Amar'e to NY is official

His agent texted that it's done.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AnHBp_QEos0EmhlTld73WzS8vLYF?slug=ys-stoudemireknicks070510

Now...is LBJ gonna join him?

EDIT: Oh, and now he's saying "The Knicks are back." Great. The Eastern Conference version of the Suns has arrived...

What a dumbass...now he's going to do pick-and-rolls with Chris Duhon instead of Steve Nash, one of the best all-time.

This is a perfect example of how athletes have evolved today. Before, barely anyone got paid and where you signed was a matter of how good the team was, not how much money you were paid. Athletes today are all about the money, the fame, the glory...I mean, come on, 100 millon dollars to shoot a fucking basketball? Out of this world.

Good for NY.

At least they got someone... there was a chance that a team [NY, NJ, CHI, MIA] was going to get shut out this free agency and the Knicks made sure they weren't one of them.

They can still get even better by signing Lee and trading him for a Parker or Ellis.


" Athletes today are all about the money, the fame, the glory...I mean, come on, 100 millon dollars to shoot a fucking basketball? Out of this world. "

and I agree with that

Amar'e better grow some thick skin quick. It's gonna be hell on him if he's he only big name free agent signed. Many teams passed over STAT at the chance to secure the other available free agents out there. Suns wanted to sign him to 5 years with the final two years non-guarenteed and with stipulations about games played.

That's what made him bolt the Suns.

I'm not sure his signing is going to bring LeBron to NY. I still think NJ, CHI, and of course CLE have a better shot at him at this point.

Knicks might be close to beating Toronto :O.... Lol, but really.. why waste money on Amare.. out of all people they could have gotten.

Quote :

" Athletes today are all about the money, the fame, the glory...I mean, come on, 100 millon dollars to shoot a fucking basketball? Out of this world. "

I don't. Thats been going on since Babe Ruth hit homers for the Yankees.

That is the natural progression of salaries/entertainment/business.

Jim Carrey get's 25 million for a couple months of work to entertain me (sometimes not doing that either) for two hours.

Rise Against wrote:

" Athletes today are all about the money, the fame, the glory...I mean, come on, 100 millon dollars to shoot a fucking basketball? Out of this world. "

and I agree with that

Same here.
Honestly, athletes do not NEED to make that kind of money for what they are doing. I can say the same for other entertainers of sorts but that is a completely different debate.

Knicks should get better with the signing of Amarè but they prolly need to do quite a bit more to become championship contenders.

SRF: Believe wrote:

Rise Against wrote:

" Athletes today are all about the money, the fame, the glory...I mean, come on, 100 millon dollars to shoot a fucking basketball? Out of this world. "

and I agree with that

Same here.
Honestly, athletes do not NEED to make that kind of money for what they are doing. I can say the same for other entertainers of sorts but that is a completely different debate.

Knicks should get better with the signing of Amarè but they prolly need to do quite a bit more to become championship contenders.

No one NEEDS to make that type of money. I don't think its a different debate at all. It's entertainment and individuals that can improve business or opportunity.

It is an incredible amount of money to spend on one person.

But the fact is that sports/movie/music/televsion/CEO/Presidents in general don't say no to taking the money.

If I could get paid twice as much as I'm getting paid now with another company would take it too.

Nick C wrote:

SRF: Believe wrote:

Rise Against wrote:

" Athletes today are all about the money, the fame, the glory...I mean, come on, 100 millon dollars to shoot a fucking basketball? Out of this world. "

and I agree with that

Same here.
Honestly, athletes do not NEED to make that kind of money for what they are doing. I can say the same for other entertainers of sorts but that is a completely different debate.

Knicks should get better with the signing of Amarè but they prolly need to do quite a bit more to become championship contenders.

No one NEEDS to make that type of money. I don't think its a different debate at all. It's entertainment and individuals that can improve business or opportunity.

It is an incredible amount of money to spend on one person.

But the fact is that sports/movie/music/televsion/CEO/Presidents in general don't say no to taking the money.

If I could get paid twice as much as I'm getting paid now with another company would take it too.

