CrushAlot wrote:As per Hahn, there was a deal in place to send Nate to Memphis for Marcus Williams and a pick in December.
Nate allegedly vetoed the deal...
Now we don't know what pick it wouldve been but with that said, how do you guys feel about such a proposed trade?
Did anyone see this? I am not sure if it is accurate.

this is the first i'm hearing of it, but if it's true that pick woulda been a nice asset to have, but you had to expect he wouldn't wanna go to MEM... it would also dispel any of those ridiculous notions that there weren't any teams interested in Nate over the past year & a half... who knows if it's true tho... either way, right now our options are severely limited... unless we're trading him to a contender where he's pretty much guaranteed he'd see significant playing time, i dunno if we'll be able to find a suitable match for Nate to sign off on.

http://www.realgm.com/src_checktrade.php?tradeid=5360283

I wouldn't shoot down Memphis however--they are better than the Knicks--they are a pretty formidable team. If they were in the east--a top team might lose to them or atleast lose 2 maybe 3 games in a playoff.

Garbage trades here. That coupled with no offers in the offseason for Nate ought to illustrate that his value is pretty low AND that it's well known that Mike doesn't like him and wants him gone.

Teams will just sit us out and when Nate walks next summer then they'll spend on him outright without dealing with us.

Now, the question here is, do I want to just let Nate walk or do I want to be saddled with a mid-teens 2010 1st round guaranteed contract who might be a garbage player?

I'd be willing to just let Nate walk in such an instance - EXCEPT - if we were just acquiring such a pick with the sole intent on doing a draft day trade.

See what I mean? If I give up Nate's "talent" I want a high pick - BECAUSE - if I am adding that high pick to my coveted 2010 payroll - IT BETTER BE WORTH IT.

Again, as usual, I'd be just happy with using Nate to turn Jeffries into another 2010 - no matter the player. OR...I guess just letting Nate walk.

No need to turn Nate into guaranteed 2010-2011 salary that isn't going to be anything more than what we already have in Hill or Chandler or godforbid worse.

So this is very tricky. Do not trade Nate just to say you got SOMETHING for him for that SOMETHING could end up screwing our 2010 cap space be it a player or a mid to late first rounder!

TheGame wrote:I would not trade Nate for anything less than an unprotected first round pick projected in the 14-22 pick range. Marcus Williams would have been a nice backup PG, who I think is probably better than Duhon, but unless that pick was a first round pick (I would accept top-3 protection), Knicks should have passed on the deal.

agreed... if we ended up w/a guy like Damion James w/a mid-late pick i take that in a heartbeat... i'd even throw in both our 2nd round picks & parlay with whatever pick we can get in a Nate tradeoff to make that happen... that dude is the goods... putting up some Shawn Marion like numbers at Texas... 17 / 11 / 1 / 2 with 3 pt. range in only 28 mpg! dude is straight NASTY!

if we do get a 1st round pick it should be a mid first round pick, as anything higher is just not cost efficient (see case "Jordan Hill" sitting on bench). A late first rounder doesn't make as much sense due to us already having the 2 moderately high 2nd round picks in a deep draft. And you know someone is going to fall to one of those picks as does happen every year. I wonder if we can trade those two 2nd round picks for a first rounder?

u can still get very good propects late in the 1st round... David Lee & Wilson Chandler were late 1st round picks... & there are always guys like Carl Landry & Chase Budinger that slip to the 2nd round every year... just having assets to make some moves with would be huge this offseason, either to parlay them to move up in a deep draft, or to replace all the outgoing veterans with young, cheap talent that can play & utilize the cap space to sign 1 or 2 impact FA's.

earthmansurfer wrote:

TMS wrote:

if we do get a 1st round pick it should be a mid first round pick, as anything higher is just not cost efficient (see case "Jordan Hill" sitting on bench). A late first rounder doesn't make as much sense due to us already having the 2 moderately high 2nd round picks in a deep draft. And you know someone is going to fall to one of those picks as does happen every year. I wonder if we can trade those two 2nd round picks for a first rounder?

u can still get very good propects late in the 1st round... David Lee & Wilson Chandler were late 1st round picks... & there are always guys like Carl Landry & Chase Budinger that slip to the 2nd round every year... just having assets to make some moves with would be huge this offseason, either to parlay them to move up in a deep draft, or to replace all the outgoing veterans with young, cheap talent that can play & utilize the cap space to sign 1 or 2 impact FA's.

Perhaps you read my post wrong but I agree with you. I said someone falls every year. Unless you meant having a mid first round pick would be a nice asset, and yeah, I concur. We will be making some moves for sure. We are going to have to fill out our roster but D'Antoni doesn't like playing rooks so I see us keeping only one rooky and then getting some cheap vets to fill out the roster.

nah i wasn't disparaging ur post as much as just pointing out that we don't necessarily need to get a mid 1st rounder in a Nate trade to make it worth our while... we have 2 second rounders & if we can at least add a late 1st rounder (obviously the higher the pick the better) we can still be looking real good going into this draft... there's some nice talent that will be available that i would love to snap up & replace some of the guys who's contracts will be expiring this year.