He's a bball savant. He knows so little about basketball that it doesn't matter. It's right-place, right-time, pure physics and soul. It's all about Being There.
Let's look at the last 2 teams to have loads of cap space. In 2004, Jazz signed Boozer to a max contract and Okur to about 75% of max. They were expected to be a contender. They went from a 14th draft pick in 2004 with a 42-40 record to a 26-56 record and the 3rd pick(Deron Williams) in the draft . By 01/22, they had lost Boozer and their record was 14-27(0.341). Apparently having Okur and Boozer wasn't enough, because they had injuries to key players in their very very short rotation. They had no depth. They lost Arroyo and Raul Lopez in the early part of the season. They lost Kirilenko for half the season. Will the Knicks overplay their starters and risk more injury, due to lack of depth? probably. Can they guarantee perfect health for their thin rotation for 82 games? no, nobody can guarantee that. Unfortunately, after losing most of their roleplayers, a 2009 and a 2010 lottery pick and losing their MLE, they will have no decent roleplayers to move into the rotation. When they will be forced to call up players from the NBDL like the Rockets did with Temple and Conroy for 10-day contracts to be in the playing rotation. Remember the Jazz were a borderline playoff time before the signing and had very good role players. The Knicks roleplayers are even worse. Two max free agents would be going to a lottery lineup that's comparable to the injured Jazz rotation. The Magic are an even worse scenario. They got Grant Hill(the Lebron of the 90s) and T-Mac(comparable to Kobe almost at the time). Grant Hill never played. This team had some good roleplayers in Armstrong and Mike Miller, a rookie. After those 2 players, the rest of the team wasn't much to talk about. The Magic didn't have an MLE to sign any good veterans. They went from 41-41 record to a 43-39 record, after the trade. Their draft position didn't change much. Injuries affect every team. The chances of injury are even higher, when starters are playing 38-40 minutes a game without good bench players to relieve them. Losses will pile up, whether those injuries are to the 2 max free agents or to Gallinari or Chandler. Their bench will be one of the worst bench of all 30 teams, without young talent(2009 draft pick and 2010 draft pick and 2011 draft pick) and without good veterans (free agents signed with the MLE).
Just wait until he starts scoring 20ppg. Then half the people in the GARM will hate him and demand that he "play more unselfishly".
Where teams with cap space screw up is, they can't sign the players they want, and they reach. Walsh is smarter than that. If he doesn't get the players he wants, he'll sign people to one-year contracts, and save his cap space until he finds what he wants. He won't give max money to a B-level FA. This is a guy that took his team from being cap-screwed to having enough space to sign 2 max FAs in only 2 years. Not that I'd trade DM for him...
WE KNOW WHAT HE CANT DO HMMM LET ME SEE PLAY DEFENSE,REBOUND,OR PLAY DEAD :grin: THATS WHAT IT IS I THOUGHT I WOULD REMEMBER :grin:
Walsh is on the last year of his contract with NY. He won't be around tosign his 2 max FAs, after this year. Besides, it will also work against him, because of the 2011 draft pick swap with us. Knicks would end up with our 20 something pick, while the Rockets would get the 2nd-5th pick from NY.
I also forgot about the new CBA for 2011-12. The hot free agents will sign an extension instead of going into 2011-12 free agency with a looming lockout or getting a contract under the new CBA, which will lower the salary on max players. They stand to lose lots of money by not signing an extension under the current CBA. For this reason, I think the 2011 free agency period will be very slow, with an abnormally low amount of good free agents available.
$100 says he'll offer a 2nd tier FA a max contract. If he loses out on LBJ, Bosh, Wade, etc he'll go after Gay, Stoudamire, Boozer
The didn't sign boozer nor okur to max, they were 9m per year player who were sub 25 yr old players with upside. They had bigtime injuries with boozer, got williams in the draft the next year, and has pretty much been rolling since. The knicks will probably have a plan like this in mind somehow. They don't need to max guys to be ultra competititve in the east. How many max guys do the hawks have? What they can focus on is getting those sub 25 yr olds who can get better. A pg like felton will cost about 5m, rudy gay will cost about 10m and throw in eddy curry expiring contract and now you have something.
