Posted by Panos:

Posted by VDesai:

Posted by Panos:

Maybe if we all concentrate really hard at the same moment we can broadcast a brainwave that will convince Dolan that firing Isiah now was his own brilliant idea.

Then I'll talk 2010 with you.

I feel you're being cynical- I'm not presenting some kind of undue hope for 2010- I'm just saying this is the reality of the situation if you want to turn around this team's financial situation. I understand though, everyone's on edge.

I AM cynical. Aren't you? What has this management done to inspire anything short of cynacism?

I'm just trying to answer the poster's question.

Posted by djsunyc:

here's something to think about - if curry/crawford opt out, and we don't bring somebody else in, we are gonna be screwed b/c we owe our 2010 #1 unprotected in the marbury deal.

we can not afford to lose alot games in the 09/10 season IF losing that pick matters.

but if it doesn't, and it shouldn't, then we should proceed with a sound plan, which means getting rid of zeke now.

Posted by VDesai:


http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/new_york.htm

Everyone on the team is under contract for next season against Fred Jones, and while I like Freddie, it would be insane to re-sign him. In 2009/2010, Marbury and Rose will finally expire and the team has 4 players with player options- Curry, Craw, Richardson and James. James and Richardson may never have another payday in the NBA so they will be insane to opt out.

Now with Curry and Craw, you can make a case that b/c very few players ever hit the market as an FA, that they will opt out to leave this mess to make an equivalent or better contract. Craw will only be 29 and Curry just 27 so both could earn 5 year extensions at good money somewhere else rather than play out their options for what would amount to 1 or 2 more years. So no doubt I think they will leave and go for more guaranteed money.

Now the other issue is the young guys- while Balk, Chandler and Collins will be under team control for for another season...Lee and Robinson will be restricted free agents, and we will either need to extend them, risk them getting an offer from another team (which we will have the right to match), or they can play for the qualifying offer and become a UFA the next season. I think you have to extend Lee and take your chances with Robinson.

Because in all likelihood, Lee would get a big money offer elsewhere, we have to extend him and we'll be over or near the cap anyway. This is why I thought the Randolph contract didn't kill us the way every one thought it did.

Now in 2010-2011, if we have not re-signed Robinson, only extended Lee and did not retain Curry and Craw, we will be under the cap with the only players under contract being Randolph, Lee and possibly a re-signed Balkman, Collins, Chandler + whatever 2-3 draft picks we have picked up.

Hmmm...
Now I see why IT get 4 years extension.
he want to finish The Knicks and get full credit for this.
In 4 years we will have no players and he can go...


[Edited by - arkrud on 12-14-2007 12:40 PM]

Posted by nyk4ever:

Would you trade Curry for Kwame + Top10 protected 1st rounder?

Kwame has an expiring deal this year and we could get Curry's contract off the books. I think the Lakers would be interested in Curry because they could play both him and Bynum together or they could have Bynum come off the bench for now. As it stands Curry is a better lowpost scorer than Bynum and this could appease Kobe to an extent.

Posted by arkrud:

Posted by VDesai:

GM's have long given long, lucrative, multiyear deals to Centers who can do one thing well and sometimes all that is blocking shots at an middle of the road rate. I know we hate everything about Curry and the Knicks, but you really think people would not take a 25 yr old center who can score at a relatively cheap talent cost? The one thing that has been proven that GM's are willing to repeat mistakes on height. No longer is Curry gonna cost expirings and multiple first rounders- the price will be far cheaper now, but that doesn't mean demand is gone. There is always a worthwile role for size in the NBA.

[Edited by - vdesai on 12-14-2007 12:54 PM]

Size of what? Tittis?

Yes titties. Without manboobs how would they get us all to watch.

Posted by VDesai:

The pick is protected in 2009-2010, when it becomes unprotected. Basically if we makeh playoffs this year or next year, we will give up the pick. If not, we'll keep the pick for the next 2 years and we'll give up the pick regardless in 2010.

Posted by VDesai:

nyk- my only argument would be that if you don't make follow on moves than you will be getting very little value out of shedding that salary.

Posted by djsunyc:

Posted by VDesai:

I thought the protection dwindled further down than that?

i think it's top 23 protected next year, top 22 in 09, unprotected in 2010.

Posted by VDesai:

nyk- my only argument would be that if you don't make follow on moves than you will be getting very little value out of shedding that salary.