that we dont even currently have or 2010. I think the cap thing is much muh harder than they realie with that Zach contract. There is no way they can count on someone trading for Zach--no way for nealt 18mm in the last year and 50mm$ owed. Curry will NEVER opt out and either will Jefferies--if you pay NateCrawford and Lee--that is way over 60mm+ not even close

Posted by BRIGGS:

that we dont even currently have or 2010. I think the cap thing is much muh harder than they realie with that Zach contract. There is no way they can count on someone trading for Zach--no way for nealt 18mm in the last year and 50mm$ owed. Curry will NEVER opt out and either will Jefferies--if you pay NateCrawford and Lee--that is way over 60mm+ not even close

Who needs to pay Crawful? He won't get more money if he opts out. We need to get rid of Crawful not try to keep him anyway.

Nate and Lee? I don't know that could be tough. If they try to pull Deng/Gordon type crap? Then we might have to S&T or let one or both walk. Again, that's in the future though there's a lot more that needs to be - and will be done - to this franchise and roster before those become big questions.


Besides, I like Lee and Nate, but if a team were to say (hypothetically here) "Yeah, I'll take Zach, give you 2010 expiring, but you must include Lee" (well, cya Lee). ((OR)) "Yeah, I'll take Curry and Crawful and give you 09 and 10 expirings and maybe a kid back - but - we want Nate in the deal" (well, cya Nate)


Point is: There's a lot of ground to cover before extending either becomes a priority. In the situation we're at we will not extend them early. We will offer then their QO's and let that take it's course before acting.

We have this offseason, next full season, next offseason, and another full season to try and dump Randolph, Crawford, Curry.

In the 2009/2010 Randolph, Crawford, Curry would all have 2 yrs left. When we come to the deadline they would all have 1.5 yrs left on there contract.

If we are really trying to get cap flexability, then we would try and move Curry or Crawford now for a contract with a yr shorter. Then we during the 2009/2010 season probably at the deadline when Randolph has 1.5 yrs left. We could then offer Randolph and something else for an expiring contract. Maybe to a contender that wants offensive frontcourt help.

If we don't resign anybody not Lee, not Nate, not Balkman, not Collins. Let everyone just come of the books and only add 2 lottery picks. Which would probably average 2-4mil each. We would have anywhere from a 32-36mil salary cap. With Curry, Randolph, Crawford, Jeffries and 2 lottery picks.
The cap is at $55.630 million for the 2007-2008 season. By the 2009/2010 season it will probably be atleast 57mil(probably 59). So if we had a 36mil salary cap with the NBA salary cap at 57mil(probably 59) we would be 21mil under the cap by 2009/2010.

So basically if we don't resign any young players we would have 21mil to throw at Lebron.

Posted by newyorknewyork:

We have this offseason, next full season, next offseason, and another full season to try and dump Randolph, Crawford, Curry.

In the 2009/2010 Randolph, Crawford, Curry would all have 2 yrs left. When we come to the deadline they would all have 1.5 yrs left on there contract.

If we are really trying to get cap flexability, then we would try and move Curry or Crawford now for a contract with a yr shorter. Then we during the 2009/2010 season probably at the deadline when Randolph has 1.5 yrs left. We could then offer Randolph and something else for an expiring contract. Maybe to a contender that wants offensive frontcourt help.

If we don't resign anybody not Lee, not Nate, not Balkman, not Collins. Let everyone just come of the books and only add 2 lottery picks. Which would probably average 2-4mil each. We would have anywhere from a 32-36mil salary cap. With Curry, Randolph, Crawford, Jeffries and 2 lottery picks.
The cap is at $55.630 million for the 2007-2008 season. By the 2009/2010 season it will probably be atleast 57mil(probably 59). So if we had a 36mil salary cap with the NBA salary cap at 57mil(probably 59) we would be 21mil under the cap by 2009/2010.

So basically if we don't resign any young players we would have 21mil to throw at Lebron.