I just think that some careers (some of which have a greater impact on society) are underpaid whereas some are completely overpaid (e.g. athletes like we just mentioned). That is where I think governments could step in and perhaps make athletes for example, pay more taxes than those who generate less income than them...and then redistribute the money.

SRF: Believe wrote:

Nick C wrote:

SRF: Believe wrote:

Rise Against wrote:

" Athletes today are all about the money, the fame, the glory...I mean, come on, 100 millon dollars to shoot a fucking basketball? Out of this world. "

and I agree with that

Same here.
Honestly, athletes do not NEED to make that kind of money for what they are doing. I can say the same for other entertainers of sorts but that is a completely different debate.

Knicks should get better with the signing of Amarè but they prolly need to do quite a bit more to become championship contenders.

No one NEEDS to make that type of money. I don't think its a different debate at all. It's entertainment and individuals that can improve business or opportunity.

It is an incredible amount of money to spend on one person.

But the fact is that sports/movie/music/televsion/CEO/Presidents in general don't say no to taking the money.

If I could get paid twice as much as I'm getting paid now with another company would take it too.

I just think that some careers (some of which have a greater impact on society) are underpaid whereas some are completely overpaid (e.g. athletes like we just mentioned). That is where I think governments could step in and perhaps make athletes for example, pay more taxes than those who generate less income than them...and then redistribute the money.

YOU...*points finger*...COMMUNIST!

SRF: Believe wrote:

Nick C wrote:

SRF: Believe wrote:

Rise Against wrote:

" Athletes today are all about the money, the fame, the glory...I mean, come on, 100 millon dollars to shoot a fucking basketball? Out of this world. "

and I agree with that

Same here.
Honestly, athletes do not NEED to make that kind of money for what they are doing. I can say the same for other entertainers of sorts but that is a completely different debate.

Knicks should get better with the signing of Amarè but they prolly need to do quite a bit more to become championship contenders.

No one NEEDS to make that type of money. I don't think its a different debate at all. It's entertainment and individuals that can improve business or opportunity.

It is an incredible amount of money to spend on one person.

But the fact is that sports/movie/music/televsion/CEO/Presidents in general don't say no to taking the money.

If I could get paid twice as much as I'm getting paid now with another company would take it too.

I just think that some careers (some of which have a greater impact on society) are underpaid whereas some are completely overpaid (e.g. athletes like we just mentioned). That is where I think governments could step in and perhaps make athletes for example, pay more taxes than those who generate less income than them...and then redistribute the money.

Athletes do pay more taxes.

I think the government, who has more money than any athlete, actor, CEO, corporation and so forth should put money into education, health, community events, protection (of the non-warfare variety). It's not the resposiblity of famous people to help the community. Some do on their own with their own money.

It's the governments responsiblity to remeber that we have problems over here in the states that are far more important to take care of than what an athlete makes compared to what a police officer or teacher makes. They make what is offered. The government should be taking care of those whose careers have a greater impact on society as you said. That's what I hope my taxes go to... even though I know it's a super small portion that goes to education compared to whatever the military needs.

But we have wars to invest billions of dollars into. We have money we send overseas because other governments screw over their people worse than ours does to us.

I just think worrying about what people earn as their occupation is small compared to what the government spends on, that we the people are paying for through taxes.

I would love to know my tax money went to buying computers for a school instead of a couple rounds of bullets that kills another human being overseas.

But there is no way to check that offically.

LOL Marshy...I do think like a communist eh? haha

Nick C wrote:

SRF: Believe wrote:

Nick C wrote:

SRF: Believe wrote:

Rise Against wrote:

" Athletes today are all about the money, the fame, the glory...I mean, come on, 100 millon dollars to shoot a fucking basketball? Out of this world. "

and I agree with that

Same here.
Honestly, athletes do not NEED to make that kind of money for what they are doing. I can say the same for other entertainers of sorts but that is a completely different debate.

Knicks should get better with the signing of Amarè but they prolly need to do quite a bit more to become championship contenders.

No one NEEDS to make that type of money. I don't think its a different debate at all. It's entertainment and individuals that can improve business or opportunity.

It is an incredible amount of money to spend on one person.

