towns & Randle are ready to be focal points for the team. Wade would be a nice addition to give us a shot at the playoffs until then & then step aside with Kobe so it can become the young guys' team. edit: Strictly from a production standpoint, I'd go after Monta Ellis before Wade because I think he can provide the same type of production for longer & will come cheaper, but Wade has some things that Monta doesn't: Rings, Superstar Status, & a lot more respect from his peers. Wade producing at his usual level gives us a much better chance of recruiting a top FA in 2016. Both Wade & Kobe producing probably makes us favorites to land whoever we want.
Yeah I couldn't possibly disagree with you all more about NY. You're telling me that the same Monroe (who I like a lot by the way) that can't help Detroit get much better and Carroll (who I like a LOT) is enough to turn the franchise around? Really? Chandler left, Carmelo has chronic knee issues, and their money goes into those two?... Does that team even make the playoffs in the East? If NY can turn it around quickly, then what are we doing here? Not having Randle and #2 play is almost better than what I've seen from every Knick on the roster right now because not seeing them play is better than seeing them play as badly as that roster. At least with Randle and #2 there's a chance (a good chance I'd say even objectively) that those two will be good NBA players. There's NO chance anyone on that NY roster starts on any other team right now. Their team at the end of the year featured Cole Aldrich. I think in an effort to somehow maintain objectivity, you're all trying to speak highly of the Knicks or at least positively and I just don't see any reason to be positive about them. Carmelo went there to collect money, which we all knew. And by the way yes we tried to woo him over here as did Chicago and in choosing NY he sealed his fate as a loser. Same with Howard. Had they accepted their positions here (or for Carmelo especially in Chicago) they would have taken a massive leap forward as players that want to win and will do what it takes. Instead he chose money (and Howard chose comfort) and that makes him a loser. Then we can go into the toxic environment brought about by bad ownership. Everyone wants to pile on Jim Buss even though he's not even the real boss and you guys don't want to consider what Dolan does to that franchise? Who wants to join that franchise and be mired in that drama? Bringing Isiah Thomas back? Hiding from the media? BUYING the media (or attempting to I don't remember if he did buy NY Daily News)? It's an awful franchise that's basically just as cursed as the Clippers have been. They've had more success than the Clippers because they've played in a worse conference, but they're just terrible. If I were a free agent and money was equal between LA and NY, I'd pick LA easily. Without question it's a better situation. I don't have to be a Laker fan to admit that. There's no accounting for people who just straight up love NY that much, but how many people are like that? So far Carmelo and his moneybags are the only one I can think of.
melo chose them for the extra money, and for the fact that la wasn't going to get him any closer to winning. he was right. melo also knew that he could force a trade if things went south, which is what he did already in Denver. I think la is a better situation right now, but it's not the landslide you're suggesting, and non-laker fans and some players may not feel the same way. again: melo is still a very good player, and he's under contract. they have that, the #4 pick, and cap space. the lakers have the #2, a promising pick coming off major injury, a pretty good young guard, and cap space. do you weigh randle and Clarkson over melo? I wouldn't trade them for melo, but that's mostly due to contractual issues. if you're betting on la, you're putting a lot of stock in their ability to lure FAs. they didn't last year, and their most notable FA experience of late was the exact opposite. I do agree that dolan is worse than jim buss, and I think mitch is a better manager than phil.
I'm not hedging Carmelo against Randle/Clarkson. I'm hedging Carmelo against Randle/Clarkson/Kobe. 1. Carmelo has chronic knee issues. Is there a FA that is desperate to play with a 30+ year old guy with no history of winning in the pros, chronic knee pain, and who takes up a large portion of the cap? Because we just went through that and it really seemed like no one wanted to play with that guy. 2. Sure Kobe is also often injured, but you've got one more season with him. If he can recapture some youth, you guys have a shot at the playoffs. If not, he comes off the books and you're able to retool with another star in his place. I'd rather be attached to that than to a guy who is under contract for the next 4 years and is only a step behind Kobe in terms of injury. Last season Carmelo barely out performed Kobe statistically. Kobe has two feet in the grave and Carmelo is supposed to be in his player prime. 3. The Lakers have a young core of Clarkson, Randle, and now the #2 pick. The Knicks don't have anything like that. The closest they have is... Galloway, Hardaway Jr, and the #4 pick. Which young core are you more interested in? I think the answer is pretty clear, even a Knick fan would pick our situation. Carmelo is a good player, but he is essentially a slightly younger Kobe at this point: he needs the ball a lot, he's often injured, and he's at a stage in his career where he can't carry a team night in and night out. The only difference is you're stuck with him for years and you have no escape. You are choosing to hitch your wagon to that fading star. And again, I can't stress enough the lack of continuity with the FO. Derek Fisher a rookie coach with a history of one of the Knicks' worst seasons ever. Phil who has shown ineptitude as a GM. Dolan who is, without Sterling in the picture, the worst owner in the sport. Compared to Mitch, Jeanie, and Byron Scott? We look like basketball legends. If I am a free agent choosing which team I want to be on for the next four years, in terms of basketball the ONLY reason to pick NY is because it's in a weaker conference and you have a better shot at the playoffs every year where something crazy can happen. Their roster makeup is already behind ours, their FO is way behind ours, their culture is way behind ours, and even their record last season in OUR worst season was behind ours. That's not to say you must pick the Lakers. That's just the Lakers over the Knicks. If I were a FA my first choice would be San Antonio this summer. They've got the room, the coach, the organization, and the infrastructure. I'd go there first. Then probably Atlanta. I'd have to give serious consideration to the C Bags because they've got so much cap room this summer. Dallas if they've got a creative way to get me enough money. Then I'd call LA over teams like Milwaukee, Philadelphia, New York, and Orlando. Portland is kind of a wild card... They regressed last year and without LaMarcus it's a little hard to say where that team is going.
I'm with real. We have a better owner, a better GM, a better coach, better players, and last but not least, we have a tradition of winning. When's the last time the Knicks won a chip? The early 70's? We've been relevant consistantly for over half a century. Everyone knows we'd be back on top sooner or later.