How can you bank on anyone coming here and just letting those assets walk for nothing? No GM would let David Lee Crawford or Nate leave for nothing two full years before cap space is available.

I'm all for trading Lee and Nate for a pick. Nate would probably look good in a place like Cleveland while Lee would look good in a place like Phoenix. I would prefer to grow a nucleus now, get under the cap, and start fresh. I think all these guys are infected by Isiah Thomas and the losers he molded the team after. I mean, his signature team was one with Marbs, Tim Thomas, and Mo Taylor for Christ's sake. The quickest way to turn this around is to start over. Marbs should be bought out, as should Rose. I just don't want any of the infected to taint the fresh blood.

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by newyorknewyork:

How can you bank on anyone coming here and just letting those assets walk for nothing? No GM would let David Lee Crawford or Nate leave for nothing two full years before cap space is available.

We don't have to dump Randolph if we can't. We could try to unload Curry & Crawford though.
If we unload Curry & Crawford who are more movable than Randolph for shorter contracts. Then we would be able to resign Lee & Nate with the money we saved from Curry & Crawford and still have 20mil to throw at Lebron.

Plus Randolph would be in his final yr the following offsesaon and if we let his contract run out. We would have another 17mil come off the books. We could then go after another top free agent the next yr. Or save the money and use it to resign our lottery picks down the road.

[Edited by - newyorknewyork on 04-07-2008 12:13 PM]

[Edited by - newyorknewyork on 04-07-2008 12:14 PM]

That is a tall order. Curry has an uninusred near max contract and is coming off knee surgery and the first guy that Walsh mentioned that he liked was Crawford. I really dont know what the Knicks will do but the balancing act to get it done will be near impossible--then you have to bank that the guy wants to come here. I think you are taking for granted how easy it will be to move Curry or Randolph for less $$$$

If the goal is to sign Lebron or Wade then something will have to give. If we can't move Curry then Nate can't be resigned. If we also can't move Randolph or Crawford or Jefferies for shorter contracts then Lee can't be resigned. That would be the price to pay to go after Lebron. If we resign Lee & Nate and can't unload Curry, Crawford, or Randolph then we have no shot at Lebron. But in the 2010-2011 offseason we would have a ton of cap space for whoever is a free agent, as well as Lee & Nate.

If we trade Crawford for a shorter contract, resign Lee and let Nate walk then we would still be able to have 20 mil to throw at Lebron or Wade

Curry could have been moved this trade deadline. Isiah balked because he didn't want to give Curry up only for cap space. I also beleive Crawford is moveable if Walsh wanted to move him. Crawford is replaceable. If I was Walsh I would easily unload Crawford if I could just for the opportunity to have a shot at Lebron & resign Lee.

we should be able to trade crawford -

Curry's deal isn't bad, but he's coming off a pretty pathetic season. I can see a GM gambling that he'll return to 06/07 form and be an effective scorer down low and a decent rebounder (6-7 boards)- but I don't know that he can be moved this summer.

We should sticky a Who Liked the Zach Trade Man Up thread.

To be fair, when Donnie Walsh talked about the cap, he said we had cap space in three years. Three years from now is April 2011. He may realize we don't have a way to get under the cap for the summer of 2010, he may be aiming for the summer of 2011.

Walsh doesn't have to do anything to get cap space by 2009/2010. As it stands now we are set to have a 28mil cap by *EDIT 2010/2011*. You add 2 high lottery picks at 4mil a pop by that yr that would be 36-37 salary cap if we were not to resign Lee or Nate.

Now of course we are going to want to resign Lee and Nate so in order to be able to resign Lee & Nate without lossing your option to go after Lebron we would need to trade Crawford & Curry for a shorter salary. Or we could trade Lee & Nate for draft picks and add other areas of need and maintain rookie scale contracts. You still with me??

Now if we were able to do so then we would have 2 high lotto picks(which could be stars), Lee, Nate, Chandler as well as 20mil to throw at Lebron. Then the following season Randolph would be comming off the books and we would be cutting another 17mil.

So I don't see how we would be putting all our eggs in one basket. In this senario even if we didn't land Lebron we are left with 2 high lottery picks, Lee, Nate, Chandler and close to 40mil between the 2 offseasons of 2010/2011-2011/2012.

So please explain to me how we would be hurting ourselves?? The absolute worst that could happen would be if we were dumb and let Lee & Nate for nothing. Then all top free agents turn us down. But in the end we would still have 2 high lottery picks and over 40mil in cap space to build a team with.

[Edited by - newyorknewyork on 04-07-2008 7:23 PM]

The key will be to let guys like Mardy Collins and Balkman just walk away when we have a team option, if they don't show improvement. Right now, Mardy and Balkman play at a level that you can easily replace with the league minimum. Signing them, or a player like Jefferies to a $5 M a year deal is what will kill us. You have to do what Riley does, have a few key guys with big contracts and a bunch of guys playing for the league minimum.

We can easily have cap space for the summer of 2010.


[Edited by - crzymdups on 07-04-2008 7:27 PM]

Posted by newyorknewyork:

Walsh doesn't have to do anything to get cap space by 2009/2010. As it stands now we are set to have a 28mil cap by *EDIT 2010/2011*. You add 2 high lottery picks at 4mil a pop by that yr that would be 36-37 salary cap if we were not to resign Lee or Nate.

Now of course we are going to want to resign Lee and Nate so in order to be able to resign Lee & Nate without lossing your option to go after Lebron we would need to trade Crawford & Curry for a shorter salary. Or we could trade Lee & Nate for draft picks and add other areas of need and maintain rookie scale contracts. You still with me??

Now if we were able to do so then we would have 2 high lotto picks(which could be stars), Lee, Nate, Chandler as well as 20mil to throw at Lebron. Then the following season Randolph would be comming off the books and we would be cutting another 17mil.

So I don't see how we would be putting all our eggs in one basket. In this senario even if we didn't land Lebron we are left with 2 high lottery picks, Lee, Nate, Chandler and close to 40mil between the 2 offseasons of 2010/2011-2011/2012.

So please explain to me how we would be hurting ourselves?? The absolute worst that could happen would be if we were dumb and let Lee & Nate for nothing. Then all top free agents turn us down. But in the end we would still have 2 high lottery picks and over 40mil in cap space to build a team with.

[Edited by - newyorknewyork on 04-07-2008 7:23 PM]

Newyorknewyork

Where you lose me is when you operate under the assumption that Lee and Nate are valuable parts to a successful team. They are not there for they like everyone else on this team is very expendable. Obvisously no one here is advocating trading them just to trade them but if a good deal comes their way they shouldn't balk at it either. If either one of them is asking for big contracts I would have no problem with the Knicks letting them go especially Nate who to me is no better then a circus act I'm hard pressed to see Nate being successful in a controlled system working with a coach who actually knows what the hell the're doing particularly if that said coach is going to put a leash on his shot-attempts.

And David Lee is David Lee a hard worker but at the end of the day just an average player on a bad team so I don't understand all the bru ha ha is over keeping any these guys. Sure David is a good guy to have on your team non-controversial, hard-worker, seems to have a good relationships with teammates, but at the end its not the end of the world if he's not wearing a Knick's uniform for the rest of his career.

Also keep in mind that there are other ways of building a franchise other then waiting for some big time free-agent to swing your way. Just focus on the here and now. Stop trying to put everything into this hypothetical where many unpredictable variables still exist. If the opportunity arises for the Knicks to net him or whatever free-agent then cross that bridge when you come to it but for now worry about this team what we have or better yet don't have.

The key will be to let guys like Mardy Collins and Balkman just walk away when we have a team option, if they don't show improvement. Right now, Mardy and Balkman play at a level that you can easily replace with the league minimum. Signing them, or a player like Jefferies to a $5 M a year deal is what will kill us. You have to do what Riley does, have a few key guys with big contracts and a bunch of guys playing for the league minimum.

LOL the question you should be asking about Balkman and Collins is will these guys even be in the NBA come 2010.