But the fact is that sports/movie/music/televsion/CEO/Presidents in general don't say no to taking the money.

If I could get paid twice as much as I'm getting paid now with another company would take it too.

I just think that some careers (some of which have a greater impact on society) are underpaid whereas some are completely overpaid (e.g. athletes like we just mentioned). That is where I think governments could step in and perhaps make athletes for example, pay more taxes than those who generate less income than them...and then redistribute the money.

Athletes do pay more taxes.

I think the government, who has more money than any athlete, actor, CEO, corporation and so forth should put money into education, health, community events, protection (of the non-warfare variety). It's not the resposiblity of famous people to help the community. Some do on their own with their own money.

It's the governments responsiblity to remeber that we have problems over here in the states that are far more important to take care of than what an athlete makes compared to what a police officer or teacher makes. They make what is offered. The government should be taking care of those whose careers have a greater impact on society as you said. That's what I hope my taxes go to... even though I know it's a super small portion that goes to education compared to whatever the military needs.

But we have wars to invest billions of dollars into. We have money we send overseas because other governments screw over their people worse than ours does to us.

I just think worrying about what people earn as their occupation is small compared to what the government spends on, that we the people are paying for through taxes.

I would love to know my tax money went to buying computers for a school instead of a couple rounds of bullets that kills another human being overseas.

But there is no way to check that offically.

I just think that athletes could be subject to increased taxes that are exclusive to them...cause they do not need that extra money going into their pockets. I find that our society is quite selfish (humans are innately selfish I believe) and care about generating as much income as possible for themselves without taking into consideration how their neighbours are faring financially.

Going back to what you said...you're totally right; the government has a great responsibility to ensure the safety/well-being of its citizens...so by implementing laws that result in the fair distribution income...it could benefit those who originally earn less income.

To me personally, I think how much one earns is an important issue to look at because, to me, it's somewhat problematic to see people accumulate so much income and others live in destitute conditions. Hence why I would support a policy that places emphasis on redistributing income so that we could provide better funding for such programs that you had already mentioned in your previous post and keep more people out of poverty.

Otherwise, I totally feel what you are saying.

Man, when I posted that Stoudemire was officially bound for NY, the thought never occurred to me that the thread would become an opportunity for political discourse...

Give me 20 million dollars to sit on a bench and get free front row tickets to every Knicks game like Stephon Marbury and every damn school in Connecticut would be rich.
Except Suffield.

CAguyofftoUNC wrote:

Man, when I posted that Stoudemire was officially bound for NY, the thought never occurred to me that the thread would become an opportunity for political discourse...

LOL. Yeah. On RBT I don't think any thread stays on topic.

I actually like that.

Nick C wrote:

CAguyofftoUNC wrote:

Man, when I posted that Stoudemire was officially bound for NY, the thought never occurred to me that the thread would become an opportunity for political discourse...

LOL. Yeah. On RBT I don't think any thread stays on topic.

I actually like that.

Oh, I go off-topic all the time; if I were to complain about it, I'd be one of the biggest hypocrites of all time lol. It was just funny to me to read the topic title again and then read you and SRF's posts. The incongruity just struck me as funny.

But yeah, going off topic keeps things interesting.

SRF: Believe wrote:

LOL Marshy...I do think like a communist eh? haha

Nick C wrote:

SRF: Believe wrote:

Nick C wrote:

SRF: Believe wrote:

Rise Against wrote:

" Athletes today are all about the money, the fame, the glory...I mean, come on, 100 millon dollars to shoot a fucking basketball? Out of this world. "

and I agree with that

Same here.
Honestly, athletes do not NEED to make that kind of money for what they are doing. I can say the same for other entertainers of sorts but that is a completely different debate.

Knicks should get better with the signing of Amarè but they prolly need to do quite a bit more to become championship contenders.

No one NEEDS to make that type of money. I don't think its a different debate at all. It's entertainment and individuals that can improve business or opportunity.

It is an incredible amount of money to spend on one person.

But the fact is that sports/movie/music/televsion/CEO/Presidents in general don't say no to taking the money.

If I could get paid twice as much as I'm getting paid now with another company would take it too.