Pretty sure those are not the last 2 teams with cap space...enough to get a major free agent. Toronto signed Turkoglu, though not for max. Not the same situation exactly, I know. The Clippers signed Baron Davis. Going back further. the Suns signed Steve Nash. Regarding the idea that NY would sign players to one year deals instead of commiting long term, thus allowing for a FA signing the following year. How many players would be willing to do that? Does a player want a 1 year 9 mil deal, or a 4 year 24 mil deal? They are taking somewhat of a risk with the one year deal. And do they really want to sign up to be a rental players when they could be a soldi part of a team's plan elsewhere. Sure you can way over pay for a player who's not going to get 9 mil over 4 years (a guy like Luther Head perhaps), but then you got another crappy team that you don't even get the lottery pick from. I think it would be wiser to get several players, and give them the contract they deserve. Since you just learned that players prefer a S&T over outright signing, learn from your mistake and prepare to acquire players that way.
Well, given that Utah got Williams through the draft, something New York can't do, there's a massive difference. As I'm sure I've seen you harp a lot, teams if they choose to utterly rebuild do it through the draft, not through free agency. As he is utterly worthless as a player (in contrast to T-Mac who still had his rep and I think New York had some interest in looking in him as a player), Curry's contract will not be useful until the trade deadline, when teams that are doing below expectations may want an expiring contract, and no one will want that thing unless they can send in an even worse contract, say Nocioni or Brand. New York might finally be good in two years, but next year will suck for them, and they'll be the 6th seed in absolute best case scenario where 100% goes right - which it never does. You're right, let's take more recent examples. The Pistons. Dump Billups, get an expiring, and get Gordon and Villenueva. And now they suck. Happens over and over again, and I don't see why there's something special for NY.
They got Boozer for less than max because he didn't deserve a max contract. He was having numbers very similar to what Scola has been racking up since he started playing 40 minutes a game, although at age 22 or so. He clearly had potential, though. If New York were to offer Luis $9 million a year this summer, can you imagine the reaction here? Sorry, but I just had a visual of the GARM exploding, or something like that. Not much chance of that happening. Anyway, we're talking about New York, where they expect Jesus to lace them up this summer and decide to play in the spotlight. Not Salt Lake City. If New York takes the kind of path you're suggesting they might, wouldn't the fans go ballistic? They've been putting up with hell for so long, assuming they are going to be "saved" this summer by the "grand plan." What if Walsh goes with solid veteran role players and talented young players with upside? That sounds like desperation, not what the plan is (Walsh gave up Hill, after all). They don't have a pick that might get a Deron Williams or anyone like him. Ironically, Utah does, this summer. It looks likely that we'll get their picks if they suck the next couple of seasons. I really don't see a strong comparison, although I don't think Walsh is going anywhere and will pull off something, even if it's not what their fans expect.
The Jazz DID gave Carlos boozer the max. The maximum salary for a 2 year veteran is 25% of the cap, $43.87 mil that year. He signed a 6 year $68 mil contract starting at $10,967,500($43,870,000 x 0.25) and averages about $11.5 mil a season. Okur signed a 6-yr $50 mil contract starting at $7.5 mil which is about 75% of the $10,967,500 starting salary for a 2 year vet. I don't know where you got the idea that Boozer didn't sign for the max or signed
If you want more information Leebigez, here is the salary cap faq for the 1999 CBA which was in effect when Boozer and Okur signed. Keep in mind the salary cap was at $43.875 instead of the projected $54 million. At the player's 7th year, they are eligible for 30% of the projected salary cap, which is about $16.3 mil($54 mil x 0.30=$16.3 mil). http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap99.htm
I was referring to "lots of capspace" that I was referring to NY and cap space for almost 2 players at the max instead of just 1 player. This is only happened twice in the last 10 years. Teams with capspace for only 1 max player is more common, especially this offseason. Chicago had enough cap space They end up better than Jazz and Magic, because they don't gut their depth to get that capspace. They can withstand injuries to their rotation much better.
