How could we do it? Through a 3 team trade with the Celtics and Nuggets.

We could send Amare, Earl Barron and the rights to Hardaway Jr to Boston for Gerald Wallace, Courtney Lee and Kris Humphries; then redirect Humphries (expirer) and Shumpert for Igoudala via a sign and trade.

I think Boston does the deal because they save $16 million during the 2015-2016 season and about $4 million this . They'd also receive a serviceable young role player in the interim to build with.

I think the Nuggets do it because they are particularly cheap and particularly young, who would probably favor Shumpert because of those reasons long-term.

We do it because Igoudala could be the poor man's Pippen to Melo's supremely poor man's Jordan (from a scoring perspective only). I also believe that Wallace and Lee can be key contributors off the bench. The deal would hamper our ability to make several free agent signings in 2015 but it would still leave us with cap space to sign a max free agent (Kevin Love). In 2016 when Wallace and Lee expire, we could then go after Kyrie Irving and/or Paul George if they elect to sign a one year deal in 2015 to become unrestricted free agents the following offseason. Thoughts?

NardDogNation wrote:We need to pursue a sign and trade for Igoudala, supposedly through the same means we intended to use to pursue Monta Ellis. As I've said before Igoudala is exactly what we need: a Swiss Army Knife defender, capable scorer (albeit while not being an actual scorer) and the ability to push the ball in transition.

How could we do it? Through a 3 team trade with the Celtics and Nuggets.

We could send Amare, Earl Barron and the rights to Hardaway Jr to Boston for Gerald Wallace, Courtney Lee and Kris Humphries; then redirect Humphries (expirer) and Shumpert for Igoudala via a sign and trade.

I think Boston does the deal because they save $16 million during the 2015-2016 season and about $4 million this . They'd also receive a serviceable young role player in the interim to build with.

I think the Nuggets do it because they are particularly cheap and particularly young, who would probably favor Shumpert because of those reasons long-term.

We do it because Igoudala could be the poor man's Pippen to Melo's supremely poor man's Jordan (from a scoring perspective only). I also believe that Wallace and Lee can be key contributors off the bench. The deal would hamper our ability to make several free agent signings in 2015 but it would still leave us with cap space to sign a max free agent (Kevin Love). In 2016 when Wallace and Lee expire, we could then go after Kyrie Irving and/or Paul George if they elect to sign a one year deal in 2015 to become unrestricted free agents the following offseason. Thoughts?

guys here would NEVER be satisfied with Andre. He can't shoot!!!! Offense was our biggest problem last year plus, how could we possibly afford him.

gunsnewing wrote:Isn't he going to Sacramento for 4yrs $56Mil?

They revoked the deal to focus on re-signing Evans.

Denver has Faried. Why they need Hump?

Why they need an "Expiring" if they have Iggy coming off the books?

Nalod wrote:
You lost me when you included Amare.

Denver has Faried. Why they need Hump?

Why they need an "Expiring" if they have Iggy coming off the books?

Humphries is necessary to make the deal work financially since we are over the cap. The Nuggets could save money by letting Igoudala walk but it would be better to save that $13 million and have a guy like Shumpert to replace him in a seasons time.

JayNYC wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

JayNYC wrote:I thought we couldn't sign and trade?.. over the cap. stupid cba provisions

I thought that Kidd retiring, allowed us the ability to have that option. I presume that that is why Monta Ellis was rumored as a target of ours a few days ago.

Nahhh not to my knowledge.. i could be wrong, as this CBA cap stuff is terribly confusing.... I think we'd pursue Ellis on a 1 yr deal @ FULL MLE. 3.9 mil (He'd be a fool to accept it.. LOL The guy opted out of 12 mil) The rumor supposedly is on the basis of him wanting to play for a contender in a winning market. That's a heck of a financial dip tho.. just sayin

Damn. I wonder how much salary we'd have to shed to be eligible for a sign and trade then. There seems to be so much gray involved in its interpretation that maybe there is a way to circumvent it, ala the decision that allowed us to have Lin's and Novak's Bird Rights, which set precedent.

NardDogNation wrote:

JayNYC wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

JayNYC wrote:I thought we couldn't sign and trade?.. over the cap. stupid cba provisions

I thought that Kidd retiring, allowed us the ability to have that option. I presume that that is why Monta Ellis was rumored as a target of ours a few days ago.

Nahhh not to my knowledge.. i could be wrong, as this CBA cap stuff is terribly confusing.... I think we'd pursue Ellis on a 1 yr deal @ FULL MLE. 3.9 mil (He'd be a fool to accept it.. LOL The guy opted out of 12 mil) The rumor supposedly is on the basis of him wanting to play for a contender in a winning market. That's a heck of a financial dip tho.. just sayin

Damn. I wonder how much salary we'd have to shed to be eligible for a sign and trade then. There seems to be so much gray involved in its interpretation that maybe there is a way to circumvent it, ala the decision that allowed us to have Lin's and Novak's Bird Rights, which set precedent.

I'd imagine about 15 mil.. they gotta be under the 58.5 mil cap. I think! Calling on the UK cap guru's.. help????

CrushAlot wrote:I don't think he walks. My concern is that he comes back and is a starter. JR is not reliable enough to be your second option. Sixth man suits him and you play him with the knowledge that he might not heat up some nights. Bargs needs to be the second option and Smith needs to be the sixth man. He has too much talent and the Knicks can't use his salary on anyone else so I think they have to find away to get him back. He is too much of a wild card to be the starting two guard though.

I hope JR doesn't include starting as part of the deal for his coming back. Smith might argue that he's taking less money so the Knicks should do something in return. Hope it doesn't happen for the reasons you listed. The more balanced a scoring attack we have the less we will be putting the team's fortunes on whether or not JR can keep it together.

GustavBahler wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:I don't think he walks. My concern is that he comes back and is a starter. JR is not reliable enough to be your second option. Sixth man suits him and you play him with the knowledge that he might not heat up some nights. Bargs needs to be the second option and Smith needs to be the sixth man. He has too much talent and the Knicks can't use his salary on anyone else so I think they have to find away to get him back. He is too much of a wild card to be the starting two guard though.

I hope JR doesn't include starting as part of the deal for his coming back. Smith might argue that he's taking less money so the Knicks should do something in return. Hope it doesn't happen for the reasons you listed. The more balanced a scoring attack we have the less we will be putting the team's fortunes on whether or not JR can keep it together.

lol Not for nothing, I think there will be some sort of concession. Wink wink deals... ie Chris Smith makes the team, signed like Flight White was. He might lobby to start.. I could see him asking for a long term contract w/ a player option. Trade clause with a kicker.. or something crazy. If it's all about 2015.. I'd let him walk. Between Melo's potential opt out at seasons end.. and his pending signing this yr.. That 50 mil free agent money budget will decrease by at least 30 mil IMO.. but what do i know smh

CrushAlot wrote:Frank Isola ‏@FisolaNYDN 4h
Yet one more reason why J.R. Smith returns to Knicks RT@ESPNSteinLine: Word is Bucks, for one, offering Korver 3-year deal worth $20 million

And we couldn't dump Steve Novak on them for an expirer? The dude is even from Milwakee, which would make him an evem better mascot than Korver. I feel like this is one more reason to hate giving up picks in the Bargnani deal. Again, my problem has never been the player, it has been the resources we lost on him. We could've just as easily made it a 3 team deal and still got Bargnani.