I just think that some careers (some of which have a greater impact on society) are underpaid whereas some are completely overpaid (e.g. athletes like we just mentioned). That is where I think governments could step in and perhaps make athletes for example, pay more taxes than those who generate less income than them...and then redistribute the money.

Athletes do pay more taxes.

I think the government, who has more money than any athlete, actor, CEO, corporation and so forth should put money into education, health, community events, protection (of the non-warfare variety). It's not the resposiblity of famous people to help the community. Some do on their own with their own money.

It's the governments responsiblity to remeber that we have problems over here in the states that are far more important to take care of than what an athlete makes compared to what a police officer or teacher makes. They make what is offered. The government should be taking care of those whose careers have a greater impact on society as you said. That's what I hope my taxes go to... even though I know it's a super small portion that goes to education compared to whatever the military needs.

But we have wars to invest billions of dollars into. We have money we send overseas because other governments screw over their people worse than ours does to us.

I just think worrying about what people earn as their occupation is small compared to what the government spends on, that we the people are paying for through taxes.

I would love to know my tax money went to buying computers for a school instead of a couple rounds of bullets that kills another human being overseas.

But there is no way to check that offically.

I just think that athletes could be subject to increased taxes that are exclusive to them...cause they do not need that extra money going into their pockets. I find that our society is quite selfish (humans are innately selfish I believe) and care about generating as much income as possible for themselves without taking into consideration how their neighbours are faring financially.

Going back to what you said...you're totally right; the government has a great responsibility to ensure the safety/well-being of its citizens...so by implementing laws that result in the fair distribution income...it could benefit those who originally earn less income.

To me personally, I think how much one earns is an important issue to look at because, to me, it's somewhat problematic to see people accumulate so much income and others live in destitute conditions. Hence why I would support a policy that places emphasis on redistributing income so that we could provide better funding for such programs that you had already mentioned in your previous post and keep more people out of poverty.

Otherwise, I totally feel what you are saying.

I accumulate a lot of income. I don't know where my money goes.

That's my issue.

However I'm now expecting you to change the world.

You'll have my support.

Nick C wrote:

SRF: Believe wrote:

LOL Marshy...I do think like a communist eh? haha

Nick C wrote:

SRF: Believe wrote:

Nick C wrote:

SRF: Believe wrote:

Rise Against wrote:

" Athletes today are all about the money, the fame, the glory...I mean, come on, 100 millon dollars to shoot a fucking basketball? Out of this world. "

and I agree with that

Same here.
Honestly, athletes do not NEED to make that kind of money for what they are doing. I can say the same for other entertainers of sorts but that is a completely different debate.

Knicks should get better with the signing of Amarè but they prolly need to do quite a bit more to become championship contenders.

No one NEEDS to make that type of money. I don't think its a different debate at all. It's entertainment and individuals that can improve business or opportunity.

It is an incredible amount of money to spend on one person.

But the fact is that sports/movie/music/televsion/CEO/Presidents in general don't say no to taking the money.

If I could get paid twice as much as I'm getting paid now with another company would take it too.

I just think that some careers (some of which have a greater impact on society) are underpaid whereas some are completely overpaid (e.g. athletes like we just mentioned). That is where I think governments could step in and perhaps make athletes for example, pay more taxes than those who generate less income than them...and then redistribute the money.

Athletes do pay more taxes.

I think the government, who has more money than any athlete, actor, CEO, corporation and so forth should put money into education, health, community events, protection (of the non-warfare variety). It's not the resposiblity of famous people to help the community. Some do on their own with their own money.

It's the governments responsiblity to remeber that we have problems over here in the states that are far more important to take care of than what an athlete makes compared to what a police officer or teacher makes. They make what is offered. The government should be taking care of those whose careers have a greater impact on society as you said. That's what I hope my taxes go to... even though I know it's a super small portion that goes to education compared to whatever the military needs.

But we have wars to invest billions of dollars into. We have money we send overseas because other governments screw over their people worse than ours does to us.

I just think worrying about what people earn as their occupation is small compared to what the government spends on, that we the people are paying for through taxes.

I would love to know my tax money went to buying computers for a school instead of a couple rounds of bullets that kills another human being overseas.

