[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Cash in on David Lee?


Author Poll
SupremeCommander
Posts: 14121
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127

Tonight's game deviated from past games in that this season, the Knicks typically put up crap numbers to start and come on strong at the end. Well, tonight Lee started, the Knicks started well then caved at the end. I'd argue this trend has to do with when Lee is on the floor. However, he's a sixth man. He's not someone I can see dominating for 40 minutes a game. He should start on the Knicks, because he's our best player... which is another indictment on the franchsie. He's makin $900k and could help any contender. Well, Phoenix owns Atlanta's pick this year (although they may be headed for the playoffs this year). Come the deadline though, Atlanta may be out of contention. If that's the case and the Knicks decide to rebuild correctly, would you trade Lee? I would. There are two destinations I can think of: (1) Phoenix for Atlanta's pick (2) Utah for the rights to our future pick owed to them... this team is going to take 5-8 years to get good Lee would help any team he's on... he's that type of player. However, the Knicks aren't going to get to the next level any time soon. I say maximize the team's future.
5 votes
38.46%
yes
8 votes
61.54%
no


Author Thread
SlimPack
Posts: 23588
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/14/2005
Member: #1009
USA
12/26/2007  11:49 PM
I think we can get those kinds of picks without givin up lee. Also I wouldn't trade lee for the Marbury pick back.
AUTOADVERT
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081

12/26/2007  11:57 PM
I would agrue this trend (knick staying in games) occured because Zach and Nate came off the bench promply to keep the Knicks in it..but thats just me...



[Edited by - holfresh on 12-27-2007 12:01 AM]
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/27/2007  2:25 AM
Lee should've been drafted in the Lottery. Or near it. So if we trade him we better get that back, and you still have to cross your fingers that the kid pans out.
lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
franco12
Posts: 34069
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/19/2004
Member: #599
USA
12/27/2007  9:48 AM
if its just trading lee in isolation- I don't think that makes any sense.

But, if you can completely dismantle this team - then I would move lee for a future set of picks because I believe that when David is in his prime, he'll be wasted here on this squad.
TheGame
Posts: 26658
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2006
Member: #1154
USA
12/27/2007  11:02 AM
We can trade Balkman for a 1st round pick. We need to keep Lee unless we are getting a solid player in return.
Trust the Process
nyk4ever
Posts: 41014
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
12/27/2007  11:11 AM
I don't mind trading Lee, although I'd prefer not to, but if we are going to trade we have to get back more than what you are proposing.
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
jaydh
Posts: 23181
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/16/2001
Member: #96
12/27/2007  11:12 AM
Posted by TheGame:

We can trade Balkman for a 1st round pick. We need to keep Lee unless we are getting a solid player in return.


I don't think so. Balkman has done nothing to warrant a 1st.
SlimPack
Posts: 23588
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/14/2005
Member: #1009
USA
12/27/2007  11:33 AM
I wouldn't mind trading Lee for sergio rodriquez or another diamond in the rought type player. but as far as getting mid first rounders, we can do that just by taking salary back like seattle did with the kurt thomas trade. Well somewhat like that, we can't do exactly what they did because we are not under the cap. We shouldn't have to trade lee for that, and depending on what the plan is it won't be imperative to get the marbury pick back. I think the Knicks can stink for just one or two years and be pretty good after that without mortgaging the future, so as of right now I don't think it would be worth it to get the Marbury pick back at the expense of Lee.

[Edited by - Slimpack on 12-27-2007 11:36 AM]
TheGame
Posts: 26658
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2006
Member: #1154
USA
12/27/2007  12:22 PM
Posted by jaydh:
Posted by TheGame:

We can trade Balkman for a 1st round pick. We need to keep Lee unless we are getting a solid player in return.


I don't think so. Balkman has done nothing to warrant a 1st.


You are not going to get a top-10 pick for him, but Balkman would be worth a 19-30 1st round pick for a team that needed energy and defense at the SF position and who had shooters to compensate for his lack of shooting.
Trust the Process
VDesai
Posts: 43302
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
12/27/2007  5:15 PM
First off, Isiah should not be allowed to move Lee.

Problem with dealing Lee- he's by far your most valuable piece, but he's making a rookie scale contract. You can't salary match him for anything as valuable unless its for a player with a similar contract, thus similar experience, youth, value. Bottom line, those players don't get dealt very often. Guys we've identified that would make sense like a Jose Calderon may not be on the block.

Now since you can't deal him one on one, you have to package him with another guy. Package him with virtually any one on our team and it decreases his value b/c of the decreased values of most of the overpaid scrubs we have. Maybe it pries a little more out of another team when you're dealing Curry, Craw, Randolph, Marb etc. but its not nearly enough.

Or maybe you deal him with Fred Jones and some more youngsters. Now how many pieces are you giving up in the same deal? And even adding all these salaries you're not getting a max guy. How many players out there that are making mid-range salaries are out there on the block. Ron Artest? Who else?

