Childs2Dudley wrote:

TMS wrote:i actually like Eddie House & wanted to sign him to a LLE contract for the past 2 years, but neither him nor Giddens are guys who can impact a game the way Nate can, & i think the Knicks view both these guys as purely cap filler, not really usable assets going forward... maybe House could be extended to a LLE contract next season, but we could have done that anyway w/o making this trade... for us to give up Nate w/o getting any pick or young players who will stick in return is a bad oversight on the part of our GM & our head coach IMO & this could have easily been avoided by trading Nate at the deadline last season.

I see other reasons why this trade is being done: Nate isn't coming back and they're rewarding him by sending him to a playoff team. This makes them look good around the league to other players because they granted his wishes (Boston, LA, Orlando) and traded him to one of those teams. Knicks look good by helping out their "long time" player.

bro, they're trading Nate so MDA doesn't have to deal w/his shenanigans anymore... there's no other reason... they were so desperate to trade Nate they dealt him to a divisional rival for God's sakes instead of looking to deal him out West to the Lakers or even to Orlando who he was also willing to accept a trade to... Nate is going to Boston because he gave them 3 options & apparently the Boston deal was the best deal they could get because of how low Nate's trade value has fallen this year.

TMS wrote:

JrZyHuStLa wrote:TMS,

I don't think Nate can impact a game that much better than House. One is a better shooter, and the other is a better slasher. Both are capable of getting hot. But I guess Nate's youth is what makes the difference.

Eddie House cannot take the game over by himself the way Nate can, i'm sorry... he's a spot up shooter that can get hot & hit a few shots in a row but he's not putting up no 40 pt. games & taking the other team on 1 on 5 anytime soon.

how many times has that strategy worked for nate? once in his career? great. he's not a dependable player you win with. we were asking him to do too much here. he'll be better off in boston where he won't have as much responsibility to perform nightly. if he's hot, they'll ride him for a bit. if he's not, they won't. he's a perfect bench spark for a good team. he can never be more than that - he's too inconsistent.

we weren't bringing him back anyway and this way we get a pick.

JrZyHuStLa wrote:TMS,

I don't think Nate can impact a game that much better than House. One is a better shooter, and the other is a better slasher. Both are capable of getting hot. But I guess Nate's youth is what makes the difference.

Reference: http://www.nba.com/2010/news/02/02/celtics.giddens.ap/index.html

As I said the deal BLOWS

Please explain to me how he is a good pick up?

TMS wrote:

Markji wrote:Giddens sucks. He is 25 years old; been in the league for 2 years; played a total of 106 min in 27 games. Averages 3:53 min/game and 1 point/game. He doesn't shoot 3's and he shoots 50% from the line. And now he has had surgery on his knee.

Please explain to me how he is a good pick up?

but... Nate was gonna walk anyway... so whatever we get is a bonus... right??? [/backwardsreasoning]

Well, they still haven't confirmed the final trade components. I am thinking it may hinge on us making another trade or not, in order to see who else we include.

TMS wrote:

Markji wrote:

TMS wrote:

Markji wrote:Giddens sucks. He is 25 years old; been in the league for 2 years; played a total of 106 min in 27 games. Averages 3:53 min/game and 1 point/game. He doesn't shoot 3's and he shoots 50% from the line. And now he has had surgery on his knee.

Please explain to me how he is a good pick up?

but... Nate was gonna walk anyway... so whatever we get is a bonus... right??? [/backwardsreasoning]

OK Whatever.

Well, they still haven't confirmed the final trade components. I am thinking it may hinge on us making another trade or not, in order to see who else we include.

Nate's pretty much gone... i doubt we'll be getting a pick on top of House & Giddens... if we do i have a feeling that pick will be going to HOU anyway.

lol. i love the unrelenting negativity.

"okay, so we signed lebron. the contract is only five years and what's the point of life anyway?"

TMS wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

TMS wrote:

Markji wrote:

TMS wrote:

Markji wrote:Giddens sucks. He is 25 years old; been in the league for 2 years; played a total of 106 min in 27 games. Averages 3:53 min/game and 1 point/game. He doesn't shoot 3's and he shoots 50% from the line. And now he has had surgery on his knee.

Please explain to me how he is a good pick up?

but... Nate was gonna walk anyway... so whatever we get is a bonus... right??? [/backwardsreasoning]

OK Whatever.

Well, they still haven't confirmed the final trade components. I am thinking it may hinge on us making another trade or not, in order to see who else we include.

Nate's pretty much gone... i doubt we'll be getting a pick on top of House & Giddens... if we do i have a feeling that pick will be going to HOU anyway.

lol. i love the unrelenting negativity.

"okay, so we signed lebron. the contract is only five years and what's the point of life anyway?"

i'm stating reality... Giddens is not all that great a prospect & i would much rather have a late round pick than him, & i'm pretty sure 99% of Knick fans would agree with me.

i'm pretty sure 99% of knick fans don't know what the actual trade is yet. just because they threw in giddens to make the salaries match doesn't mean they took out the pick.

Uptown wrote:"Again, first rounder will be coming Knicks way from what I understand from multiple sources." Tommy Dee. Obviously, some type of deal will get done at some point. Looks like there is a shot at getting a 1st rounder.

If Tommy Dee said it then it definitely wont happen. This guy is constantly wrong.

TMS wrote:

Childs2Dudley wrote:

TMS wrote:i actually like Eddie House & wanted to sign him to a LLE contract for the past 2 years, but neither him nor Giddens are guys who can impact a game the way Nate can, & i think the Knicks view both these guys as purely cap filler, not really usable assets going forward... maybe House could be extended to a LLE contract next season, but we could have done that anyway w/o making this trade... for us to give up Nate w/o getting any pick or young players who will stick in return is a bad oversight on the part of our GM & our head coach IMO & this could have easily been avoided by trading Nate at the deadline last season.

I see other reasons why this trade is being done: Nate isn't coming back and they're rewarding him by sending him to a playoff team. This makes them look good around the league to other players because they granted his wishes (Boston, LA, Orlando) and traded him to one of those teams. Knicks look good by helping out their "long time" player.

bro, they're trading Nate so MDA doesn't have to deal w/his shenanigans anymore... there's no other reason... they were so desperate to trade Nate they dealt him to a divisional rival for God's sakes instead of looking to deal him out West to the Lakers or even to Orlando who he was also willing to accept a trade to... Nate is going to Boston because he gave them 3 options & apparently the Boston deal was the best deal they could get because of how low Nate's trade value has fallen this year.

Nate's reps also said they asked for a trade going back into December. I don't blame them - and - I don't blame the Knicks for being done with his style of play. It's win win. Nate gets to move on. Knicks get to move on.

I bet there is zero animosity here from either side.