But there is no way to check that offically.

I just think that athletes could be subject to increased taxes that are exclusive to them...cause they do not need that extra money going into their pockets. I find that our society is quite selfish (humans are innately selfish I believe) and care about generating as much income as possible for themselves without taking into consideration how their neighbours are faring financially.

Going back to what you said...you're totally right; the government has a great responsibility to ensure the safety/well-being of its citizens...so by implementing laws that result in the fair distribution income...it could benefit those who originally earn less income.

To me personally, I think how much one earns is an important issue to look at because, to me, it's somewhat problematic to see people accumulate so much income and others live in destitute conditions. Hence why I would support a policy that places emphasis on redistributing income so that we could provide better funding for such programs that you had already mentioned in your previous post and keep more people out of poverty.

Otherwise, I totally feel what you are saying.

I accumulate a lot of income. I don't know where my money goes.

That's my issue.

However I'm now expecting you to change the world.

You'll have my support.

Haha, I will try my best.
I will prolly start my initiative in Canada first cause that's where I live.
if it works out and poverty rates decline here, hopefully your government will take notice and follow suit...then it'll be your job to pressure them to implement the policy :p

Resident Douchebag wrote:

What a dumbass...now he's going to do pick-and-rolls with Chris Duhon instead of Steve Nash, one of the best all-time.

This is a perfect example of how athletes have evolved today. Before, barely anyone got paid and where you signed was a matter of how good the team was, not how much money you were paid. Athletes today are all about the money, the fame, the glory...I mean, come on, 100 millon dollars to shoot a fucking basketball? Out of this world.

No way Chris Duhon will be back in NY next year he was finally put on the Mike D doghouse & NY has shown no desire to extend his contract in NY. I think he will go to Milwaukee and play backup to Jennings cause hey Ridnour is gonna bounce maybe NY & Duhon is better than Royal Ivey. Also Duhon has played backup for Skiles before. As for NY it would be Ridnour or they will make Toney Douglas more of a SG into the PG he can be. Douglas is good he is a passionate defender, can shoot, and can take over games offensively as well. Averaged 14+ points when he was made starter & had like 16 of NY's last 22 points against Philly. Now if he could figure out how to distribute the ball and figure out his PG duties. And as for Amar'e ehh he's better than Boozer. If and when we resign Lee we can put Amar'e @ C. He is bigger than Lee & played C for Mike D before. And Lee who isn't the best defender out there is better defensively than Amar'e and has also shown to want to get better defensively placing him @ his natural 4 spot could do him good. Amar'e will have a lot of nights where he struggles cause hecan;t create for himself but that's where Lee comes in . Lee's presence could counteract the liabilities Amar'e could bring. Amar'e and his explosiveness and offensive ability when he doesnt have a lazy offensive showing as well as 8+ rpg when he has a good rebounding game and not one of his bad ones could also help Lee out. No need for Al Buckets now go to PHX.

Interesting Amar'e in NY HMMMN .... Now free agency is getting more interesting .

supposedly the goal is carmelo, parker, and amare, but i don't really see that happening :/

hmm... But i heard on espn Denever won't trade Melo.
I also heard Parker still wants to stay in UMMM what is it called... Spurs there ya go lol.

Sportscenter said that it's financially probable cause Curry's contract would come off the books and the unused cap space we would have this season could go into re-signing Lee who Walsh has turned down a flurry of sign and trades with other teams already for Lee calling them unwanted and said in today's press conference that bringing in Amar'e does not mean the end of Lee in NY as well as giving some extra to Melo and Parker to wet their beaks. Amar'e said that he's been in contact with both of them and both have expressed their interest to him. I'd take what he says with a grain of salt right now but if it happens all I gotta say is cool. A Cuse' fan like me would like Melo back in NY. If it's not TP then let it be Nash instead.

sportcenter saying that it is financially probable is pretty much another way of saying "ITS NOT GONNA HAPPEN! BUT WE'RE GUNNA TALK ABOUT IT ON AND ON ANYWAY" :/

I know that hahaha but one can still be hopeful. Who knows? I think at least Nash this time around can be a possibility not like 09' off-season