Deal him for picks? Picks yield a lot of uncertainty. He will be worth a higher pick than what he was drafted for, but the player you draft at that position has a high chance of not being worth as much. Now the question becomes how high of a pick do you need to justify the risk. Late lottery? Are late lottery teams going to want to acquire David Lee- they don't need him for a stretch run, so unless they view him as a major piece it will be hard for them to line up to do so.

So its a very tricky situation and absolutely not one you want Isiah Thomas to be dealing with. You cannot afford to make a mistake with our best asset and the options for what you can do with him are cloudy. The decision the next GM makes with a player like him could be the most important indicator of where we'll be headed.
jimimou
Posts: 23517
Alba Posts: 36
Lame Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/6/2004
Member: #681
USA
12/27/2007  7:46 PM
Posted by VDesai:

First off, Isiah should not be allowed to move Lee.

Problem with dealing Lee- he's by far your most valuable piece, but he's making a rookie scale contract. You can't salary match him for anything as valuable unless its for a player with a similar contract, thus similar experience, youth, value. Bottom line, those players don't get dealt very often. Guys we've identified that would make sense like a Jose Calderon may not be on the block.

Now since you can't deal him one on one, you have to package him with another guy. Package him with virtually any one on our team and it decreases his value b/c of the decreased values of most of the overpaid scrubs we have. Maybe it pries a little more out of another team when you're dealing Curry, Craw, Randolph, Marb etc. but its not nearly enough.

Or maybe you deal him with Fred Jones and some more youngsters. Now how many pieces are you giving up in the same deal? And even adding all these salaries you're not getting a max guy. How many players out there that are making mid-range salaries are out there on the block. Ron Artest? Who else?

Deal him for picks? Picks yield a lot of uncertainty. He will be worth a higher pick than what he was drafted for, but the player you draft at that position has a high chance of not being worth as much. Now the question becomes how high of a pick do you need to justify the risk. Late lottery? Are late lottery teams going to want to acquire David Lee- they don't need him for a stretch run, so unless they view him as a major piece it will be hard for them to line up to do so.

So its a very tricky situation and absolutely not one you want Isiah Thomas to be dealing with. You cannot afford to make a mistake with our best asset and the options for what you can do with him are cloudy. The decision the next GM makes with a player like him could be the most important indicator of where we'll be headed.

i agree with you. i think you have to suck it up, dont let isiah make anymore deals, let whoever the new gm will be come in and assess the situation. time is actually our friend here believe it or not. we need to let contracts expire and rebuild properly under intelligent leadership.
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34121
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127

12/27/2007  9:03 PM
Posted by VDesai:

First off, Isiah should not be allowed to move Lee.

Problem with dealing Lee- he's by far your most valuable piece, but he's making a rookie scale contract. You can't salary match him for anything as valuable unless its for a player with a similar contract, thus similar experience, youth, value. Bottom line, those players don't get dealt very often. Guys we've identified that would make sense like a Jose Calderon may not be on the block.

Now since you can't deal him one on one, you have to package him with another guy. Package him with virtually any one on our team and it decreases his value b/c of the decreased values of most of the overpaid scrubs we have. Maybe it pries a little more out of another team when you're dealing Curry, Craw, Randolph, Marb etc. but its not nearly enough.

Or maybe you deal him with Fred Jones and some more youngsters. Now how many pieces are you giving up in the same deal? And even adding all these salaries you're not getting a max guy. How many players out there that are making mid-range salaries are out there on the block. Ron Artest? Who else?

Deal him for picks? Picks yield a lot of uncertainty. He will be worth a higher pick than what he was drafted for, but the player you draft at that position has a high chance of not being worth as much. Now the question becomes how high of a pick do you need to justify the risk. Late lottery? Are late lottery teams going to want to acquire David Lee- they don't need him for a stretch run, so unless they view him as a major piece it will be hard for them to line up to do so.

So its a very tricky situation and absolutely not one you want Isiah Thomas to be dealing with. You cannot afford to make a mistake with our best asset and the options for what you can do with him are cloudy. The decision the next GM makes with a player like him could be the most important indicator of where we'll be headed.

Part of the reason I'd advocate trading him for a lotto-type pick is because there is a POSSIBILITY to obtain a player who you can build around. Lee is very good, but I wouldn't call him a building block. He's an outstanding third option or sixth man. This draft is going to be deep, so I'd like as many significant picks as possible. Likewise, I think getting our pick back from Denver is a good idea so the franchise can focus on rebuilding during the next three drafts, as opposed to trying to avoid giving up ANOTHER top lotto pick.

Of course trading him is contingent on Isiah getting axed. Isiah shouldn't be allowed to make any changes, because he's obviously a moron.
DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
Cash in on David Lee?

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy